Figure - available from: Plant Ecology and Evolution
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Macrograph (A) and SEM images (B–F) of inflorescence (A–B) and successive stages of the early floral development (C–F) in Dialypetalanthus fuscescens. A and B: lateral view. C and E: apical view. D and F: lateral-apical view. A. Inflorescence axis with flowers in bud and at anthesis with calyx lobes, corolla lobes, androecium, and style indicated (resp. light green, red, yellow, and purple arrows). Pedicel of each flower with two opposite, possibly slightly displaced with respect to each other, bracteoles (encircled in dark green). Encircled in white the distal part of the main inflorescence axis and lower, an inflorescence unit. Framed in purple the inferior, bilocular ovary. B. Cymosely branched inflorescence unit with a terminal flower (F); scar of one of its bracteoles (Bo) subtending an inflorescence unit consisting of a developing lateral flower with two bracteoles (dark green arrows), a hairy calyx (light green arrows) and inner flower (blue) with centrally the appearing style (purple arrowhead) surrounded by stamens (yellow arrowhead). C. Flower primordium and two bracteoles. D. First two sepals appearing, opposite to each other and at 90° with respect to the pair of bracteoles. E. Four sepals, two by two, surrounding a flat central floral apex. The most recent pair of sepals opposite the bracteoles. F. Appearance of a first pair of petals, at 90° with respect of the latest developed pair of sepals. The floral axis (red arrow), situated in the centre of a cavity formed by the upwards growth of the bases of the surrounding floral parts. Colour code: blue, developing inner flower–pollen grains; green, calyx/bracteoles; purple, gynoecium; red, corolla; yellow, androecium. Symbols: B, bract; Bo, bracteole; ca, calyx (lobe); cl, colleter; co, corolla (lobe); F, flower.
Source publication
Background – Vegetative and fruit characters of the Amazonian genus Dialypetalanthus point to a position in Rubiaceae. However, its floral morphology is so deviant that the genus was often placed in a family of its own. Even relationships outside Gentianales were postulated. Current molecular phylogenetic studies firmly show that Dialypetalanthus b...
Citations
... Genera included ( Useful references. -Rova & Andersson (1995), Piesschaert & al. (1997), Fay & al. (2000), Kainulainen & al. (2010), , and Vrijdaghs & al. (2022). ...
... -The odd species behind the monospecific formerly recognized family Dialypetalanthaceae deserves a few words. Although originally assigned to the Rubiaceae (Kuhlmann, 1925(Kuhlmann, , 1942, later students of its single species, Dialypetalanthus fuscescens Kuhlm., found it so morphologically unique that it was placed in its own family with highly uncertain relationship to other angiosperms (see Piesschaert & al., 1997;Vrijdaghs & al., 2022). It was mostly features of the androecium and corolla that appeared puzzling to many authors, but in-depth morphological studies by Piesschaert & al. (1997) and Vrijdaghs & al. (2022) have firmly placed D. fuscescens in Rubiaceae, which is consistent with results based on molecular data (Fay & al., 2000) although its precise position in the family as related to members of the Condamineeae was not revealed until later (Bremer & Eriksson, 2009;Kainulainen & al., 2010). ...
... Although originally assigned to the Rubiaceae (Kuhlmann, 1925(Kuhlmann, , 1942, later students of its single species, Dialypetalanthus fuscescens Kuhlm., found it so morphologically unique that it was placed in its own family with highly uncertain relationship to other angiosperms (see Piesschaert & al., 1997;Vrijdaghs & al., 2022). It was mostly features of the androecium and corolla that appeared puzzling to many authors, but in-depth morphological studies by Piesschaert & al. (1997) and Vrijdaghs & al. (2022) have firmly placed D. fuscescens in Rubiaceae, which is consistent with results based on molecular data (Fay & al., 2000) although its precise position in the family as related to members of the Condamineeae was not revealed until later (Bremer & Eriksson, 2009;Kainulainen & al., 2010). The tribal name Dialypetalantheae is legitimately published (Reveal, 2012) and has priority over earlier tribe names (Condamineeae, Simireae, Hippotideae, Tammsieae, Calycophylleae), because it includes the type of a conserved family name, Dialypetalanthaceae Rizzini & Occhioni (Art. ...
The use of molecular data in phylogenetic reconstruction during more than three decades has greatly improved our understanding of the macroevolutionary history of the coffee family (Rubiaceae) and has provided a solid basis for improvement of its classification. Based on the results of 130 studies, among them most recent phylogenomic works, we present a consensus phylogeny and a robust classification of Rubiaceae that shed light on the evolutionary success of this highly diverse angiosperm family and can serve as a framework for ecological and evolutionary studies. There are more than 14,000 species and about 580 accepted genera of Rubiaceae that are assigned to 71 tribes, of which 68 are classified in two subfamilies (Dialypetalanthoideae with 38 tribes and Rubioideae with 30 tribes). Three tribes (Acranthereae, Coptosapelteae, Luculieae) remain unclassified as to subfamily. Sixty‐three of these 71 tribes are assigned to nine informal alliances (four in Rubioideae and five in Dialypetalanthoideae). These tribes are listed in alphabetical order within their respective alliances. Five tribes, one (Coussareeae) in Rubioideae and four (Airospermeae, Jackieae, Retiniphylleae, Steenisieae) in Dialypetalanthoideae, are excluded from these alliances due to unclear or conflicting phylogenetic positions. Thirty‐six tribes retain their tribal status but receive new generic limits to remedy their previous para‐ or polyphyletic nature. Twenty‐nine tribes not implemented in previous classifications have been added, of which three (Chioneae, Glionnetieae, Temnopterygeae) are newly described here. Basic information on phylogenies, distributions, former classifications, and useful references to previous works are provided for all accepted tribes, and future perspectives are discussed.
