Molecular phylogenetic analysis of the subfamily Chenopodioideae of the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae), with the addition of matK/trnK sequences to an existing trnL-F data set, indicates that Chenopodium as traditionally recognised consists of six independent lineages. One of these, the Dysphania-Teloxys clade, had already been recognised previously as a separate tribe Dysphanieae. Of the five others, Chenopodium is here re-defined in a narrow sense so as to be monophyletic. The C. polyspermum, C. rubrum and C. murale clades are successive sisters of a lineage constituted by Atripliceae s.str. plus Chenopodium s.str. Consequently, the long forgotten genera Lipandra (for C. polyspermum) and Oxybasis (for C. rubrum and relatives) are revived, and the new genus Chenopodiastrum (for C. murale and relatives) is published. The afore-mentioned five clades, taken together, are a monophylum corresponding to an enlarged tribe Atripliceae (a name that has priority over Chenopodieae). Last, the Linnaean genus Blitum (for C. capitatum and relatives), enlarged to include C. bonus-henricus, is the sister group of Spinacia in the tribe Anserineae (a name that has priority over Spinacieae). The aromatic species of Dysphania, the related genus Teloxys, as well as Cyclocoma and Suckleya form the enlarged tribe Dysphanieae. Building upon phylogenetic results, the present study provides a modern classification for a globally distributed group of plants that had suffered a complex taxonomic history due to divergent interpretation of single morphological characters for more than two hundred years. The seven genera among which the species traditionally assigned to Chenopodium are now distributed are defined morphologically and keyed out; for four of them (Blitum, Chenopodiastrum, Lipandra, Oxybasis) the component species and subspecies are enumerated and the necessary nomenclatural transfers are effected.
References
P. Aellen
1927:
Chenopodium crassifolium Hornem., eine verkannte europaeische Art. — Magyar Bot. Lapok 25: 55–63. Google Scholar
P. Aellen
1929: Beitrag zur Systematik der Chenopodium-Arten Amerikas, vorwiegend auf Grund der Sammlung des United States National Museum in Washington, D.C. I. — Feddes Repert. 26: 31–64. Google Scholar
P. Aellen
1930: Die Wolladventiven Chenopodien Europas. — Verh. Naturf. Ges. Basel 41: 77–104. Google Scholar
P. Aellen
1933: Nomenklatorische Bemerkungen zu einigen Chenopodien. — Pp. 98–101 in
Anon, (ed.),
Ostenia. Coleccion de trabajos botanicos dedicades a Don Cornelio Osten en ocasion del LXX aniversario de su nacimiento. — Montevideo: [no publisher]. Google Scholar
P. Aellen
1960–61:
Chenopodiaceae.
— Pp. 533–762 in:
K. H. Rechinger (ed.),
G. Hegi, Illustrierte Flora von Mitteleuropa, ed. 2, 3(2[Lief. 2–4]). — Berlin & Hamburg: Parey. Google Scholar
P. Aellen
&
T. Just
1943: Key and synopsis of the American species of the genus Chenopodium L. — Amer. Midl. Naturalist 30: 47–76. Google Scholar
I. J. Bassett
&
C. W. Crompton
1982: The genus Chenopodium in Canada. — Canad. J. Bot. 60: 586–610. Google Scholar
T. Borsch
,
K. W. Hilu
,
D. Quandt
,
V. Wilde
,
C. Neinhuis
&
W. Barthlott
2003: Noncoding plastid trnT-trnF sequences reveal a well resolved phylogeny of basal angiosperms. — J. Evol. Biol. 16: 558–576. Google Scholar
J. P. M. Brenan
1954:
Chenopodiaceae.
— In:
W. B. Turrill &
E. Milne-Redhead (ed.),
Flora of tropical East Africa 7. — London. Google Scholar
J. P. M. Brenan &
J. Akeroyd
1993:
Chenopodium.
— Pp. 111–114 in:
T. G. Tutin,
N. A. Burges,
A. O. Chater,
J. R. Edmonson,
V. H. Heywood,
D. M. Moore,
D. H. Valentine,
S. M. Walters &
D. A. Webb (ed.),
Flora europaea, ed. 2, 1. — Cambridge: Cambridge University. Google Scholar
N. L. Britton &
A. Brown
1913: An illustrated flora of the northern United States, Canada and the British possessions, ed. 2, 2. — New York: The New York Botanical Garden. Google Scholar
R. C. Carolin
1983: The trichomes of the Chenopodiaceae and Amaranthaceae. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 103: 451–466. Google Scholar
S. E. Clemants &
S. L. Mosyakin
2003:
Chenopodium.
— Pp. 275–300 in:
L. S. Welsch,
W. C. Cromptom &
S. E. Clemants (ed.),
Flora of North America 4. — New York, etc.: Oxford University. Google Scholar
H. J. N. Crantz
1766: Institutiones rei herbariae juxta nutum naturae digestae ex habitu. — Vienna: J. P. Kraus. Google Scholar
R. D. Dom
1988:
Chenopodium simplex, an older name for C. gigantospermum (Chenopodiaceae). — Madroño 35: 162. Google Scholar
H. Flores-Olvera
,
A. Vrijdaghs
,
H. Ochoterena
&
E. Smets
2011: The need to re-investigate the nature of homoplastic characters: an ontogenetic case study of the ‘bracteoles’ in Atripliceae (Chenopodiaceae).
— Ann. Bot. 108: 847–865. Google Scholar
S. Fuentes-Bazan
,
G. Mansion
&
T. Borsch
2012: Towards a species level tree of the globally diverse genus Chenopodium (Chenopodiaceae).
— Molec. Phylogenet. Evol. 62: 359–374. Google Scholar
W. Greuter,
H. M. Burdet &
G. Long
1984: Med-Checklist 1. — Genève: Conservatoire et Jardin Botaniques & Berlin: Botanischer Garten und Botanisches Museum. Google Scholar
A. S. Hitchcock
1929: Standard species of Linnaean genera of phanerogamae. — Pp. 114–155 in: International Botanical Congress, Cambridge (England), 1930. Proposals by British Botanists. — London: His Majesty's Stationary Office. Google Scholar
J. P. Huelsenbeck
&
F. Ronquist
2001: MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. — Bioinformatics 17: 754–755. Google Scholar
C. E. Jarvis
2007: Order out of chaos: Linnaean plant names and their types. — London: Linnean Society of London & Natural History Museum. Google Scholar
M. Iljin
1936:
Spinacia.
— Pp. 75–77 in:
V. L. Komarov (ed.).
Flora URSS 6. — Moskva & Leningrad: Isdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR. Google Scholar
M. Iljin &
P. Aellen
1936:
Chenopodium.
— Pp. 41–73 in:
V. L. Komarov (ed.),
Flora URSS 6. — Moskva & Leningrad: Isdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR. Google Scholar
W. S. Judd
&
I. K. Ferguson
1999: The genera of Chenopodiaceae in the southeastern United States. — Harvard Pap. Bot. 4: 365–416. Google Scholar
G. Kadereit
,
T. Borsch
,
K. Weising
&
H. Freitag
2003: Phylogeny of Amaranthaceae and Chenopodiaceae and the evolution of C4 photosynthesis. — Int. J. Pl. Sci. 164: 959–986. Google Scholar
G. Kadereit
,
E. V Mavrodiev
,
E. H. Zacharias
&
A. P. Sukhorukov
2010: Molecular phylogeny of Atripliceae (Chenopodioideae, Chenopodiaceae):. implications for systematics, biogeography, flower and fruit evolution, and the origin of C4 photosynthesis. — Amer. J. Bot. 97: 1664–1687. Google Scholar
G. S. Karelin
&
I. P. Kirilov
1841: Enumeration plantarum anno 1840 in regionibus altaicis et confinibus collectarum, [2]. — Bull. Soc. Imp. Naturalistes Moscou 14: 369–159, 703–770[“870”]. Google Scholar
U. Kühn
1993:
Chenopodiaceae.
