Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 207, Issue 3–4, pp 225–254 | Cite as

Phylogeny of theAsteridae s. str. based onrbcL sequences, with particular reference to theDipsacales



TherbcL gene of 15 taxa was sequenced and analyzed cladistically together with a large sample of genera representing all main clades of the subclassAsteridae in order to determine more precisely the delimitation of the orderDipsacales and to elucidate the phylogeny of the families within the order. The cladistic analyses show that the Dipsacales comprise the familiesCaprifoliaceae, Morinaceae, Dipsacaceae, andValerianaceae includingTriplostegia. The results also provide a basis for the exclusion of a number of taxa previously placed in theDipsacales, such asDesfontainia, Columellia andAdoxaceae s. l. (includingSambucus andViburnum). Ever since the orderDipsacales was first suggested byDumortier (1829) and the similarCaprifoliales byLindley (1833, 1836), there has been confusion concerning the circumscription of the order, the relations between the included families, their circumscriptions, and the position of the order in a larger context.

Key words

Asteridae Dipsacales Apiales Asterales Caprifoliaceae Morinaceae Dipsacaceae Valerianaceae Triplostegia Columellia Desfontainia Bruniaceae Apiaceae Alseuosmiaceae Chloroplast DNA phylogeny rbc


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agardh, J. G., 1858: Theoria systematis plantarum; accedit familiarum Phanerogamarum.—Lund: Gleerup.Google Scholar
  2. Airy-Shaw, H. K., 1965a: Diagnoses of new families, new names, etc., for the 7th edition of Willis's ‘Dictionary’.—Kew Bull.18: 249–273.Google Scholar
  3. , 1965b: On a new species of the genusSilvianthus Hook.f., and on the familyCarlemanniaceae.—Kew Bull.19: 507–512Google Scholar
  4. Albert, V., Backlund, A., Bremer, K., 1994a: DNA characters and cladistics: the optimization of functional history.—InScotland, R. W., Siebert, D. J., Williams, D. M., (Eds): Models in phylogeny reconstruction. Systematics Association Special Volume52, pp. 249–272.—Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  5. , 1994b: Functional constraints andrbcL evidence for land plant phylogeny.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard81: 534–567.Google Scholar
  6. Al-Shammary, K. I., Gornall, R. J., 1994: Trichome anatomy of theSaxifragaceae s. l. from the southern hemisphere.—Bot. J. Linn. Soc.114: 99–131.Google Scholar
  7. Baas, P., 1975: Vegetative anatomy and the affinities ofAquifoliaceae, Penostemon, Phelline, andOncotheca.—Blumea22: 311–407.Google Scholar
  8. Backlund, A., Bremer, K., 1996: To be or not to be—principles of classification and monotypic plant families.—InBackluno, A.: Phylogeny of theDipsacales.—Doctoral Thesis, Uppsala University.Google Scholar
  9. -Nilsson, S., 1997: The systematic position ofTriplostegia Wall. with notes on its pollen.—Taxon (in press).Google Scholar
  10. Baillon, H., 1880: Rubiacées-Dipsacacées.—InBaillon, H.: Histoire des plantes7, pp. 257–546.—Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
  11. , 1888: Bignoniacées, Gesnériacées.—InBaillon, H.: Histoire des plantes10, pp. 1–112.—Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
  12. Baksay, L., 1952: Monographie der GattungSuccisa.—Ann. Hist. Nat. Mus. Natl. Hung.2: 237–259.Google Scholar
  13. Bartling, F. G., 1830: Ordines naturales plantarum eorumque characteres et affinitates.—Göttingen: Dieterichianus.Google Scholar
  14. Baumann, G. M., 1946:Myodocarpus und die Phylogenie der Umbelliferen Frucht.—Ber. Schweiz. Bot. Ges.56: 13–112.Google Scholar
  15. Benko-Iseppon, A. M., 1992: Karyologische Untersuchung derCaprifoliaceae s.l. und möglicher verwandter Familien.—Doctoral Thesis, University of Wien.Google Scholar
  16. Bensel, C. R., Palser, B. F., 1975: Floral anatomy in theSaxifragaceae sensu lato. III.Kirengeshomoideae, Hydrangeoideae andEscallonioideae.—Amer. J. Bot.62: 676–687.Google Scholar
  17. Blackmore, S., Cannon, M. J., 1983: Palynology and systematics ofMorinaceae.—Rev. Palaeobot. Palyn.40: 207–226.Google Scholar
  18. Bolli, R., 1994: Revision of the genusSambucus.—Diss. Bot.223.Google Scholar
  19. Bremer, B., Olmstead, R. G., Struwe, L., Sweere, J. A., 1994:rbcL sequences support exclusion ofRetzia, Desfontainia andNicodemia (Buddlejaceae) from theGentianales.—Pl. Syst. Evol.190: 213–230.Google Scholar
  20. Bremer, K., 1988: The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction.—Evolution42: 795–803.Google Scholar
  21. , 1994: Branch support and tree stability.—Cladistics10: 295–304.Google Scholar
  22. Cannon, M. J., Cannon, J. F. M., 1984: A revision of theMorinaceae (Magnoliophyta-Dipsacales).—Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Bot.12: 1–35.Google Scholar
  23. Caputo, G., Cozzolino, S., 1994: A cladistic analysis ofDipsacaceae (Dipsacales).—Pl. Syst. Evol.189: 41–61.Google Scholar
  24. Carlquist, S., 1982: Wood anatomy ofDipsacaceae.—Taxon31: 443–450.Google Scholar
  25. , 1991: Leaf anatomy ofBruniaceae: ecological, systematic and phylogenetic aspects.—Bot. J. Linn. Soc.107: 1–34.Google Scholar
  26. , 1992: Wood anatomy of sympetalous dicotyledon families: a summary, with comments on systematic relationships and evolution of the woody habit.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.79: 303–332.Google Scholar
  27. Chase, M. W., Hills, H. H., 1991: Silica gel: an ideal material for field preservation of leaf samples for DNA studies.—Taxon40: 215–220.Google Scholar
  28. ,Learn, G. H. Jr.,Graham, S. W., Barrett, S. C. H., Dayanandan, S., Albert, V. A., 1993: Phylogenetics of seed plants: an analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid generbcL.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.80: 528–580.Google Scholar
  29. Cronquist, A., 1968: The evolution and classification of flowering plants.—Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  30. , 1981: An integrated system of classification of flowering plants.—New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Cullen, J., 1978: A preliminary survey of ptyxis (vernation) in the angiosperms.—Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh37: 161–214.Google Scholar
  32. Dahlgren, G., 1989: An updated angiosperm classification.—Bot. J. Linn. Soc.100: 197–203.Google Scholar
  33. Dahlgren, R., 1975: A system of classification of the angiosperms to be used to demonstrate the distribution of characters.—Bot. Not.128: 119–147.Google Scholar
  34. , 1977: A note of the taxonomy of the “Sympetalae” and related groups.—Publ. Cairo Univ.7 & 8: 83–102.Google Scholar
  35. , 1980: Angiospermernes taxonomi, Dicotyledonernes taxonomi:Fabanae-Lamianae. 2nd edn.—Køpenhavn: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
  36. Dickison, W. C., 1986: Wood anatomy and affinities of theAlseuosmiaceae.—Syst. Bot.11: 214–221.Google Scholar
  37. , 1989: Stem and leaf anatomy of theAlseuosmiaceae.—Aliso12: 567–578.Google Scholar
  38. Doll, W., 1927: Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Dipsaceen und dipsaceenähnlichen Pflanzen.—Bot. Arch.17: 107–146.Google Scholar
  39. Donoghue, M. J., 1985: Pollen diversity and exine evolution inViburnum and theCaprifoliaceae sensu lato.—J. Arnold Arbor.66: 421–469.Google Scholar
  40. , 1992: Phylogenetic relationships ofDipsacales Based onrbcL sequences.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.79: 333–345.Google Scholar
  41. Doyle, J. J., Doyle, J. L., 1987: A rapid DNA isolation procedure for small quantities of fresh leaf tissue.—Phytochem. Bull. Bot. Soc. Amer.19: 11–15.Google Scholar
  42. Dumortier, B. C. J., 1829: Analyse des familles des plantes.—Tournay: Casterman.Google Scholar
  43. Ehrendorfer, F., 1964: Über stammesgeschichtliche Differenzierungsmuster bei den Dipsacaceen.—Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.77: 83–94.Google Scholar
  44. Endlicher, S., 1839:Columelliaceae.—InEndlicher, S: Genera plantarum, p. 745.—Wien: Beck.Google Scholar
  45. Engler, A., 1930:Saxifragaceae.—InEngler, A., (Ed.): Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien18a, pp. 74–226. 2nd edn. — Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
  46. Erbar, C., 1991: Sympetaly—a systematic character?—Bot. Jahrb. Syst.112: 417–451.Google Scholar
  47. , 1994: Contributions to the affinities ofAdoxa from the viewpoint of floral development.—Bot. Jahrb. Syst.116: 259–282.Google Scholar
  48. Eriksen, B., 1989: Note on generic and infrageneric delimitation in theValerianaceae.—Nordic J. Bot.9: 179–187.Google Scholar
  49. Farris, J. S., 1969: A successive approximations approach to character weighting.—Syst. Zool.18: 374–385.Google Scholar
  50. , 1989: The retention index and the rescaled consistency index.—Cladistics5: 417–419.Google Scholar
  51. , 1996: Parsimony jackknifing outperforms neighbor-joining.—Cladistics12: 99–124.Google Scholar
  52. Felsenstein, J., 1985: Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap.—Evolution39: 783–791.Google Scholar
  53. Fitch, W. M., 1971: Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology.—Syst. Zool.20: 406–416.Google Scholar
  54. Fritsch, K., 1894:Columelliaceae.—InEngler, A., (Ed.): Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien,IV, 3b, p. 186–188.—Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
  55. , 1897:Caprifoliaceae.—InEngler, A., Prantl K., (Eds): Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien,IV, 4, pp. 156–169.—Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
  56. Fukuoka, N., 1969: Inflorescence ofLinnaeeae (Caprifoliaceae).—Acta Phytotax. Geobot.23: 153–162.Google Scholar
  57. Gardner, R. O., 1978a: Systematic notes on theAlseuosmiaceae.—Blumea24: 138–142.Google Scholar
  58. , 1978b: The species ofAlseuosmia (Alseuosmiaceae).—New Zealand J. Bot.16: 271–277.Google Scholar
  59. Gentry, A. H., 1993: A field guide to the families and genera of woody plants of Northwest South America.—Washington, DC.: Conservation International.Google Scholar
  60. Gustafsson, M. H. G., Bremer, K., 1995: Morphology and phylogenetic interrelationships of theAsteraceae, Calyceraceae, Campanulaceae, Goodeniaceae, and related families (Asterales).—Amer. J. Bot.82: 250–265.Google Scholar
  61. , 1996: Phylogeny of theAsterales sensu lato based onrbcL sequences with particular reference to theGoodeniaceae.—Pl. Syst. Evol.199: 217–242.Google Scholar
  62. Hallier, H., 1901: Über die Verwandtschaftverhältnisse der Tubifloren und Ebenalen.—Abh. Verh. Naturwiss. Vereins Hamburg16: 1–112.Google Scholar
  63. , 1903: Über die Abgrenzung und Verwandtschaft der einzelnen Sippen bei den Scrophularineen.—Bull. Herb. Boissier, sér. 2,3: 181–207.Google Scholar
  64. - 1910: Über Phanerogamen von unsicherer oder unrichtiger Stellung.—Meded. Rijks-Herb.1. Google Scholar
  65. Hegnauer, R., 1969: Chemical evidence for the classification of some plant taxa.—InHarborne, J. B., Swain, T., (Eds): Perspectives in phytochemistry, pp. 121–138.—London, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  66. Hempel, A. L., Reeves, P. A., Olmstead, R. G., Jansen, R. J., 1995: Implications ofrbcL sequence data for higher order relationships of theLoasaceae and the anomalous aquatic plantHydrostachys (Hydrostachyaceae).—Pl. Syst. Evol.194: 25–37.Google Scholar
  67. Herzog, T., 1915: Die von Dr.Th. Herzog auf seiner zweiten Reise durch Bolivien in den Jahren 1910 und 1911 gesammelten Pflanzen. II Teil.—Meded. Rijks-Herb.27: 1–90.Google Scholar
  68. Hideux, M. J., Ferguson, I. K., 1976: The stereo-structure of the exine and its evolutionary significance inSaxifragaceae sensu lato.—InFerguson, I. K., Muller, J., (Eds): The evolutionary significance of the exine, pp. 327–377.—London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  69. Hillebrand, G. R., Fairbrothers, D. E., 1970: Serological investigation of the systematic position of theCaprifoliaceae. I. Correspondence with selectedRubiaceae andCornaceae.—Amer. J. Bot.57: 810–815.Google Scholar
  70. Hooker, J. D., 1875:Columellia oblonga.—Bot. Mag.101: table 6183.Google Scholar
  71. Hutchinson, J., 1959: The families of flowering plants.1. Dicotyledons arranged according to a new system based on their probable phylogeny. 2nd edn.—Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  72. Judd, W. S., Sanders, R. W., Donoghue, M. J., 1994: Angiosperm family pairs: preliminary phylogenetic analyses.—Harvard Pap. Bot.5: 1–51.Google Scholar
  73. Jussieu, A.-L. de, 1789: Genera plantarum.—Paris: Vidaum Herissant.Google Scholar
  74. , 1801: Responsa ad dubia clar (Columellia, 147).—InRuiz, H., Pavón, J., (Eds): Suplemento á la Quinologia.—Madrid: Imprenta de la Viuda e Hijo de Marin.Google Scholar
  75. , 1848: Taxonomie.—InD'Orbigny, A. C. V. D., (Ed.): Dictionnaire universel d'histoire naturelle, pp. 368–434.—Paris: Renard, Martinet.Google Scholar
  76. Kaltenboeck, B., Spatafora, J. W., Zhang, X., Kousoulas, K. G., Blackwell, M., Storz, J., 1992: Efficient production of single-stranded DNA as long as 2 kb for sequencing of PCR-amplified DNA.—Biofeedb. Self-Regulat.12: 164–171.Google Scholar
  77. Kamelina, O. P., 1980: Comparative embryology in the familiesDipsacaceae andMorinaceae. 1st edn.—Leningrad: Nauka (in Russian).Google Scholar
  78. , 1983: Basic results of the comparative embryological investigation ofDipsacaceae andMorinaceae.—InErdelská, O., (Ed.): Fertilization and embryogenesis in ovulated plants. Proceedings of the VII. International cytoembryological symposium, High Tatra, June 14–17, 1982, pp. 343–346.—Bratislawa: Slovak Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  79. Kim, K-J., Jansen, R. K., 1995:ndhF sequence evolution and the major clades in the sunflower family.—Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA92: 10379–10383.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Kluge, A. G., Farris, J. S., 1969: Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of the anurans.—Syst. Zool.18: 1–32.Google Scholar
  81. Kunth, C. S., 1818:Columellia Ruiz etPav.—InHumboldt, A. von, Bonpland, A., Kunth, C. S., (Eds): Nova genera et species plantarum, pp. 388–389.—Paris: Fol. & Qu.Google Scholar
  82. Källersjö, M., Farris, J. S., Kluge, A. G., Bult, C., 1992: Skewness and permutation.—Cladistics8: 275–287.Google Scholar
  83. Larsen, B. B., 1986: A taxonomic revision ofPhyllactis andValeriana sect.Bracteata (Valerianaceae).—Nordic J. Bot.6: 427–446.Google Scholar
  84. Lindley, J., 1833: Nixus plantarum.—London: Ridgway.Google Scholar
  85. , 1836: A natural system of botany; or, a systematic view of the organization, natural affinities, and geographical distribution, of the whole vegetable kingdom. 2nd edn.—London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longman.Google Scholar
  86. , 1853: The vegetable kingdom. 3rd edn.—London: Bradbury & Evans.Google Scholar
  87. Linnaeus, C., 1738: Classes plantarum.—Leyden: Wishoff.Google Scholar
  88. Loesener, T., 1942:Aquifoliaceae.—InEngler, A., (Ed.): Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien,20b, pp. 36–68. 2nd edn.—Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
  89. Macbride, J. F., 1961: Flora of Peru.—Chicago: Field Museum of Natural History.Google Scholar
  90. Maout, E. L., Decaisne, A., 1873: in “Editors' note” byJ. D. Hooker.—InHooker, J. D., (Ed.): A general system of botany, p. 594.—London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green, and Longman.Google Scholar
  91. Metcalfe, D. R., Chalk, L., 1950: Anatomy of the Dicotyledons.—Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  92. Morgan, D. R., Soltis, D. E., 1993: Phylogenetic relationships among members ofSaxifragaceae sensu lato based onrbcL sequence data.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.80: 631–660.Google Scholar
  93. Mori, S. A., Kallunki, J. A., 1977: A revision of the genusPhyllonoma (Grossulariaceae).—Brittonia29: 69–84.Google Scholar
  94. Neubauer, H. F., 1978: On nodal anatomy and petiolar vascularization of someValerianaceae andDipsacaceae.—Phytomorphology28: 431–436.Google Scholar
  95. Niedenzu, F., Harms, H., 1930:Bruniaceae.—InEngler, A., (Ed.): Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien18a, p. 288. 2nd edn.—Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
  96. Olmstead, R. G., Michaels, H. J., Scott, K. M., Palmer, J. D., 1992: Monophyly of theAsteridae and identification of their major lineages inferred from DNA sequences ofrbcL.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.79: 349–265.Google Scholar
  97. , 1993: A parsimony analysis of theAsteridae sensu lato based onrbcL sequences.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.80: 700–722.Google Scholar
  98. Philipson, W. R., 1970: Constant and variable features of theAraliaceae.—InRobson, N. K. B., Culter, D. F., Gregory, M., (Eds): New research in plant anatomy, pp. 87–100.—London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  99. Pillans, N. S., 1947: A revision ofBruniaceae.—S. African J. Bot.13: 121–207.Google Scholar
  100. Plunkett, G. M., Soltis, D. E., Soltis, P. S., 1992: Molecular phylogenetic study ofApiales (Apiaceae, Araliaceae, andPittosporaceae).—Amer. J. Bot.79: 158.Google Scholar
  101. , 1996: Higher level relationships ofApiales (Apiaceae andAraliaceae) based on phylogenetic analysis ofrbcL sequences. — Amer. J. Bot.83: 499–515.Google Scholar
  102. Pollard, C. J., Amuti, R. S., 1981: Fructose oligosaccharides: possible markers of phylogenetic relationships among dicotyledonous plant families.—Biochem. Syst. Ecol.9: 69–78.Google Scholar
  103. Reichenbach, H. G. L., 1828: Conspectus regni vegetabilis per gradus naturales evoluti.—Leipzig: Cnobloch.Google Scholar
  104. , 1837: Handbuch des natürlichen Pflanzensystems.—Dresden, Leipzig: Arnold.Google Scholar
  105. Rodríguez, R. L., 1971: The relationships of theUmbellales.—InHeywood, V. H., (Ed.): The biology and chemistry of theUmbelliferae, pp. 63–91. — Reading: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  106. Roels, P., 1993: Lengtepolymorfisme van chloroplast-DNA restrictiefragmenten en bloemontogenie in deDipsacales.—Degree Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  107. , 1995: A comparative floral ontogenetical study betweenAdoxa moschatellina andSambucus ebulus.—Belg. J. Bot.127: 157–170.Google Scholar
  108. Saghai-Maroof, M. A., Soliman, K. M., Jorgensen, R. A., Wallard, R. W., 1984: Ribosomal DNA spacer-length polymorphisms in barley: Mendelian inheritance, chromosomal location, and population dynamics.—Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA81: 1769–1778.Google Scholar
  109. Savolainen, V., Manen, J. F., Douzery, E., Spichiger, R., 1994: Molecular phylogeny of families related toCelastrales based onrbcL 5′ flanking sequences.—Molec. Phylogenet. Evol.3: 27–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. Saxton, W. T., 1910: The ovule of theBruniaceae.—Trans. Roy. Soc. S. Africa2: 27–31.Google Scholar
  111. Schnizlein, A., 1849: Iconographia familiarum naturalium regni vegetabilis.—Bonn: Cohen.Google Scholar
  112. Solereder, H., 1899: Systematische Anatomie der Dicotyledonen.—Stuttgart: Enke.Google Scholar
  113. Steenis, C. G. G. J. van, 1984: A synopsis ofAlseuosmiaceae in New Zealand, New Caledonia, Australia, and New Guinea.—Blumea29: 387–394.Google Scholar
  114. Swofford, D. L., 1993: PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, version 3.1.1. Computer program.—Champaign, Illinois: Illinois Natural History Survey.Google Scholar
  115. - 1996: PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, version 4.0d45. Computer program.—Swofford, personal distribution.Google Scholar
  116. Takhtajan, A. L., 1987: Systema Magnoliophytorum.—Leningrad: Nauka.Google Scholar
  117. Thorne, R. F., 1968: Synopsis of a putatively phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants.—Aliso6: 57–66.Google Scholar
  118. , 1973: Inclusion of theApiaceae (Umbelliferae) in theAraliaceae.—Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh32: 161–165.Google Scholar
  119. , 1992: Classification and geography of the flowering plants.—Bot. Rev.58: 225–348.Google Scholar
  120. Thulin, M., 1991: Another arborescent umbellifer: a new species ofSteganotaenia from north-east tropical Africa.—Bot. J. Linn. Soc.107: 164.Google Scholar
  121. Tieghem, P. van, 1909: Remarques sur les Dipsacacées.—Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot.10: 148–200.Google Scholar
  122. Utzschneider, R., 1947: Der Fruchtknotenbau der Rubiaceen mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Cinchonoideen.—Thesis, University of München.Google Scholar
  123. Verlaque, R., 1977: Rapports entre lesValerianaceae, lesMorinaceae et lesDipsacaceae.—Bull. Soc. Bot. France124: 475–482.Google Scholar
  124. Vijayaraghavan, M. R., Sarveshwari, G. S., 1968: Embryology and systematic position ofMorina longifolia Wall.—Bot. Not.121: 383–402.Google Scholar
  125. Vinokurova, L. V., 1959: Palynological data on the systematic position ofDipsacaceae andMorinaceae.—Probl. Bot.4: 51–67 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  126. Wagenitz, G., 1959: Die systematische Stellung derRubiaceae—Ein Beitrag zum System der Sympetalen.—Bot. Jahrb.79: 17–35.Google Scholar
  127. Willis, J. C., revised byAiry Shaw, H. K., 1966: A dictionary of the flowering plants and ferns. 7th edn.—London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  128. Xiang, Q.-Y., Soltis, D. E., 1996:rbcL sequence divergence and phylogenetic relationships ofCornaceae sensu lato.—InBoufford, D. E., Ohba, H., (Eds): Sino-Japanese flora—its characteristics and diversification.—Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.Google Scholar
  129. , 1993: Phylogenetic relationships ofCornus sensu lato and putative relatives inferred fromrbcL sequence data.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.80: 723–734.Google Scholar
  130. Yakovlev, M. S., Zhukova, G. Y., 1980: Chlorophyll in embryos of angiosperm seeds, a review.—Bot. Not.133: 323–336.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Systematic BotanyUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations