Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 125, Issue 1, pp 29–46

Systematics and phylogeny of theCompositae (Asteraceae)

  • Gerhard Wagenitz


Compositae (Asteraceae) are remarkably homogenous in basic type of inflorescence, flower and fruit. TheCichorioideae are more closely related to the other groups than usually realized. The classical concept of theAsteroideae tribes has been confirmed in general, but recent investigations (using palynology, carpology, phytochemistry etc.) suggest numerous corrections, and some genera (e.g.Liabum, Echinops, Tarchonanthus, Arnica) do not fit into the scheme. The tribes ofAsteroideae may be divided into two groups characterized by several common characters and common tendencies. The oldest reliable fossils are known from the borderline Oligocene/Miocene. Looking for the nearest relatives,Campanulales (incl.Calyceraceae) and—because of interesting phytochemical agreements—Araliales have to be discussed.

Key words

Compositae (Asteraceae) Liabum Echinops Tarchonanthus Arnica Pollen-morphology excretion-organs phytochemistry 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adams, C. D., 1972: Flowering Plants of Jamaica. Mona: University of the West Indies.Google Scholar
  2. Avetisian, E. M., 1964: Palynosystématique de la tribu desCentaureinae desAsteraceae. — Trudy Bot. Inst. Akad. Nauk Armj. SSR14, 31–47.Google Scholar
  3. Babcock, E. B., 1947: The GenusCrepis.—Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot.21 &22.Google Scholar
  4. Backer, C. A., andBakhuizen van den Brink, R. C., 1965: Flora of Java. Vol.2. Groningen: N. V. P. Nordhoff.Google Scholar
  5. Beauverd, G., 1910: Contribution à l'étude des Composées. Suite IV: Recherches sur la tribu des Gnaphaliées. — Bull. Soc. Bot. Genève, sér. 2,2, 207–253.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, H. F., 1969: Fossil plants of the Tertiary Beaverhead Basins in Southwestern Montana.—Palaeontographica127 B, 1–142.Google Scholar
  7. Bentham, G., 1873: Notes on the classification, history, and geographical distribution of theCompositae.—Journ. Linn. Soc. (Bot.)13, 335–577.Google Scholar
  8. Besold, B., 1971: Pollenmorphologische Untersuchungen an Inuleen (Angianthinae, Relhaniinae, Athrixinae). Diss. Bot.14. Lehre: J. Cramer.Google Scholar
  9. Bohlmann, F., Burkhardt, T., andZdero, C., 1973: Naturally Occurring Acetylenes. London-New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Briquet, J., 1918: L'appareil staminal des Composées; structure et fonctions de ses diverses parties.—Bull. Soc. Vaud. Sci. Nat.51, procèsverb. 208–210.Google Scholar
  11. , andCavillier, F., 1931: Composées Cynaroidées. In:E. Burnat, Flore des Alpes Maritimes Vol.7. Genève: Éditon des Auteurs.Google Scholar
  12. Carlquist, S., 1957a: The genusFitchia (Compositae).—Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot.29, 1–144.Google Scholar
  13. , 1957b: Anatomy of GuayanaMutisieae.—Mem. New York Bot. Gard.9, 441–476.Google Scholar
  14. , 1958a: Anatomy of GuayanaMutisieae. Part. II.—Mem. New York Bot. Gard.10, 157–184.Google Scholar
  15. , 1958b: Structure and ontogeny of glandular trichomes ofMadinae (Compositae).—Amer. Journ. Bot.45, 675–682.Google Scholar
  16. , 1965: Island Life. A Natural History of the Islands of the World. New York: Natural History Press.Google Scholar
  17. , 1966: Wood anatomy ofCompositae: a summary, with comments on factors controlling wood evolution.—Aliso6, 25–44.Google Scholar
  18. Cassini, H., 1826: Opuscules phytologiques. Vol.1 and2. Strasbourg-Paris.Google Scholar
