Species boundaries among the Cercocarpus fothergilloides complex (Rosaceae)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21829/abm131.2024.2310Keywords:
Canonical Discriminant Analysis, correlation analysis, Dryadoideae, morphometry, species delimitationAbstract
Background and Aims: Cercocarpus (Dryadoideae, Rosaceae) is an endemic genus to the central-western United States of America and Mexico. Three taxonomic revisions recognize six to 21 species, which have been delimited mainly based on morphological foliar characters and are grouped into the complexes C. ledifolius, C. betuloides, C. montanus and C. fothergilloides. The Cercocarpus fothergilloides complex includes four taxa endemic to Mexico, but present morphological variation and more species could be recognized. The aims of this work were to identify and delimit the species of the fothergilloides complex, establish if the characters correlate with latitude and longitude as well as describe the anatomy and leaf architecture.
Methods: We quantified 13 foliar and floral morphological characters and eight anatomical ones of the leaf. We used two Canonical Discriminant Analyzes (CDAs) to examine the quantitative morpho-anatomical data. With the most important quantitative characters from the CDA and ten qualitative morpho-anatomical and leaf architecture ones, we performed a clustering analysis to recognize groups. A correlation analysis between characters and latitude and longitude was performed.
Key results: The number of secondary veins, the length of the lamina, the fruit pedicel, the style and the fruit were the morphological characters that allowed differentiating species. Anatomical characteristics such as the thickness of the leaf and cuticle, the height of the palisade parenchyma and epidermis, as well as the depth of the crypt distinguished the taxa. The cluster analysis differentiated seven species. There was not a correlation between most characters with latitude and longitude.
Conclusions: The Cercocarpus fothergilloides complex comprises seven species and three of these are new. The species are distinguished by combinations of morphological, anatomical and leaf architecture characters.
Downloads
References
Abràmoff, M. D., P. J. Magalhães y S. J. Ram. 2004. Image processing with ImageJ. Biophotonics International 11: 36-42.
Andrés-Hernández, A. R. y T. Terrazas. 2009. Leaf architecture of Rhus s.str. (Anacardiaceae). Feddes Repertorium 120(5-6): 293-306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/fedr.200911109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/fedr.200911109
Boza Espinoza, T. E., H. R. Quispe-Melgar y M. Kessler. 2019. Taxonomic reevaluation of the Polylepis sericea complex (Rosaceae), with the description of a new species. Systematic Botany 44(2): 324-334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1600/036364419X15562052252225 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1600/036364419X15562052252225
Ceja-Romero, J., A. Espejo-Serna y A. R. López-Ferrari. 2009. Una nueva especie de Sisyrinchium (Iridaceae) del estado de Guanajuato, México. Acta Botanica Mexicana 87: 83-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21829/abm87.2009.1083 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21829/abm87.2009.1083
Chitchak, N., P. Traiperm, G. Staples, P. Rattanakrajang y P. Sumanon. 2018. Species delimitation of some Argyreia (Convolvulaceae) using phenetic analyses: insights from leaf anatomical data reveal a new species. Botany 96(4): 217-233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2017-0108 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2017-0108
Cutler, D. F., T. Botha y D. W. Stevenson. 2008. Plant anatomy and applied approach. Blackwell Publishing. Malden, USA. 312 pp.
de Queiroz, K. 2005. A unified concept of species and its consequences for the future of taxonomy. Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 56(18): 196-215.
de Souza Lima, M. P., A. Soares, J. L. Ribeiro de Sousa, M. Santos Carvalho, J. M. Padovani Porto y F. Tavares Braga. 2019. Leaf architecture of Rubiaceae Juss. from caatinga vegetation in Brazil. Biota Neotropica 19(1): e20170473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-0611-BN-2017-0473 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-0611-bn-2017-0473
Duminil, J. y M. Di Michele. 2009. Plant species delimitation: a comparison of morphological and molecular markers. Plant Biosystems 143(3): 528-542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/11263500902722964 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/11263500902722964
Ellis, B., D. C. Daly, L. J. Hickey, K. R. Johnson, J. D. Mitchell, P. Wilf y S. L. Wing. 2009. Manual of leaf architecture. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, USA. 190 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1079/9781845935849.0000
Eriksen, B. 1997. Morphometric analysis of Alaskan members of the genus Potentilla sect. Niveae (Rosaceae). Nordic Journal of Botany 17(6): 621-630. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.1997.tb00358.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-1051.1997.tb00358.x
Faghir, M. B., F. Attar y B. Ertter. 2011. Foliar anatomy of the genus Potentilla L. (Rosaceae) in Iran and its taxonomic implication. Iranian Journal of Science & Technology 35(3): 243-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22099/IJSTS.2011.2149
Finot, V. L., R. J. Soreng, L. M. Giussani y R. G. Muñoz. 2018. A multivariate morphometric delimitation of species boundaries in the South American genus Nicoraepoa (Poaceae: Pooideae: Poeae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 304: 679-697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-018-1499-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-018-1499-y
Freudenstein, J. V., M. B. Broe, R. A. Folk y B. T. Sinn. 2017. Biodiversity and the species concept-lineages are not enough. Systematic Biology 66(4): 644-656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syw098 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syw098
Google Inc. 2020. Google Earth Pro v. 7.3. https://www.google.com/intl/es-419/earth/ (consultado enero de 2020).
Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham y W. C. Black. 1999. Análisis multivariante. Pearson Prentice Hall. Madrid, España. 832 pp.
Hammer, Ø., D. A. T. Harper y P. D. Ryan. 2001. PAST: Paleontological Statistics Software Package for Education and Data Analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica 4: 1-9. https://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm (consultado marzo de 2020).
Hassiotou, F., J. R. Evans, M. Ludwig y E. J. Veneklaas. 2009. Stomatal crypts may facilitate diffusion of CO2 to adaxial mesophyll cells in thick sclerophylls. Plant, Cell & Environment 32(11): 1596-1611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02024.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.02024.x
Henrickson, J. y B. D. Vanden Heuvel. 2014. Cercocarpus Kunth. In: Comité Editorial de Flora of North America (eds.). Flora of North America, Magnoliophyta: Picramniaceae to Rosaceae, vol. 9. Oxford University Press. New York, USA. http://floranorthamerica.org/Cercocarpus (consultado mayo de 2022).
Hickey, L. J. 1973. Classification of the Architecture of Dicotyledonous Leaves. American Journal of Botany 60(1): 17-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1973.tb10192.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1973.tb10192.x
Image Pro-plus. 2019. Image Pro-plus ver. 7.1. Media Cybernetics. Inc. Bethesda, EUA. https://www.mediacy.com/78-products/image-pro-plus (consultado agosto de 2019).
INEGI. 2020. Catálogo Único de Claves de Áreas Geoestadísticas Estatales, Municipales y Localidades. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) https://www.inegi.org.mx/app/ageeml/# (consultado enero de 2024).
JSTOR. 2022. JSTOR Global Plants. https://plants.jstor.org/ (consultado mayo de 2022).
Lis, R. A. 1992. Leaf architectural survey of Cercocarpus (Rosaceae) and its systematic significance. International Journal of Plant Sciences 153(2): 258-272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/297030 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/297030
Mallet, J. 1995. A species definition for the modern synthesis. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 10(7): 294-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(95)90031-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(00)89105-3
Martin, F. L. 1950. A revision of Cercocarpus. Brittonia 7: 91-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2804932 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2804932
Martínez-Cabrera, D., T. Terrazas y H. Ochoterena. 2007. Leaf architecture of Hamelieae (Rubiaceae). Feddes Repertorium 118(7-8): 286-310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/fedr.200711140 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/fedr.200711140
Martínez-Cabrera, D., F. Zavala-Chávez y T. Terrazas. 2011. Estudio morfométrico de Quercus sartorii y Q. xalapensis (Fagaceae). Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 82(2): 551-568. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ib.20078706e.2011.2.459 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ib.20078706e.2011.2.459
Metcalfe, C. R. y L. Chalk. 1950. Anatomy of the dicotyledons: leaves, stem and wood in relation to taxonomy, with notes on economic uses, Vol. I. Oxford University Press. Londres, UK. 724 pp.
Mortenson, T. H. 1973. Ecological variations in the leaf anatomy of selected species of Cercocarpus. Aliso 8(1): 19-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5642/aliso.19730801.14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5642/aliso.19730801.14
Pacheco Seixas, D., A. P. Fortuna-Perez y T. M. Rodrigues 2019. Leaf anatomical features of the Eriosema campestre Benth. (Leguminosae, Papilionoideae, Phaseoleae) complex and potential taxonomic implications. Flora 253: 107-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2019.03.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flora.2019.03.011
Pinheiro, F., M. V. Dantas-Queiroz y C. Palma-Silva. 2018. Plant species complexes as models to understand speciation and evolution: a review of South American studies. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 37(1): 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2018.1471565 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2018.1471565
Ramírez-Diaz, C. M. 2016. Anatomía y arquitectura foliar del género Tilia en México. Tesis de licenciatura. Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Cd. Mx., México. 51 pp.
Rasband, W. S. 2019. ImageJ ver. 1.52a. U. S. National Institutes of Health. Bethesda, EUA. https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html (consultado agosto de 2019).
R Core Team. 2018. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/ (consultado enero de 2020).
RStudio Team. 2019. RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC. Boston, EUA. https://www.rstudio.com/products/rstudio/ (consultado enero de 2023).
Ruzin, S. E. 1999. Plant Microtechnique and Microscopy. Oxford University Press. New York, USA. 322 pp.
Rydberg, P. A. 1913. Rosaceae. In: Glenson, H. A., H. W. Rickett, D. P. Rogers, F. W. Pennell y E. P. Killip (eds.). North American Flora, vol. 22, part. 5. The New York Botanical Garden. New York, USA. Pp. 389-480.
