Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Notes on calycophyllous Rubiaceae. Part III. Systematic position of the monotypic Mexican genus Cosmocalyx and notes on the calycophyll development

  • Articles
  • Published:
Brittonia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The systematic position ofCosmocalyx, heretofore treated as agenus incertae sedis, is discussed. The morphological features ofCosmocalyx suggest strong similarities to various genera of the Hamelieae, to which it is compared and where it is placed. A complete description ofCosmocalyx, observations on its phenology, and comments on calyx and fruit development are presented and illustrated.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Andersson, L. &C. Persson. 1991. Ciroumscription of the tribe Cinchoneae (Rubiaceae)—A cladistic approach. Pl. Syst. Evol. 178: 65–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bold, H. C., C. J. Alexopoulos &T. Delevorvas. 1980. Morphology of plant and fungi. Ed. 4. Harper & Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremekamp, C. E. B. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1992. Phylogeny of the Rubiaceae and the Loganiaceae: congruence or conflict between morphological and molecular data? Amer. J. Bot. 79: 1171–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Candolle, A. P. de. 1830. Rubiaceae. Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis, IV: 341–622. Treuttel & Würtz, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Classen-Bockhoff, R. 1996. A survey of flower-like inflorescences in the Rubiaceae. Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 329–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delprete, P. G. 1996a. Notes on calycophyllous Rubiaceae. Part I. Morphological comparisons of the generaChimarrhis, Bathysa, andCalycophyllum, with new combinations and a new species,Chimarrhis gentryana. Brittonia 48: 35–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1996c. Notes on the taxonomic position of the monotypic Brazilian genusKerianthera (Rubiaceae). Opera Bot. Belg. 7: 271–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1996d. Systematics, typification, and reproductive biology ofPinckneya bracteata (W. Bartram) Raf. (Rubiaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 201: 243–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1997. Notes on calycophyllous Rubiaceae. Part II. Morphological comparisons of the generaBathysa andSchizocalyx. Brittonia 49: 480–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delprete, P. G. In press. Rondeletieae (Rubiaceae)—part I. Fl. Neotrop. Monogr. 77.

  • Esau, K. 1965. Plant anatomy. Ed. 2. John wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Font Quer, P. 1985. Diccionario de botánica. Ed. 9. Editorial Labor, Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooker, J. D. 1873. Ordo LXXXIV. Rubiaceae.In: G. Bentham & J. D. Hooker, editors Genera Plantarum ad exemplaria imprimis in herbariis kewensibus servata defirmata, 2: 7–151. London.

  • Jackson, B. D. 1928. A glossary of botanic terms with their derivation and accent. Ed. 4. Reprinted 1960. Hafner, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkbride., J. H. 1984. Manipulus rubiacearum III. Deepeae, a new tribe of Rubioideae (Rubiaceae). Brittonia 36: 317–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunth, C. S. 1820. Hameliaceae [Hamelieae]. In A. Humboldt, A. Bonpland & C. S. Kunth. Nov. gen. sp. 3: 413.

  • Lawrence, G. H. M. 1951. Taxonomy of vascular plants. Macmillan, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leppik, E. E. 1956. The form and function of numeral patterns in flowers. Amer. J. Bot. 43: 445–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindley, J. 1951. Glosologia de los términos usados en botánica. Traducida de la segunda edición inglesa y aumentada con la terminologia equivalente alemana por J. E. Rothe. Tucumán, Argentina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorence, D. H. 1990. A phyloeenetic list of the genera of Rubiaceae in Mexico. Acta Bot. Mex. 12: 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1988. A revision ofDeppea (Rubiaceae). Allertonia 4: 389–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, T. 1996.Syringantha coulteri (Hooker f.) McDowell, a new combination and remarks on the relationships of the monotypic Mexican genusSyringantha Standley (Rubiaceae). Novon 6: 273–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, N. P. 1984. Glosario botánico ilustrado. Editorial Continental, Ciudad México.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbrecht, E. 1988. Tropical woody Rubiaceae. Characteristic features and progressions. Contribution to a new subfamilial classification. Opera Bot. Belg. 1: 1–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbrecht, E. 1993. Supplement to the 1988 outline of the classification of the Rubiaceae. Index to generaIn: E. Robbrecht, editor. Advances in Rubiaceae macrossstematics. Opera Bot. Belg. 6: 173–196.

  • Rova, J. H. E., L. Andersson, P. G. Delprete &V. A. Albert. 1997. Macrophylogeny of the Rubiaceae fromtrnL-F sequence data. Amer. J. Bot. 84, suppl. [abstract]: 227–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampaio, A. J. 1943. Tipologia carpologia. Anais Acad. Brasil. Ci. 15: 309–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumann, K. 1891. Rubiaceae.In: A. Engler & K. Prantl, editors. Die Natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien 4(4): 1–156. Engelmann, Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spjut, R. W. 1994. A systematic treatment of fruit types. Mem. New York Bot. Gard. 70: 1–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standley, P. C. 1918–1934. Rubiaceae. N. Amer. Fl. 32: 1–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1930.Cosmocalyx. Studies of American plants—III. Publ. Field Columbian Mus., Bot. Ser. 8: 56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verdcourt, B. 1958. Remarks on the classification of the Rubiaceae. Bull. Jard. Bot. État. 28: 209–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Systematic Botany, The New York Botanical Garden, 10458-5126, Bronx, NY, U.S.A.

    Piero G. Delprete

Authors
  1. Piero G. Delprete
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delprete, P.G. Notes on calycophyllous Rubiaceae. Part III. Systematic position of the monotypic Mexican genus Cosmocalyx and notes on the calycophyll development. Brittonia 50, 309–317 (1998). https://doi.org/10.2307/2807774

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2807774

Key words

Search

Navigation