  19. , 1829: Tableau synoptique des Synanthérées.—Ann. Sci. Nat. sér. I.17, 387–423.Google Scholar
  20. - 1834: Opuscules phytologiques. Vol.3 (Supplément). Strasbourg-Paris.Google Scholar
  21. Col, A., 1899/1901: Quelques recherches sur l'appareil sécréteur des Composées. — Journ. Bot. (Morot)13, 234–252;15, 166–168.Google Scholar
  22. , 1903–1904: Recherches sur l'appareil sécréteur interne des Composées. — Journ. Bot. (Morot)17, 252–318;18, 110–133, 153–175.Google Scholar
  23. Cronquist, A., 1955: Phylogeny and taxonomy of theCompositae.—Amer. Midland Nat.53, 478–511.Google Scholar
  24. , 1968: The Evolution and Classification of Flowering Plants. London: Nelson.Google Scholar
  25. Davis, G. L., 1966: Systematic Embryology of the Angiosperms. New York etc.: J. Wiley.Google Scholar
  26. Dimon, Th., 1971: Étude des types polliniques des Composées echinulées du bassin mediterranéen occidental. Thèse Acad. Montpellier.Google Scholar
  27. Dittrich, M., 1968: Karpologische Untersuchungen zur Systematik vonCentaurea und verwandten Gattungen. — Bot. Jb.88, 70–162.Google Scholar
  28. , 1969: Anatomische Untersuchungen an den Früchten vonCarthamus L. undCarduncellus Adans. — Candollea24, 263–277.Google Scholar
  29. Germeraad, J. H., Hopping, C. A., andMuller, J., 1968: Palynology of tertiary sediments from tropical areas.—Rev. Palaeobot. Palyn.6, 189–348.Google Scholar
  30. Goebel, K., 1931: Blütenbildung und Sproßgestaltung. Jena: G. Fischer.Google Scholar
  31. Hanausek, T. F., 1911: Untersuchungen über die kohleähnliche Masse der Kompositen (Botanischer Teil). — Denkschr. K. Akad. Wiss., Math.-Nat. Kl.87, 93–142.Google Scholar
  32. Harling, G., 1950–1951: Embryological studies in theCompositae. I.–III.—Acta Hort. Berg.15, 136–168;16, 1–56, 73–120.Google Scholar
  33. Hayek von, A., 1924–1933: Prodromus florae peninsulae balcanicae.—Repert. Spec. Nov. Beih.30. Berlin.Google Scholar
  34. Hedberg, O., 1957: Afroalpine Vascular Plants.—Symb. Bot. Upsal.15, No. 1, 1–411.Google Scholar
  35. Hegnauer, R., 1964: Chemotaxonomie der Pflanzen. Band3. Basel-Stuttgart: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  36. , 1971: Chemical patterns and relationship ofUmbelliferae. In:V. H. Heywood (Ed.), The Biology and Chemistry of theUmbelliferae, p. 267–277. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  37. Hegnauer, R., 1973: Chemotaxonomie der Pflanzen. Band6. Basel-Stuttgart: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  38. Hering, M., 1951: Biology of the Leaf Miners. 's-Gravenhage: W. Junk.Google Scholar
  39. Herout, V., 1971: Chemotaxonomy of the familyCompositae (Asteraceae). In:H. Wagner andL. Hörhammer (Ed.), Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, p. 93–110. Berlin etc.: J. Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Hess, R., 1938: Vergleichende Untersuchungen über die Zwillingshaare der Compositen. — Bot. Jb.68, 435–496.Google Scholar
  41. Hoffmann, O., 1889–1894:Compositae. In:Engler & Prantl, Natürl. Pflanzenfam.IV, 5, 87–391.Google Scholar
  42. Jackson, R. C., 1962: Interspecific hybridization inHaplopappus and its bearing on chromosome evolution in theBlepharodon section.—Amer. Journ. Bot.49, 119–132.Google Scholar
  43. King, R. M., andRobinson, H., 1970: The new synantherology.—Taxon19, 6–11.Google Scholar
  44. Kirchheimer, F., 1948: Die erdgeschichtliche Vergangenheit der Compositen. — Ztschr. Naturf.3 b, 125–129.Google Scholar
  45. Koso-Poljansky, B. M., 1924: Sur la position systématique de la famille desCompositae. — Žurn. Russk. Bot. Obšč. Akad. Nauk8, 167–191.Google Scholar
