Troublesome tropical mints: re‐examining generic limits of <i>Vitex</i> and relations (Lamiaceae) in South East Asia

Bramley, Gemma L. C.; Forest, Félix; Kok, R.P.J. de

doi:10.1002/tax.582014

Cited by 30 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1A). This corroborates the results of Bramley & al. (2009), who also included a broader viticoid taxon sample and the symphorematoid genus Sphenodesme.…”

Section: Leucadeaesupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Viticoideae are non-monophyletic as currently circumscribed (Fig. 1A), which has also been demonstrated by other molecular investigations (Wagstaff & Olmstead, 1997;Wagstaff & al., 1998;Bramley & al., 2009). Subfamily Symphorematoideae (here represented by Congea) is supported in all analyses as sister to a clade consisting of two viticoid genera (Petitia, Vitex) (Fig.…”

Section: Leucadeaementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An updated phylogeny and classification of Lamiaceae subfamily Lamioideae

Bendiksby

Thorbek

Scheen

et al. 2011

TAXON

132

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lamioideae comprise the second‐largest subfamily in Lamiaceae. Although considerable progress has recently been made in Lamioideae phylogenetics, the subfamily remains one of the most poorly investigated subfamilies in Lamiaceae. Here we present a taxonomic update of the subfamily based on earlier published data as well as 71 new DNA extracts from relevant in‐ and outgroup taxa, and DNA sequence data from four chloroplast regions (matK, rps16, trnL intron and trnL‐F spacer). The phylogenetic positions of 10 out of 13 previously unplaced small or monotypic Asian lamioid genera and 37 additional lamioid species have been identified, and the classification is updated accordingly. Results from parsimony and Bayesian phylogenetic methods corroborate earlier results, but phylogenetic resolution as well as overall branch support are improved. All newly added genera are assigned to earlier established tribes or the new tribe Paraphlomideae Bendiksby, which includes Ajugoides, Matsumurella and Paraphlomis. Acanthoprasium is resurrected as a genus. Transfer of species is proposed to ac ‐ commodate the monophyly of two genera (Lamium, Otostegia), whereas ten genera remain non‐monophyletic (Ballota s. str., Lagopsis, Leonotis, Leonurus, Leucas, Microtoena, Phlomoides, Sideritis, Stachys, Thuspeinanta). Eriophyton and Stachyopsis have been included in Lamieae, Hypogomphia in Stachydeae, and Loxocalyx in Leonureae. Betonica, Colquhounia, Galeopsis, and Roylea remain unclassified at the tribal level. Lamium chinense and three East Asian Galeobdolon species are transferred to Matsumurella. Sulaimania and four Otostegia species are transferred to Moluccella . Alajja and three Lamium species are transferred to Eriophyton. In total, 14 new combinations are made, one at the rank of subgenus and 13 at the rank of species.

show abstract

“…1A). This corroborates the results of Bramley & al. (2009), who also included a broader viticoid taxon sample and the symphorematoid genus Sphenodesme.…”

Section: Leucadeaesupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Leucadeaementioning

confidence: 99%

An updated phylogeny and classification of Lamiaceae subfamily Lamioideae

Bendiksby

Thorbek

Scheen

et al. 2011

TAXON

132

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Viticoideae sensu are divided into two separate clades in Fig. 3, in agreement with other analyses (e.g., Wagstaff & al., 1998;Bramley & al., 2009), indicating that this subfamily is nonmonophyletic. Subfamily Symphoremat oideae was represented by only one species in the analysis, so its monophyly wasn't tested.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…-In addition to Holocheila, we included in our analyses six other genera that were considered incer tae sedis by . Hymenopyramis, Peronema and Petraeovitex were included by Bramley & al. (2009), and Acrymia, Cymaria, and Garrettia were included by Bendiksby & al.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic placement of the enigmatic genus Holocheila (Lamiaceae) inferred from plastid DNA sequences

Chen

Olmstead

et al. 2014

TAXON

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The monotypic genus Holocheila was originally placed in Teucrium sect. Holocheila but was later treated as a distinct genus and variably affiliated with subfamilies Ajugoideae, Scutellarioideae, or Lamioideae. We investigated the phylogenetic position of this enigmatic genus using likelihood, parsimony, and Bayesian methods based on six plastid DNA sequences. The preliminary results from a concatenated ndhF and rbcL dataset that covered all seven subfamilies of Lamiaceae suggested that Holocheila is part of subfamily Lamioideae. To examine its position within Lamioideae more thoroughly, a dataset was assembled that included representatives of 59 of the 63 genera of Lamioideae and data for four genetic markers: trnL intron, trnL‐trnF spacer, rps16 and matK. The results showed that Holocheila is part of tribe Pogostemoneae. Glossy mericarps and unilocular anthers are apomorphies that Holocheila shares with some members of Pogostemoneae. The genera Acrymia and Cymaria, which have been considered incertae sedis, were found to be the closest relatives of Lamioideae. Four other incertae sedis genera (Garrettia, Hymenopyramis, Peronema, Petraeovitex) appear to form a clade that is sister to the clade comprising Lamioideae, Acrymia, Cymaria, and Scutellarioideae.

show abstract

“…Clerodendrum L. and other genera formerly placed in Verbenaceae), the Lamiaceae as a family has been well-circumscribed historically ( Bentham 1876 ;Briquet 1895Briquet -1897Wunderlich 1967 ;Wagstaff et al 1998 ), but subfamilial, tribal, and generic delimitations have been less satisfactory . During the past fifteen years the mints have been the focus of numerous molecular phylogenetic studies ( Wagstaff et al 1995 ;Wagstaff and Olmstead 1997 ;Wagstaff et al 1998 ;Prather et al 2002 ;Paton et al 2004 ;Trusty et al 2004 ;Walker et al 2004 ;Bräuchler et al 2005 ;Edwards et al 2006 ;Walker and Sytsma 2007 ;Bramley et al 2009 ;Bräuchler et al 2010 ;Scheen et al 2010 ;Yuan et al 2010 ). These efforts have spurred taxonomic revisions at several levels ( Cantino and Wagstaff 1998 ;Harley et al 2004 ;Walker et al 2004 ;Bräuchler et al 2005 ;Yuan et al 2010 ), and have led to an unprecedented understanding of relationships within the Lamiaceae, especially in regards to subfamilial and tribal designations ( Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%