Cryptic species could represent a substantial fraction of biodiversity. However, inconsistent definitions and taxonomic treatment of cryptic species prevent informed estimates of their contribution to biodiversity and impede our understanding of their evolutionary and ecological significance. We propose a conceptual framework that recognizes cryptic species based on their low levels of phenotypic (morphological) disparity relative to their degree of genetic differentiation and divergence times as compared with non-cryptic species. We discuss how application of a more rigorous definition of cryptic species in taxonomic practice will lead to more accurate estimates of their prevalence in nature, better understanding of their distribution patterns on the tree of life, and increased abilities to resolve the processes underlying their evolution.

When my project is about to finish, it's time for acknowledgements: x Annen. ANNEANNEANNE! Fineste sjefstøsen! My main supervisor Anne K. Brysting. Best supervisor in the world, I'm sure. You are my colleague, my friend, my third mum (I have a modern family), and my hero. As well as scientifically strong, you show a care for and a faith in your students that is really remarkable. Your door is always open, even literally, for all kinds of problems, personal as well as scientifical. If I didn't have you, I would have quitted a long time ago. But you were there, and you kept your faith in me when I didn't. Thanks for all your chatter, your support, and your hugs! I wonder if you'll ever be able to say Vålenga kjaerke! x Barbs. My wonderful co-supervisor Barbara Mable at the Glasgow Uni. Your hospitality when welcoming me to Glasgow meant a lot. And your patience with my ignorance on S-alleles and inheritage and crossings. From now on, my focus will be on our joint project! x Hilde, agent Empetrum, thanks for always being there. Thanks for sharing my tears and my laughter. Thanks to you, Julie, Ragnhild, Flua, Helge, and Einar for quiz nights every Tuesday. And thanks to you, Vir, and Inger for wine colloquia and a nice master period. Snilleskrede: thanks for reading! x Torbaeibi, my wise and nice colleague Tor Carlsen, thanks for all the nice scientific discussions and all the coffea! x Thanks to Svend-Ole Nielsen (my Danish friend), Elisabeth Hubbuck, and Cecilia Leslie for professional help with a messy brain. x Thanks to my family, particularly my father for being supportive, taking me on boat trips, trips to our cottage, and for using me as a source of knowledge in molecular Literature cited

The monophyletic status of Ledebouria, Resnova and Drimiopsis (Hyacinthaceae) was investigated using cladistic analyses of morphological characters as well as by combined trnL‐F and morphology dataset. Based on morphology alone, numerous synapomorphies support Ledebouria, Resnova and Drimiopsis as three separate clades. In contrast, trnL‐F data in a reduced taxon sample suggest that Resnova and Drimiopsis are imbedded within Ledebouria, while in combination with morphology again suggest them to be separate. The analysis of morphological data shows that the majority of morphological characters listed by Manning & al. (2004) to support Ledebouria s.l. are homoplasious or symplesiomorphies. A revised taxonomy of Ledebouria, Resnova and Drimiopsis is premature.

No abstract

The genetic diversity and structure in 17 wild populations (249 individuals) of Phytolacca dodecandra (endod) sampled along altitudinal gradients of 1600-3000 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l.) in Ethiopia was studied using random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD). A total of 70 polymorphic loci (P) scored from 12 RAPD primers were used to calculate different diversity indices within and between populations, habitats, geographical regions, climatic zones and altitude groups. The number of polymorphic loci and overall Shannon information measure (H) in the populations varied from 30 to 55 and from 0.228 to 0.418, respectively. In general, differences in population variability were found significantly correlated to effective population size. Both P and H were significantly higher in an undisturbed than in a disturbed habitat, and in the lowland and central-highland than in the highland altitude group. However, for both parameters the differences were not statistically significant between regions and climatic zones. Genetic distance between populations varied from 0.301 to 0.628. Cluster analysis performed using the genetic distance matrix revealed a clear separation of the highland populations (2501-3000 m.a.s.l.) from those of the lowland/central-highlands (1600-2500 m.a.s.l.) irrespective of their geographical regions and climatic zones. Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) indicated that differences in habitat, geographical regions and climatic zones explained 4.6%, 2.5% and 4.6%, respectively. But none of these differences were significant. Altitude explained 17.2% of the total variance and was highly significant. The data, therefore, clearly indicated the association of genetic structure in endod with altitude. The proportion of RAPD variation found among populations (21.2-35.0%) was somewhat intermediate between values reported for selfing and outcrossing species. The fixation index (FST) values (0.350 to 0.384) indicated very high genetic differentiation among populations.