Skip to main content

Monocotyledon Evolution

Characters and Phylogenetic Estimation

  • Chapter

Abstract

The distribution of a great number of character states in monocotyledons has recently been surveyed by Dahlgren and Clifford (1982). This presentation deals with the possibilities of using these characters in estimates of monocotyledon phylogeny. Various hypotheses of monocotyledon evolution and phylogeny are discussed in the light of our current knowledge of characters, and some theoretical and practical problems in cladistic analysis of monocotyledons are pointed out.

Keywords

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

If organisms have reached their present state by a process of evolution, it follows that they have a built-in classification, and man’s problem is to find it. This is quite a different problem from that presented to the classifier of man-made objects. . .

R. Holttum (1967)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ambrose, J. D., 1980, A re-evaluation of the Melanthoideae (Liliaceae) using numerical analyses, in: Petaloid Monocotyledons (C. D. Brickell et al., eds.), PP. 65–81, Academic, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ancibor, E., 1979, Systematic anatomy of vegetative organs of the Hydrocharitaceae, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 78:237–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arber, A., 1925, Monocotyledons. A Morphological Study, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashlock, P. D., 1971, Monophyly and associated terms, Syst. Zool. 20:63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashlock, P. D., 1974, The uses of cladistics, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5:81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthlott, W., and Fröhlich, D., 1983, Micromorphologie und Orientierungs-Muster epi-cuticularer Wachs-Kristalloide: Ein neues systematisches Merkmal bei Monocotylen, Plant Syst. Evol. (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnke, H.-D., 1968, Zum Feinbau der Siebröhren-Plastiden bei Monocotylen, Naturwissenschaften 55:120–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnke, H.-D., 1971, Zum Feinbau der Siebröhren-Plastiden von Aristolochia und Asarum (Aristolochiaceae), Planta 97:62–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnke, H.-D., 1981, Siebelement-Plastiden, Phloem-Protein und Evolution der Blütenpflanzen: II. Monocotyledonen, Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 94:647–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnke, H.-D., and Barthlott, W., 1983, New evidence from the ultrastructural and micro-morphological fields in angiosperm classification, Nord. J. Bot. 3:43–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behnke, H.-D., and Dahlgren, R., 1976, The distribution of characters within an angiosperm system, 2. Sieve element plastids, Bot. Not. 129:287–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergson, H., 1908, L’evolution creatice, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björnstad, I., 1970, Comparative embryology of Asparagoideae-Polygonatae, Liliaceae, Nytt Mag. Bot. 17:169–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Björnstad, I., and Friis, I., 1972, Studies on the genus Haemanthus L. (Amaryllidaceae). II. A revision of the section Demeusa (De Wild. & Th. Dur.) Pax & Hoffm. emend. I. Björnstad & I. Friis, Nor. J. Bot. 19:207–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonde, N., 1977, Cladistic classification as applied to vertebrates, in Major Patterns in Vertebrate Evolution (M. K. Hecht, P. C. Goody, and B. M. Hecht, eds.), pp. 741–804, Plenum, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudet, A. M., Lecusson, R., and Boudet, A., 1975, Mise en évidence et propriétés de deux formes de la 5-déshydroquinate hydrolyase chez les végétaux supérieurs, Planta (Berl.) 124:67–75.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Boudet, A. M., Boudet, A., and Bouyssou, H., 1977, Taxonomic distribution of isoenzymes of dehydroquinate hydrolyase in the angiosperms, Phytoehemistry 16:919–922.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bremer, K., and Wanntorp, H.-E., 1978, Phylogenetic systematics in botany, Taxon 21:311–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremer, K., and Wanntorp, H.-E., 1981a, A cladistic classification of green plants, Nord. J. Bot. 1:1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremer, K., and Wanntorp, H.-E., 1981b, The cladistic approach to plant classification, in: Advances in Cladistics (V. Funk and D. R. Brooks, eds.), pp. 87–94, New York Botantical Gardens, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewbaker, J. L., 1967, The distribution and phylogenetic significance of binucleate and trinucleate pollen grains in the angiosperms, Am. J. Bot. 54:1069–1083.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, W. C., 1977, The Piperales and the monocots. Alternative hypotheses of mono-cotyledonous flowers, Bot. Rev. 43:346–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, W. C., 1981, Heresy revived: The monocot theory of angiosperm origin, Evol. Theory 5:189–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bush, G. L. 1975, Modes of animal speciation, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 6:339–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantino, P. D., 1982, Affinities of the Lamiales: A cladistic analysis, Syst. Bot. 7:237–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanda, S., and Ghosh, K., 1976, Pollen morphology and its evolutionary significance in Xanthorrhoeaceae, in: The Evolutionary Significance of the Exine (I. K. Ferguson and J. Muller, eds.), pp. 527–559, Academic, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheadle, V. I., 1943, The origin and certain trends of specialization of the vessels in the Monocotyledoneae, Am. J. Bot. 30:11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheadle, V. I., 1944, Specialization of vessels within the xylem of each organ in the Monocotyledoneae, Am. J. Bot. 31:81–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheadle, V. I., 1953, Independent origin of vessels in the monocotyledons and dicotyledons, Phytomorphology 3:23–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheadle, V. I., and Kosakai, H., 1980, Occurrence and specialization of vessels in Commelinales, Phytomorphology 30:98–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheadle, V. I., and Kosakai, H., 1982, Occurrence and specialization of vessels in Xyridales, Nord. J. Bot. 2:97–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chupov, V. S., and Kutiavina, N. G., 1978, The comparative immuno-electrophoretic investigation of seed proteins of Liliaceae (in Russian), Bot. Zh. 63:473–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chupov, V. S., and Kutiavina, N. G., 1981, Serological studies in the order Liliales (in Russian), Bot. Zh. 66:75–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, H. T., 1970, Monocotyledon classification with special reference to the origin of grasses (Poaceae), in: New Research in Plant Anatomy (N. K. B. Robson et al., eds.), Bot. J. Linn. Soc. (Suppl. 1) 1970:25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, H. T., and Williams, W. T., 1980, Interrelationships amongst the Liliatae: A graph theory approach, Aust. J. Bot. 28:261–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover, M., 1982, The vegetative morphology and development of the reticulate-veined Lilliiflorae and their parallel veined allies, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cracraft, I., 1975, Historical biogeography and earth history: Perspectives for a future synthesis, Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 62:227–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisci, I. V., and Stussey, T. F., 1980, Determining primitive character states for phylo-genetic reconstruction, Syst. Bot. 5:112–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crisci, I. V., and Stussey, T. F., 1982, Of reason and logic: Evolutionary polarity revisited, Syst. Bot. 7:230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronquist, A., 1963, The taxonomic significance of evolutionary parallelism, Sida 1:109–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronquist, A., 1968, The Evolution and Classification of Flowering Plants, Nelson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronquist, A., 1969, Broad features of the system of angiosperms, Taxon 18:188–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronquist, A., 1981, An Integrated System of Classification of Flowering Plants, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, J., 1978, A preliminary survey of ptyxis (vernation) in the angiosperms. Notes R. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 37:161–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daghlian, C. P., 1981, A review of the fossil record of monocotyledons, Bot. Rev. 47:517–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R. (in cooperation with Hansen, B., Jakobsen, K., and Larsen, K.), 1974, An-giospermernes Taxonomi, 1, Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R. (in cooperation with Hansen, B., Jakobsen, K., Jensen, S. R., Larsen, K., and Nielsen, B. J.), 1979, Angiospermernes Taxonomi, 1, 2nd ed., Akademisk Forlag, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R. 1980, A revised system of classification of the angiosperms, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 80:91–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R., 1983, General aspects of angiosperm evolution and macrosystematics, Nord. J. Bot. 3:119–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R., and Clifford, H. T., 1981, Some conclusions from a comparative study of the monocotyledons and related dicotyledonous orders, Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 94:203–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R., and Clifford, H. T., 1982, The Monocotyledons: A Comparative Study, Academic, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C., 1859, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Murray, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daumann, E., 1970, Das Blütennektarium der Monocotyledonen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung seiner systematischen und phylogenetischen Bedeutung, Feddes Repert. 80:463–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, G. L., 1966, Systematic Embryology of the Angiosperms, Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, M., 1972, The genus Romulea in South Africa, J. S. Afr. Bot. (Suppl.) 9:1–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilcher, D. L., 1979, Early angiosperm reproduction: An introductory report, Rev. Paleobot. Palynol. 27:291–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dressier, R. L., 1981, The Orchids—Natural History and Classification, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, T., 1980, Cladistics for the practicing taxonomists—An eclectic view, Syst. Bot. 5:136–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastop, V., 1979, Stenorrhyncha as angiosperm taxonomists, Symb. Bot. Ups. 22:120–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eldredge, N., and Cracraft, J., 1980, Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Gazzar, A., and Hamza, M. K., 1975, On the monocots-dicots distinction, Publ. Cairo Univ. Herb. 6:15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emberger, L., 1960, Traité de Botanique, Vol. II, Les végétaux vasculaires (M. Chaudefaut and L. Emberger, eds.), Masson, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engler, A., 1919, Araceae, Das Pflanzenreich 4(23A).

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdtman, G., 1952, Pollen Morphology and Plant Taxonomy: Angiosperms, Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., 1972, Cladistic methodology: A discussion of the theoretical basis for the induction of evolutionary history, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 3:427–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., 1977. Does common equal primitive?, Syst. Bot. 2:36–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., 1978, Some concepts for the estimation of evolutionary relationships, Syst. Bot. 3:146–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., and McMorris, F. R., 1980, When is one estimate of evolutionary relationships a refinement of another?, J. Math. Biol. 10:367–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., Johnson, C. S., and McMorris, F. R., 1975, An idealized concept of the cladistic character, Math. Biosci. 23:263–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., Johnson, C. S., and McMorris, F. R., 1976a, An algebraic analysis of cladistic characters, Discrete Math. 16:141–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estabrook, G. F., Johnson, C. S., and McMorris, F. R., 1976b, A mathematical foundation for the analysis of cladistic character compatibility, Math. Biosci. 29:181–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, J. S., and Kluge, G., 1979, A botanical clique, Syst. Zool. 28:400–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein, J., 1978, Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading, Syst. Zool. 27:401–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein, J., 1979, Alternative methods of phylogenetic inference and their relationship, Syst. Zool. 28:49–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein, J., 1981, A likelihood approach to character weighting and what it tells us about parsimony and compatibility, Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 16:183–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funk, V. A., 1981, Special concerns in estimating plant phylogenies, in: Advances in Cladistics (V. A. Funk and D. M. Brooks, eds.), pp. 73–86, New York Botanical Gardens, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funk, V. A., and Stussey, T. F., 1978, Cladistics for the practicing taxonomist, Syst. Bot. 3:159–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldblatt, P., 1977, The genus Moraea in the winter rainfall region of Southern Africa, Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 63:657–786.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gornall, R. J., Bohm, B. A., and Dahlgren, R., 1979, The distribution of flavonoids in the angiosperms, Bot. Not. 132:1–30.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J., 1980, Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?, Paleobiology 6:119–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines, R. W., and Lye, K. A., 1975, Seedlings of Nymphaeaceae, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 70:255–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, U., 1961, Merkmalsbestand und Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der “Farinosae,” Willdenowia 2:639–768.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, U., 1962a, Weiteres über Merkmalsbestand und Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der “Farinosae,” Willdenowia 3:169–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, U., 1962b, Beitrag zur Embryologie der Centrolepidaceae mit Bemerkungen über den Bau der Blüten und Blütenstände und die systematische Stellung der Familie, Ber. Dtsch. Bot. Ges. 75:153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, U., 1966, Embryologische, morphologisch-anatomische und systematische Untersuchungen an Philydraceen, Willdenowia 4:1–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, U., 1975, Neue Untersuchungen zur Embryologie und Systematik der Centrolepidaceae, Bot. Jahrb. 96:154–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamann, U., 1976, Hydatellaceae—A new family of Monocotyledoneae, N. Z. J. Bot. 14:193–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harborne, J. B., 1973, Flavonoids as systematic markers in the angiosperms, in: Chemistry in Botanical Classification (G. Bendz and J. Santesson, eds.), pp. 103–115, Academic, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, P. J., and Hartley, R. D., 1980, Phenolic constituents of the cell walls of monocotyledons, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 8:153–160.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hennig, W., 1950, Grundzüge einer Theorie der phylogenetischen Systematik, Deutscher Zentralverlag, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennig, W., 1966, Phylogenetic Systematics, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennig, W., 1969, Die Stammesgeischichte der Insekten, Kramer, Frankfurt am Main.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heslop-Harrison, Y., and Shivanna, K. R., 1977, The receptive surface of the angiosperm stigma, Ann. Bot. 41:1233–1258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, L. J., and Doyle, J. A., 1977, Early Cretaceous fossil evidence for angiosperm evolution, Bot. Rev. 43:3–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holttum, R. E., 1967, Comparative morphology, taxonomy and evolution, Phytomorphology 17:36–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, H., 1969, Die Samenmerkmale und Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der Liliiflorae Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München. 8:219–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, H., 1977, The treatment of the monocotyledons in an evolutionary system of classification, Plant Syst. Evol., Suppl. 1 1977:285–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L., 1966, Phylogenetic numericlature, Syst. Zool. 15:14–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L., 1967, Certainty and circularity in evolutionary taxonomy, Evolution 21:174–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L., 1970, Contemporary systematic philosophies, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1:19–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L., 1979, The limits of cladism, Syst. Zool. 28:416–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, J., 1934, The Families of Flowering Plants, II, Monocotyledons, Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, J., 1959, The Families of Flowering Plants, II, Monocotyledons, 2nd ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley, I., 1958, Evolutionary processes and taxonomy with special reference to grades, Upps. Univ. Årsskrift 1958:21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inamdar, J. A., and Aleykutty, K. M., 1979, Studies on Cabomba aquatica (Cabombaceae), Plant Syst. Evol. 132:161–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krajncic, B., and Dévidé, Z., 1979, Flower development in Spirodela polyrrhiza (Lemna-ceae), Plant Syst. Evol. 132:305–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt, R. G., 1904, Trichomes of the root in vascular cryptogams and angiosperms, Proc. Boston Nat. Hist. Soc. 31:273–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, A. C., 1946, The comparative internal morphology of seeds, Am. Midl. Nat. 36:513–660.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E., 1974, Cladistic analysis or cladistic classification? Z. Zool. Syst. Evolutionsforsch. 12:94–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMorris, F. R., 1975, Compatibility criteria for cladistic and qualitative taxonomic characters, in: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference Numerical Taxonomy (G. F. Estabrook ed.), pp. 399–429, Freeman, San Francisco, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, J., 1978, Purposeful phenetics, Syst. Zool. 28:465–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meacham, C. A., 1980, Phylogeny of the Berberidaceae with an evaluation of classifications, Syst. Bot. 5:149–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meacham, C. A., 1981, A manual method for character compatibility analysis, Taxon 30:591–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meeuse, A. D. J., 1978, Nectarial secretion, floral evolution, and the pollination syndrome in early Angiosperms, Proc. K. Ned. Akad. Wet. Ser. C Biol. Med. Sci. 81:300–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, C. R., 1971, Anatomy of the Monocotyledons, Vol. V, Cyperaceae, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitter, C., 1981. “Cladistics” in botany. Syst. Zool. 30:373–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, H. E., Jr., 1953, The genus Milia (Amaryllidaceae-Allieae) and its allies, Gentes Herb. 8:269–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller, J., 1981, Fossil pollen records of extant angiosperms, Bot. Rev. 47:1–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Doblies, D., 1968, Über die Verwandtschaft von Typha und Sparganium im Inflo-rescenz-und Blütenbau, Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 89:451–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G. J., 1970, Outline of a theory of comparative biology. Syst. Zool. 19:373–376.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G. J., 1971, Paraphyly and polyphyly: Redefinitions. Syst. Zool. 21:471–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G. J., 1972, Comments on Hennig’s “Phylogenesc systematics” and its influence on ichthyology, Syst. Zool. 21:364–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G. J., 1974, Classification as an expression of phylogenetic relationships. Syst. Zool. 22:344–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G., 1978, Ontogeny, phylogeny, paleontology, and the Biogenetic Law, Syst. Zool. 27:324–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G., and Platnick, N., 1981, Systematics and Bio geography, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, C., 1978, Evolution. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, F. N., 1982, The gynostemium of the neottioid orchids, Opera Bot. 65:1–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O., 1978, Ontogeny and the recognition of primitive character states, Zool. Syst. Evolutionsforsch. 17:57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattler, R., and Singh, V., 1978, Floral organogenesis of Echinodorus amazonicus Rataj and floral construction of the Alismatales, Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 77:141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savile, D. B. O., 1979, Fungi as aids in higher plant classification, Bot. Rev. 45:377–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seigler, D. S., 1977, Plant systematics and alkaloids, Alkaloids 16:1–82.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, G. G., 1961, Principles of Animal Taxonomy, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V., and Sattler, R., 1977, Development of the inflorescence and flower in Sagittaria cuneata, Can. J. Bot. 55:1087–1105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, J. A., 1976, Monocots and chinch-bugs: A study of host plant relationships in the Lygaeid subfamily Blissinae (Hemiptera: Lygidae), Biotropica 8:143–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneath, P., and Sokal, R., 1962, Numerical taxonomy, Nature 4818:855–856.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanley, S. M., 1979, Macroevolution: Pattern and Process, Freeman, San Francisco, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stant, M. Y., 1964, Anatomy of the Alismataceae, J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.) 59:1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stant, M. Y., 1967, Anatomy of Butomaceae, J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.) 