Skip to main content
Log in

Numerisch-taxonomische Untersuchungen anPisum sativum L.

Numerical taxonomic studies inPisum sativum L.

Исследования по нуме рической таксономииPisum sativum L.

  • Originalarbeiten
  • Published:
Die Kulturpflanze Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Es werden die folgenden in der numerischen Taxonomie gebräuchlichen 11 Ähnlichkeitsmaße auf ihre Anwendbarkeit geprüft: Koeffizient vonJaccard (2 Varianten), simple matching-Koeffizient, Koeffizient vonRogers undTanimoto, Phi-Koeffizient, Koeffizient vonGower, mittlere Merkmalsdifferenz, mittlerer quadratischer Abstand, Canberra-Metrik, Divergenzkoeffizient vonClark und Produkt-Moment-Korrelationskoeffizient vonPearson.

Die Untersuchung erfolgte anhand von 312 Sippen der GattungPisum. Die an ihren bonitierten 71 Merkmale wurden zu vier Merkmalssätzen (Gesamtheit der Merkmale, alle quantitativen Merkmale, alle qualitativen Merkmale, 21 ausgewählte qualitative Merkmale) zusammengestellt. Für die Gruppenbildung wurde die unbewichtete Paar-Gruppen-Methode mit arithmetischen Mittelwerten (UPGMA) benutzt. Insgesamt ergaben sich 50 verschiedene Dendrogramme, aufgrund derer die Ähnlichkeitsmaße eingeschätzt wurden. Die Auswertung der Dendrogramme erfolgte durch die Informationsmaße Sumrat und Samrat, den F-Index und die Hauptkomponentenanalyse.

Die Hauptaussagen der Arbeit sind: (1) Alle Ähnlichkeitsmaße ergeben in Abhängigkeit von den Merkmalssätzen sowohl taxonomisch brauchbare als auch taxonomisch unbrauchbare Dendrogramme. (2) Von den geprüften 11 Koeffizienten erweisen sich bei Vorliegen von überwiegend vielstufigen Merkmalen die Canberra-Metrik und bei Berücksichtigung von ausschließlich zweistufigen Merkmalen der simple matching-Koeffizient als gut. (3) Während die Verwendung aller 71 Merkmale und der 28 quantitativen Merkmale zu taxonomisch ungeeigneten Dendrogrammen führt, resultieren bei Benutzung der qualitativen Merkmale, insbesondere der ausgewählten 21, taxonomisch brauchbare Dendrogramme. (4) Dendrogramme, basierend auf wenigen Merkmalen, haben höhere Informationsgehalte als vergleichbare Dendrogramme, die auf einer größeren Anzahl von Merkmalen beruhen. (5) Unter den analysierten Faktoren übt die Auswahl der Merkmale den größten Einfluß auf die Dendrogrammbildung aus, es folgt die Merkmalskodierung und danach der Ähnlichkeitskoeffizient. (6) Für die UnterartP. sativum L. s. l. ssp.sativum ergibt sich ein Vorschlag für eine Neuklassifikation, in der für die Hauptgruppen die Differentialmerkmale Blütenfarbe, Pergamentschicht und Samenform oder Zeichnung der Samenschale in der genannten Reihenfolge berücksichtigt werden müßten.

Summary

The following 11 similarity coefficients, which are often used in numerical taxonomy, are compared to test their applicability: coefficient ofJaccard (two different readings), simple matching coefficient, coefficient ofRogers andTanimoto, phi coefficient, general similarity coefficient ofGower, mean character difference, mean square distance, Canberra metric, coefficient of divergence, andPearson's product-moment correlation coefficient.

The studies were based on 312 taxa of the genusPisum for which 71 characters had been measured. Four character sets have been established: totality of the characters, all quantitative characters, all qualitative characters, and 21 carefully selected qualitative characters. The clustering method selected was the unweighted pair-group method using arithmetic averages (UPGMA). Thus 50 different dendrograms were elaborated. The dendrograms were analysed by the information-theoretic measures SUMRAT and SAMRAT, the F-index, and the principal component analysis.

The following main results were obtained: (1) Depending on the character sets every similarity coefficient yields taxonomic useful and taxonomic useless dendrograms. (2) The investigation shows that if the greater part of the characters are multistate characters the Canberra metric proves best, but if only two-state characters are used the simple matching coefficient is the best one. (3) Dendrograms based on all of the 71 characters or the 28 quantitative characters make no taxonomic sense; the choice of the qualitative characters, especially the selected 21 ones, yields taxonomic useful dendrograms. (4) Dendrogra msbased on few characters have greater information contents than comparable ones based on a greater number of characters. (5) Among the analysed factors the selection of characters had the most important influence upon the construction of the dendrograms; it is followed by the codification of the characters and finally by the kind of the used similarity coefficient. (6) ForP. sativum L. s. l. ssp.sativum guide-lines for a new classification could be proposed; flower colour, parchment-layer, and shape of seed or mottling of the seed-coat should be taken into account in this sequence as the taxonomically most important differential characters.

