2005
DOI: 10.1071/sb04031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phylogenetic analysis of the Australian Salicornioideae (Chenopodiaceae) based on morphology and nuclear DNA

Abstract: The Salicornioideae Kostel. are distinctive among the Chenopodiaceae Venet. However, their phylogenetic relationships are poorly understood. Analyses of morphological and molecular characters were undertaken to evaluate relationships within the subfamily and to test the monophyly of the endemic Australian genera Halosarcia Paul G. Wilson, Pachycornia Hook.f., Sclerostegia Paul G. Wilson, Tecticornia Hook.f. and Tegicornia Paul G. Wilson. Kalidium Moq. and Halopeplis Bunge ex Ung.-Sternb. of the tribe Halopepli… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
41
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(74 reference statements)
1
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Halosarcia was distinguished from Arthrocnemum by the absence of sclereids in the chlorenchyma and flowers that have only one (abaxial) stamen. Based on a morphological and molecular study of Shepherd & al. (2005b), Shepherd & Wilson (2007) incorporated Halosarcia together with Pachycornia, Sclerostegia and Tegicornia in one genus, Tecticornia.…”
Section: Genera Of Salicornioideae As Currently Understood -mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Halosarcia was distinguished from Arthrocnemum by the absence of sclereids in the chlorenchyma and flowers that have only one (abaxial) stamen. Based on a morphological and molecular study of Shepherd & al. (2005b), Shepherd & Wilson (2007) incorporated Halosarcia together with Pachycornia, Sclerostegia and Tegicornia in one genus, Tecticornia.…”
Section: Genera Of Salicornioideae As Currently Understood -mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Later molecular studies have supported the subfamily status of Salicornioideae (Kadereit & al., 2003(Kadereit & al., , 2006Kapralov & al., 2006;Kadereit & al., 2012a). The tribal classification has either remained unresolved (Kadereit & al., 2003) or has been rejected (Shepherd & al., 2005b;Kadereit & al., 2006;Kapralov & al., 2006). Kadereit & al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…10.1]), and none of the species recognized by MoquinTandon (1840) is appropriate for the typification. This and Salicornia including paraphyletic Sarcocornia (Shepherd, Macfarlane and Waycott 2005b;Steffen et al 2015) are overlapping (Zare and Keshavarzi 2007). Despite many morphological homologies (shrubby life history; glabrous stem; opposite scale-like leaves and bracts; cymes consisting of three flowers; rupture of the lower part of both perianth and pericarp making the ripe seed free; vertical embryo position) and similar (saline) habitats, there are several important traits unambiguously distinguishing Arthrocnemum from the Salicornia/Sarcocornia group (Table 1; see also De Fraine 1913;Ferguson 1964;Sukhorukov 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Shepherd, Waycott and Calladine, 2004;Kadereit, Mucina and Freitag, 2006;Kadereit and Yaprak 2008) and carpological (Sukhorukov 2014) results show that Arthrocnemum is closely related to the monotypic genus Microcnemum found in the Mediterranean region. The genera are nested within one clade (Shepherd, Macfarlane and Waycott, 2005b;Kadereit, Mucina and Freitag, 2006;Kadereit and Yaprak 2008), which is clearly distant from both Salicornia and Sarcocornia, which together form a separate lineage. Carpologically both Arthrocnemum and Microcnemum possess black seeds with a thick, crustaceous coat often forming stout (papilla-like) outgrowths from the testa cells, and with "stalactites" on the outer cell walls of the testa (Sukhorukov 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Alkhani & al. 2003;Iamonico 2009;McAndrews & Swanson 1967;Pinar & Inceoglu 1999;Riollet & Bonnefille 1976;Shepherd & al. 2005;Soliman 2006;Toderich & al.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%