@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref15090, author = {Patricia B. Cox and Lowell E. Urbatsch}, title = {A phylogenetic analysis of the coneflower genera (Asteraceae: Heliantheae).}, year = {1990}, keywords = {}, doi = {}, url = {}, pmid = {}, journal = {Systematic Botany}, volume = {15}, number = {}, pages = {394--402}, abstract = {The coneflowers include the genera Dracopis, Echinacea, Ratibida, and Rudbeckia, with Rudbeckia being divided into sects. Rudbeckia, Macrocline and Laciniata. As part of a monographic study of Rudbeckia sects. Macrocline and Laciniata, relationships to other nearby Heliantheae needed to be assessed. Stuessy grouped the four coneflower genera together within the subtribe Helianthinae. Later, Robinson erected the subtribe Rudbeckiinae to include Dracopis, Ratibida, and Rudbeckia. He removed Echinacea to the subtribe Ecliptinae on the bases of chromosome number and anatomical features and suggested a probable relationship to the genera Balsamorhiza, Helianthella, and Wyethia. In the current work, twenty-eight qualitative characters were chosen for cladistic analysis performed by the Branch and Bound algorithm in PAUP, which guarantees discovery of the most parsimonious tree. This analysis supports the historical placement of Echinacea with the coneflowers. The resulting cladogram presents the Rudbeckiinae as a monophyletic taxon with the genera of the Ecliptinae forming a group distinct from the coneflowers. The clade of the sister taxa, Dracopis and Ratibida, is related to a clade containing two distinct groups, one of Echinacea and Rudbeckia sect. Macrocline and the other of Rudbeckia sect. Rudbeckia and sect. Laciniata.} }

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

CiteULike

Delicious

Connotea