4.2 Article

Resurrection of Leucobryum scalare M?ll.Hal. ex M.Fleisch. (Bryophyta, Leucobryaceae) based on phylogenetic and morphometric evidence

Journal

PHYTOKEYS
Volume -, Issue 222, Pages 27-47

Publisher

PENSOFT PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.3897/phytokeys.222.98990

Keywords

Bryophytes; classification; mosses; revision; tropical biodiversity

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study re-evaluated the taxonomic status of Leucobryum scalare using phylogenetic and morphometric approaches. The results showed that it should be resurrected as a separate species from Leucobryum aduncum. This work highlights the need for a more thorough revision of Leucobryum to clarify the actual level of diversity in this genus.
Leucobryum scalare was described in 1904 but its taxonomic status has been disputed, being reduced to a variety of Leucobryum aduncum or synonymized with Leucobryum aduncum. The taxonomic confusion of this taxon has remained unresolved. Hence, we revisited the taxonomic status of the taxon using phylogenetic and morphometric approaches. A total of 27 samples from Leucobryum aduncum var. aduncum and Leucobryum aduncum var. scalare were used to generate data from four markers, including ITS1, ITS2, atpB-rbcL spacer, and trnL-trnF. The concatenated dataset was used to reconstruct a phylogenetic tree. Both qualitative and quantitative morphological characters were measured and analyzed with Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and PERMANOVA. The results showed that the two taxa are closely related but they are reciprocally monophyletic. Both qualitative and quantitative characters could also separate Leucobryum aduncum var. scalare from Leucobryum aduncum var. aduncum as shown with PCA and PERMANOVA. We propose the resurrection of the species rank for Leucobryum scalare as separate from Leucobryum aduncum. This work highlights the need for a more thorough revision of Leucobryum to clarify the actual level of diversity in this genus.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available