Skip to main content

Morphology, anatomy, and taxonomic position of Pagameopsis (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae)

Abstract

Morphological and anatomical features (including wood anatomy and pollen morphology) of the small neotropical genusPagameopsis (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae) are discussed and illustrated. The fused ovaries, fenestrate corolla tube, basally attached anther filaments, and absence of raphides are especially noteworthy.Pagameopsis is definitely not a member of the Psychotrieae because of significant differences in wood anatomy and gynoecial and fruit structure. A close affinity with Gaertnereae seems doubtful for similar reasons. The taxonomic affinities ofPagameopsis remain obscure. The genus shows similarities with several taxa of the Rubioideae, such as Coccocypseleae, Morindeae, Hedyotideae, andMetabolos. The absence of raphides, on the other hand, makes a position in the Rubioideae doubtful.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Literature Cited

  • Andersson, L. 1996. Circumscription of the tribe Isertieae (Rubiaceae). Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 139–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1997. A new revision ofJoosia (Rubiaceae-Cinchoneae), Brittonia 49: 24–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &J. H. E. Rova. 1999. Therps16 intron and the phylogeny of the Rubioideae (Rubiaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 214: 161–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bremekamp, C. E. B. 1939.Pleiocraterium genus novum Rubiacearum Hedyotidearum. Rec. Trav. Bot. Néerl. 36: 438–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1952. The African species ofOldenlandia L. sensu Hiern et K. Schumann. Verh. Koninkl. Ned. Akad. Wetensch., Afd. Natuurk., ser. 2, 18: 1–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1966. Remarks on the position, the delimitation and the subdivision of the Rubiaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15: 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremer, B. 1987. The sister-group of the paleotropical tribe Argostemmateae: a redefined neotropical tribe Hamelieae (Rubiaceae, Rubioideae). Cladistics 3: 35–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1992. Phylogeny of the Rubiaceae (Chiococceae) based on molecular and morphological data—useful approaches for classification and comparative ecology. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 79: 380–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1996. Phylogenetic studies within Rubiaceae and relationships to other families based on molecular data. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 33–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • — &O. Eriksson. 1992. Evolution of fruit characters and dispersal modes in the tropical family Rubiaceae. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 47: 79–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &R. K. Jansen. 1991. Comparative restriction site mapping of chloroplast DNA implies new phylogenetic relationships within Rubiaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 78: 198–213.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • — &M. Thulin. 1998. Collapse of Isertieae, reestablishment of Mussaendeae, and a new genus of Sabiceeae (Rubiaceae); phylogenetic relationships based onrbcL data. Pl. Syst. Evol. 211: 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —,K. Andreasen &D. Olsson. 1995. Subfamilial and tribal relationships in the Rubiaceae based onrbcL sequence data. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 383–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchner, R. &C. Puff. 1993. The genus complexDanais-Schismatoclada-Payera (Rubiaceae). Character states, generic delimitation and taxonomic position. Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat., Paris, 4e sér., 15, sect. B, Adansonia: 23–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chenery, E. M. 1946. AreHydrangea flowers unique? Nature 158: 240–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1948. Aluminium in the plant world. Part I. General survey in dicotyledons. Kew Bull. 1948: 173–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delprete, P. G. 1996. Evaluation of the tribes Chiococceae, Condamineeae and Catesbaeeae (Rubiaceae) based on morphological characters. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 165–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fay, M. F., B. Bremer, G. T. Prance, M. van der Bank, D. Bridson &M. W. Chase. 2000. PlastidrbcL sequence data showDialypetalanthus to be a member of Rubiaceae. Kew Bull. 55: 853–864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallé, N. 1966. Flore du Gabon 12. Rubiacées (1re partie). Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, O. 1995. Vegetation. Pages. 97–160.In: J. A. Steyermark, P. E. Berry & B. K. Holst, editors. Flora of the Venezuelan Guayana. Vol. 1. Introduction. Timber Press, Portland.

    Google Scholar 

  • IACA Committee. 1989. IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood identification. IAWA Bull. 10: 219–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Igersheim, A. 1993. The character states of the Caribbean monotypic endemicStrumpfia (Rubiaceae). Nordic J. Bot. 13: 545–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — &E. Robbrecht. 1994. The character states and relationships of the Prismatomerideae (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae). Comparisons withMorinda and comments on the circumscription of the Morindeae s.str. Opera Bot. Belg. 6: 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,C. Puff, P. Leins &C. Erbar. 1994. Gynoecial development ofGaertnera Lam. and of presumably allied taxa of the Psychotrieae (Rubiaceae): secondarily “superior” vs. inferior ovaries. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 116: 401–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, S., E. Robbrecht, H. Beeckman &E. Smets. 1996a.Gaertnera andPagamea: genera within the Psychotrieae or constituting the tribe Gaertnereae? A wood anatomical and palynological approach. Bot. Acta 109: 466–476.

