Advertisement

Delimitation of the Major Taxa of the Higher Cycadophytina: Theoretical Criteria Versus Taxonomic Practice

  • A. D. J. Meeuse
Part of the Plant Systematics and Evolution / Entwicklungsgeschichte und Systematik der Pflanzen book series (SYSTEMATICS, volume 1)

Abstract

The application of other than strictly morphological criteria in attempts towards producing a “phylogenetic” classification of the Flowering Plants is clearly unsound as long as the fundamental morphological interpretation of certain magnoliophytic features remains unsettled. Such “established” notions as gymnospermy versus angiospermy, the nature of the functional reproductive units, the sporophyll concept, the assumed primacy of phaneranthy and the entomophilous syndrome (including the sex distribution), etc., which postulates primarily decide the basic framework for the taxonomic arrangement in a system, may well be antiquated. A greater heterogeneity among the major taxa of the magnoliophytic assembly is in better agreement with the available evidence and finds some support when additional taxonomic criteria are applied. It is to be expected that appreciable advances will result from such ancillary criteria if applied to a framework based on a neological approach of the phylogeny and morphology of the Magnoliophyta founded upon alternative assumptions concerning their original anthomorphology and palaeoecology. The present author is entirely in favour of the application of evidence from all sources potentially providing useful taxonomic pointers, but does not believe that such data can be decisive for the delimitation and placing of higher taxa among the Angiosperms until some agreement concerning several fundamental, morphological concepts has been attained. This inevitably involves phylogenetic speculations concerning the nature and morphology of the early magnoliophytes which already require the application of some additional criteria such as palaeoecological evidence and certain palaeo-botanic clues.

Keywords

Major Taxon Angiosperm Phylogeny Angiosperm Pollen Leafy Shoot Morphological Concept 
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. Bate-Smith, E. C., 1972: Chemistry and phylogeny of the Angiosperms. Nature 236, 353–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Behnke, H.-D., 1972: Sieve-tube plastids in relation to Angiosperm sys-tematics—an attempt towards a classification by ultrastructural analysis. Bot. Rev. 38, 155–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bouman, F., 1974: Developmental studies of the ovule, integuments and seed in some Angiosperms. Thesis, Univ. of Amsterdam. Naarden.Google Scholar
  4. Dahlgren, R., 1974: Angiospermernes taxonomi. Vol. 1. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  5. Dahlgren, R., 1975: Current Topics. The distribution of characters within an Angiosperm System. 1. Some embryological characters. Bot. Notiser 128, 181–197.Google Scholar
  6. Dickison, W.C., 1975: The bases of Angiosperm phylogeny: vegetative anatomy. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gdn. 62, 590–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Doyle, J. A., Van Campo, M., and Lugardon, B., 1975: Observations on exine structure of Eucommiidites and Lower Cretaceous Angiosperm pollen. Pollen & Spores 17, 429–486.Google Scholar
  8. Ehrendorfer, F., 1971: Systematik und Evolution. In: Lehrbuch der Botanik für Hochschulen (Strasburger, E., et al.), 30. Aufl., p. 379–741. Stuttgart: G. Fischer.Google Scholar
  9. Eyde, R. H., 1975: The bases of Angiosperm phylogeny: floral anatomy. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 62, 521–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jensen, S. R., Nielsen, B. J., and Dahlgren, R., 1975: Iridoid compounds, their occurrence and systematic importance in the Angiosperms. Bot. Notiser 128, 148–180.Google Scholar
  11. Johri, B. M., 1963: Embryology and taxonomy. In: Recent advances in the embryology of Angiosperms (Maheshwari, P., Ed.), 395–444. Delhi.Google Scholar
  12. Kubitzki, K., 1969: Chemosystematische Betrachtungen zur Großgliederung der Dicotylen. Taxon 18, 360–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kubitzki, K., 1973: Probleme der Großsystematik der Blütenpflanzen. Ber. dtsch. bot. Ges. 85, 259–277 (1972).Google Scholar
  14. Kuprianova, L. A., 1967: Palynological data for the history of the Chloranthaceae. Pollen & Spores 9, 95–100.Google Scholar
  15. Leins, P., 1971: Das Androeceum der Dikotylen. Ber. dtsch. bot. Ges. 84, 191–193.Google Scholar
  16. Maheshwari, P., 1964: Embryology in relation to taxonomy. In: Vistas in Botany (Turrill, W. B., Ed.), 4, 55–97. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  17. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1970: The descent of the Flowering Plants in the light of new evidence from phytochemistry and from other sources. Acta Bot. Neerl. 19, 61–72, 133–140.Google Scholar
  18. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1972: Sixty-five years of theories of the multiaxial flower. Acta Bio-theor. 21, 167–202.Google Scholar
  19. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1974: Some fundamental principles in interpretative floral morphology. In: Vistas in Plant Sciences (Varghese, T. M., Ed.), Vol. 1, 1–78. Hissar.Google Scholar
  20. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1975a: Changing floral concepts: Anthocorms, flowers, and anthoids. Acta Bot. Neerl. 24, 25–36.Google Scholar
  21. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1975b (1974): Floral evolution and emended Anthocorm Theory. In: Intern. Bioscience Monogr. (Varghese, T. M., Ed.), Vol. 1. Hissar.Google Scholar
  22. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1975 c: Aspects of the evolution of the Monocotyledons. Acta Bot. Neerl. 24, 421–436.Google Scholar
  23. Meeuse, A. D. J., 1976: Fundamental aspects of evolution of the Magnoliophyta. In: Glimpses in Plant Research (Nair, P. K. K., Ed.), 3, 82–100. New Delhi: Vikas.Google Scholar
  24. Merxmüller, H., 1972: Systematic Botany: an unachieved synthesis. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 4, 311–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Philipson, W. R., 1974: Ovular morphology and the major classification of the dicotyledons. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 68, 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sporne, K. R., 1975: A note on ellagitannins as indicators of evolutionary status in Dicotyledons. New Phytol. 75, 613–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Takhtajan, A. L., 1973: Evolution und Ausbreitung der Blütenpflanzen. Jena: G. Fischer.Google Scholar
  28. Wagenitz, G., 1975: Blütenreduktion als ein zentrales Problem der Angiospermen-Systematik. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 96, 448–470.Google Scholar
  29. Walker, J. W., 1975: The bases of angiosperm phylogeny: Introduction. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gdn. 62, 515–516.Google Scholar
  30. Walker, J. W., 1976: Comparative pollen morphology and phylogeny of the Ranalean complex. In: Origin and early evolution of the Angiosperms (Beck, C. B., Ed.), 241–299. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. D. J. Meeuse
    • 1
  1. 1.Hugo de Vries-LaboratoriumUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations