Abstract
The chemosystematics ofRutaceae is reviewed on the basis of updated surveys of various secondary metabolites and their biosynthetic derivation. A comparison of these data with the morphological and geographical differentiation clearly shows that the current taxonomic arrangement of the family is to a large extent artificial and needs improvement. Starting from obviously “natural” groups of genera (or single genera) as “basic taxonomic entities” a new system with informal tribal names is suggested. In particular, the subfamilyToddalioideae is broken up altogether and its former members are rearranged among several of the 17 provisional tribes within the subfamilyRutoideae s. lat. Phylogenetic progressions can be recognized from parallel changes of morphological characters and biosynthetic pathways to secondary metabolites. As a general trend, a stepwise replacement of benzylisoquinolines by simple and complex anthranilic acid derived alkaloids, and eventually by coumarins and/or limonoids is confirmed. The available data are summarized in a discussion of the possible evolutionary relationships among theRutaceae, with theZanthoxylum- andEvodia-tribes in a central position.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Behnke, H.-D., 1976: Sieve-element plastids ofFouquieria, Frankenia (Tamaricales), andRhabdodendron (Rutaceae), taxa sometimes allied withCentrospermae (Caryophyllales). — Taxon25: 265–268.
—, 1977: Zur Skulptur der Pollen-Exine bei drei Centrospermen (Gisekia, Limeum, Hectorella), bei Gyrostemonaceen und Rhabdodendraceen. — Pl. Syst. Evol.128: 227–235.
Boeswinkel, F. D., Bouman, F., 1978: Development of ovule and testa inRutaceae. II: The unitegmic and pachychalazal seed ofGlycosmis cf.arborea (Roxb.) DC. — Acta Bot. Neerl.27: 69–78.
Cagnin, M. A. H., Gomes, C. M. R., Gottlieb, O. R., Marx, M. C., Rocha, A. I. da, Silva, M. F. das G. F. da, Temperini, J. A., 1977: Biochemical systematics: methods and principles. — Pl. Syst. Evol., Suppl.1: 53–76.
Campbell, W. E., Majal, T., Bean, P. A., 1986: Chemosystematic studies in the genera of theDiosmeae. I. Coumarins of theRutoideae: tribeDiosmeae. — Phytochemistry25: 655–657.
Corner, E. J. H., 1976: The seeds of Dicotyledons. — London: Cambridge University Press.
Da Silva, M. F. das G. F., Gottlieb, O. R., 1987: Plant chemosystematics and phylogeny. XXXI. Evolution of quassinoids and limonoids in theRutales. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.15: 85–103.
Diels, L., 1936: The genetic phytogeography of the Southwestern Pacific with particular reference to Australia. — In: Essays in geobotany in honor of William AlbertSetchell, pp. 189–194. — Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dreyer, D. L., 1966:Citrus bitter principles. V. Botanical distribution and chemotaxonomy in theRutaceae. — Phytochemistry5: 367–378.
—, 1968: Limonoid bitter principles. — Fortschr. Chem. Org. Naturst.26: 190–244.
—, 1972: Distribution of limonoids in theRutaceae. — Phytochemistry11: 705–713.
Engler, A., 1896:Rutaceae. — Nat. Pflanzenfam.III 4: 95–201.
—, 1931:Rutaceae. — Nat. Pflanzenfam. 2nd edn.19a: 187–359, 458–459.
Fish, F., Waterman, P. G., 1973: Chemosystematics in theRutaceae. II. The chemosystematics of theZanthoxylum/Fagara complex. — Taxon22: 177–203.
Gottlieb, O. R., 1980: Micromolecular systematics: principles and practice. — InBisby, F. A., Vaughan, J. G., Wright, C. A., (Eds.): Chemosystematics: principles and practice, pp. 329–352. — London: Academic Press.
—, 1982: Micromolecular evolution, systematics, and ecology. An essay into a novel botanical discipline. — Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.
Gray, A. I., 1983: Structural diversity and distribution of coumarins and chromones in theRutales. — InWaterman, P. G., Grundon, M. F. (Eds.): Chemistry and chemical taxonomy of theRutales, pp. 97–146. — London: Academic Press.
—, 1978: Review: Coumarins in theRutaceae. — Phytochemistry17: 845–864.
Gregor, H. J., 1988: Aspects of the fossil record and phylogeny of the familyRutaceae (Zanthoxyleae, Toddalioideae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.162 (in press).
Grieve, C. M., Scora, R. W., 1980: Flavonoid distribution in theAurantioideae (Rutaceae). — Syst. Bot.5: 39–53.
Gut, B.J., 1966: Beiträge zur Morphologie des Gynoeceums und der Blütenachse einiger Rutaceen. — Bot. Jahrb.85: 10–247.
Harborne, J. B., Mabry, T. J., 1982: The flavonoids: advances in research. — London: Chapman and Hall.
Hartl, D., 1957: Struktur und Herkunft des Endokarps der Rutaceen. — Beitr. Biol. Pfl.34: 35–49.
Hartley, T. G., 1969: A revision of the genusFlindersia (Rutaceae). — J. Arnold Arb.50: 481–526.
Hegnauer, R., 1963–1973: Chemotaxonomie der Pflanzen. Vols.2–6. — Basel, Stuttgart: Birkhäuser.
Melchior, H., Wedermann, E. (Eds.) 1964:A. Engler's Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien, Vols.1 and2. 12th edn. — Berlin: Bornträger.
Mester, I., 1983: Structural diversity and distribution of alkaloids in theRutales. — InWaterman, P. G., Grundon, M. F., (Eds.): Chemistry and chemical taxonomy of theRutales, pp. 31–96. — London: Academic Press.
Moore, J. A., 1936: Floral anatomy and phylogeny in theRutaceae. — New Phytol.35: 318–322.
Prance, G. T., 1968: The systematic position ofRhabdodendron Gilg & Pilg. — Bull. Jard. Bot. Nat. Belg.38: 127–146.
—, 1972:Rhabdodendraceae. Flora Neotropica, Monograph11. — New York: Hafner Publ. Comp.
Puff, C., Weber, A., 1976: Contributions to the morphology, anatomy, and karyology ofRhabdodendron, and a reconsideration of the systematic position of theRhabdodendr(on)aceae. — Pl. Syst. Evol.125: 195–122.
Scholz, H., 1964:Rutales. — InMelchior, H., Wedermann, E. (Eds.):A. Engler's Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien, Vol.2, 12th edn., pp. 262–277. — Berlin: Bornträger.
O'Sullivan, J., 1983: Structural diversity and distribution of lignans in theRutales. — InWaterman, P. G., Grundon, M. F., (Eds.): Chemistry and chemical taxonomy of theRutales, pp. 267–279. — London: Academic Press.
Swingle, W. T., 1938: A new taxonomic arrangement of the orange subfamily,Aurantioideae. — J. Washington Acad. Sci.28: 530–533.
—, 1967: The botany ofCitrus and its wild relatives. — InReuter, W., Batchelor, L. D., Webber, H. J., (Eds.): The Citrus industry, pp. 190–430. — Berkeley: University of California Press.
Tanaka, T., 1936: The taxonomy and nomenclature ofRutaceae-Aurantioideae. — Blumea2: 101–110.
Tiffney, B. H., 1980: Fruits and seeds of the Brandon Lignite. V.Rutaceae. — J. Arnold Arbor.61: 1–40.
Waterman, P. G., 1975: Alkaloids of theRutaceae: their distribution and systematic significance. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.3: 149–180.
—, (Eds.), 1983: Chemistry and chemical taxonomy of theRutales. — London: Academic Press.
—, 1981: The biochemical systematics ofFagaropsis angolensis and its significance in theRutales. — Biochem. Syst. Ecol.9: 45–51.
Wolter-Filho, W., Rocha, A. I da, Yoshida, M., Gottlieb, O. R., 1985: The chemistry of BrazilianRhabdodendraceae. I. Ellagic acid derivatives fromRhabdodendron macrophyllum. — Phytochemistry24: 1991–1993.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
da Silva, M.F.d.G.F., Gottlieb, O.R. & Ehrendorfer, F. Chemosystematics of theRutaceae: Suggestions for a more natural taxonomy and evolutionary interpretation of the family. Pl Syst Evol 161, 97–134 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00937293
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00937293