— Pp. 253–281 in:
K. Kubitzki (ed.),
The families and genera of vascular plants 2. — Berlin, etc.: Springer. Google Scholar
C. F. Lessing
1834: Beitrag zur Flora des südlichen Urals und der Steppen. — Linnaea 9: 198–199. Google Scholar
H. F. Link
1821: Enumeratio plantarum horti regii botanici Berolinensis altera. — Berolini: G. Reimer. Google Scholar
C. Löhne
&
T. Borsch
2005: Molecular evolution and phylogenetic utility of the petD group II intron: a case study in basal angiosperms. — Molec. Biol. Evol. 22: 317–3327 Google Scholar
J. McNeill
,
N. J. Turland
,
A. M. Monro
&
B. J. Lepschi
2011: XVIII International Botanical Congress: Preliminary mail vote and report of Congress action on nomenclature proposals. — Taxon 60: 1507–1520. Google Scholar
J. McNeill,
F. R. Barrie,
H. M. Burdet,
V. Demoulin,
D. L. Hawksworth,
K. Marhold,
D. H. Nicolson,
J. Prado,
P. C. Silva,
J. E. Skog,
J. H. Wiersema &
N. J. Turland
(ed. & compilers) 2006: International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Vienna Code, 2006) adopted by the Seventeenth International Botanical Congress Vienna, Austria, July 2005. — Regnum Veg. 146. Google Scholar
C. A. Meyer
1829:
Chenopodeae [Chenopodiaceae]. — Pp. 370–418 in:
C. A. Meyer,
A. Bunge &
C. F. Ledebour (ed.),
Flora altaica 1. — Berlin: G. Reimer. Google Scholar
C. A. Meyer
1843: Die Gattungen Monolepis Schrad., Oligandra Less, und Nanophytum Less, näher characterisiert. — Bull. Cl. Phys-Math. Acad. Imp. Sci. Saint-Pétersbourg 1: 131–134. Google Scholar
A. Moquin-Tandon
1849:
Salsolaceae.
— Pp. 43–230 in:
A. P. D. Candolle (ed.),
Prodromus systematics naturalis 13(2). — Paris: Treuttel & Würtz. Google Scholar
S. L. Mosyakin
2002: The system and phytogeography of Chenopodium subg. Blitum I. Hiitonen (Chenopodiaceae).
— Ukrayins'k. Bot. Zhurn. 59: 696–701. Google Scholar
S. L. Mosyakin
&
S. E. Clemants
1996: New infrageneric taxa and combinations in Chenopodium L. (Chenopodiaceae). — Novon 6: 398–403. Google Scholar
S. L. Mosyakin
&
S. E. Clemants
2002: New nomenclatural conbinations in Dysphania R. Br. (Chenopodiaceae): taxa occurring in North America. — Ukrains'k. Bot. Zhurn. 59: 380–385. Google Scholar
F. Mueller
1855: Description of new Australian plants chiefly from the colony of Victoria. — Trans. & Proc. Victorian Inst. Advancem. Sci. 1: 114–135. Google Scholar
J. Müller,
K. F. Müller,
C. Neinhuis &
D. Quandt
2007: PhyDE, Phylogenetic Data Editor. — Published at http://www.phyde.de. Google Scholar
K. F. Müller
2004: PRAP-computation of Bremer support for large data sets. — Molec. Phylogenet. Evol. 31: 780–782. Google Scholar
K. F. Müller
2005a: SeqState, primer design and sequence statistics for phylogenetic DNA data sets. — Appl. Bioinformatics 4: 65–69. Google Scholar
K. F. Müller
2005b: The efficiency of different search strategies in estimating parsimony jackknife, bootstrap, and Bremer support. — BMC Evol. Biol. 5: 58. Google Scholar
K. F. Müller
&
T. Borsch
2005: Phylogenetics of Amaranthaceae based on matK/trnK sequence data: evidence from parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian analyses. — Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 92: 66–102. Google Scholar
K. C. Nixon
1999: The parsimony ratchet, a new method for rapid parsimony analysis. — Cladistics 15: 407–414. Google Scholar
F. Pax
1889:
Caryophyllaceae.
— In:
A. Engler &
K. Prantl (ed.).
Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien 3, 1b. — Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. Google Scholar
D. Posada
2008: jModelTest: phylogenetic model averaging. — Molec. Biol. Evol. 25: 1253–1256. Google Scholar
J. L. Reveal
2011+: Indices nominum supragenericorum plantarum vascularium. — Published at http://www.plantsystematics.org/reveal/pbio/fam/allspgnames.html. Google Scholar
C. Schmitz-Linneweber
,
R. M. Maier
,
J.-P. Alcaraz
,
A. Cottet
,
R. G. Herrmann
&
R. Mache
2001: The plastid chromosome of spinach (Spinacia oleracea): complete nucleotide sequence and gene organization. — Pl. Molec. Biol. 45: 307–315. Google Scholar
P. J. F. Schur
1866: Enumeratio plantarum Transsilvaniae, exhibens. — Michigan: G. Braumüller. Google Scholar
A. J. Scott
1978: A review of the classification of Chenopodium L. and related genera (Chenopodiaceae).
— Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 100: 205–220. Google Scholar
L. Shults
2003:
Spinacia.
— P. 302 in:
L. S. Welsch,
W. C. Cromptom &
S. E. Clemants (ed.),
Flora of North America 4. — New York: Oxford University. Google Scholar
M. P. Simmons
&
H. Ochoterena
2000: Gaps as characters in sequence-based phylogenetic analyses. — Syst. Biol. 49: 369–381. Google Scholar
P. C. Standley
1916:
Chenopodiaceae.
— Pp. 1–93 in: North American flora 21(1). – New York: New York Botanic Garden. Google Scholar
A. P. Sukhorukov
1999: Eine neue asiatische Chenopodium-Art aus der Sektion Pseudoblitum Hook. f. (Chenopodiaceae). — Feddes Repert. 110: 493–497. Google Scholar
D. L. Swofford
1998: PAUP* Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and other methods), version 4. 0b.10. — Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates. Google Scholar
J. T. B. Syme
(ed.) 1868:
J. Sowerby &
J. E. Smith
, English botany, ed. 3[B], 8. — London: R. Hartwicke. Google Scholar
N. Tzvelev
1960: De speciebus nonnulis novis vel minus cognitis e Pamir. — Bot. Mater. Gerb. Bot. Inst. V. L. Komarova Akad. Nauk SSSR 20: 399–439. Google Scholar
N. Tzvelev
1996: Flora Europae orientalis 9. — St. Petersbourg: Acad. Sci., Rossicae Inst. Bot. Nomine V. L. Komarov. Google Scholar
E. Ulbrich
1934:
Chenopodiaceae.
— Pp. 379–584 in:
A. Engler &
K. Prantl (ed.),
Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, ed. 2, 16c. — Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
1974: Pollen morphology in European species of Chenopodium sect. Chenopodium, with special reference to C. album and C. suecicum.
— Ann. Bot. Fenn. 11: 44–58. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
1979:
Chenopodium exsuccum, a neglected species of the C. foliosum aggregate. — Ann. Bot. Fenn. 16: 237–240. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
1993: Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on Chenopodium in the Flora iranica area. — Ann. Bot. Fenn. 30: 189–194. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
1997:
Chenopodium, Spinacia.
— Pp. 24–63 in:
I. C. Hedge (ed.),
Flora iranica 172. — Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
2001a:
Chenopodium.
— Pp. 13–52 in: Ali S. I. & Qaiser M., Flora of Pakistan 204. — Karachi: Karachi University & St Louis: Missouri Botanic Garden. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
2001b:
Chenopodium.
— Pp. 4–31 in:
B. Jonsell
(ed.), Flora nordica 2. — Stockholm: Bergius Foundation, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Google Scholar
P. Uotila
2001c: Taxonomie and nomenclataural notes on Chenopodium (Chenopodiaceae) for Flora Nordica. — Ann. Bot. Fenn. 38: 95–97. Google Scholar
S. Watson
1874: Revision of the North American Chenopodiaceae.
— Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts Sci. 9: 82–126. Google Scholar
P. Wilson
1983:
Chenopodiaceae.
— Pp. 81–317 in:
A. S. George (ed.),
Flora of Australia 4. — Canberra: Australian Government Publ. Service. Google Scholar
E. H. Zacharias
&
B. G. Baldwin
2010 : A molecular phylogeny of North American Atripliceae (Chenopodiaceae), with implications for floral and photosynthetic pathway evolution. — Syst. Bot. 35: 839–857. Google Scholar
