A Survey of Floral Anatomy in Araceae

Eyde, Richard H.; Nicolson, Dan H.; Sherwin, Priscilla

doi:10.2307/2440840

Cited by 29 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Araceae occasional structures resembling bracts occur in the basal part of the inflorescence in Anthurium (Pothoideae, Engler, 1905). In Pothos vascularized appendages between the flowers were interpreted as vestigial bracts by Eyde et al (1967). However, such bracts were not found in this study (nor in the detailed study by Carvell, 1989).…”

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthcontrasting

confidence: 59%

“…In Potamogeton associated tepal and stamen additionally share a pronounced common base, which is not found in Acorns, Juncaginaceae or most Araceae. Nevertheless, in all these taxa stamens and tepals develop from clearly distinct whorls, and not from common primordia (Araceae, Eyde et al, 1967;Barabe et al, 1987;Barabe, 1994;Poisson, 1996;Poisson & Barabe, 1998;this study;Potamogeton and Triglochin, Hill, 1900;Singh & Sattler, 1972;Sattler, 1973;Posluszny & Sattler, 1974a,b;Lieu, 1979;Tomlinson, 1982;Acorus, Sattler, 1973;Buzgo & Endress, 2000;some Alismataceae, Charlton, 199913). Exceptions are Symplocarpus and Lysichiton (Orontioideae), where tepal and stamen of the same sector are formed from a common primordium, similar to some alismatids (Lumnium and Wiesneria, Alismataceae) (Singh & Sattler, 1972, 1974, 1977aBurger, 1977;Lieu, 1979;Charlton, 1981;Tomlinson, 1982;Charlton, 1999a).…”

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…The absence or presence of a flower-subtending bract, the position of the tepals in the flower and unidirectional flower development are a set of correlated characters in Araceae, some alismatids such as Potamogetonaceae, Juncaginaceae, Aponogetonaceae, and Acoraceae (Engler, 1905(Engler, ,1920aEyde, Nicolson & Sherwin, 1967;Hotta, 1971;Hutchinson, 1973;Cronquist, 1981;Dahlgren et al, 1985;Grayum, 1987Grayum, ,1990Scribailo & Tomlinson, 1992;Buzgo & Endress, 2000). In Araceae occasional structures resembling bracts occur in the basal part of the inflorescence in Anthurium (Pothoideae, Engler, 1905).…”

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the true Araceae the tepals and stamens within the inner whorls also all develop equally; for example in Pothos, Spathiphyllum and Dracontium. An abaxial precocity or enlargement is not seen (Eyde et al, 1967;Poisson, 1996;Poisson & Barabe, 1998). In Spathiphylleae (and generally other Monsteroideae) a trend of tepal reduction (to a seemingly single whorl, sometimes with reduced number of tepals) and tepal fusion (e.g.…”

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Comparisons of coding sequences and of expression pattern of homeotic genes in floral development indicate a close relation of the first perianth whorl with bracts or bracteoles in monocots and magnoliids: activation of B-class transcription factors not only in stamens, but also in tepals or bracteoles, resulting in the more stringent formation of two perianth whorls instead of bracteoles and the distinction of petals and sepals (Albert, Gustafsson & Di Laurenzio, 1997;Frohlich & Meyerowitz, 1997;paleoAP3 by Kramer, Dorit & Irish, 1998;Kramer & Irish, 1999 (Engler, 1911;Eyde et al, 1967;Poisson, 1996;Poisson & Barabe, 1998;Mayo, Bogner & Boyce, 1997. Changes must have occurred independently several times, and it is unclear, whether dimery or trimery is plesiomorphic in Araceae (Engler, 1905(Engler, , 1920aEyde et al, 1967;Barabe, 1982Barabe, , 1994Barabe & Labrecque, 1983, 1984Poisson, 1996;Poisson & Barabe, 1998). However, a pathway of reduction from trimery to dimery is found in Omntium, implying that in Orontioideae trimery is original: the delay of the inner adaxial sectors sometimes results in a reduction from six to four sectors, with the outer organs in transverse orientation as in other dimerous Araceae.…”

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Flower structure and development of Araceae compared with alismatids and Acoraceae

Buzgo¹

2001

Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floral development of Araceae is compared with that of other basal monocots such as alismatids and Acorus. Flowers of Araceae, Acorus and several alismatids with spicate inflorescences lack a subtending floral bract. In Araceae and some Potamogetonaceae the subtending floral bract is suppressed, and not incorporated into the perianth. This differs from Acorus and some alismatids, where a bract-like median abaxial tepal is formed in the outer perianth whorl (i.e. developmental merger of flower-subtending bract and tepal). In Araceae, Acorus and spicate alismatids flowers develop unidirectionally, correlated with bract reduction. Araceae lack unidirectionality in the outer perianth whorl, in contrast t o Acorus and Juncaginaceae. The transition from trimerous to dimerous flowers in Onintiurn (Araceae) is by accentuation of the unidirectionality of the inner perianth. The gynoecium of Araceae and Acorus is synascidiate. However, in most Araceae the synascidiate portion is shorter than in Acorns, and a distinct basal elongation phase as in Acorus and Juncaginaceae was not found. The perianth and androecium of Lysichiton and Symplocarpus and the gynoecium of Gymnostachys differ from other Araceae and resemble those in Potamogetonaceae. Developmental findings support the isolation of Acorus from Araceae, and show similarities of Araceae with Potamogetonaceae and of Acorus with Juncaginaceae.

show abstract

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthcontrasting

confidence: 59%

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Flower-subtending Bract and Perianthmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Flower structure and development of Araceae compared with alismatids and Acoraceae

Buzgo¹

2001

Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fossil evidence for Paleocene diversification of Araceae: Bognerospadix gen. nov. and Orontiophyllum grandifolium comb. nov.

Stockey

Hoffman²,

Rothwell

2021

American J of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Premise: Nearly 200 araceous leaves and two spadices have been identified among Paleocene fossils from the Blindman River locality near Blackfalds, Alberta, Canada. Although not found in attachment, these probably represent parts of the same extinct plant species. Methods: Specimens were studied using light microscopy. Phylogenetic analyses using a morphological matrix of living and fossil Araceae were performed using TNT version 1.5 to help establish relationships of the fossil leaves and spadices within Araceae and to each other. Results: Leaves are simple with a broad petiole, entire margin, and elliptic to ovate or oblong blade with an acute to slightly rounded apex. A multi-veined midrib extends into the basal region of the blade. Parallelodromous primary veins of two orders diverge at acute angles, converging with a submarginal vein or at the apex. Transverse veins are opposite percurrent, producing rectangular to polygonal areoles. Higherorder veins are mixed opposite/alternate. Spadices are cylindrical, with helically arranged, bisexual, perigoniate flowers, each with six free tepals and a protruding style. Fruits are trilocular, with axile placentation and one seed per locule. Conclusions: Leaves are assignable to the fossil genus Orontiophyllum J. Kvaček & S.Y. Sm. as O. grandifolium comb. nov. Spadices are described as Bognerospadix speirsiae gen. et sp. nov. Leaves and spadices each conform to an early-diverging lineage of Araceae, increasing the known diversity of Proto-Araceae (viz., subfamilies Gymnostachydoideae and Orontioideae). Together, they provide strong evidence for extinct Proto-Araceae with novel combinations of characters shortly after the Cretaceous-Paleogene floral transition.

show abstract

Patterns of Endothecial Wall Thickenings in Araceae: Subfamilies Pothoideae and Monsteroideae

French

1985

American J of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey of the patterns of endothecial wall thickenings in 106 representative species from 20 genera in the Pothoideae and Monsteroideae was made using cleared anthers, sections and macerations. The wide variety of wall thickenings that is present is based on an annular‐helical pattern. Variations in thickenings are related to differences in cell shape, cell orientation, intergradation between helical and annular patterns, pitch of helices, presence of branched thickenings, and various types of discontinuities in thickenings. Notable exceptions to the annular‐helical pattern include Culcasia, which lacks a differentiated endothecial layer with thickenings, and Acorus, which has a peculiar stellate pattern that is unique in the family. No single pattern consistently characterizes either subfamily, although continuous helices are common in the Monsteroideae, and rare in the endothecium of Pothoideae (except Anadendrum). Monsteroideae frequently exhibit a series of slanted separate thickenings on anticlinal walls, which is absent from Pothoideae except in Heteropsis. The slanted pattern is considered a variation on a rectangular helix, involving discontinuities of thickenings on the periclinal walls. Some monsteroid genera show considerably more interspecific variation (Rhaphidophora) than others (Monstera). Endothecial thickenings constitute an anatomical character that is useful in the systematic study of Araceae; present results support other anatomical studies in identifying Culcasia and Acorus as highly divergent genera in the Pothoideae.

show abstract

A Survey of Floral Anatomy in Araceae

Cited by 29 publications

References 0 publications

Flower structure and development of Araceae compared with alismatids and Acoraceae

Flower structure and development of Araceae compared with alismatids and Acoraceae

Fossil evidence for Paleocene diversification of Araceae: Bognerospadix gen. nov. and Orontiophyllum grandifolium comb. nov.

Patterns of Endothecial Wall Thickenings in Araceae: Subfamilies Pothoideae and Monsteroideae

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About