Advertisement

Introduction to Centrospermae

  • V. Bittrich
Chapter
Part of the The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants book series (FAMILIES GENERA, volume 2)

Abstract

The Caryophyllales or Centrospermae (Eichler 1878) are a good, if not the best, example of a major natural group within the angiosperms. First recognized by Bartling (1830) as “Caryophyllinae”, it is accepted at present in nearly the same circumscription as in Braun’s treatment (1864; see Table 1). The most useful characters for the order known at that time were the so-called free-central placentation, the mostly campylotropous ovule (e.g., Hofmeister 1858), and the presence of perisperm (e. g., Schleiden and Vogel 1838; Endlicher and Unger 1843). When one compares the order as defined by Braun (1864) or Hallier (1912) with the circumscription given, for instance, by Takhtajan (1959), little progress seems to have been made. Since then, the investigation of sieve-element plastids, betalains, bound ferulic acid in unlignified cell walls, serology, and DNA-RNA hybridization, confirmed beyond reasonable doubt the correctness of the circumscription of the order with the inclusion of the Cactaceae and Didiereaceae, and the exclusion of the Bataceae, Gyrostemonaceae, Theligonaceae, Plumbaginaceae, and Polygonaceae. They also provided new and important characters for an understanding of phylogenetic relationships of the order and its subdivision. Yet taxonomic studies showed that several families in their traditional circumscription are paraphyletic or polyphyletic. Therefore, a completely new subdivision of the order at the present state of knowledge seems to be premature, and it is preferable to use the families mainly in their traditional circumscription while keeping in mind that their strict monophyly is sometimes dubious.

