Rosaceae

  • C. Kalkman
Chapter
Part of the The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants book series (FAMILIES GENERA, volume 6)

Abstract

Woody or herbaceous. Leaves usually alternate, sometimes distichous, rarely opposite, simple or compound; stipules on the twig or on the base of the petiole, free or adnate to the petiole, rarely O. Inflorescences various, usually terminal, usually (compound) racemes. Flowers actinomorphic, mostly (4)5-merous, mostly bisexual, rarely unisexual and then the plants monoecious or dioecious; hypanthium usually well-developed (not evident in some staminate flowers), from saucer-shaped to tubular or camp anulate, the epicalyx, sepals, petals, and stamens inserted on its rim, its inside usually lined by nectariferous tissue; disk sometimes distinct, intrastaminal; epicalyx + in some genera; sepals free; petals free, from large and showy to small and not or hardly distinct from sepals, rarely 0; stamens few to numerous, often their number distinctly related to the number of perianth parts; filaments free; anthers bilocular, dehiscing longitudinally; carpels 1-many, free or variously connate with each other and/or adnate to the hypanthium, forming 1 or more superior to inferior ovary(ies); stylodia (in monocarpellate ovaries styles) +, these sometimes (some Maleae) fused into a common, branched style; ovules 1-several (often 2) per carpel, anatropous, ascending or pendulous. Fruits various, fleshy or dry, dehiscent or not; seeds 1-several, testa usually firm, endosperm 0 or a thin layer, cotyledons fleshy or flat.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Allen, G.A. 1986. Flowering pattern and fruit production in the dioecious shrub Oemleria cerasiformis (Rosaceae). Can. J. Bot. 64: 1216–1220.Google Scholar
  2. Antos, J.A., Allen, G.A. 1990. Habitat relationships of the Pacific coast shrub Oemleria cerasiformis (Rosaceae). Madrono 37: 249–260.Google Scholar
  3. APG II (Angiosperm Phylogeny Group) 2003. See general references.Google Scholar
  4. Asker, S. 1979. Progress in apomixis research. Hereditas 91: 231–240.Google Scholar
  5. Balick, M.J., Cox, P.A. 1996. Plants, people, and culture. The science of ethnobotany, ix + 228 pp. New York: Scientific American Library.Google Scholar
  6. Barr, A. et al. 1993. Traditional aboriginal medicines in the Northern Territory of Australia, xxiv + 650 pp. Darwin: Conservation Commission.Google Scholar
  7. Becking, J.H. 1979. Nitrogen fixation by Rubus ellipticus J.E. Smith. Plant Soil 53: 541–545.Google Scholar
  8. Bhat, R.B., Etejere, E.O., Oladipo, V.T. 1990. Ethnobotanical studies from Central Nigeria. Econ. Bot. 44: 382–390.Google Scholar
  9. Bolle, F. 1935. Ueber eine bemerkenswerte Missbildung bei Geum. Notizbl. Bot. Gart. Mus. Berlin-Dahlem 12, nr. 113: 349–354.Google Scholar
  10. Bowden, W. 1945. A list of chromosome numbers in the higher plants II. Am. J. Bot. 32: 191–201.Google Scholar
  11. Bramwell, D. 1978. The endemic genera of Rosaceae (Poterieae) in Macaronesia. Bot. Macar. 6: 67–73.Google Scholar
  12. Bramwell, D., Bramwell, Z.I. 1974. Wild flowers of the Canary Islands, x + 261 pp. London: Thornes.Google Scholar
  13. Brummitt, R.K. 1992. Vascular plant families and genera. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.Google Scholar
  14. Cambie, R.C., Ash, J. 1994. Fijian medicinal plants. Canberra: CSIRO.Google Scholar
  15. Campbell, C.S., Donoghue, M.J., Baldwin, B.G., Wojciechowski, M.F. 1995. Phylogenetic relationships in Maloideae (Rosaceae): evidence from sequences of the internal transcribed spacers of nuclear ribosomal DNA and its congruence with morphology. Am. J. Bot. 82: 903–918.Google Scholar
  16. Charlton, W.A. 1993. The rotated-lamina syndrome. III. Cases in Begonia, Corylus, Magnolia, Pellionia, Prunus, and Tilia. Can. J. Bot. 71: 229–247.Google Scholar
  17. Crawford, D.J., Brauner, S., Cosner, M.B., Stuessy, T.F. 1993. Use of RAPD markers to document the origin of the inter-generic hybrid x Margyracaena skottsbergii (Rosaceae) on the Juan Fernandez Islands. Am. J. Bot. 80: 89–92.Google Scholar
  18. Croizat, L. 1952. Manual of phytogeography. The Hague: Junk. Cronquist, A. 1981. See general references.Google Scholar
  19. Dahlgren, R. 1971. Multiple similarity of leaf between two genera of Cape plants, Cliffortia L. (Rosaceae) and Aspalathus L. (Fabaceae). Bot. Not. 124: 292–304.Google Scholar
  20. Dahlgren, R. 1983. General aspects of angiosperm evolution and macrosystematics. Nord. J. Bot. 3: 119–149.Google Scholar
  21. Endress, P.K. 1994. Diversity and evolutionary biology of tropical flowers. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Eriksson, T., Donoghue, M.J., Hibbs, M.S. 1998. Phylogenetic analysis of Potentilla using DNA sequences of nuclear ribosomal internal transcribed spacers (ITS), and implications for the classification of Rosoideae (Rosaceae). Plant Syst. Evol. 211: 155–179.Google Scholar
  23. Evans, R.C., Campbell, C.S. 2002. The origin of the apple subfamily (Maloideae; Rosaceae) is clarified by DNA sequence data from duplicated GBSSI genes. Am. J. Bot. 89: 1478–1484.Google Scholar
  24. Evans, R.C., Dickinson, T.A. 1999a. Floral ontogeny and morphology in subfamily Amygdaloideae T. & G (Rosaceae). Int. J. Plant Sci. 160: 955–979.Google Scholar
  25. Evans, R.C., Dickinson, T.A. 1999b. Floral ontogeny and morphology in subfamily Spiraeoideae Endl. (Rosaceae). Int. J. Plant Sci. 160: 981–1012.Google Scholar
  26. Faegri, K., van der Pijl, L. 1979. The principles of pollination ecology, ed. 3. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  27. Focke, W.O. 1888. Rosaceae. In: Engler & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. III, 3. Leipzig: Engelmann, pp. 1–61. (The pages 49-61 were published later than pp. 1–48, but there is no clarity about the publication dates, compare p. 767 and 849 in Stafleu & Cowan, Taxonomic Literature, ed. 2, vol. 1).Google Scholar
  28. Fuks, R. 1987. 0 gênero Agrimonia L. (Rosaceae) no Brasil. Albertoa 1: 73–84.Google Scholar
  29. Gams, H. 1922-1923. Rosaceae. In: Hegi, G. (ed.) Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa, ed. 1, IV. 2, pp. 662–1112a. (The pages 662-908 were published in 1922, the remainder in 1923 ).Google Scholar
  30. Gleason, H.A., Cronquist, A. 1991. Manual of vascular plants of Northeastern United States and adjacent Canada, ed. 2. New York: New York Botanic Garden.Google Scholar
  31. Goldblatt, P. 1976. Cytotaxonomic studies in the tribe Quillajeae (Rosaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 63: 200–206.Google Scholar
