4.5 Article

The phylogeny of the Pentaschistis clade (Danthonioideae, Poaceae) based on chloroplast DNA, and the evolution and loss of complex characters

期刊

EVOLUTION
卷 61, 期 4, 页码 864-884

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00067.x

关键词

ancestral; correlated evolution; Danthonioideae; gland evolution; Pentaschistis; phylogeny; Poaceae

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We construct a species-level phylogeny for the Pentaschistis clade based on chloroplast DNA, from the following regions: trnL-F, trnT-L,atpB-rbcL, rpL16, and trnD-psbA. The clade comprises 82 species in three genera, Pentaschistis, Pentameris, and Prionanthium. We demonstrate that Prionanthium is nested in Pentaschistis and that this clade is sister to a clade of Pentameris plus Pentaschistis tysonii. Forty-three of the species in the Pentaschistis clade have multicellular glands and we use ancestral character state reconstruction to show that they have been gained twice or possibly once, and lost several times. We suggest that the maintenance, absence, loss, and gain of glands are correlated with leaf anatomy type, and additionally that there is a difference in the degree of diversification of lineages that have these different character combinations. We propose that both glands and sclerophyllous leaves act as defense systems against herbivory, and build a cost/benefit model in which multicellular glands or sclerophyllous leaves are lost when the alternative defense system evolves. We also investigate the association between leaf anatomy type and soil nutrient type on which species grow. There is little phylogenetic constraint in soil nutrient type on members of the Pentaschistis clade, with numerous transitions between oligotrophic and eutrophic soils. However, only orthophyllous-leaved species diversify on eutrophic soils. We suggest that the presence of these glands enables the persistence of orthophyllous lineages and therefore diversification of the Pentaschistis clade on eutrophic as well as oligotrophic soils.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据