Plant Systematics and Evolution

, Volume 143, Issue 1–2, pp 83–107 | Cite as

Flavonoids and phylogenetic reconstruction

  • Tod F. Stuessy
  • Daniel J. Crawford
Article

Abstract

Flavonoids have been used successfully for interpreting evolutionary relationships in many groups of angiosperms. These interpretations often have been presented in narrative fashion without specific indications of the kinds of relationships expressed. In this paper a method of phylogeny reconstruction with flavonoid data showing cladistic, patristic, and phenetic relationships is presented. Such a phylogram contains maximal information about flavonoid evolution. As an example, relationships in the North American species ofCoreopsis (Compositae), containing 46 species in 11 sections, are analyzed by this approach. A phylogeny of sections of the genus from previous morphological, chromosomal and hybridization data is compared with that from data on anthochlors (chalcones and aurones). Strong correspondence of these evolutionary interpretations gives support to the hypothesized evolutionary trends within the group.

Key words

Angiospermae Compositae Coreopsis Flavonoids chalcones chronistics cladistics patristics phenetics chemosystematics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baverstock, P. R., Cole, S. R., Richardson, B. J., Watts, C. H. S., 1979: Electrophoresis and cladistics. — Syst. Zool.28, 214–219.Google Scholar
  2. Beyer, W. A., Stein, M. L., Smith, T. F., Ulam, S. M., 1973: A molecular sequence metric and evolutionary trees. — Math. Biosci.19, 9–25.Google Scholar
  3. Bohm, B. A., 1975: Chalcones, aurones and dihydrochalcones. — InHarborne, J. B., Mabry, T. J., Mabry, H., (Eds.): The Flavonoids, 442–504. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  4. —, 1974: The flavonoids ofLasthenia (Compositae). — Amer. J. Bot.61, 551–561.Google Scholar
  5. Boulter, D., 1980: The evaluation of present results and future possibilities of the use of amino acid sequence data in phylogenetic studies with specific reference to plant proteins. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. F., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 235–240. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  6. —, 1978: The relationships of 8 tribes of theCompositae. — Phytochemistry17, 1585–1589.Google Scholar
  7. —, 1979: Relationships between the partial amino acid sequence of plastocyanin from members of the families of flowering plants. — Phytochemistry18, 603–608.Google Scholar
  8. Brederode, J. van, Kamps-Hensbroek, R., 1981: Methylation of 3′, 4′ Di-OH C-glycosylflavones inSilene. — Z. Naturforsch.36c, 486–487.Google Scholar
  9. Cagnin, M. A. H., Gomes, C. M. R., Gottlieb, O. R., Marx, M. C., Da Roche, A. I., Da Silva, M. F., Temperini, J. A., 1977: Biochemical systematics: methods and principles. — Pl. Syst. Evol., Suppl.1, 53–76.Google Scholar
  10. —, 1978: Isoflavonoids as systematic markers. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.6, 225–238.Google Scholar
  11. Crawford, D. J., 1978: Flavonoid chemistry and angiosperm evolution. — Bot. Rev.44, 431–456.Google Scholar
  12. Crawford, D. J., Mabry, T. J., 1978: Flavonoid chemistry ofChenopodium fremontii: infraspecific variation and systematic implications at the interspecific level. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.6, 189–192.Google Scholar
  13. —, 1982: Plant chemosystematics. — Bioscience32, 114–124.Google Scholar
  14. —, 1978: Flavonoid profile affinities and genetic similarity. — Syst. Bot.3, 369–373.Google Scholar
  15. —, 1981: The taxonomic significance of anthochlors in theCoreopsidinae (Heliantheae:Compositae). — Amer. J. Bot.68, 107–117.Google Scholar
  16. —, 1983: The distribution of anthochlor floral pigments in North AmericanCoreopsis (Compositae): taxonomic and phyletic interpretations. — Amer. J. Bot.70, 355–362.Google Scholar
  17. Crisci, J. V., Stuessy, T. F., 1980: Determining primitive character states for phylogenetic reconstruction. — Syst. Bot.5, 112–135.Google Scholar
  18. Cronquist, A., 1977: On the taxonomic significance of secondary metabolites in angiosperms. — Pl. Syst. Evol., Suppl.1, 179–189.Google Scholar
  19. —, 1980: Chemistry in plant taxonomy: an assessment of where we stand. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughn, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 1–28. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  20. Crovello, T. J., 1970: Analysis of character variation in ecology and systematics. — Ann. Rev. Syst. Ecol.1, 55–98.Google Scholar
  21. Dover, G. A., 1980: Problems in the use of DNA for the study of species relationships and the evolutionary significance of generic differences. InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 241–268. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Eldredge, N., Cracraft, J., 1980: Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process. — New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ellison, W. L., Alston, R. E., Turner, B. L., 1962: Methods of presentation of crude biochemical data for systematic purposes with particular reference to the genusBahia (Compositae). — Amer. J. Bot.49, 599–604.Google Scholar
  24. Estabrook, G. F., 1980: The compatibility of occurrence patterns of chemicals in plants. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 379–397. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Fitch, W. M., 1977: On the problem of discovering the most parsimonious tree. — Amer. Nat.11, 223–257.Google Scholar
  26. —, 1967: Construction of phylogenetic trees. — Science155, 279–284.Google Scholar
  27. Forkmann, G., 1980: The B-ring hydroxylation pattern of intermediates of anthocyanin synthesis in pelargonidin- and cyanidin-producing lines ofMatthiola incana. — Planta148, 157–161.Google Scholar
  28. Frelin, Ch., Vuilleumier, F., 1979: Biochemical methods and reasoning in systematics. — Z. Zool. Syst. Evolut.-Forsch.17, 1–10.Google Scholar
  29. Friday, A. E., 1980: The status of immunological distance data in the construction of phylogenetic classifications: a critique. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 289–304. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Funk, V. A., Brooks, D. R., (Eds.), 1981: Advances in Cladistics. — New York Bot. Gard., N.Y.Google Scholar
  31. —, 1978: Cladistics for the practicing plant taxonomist. — Syst. Bot.3, 159–178.Google Scholar
  32. Giannasi, D. E., 1978a: Systematic aspects of flavonoid biosynthesis and evolution. — Bot. Rev.44, 339–429.Google Scholar
  33. —, 1978b: Generic relationships in theUlmaceae based on flavonoid chemistry. — Taxon27, 331–344.Google Scholar
  34. —, 1977: Flavonoid and other chemical constituents of fossil MioceneCeltis andUlmus (Succor Creek Flora). — Science197, 765–767.Google Scholar
  35. Gornall, R. J., Bohm, B. A., 1978: Angiosperm flavonoid evolution: a reappraisal. — Syst. Bot.3, 353–368.Google Scholar
  36. —, 1979: The distribution of flavonoids in the angiosperms. — Botaniska Notiser132, 1–30.Google Scholar
  37. Gottlieb, O. R., 1978: Biochemical systematics based on secondary metabolites: principles and methods. — Rev. Latinoamer. Quim.9, 138–147.Google Scholar
  38. —, 1980: Micromolecular systematics: principles and practice. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 329–352. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  39. Gray, J. C., 1980: Fraction I protein and plant phylogeny. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughn, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 167–193. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Grisebach, H., 1979: Selected topics in flavonoid biosynthesis. — InSwain, T., Harborne, J. B., Van Sumere, C. F., (Eds.): Biochemistry of Plant Phenolics12. — Rec. Adv. Phytochem. Plenum Press, 221–248. — New York.Google Scholar
  41. Hahlbrock, K., Grisebach, H., 1979: Enzymic controls in the biosynthesis of lignin and flavonoids. — Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol.39, 105–130.Google Scholar
  42. —, 1970: Comparison of chalcone-flavanone isomerase heteroenzymes and isoenzymes. — Phytochemistry9, 949–958.Google Scholar
  43. Harborne, J. B., 1975: The biochemical systematics of flavonoids, 1056–1095. — InHarborne, J. B., Mabry, T. J., Mabry, H., (Eds.): The Flavonoids, 1056–1095. — London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  44. —, 1977: Flavonoids and the evolution of the angiosperms. — Biochem. Syst. & Ecol.5, 7–22.Google Scholar
  45. Harrison, B. J., Strickland, R. G., 1978: Precursors and genetic control of pigmentation. 4. Hydroxylation and methoxylation stages in anthocyanin synthesis. — Heredity40, 127–132.Google Scholar
  46. Heinsbroek, R., Van Brederode, J., 1980: The genetic controlled hydroxylation pattern of the anthocyanin B-ring inSilene dioica is not determined at the p-coumaric acid stage. — Phytochemistry19, 2225–2226.Google Scholar
  47. Humphries, C. J., Richardson, P. M., 1980: Hennig's method and phytochemistry. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: Principles and Practice, 353–378. — London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  48. Jaccard, P., 1908: Nouvelles recherches sur la distribution florale. — Bull. Soc. Vand. Sci. Nat.44, 223–270.Google Scholar
  49. Kamsteeg, J., Van Brederode, J., Nigtevecht, G., 1980: Genetical and biochemical evidence that the hydroxylation pattern of the anthocyanin B-ring inSilene dioica is determined at the p-coumaroyl-coenzyme A state. — Phytochemistry19, 1459–1462.Google Scholar
