Advertisement

Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 147, Issue 1–2, pp 103–118 | Cite as

A taxometric analysis ofLimonium (Plumbaginaceae) in Western Europe

  • M. J. Ingrouille
Article

Abstract

A taxometric analysis ofLimonium species in Western Europe has provided evidence for the subgeneric groupings proposed by other authors. A cluster analysis suggests that the origin of sexual and agamospermous species has taken place separately. Sexual and agamospermous species are usually clustered separately. The lack of a sexual process in many agamospermous species, as indicated by the distribution of incompatibility morphs and by very low pollen fertility, suggests that the evolution of sexual and agamospermous taxa has been by different processes. It is suggested that following the origin of agamospermous species or species groups by hybridisation, subsequent evolution in the agamospermous taxa has occurred by asexual means. Evidence from the distribution of pollen/stigma incompatibility morphs, especially the existence of self-compatible agamospermous species supports this hypothesis.

Key words

Angiosperms Limonium Plumbaginaceae Numerical taxonomy variation agamospermy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baker, H. G., 1953a: Race formation and reproductive method in flowering plants. — Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol.7, 114–143.Google Scholar
  2. —, 1953b: Dimorphism and Monomorphism in thePlumbaginaceae. 2. The genusLimonium. — Ann. Bot., n.s.17, 433–445.Google Scholar
  3. —, 1960: The evolution, functioning and breakdown of heteromorphic incompatibility systems. 1. ThePlumbaginaceae. — Evol.20, 349–368.Google Scholar
  4. Bemis, W. P., Rhodes, A. M., Whitaker, T. W., Carmer, S. G., 1970: Numerical Taxonomy applied toCucurbita relationships. — Amer. J. Bot.57 (4), 404–412.Google Scholar
  5. Boissier, E. P., 1848:Plumbaginaceae. — InDe Candolle, A., (Ed.): Prodr. System. Nat. Regni Veget.12, 617–696. — Paris: Victoris Masson.Google Scholar
  6. Brullo, S., 1978: Il genereLimonium Miller in Cirenaica. — Webbia33(1), 137–158.Google Scholar
  7. —, 1980: Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on the genusLimonium in Sicily. — Bot. Notiser133, 281–293.Google Scholar
  8. Crane, M. B., Thomas, P. T., 1939: Segregation in asexual (apomictic) offspring inRubus. — Nature143, 684–685.Google Scholar
  9. Dolcher, T., Pignatti, S., 1971: Un ipotesi sull evoluzione deiLimonium de bacino del Mediterraneo. — Giorn. Bot. Ital.105(2), 95–107.Google Scholar
  10. Erben, M., 1978: Die GattungLimonium im südwestmediterranen Raum. — Mitt. Bot. Staatsamm. München14, 361–631.Google Scholar
  11. —, 1979: Karyotype differentiation and its consequences in MediterraneanLimonium. — Webbia34(1), 409–417.Google Scholar
  12. Gustafsson, Å., 1937: Over forekornsten av en sexuell population inomTaraxacum vulgare-gruppen. — Bot. Notiser90, 332–336.Google Scholar
  13. —, 1946: Apomixis in the higher plants. 1. The mechanism of apomixis. — Lunds Univ. Arsskr. N.F. Avd. 242(3), 1–66.Google Scholar
  14. Heiser, C. B. Jr., Soria, J., Burton, D. L., 1965: A numerical taxonomic study ofSolanum species and hybrids. — Amer. Natur.99, 471–488.Google Scholar
  15. Ingrouille, M. J., Stace, C. A., 1983: TheLimonium binervosum (G. E. Sm.)C. E. Salmon aggregate in the British Isles. — Bot. J. Linn. Soc. (accepted for publication July 1983).Google Scholar
  16. Jardine, N., Sibson, R., 1976: The construction of hierarchic and non-hierarchic classifications. — Computer J.11, 177–184.Google Scholar
  17. Nygren, A., 1946: The genesis of some Scandinavian species ofCalamagrostis. — Hereditas32, 131–262.Google Scholar
  18. Ostenfield, C. H., 1921: Some experiments on the origin of new forms in genusHieracuum subg.Archieracium. — J. Genet.11, 117–122.Google Scholar
  19. Pignatti, S., 1963: Über die Beziehungen zwischen italienischen und iberischen Arten der GattungLimonium. — Webbia18, 73–93.Google Scholar
  20. —, 1971: Flora Europaea, notulae systematicae ad floram Europaeam spectantes. 11. Studi suiLimonium 8. — Bot. J. Linn. Soc.64, 361–370.Google Scholar
  21. —, 1972:Limonium Miller. — InTutin, T. G., & al., (Eds.): Flora Europaea 3. — Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Rahn, K., 1974:Plantago sect.Virginica. — Dansk Bot. Arkiv.30, 1–180.Google Scholar
  23. Rollins, R. C., 1944: Evidence for genetic variation among apomictically produced plants of several Fl. progenies of Guayule (Parthenium argentatum) and Maniola (P. incanum). — Amer. J. Bot.32, 554–560.Google Scholar
  24. Samuelsson, G., 1943: Die Verbreitung derAlchemilla; Arten aus dervulgaris-gruppe in Nordeuropa. — Acta Phytogeographia Suecica16, 159.Google Scholar
  25. Smith, D. W., 1969: A taximetric study ofVaccinium in northeastern Ontario. — Can. J. Bot.47(11), 1747–1759.Google Scholar
  26. Sneath, P. H., Sokal, R. R., 1973: Numerical Taxonomy. — San Francisco, London:W. H. Freeman & Co. Google Scholar
  27. Turesson, G., 1943: Variation in the apomictic species ofAlchemilla vulgaris L. — Bot. Notiser96, 413–427.Google Scholar
  28. Wishart, D., 1979: Clustan 1B. — University of Manchester Regional Computing Centre.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. J. Ingrouille
    • 1
  1. 1.Botany DepartmentBirkbeck CollegeLondonEngland, UK

Personalised recommendations