Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T09:08:27.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The carpology and taxonomic relationships of Davidsonia (Davidsoniaceae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 1998

A. B. Doweld
Get access

Abstract

The fruit of Davidsonia pruriens F. v. Muell. drying and splitting at maturity into two indehiscent mericarps is re-defined as a schizocarpic didrupe. The sclerified mesendocarpic construction of the whole pericarp supports its classification as a drupe. The peculiar fimbriate surface of the mericarp is caused by the destruction of parenchymatous exocarpic and mesocarpic tissues exposing radially elongated mesendocarpic osteosclereids. The seed coat is described as diffusive exotegmic with expanding pachychalaza substituting the two integuments in the chalazal half of the seed. The diffusive exotegmy of the spermoderm supports a close relationship with Cunoniaceae, but refutes any relationships with Saxifragales or with Staphyleaceae or any Hamamelidae. The seed-coat structure indicates advancement and specialization of Davidsonia among Cunoniales; its origin could trace back possibly to Rosales, but never to hamamelidalean stock.

Keywords

CarpologyDavidsoniaceaeCunoniaceaeHamamelidaeRosidaeseed anatomytaxonomic relationships
Type
Articles
Information
Edinburgh Journal of Botany , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , March 1998 , pp. 13 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bange, G. G. J. (1952). A new family of dicotyledons: Davidsoniaceae. Blume. 7: 293–296.Google Scholar
Corner, E. J. H. (1976). The Seeds of Dicotyledons. Vols 1, 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cronquist, A. (1992). An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants, 2. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Czerniakowskaya, E. F. & Doweld, A. B. (1998). Davidsoniaceae. In: Takhtajan, A. L. (ed.) Anatomia Seminum Comparativa, Vol. 5, pp. 14–16. St.-Petersburg: Mir et Semja. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Dahlgren, G. (1989). The last Dahlgrenogram. System of classification of the dicotyledons. In: Tan, K. (ed.) Plant Taxonomy, Phytogeography and Related Subjects. The Davis and Hedge Festschrift, pp. 249–260. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Dickison, W. C. (1975). Studies on the floral anatomy of Cunoniaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 62: 433–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickison, W. C. (1980). Comparative wood anatomy and evolution of the Cunoniaceae. Allertonia 2: 281–321.Google Scholar
Dickison, W. C. (1984). Fruits and seeds of the Cunoniaceae. J. Arnold Arbor. 65: 149–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickison, W. C. (1989). Comparisons of primitive Rosidae and Hamamelidae. In: Crane, P. R. & Blackmore, S. (eds) Evolution, Systematics, and Fossil History of Hamamelidae, Vol. I, Introduction and 'Lower' Hamamelidae. Syst. Assoc. Spec. Vol. 47–73. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Doweld, A. B. (1998a). Sapindaceae, Hippocastanaceae. In: Takhtajan, A. L. (ed.) Anatomia Seminum Comparativa, Vol. 5, pp. 317–339, 343–346. St.-Petersburg: Mir et Semja. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Doweld, A. B. (1998b). Staphyleaceae. In: Takhtajan, A. L. (ed.) Anatomia Seminum Comparativa, Vol. 5, pp. 312–315. St.-Petersburg: Mir et Semja. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Doweld, A. B. (1998). Carpology, seed anatomy and taxonomic relationships of Tetracentron (Tetracentraceae) and Trochodendron (Trochodendraceae). Ann. Bot. (London) (in press).Google Scholar
Engler, A. (1928). Cunoniaceae. In: Engler, A. & Prantl, K. (eds) Die Natiirlichen Pflanzenfamilien. 2 Aufl. Bd. 18a, pp. 229–262. Leipzig: W. Engelmann.Google Scholar
Garcin, A.-G. (1891). Contribution à l'étude des péricarpes charnus. Du noyau des drupes. Histologie et histogénèse. Ann. Soc. Bot. Lyon 17 (1890): 27–39.Google Scholar
Hallier, H. (1908). Über Juliania, eine Terebinthaceen-Gattung mit Cupula, und die wahren Stammeltern der Kätzchenbluthler. Neue Beiträge zur Stammesgeschichte der Dicotyledonen. Beih. Bot. Centralbl. 23: 81–265.Google Scholar
Hallier, H. (1912). L'origine et le système phylétique des Angiospermes exposés à l'aide de leur arbre généalogique. Arch. Néerl. Sci. Exact. Nat. Sér. 3B (Sci. Nat.) 1: 146–234.Google Scholar
Ingle, H. D. & Dadswell, H. E. (1956). The anatomy of the timbers of the South-West Pacific area. IV. Cunoniaceae, Davidsoniaceae, and Eucryphiaceae. Austr. J. Bot. 4: 125–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krach, J. E. (1976). Samenanatomie der Rosifioren. I. Die Samen der Saxifragaceen. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 97: 1–60.Google Scholar
Krach, J. E. (1977). Seed characters in and affinities among the Saxifragineae. Pl. Syst. Evol. Suppl. 1: 141–153.Google Scholar
Kulbayeva, B. Zh. (1992a). Anatomiya semyan predstaviteley semeistva Saxifragaceae [Anatomy of the seeds in the representatives of Saxifragaceae]. Bot. Zhurn. (St.-Petersburg) 77(3): 36–49. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Kulbayeva, B. Zh.(1992b). Poverkhnostnaya struktura semyan predstaviteley semeistva Saxifragaceae [Seed surface structure in the representatives of Saxifragaceae]. Bot. Zhurn. (St.-Petersburg) 77(4): 61–68. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Linden, B. L. van der (1960). Staphyleaceae. In: Steenis, C. G. G. J. (ed.) Flora Malesiana, ser. I, Vol. 6, pp. 49–53. Groningen: P. Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Melikian, A. P. (1973). Tipy semennoy kozhury Hamamelidaceae i blizkikh semeistv v sviazi s ikh filogeneticheskimi vzaimootnosheniyami [Types of seed coats of Hamamelidaceae and related families relative to its systematic relationships.] Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Leningrad. 58: 350–359. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Melikian, A. P. (1991). Cercidiphyllales, Eucommiales, Hamamelidales. In: Takhtajan, A. L. (ed.) Anatomia Seminum Comparativa, Vol. 3, pp. 101, 104–112. Leningrad: Nauka. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Mohana Rao, P. R. (1974). Seed anatomy of some Hamamelidaceae and phytogeny. Phytomorpholog. 24: 113–139.Google Scholar
Mueller, F. von (1867). Fragmenta Phytographiae Australiae, Vol. 6. Melbourne: Auctoritate Gubern. Coloniae Victoriae. Ex Officina J. Ferres.Google Scholar
Netolitzky, F. (1926). Anatomie der Angiospermen-Samen. In: Linsbauer, K. (ed.) Handbuch der Pflanzenanatomie, II Abth., 2 Teil, Pteridophyten und Anthophyten, Bd. 10. Berlin: Verlag von Gebrüder Borntraeger.Google Scholar
O'Brien, T. P. & Mccully, M. E. (1981). The Study of Plant Structure: Principles and Selected Methods. Melbourne: Termarcarphi and Pty. Ltd.Google Scholar
Takhtajan, A. L. (1987). Systema Magnoliophytorum. Leningrad: Nauka. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Thorne, R. F. (1992). An updated phylogenetic classification of the flowering plants. Aliso 13: 365–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar