Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An integrative approach to species delimitation in Echinodorus (Alismataceae) and the description of two new species

  • Published:
Kew Bulletin Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Taxonomy of the genus Echinodorus is partially revisited in the light of current understanding of the phylogenetic relationships of the genus. As a result of new taxonomy, the species status of some previously synonymised taxa are restored, other names are synonymised, and some nomenclatural problems unnoticed by previous authors are resolved. Two new species, Echinodorus reptilis and E. emersus are described. The subgeneric divisions of the genus are not accepted, and all subspecific taxa are either rejected or established as species. As a result, 28 species based on a phylogenetic species concept are now recognised in Echinodorus and an identification key to these species is provided.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Map 1
Map 2
Map 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alonso Paz, E. (1986). Nota acerca del typus de Echinodorus uruguayensis Arechavaleta (Alismataceae). Comun. Bot. Mus. Hist. Nat. Montevideo 4: 1 – 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alroy, J. (2002). How many species names are valid? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99: 3706 – 3711.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Álvarez, I. & Wendel, J. F. (2003). Ribosomal ITS sequences and plant phylogenetic inference. Molec. Phylogenet. Evol. 29: 417 – 434.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Arechavaleta, J. (1903). Contribución al conocimiento de la flora de la república Uruguay. Varias especies nuevas y otras poco conocidas. Anales Mus. Nac. Montevideo 4: 61 – 86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergsten, J. (2005). A review of long-branch attraction. Cladistics 21: 163 – 193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britton, N. L. (1905). Alismaceae. Manual of the Flora of the northern states and Canada, ed. 2. H. Holt & Co., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brower, A. V. Z., DeSalle, R. & Vogler, A. (1996). Gene trees, species trees, and systematics: a cladistic perspective. Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27: 423 – 450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buchenau, F. (1903). Alismataceae. In: A. Engler (ed.), Das Pflanzenreich 15: 23 – 35. W. Engelmann, Leipzig.

  • Chamisso, L. K. A. & Schlechtendal, D. F. L. (1827). Alismaceae verae. Linnaea 2: 152 – 157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chodat, R. & Hassler, E. (1903). Alismataceae. Bull. Herb. Boissier, ser. 2, 3: 1030 – 1032.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, C. (1978). Book reviews, two taxonomic monographs. Aquatic Bot. 4: 377 – 381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayrat, B. (2005). Towards integrative taxonomy. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 85: 407 – 415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dominguez Licona, E. (2001). Alismataceae de la Vertiente del Pacifico en Mexico. Tesis para obtener el titulo de Biologo, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.

  • Doyle, R. D. (2001). Expansion of the exotic aquatic plant Cryptocoryne beckettii (Araceae) in the San Marcos River, Texas. Sida, 19: 1027 – 1038.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelmann, G. (1848). Alismaceae. In: A. Gray (ed.), A manual of the botany of the northern United States, from New England to Wisconsin and south to Ohio and Pennsylvania inclusive. Pp. 458 – 461. J. Munroe, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1890). Alismaceae. In: S. Watson & J. M. Coulter (eds.), Manual of the botany of the northern United States: including the district east of the Mississippi and north of North Carolina and Tennessee ed. 6: 553 – 556. Ivison, Blakeman & Co., New York.

  • Farris, S. (1979). The information content of the phylogenetic system. Syst. Zool. 28: 483 – 519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1982). Simplicity and informativeness in systematics and phylogeny. Syst. Zool. 31: 413 – 444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____, Albert, V. A., Källersjä, M., Lipscomb, D. & Kluge, A. G. (1996). Parsimony jackknifing outperforms neighbor-joining. Cladistics 12: 99 – 124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fassett, N. C. (1955). Echinodorus in the American tropics. Rhodora 57: 133 – 156, 174 – 188, 202 – 212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernald, M. L. (1936). Some forms in the Alismaceae. Rhodora 38: 73.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1947). Additions to and subtractions from the flora of Virginia. Rhodora 49: 85 – 115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzhugh, K. (2006). The ‘requirement of total evidence’ and its role in phylogenetic systematics. Biol. Philos. 21: 309 – 351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goloboff, P., Farris, N. & Nixon, K. (2003). T.N.T. tree analysis using new technology. Program and documentation, available from the authors, and http://www.zmuc.dk/public/phylogeny/.

  • Graebner, P. (1911). Alismatacea uruguayensis. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 45: 433 – 434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grisebach, A. (1857). Systematische Untersuchungen über die Vegetation der Karaiben. Abh. Königl. Ges. Wiss. Göttingen 7: 257.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1858). Alismaceae. Bonplandia 6: 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1866). Alismaceae. Catalogus plantarum cubensium exhibens collectionem Wrightianam aliasque minores ex insula Cuba missas: 218. Apud Gulielmum Engelmann, Lipsae.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauman, L. (1915). Les Alismatacées Argentines. Anales Mus. Nac. Hist. Nat. Buenos Aires 27: 307 – 324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes, R. R. (1984). Alismataceae. Flora de Veracruz 37: 1 – 20. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Sobres Recursos Bioticos, Xalapa, Veracruz, Mexico.

  • ____ & Holm-Nielsen, L. B. (1986). Notes on Echinodorus (Alismataceae). Brittonia 38: 325 – 332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ & ____ (1989). Speciation of Alismatidae in the Neotropics. In: L. B. Holm-Nielsen, I. C. Nielsen & H. Balslev (eds.), Tropical forests. Botanical dynamics, speciation and diversity, pp. 212 – 219. Academic Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ & ____ (1994). The Alismataceae. Flora Neotrop. Monogr. 64.

  • ____ & Burkhalter, J. R. (1998). A new species of Echinodorus (Alismataceae) from the United States of America. Castanea 63: 180 – 182.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ & Hellquist, C. B. (2000). 190. Alismataceae Ventenat. In: Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds.), Flora of North America 22: 7 – 25. Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford.

  • Hennig, W. (1966). Phylogenetic systematics. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmgren, P. K. & Holmgren, N. H. (1998 onwards continuously updated). Index Herbariorum. New York Botanical Garden. http://sciweb.nybg.org/science2/IndexHerbariorum.asp

  • Holm-Nielsen, L. B. & Haynes, R. R. (1985). Two new Alismatidae from Ecuador and Peru (Alismataceae and Zannichelliaceae). Brittonia 37: 17 – 21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ & ____ (1986). Alismataceae. In: G. Harling & L. Andersson (eds.), Flora of Ecuador 26: 1 – 24. Department of Systematic Botany, University of Gothenburg.

  • Hooker, W. J. & Arnott, G. A. W. (1838). The Botany of Captain Beechey’s Voyage. Henry G. Bohn, No. 4, York Street, Covent Garden, London.

  • IUCN (2001). IUCN red list categories and criteria: version 3.1. IUCN species survival comission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasselmann, C. (2000). Echinodórus decúmbens Kasselmann, spec. nov. (Alismatáceae), eine neue Art aus Ostbrasilien. Aqua-Planta 25: 3 – 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (2001). Echinodorus, die beliebtesten Aquariepflanzen. Ettlingen, Dähne Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (2003). Aquarium Plants. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluge, A. G. (1989). A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38: 7 – 25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunth, C. S. (1841). Alismaceae L. C. Richard. Enumeratio Plantarum 3: 147 – 162. J. G. Collae, Stuttgart & Tübingen.

  • Kuntze, O. (1898). Revisio Generum Plantarum 3 pt. 2. Arthur Felix, Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamarck, J. B. (1788). Encylopédie méthodique. Botanique 2: 504. Chez Panckoucke, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehtonen, S. (2006). Phylogenetics of Echinodorus (Alismataceae) based on morphological data. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 150: 291 – 305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ & Myllys, L. (2008). Cladistic analysis of Echinodorus (Alismataceae): simultaneous analysis of molecular and morphological data. Cladistics 24: 218 – 239.

  • Linnaeus, C. (1753). Species Plantarum. Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lot, A. H. & Novelo, A. R. (1994). Alismataceae. In: G. Davidse, M. S. Sousa, & A. O. Chater (eds.), Flora Mesoamericana 6 Alismataceae a Cyperaceae. Pp. 3 – 8. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Missouri Botanical Garden and The Natural History Museum (London).

  • Lot, A., Novelo, A., Olvera, M. & Ramírez-García, P. (1999). Catálogo de angiospermas acuáticas de México. Hidrófitas estrictas emergentes y flotantes. Instituto de Biología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México.

  • Macbride, J. F. (1931). Publ. Field Mus. Nat. Hist., Chicago, Bot. Ser. II: 21.

  • Maddison, D. R. & Maddison, W. P. (2005). MacClade 4.08. Sinauer Associates, Inc. Sunderland, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martius, C. (1830). In: J. A. Schultes & J. H. Schultes (eds), Systema Vegetabilium 7. J. G. Cottae, Stuttgart.

  • Micheli, M. (1881). Alismaceae. In: A. De Candolle & C. De Candolle (eds.), Monographiæ phanerogamarum 3: 29 – 83. Masson, Paris.

  • Mishler, B. D. & Theriot, E. C. (2000). The Phylogenetic Species Concept (sensu Mishler and Theriot): Monophyly, Apomorphy, and Phylogenetic Species Concepts. In: Q. D. Wheeler & R. Meier (eds.), Species concepts and phylogenetic theory, pp. 44 – 54. Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morison, R. (1699). Plantarum historiae universalis oxoniensis. Vol. 3. Oxford.

  • Mühlberg, H. (1986). Echinodorus barthii spec. nov. Aquarien- Terrar.-Z. 11: 368 – 369.

  • ____ (2004). Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Gattung Echinodorus 2. Echinodorus ovalis. Schlechtendalia 12: 95 – 100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nees, C. & Martius, C. (1823). Nov. Actorum Acad. Caes. Leop.-Carol. Nat. Cur. 11: 21.

  • Nichols, R. (2001). Gene trees and species trees are not the same. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 358 – 364.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, K. C. & Wheeler, Q. D. (1990). An amplification of the phylogenetic species concept. Cladistics 6: 211 – 223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuttall, T. (1835). Collections towards a flora of the Territory of Arkansas. Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc. 5: 159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pichon, M. (1946). Sur les Alismatacées et les Butomacées. Notul. Syst. (Paris). 12: 170 – 183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rataj, K. (1967). Echinodorus intermedius (Martius) Grisebach und verwandte arten des tropischen Amerika. Mitt. Bot. Staatssaml. München 6: 613 – 619.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1968). Echinodorus paniculatus Micheli and its ally E. lanceolatus Rataj sp. nov. (American Alismataceae). Bull. Jard. Bot. Natl. Belg. 38: 401 – 408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1969a). Echinodorus grandiflorus (Cham. et Schlecht.) Mich., its geographical distribution and variability. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 4: 319 – 326.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1969b). Echinodorus longipetalus Mich. and other species with reticulate markings in the blades from Central and South America. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 4: 331 – 336.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1969c). Contribution to the knowledge of Echinodorus macrophyllus (Kunth) Mich. and E. scaber Rataj from tropical America. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 4: 435 – 442.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1969d). Echinodorus longiscapus Arech. y su dispersión en la América latina. Darwiniana 15: 183 – 188.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1969e). Echinodorus L. C. Rich. In: M. N. Correa (ed.), Flora Patagonica 2, pp. 29 – 31. Instituto Nacional de Technologia Argropecuaría, Buenos Aires.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1970a). New species of the genus Echinodorus from South Brazil. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 5: 213 – 216.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1970b). Three new species of the genus Echinodorus imported for the decoration of aquaria. Preslia 42: 264 – 266.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1970c). Las Alismataceae de la República Argentina. Darwiniana 16: 9 – 39.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1971). The taxonomy of Echinodorus palaefolius (Nees et Mart.) Macbr. (Alismataceae) and related species from Mexico, Central and South America. Preslia 43: 10 – 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1975). Revizion [sic!] of the genus Echinodorus Rich. Stud. Ceskoslov. Akad. Ved. 2: 1 – 156.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1981). Diagnozy trech novych druhu rodu Echinodorus. Akvárium Terárium 24 (6): 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1988). Schwertpflanzen aus Afrika. Aquarama 2: 27 – 30.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1989). Echinodorus multiflorus sp.n. Beschreibung einer neuen Schwertpflanze und Bemerkungen zur Haltung im Aquarium. Aquarama 4: 24 – 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (1990). Sekce Uruguayensii rodu Echinodorus. Akvárium Terárium 33 (2): 14 – 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____ (2002). Éxinodorusy i “flora neotropikov” [in Russian]. Akvarium Moskow 5: 30.

  • ____ (2004). A new revision of the swordplant genus Echinodorus Richard, 1848 (Alismataceae). Aqua (Neu Isenburg), Special Publication No. I.

  • Ridings, W. H. & Zettler, F. W. (1973). Aphanomyces Blight of Amazon Sword Plants. Phytopathology, 63: 289 – 295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauvalle, F. A. (1870). Flora Cubana. Anales Acad. Ci. Med. Habana 7: 560 – 566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultes, J. A. & Schultes, J. H. (eds) (1830). Systema Vegetabilium 7. J. G. Cottae, Stuttgart.

  • Seubert, A. (1847). Alismaceae. In: C. F. P. Martius (ed.), Flora Brasiliensis 3: 103 – 112.

  • ____ (1872). Fam. Alismaceae. In: E. Warming (ed.), Vidensk. Meddel. Dansk Naturhist. Foren. Kjobenhavn 6 – 9: 112 – 115.

  • Sites, J. W. Jr. & Marshall, J. C. (2003). Delimiting species: a renaissance issue in systematic biology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 18: 462 – 470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ____ & ____ (2004). Operational criteria for delimiting species. Annual Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35: 199 – 227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, J. K. (1909). Alismaceae. North American Flora 17: 43 – 62. New York Botanical Garden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Somogyi, J. (2006). Taxonomic, nomenclatural and chorological notes on several taxa of the genus Echinodorus (Alismataceae). Biologia (Bratislava) 61: 381 – 385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spegazzini, C. L. (1902). Nova Addenda ad Floram Patagonicam. Anales Mus. Nac. Buenos Aires 7: 174 – 175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprengel, C. (1825). Systema Vegetabilium 2: 163. Librariae Dieterichianae, Göttingen.

  • Stace, C. A. (2005). Plant taxonomy and biosystematics — does DNA provide all the answers? Taxon 54: 999 – 1007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Troncoso, N. S. (1964). Alismataceae. In: A. Burkart (ed.), Plantas vasculares nuevas o interesantes de la flora de Entre Rios, I. Darwiniana 13: 625 – 631.

  • Wahlberg, N., Oliveira, R. & Scott, J. A. (2003). Phylogenetic relationships of Phyciodes butterfly species (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): complex mtDNA variation and species delimitations. Syst. Entomol. 28: 257 – 273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanke, D. (1999). Ansichten zum “Formenkreis” um Echinodórus cylíndricus RATAJ (1975) und Echinodórus gláúcus RATAJ (1975). Aqua Pl. 24: 105 – 111.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The directors and staff of all the mentioned herbaria are acknowledged. I thank Maarten Christenhusz for his generous help with the Latin diagnoses and many nomenclatural problems. The manuscript greatly benefitted from discussions with Hanna Tuomisto. I also thank Daniel Crawford, Jaakko Hyvönen, Pamela Soltis, Daniel Falck and two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments on previous drafts. The language was kindly checked by Mirkka Jones. This study was funded by the Jenny and Antti Wihuri, Turku University, Emil Aaltonen, and Oskar Öflund’s Foundations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, Section of Biodiversity and Environmental Science, University of Turku, 20014, Turku, Finland

    Samuli Lehtonen

Authors
  1. Samuli Lehtonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuli Lehtonen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lehtonen, S. An integrative approach to species delimitation in Echinodorus (Alismataceae) and the description of two new species. Kew Bull 63, 525–563 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12225-008-9068-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12225-008-9068-0

Key Words

Search

Navigation