Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 128, Issue 1–2, pp 123–136 | Cite as

Variation in wild populations of annual beet (Beta, Chenopodiaceae)

  • Karl Peter Buttler


Among the morphological variation in wild annual populations of sect.Beta only tepal characters show a geographic pattern, and hence can be used to distinguish different taxa. Two morphological types correspond with taxa already described:B. macrocarpa (incl.B. bourgaei) has a Macaronesian and W. to E. Mediterranean andB. adanensis an E. Mediterranean distribution area. A third type in the Aegean region is not well known yet and possibly has to be included inB. macrocarpa. Both diploid and tetraploid (x = 9) cytotypes are found withinB. macrocarpa, the latter exclusively on the Canary Islands.

Key words

Chenopodiaceae Beta sect.Beta (=VulgaresB. adanensis B. bourgaei B. macrocarpa. Morphological variation chromosome numbers distribution taxonomy 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aellen, P., 1960:Beta. InHegis Ill. Fl. Mitteleur. ed. 2,3 (2), 550–569.Google Scholar
  2. Bramwell, D., 1972: Endemism in the Flora of the Canary Islands. InValentine, D. H. (Ed.): Taxonomy, Phytogeography, and Evolution 141–159. London-New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  3. Coons, G. H., 1954: The Wild Species ofBeta. Proc. Amer. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol.8, 142–147.Google Scholar
  4. Ford-Lloyd, B. V., Williams, J. T., 1975: A revision ofBeta sectionVulgares (Chenopodiaceae), with new light on the origin of cultivated beets. Bot. J. Linn. Soc.71, 89–102.Google Scholar
  5. Greuter, W., 1976: The flora of Psara (E. Aegean Islands, Greece)—an annotated catalogue. Candollea31, 191–242.Google Scholar
  6. Knapp, E., 1958:Beta-Rüben, besonders Zuckerrüben. InKappert, H., Rudolf, W. (Eds.): Handbuch der Pflanzenzüchtung ed. 2,3, 196–284.Google Scholar
  7. Krasočkin, V. T., 1959: Obzor vidov rodaBeta. Trudy Prikl. Bot. Genet. Selek.32 (3), 3–36.Google Scholar
  8. Kuzdowicz, A., 1958: Determination of the polyploid degree in sugar beet by the number of pores in the pollen. Compte Rendue 21. Congrès Hiver Inst. Rech. Betterav. (Tirlemont), 259–261.Google Scholar
  9. McFarlane, J. S., 1975: Naturally Occurring Hybrids Between Sugar Beet andBeta macrocarpa in the Imperial Valley of California. J. Amer. Soc. Sugar Beet Technol.18, 245–251.Google Scholar
  10. Panin, V. O., Panina, Je. B., 1965: Osoblivosti pilku autopoliploïdnyh ta dyploïdnyh form burkjaka. Ukr. Bot. Ž.22, 28–35.Google Scholar
  11. Tranšel', V. A., 1927: Obzor vidov rodaBeta L. Bull. Appl. Bot. Plant-Breed. (Leningrad)17, 203–223.Google Scholar
  12. Ulbrich, E., 1934:Beta. InEngler, A., Prantl, K. (Eds.): Natürl. Pflanzenfam. ed. 2,16c, 457–480.Google Scholar
  13. Walther, F., 1961: Eine neue cytologische Untersuchungsmethode fürBeta-Rüben. Zucker14, 274–276.Google Scholar
  14. Williams, J. T., Scott, A. J., Ford-Lloyd, B. V., 1977:Patellifolia nomen novum (Chenopodiaceae). Taxon26, 284.Google Scholar
  15. Zosimovič, V. P., 1940: Dikie vidy i proishoždenie kul'turnoj svekly. Sveklovodstvo1, 17–85.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karl Peter Buttler
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Systematische BotanikMünchen 19Germany

Personalised recommendations