  32. Graham, R.A. 1960. Rosaceae. In: Fl. Trop. E. Africa, 61 pp. London: Crown Agents.Google Scholar
  33. Grandoso, E. 1964. Las especies argentinas del género Acaena ( Rosaceae ). Darwiniana 13: 209–342.Google Scholar
  34. Gunn, C.R., Wiersema, J.H., Ritchie, C.A., Kirkbride, H.J. 1992. Families and genera of Spermatophyta recognized by the Agricultural Research Service. USDA/ARS Tech. Bull. nr. 1796, 500 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Harley, J.L., Smith, S.E. 1983. Mycorrhizal symbiosis. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hegnauer, R. 1973, 1990. See general references.Google Scholar
  37. Henrickson, J. 1986a. Xerospiraea, a generic segregate of Spiraea ( Rosaceae) from Mexico. Aliso 11: 199–211.Google Scholar
  38. Henrickson, J. 1986b. Notes on Rosaceae. Phytologia 60: 468. Hutchinson, J. 1964. The genera of Flowering Plants, vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  39. Hutchinson, J. 1973. The families of Flowering Plants, ed. 3. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  40. Iketani, H., Ohashi, H. 199la. Anatomical structure of fruits and evolution of the tribe Sorbeae in the subfamily Maloideae (Rosaceae). J. Jap. Bot. 66: 319–351.Google Scholar
  41. Iketani, H., Ohashi, H. 1991b. Pourthiaea (Rosaceae) distinct from Photinia. J. Jap. Bot. 66: 352–355.Google Scholar
  42. Iltis, H. 1913. Ueber das Gynophor und die Fruchtausbildung bei der Gattung Geum. Sitz. Ber. Math.-Naturwiss. KI. Kais. Akad. Wiss. 122: 1177–1212,2 pl.Google Scholar
  43. IUCN, 1994. IUCN Red list categories. Prepared by IUCN species survival commission, as approved at 40th Meet. IUCN Council, 21 pp. Gland: IUCN.Google Scholar
  44. Jansen, P.C.M. 1981. Spices, condiments and medicinal plants in Ethiopiachrw(133). Ph. D. Wageningen, 327 pp. (also published in Belmontia n.s. 12 ).Google Scholar
  45. Jepson, W.L. 1936. A flora of California, vol. 2. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  46. Johri, B.M. et al. 1992. See general references.Google Scholar
  47. Juel, H.O. 1918. Beiträge sur Blütenanatomie und zur Systematik der Rosaceen. Kungl. Svenska Vetensk. Akad. Handl. 58, 5, 81 pp.Google Scholar
  48. Juel, H.O. 1927. Ueber die Blütenanatomie einiger Rosaceen. Nova Acta Reg. Soc. Sci. Upsal., vol. extr., 31 pp., 1 pl.Google Scholar
  49. Kalkman, C. 1968. Potentilla, Duchesnea, and Fragaria in Malesia ( Rosaceae ). Blumea 16: 325–354.Google Scholar
  50. Kalkman, C. 1988. The phylogeny of the Rosaceae. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 98: 37–59.Google Scholar
  51. Kalkman, C. 1993. Rosaceae. In: Flora Malesiana I, 11: 227351.Google Scholar
  52. Kania, W. 1973. Entwicklungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen an Rosaceenblüten. Bot. Jahrb. 93: 175–246.Google Scholar
  53. Kearney, T.H., Peebles, R.H. c.s. 1960. Arizona Flora, ed. 2. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  54. Knuth, P. 1898, 1904. Handbuch der Blütenbiologie II,1 & ííb1. Leipzig: Engelmann.Google Scholar
  55. Koehler, D.L., Smith, D.M. 1981. Hybridization between Cowania mexicana var. stansburiana and Purshia glandulosa ( Rosaceae ). Madrono 28: 13–25.Google Scholar
  56. Koehne, E. 1890. Die Gattungen der Pomaceen. Wiss. Beil. Progr. Falk-Realgymn. Berlin, 33 pp., 2 pl. Berlin: Gaertner.Google Scholar
  57. Krügel, T. 1992a. Zur zytologischen Struktur der Gattung Cotoneaster ( Rosaceae, Maloideae) III. Beitr. Phytotax. Univ. Jena 15: 69–86.Google Scholar
  58. Krügel, T. 1992b. Zur zytologischen Struktur von x Sorbocotoneaster pozdnjakovii Pojark. Beitr. Phytotax. Univ. Jena 15: 87–92.Google Scholar
  59. Langenfeld, W. 1971. Die Evolution der Gattung Malus Mill. Wiss. Zeitschr. Univ. Rostock 20, Math.-Naturwiss. Reihe 1: 49–51.Google Scholar
  60. Lemordant, D. 1974 (`1972’). Histoire et ethnobotanique du Kosso. J. Agr. Trop. Bot. Appl. 19: 560–582.Google Scholar
  61. Lersten, N.R., Curtis, J.D. 1982. Hydathodes in Physocarpus ( Rosaceae: Spiraeoideae). Can. J. Bot. 60: 850–855.Google Scholar
  62. Lindenhofer, A., Weber, A. 1999a. Polyandry in Rosaceae: evidence for a spiral origin of the androecium in Spiraeoideae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 121: 553–582.Google Scholar
  63. Lindenhofer, A., Weber, A. 1999b. The spiraeoid androecium of Pyroideae and Amygdaloideae (Rosaceae). Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 121: 583–605.Google Scholar
  64. Lindenhofer, A., Weber, A. 2000. Structural and developmental diversity of the androecium of Rosoideae (Rosaceae). Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 122: 63–91.Google Scholar
  65. Litav, M., Orshan, G. 1971. Biological flora of Israel. 1. Sarcopoterium spinosum (L.) Sp. Israel J. Bot. 20: 48–64.Google Scholar
  66. Long, A.A. 1989. Disjunct populations of the rare shrub, Neviusia alabamensis Gray ( Rosaceae ). Castanea 54: 29–39.Google Scholar
  67. Maximowicz, C.J. 1879. Adnotationes de Spiraeaceis. Acta Hort. Petropol. 6, 1: i-xi, 105–261.Google Scholar
  68. McArthur, E.D., Sanderson, S.C. 1985. A cytotaxonomic contribution to the Western North American Rosaceaous flora. Madrono 32: 24–28.Google Scholar
  69. Melchior, H. 1964. A. Engler’s Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien, ed. 12, vol. 2. Berlin: Borntraeger. (Rosales by G.K. SchulzeMenz, pp. 193–242 ).Google Scholar
  70. Mendes, E.J. 1978. Rosaceae. In: Launert, E. (ed) Flora Zambesiaca vol. 4. London: Fl. Zambes. Committee, pp. 7–33.Google Scholar
  71. Moffett, A.A. 1931. The chromosome constitution of the Pomoideae. Proc. Roy. Soc. B 108: 423–446, 1 p l.Google Scholar
  72. Morgan, W.T.W. 1981. Ethnobotany of the Turkana: use of plants by a pastoral people and their livestock in Kenya. Econ. Bot. 35: 96–130.Google Scholar
  73. Morgan, D.R., Soltis, D.E., Robertson K.R. 1994. Systematic and evolutionary implications of rbcL sequence variation in Rosaceae. Am. J. Bot. 81: 890–903.Google Scholar
  74. Newcomb, W., Heisey, R.M. 1984. Ultrastructure of actinorhizal root nodules of Chamaebatia foliolosa (Rosaceae). Can. J. Bot. 62: 1697–1707.Google Scholar
  75. Nordborg, G. 1966. Sanguisorba L., Sarcopoterium Spach, and Bencomia Webb. et Berth. Delimitation and subdivision of the genera. Opera Bot. 11,2: 1–103, pl. i-vi.Google Scholar
  76. Nybom, H. 1988. Apomixix versus sexuality in blackberries (Rubus subg. Rubus, Rosaceae). Plant Syst. Evol. 160: 207–218.Google Scholar
  77. Ohashi, H. 1988. Rhaphiolepis (Rosaceae) of Japan. J. Jap. Bot. 63: 1–7.Google Scholar
  78. Okuda, T. et al. 1992. Hydrolysable tannins as chemotaxonomic markers in the Rosaceae. Phytochemistry 31: 3091–3096.Google Scholar
  79. Parkin, J. 1914. The evolution of the inflorescence. J. Linn. Soc., Bot. 42: 511–562,1 pl.Google Scholar
  80. Perry, L.M. 1980. Medicinal plants of East and Southeast Asia. Attributed properties and uses (with the assistance of J. Metzger). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  81. Phipps, J.B. 1990. Mespilus canescens, a new Rosaceous endemic from Arkansas. Syst. Bot. 15: 26–32.Google Scholar
  82. Phipps, J.B. 1992. Heteromeles and Photinia (Rosaceae, subfam. Maloideae) of Mexico and Central America. Can. J. Bot. 70: 2138–2162.Google Scholar
  83. Phipps, J.B., Robertson, K.R., Smith, P.G., Rohrer, J.R. 1990. A checklist of the subfamily Maloideae (Rosaceae). Can. J. Bot. 68: 2209–2269.Google Scholar
  84. Phipps, J.B., Robertson, K.R., Rohrer, J.R., Smith, P.G. 1991. Origins and evolution of subfam. Maloideae (Rosaceae). Syst. Bot. 16: 303–332.Google Scholar
  85. Potter, D., Gao, E, Bortiri, P.E., Oh, S.-H., Baggett, S. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships in Rosaceae inferred from chloroplast matK and trnL-trnF nucleotide sequence data. Plant Syst. Evol. 231: 77–89.Google Scholar
  86. Press, J.R., Short, M.J. (eds.) 1994. Flora of Madeira. London: HSMO.Google Scholar
  87. Ratter, J.A., Milne, C. 1973. Some Angiosperm chromosome numbers. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 32: 429–438.Google Scholar
  88. Ridley, H.N. 1930. Dispersal of plants throughout the world. Ashford: Reeve.Google Scholar
  89. Robertson, K.R. 1974. The genera of Rosaceae in the Southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arbor. 55: 303–332,344–401, 611–662.Google Scholar
  90. Robertson, K.R., Phipps, J.B., Rohrer, J.R., Smith, P.G. 1991. A synopsis of genera in Maloideae (Rosaceae). Syst. Bot. 16: 376–394.Google Scholar
  91. Robertson, K.R., Weeden, N.F., Rohrer, J.R. 1995. The current status of Chamaemeles (Rosaceae: Maloideae), a Madeiran endemic. Bol. Mus. Mun. Funchal, suppl. 4: 621–636.Google Scholar
  92. Romoleroux, K. 1996. Rosaceae. In: Flora of Ecuador nr. 56: 3–151.Google Scholar
  93. Rothmaler, W. 1937. Systematische Vorarbeiten zu einer Monographie der Gattung Alchemilla (L.) Scop. Feddes Repert. 42: 164–173.Google Scholar
  94. Said, C. 1979. Quelques aspects de l’écologie florale chez les Rosaceae: étude morphologique et histologique comparée chez Sanguisorba officinalis L. et Poterium sanguisorba L. Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr. 126, Lett. Bot.: 311–324.Google Scholar
  95. Sax, K. 1932. The origin of the Pomoideae. Proc. Am. Hort. Soc. 30: 147–150.Google Scholar
  96. Schaeppi, H. 1953. Kelch und Aussenkelch von Rhodotypus kerrioides. Viertelj.schr. Naturf. Ges. Zürich 98: 30–36.Google Scholar
  97. Schaeppi, H. 1977. Ueber den “doppelten Fruchtknoten” von Rhodotypos. Beitr. Biol. Pflanzen 53: 165–175.Google Scholar
  98. Schneider, C.K. 1905–1906a. Illustriertes Handbuch der Laubholzkunde I, iv + iv + 808 pp (Rosaceae on pp. 440–802). Jena: Fischer. (The pages 440–592 were published in 1905, the remainder in 1906 ).Google Scholar
  99. Schneider, C.K. 1906b. Species varietatesque Pomacearum novae IV. In: Feddes Repert. 3: 177–183.Google Scholar
  100. Sharma, A.K. 1970. Res. Bull. Univ. Calc. (Cytog. Lab.) 2 (cited in P. Goldblatt, ed. 1981. Index to plant chromosome numbers 1975–1978, Missouri Monogr. Syst. Bot. 5 ).Google Scholar
  101. Simpson, B.B. 1979. A revision of the genus Polylepis (Rosaceae: Sanguisorbeae). Smithson. Contrib. Bot. 43, 62 pp. Washington, DC.: Smithsonian Institution.Google Scholar
  102. Skalicky, V. 1971. Amerikanische Odermennige, Agrimonia L. ser. Parviflorae ser. n. Nov Bot. Inst. Bot. Univ. Carol. Prag. 1970: 9–16.Google Scholar
  103. Stebbins, G.L. 1974. Flowering plants. Evolution above the species level. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Sterling, C. 1964a, b, c. Comparative morphology of the carpel in the Rosaceae. I-III. Am. J. Bot. 51: 36–44, 354–360, 705–712.Google Scholar
  104. Idem. 1965a, b, c. IV-VI. Ibid. 52: 47-54,418-426,938-946. Idem. 1966a, b, c. VII-IX. Ibid. 53: 225–231, 521–530, 951–960.Google Scholar
  105. Idem. 1969. X (Evaluation and summary). Oest. Bot. Zeitschr. 116: 46–54.Google Scholar
  106. Stöger, E.A. 1989. Arzneibuch der Chinesischen Medizin I, II. Wasserburg: DECA. (Loose-leaf edition of an edited translation from the Chinese Pharmacopoeia, 1985 ).Google Scholar
  107. Sudworth, G.B. 1967. Forest trees of the Pacific slope. 2nd edn. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  108. Takhtajan, A. 1981. See general references.Google Scholar
  109. Thorne, R.F. 1983. Proposed new realignments in the Angiosperms. Nord. J. Bot. 3: 85–117.Google Scholar
  110. Thorne, R.F. 1992. Classification and geography of the Flowering Plants. Bot. Rev. 58: 225–348.Google Scholar
  111. Troll, W. 1935. Vergleichende Morphologie der Fiederblätter. Nova Acta Leopoldina, N.F. 2: 315–455.Google Scholar
  112. Troll, W. 1964, 1969. Die Infloreszenzen. Typologie und Stellung im Aufbau des Vegetationskörpers. I, II/1. Jena: Fischer.Google Scholar
  113. Vieira, R. 1992. Flora da Madeira o interesse das plantas endémicas Macaronésicas, 155 pp. Lisboa?: Servi Nac. de Parques.Google Scholar
  114. Weber, C. 1964. The genus Chaenomeles (Rosaceae). J. Arnold Arbor. 45: 161–205, 302–345.Google Scholar
  115. Wieffering, J. 1979. Het basis-chromosoomgetal en de taxonomische positie van de tribus Quillajeae binnen de Rosaceae. Danseria 16: 122–123.Google Scholar
  116. Williams, A.H. 1982. Chemical evidence from the flavonoids relevant to the classification of Malus species. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 84: 31–39.Google Scholar
  117. Wolfe, J.A., Wehr, W. 1988. Rosaceous Chamaebatiaria-like foliage from the Paleogene of Western North America. Aliso 12: 177–200.Google Scholar
  118. Zardini, E.M. 1971. Especies nuevas o criticas de la flora Jujena, II. Bull. Soc. Argent. Bot. 14: 107–110.Google Scholar
  119. Zhang, Shu-yin 1992. Systematic wood anatomy of the Rosaceae. Blumea 37: 81–158.Google Scholar
  120. Zhang, Shu-yin, Baas, P. 1992. Wood anatomy of trees and shrubs from China III, Rosaceae. IAWA Bull., n.s. 13: 21–91.Google Scholar
  121. Zielinski, J. 1980. Distribution of Rosa persica Michx ex Juss. and its hybrids. Arbor. Korn. 25: 41–51.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Kalkman

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations