Claim · model-written summary
Lanaria and Lophiola have tectate-columellate exine walls with monosulcate exine-less apertures.
- Outcome
- tectate-columellate exine walls with monosulcate, exine-less aperturese0
Lanaria
LophiolaVerbatim
e0“Lanaria and Lophiola are aberrant within the Haemodoraceae in having tectate-columellate exine walls with monosulcate, exine-less apertures”
Title
Pollen ultrastructure of the Haemodoraceae and its taxonomic significance
Michael G. Simpson Grana 1983. doi:10.1080/00173138309431969
Other claims from this paper (14)
- Observation Haemodoraceae except Lanaria and Lophiola lack typical tectate-columellate exine architecture.
- Observation All eight Haemodoreae genera have boat-shaped, monosulcate, heteropolar pollen with verrucate or foveolate exine.
- Observation All six Conostylideae genera have porate isopolar or apolar pollen with rugulate sculpturing.
- Observation A two-layered exine without a foot layer occurs throughout Conostylideae.
- Observation Four Haemodoreae genera have a two-layered exine without a foot layer.
- Observation The other four Haemodoreae genera show a hypothesized gradation in exine wall architecture.
- Observation Ultrastructure supports delimiting Haemodoreae and Conostylideae as tribes.
- Observation Ultrastructure supports placing Phlebocarya in Conostylideae.
- Observation Ultrastructure supports recognizing subgroups within each tribe.
- Observation Tecophilaeaceae has tectate-columellate exine.
- Observation Tecophilaeaceae exine argues against classifying it as a Haemodoraceae tribe.
- Observation Pollen evidence refutes classifying Lanaria or Lophiola within either Haemodoraceae tribe or Tecophilaeaceae.
- Observation Pauridia pollen has tectate-columellate architecture but differs by disulcate apertures and absence of an ektexinous foot layer.
- Observation The study leaves Pauridia placement in Haemodoraceae versus Hypoxidaceae unresolved.