60:31–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steenis, C. G. G. J., 1982, Pentastemona, a new 5-merous genus of monoctyledons from North Sumatra, Blumea 28:151–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stebbins, G. L., 1974, Flowering Plants: Evolution above the Species Level, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, P. F., 1980, Evolutionary polarity of character states, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11:333–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, P. F., 1981, On ends and means, or how polarity criteria can be assessed, Syst. Bot. 6:186–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takhtajan, A., 1969, Flowering Plants. Origin and Dispersal, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takhtajan, A., 1980, Outline of the classification of flowering plants (Magnoliophyta) Bot. Rev. 46:295–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tattersall, I., and Eldredge, N., 1977, Fact, theory, and fantasy in human paleontology, Am. Sci. 65:204–211.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thanikaimoni, G., 1978, Pollen morphological terms: Proposed definitions—1, in: IV International Palyn. Conference, Lucknow (1976–1977), Vol. 1, pp. 228–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorne, R. F., 1976, A phylogenetic classification of the Angiospermae, Evol. Biol. 9:35–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, P. B., 1962, Phylogeny of the Scitamineae—Morphological and anatomical considerations, Evolution 16:192–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, P. B., 1969, Anatomy of the Monocotyledons. III. Commelinales-Zingiberales, (C. R. Metcalfe, ed.), Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, P. B., 1974, Development of the stomatal complex as a taxonomic character in the monocotyledons, Taxon 23:109–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, P. B., 1982, Anatomy of the Monocotyledons. VII. Helobiae (Alismatales), (C. R. Metcalfe, ed.), Clarendon Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhl, N. W., and Moore, H. E., 1980, Androecial development in six polyandrous genera representing five major groups of palms; Ann. Bot. 45:57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Untawale, A. G., and Bhasin, R. K., 1973, On endothecial thickenings in some monoco-tyledonous families, Curr. Sci. 42:398–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Utech, F. H., and Kawano, S., 1976, Biosystematic studies on Disporum (Liliaceae-Polygonatae): IV. Floral biology of D. sessile D. Don and D. smilacinum A. Gray from Japan, Bot. Mag. Tokyo 89:159–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Steenis, C. G. G. J., 1982, Pentastemona, a new 5-merous genus of monocotyledons from North Sumatra, Blumea 28:151–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Tieghem, P., 1887, Structure de la racine et disposition des radicelles dans Centrole-pidées, Eriocaulées, Joncées, Mayacées, et Xyridées, J. Bot. 1:305–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Tieghem, P., and Duliot, H., 1888, Récherches comparatives sur l’origine des membres endogénes dans les plantes vasculaires, Ann. Sci. Nat., Ser. 7 8:1–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velenovsky, J., 1907, Vergleichende Morphologie der Pflanzen, II, Rivnat, Prague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Staudermann, W., 1924, Die Haare der Monocotyledonen, Bot. Archiv 8:105–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. W., 1975, Comparative pollen morphology and phylogeny of the Ranalean complex, in: The Origin and Early Evolution of Angiosperms (C. B. Beck, ed.), pp. 241–299, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. W., 1976, Evolutionary significance of the exine in the pollen of primitive angiosperms, in: The Evolutionary Significance of the Exine (I. K. Ferguson and J. Muller, eds.), pp. 251–308, Academic, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, P., 1977, Vessel types of monocotyledons: A survey, Bot. Not. 130:383–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watrous, L. E., and Wheeler, Q. D., 1981, The out-group comparison method of character analyses, Syst. Zool. 30:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernham, H. F., 1912, Floral evolution: With particular reference to the sympetalous dicotyledons.—IX. Summary and conclusion. Evolutionary genealogy and some principles of classification, New Phytol. 11:373–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, Q. D., 1981, The ins and outs of character analysis: A response to Crisci and Stussey, Syst. Bot. 6:297–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilder, G. J., and Harris, D. H., 1982, Laticifers in Cyclanthus bipartitus Poit. (Cyclanthaceae), Bot. Gaz. 143:84–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, E. O., 1978, The evolutionary species concept reconsidered, Syst. Zool. 27:17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, E. O., 1979, An annotated Linnean hierarchy, with comments on natural taxa and competing systems, Syst. Zool. 28:308–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, E. O., 1980, Phylogenetic systematics and vicariance biogeography, Syst. Bot. 5:194–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, E. O., 1981, Phylogenetics, I Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wunderlich, R., 1959, Zur Frage der Phylogenie der Endospermtypen bei den Angiospermen, Oest. Bot. Z. 106:203–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yakolev, M. S., and Zhukova, G. Y., 1980, Chlorophyll in embryos of angiosperm seeds, a review: Bot. Notiser 133:323–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, D. A., 1981, Are the angiosperms primitively vesselless?, Syst. Bot. 6:313–330.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 Plenum Press, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dahlgren, R., Rasmussen, F.N. (1983). Monocotyledon Evolution. In: Hecht, M.K., Wallace, B., Prance, G.T. (eds) Evolutionary Biology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6971-8_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-6971-8_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4615-6973-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-6971-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics