Do Hydatellaceae belong to the monocotyledons or basal angiosperms? Evidence from seedling morphology

Hans-Jürgen Tillich; Renee Tuckett; Eva Facher

doi:10.3372/wi.37.37201

How to translate text using browser tools

14 December 2007 Do Hydatellaceae belong to the monocotyledons or basal angiosperms? Evidence from seedling morphology

Hans-Jürgen Tillich, Renee Tuckett, Eva Facher

Author Affiliations +

Willdenowia, 37(2):399-406 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.37.37201

Abstract

Tillich, H.-J., Tuckett, R. & Facher, E.: Do Hydatellaceae belong to the monocotyledons or basal angiosperms? Evidence from seedling morphology. — Willdenowia 37: 399–406. — ISSN 0511 9618; © 2007 BGBM Berlin-Dahlem. doi:10.3372/wi.37201 (available via http://dx.doi.org/)

Seedlings of Hydatellaceae are described for the first time. The seedlings of three species from SW Australia, Hydatella dioica, Trithuria submersa and T. bibracteata were investigated. All proved monocotylar, the cotyledon structure as well as the overall seedling morphology being typical for the monocotyledons. The results are discussed in the light of recent molecular analyses. Seedling morphology does not support the assignment of the family to the Nymphaeales and basal angiosperms, respectively.

See the PDF.

References

1.

Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG) 2003: An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG II. — Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 141: 399–436. [ CrossRef] Google Scholar

2.

H.-D. Behnke 1995: P-type plastids and the systematics of the Arales (sensu Cronquist 1988) with S-type plastids in Pistia. — Pl. Syst. Evol. 195: 87–119. Google Scholar

3.

H.-D. Behnke 2000: Forms and sizes of sieve-element plastids and evolution of the monocotyledons. — Pp. 163–188 in: K. L. Wilson & D. A. Morrison (ed.), Monocots. Systematics and evolution. — Melbourne. Google Scholar

4.

C. D. K. Cook & R. Rutishauser 2007: Podostemaceae. — Pp. 304–344 in: K. Kubitzki (ed.), The families and genera of vascular plants 9. Flowering plants. Eudicots. Berberidopsidales through Sabiaceae. — Berlin, etc. Google Scholar

5.

D. A. Cooke 1983: The seedling of Trithuria (Hydatellaceae). — Victorian Naturalist 100(2): 68–69. Google Scholar

6.

D. A. Cooke 1987: Hydatellaceae. — Pp. 1–5 in: A. S. George (ed.), Flora of Australia 45. — Canberra. Google Scholar

7.

L. Diels 1936: Engler's Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien, ed. 11. — Berlin. Google Scholar

8.

P. Förster 1997: Die Keimpflanzen der Tribus Ranunculeae DC. und der Tribus Adonideae Kunth (Ranunculaceae). — Flora 192: 133–142. Google Scholar

9.

K. Goebel 1891: Pflanzenbiologische Schilderungen. 2. Teil. — Marburg. Google Scholar

10.

B. Haccius 1952: Verbreitung und Ausbildung der Einkeimblättrigkeit bei den Umbelliferen. — Österr. Bot. Z. 99: 483–505. [ CrossRef] Google Scholar

11.

B. Haccius 1953: Embryologische und histogenetische Untersuchungen an “monokotylen Dikotylen”. Bau und Funktion des Keimblattstiels. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 66: 17–19. Google Scholar

12.

B. Haccius 1954: Embryologische und histogenetische Studien an “monokotylen Dikotylen” 1. Claytonia virginica L. — Österr. Bot. Z. 101: 285–303. [ CrossRef] Google Scholar

13.

B. Haccius & E. Fischer 1959: Embryologische und histogenetische Studien an “monokotylen Dikotylen” III. Anemone appenina L. — Österr. Bot. Z. 106: 373–389. [ CrossRef] Google Scholar

14.

B. Haccius & E. Hartl-Baude 1956: Embryologische und histogenetische Studien an “monokotylen Dikotylen” II. Pinguicula vulgaris L. und Pinguicula alpina L. — Österr. Bot. Z. 103: 567–587. [ CrossRef] Google Scholar

15.

U. Hamann 1962: Beitrag zur Embryologie der Centrolepidaceae mit Bemerkungen über den Bau der Blüten und Blütenstände und die systematische Stellung der Familie. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 75: 153–171. Google Scholar

16.

U. Hamann 1975: Neue Untersuchungen zur Embryologie und Systematik der Centrolepidaceae. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 96: 154–191. Google Scholar

17.