Rzedowski, J. y G. Calderón de Rzedowski. 2005. Rosaceae. In: Rzedowski, J. y G. Calderón de Rzedowski (eds.). Flora del Bajío y de Regiones Adyacentes 135. Instituto de Ecología, A.C., Pátzcuaro, México. 157 pp. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21829/fb.113.2005.135 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21829/fb.113.2005.135
Sánchez, D., S. Arias y T. Terrazas. 2013. Análisis morfométrico de las especies de Echinocereus sección Triglochidiati (Cactaceae) en México. Brittonia 65: 368-385. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12228-012-9285-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12228-012-9285-6
Sánchez, D., D. Gómez-Quintero, O. Vargas-Ponce, P. Carillo-Reyes y P. Dávila-Aranda. 2020. Species delimitation in the Echinocereus pulchellus complex (Cactaceae). Brittonia 72(4): 433-452. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12228-020-09632-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12228-020-09632-x
SAS Institute Inc. 2018. SAS Studio 3.8: User’s Guide. Cary: SAS Institute Inc. https://support.sas.com/downloads/package.htm?pid=1924 (consultado enero de 2020).
Schneider, C. K. 1905a. Gattung Cercocarpus Kunth. IIllustriertes Handbuch der Laubholzkunde 14: 125-129.
Schneider, C. K. 1905b. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Arten und Formen der Gattung Cercocarpus Kunth. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Dendrologischen Gesellschaft 14: 125-129.
Simpson, B. B. 1979. A revision of the genus Polylepis (Rosaceae: Sanguisorbeae). Smithsonian Contributions to Botany 43: 1-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5479/si.0081024X.43.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5479/si.0081024X.43
Sosa, M., A. Panseri y M. Dematteis. 2012. Morphometric analysis of Stemodia hyptoides and S. stricta (Plantaginaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 298: 1315-1323. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-012-0638-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-012-0638-0
StaSoft Inc. 2004. STATISTICA (Data analysis software system) ver. 7.0. StaSoft Inc. Oklahoma, USA. https://www.statistica.com/en/ (consultado marzo de 2020).
Terrazas, T., S. Aguilar-Rodríguez y L. López-Mata. 2008. Wood anatomy and its relation to plant size and latitude in Buddleja L. (Buddlejaceae). Interciencia 33(1): 46-50.
Thiers, B. 2022+. Index Herbariorum: a global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. New York Botanical Garden’s Virtual Herbarium. http://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih/ (consultado mayo de 2022).
Vanden Heuvel, B. D. 2002. Molecular systematics of Cercocarpus H.B.K. (Rosaceae). Tesis de doctorado. Faculty of the Graduate School, The University of Texas at Austin. Austin, USA. 256 pp.
Vanden Heuvel, B. D. y C. R. Linder. 2001. A molecular phylogeny for Cercocarpus H.B.K. (Rosaceae) using the external transcribed spacer of the nuclear ribosomal repeat. In: McArthur, E. D. y D. J. Fairbanks (comps.). Shrubland ecosystem genetics and biodiversity: proceedings. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. Colorado, USA. Pp. 89-94.
Vásquez-Cruz, M., A. P. Vovides y V. Sosa. 2017. Disentangling species limits in the Vauquelinia corymbosa complex (Pyreae, Rosaceae). Systematic Botany 42(4): 835-847. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1600/036364417X696519 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1600/036364417X696519
Vila Nova de Lima, R. G., L. Ferreira Lima, A. Cândida Ferreira, J. Silva Araújo y C. Silvia Zickel. 2019. Leaf morphoanatomy of Diploon Cronquist (Sapotaceae Juss.). Biota Neotropica 19(1): e20180600. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-0611-BN-2018-0600 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1676-0611-bn-2018-0600
Villaseñor, J. L. 2016. Checklist of the native vascular plants of Mexico. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 87(3): 559-902. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmb.2016.06.017 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmb.2016.06.017
Zamora-Natera, J. F. y T. Terrazas. 2012. Anatomía foliar y del pecíolo de cuatro especies de Lupinus (Fabaceae). Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad 83(3): 687-697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ib.20078706e.2012.83.3269 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.27264
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
-
Abstract3143
-
PDF (Español)388
-
XML (Español)30
-
EPUB (Español)90
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions:
In accordance with copyright legislation, Acta Botanica Mexicana recognizes and respects the moral rights of authors, as well as the ownership of the patrimonial right, which will be assigned to the journal for its dissemination in open access. Acta Botanica Mexicana does not charge authors for sending and processing articles for publication.
All the texts published by Acta Botanica Mexicana - without exception- are distributed under the Creative Commons 4.0 Attribution-Non Commercial License (CC BY-NC 4.0 International), which allows third parties to use what is published whenever they mention the authorship of the work and the first publication in this journal.
The authors can make other independent and additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in Acta Botanica Mexicana (for example, include it in an institutional repository or publish it in a book) as long as they clearly indicate that the work was published for the first time in Acta Botanica Mexicana
As a consequence, the copyeditors will request you, together with the galley review, to issue your Letter-Transfer of Ownership of Copyright form of the first publication duly completed and signed by the author(s). This letter should be sent by email in pdf file to the email: acta.botanica@inecol.mx (Letter-Transfer of Ownership of Copyright).
