Leaf anatomical characters variation of Strobilanthes s.l. from Sumatra, Indonesia and its taxonomic implications

Abstract

Abstract. Suratman, Suranto, Muzzazinah, Purnomo. 2022. Leaf anatomical characters variation of Strobilanthes s.l. from Sumatra, Indonesia and its taxonomic implications. Biodiversitas 23: 3705-3720. The objective of this study was to evaluate leaf anatomical character variation among species of Strobilanthes s.l. from Sumatra. A total of 35 species from four genera previously recognized within the subtribe Strobilanthineae (Strobilanthes, Hemigraphis, Sericocalyx, Semnostachya) were used for leaf paradermal section observations. A total of seventeen leaf anatomical characters consisting of ten quantitative and seven qualitative characters were selected for leaf anatomical comparison. The quantitative and qualitative character analysis showed great variability in the majority of tested leaf anatomical characters. This result indicates the large diversity of leaf anatomical characters occurs among species of Strobilanthes s.l. A similarity dendrogram among species of Strobilanthes s.l. based leaf anatomical character data revealed two major clusters. The first cluster consists of eleven species with regular epidermal cell shape and straight cell wall with a similarity coefficient of 0.67. The second cluster consists of twenty four species that differed from species in the first cluster due to their irregular epidermal cell shape and undulate anticlinal cell wall with a similarity coefficient of 0.59. This study indicates that leaf anatomical characters are valuable taxonomic features in taxa delimitation at the species level. The results of this study also support earlier works through molecular studies that all members of the Strobilanthinae then accepted as Strobilanthes s.l. group which could not be easily split into smaller component genera.

Pollen morphological characters variation among species of Strobilanthes s.l. from Sumatra, Indonesia and its taxonomic implications

“…The results of this study also support earlier works through molecular studies (Moylan et al 2004), statistical analysis (Carine and Scotland 2002), gross morphology observations (Terao 1983;Wood 1994) and leaf anatomy studies (Suratman et al 2022) that the majority of groups into which the subtribe Strobilanthinae was divided by Bremekamp (1944) could not be easily split into smaller component genera (Deng 2019). Thus, the separation of this subtribe into segregate genera (eg Hemigraphis, Sericocalyx, Strobilanthes, etc) however should be neglected (Suratman et al 2022). As a consequence of these findings, the only practical solution to this taxonomy problem seems to be to place all segregate genera of the subtribe Strobilanthinae under an expanded, single and well-defined genus as Strobilanthes s.l.…”

“…This finding indicates that these genera are closely related and not easily distinguishable. The results of this study also support earlier works through molecular studies (Moylan et al 2004), statistical analysis (Carine and Scotland 2002), gross morphology observations (Terao 1983;Wood 1994) and leaf anatomy studies (Suratman et al 2022) that the majority of groups into which the subtribe Strobilanthinae was divided by Bremekamp (1944) could not be easily split into smaller component genera (Deng 2019). Thus, the separation of this subtribe into segregate genera (eg Hemigraphis, Sericocalyx, Strobilanthes, etc) however should be neglected (Suratman et al 2022).…”

“…The transparent nail polish was also deposited along the margins of glass slides with cover glass to make it semipermanent for LM observation (Raza et al 2020). For LM observations, light microscopic (Model: Nikon Eclipse E100, magnification of 10 x for ocular and 40 x for objective) were used (Suratman et al 2022). Random observations of the glass slides were conducted based on ten pollen grains (Rueangsawang et al 2013).…”

The phenetic relationship of citrus plants based on the morphological and anatomical characteristics

“…The leaves' shape varies on each plant, including citrus. These differences in leaf morphology are often used to identify species (Opara et al 2010;Suratman et al 2022). The lamina of the leaves has many variations in size, shape, and color; this variation can be used to identify plants.…”

“…The phenetic relationship among plants can be determined by observing the similarities in their morphological characteristics (Yuan et al 2020). An anatomical approach can show correlations between anatomical characters and other characters so that anatomical data can strengthen taxon boundaries, especially for taxonomic evidence such as morphological characteristics that are doubtful (Suratman et al 2022). Qualitatively, phenetic relationships are determined by comparing the similarities and differences in characteristics of each taxon, using several character similarities (morphology, anatomy, embryology, palynology, cytology, chemistry, reproductive biology, ecology, and physiology).…”