U. Hamann 1976: Hydatellaceae — a new family of Monocotyledoneae. — New Zealand J. Bot. 14: 193–196. Google Scholar

18.

U. Hamann 1977: Über Konvergenzen bei embryologischen Merkmalen der Angiospermen. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 90: 369–384. Google Scholar

19.

U. Hamann 1998: Hydatellaceae. — Pp. 231–234 in: K. Kubitzki (ed.), The families and genera of vascular plants 4. Flowering plants. Monocotyledons. Alismatanae and Commelinanae. — Berlin, etc. Google Scholar

20.

U. Hamann , K. Kaplan & T. Rübsamen 1979: Über die Samenschalenstruktur der Hydatellaceae (Monocotyledoneae) und die systematische Stellung von Hydatella filamentosa. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 100: 555–563. Google Scholar

21.

G. Hieronymus 1873: zur Kenntnis der Centrolepidaceen. — Abh. Naturf. Ges. Halle 12: 115–222. Google Scholar

22.

G. Hieronymus 1888: Centrolepidaceae. — Pp. 11–16 in: A. Engler & K. Prantl (ed.). Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien II(4). — Leipzig. Google Scholar

23.

J. Hutchinson 1973: The families of flowering plants, ed. 3. — Oxford. Google Scholar

24.

H. P. Linder & P. J. Rudall 2005: Evolutionary history of Poales. — Annual Rev. Ecol. Syst. 35: 107–124. Google Scholar

25.

F. A. Michelangeli , J. I. Davis & D. W. Stevenson 2003: Phylogenetic relationships among Poaceae and related families as inferred from morphology, inversions in the plastid genome, and sequence data from the mitochondrial and plastid genoms. — Amer. J. Bot. 90: 93–106. Google Scholar

26.

P. J. Rudall , D. D. Sokoloff , M. V. Remizova , J. G. Conran , J. I. Davis , T. M. Macfarlaine & D. W. Stevenson 2007: Morphology of Hydatellaceae, an anomalous aquatic family recently recognized as an early divergent angiosperm lineage. — Amer. J. Bot. 94: 1033–1092. Google Scholar

27.

J. M. Saarela , H. S. Rai , J. A. Doyle , P. K. Endress , S. Matthews , A. D. Marchant , B. G. Briggs & S. W. Graham 2007: Hydatellaceae identified as a new branch near the base of the angiosperm phylogenetic tree. — Nature 446: 312–315. [ CrossRef] Google Scholar

28.

D. W. Stevenson , J. I. Davis , J. V. Freudenstein , C. R. Hardy , M. P. Simmons & C. D. Specht 2000: A phylogenetic analysis of the monocotyledons based on morphological and molecular character sets, with comments on the placement of Acorus and Hydatellaceae. — Pp. 17–24 in: K. L. Wilson & D. A. Morrison (ed.), Monocots. Systematics and evolution. — Collingwood. Google Scholar

29.

H.-J. Tillich 1990: Die Keimpflanzen der Nymphaeaceae — monocotyl oder dicotyl? — Flora 184: 169–176. Google Scholar

30.

H.-J. Tillich 1995: Seedlings and systematics in monocotyledons. — Pp. 303–352 in: P. J. Rudall , P. J. Cribb , D. F. Cutler & C. J. Humphries (ed.), Monocotyledons: systematics and evolution. — Kew. Google Scholar

31.

H.-J. Tillich 2007: Seedling diversity and the homologies of seedling organs in the order Poales (Monocotyledons). — Ann. Bot. (Oxford) 100 (in press). Google Scholar

32.

H. Winkler 1931: Die Monokotylen sind monokotyl. — Beitr. Biol. Pfl. 19: 29–34. Google Scholar

33.

S. R. Yadav & M. K. Janarthanam 1994: Hydatellaceae: a new family to Indian flora with a new species. — Rheedea 4: 17–20. Google Scholar

34.

S. R. Yadav & M. K. Janarthanam 1995: Trithuria konkanensis (Hydatellaceae), eine neue Art aus Indien. — Aqua Pl. 20: 91–97. Google Scholar

Citation Download Citation

Hans-Jürgen Tillich, Renee Tuckett, and Eva Facher "Do Hydatellaceae belong to the monocotyledons or basal angiosperms? Evidence from seedling morphology," Willdenowia 37(2), 399-406, (14 December 2007). https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.37.37201

Published: 14 December 2007

JOURNAL ARTICLE
8 PAGES

DOWNLOAD PAPER + SAVE TO MY LIBRARY