Краткое содержание

Исследуется возможн ость применения след ующих одинадцати коэффици ентов сходства, часто испол ьзуемых в нумерическ ой таксономии: коэффици енты Жакарда (в двух вариан тах), Роджерса и Танимо то, Гоуера, коэффициенты «фи» и «simple matching», средняя ра зница признаков, сред няя квадратическая дистанция, «Canberra metric», коэфф ициент дивергенции Клерка и корреляцион ный коэффициент Пирсона.

Исследования провод ились на 312 формах родаPisum. Бонитировался 71 признак; признаки обр абатывались как 4 разл ичных набора (все признаки, 28 количественных приз наков, 43 качественных и 21 отобранный качестве нный признак). Для группиро вки применялся метод невзвешенных парных групп с арифметическ ими средними. Всего бы ло составлено 50 различны х дендрограмм, на основ ании которых оценива лись коэффициенты сходст ва. Дендрограммы обраба тывались с помощью информационных мер, F-и ндекса и анализа главных ком понентов.

Работа позволяет сде лать следующие вывод ы. (1) В зависимости от набор а признаков все коэффи циенты сходства дают как приемлемые, так и непр иемлемые, с точки зрения таксон омии, дендрограммы. (2) И з 11 испытанных коэффици ентов хорошие результаты д али: при преобладании призна ков со многими состояниями — «Canberra metric», а при учёте толь ко признаков с двумя состояниями — « simple matching»-коэффициент. (3) В то время как использование всех п ризнаков (т. е. 71), или 28 количественных — при вело к таксономически непр игодным дендрограмм ам, использование качес твенных признаков, в особенно сти 21 отобранного — дал о таксономически прие млемые дендрограммы. (4) Дендро граммы, полученные пр и учёте малого количества признаков обладают б олее богатым информа ционным содержанием, чем сравнимые дендрогра ммы, построенные на бо льшем количестве признако в. (5) Самое сильное влияни е на образование денд рограмм, из анализированных факторов, оказывает в ыбор признаков, за ним следует кодирование признак ов и вслед за ним — коэффи циент сходства. (6) Для подвида ssp.sativum можно предложить нов ую классификацию, в ко торой для главных групп следовало бы учитыва ть как дифференциаль ные признаки: окраску цве тка, затем характер перга ментного слоя и затем форму семени или рисунок семенной кожуры.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Literatur

  • Akinola, J. O., andP. C. Whiteman, 1972: A numerical classification ofCajanus cajan (L.) Millsp. accessions based on morphological and agronomic attributes. - Aust. J. agric. Res.23, 995–1005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alefeld, F., 1866: Landwirtschaftliche Flora. - Wiegandt und Hempel, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. C., S. G. Carmer, andA. M. Rhodes, 1969: A taximetric study of interspecific variation inVitis. - Vitis8, 177–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, B. R., 1974: Classification of the oat species (Avena, Poaceae) using various taximetric methods and an information-theoretic model. - Canad. J. Bot.52, 2241–2262.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1977: Oats: wild and cultivated. A monograph of the genusAvena L. (Poaceae). - Biosystematics Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Research Branch, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Monograph No. 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andL. P. Lefkovitch, 1972: A model for cultivar classification and identification with reference to oats (Avena). I. Establishment of the groupings by taximetric methods. - Canad. J. Bot.50, 121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bidault, M. etJ. M. Hubac, 1967: Application des méthodes numériques de la taxinomie sur une série de populations deFestuca ovina L. ssp.eu-ovina Hack. - C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris, Sér. D264, 1785–1788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bird, R. McK., andM. M. Goodman, 1977: The races of maize V: Grouping maize races on the basis of ear morphology. - Econ. Bot.31, 471–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyce, A. J., 1969: Mapping diversity: a comparative study of some numerical methods. In:A. J. Cole (ed.), Numerical taxonomy. Proc. of the Coll. in Numerical Taxonomy held in the University of St. Andrews, September 1968, pp. 1–31. - Academic Press, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R. L., L. A. Edye, W. T. Williams, B. Grof, andC. H. L. Nicholson, 1971: Numerical analysis of variation patterns in the genusStylosanthes as an aid to plant introduction and assessment. - Aust. J. agric. Res.22, 737–757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cain, A. J., andG. A. Harrison, 1958: An analysis of the taxonomist's judgment of affinity. - Proc. zool. Soc. Lond.131, 85–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, P. J., 1952: An extension of the coefficient of divergence for use with multiple characters. - Copeia2, 61–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cubero, J. I., 1975: The research on the chickpea (Cicer arietinum) in Spain. In: International Workshop on Grain Legumes, January 13–16, 1975, pp. 117–122. - Internatl. Crops Res. Inst. for the Semi-Arid Tropics, Hyderabad, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drury, D. G., andJ. M. Randal, 1969: A numerical study of the variation in the New ZealandErechtiles arguta-scaberula complex (Senecioneae-Compositae). - N. Z. J. Bot.7, 56–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edye, L. A., W. T. Williams, andA. J. Pritchard, 1970: A numerical analysis of variation patterns in Australian introductions ofGlycine wightii (G. javanica). - Aust. J. agric. Res.21, 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, W. R., 1967: Floral morphology and systematics ofPlatystemon and its alliesHesperomecon andMeconella (Papaveraceae: Platystemonoideae). - Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull.47, 25–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fanizza, G., andT. P. Bogyo, 1976: A cluster analysis of almond varieties in Apulia. - Riv. Ortoflorofrutt. It.60, 277–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. M., andR. McK. Bird, 1977: The races of maize IV: Tentative grouping of 219 Latin American races.- Econ. Bot.31, 202–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govorov, L. I., 1937: Goroch. V.: N. I.Vavilov i. E. V.Vul'f (Red. izd.), Kul'turnaja flora SSSR.4, S. 229–336. - Gosudarstvennoe izdatel'stvo sovchoznoj i kolchoznoj literatury, Moskva i Leningrad.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gower, J. C., 1966: Some distance properties of latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analysis. - Biometrika53, 325–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1967a: A comparison of some methods of cluster analysis. - Biometrics23, 623–637.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • —, 1967b: Multivariate analysis and multidimensional geometry. - Statistician17, 13–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1971: A general coefficient of similarity and some of its properties. - Biometrics27, 857–871.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, A. V., 1967: Studies in recently developed group-forming procedures in taxonomy and ecology. - J. South Afr. Bot.33, 185–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivimey-Cook, R. B., 1968: Investigations into the phenetic relationships between species ofOnonis L. - Watsonia7, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1969: The phenetic relationships between species ofOnonis. In:A. J. Cole (ed.). Numerical taxonomy. Proc. of the Coll. in Numerical Taxonomy held in the University of St. Andrews, September 1968, pp. 69–90. - Academic Press, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. P., andR. W. Holm, 1968: Numerical taxonomic studies in the genusSarcostemma R. Br. (Asclepiadaceae). In:V. H. Heywood (ed.), Modern methods in plant taxonomy, pp. 199–217. - Academic Press, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamijima, O., 1974: Characteristics and classification of so-called dwarf rice. II. Principal component analysis of the panicle and internode lengths in dwarf strains of rice and its implication in grouping the strains. - Jap. J. Breed.24, 261–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Körnicke, F., 1873: Systematische Uebersicht der Cerealien und monocarpischen Leguminosen in Aehren, Rispen, Frü chten und Samen. - Carl Georgi, Bonn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuiper, F. K., andL. Fisher, 1975: A Monte Carlo comparison of six clustering procedures. - Biometrics31, 777–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamprecht, H., 1974: Monographie der GattungPisum. - Steiermärkische Landesdruckerei, Graz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lance, G. N., andW. T. Williams, 1966: Computer programs for hierarchical polythetic classification (“ similarity analyses”). - Computer J.9, 60–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, and —, 1967a: A general theory of classificatory sorting strategies. I. Hierarchical systems. - Computer J.9, 373–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, and —, 1967b: Mixed-data classificatory programs. I. Agglomerative systems. - Aust. Computer J.1, 15–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legendre, P., andD. J. Rogers, 1972: Characters and clustering in taxonomy: a synthesis of two taximetric procedures. - Taxon21, 567–606.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, Chr. O., 1954: Das morphologische System der Saaterbsen (Pisum sativum L. sens. lat. Gov. ssp.sativum). - Züchter24, 316–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leuschner, D., 1974: Einführung in die numerische Taxonomie. - VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liang, G. H. L., andA. J. Casady, 1966: Quantitative presentation of the systematic relationships among twenty-oneSorghum species. - Crop Sci.6, 76–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Makaševa, R. Ch., 1973: Goroch. - Kolos, Leningrad.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannetje, L. 't, 1967: A comparison of eight numerical procedures applied to the classification of some AfricanTrifolium. taxa based onRhizobium affinities. - Aust. J. Bot.15, 521–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1969:Rhizobium affinities and phenetic relationships within the genusStylosanthes. - Aust. J. Bot.17, 553–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michener, C. D., andR. R. Sokal, 1957: A quantitative approach to a problem in classification. - Evolution11, 130–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molina-Cano, J. L., 1976: A numerical classification of some European barley cultivars (Hordeum vulgare L. s. i.). - Z. Pflanzenz.76, 320–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, P. H., P. Neumann undR. Storm, 1973: Tafeln der mathematischen Statistik. - VEB Fachbuchverlag, Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, E. C., 1964: Morphological integration and the meaning of characters in classification systems. In: V. H.Heywood, and J.McNeill (eds.), Phenetic and phylogenetic classification, pp. 123–156. - Syst. Ass. Pub.6, London.

  • Parker, W. H., 1976: Comparison of numerical taxonomic methods used to estimate flavonoid similarities in the Limnanthaceae. - Brittonia28, 390–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pernes, J., D. Combes etR. Réné-Chaume, 1970: Différenciation des populations naturelles duPanicum maximum Jacq. en Côte-d'Ivoire par acquisition de modifications transmissibles, les unes par graines apomictiques, d'autres par multiplication végétative. - C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris, Sér. D270, 1992–1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramon, S., 1968: A numerical taxonomic study of certain taxa ofHaplopappus. sectionBlepharodon. - Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull.47, 863–900.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, A. M., W. P. Bemis, T. W. Whitaker, andS. G. Carmer, 1968: A numerical taxonomic study ofCucurbita. - Brittonia20, 251–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,C. Campbell, S. E. Malo, andS. G. Carmer, 1970: A numerical taxonomic study of the mangoMangifera indica L. - J. Amer. Soc. hort. Sci.95, 252–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andS. G. Carmer, 1966: Classification of sweet corn inbreds by methods of numerical taxonomy. - Proc. Amer. Soc. hort. Sci.88, 507–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • —' —, andJ. W. Courter, 1969: Measurement and classification of genetic variability in horseradish.- J. Amer. Soc. hort. Sci.94, 98–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,S. E. Malo, C. W., Campbell, andS. G. Carmer, 1971: A numerical taxonomic study of the avocado (Persea americana Mill.). - J. Amer. Soc. hort. Sci.96, 391–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andF. W. Martin, 1972: Multivariate studies of variations in yams (Dioscorea alata L.).- J. Amer. Soc. hort. Sci.97, 685–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, D. J., andT. T. Tanimoto, 1960: A computer program for classifying plants. - Science132, 1115–1118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohlf, F. J., 1963: Classification ofAedes by numerical taxonomic methods (Diptera: Culicidae). - Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer.56, 798–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1968: Stereograms in numerical taxonomy. - Syst. Zool.17, 246–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1970: Adaptive hierarchical clustering schemes. - Syst. Zool.19, 58–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Small, F., P. Y. Jui, andL. P. Lefkovitch, 1976: A numerical taxonomic analysis ofCannabis with special reference to species delimitation. - Syst. Bot.1, 67–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneath, P. H. A., 1969: Evaluation of clustering methods. In:A. J. Cole (ed.), Numerical taxonomy. Proc. of the Coll. in Numerical Taxonomy held in the University of St. Andrews, September 1968, pp. 257–271. - Academic Press, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneath, P. A. H., andR. R. Sokal, 1973: Numerical taxonomy. The principles and practice of numerical classification. - W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R., 1960: Die Grundlagen der numerischen Taxonomie. - Verhandl. XI. Internat. Kong. Entomol.1, 7–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andC. D. Michener, 1958: A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. - Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull.38, 1409–1438.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, and —, 1967: The effects of different numerical techniques on the phenetic classification of bees of theHoplitis complex (Megachilidae). - Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond.178, 59–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andF. J. Rohlf, 1962: The comparison of dendrograms by objective methods, - Taxon11, 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andP. H. A. Sneath, 1963: Principles of numerical taxonomy. - W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco and London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teräsvuori, K., 1915: Über in Finnland feldmäßig gebaute Erbsenformen. Experimentelle Vererbungsuntersuchungen mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Anzahl der Samenanlagen und Samen in den Hülsen. - Acta Soc. Fauna Flora fenn.40 (9) Helsinki.

  • Yamada, T., andS. Suzuki, 1975: Classification of alfalfa cultivars by the clustering method based on quantitative characters: its significance in the introduction and conservation of genetic resources. - JIBP Synthesis5, 137–143, 145.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meyer, D. Numerisch-taxonomische Untersuchungen anPisum sativum L.. Die Kulturpflanze 28, 285–340 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02014725

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02014725

Navigation