Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support

Comparative Pollen Morphology and Its Relationship to Phylogeny of Pollen in the Hamamelidae

Michael S. Zavada and David L. Dilcher
Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden
Vol. 73, No. 2 (1986), pp. 348-381
DOI: 10.2307/2399117
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2399117
Page Count: 34
  • Get Access
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Cite this Item
If you need an accessible version of this item please contact JSTOR User Support
Comparative Pollen Morphology and Its Relationship to Phylogeny of Pollen in the Hamamelidae
Preview not available

Abstract

Data on pollen morphological features from 200 species in 20 families commonly included in the Hamamelidae and particular species in the Anacardiaceae and Salicaceae are presented in this paper. The basic descriptive analyses presented are derived from observations by light microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Thirty pollen characters showed some variability, and each of the species was scored for these characters. These data were analyzed and similarity cluster analyses were generated. Both an unweighted pair group and a complete linkage strategy dendrogram were produced. Three major clusters of families were defined, based on these analyses. Group I consists of Trochodendraceae, Cercidiphyllaceae, Eupteleaceae, Platanaceae, Hamamelidaceae (including Altingioideae), Eucommiaceae, and Myrothamnaceae. The Liquidambaroideae, Eucommiaceae, and Myrothamnaceae, while closest to Group I, can be viewed as intermediate between Groups I and II in complete linkage strategy and between Groups II and III in unweighted pair group strategy. Group II-consisting of Daphniphyllaceae, Leitneriaceae, Barbeyaceae, and Fagaceae (excluding Nothofagus)-has a closer phenetic relationship to Group I than Group III. Group III is the largest of these groups: it consists of Ulmaceae, Cannabaceae, Juglandaceae, Rhoipteleaceae, Betulaceae, Casuarinaceae, and Myricaceae. The Balanopaceae and Nothofagus are somewhat isolated and peripheral entities but hold together in both linkage strategies. Thirty pollen characters of 78 taxa were analyzed using PAUP to produce a cladistic tree. The outgroup used was Tetracentron. Three phylogenetically related groups sorted out, which are the same as those already recognized in the Groups I, II, and III mentioned above. Group I occurs at the base of the tree (primitive), and Group II occurs as intermediate between Groups I and III (derived). In general, these data support the relationships suggested by Barabe for the Hamamelidae, based upon vegetative and floral features and the classification of Cronquist.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[348]
    [348]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
349
    349
  • Thumbnail: Page 
350
    350
  • Thumbnail: Page 
351
    351
  • Thumbnail: Page 
352
    352
  • Thumbnail: Page 
353
    353
  • Thumbnail: Page 
354
    354
  • Thumbnail: Page 
355
    355
  • Thumbnail: Page 
356
    356
  • Thumbnail: Page 
357
    357
  • Thumbnail: Page 
358
    358
  • Thumbnail: Page 
359
    359
  • Thumbnail: Page 
360
    360
  • Thumbnail: Page 
361
    361
  • Thumbnail: Page 
362
    362
  • Thumbnail: Page 
363
    363
  • Thumbnail: Page 
364
    364
  • Thumbnail: Page 
365
    365
  • Thumbnail: Page 
366
    366
  • Thumbnail: Page 
367
    367
  • Thumbnail: Page 
368
    368
  • Thumbnail: Page 
369
    369
  • Thumbnail: Page 
370
    370
  • Thumbnail: Page 
371
    371
  • Thumbnail: Page 
372
    372
  • Thumbnail: Page 
373
    373
  • Thumbnail: Page 
374
    374
  • Thumbnail: Page 
375
    375
  • Thumbnail: Page 
376
    376
  • Thumbnail: Page 
377
    377
  • Thumbnail: Page 
378
    378
  • Thumbnail: Page 
379
    379
  • Thumbnail: Page 
380
    380
  • Thumbnail: Page 
381
    381