  50. Levy, M., 1977: Minimum biosynthetic-step indices as measures of comparative flavonoid affinity. — Syst. Bot.2, 89–98.Google Scholar
  51. Manitto, P., 1981: Biosynthesis of Natural Products. — New York: Halstead Press.Google Scholar
  52. Mayr, E., 1981: Biological classification: toward a synthesis of opposing methodologies. — Science214, 510–516.Google Scholar
  53. Michener, C. D., 1970: Diverse approaches to systematics. — Evol. Biol.4, 1–38.Google Scholar
  54. Nelson, G., Platnick, N., 1981: Systematics and Biogeography: Cladistics and Vicariance. — New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  55. —, 1981: Vicariance Biogeography: a Critique. — New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  56. Niklas, K. J., Giannasi, D. E., 1977a: Geochemistry and thermolysis of flavonoids. — Science197, 767–769.Google Scholar
  57. —, 1977b: Flavonoids and other chemical constituents of fossil mioceneZelkova (Ulmaceae). — Science196, 877–878.Google Scholar
  58. —, 1978: Angiosperm paleobiochemistry of the Succor Creek Flora (Miocene), U.S.A. — Amer. J. Bot.65, 943–952.Google Scholar
  59. Parker, W. H., 1976: Comparison of numerical taxonomic methods used to estimate flavonoid similarities in theLimnanthaceae. — Brittonia28, 390–399.Google Scholar
  60. Peacock, D., 1981: Data handling for phylogenetic trees. — InGutfreund, H., (Ed.): Biochemical Evolution, 88–115. — Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  61. —, 1975: Use of amino acid sequence data in phylogeny and evolution of methods using computer simulation. — J. Mol. Biol.95, 513–527.Google Scholar
  62. Prager, E. M., Wilson, A. C., 1978: Comparison of phylogenetic trees for proteins and nucleic acids: empirical evaluation of alternative matrix methods. — J. Mol. Evol.11, 129–142.Google Scholar
  63. Read, D. W., 1975: Primitive phylogeny, neutral mutations, and “molecular clocks”. — Syst. Zool.24, 209–221.Google Scholar
  64. Sherff, E. E., 1936: Revision of the genusCoreopsis. — Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Bot. Ser.11, 279–475.Google Scholar
  65. —, 1937: The genusBidens. — Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Bot. Ser.16, 1–709.Google Scholar
  66. Smith, D. M., Glennie, C. W., Harborne, J. B., Williams, C. A., 1977: Flavonoid diversification in thePolemoniaceae. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.5, 107–115.Google Scholar
  67. Smith, E. B., 1975: The chromosome numbers of North AmericanCoreopsis with phyletic interpretations. — Bot. Gaz.136, 78–86.Google Scholar
  68. —, 1976: A biosystematic survey ofCoreopsis in eastern United States and Canada. — Sida6, 123–215.Google Scholar
  69. Smith, P. M., 1976: The Chemotaxonomy of Plants. — New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  70. Sneath, P. H. A., 1957: The application of computers to taxonomy. — J. Gen. Microbiol.17, 201–226.Google Scholar
  71. —, 1973: Principles of Numerical Classification. — San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
  72. Sokal, R. R., Sneath, P. H. A., 1963: Principles of Numeral Taxonomy. — San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
  73. Stuessy, T. F., 1980: Cladistics and plant systematics: problems and prospects. — Syst. Bot.5, 109–111.Google Scholar
  74. Swain, T., 1975: Evolution of flavonoid compounds. — InHarborne, J. B., Mabry, T. J., Mabry, H., (Eds.): The Flavonoids, 1096–1129. — New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  75. Tubak, A. J. H., Meyer, H., Bennink, G. J. H., 1978: Modification of the B-ring during flavonoid synthesis inPetunia hybrida: Introduction of the 3′-hydroxyl group regulated by the gene Ht1. — Planta139, 67–71.Google Scholar
  76. Vickery, M. L., Vickery, B., 1981: Secondary Plant Metabolism. Baltimore: Univ. Park Press.Google Scholar
  77. Wiley, E. O., 1981: Phylogenetics: the Theory and Practice of Phylogenetic Systematics. — New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  78. Wong, E., 1976: Biosynthesis of flavonoids. — InGoodwin, T. W., (Ed.): Chemistry and Biochemistry of Plant Pigments, vol.1, ed. 2, 464–526. — New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  79. Young, D. A., 1981: The usefulness of flavonoids in angiosperm phylogeny: some selected examples. — InYoung, D. A., Siegler, D. S., (Eds.): Phytochemistry and Angiosperm Phylogeny, 205–232. — New York: Praeger Scientific.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tod F. Stuessy
    • 1
  • Daniel J. Crawford
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of BotanyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbus/OhioUSA

Personalised recommendations