Keywords

Ferulic Acid Crassulacean Acid Metabolism Outer Integument Arillate Seed Campylotropous Ovule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barthlott, W. 1984. Microstructural features of seed surfaces. In: Heywood, V. H., Moore, D. M. (eds.) Current concepts in plant taxonomy. London: Academic Press, pp. 95–105.Google Scholar
  2. Bartling, F. G. 1830. Ordines naturales plantarum eorumque characteres et affinitates adjecta generum enumeratione. Göttingen: Dietrich.Google Scholar
  3. Bate-Smith, E. C. 1962. See general references.Google Scholar
  4. Beck, E., Merxmüller, H., Wagner, H. 1962. Kurze Mitteilung über die Art der Anthocyane bei Plumbaginaceen, Alsinoideen und Molluginaceen. Planta 58: 220–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behnke, H.-D. 1976. Die Siebelement-Plastiden der Caryophyllaceae, eine weitere spezifische Form der P-Typ-Plastiden bei Centrospermen. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 95: 327–333.Google Scholar
  6. Behnke, H.-D. 1978. Elektronenoptische Untersuchungen am Phloem sukkulenter Centrospermen (incl. Didiereaceen). Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 99: 341–352.Google Scholar
  7. Behnke, H.-D. 1981. Sieve-element characters. Nord. J. Bot. 1: 381–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Behnke, H.-D., Mabry, T. J., Neumann, P., Bartlott, W. (1983). Ultrastructural, micromorphological and phytochemical evidence for a “central position” of Macarthuria (Molluginaceae) within the Caryophyllales. Pl. Syst. Evol. 143:151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bittrich, V., Amaral, M. C. 1991. Proanthocyanidins in the testa of centrospermous seeds. Biochem. Syst. Evol. 19: 319–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bittrich, V., Hartmann, H. E. K. 1988. The Aizoaceae — a new approach. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 97: 239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bittrich, V., Ihlenfeldt, H.-D. 1984. Morphologie früher Keimungsstadien bei Mesembryanthemaceae: eine Anpassung an aride Umweltbedingungen. Mitt. Inst. Allg. Bot. Hamburg 19: 123–139.Google Scholar
  12. Boulter, D., Ramshaw, J. A. M., Thompson, E. W., Richardson, M., Brown, R. H. 1972. A phylogeny of higher plants based on the amino acid sequences of cytochrome c and its biological implications. Proc. Soc. Lond., Ser. B, Biol. Sci. 181: 441–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bouman, F. 1984. The ovule. In: Johri, B. M. (ed.) Embryology of angiosperms. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer, pp. 123–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Braun, A. 1864. Übersicht des natürlichen Systems. In: Ascherson, P. (ed.) Flora der Provinz Brandenburg, der Altmark und des Herzogthums Magdeburg. Berlin: August Hirschwald, pp. 22–67.Google Scholar
  15. Bregman, R., Bouman, F. 1983. Seed germination in Cactaceae. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 86: 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown, G. K., Varadarajan, G. S. 1985. Studies in Caryophyllales I: Re-evaluation of classification of Phytolaccaceae s. 1. Syst. Bot. 10: 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brown, R. 1810. Prodromus florae Novae Hollandiae et Insulae van-Diemen. London: J. Johnson & Co.Google Scholar
  18. Buxbaum, F. 1961. Vorläufige Untersuchungen über Umfang, systematische Stellung und Gliederung der Caryophyllales (Centrospermae). Beitr. Biol. Pflanz. 36: 1–56.Google Scholar
  19. Carolin, R. C. 1983. The trichomes of the Chenopodiaceae and Amaranthaceae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 103: 451–466.Google Scholar
  20. Carolin, R. C. 1987. A review of the family Portulacaceae. Aust. J. Bot. 35: 383–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Carolin, R. C., Jacobs, S. W. L., Vesk, M. 1978. Kranz cells and mesophyll in the Chenopodiales. Aust. J. Bot. 26: 683–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chang, C., Mabry, T. J. 1974. The constitution of the order Centrospermae: RNA-DNA hybridization studies among betalain-and anthocyanin-producing families. Biochem. Syst. 1: 185–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cronquist, A. 1965. The status of the general system of classification of flowering plants. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 52: 281–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cronquist, A. 1974. Chemical plant taxonomy: a generalist’s view of a promising specialty. In Bendz, G., Santesson, J. (eds.) Chemistry in botanical classification. Proceedings of the 25th Nobel Symposium. New York: Academic Press, pp. 29–36.Google Scholar
  25. Cronquist, A. 1977. On the taxonomic significance of secondary metabolites in angiosperms. Pl. Syst. Evol., Suppl. 1: 179–189.Google Scholar
  26. Cronquist, A. 1981, 1988. See general references.Google Scholar
  27. Eckardt, Th. 1976. Classical morphological features of centrospermous families. Pl. Syst. Evol. 126: 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ehrendorfer, F. 1976. Closing remarks: systematics and evolution of centrospermous families. Pl. Syst. Evol. 126: 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Eichler, A. W. 1878. Blüthendiagramme II. Theil. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar
  30. Endlicher, S., Unger, F. 1843. Grundzüge der Botanik. Wien: Carl Gerold.Google Scholar
  31. Erbar, C. 1986. Untersuchungen zur Entwicklung der spiraligen Blüte von Stewartia pseudocamellia (Theaceae). Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 106: 391–407.Google Scholar
  32. Esau, K. 1934. Ontogeny of phloem in the sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Amer. J. Bot. 21: 632–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gibbs, R. D. 1974. See general references.Google Scholar
  34. Gibson, A. C., Nobel, P. S. 1986. The cactus primer. Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  35. Gilbert, M. G. 1987. The taxonomic position of the genera Telephium and Corrigiola. Taxon 36: 47–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hallier, H. 1912. L’origine et le système phylétique des Angiospermes exposés à l’aide de leur arbre généalogique. Arch. Néerl. Sci. Exact. Nat. IIIB, 1: 146–234.Google Scholar
  37. Harms, H. 1934. Nachträge zu Band 16c. In: Engler, A., Harms, H. (eds.) Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, 2nd. edn, 16c. Leipzig: Engelmann, p. 585.Google Scholar
  38. Harris, P. J., Hartley, R. D. 1980. Phenolic constituents of the cell walls of monocotyledons. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 8: 153–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hartley, R. D., Harris, P. J. 1981. Phenolic constituents of the cell walls of dicotyledons. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 9: 189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hegnauer, R. 1964. See general references.Google Scholar
  41. Hershkovitz, M. A. 1989. Phylogenetic studies in Centrospermae: a brief appraisal. Taxon 38: 602–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hofmann, U. 1977. Centrospermen-Studien 9. Die Stellung von Stegnosperma innerhalb der Centrospermen. Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 90: 39–52.Google Scholar
  43. Hofmeister, W. 1858. Neuere Beobachtungen über Embryobildung der Phanerogamen. Jahrb. Wiss. Bot. 1: 82–188.Google Scholar
  44. Huber, H. 1982, 1990. See general references.Google Scholar
  45. Jensen, U. 1965. Serologische Untersuchungen zur Frage der systematischen Einordnung der Didiereaceae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 84: 233–253.Google Scholar
  46. Joshi, A. C. 1937. Some salient points in the evolution of the secondary vascular cylinder of Amaranthaceae and Chenopodiaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 24: 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kendrick, R. E., Hillman, W. S. 1971. Absence of phytochrome dark reversion in seedlings of the Centrospermae. Amer. J. Bot. 58: 424–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kimler, L. M. 1975. Betanin, the red beet pigment, as an antifungal agent. Abstr. 70th Annu. Meet. Bot. Soc. Amer.: 36.Google Scholar
  49. Kluge, M., Ting, I. P. 1978. Crassulacean acid metabolism. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Leins, P. 1975. Die Beziehungen zwischen multistaminaten und einfachen Androeceen. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 96: 231–237.Google Scholar
  51. Levin, G. A. 1985. Character analysis and cladistics: a response to Rodman et al. Syst. Bot. 10: 496–500.Google Scholar
  52. Mabry, T. J. 1974. Is the order Centrospermae monophyletic? In: Bendz, G., Santesson, J. (eds.) Chemistry in botanical classification, Proceedings of the 25th Nobel Symposium. New York: Academic Press, pp. 275–280.Google Scholar
  53. Martin, P. G., Boulter, D., Penny, D. 1985. Angiosperm phylogeny studied using sequences of five macromolecules. Taxon 34: 393–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mauritzon, J. 1934. Ein Beitrag zur Embryologie der Phytolaccaceen und Cactaceen. Bot. Not. 1934: 111–135.Google Scholar
  55. Meunier, A. 1890. Les téguments séminaux des cyclospermées. Cellule 6: 299–392.Google Scholar
  56. Netolitzky, F. 1926. Anatomie der Angiospermen-Samen. Handbuch der Pflanzenantomie (Linsbauer, K., ed.) II. Abt. 2. Teil, Bd. 10. Berlin: Gebrüder Borntraeger. 364 pp.Google Scholar
  57. Neumann, M. 1935. Die Entwicklung des Pollens, der Samenanlage und des Embryosackes von Pereskia amapola var. argentina. Österr. Bot. Z. 84: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Nowicke, J. W., Skvarla, J. J. 1979. Pollen morphology: the potential influence in higher order systematics. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 66: 633–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Palmer, J. D., Jansen, R. K., Michaels, H. J., Chase, M. W., Manhart, J. R. 1988. Chloroplast DNA variation and plant phylogeny. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 75: 1180–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Prakash, N. 1967. Life history of Tetragonia tetragonioides (Pall.) O. Kuntze. Aust. J. Bot. 15: 413–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rettig, J. H., Wilson, H. D., Manhart, J. R. 1992. Phylogeny of the Carypohyllales — gene sequence data. Taxon 41: 201–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Reznik, H. 1955. Die Pigmente der Centrospermen als systematisches Element. Z. Bot. 43: 499–530.Google Scholar
  63. Reznik, H. 1957. Die Pigmente der Centrospermen als systematisches Element. II. Untersuchung über das ionophoretische Verhalten. Planta 49: 406 34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Reznik, H. 1975. Betalaine. Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 88: 179–190.Google Scholar
  65. Rocén, T. 1927. Zur Embryology der Centrospermen. Diss. Univ. of Uppsala.Google Scholar
  66. Rodman, J. E., Oliver, M. K., Nakamura, R. R., McClammer, J. U., Jr., Bledsoe, A. H. 1984. A taxonomic analysis and revised classification of Centrospermae. Syst. Bot. 9: 297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rogers, G. K. 1985. The genera of Phytolaccaceae in the southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arbor. 66: 1–37.Google Scholar
  68. Rohweder, O. 1965. Centrospermenstudien 2. Entwicklung und morphologische Deutung des Gynöciums bei Phytolacca. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 84: 509–526.Google Scholar
  69. Rohweder, O., Huber, K. 1974. Centrospermen-Studien 7. Beobachtungen und Anmerkungen zur Morphologie und Entwicklungsgeschichte einiger Nyctaginaceae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 94: 327–359.Google Scholar
  70. Roland, F. 1969. Ultrastructure des apertures. Pollen Spores 11: 475–498.Google Scholar
  71. Rutishauser, R. 1981. Basale Blattauswüchse bei Centrospermen. In: Van Cotthem, W. (ed.) Morphologie, Anatomie und Systematik der Pflanzen, 5. Symposium Gent 1979. Ninove (Belgien): Waegeman, pp. 21–27.Google Scholar
  72. Savile, D. B. O. 1979. Fungi as aids in higher plant classification. Bot. Rev. 45: 377–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schieiden, M. J., Vogel, T. 1838 (1842). Über das Albumen, insbesondere der Leguminosen. Nov. Act. Acad. Caes. Leopold.-Carol. Ger. Nat. Cur. XIX, 2: 51–96.Google Scholar
  74. Shmida, A. 1985. Biogeography of the desert flora. In: Evenari, M., Noy-Meir, I., Goodall, D. W. (eds.) Ecosystems of the world 12 A. Hot deserts and arid shrubland, A. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 23–77.Google Scholar
  75. Smets, E. 1986. Localization and systematic importance of the floral nectaries in the Magnoliatae (Dicotyledons). Bull. Jard. Bot. Natl. Belg. 56: 51–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sporne, K. R. 1980. A re-investigation of character correlations among dicotyledons. New Phytol. 85: 419–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Takhtajan, A. 1959. Die Evolution der Angiospermen. Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
  78. Takhtajan, A. 1974. The chemical approach to plant classification with special reference to the higher taxa of Magnoliophyta. In: Bendz, G., Santesson, J. (eds.) Chemistry in botanical classification, Prodeedings of the 25th Nobel Symposium. New York: Academic Press, pp. 17–26.Google Scholar
  79. Thorne, R. F 1976, 1983. See general references.Google Scholar
  80. Van Campo, M. 1976. See general references.Google Scholar
  81. Volgin, S. A. 1988. Vergleichende Morphologie und Gefäßbündelanatomie der Blüte bei den Rivinoideae (Phytolaccaceae). Flora 181: 325–337.Google Scholar
  82. Wolfe, K. H., Gouy, M., Yang, Y-W., Sharp, P. M., Li, W.-H. 1989. Date of the monocot-dicot divergence estimated from chloroplast DNA sequence data. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86: 6201–6205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zandonella, P. 1977. Apports de l’étude comparée des nectaires floraux a la conception phylogénétique de l’ordre des Centrospermales. Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 90: 105–125.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Bittrich

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations