HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sytsma, K. J. Articles by Chase, M. W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Sytsma, K. J. Articles by Chase, M. W. Agricola Articles by Sytsma, K. J. Articles by Chase, M. W.

Urticalean rosids: circumscription, rosid ancestry, and phylogenetics based on rbcL, trnL-F, and ndhF sequences¹

²Department of Botany, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706 USA, ³Molecular Systematics Section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, UK

To address the composition of the urticalean rosids, the relationships of the component families (maximally Cannabaceae, Cecropiaceae, Celtidaceae, Moraceae, Ulmaceae, and Urticaceae) and analyze evolution of morphological characters, we analyzed sequence variation for a large sampling of these families and various rosid outgroups using rbcL, trnL-F, and ndhF plastid regions. Urticalean rosids are derived out of a lineage including Barbeyaceae, Dirachmaceae, Elaeagnaceae, and Rhamnaceae, with Rosaceae less closely related; thus, they are imbedded within Rosales. Ulmaceae are the sister to all remaining families. Cannabaceae are derived out of a subclade of Celtidaceae; this expanded family should be called Cannabaceae. Cecropiaceae are derived within Urticaceae and are polyphyletic with Poikilospermum derived elsewhere within Urticaceae; this expanded family should be called Urticaceae. Monophyletic Moraceae are sister to this expanded Urticaceae. Support for these relationships comes from a number of morphological characters (floral sexuality, presence or absence of hypanthium, stamen type and dehiscence, pollen pore number, ovule position, and embryo alignment) and chromosome numbers. Most fruit types, in terms of ecological dispersal, are derived independently multiple times and are strongly correlated with habitat.

Key Words: Cannabaceae • Cecropiaceae • ndhF • phylogenetics • rbcL • Rosales • trnL-F • Urticales

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. K Monro The revision of species-rich genera: a phylogenetic framework for the strategic revision of Pilea (Urticaceae) based on cpDNA, nrDNA, and morphology Am. J. Botany, March 1, 2006; 93(3): 426 - 441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. S. Judd and R. G. Olmstead A survey of tricolpate (eudicot) phylogenetic relationships Am. J. Botany, September 1, 2004; 91(10): 1627 - 1644. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. L. Datwyler and G. D. Weiblen On the origin of the fig: phylogenetic relationships of Moraceae from ndhF sequences Am. J. Botany, May 1, 2004; 91(5): 767 - 777. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. A. Levin, W. L. Wagner, P. C. Hoch, M. Nepokroeff, J. C. Pires, E. A. Zimmer, and K. J. Sytsma Family-level relationships of Onagraceae based on chloroplast rbcL and ndhF data Am. J. Botany, January 1, 2003; 90(1): 107 - 115. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. C. Hall, K. J. Sytsma, and H. H. Iltis Phylogeny of Capparaceae and Brassicaceae based on chloroplast sequence data Am. J. Botany, November 1, 2002; 89(11): 1826 - 1842. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]