@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref17514, author = {Mark P. Simmons and Vincent Savolainen and Curtis C. Clevinger and Robert H Archer and Jerrold I. Davis}, title = {Phylogeny of the Celastraceae inferred from 26S nuclear ribosomal DNA, phytochrome B, rbcL, atpB, and morphology.}, year = {2001}, keywords = {26S nuclear ribosomal DNA; Brexia; Celastraceae; Forsellesia; Goupia; Hippocrateaceae; Parnassiaceae; Plagiopteron}, doi = {10.1006/mpev.2001.0937}, url = {}, pmid = {}, journal = {Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution}, volume = {19}, number = {3}, pages = {353--366}, abstract = {Phylogenetic relationships within Celastraceae (spindle-tree family) were inferred from nucleotide sequence characters from the 5? end of 26S nuclear ribosomal DNA (including expansion segments D1?D3; 84 species sampled), phytochrome B (58 species), rbcL (31 species), atpB (23 species), and morphology (94 species). Among taxa of questionable affinity, Forsellesia is a member of Crossosomataceae, and Goupia is excluded from Celastraceae. However, Brexia, Canotia, Lepuropetalon, Parnassia, Siphonodon, and Stackhousiaceae are supported as members of Celastraceae. Gymnosporia and Tricerma are distinct from Maytenus, Cassine is supported as distinct from Elaeodendron, and Dicarpellum is distinct from Salacia. Catha, Maytenus, and Pristimera are not resolved as natural genera. Hippocrateaceae (including Plagiopteron and Lophopetalum) are a clade nested within a paraphyletic Celastraceae. These data also suggest that the Loesener's classification of Celastraceae sensu stricto and Hall?'s classification of Hippocrateaceae are artificial. The diversification of the fruit and aril within Celastraceae appears to be complex, with multiple origins of most fruit and aril forms.} }

• Go to search
• Citation
• Taxa
• Matrices
• Trees
• Analyses
• 

CiteULike

Delicious

Connotea