2020
DOI: 10.1515/bot-2019-0045
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A profound view and discourse on the typification and status of three confused taxa: Ruppia maritima, R. spiralis and R. cirrhosa

Abstract: AbstractTaxonomic difficulties have persisted within the genus Ruppia for a long time. We first unravel misconceptions as perceived on different continents and subsequently present a revised interpretation of the identity and typification of three European taxa at species level: Ruppia maritima L., Ruppia spiralis L. ex Dumortier, and Ruppia cirrhosa (Petagna) Grande. To … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, Ruppia sampled from the two different bioregions shared highly similar sequences of ITS (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2) and rbcL (Figure S2 and S3). Phylogenetic placement of species within the family Ruppiaceae is a debated and difficult task because of their reduced morphology, high intraspecific variability, and hybridization [45,56]. While R. maritima and R. cirrhosa were identified as separate species [45,[56][57][58][59][60][61], three to four species and one cosmopolitan species complex (containing several lineages, including R. maritima and R. cirrhosa) have been proposed based on molecular evidence showing hybridization and a variety in polyploidy [57][58][59][60][61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Nevertheless, Ruppia sampled from the two different bioregions shared highly similar sequences of ITS (ITS1-5.8S-ITS2) and rbcL (Figure S2 and S3). Phylogenetic placement of species within the family Ruppiaceae is a debated and difficult task because of their reduced morphology, high intraspecific variability, and hybridization [45,56]. While R. maritima and R. cirrhosa were identified as separate species [45,[56][57][58][59][60][61], three to four species and one cosmopolitan species complex (containing several lineages, including R. maritima and R. cirrhosa) have been proposed based on molecular evidence showing hybridization and a variety in polyploidy [57][58][59][60][61].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Phylogenetic placement of species within the family Ruppiaceae is a debated and difficult task because of their reduced morphology, high intraspecific variability, and hybridization [45,56]. While R. maritima and R. cirrhosa were identified as separate species [45,[56][57][58][59][60][61], three to four species and one cosmopolitan species complex (containing several lineages, including R. maritima and R. cirrhosa) have been proposed based on molecular evidence showing hybridization and a variety in polyploidy [57][58][59][60][61]. In addition, typification issues were raised by den Hartog and Triest [56] and Ruppia spiralis L. ex Dumortier was proposed as a more correct name for R. cirrhosa.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ruppia maritima (including R. cirrhosa, now considered as a heterotypic synonym; but see [111]) is usually restricted to brackish lagoons. There, a highly variable environment induces wide fluctuations in the surface area of the R. maritima meadows.…”
Section: Ruppia Maritimamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…High phenotypic plasticity to cope with fluctuations in salinity, water level, temperature and irradiance (Verhoeven, 1979;Mannino et al, 2015), together with recurrent hybridizations (Beirinckx et al, 2020), historical misinterpretations and local, incomplete descriptions have complicated Ruppia genus taxonomy and phylogeny (Yu and den Hartog, 2014;den Hartog and Triest, 2020). As a result, Ruppia was thought to consist of only two cosmopolitan species (R. maritima and R. spiralis L. ex Dum.-the latter often cited under R. cirrhosa (Petagna) Grande) whose species range sizes were overestimated (Yu and den Hartog, 2014;den Hartog and Triest, 2020). Yu and den Hartog (2014) described two new (sub-)tropical species in Asia (China) using extensive morphological and molecular features (Yu et al, 2020) i.e., R. brevipedunculata Yu and den Hartog and R. sinensis Yu and den Hartog, which were previously considered as R. maritima and R. cirrhosa, respectively.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%