  46. Kruse, J., andMeusel, H., 1969: Zur Blattfolge und Blattbildung einiger Cynareen-Gattungen. I.Echinops.—Feddes Repert.80, 339–356.Google Scholar
  47. Kunze, H., 1969: Vergleichend-morphologische Untersuchungen an komplexen Compositen-Blütenständen. — Beitr. Biol. Pfl.46, 97–154.Google Scholar
  48. Kynčlová, M., 1970: Comparative morphology of achenes of the tribeAnthemideae Cass. and its taxonomical significance.—Preslia42, 33–53.Google Scholar
  49. Lavialle, P., 1912: Recherches sur le développement de l'ovaire en fruit chez les Composées. — Ann. Sci. Nat. (Bot.) sér. 9.15, 39–152.Google Scholar
  50. Leins, P., 1971: Pollensystematische Studien an Inuleen. I.Tarchonanthinae, Plucheinae, Inulinae, Buphthalminae. — Bot. Jb.91, 91–146.Google Scholar
  51. , 1973: Pollensystematische Studien an Inuleen. II.Filagininae. — Bot. Jb.93, 603–611.Google Scholar
  52. , andThyret, G., 1971: Pollen phylogeny and taxonomy exemplified by an AfricanAsteraceae group. — Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München10, 280–286.Google Scholar
  53. Markgraf, F., 1967:Berardia lanuginosa (Lam.)Fiori — eine kostbare Pflanze der südwestlichen Hochalpen. — Jb. Ver. Schutze Alpenpfl. u. -tiere32, 73–85.Google Scholar
  54. Meinheit, K., 1907: Der anatomische Bau des Stengels bei denCompositae Cynareae. Diss. Phil. Fak. Univ. Göttingen.Google Scholar
  55. Merxmüller, H., 1955: Beiträge zur Taxonomie der Compositen. — Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges.67, (23)-(24).Google Scholar
  56. Metcalfe, C. R., andChalk, L., 1950: Anatomy of Dicotyledons. 2 Vol. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  57. Muller, J., 1970: Palynological evidence on early differentiation of angiosperms.—Biol. Rev.45, 417–450.Google Scholar
  58. Ornduff, R., Mosquin, Th., Kyhos, D. W., andRaven, P. H., 1967: Chromosome numbers inCompositae. VI.Senecioneae. II.—Amer. Journ. Bot.54, 205–213.Google Scholar
  59. Palamarev, E., 1971: Diasporen aus der miozänen Kohle des Čukurovo-Beckens (West-Bulgarien). — Palaeontographica132 B, 153–164.Google Scholar
  60. Parra, A., andMarticorena, C., 1972: Granos de polen de plantas chilenas. II.Compositae-Mutisieae. — Gayana Bot.21, 1–107.Google Scholar
  61. Poddubnaja-Arnoldi, W., 1931: Ein Versuch der Anwendung der embryologischen Methode bei der Lösung einiger systematischer Fragen. I. Vergleichende embryologisch-zytologische Untersuchungen über die GruppeCynareae, Fam.Compositae. — Beih. Bot. Cbl.48, II, 141–237.Google Scholar
  62. Poljakov, P. P., 1967: Sistematika i proischoždenie složnocvetnych. Alma-Ata: Nauka.Google Scholar
  63. Powell, A. M., andTurner, B. L., 1974: A generic conspectus of the subtribePeritylinae (Asteraceae-Helenieae) and reassessment of its tribal position.—Amer. Journ. Bot.61, 87–93.Google Scholar
  64. Pulle, A. A., 1952: Compendium van de terminologie, nomenclatuur en systematiek der zaadplanten. 3. Aufl. Utrecht: N. V. A. Oosthoek.Google Scholar
  65. Quézel, P., andSanta, S., 1962/63: Nouvelle Flore de l'Algérie et des régions désertiques méridionales. 2 Vol. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
  66. Ramayya, N., 1962: Studies on the trichomes of some Compositae.—Bull. Bot. Survey India4, 177–192.Google Scholar
  67. Raven, P. H., andAxelrod, D. I., 1974: Angiosperm biogeography and past continental movements.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.61, 539–673.Google Scholar
  68. Reitbrecht, F., 1974: Furchtanatomie und Systematik derAnthemideae (Asteraceae). — Diss. Phil. Fak. Univ. Wien.Google Scholar
  69. Robinson, H., andBrettell, R. D., 1973a: A new tribe,Liabeae.—Phytologia25, 404–407.Google Scholar
  70. ,, 1973b: The relationships ofEriachenium.—Phytologia26, 71–72.Google Scholar
  71. ,, 1973c: The relationships ofIsoetopsis.—Phytologia26, 73–75.Google Scholar
  72. Rothmaler, W. (Ed.), 1972: Exkursionsflora für die Gebiete der DDR und der BRD. Gefäßpflanzen. Berlin: Volk und Wissen.Google Scholar
  73. Skvarla, J. J., andLarson, D. A., 1965: An electron microscopic study of pollen morphology in theCompositae with special reference to theAmbrosiinae.—Grana Palyn.6, 210–269.Google Scholar
  74. , andTurner, B. L., 1966a: Systematic implications from electron microscopic studies ofCompositae pollen. A review.—Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.53, 220–256.Google Scholar
  75. ,, 1966b: Pollen wall ultrastructure and its bearing on the systematical position ofBlennosperma andCrocidium.—Amer. Journ. Bot.53, 555 to 563.Google Scholar
  76. Solbrig, O. T., 1963: Subfamilial nomenclature ofCompositae.—Taxon12, 229–235.Google Scholar
  77. - 1972: Cytology and cytogenetics of shrubs. In:C. M. McKell, J. R. Blaidell, andJ. R. Goodin (Ed.), Wildland Shrubs, their Biology and Utilization, p. 127–137. Ogden, Utah.Google Scholar
  78. Solereder, H., 1908: Systematische Anatomie der Dicotyledonen. Ergänzungsband. Stuttgart: F. Enke.Google Scholar
  79. Soó, R., 1967: Die modernen Systeme der Angiospermen. — Acta Bot. Acad. Sci. Hung.13, 201–233.Google Scholar
  80. Stebbins, G. L., 1940: Additional evidence for a holarctic dispersal of flowering plants in the Mesozoic era.—Proc. 6th Pacific Sci. Congress3, 649–660.Google Scholar
  81. , 1953: A new classification of the tribeCichorieae, familyCompositae.—Madroño12, 65–81.Google Scholar
  82. Štepa, I., 1958: Ad cognitionem pollinis morphologiae generum nonnullorum tribusCynareae familiaeCompositae.—Notul. Syst. Geogr. Inst. Bot. Thbiliss.20, 54–62.Google Scholar
  83. Stix, E., 1960: Pollenmorphologische Untersuchungen an Compositen. — Grana Palynol.2, 39–114.Google Scholar
  84. Subramanyam, K., 1951: On the probable origin of the unilocular ovary of theCompositae from theStylidiaceae.—Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Sect.B 33, 327–330.Google Scholar
  85. Takhtajan, A., 1959: Die Evolution der Angiospermen. Jena: VEB G. Fischer.Google Scholar
  86. , 1973: Evolution und Ausbreitung der Blütenpflanzen. Jena: VEB G. Fischer.Google Scholar
  87. Tomb, A. S., Larson, D. A., andSkvarla, J. J., 1974: Pollen morphology and detailed structure of familyCompositae, tribeCichorieae. I. SubtribeStephanomeriinae.—Amer. Journ. Bot.61, 486–498.Google Scholar
  88. Vernin, J., 1952: Contribution à l'étude du développement de l'albumen et de l'embryon chez les Composées. Thèse Doct. Univ. Paris.Google Scholar
  89. Wagenitz, G., 1955: Pollenmorphologie und Systematik in der GattungCentaurea L. s. l. — Flora142, 213–279.Google Scholar
  90. , 1964: ReiheCampanulales. In:H. Melchior (Ed.), A. Engler's Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien. 12. Aufl.2, 478–497. Berlin-Nikolassee: Gebr. Borntraeger.Google Scholar
  91. Wunderlich, R., 1959: Zur Frage der Phylogenie der Endospermtypen bei den Angiospermen. — Österr. Bot. Ztschr.106, 203–293.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gerhard Wagenitz
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl für PflanzensystematikSystematisch-Geobotanisches InstitutGöttingenBundesrepublik Deutschland

Personalised recommendations