Abstract
This study represents a preliminary sampling of the pericarp histology of the subtribe Iguanurinae (tribe Areceae, subfamily Arecoideae) of the family Arecaceae. At least one sample from each of the 27 recognized genera was examined and illustrated with a line drawing. This sampling serves to characterize fruit structure in the subtribe as a whole, to illustrate the diversity of pericarp adaptations found in the subtribe, to characterize the monotypic genera, to provide hypotheses about the characterization of the larger genera, and to test existing phylogenetic hypotheses about the Iguanurinae. There are no unique tissues present in the pericarp in this subtribe, but genera can be readily characterized by unique combinations and distributional patterns in common tissues. These patterns, and some prominent evolutionary trends, parallel those in related subtribes of Areceae, such as the Ptychospermatinae and Arecinae. Significant in this subtribe is variation in the distribution of tanniniferous cells, raphide-bearing cells and brachysclereids, in the sculpturing of the seed and the locular epidermis, in the thickness of the locular epidermis, in the thickness of the fibrous vascular bundle sheaths, and especially in the number, orientation and distribution of nonvascular fibrous bundles. One major trend is the formation of systems of separate fibrous bundles and their progressive displacement toward the outer layer of the fruit, where a complex exocarp may form. The diversity of pericarp structure in the Iguanurinae is far greater than in the two subtribes previously studied.
Similar content being viewed by others
Literature Cited
Dowe, J. &N. Uhl. 1989.Carpoxylon macrospermum. Principes 33(2): 68–73.
Essig, F. 1977. A systematic histological study of palm fruits. I. ThePtychosperma alliance. Syst. Bot. 2(3): 151–168.
— 1982. A synopsis of the genusGulubia. Principes 26(4): 159–173.
Essig, F. 1999. Trends of specialization in the palm pericarp.In: A. Henderson & F. Borchsenius, editors. Evolution, variation, and classification of palms. Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 83: 73–77.
— &B. Young. 1979. A systematic histological study of palm fruits. II. TheAreca alliance. Syst. Bot. 4(1): 16–28.
——. 1985. A reconsideration ofGronophyllum andNengella (Arecoideae). Principes 29(3): 129–137.
Fuller, D. 1997. The lost palm of Fiji—a resolution of the enigmatic taxonGoniocladus Burret. Abstract of conference presenation at the symposium Evolution, Variation and Classification of Palms, New York Botanical Garden, June 1997.
Guerin, H.-P. 1949. Contribution a l'etude du fruit et de la graines des palmiers. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot., sér. 11, 10: 21–69.
Murray, S. 1971. Anatomy of certain palm fruits. Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
— 1973. The formation of endocarp in palm fruits. Principes 17: 91–102.
Pintaud, J.-C. 1999. Phylogenie, biographie et ecology des palmiers de Nouvelle-Caledonie. Ph.D. thesis, University of Toulouse.
Uhl, N. &J. Dransfield. 1987. Genera Palmarum: a classification of palms based on the work of Harold E. Moore, Jr. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas.
— &H. Moore Jr.. 1973. The protection of pollen and ovules in palms. Principes 17(4): 111–149.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Essig, F.B., Manka, T.J. & Bussard, L. A systematic histological study of palm fruits. III. Subtribe Iguanurinae (Arecaceae). Brittonia 51, 307–325 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2307/2666611
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2666611