Pteridophyten-Studien I

Rothmaler, Werner

doi:10.1002/fedr.4880540106

Cited by 17 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Herter (1949Herter ( -1950, Rothmaler (1944) and Holub (1964) all recognised the monotypic genus Phylloglossum but split Lycopodium into a number of smaller genera. The classification of this family adopted here is by Øllgaard (1987, 1990) in which he recognised four genera, viz.…”

Section: Family Lycopodiaceaementioning

confidence: 98%

A cytotaxonomic survey of the Pteridophyta of Australia

Tindale¹,

Roy²

2002

Aust. Systematic Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All enquiries and manuscripts should be directed to:An international journal devoted t o t h e t a x o n o my, b i o g e o g r a p hy and evolution of all plant groups a u s t r a l i a n s y s t e m a t i c b o t a n yAbstract. A cytotaxonomic survey of the ferns and fern allies of Australia (including Lord Howe Island) is presented. Five-hundred-and-twenty-six chromosome counts of 268 Australian species, subspecies, varieties, variants and hybrids are recorded, only a small number having been previously investigated by other botanists on Australian material. Diploids represent c. 62% of the counts on species and c. 38% on polyploids, the latter ranging principally from triploids to a single decaploid and dodecaploid (but no heptaploids). More than one ploidy level has been reported in 19 taxa (almost 8% of taxa). Counts of 10x for Asplenium aethiopicum and 12x for A. flabellifolium are the highest definite ploidy levels for the Australian pteridophyte flora. Chromosome counts for 29 families and 89 genera are cited. Only diploids were reported for Osmundaceae and Cyatheaceae, but only polyploids for the Psilotaceae, Vittariaceae and Ophioglossaceae. An analysis is given of the levels of ploidy in 248 taxa, excluding the Lycopodiaceae and Hymenophyllaceae. The percentages of diploids and polyploids in Australian species are compared with those of nearby countries. Many species reported on here have never been cytologically investigated before, while others have not been studied previously on Australian material. The following genera have been examined cytologically for the first time: Coveniella Tindale, n = 41; Paraceterach (F.Muell.) Copel., n = 29; 'Oenotrichia Copel.', 2n = 82 (2x); Revwattsia (Watts) D.L.Jones, 2n = c. 328 (8x); and Pteridoblechnum Hennipman (2n = 54). The phylogeny of the genera is discussed in the light of these findings. Certain families such as the Adiantaceae, Cyatheaceae, Hymenophyllaceae, Lindsaeaceae and Marsileaceae were given special attention by collecting as much living material as possible. A number of species-complexes has been found and further chromosome counts added to intercontinental species complexes. The Döpp-Manton and Braithwaite forms of reproductive apomixis have been reported amongst some genera. Endemism, hybridity and apogamy amongst Australian pteridophytes are discussed, as well as homosporous and heterosporous species. The new combination Phymatosorus membranifolius (R.Br.) Tindale is made. S B 0 0 0 3 4 C y t o t a x o n o mi c s u r v e y o f t h e P t e r i d o p h y t a o f A u s t r a l i a

show abstract

Section: Family Lycopodiaceaementioning

confidence: 98%

A cytotaxonomic survey of the Pteridophyta of Australia

Tindale¹,

Roy²

2002

Aust. Systematic Bot.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The homosporous lycophytes have traditionally been treated as a single monophyletic family Lycopodiaceae without close relatives, and the species all referred to a single large genus Lycopodium (e.g., Tryon & Tryon 1982), or they were subdivided into two families (Rothmaler 1944;Holub 1985) and into four, or, with recent additions, up to 16 genera (Holub 1964(Holub , 1983(Holub , 1985(Holub , 1991Pichi Sermolli 1977;Øllgaard 1987;Wagner & Beitel 1992;Haines 2003). Øllgaard (1987) revised the classification of Lycopodiaceae sensu lato in a paper that also served as base of the Index of the Lycopodiaceae (Øllgaard 1989) and the treatment in the "Families and Genera of Vascular Plants" (Øllgaard 1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lycopodiaceae in Brazil. Conspectus of the family I. The genera Lycopodium, Austrolycopodium, Diphasium, and Diphasiastrum

Øllgaard¹,

Windisch

2014

Rodriguésia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A conspectus of the Lycopodiaceae in Brazil is presented, following a generic classification based on anatomy, chromosome numbers, spores and gametophytes, as well as recent molecular studies. The species of Lycopodiaceae occurring in Brazil, traditionally treated conservatively, were grouped in three genera: Lycopodium, Lycopodiella, and Huperzia. Within each genus, the diversity (treated under various subgenera, sections, and subsections) has been discussed. In our new approach, these three genera are treated as subfamilies Lycopodiodeae (four genera in Brazil), Lycopodielloideae (three genera in Brazil), and Huperzioideae (two genera in Brazil). Branching patterns and morphological diversity of vegetative leaves and sporophylls, as well as morphology of sporangia and spores in the different groups, are discussed in a brief review. We provide keys to identification of subfamilies and genera represented in Brazil. The species of Lycopodioideae, genera Lycopodium (s.str.), Austrolycopodium, Diphasium, and Diphasiastrum (one species in the first three genera, two in Diphasiastrum -one of them new) are treated in detail, with descriptions, illustrations (or references to illustrations), and comments on habitat and distribution. Key words: taxonomy, lycophytes, diversity, floristics, phytogeography. ResumoÉ apresentado um conspecto das licopodiáceas ocorrentes na flora do Brasil, seguindo classificação genérica baseada em anatomia, números cromossômicos, esporos e gametófitos, bem como as evidências de recentes estudos moleculares. Os representantes de Lycopodiaceae eram tradicionalmente tratados de maneira conservadora, agrupados em três gêneros: Lycopodium, Lycopodiella e Huperzia, tratando sua diversidade em subgêneros, secções e sub-secções. Na nova abordagem, estes três gêneros passam a ser tratados como subfamílias, a saber: Lycopodioideae (quatro gêneros no Brasil), Lycopodielloideae (três gêneros) e Huperzioideae (dois gêneros). Os padrões de ramificação, a variabilidade na morfologia das folhas vegetativas e esporofilos, bem como a morfologia dos esporângios e esporos nos diferentes grupos são discutidos em breve resenha da terminologia adotada. É apresentada uma chave de identificação para as subfamílias e seus gêneros no Brasil. As espécies de Lycopodioidea, gêneros Lycopodium (s.str.), Austrolycopodium, Diphasium e Diphasiastrum (uma espécie em cada um dos três primeiros, duas in Diphasiastrum sendo uma nova para a ciência), são tratadas em detalhe, com apresentação de chaves, descrições, ilustrações (ou referências a ilustrações), bem como comentários sobre habitats e distribuição. Palavras-chave: taxonomia, licófitas, diversidade, florística, fitogeografia.Lycopodiaceae in Brazil. Conspectus of the family I. The genera Lycopodium, Austrolycopodium, Diphasium, and Diphasiastrum

show abstract

“…The Huperziaceae was originally separated from Lycopodium (s.l.) by Rothmaler (1944). Lycopodium (s.l.)…”

Section: Hupa Source Plantsmentioning

confidence: 98%