    Google Scholar 

  • —— &E. Smets. 1996b. The systematic value of endexine ornamentation in some Psychotrieae pollen (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae). Grana 35: 129–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——,H. Beeckman &E. Smets. 1997. Wood anatomy of the predominantly African representatives of the tribe Psychotrieae (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae). IAWA J. 18: 169–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,P. Kitin, H. De Pauw, M. Idris, H. Beeckman &E. Smets. 1998. Preparation of wood specimens for transmitted light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Belg. J. Bot. 131: 41–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,S. Dessein, F. Piesschaert, E. Robbrecht &E. Smets. 2000. Aluminum accumulation in leaves of Rubiaceae: systematic and phylogenetic implications. Ann. Bot. 85: 91–101.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, J. T. 1994. The genusMorinda (Morindeae, Rubioideae, Rubiaceae) in New Caledonia: taxonomy and phylogeny. Opera Bot. 122: 1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkbride, J. H. &E. Robbrecht. 1984. Documentation of two recent new generic names in the Rubiaceae. Taxon 33: 102–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kukachka, B. F. &R. B. Miller. 1980. A chemical spot-test for aluminum and its value in wood identification. IAWA Bull. 1: 104–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nepokroeff, M., B. Bremer &K. J. Sytsma. 1999. Reorganization of the genusPsychotria and tribe Psychotrieae (Rubiaceae) inferred from ITS andrbcL sequence data. Syst. Bot. 24: 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piesschaert, F., E. Robbrecht &E. Smets. 1997.Dialypetalanthus fuscescens Kuhlm. (Dialypetalanthaceae): the problematic taxonomic position of an amazonian endemic. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 84: 201–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —,L. Andersson, S. Jansen, S. Dessein, E. Robbrecht &E. Smets. 2000a. Searching for the taxonomic position of the African genusColletoecema (Rubiaceae): morphology and anatomy compared with anrps16-intron analysis of the Rubioideae. Canad. J. Bot. 78: 288–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —,S. Huysmans, I. Jaimes, E. Robbrecht &E. Smets. 2000b. Morphological evidence for an extended tribe Coccocypseleae (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae). Pl. Biol. 2: 536–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pire, S. M. 1997. GéneroGalianthe subg.Ebelia (Rubiaceae: Spermacoceae): estudio palinológico. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 84: 878–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puff, C., L. Andersson, U. Rohrhofer &A. Igersheim. 1993. The tirbe Schradereae (Rubiaceae) reexamined. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 114: 449–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puff, C. & A. Igersheim. 1991. The flowers ofPaederia L. (Rubiaceae-Paederieae).In: C. Puff, editor, The genusPaederia L. (Rubiaceae-Paederieae): a multidisciplinary study. Opera Bot. Belg. 3: 55–75.

  • — &A. Igersheim. 1994. The character states and taxonomic position ofMetabolos Bl. (syn.Allaeophania Thw.) (Rubiaceae). Bull. Jard. Bot. Nat. Belg. 63: 241–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Punt, W., S. Blackmoore, S. Nilsson &A. Le Thomas A. 1994. Glossary of pollen and spore terminology. LPP Contr. Ser. 1. LPP Foundation, Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbrecht, E. 1988. Tropical woody Rubiaceae. Opera Bot. Belg. 1: 1–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1994. Supplement to the 1988 outline of the classification of the Rubiaceae. Index to genera. Opera Bot. Belg. 6: 173–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • —,C. Puff &A. Igersheim. 1991. The generaMitchella andDamnacanthus. Evidence for their close alliance; comments on the campylotropy in the Rubiaceae and the circumscription of the Morindeae. Blumea 35: 307–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standley, P. C. 1931. The Rubiaceae of Venezuela. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Bot. Ser. 7: 420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standley, P. C. & J. A. Steyermark. 1953.Pagamea. In: J. A. Steyermark et al., editors. Contributions to the Flora of Venezuela. From Ericaceae through Compositae. Fieldiana, Bot. 28: 584–590.

  • Steyermark, J. A. 1965.Pagameopsis. In: B. Maguire et al., editors. The botany of the Guayana Highland. Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 12: 267–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1974. Rubiaceae.In: T. Lasser, editor. Flora de Venezuela 9(2): 1007–1014. Instituto Botanico, Caracas.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1987. Flora of the Venezuelan Guayana—II. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 74: 85–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takhtajan, A. 1986. Floristic regions of the world. University of California Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. M. 1996. Overview of the Psychotrieae (Rubiaceae) in the Neotropics. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 261–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdcourt, B. 1953. A revision of certain African genera of herbaceous Rubiaceae. V. A revision of the genusPentas Bentham together with a key to related genera. Bull. Jard. Bot. Et. Brux. 23: 237–371.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frederic Piesschaert.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Piesschaert, F., Jansen, S., Jaimes, I. et al. Morphology, anatomy, and taxonomic position of Pagameopsis (Rubiaceae-Rubioideae). Brittonia 53, 490 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02809649

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02809649

Key words

  • anatomy
  • morphology
  • Pagamea
  • Pagameopsis
  • Psychotrieae
  • Rubiaceae
  • taxonomy