Paper · 1969 · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society

COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY AND PHYLOGENY OF THE RANALES

R. L. N. SASTRI

10
claims
10
verbatim quotes
23
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

SUMMARY Comparative morphological studies of woody Ranales have established the primitive status of the group and hence their key place in angiosperm phylogeny. Significant advances in our knowledge of some ranalian families have been made in recent years. An attempt is made in the present review to bring together a range of morphological data (vegetative and floral anatomy, palynology and embryology) on the Ranales (sensu lato), with particular reference to research work published after the publication of Eames's (1961) book, and to discuss the relationships of the families. Recent ontogenetic studies have shown that the carpel of Drimys is ascidial and not conduplicate as earlier suggested. The inclusion of Degeneria in the Winteraceae is not supported by morphological data. Melville's gonophyll theory has been shown to be inapplicable to the magnoliaceous flower. The pollen of Schisandra is interpreted as derived and specialized rather than primitive as previously supposed. The removal of Schisandra from Magnoliaceae is upheld by morphological evidence. Recent morphological studies do not support a close relationship between Schisandraceae and Illiciaceae suggested by earlier authors. The Canellaceae shows similarities to Winteraceae, Magnoliaceae, Illiciaceae, Eupteleaceae and Myristicaceae. Transitional types of division of pollen mother cells found in Winteraceae, Schisandraceae and Annonaceae and their probable phylogenetic significance have been discussed. The Annonaceae, Winteraceae, Degeneriaceae, Magnoliaceae, Schisandraceae and Cercidiphyllaceae share several embryological features in addition to similarities in floral structure. Ruminate endosperm is regarded either as an archaic feature retained in some taxa or as a later and parallel development in others. Thus its value in assessing relationships seems to be doubtful. Myristicaceae has been shown to be closely related neither to the the Annonaceae nor to the Lauraceae. The suggested relationship of Eupomatiaceae to Annonaceae is not supported by palynology. Floral cortical vascular systems in Magnoliaceae, Annonaceae, Calycanthaceae and Myristicaceae have been compared and it is concluded that they may be vestigial structures. A great deal of similarity has been found between Lauraceae and Calycanthaceae in wood, node, flower structure and embryology. Further floral anatomical evidence has been adduced to support the removal of Scyphostegia from Monimiaceae. The Hernandiaceae show similarities to some members of Monimiaceae while the Gyrocarpaceae resemble the Lauraceae, Gomortegaceae and certain other genera of Monimiaceae. Available evidence from wood and floral anatomy and embryology indicates close relationships among Lauraceae, Monimiaceae and Hernandiaceae. Vegetative and floral anatomical and embryological data seem to indicate a place for the Chloranthaceae in the ranalian complex. Recent anatomical studies in the Nymphaeaceae show that the floral structure is of a primitive type with similarities to the woody Ranales. Available morphological evidence is considered inadequate to express an opinion on the splitting of the family. Ceratophyllaceae is regarded as a highly reduced ranalian family derived most probably from a nymphaeaceous stock. The gynoecium in Berberidaceae is interpreted as monocarpellate. No evidence has been found to support the tricarpellate view. Berberidaceae, Lardizabalaceae and Menispermaceae share several embryological features, while at the same time showing evidence of specialization, each in its own way. Thus they might have arisen from a common stock and early diverged along different lines. The occurrence of several types of embryo sac in Ranunculaceae may well be an indication of specialization, but their probable taxonomic value, if any, is not yet clear. The occurrence of numerous primitive features in Paeonia has been suggested as an argument for its retention in the Ranales. No evidence has been found to preclude the inclusion of Dilleniaceae in the Ranales. On the other hand, as opposed to similarities in wood and pollen characters between Dilleniaceae and Theaceae, floral anatomical and embryological features offer a sharp contrast between the two. The Ranales are believed to be polyphyletic. It has been tentatively suggested that two major phyletic lines may be recognized in each of the woody and herbaceous series: the magnolialian and lauralian lines in the former and the nymphaealian and berberidalian lines in the latter.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 10

Observationobservedreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Morphological studies of woody Ranales establish the primitive status of the group and its key place in angiosperm phylogeny.

Taxon
woody Ranalese1
Outcome
primitive status of the groupe1

Verbatim

e1

“Comparative morphological studies of woody Ranales have established the primitive status of the group and hence their key place in angiosperm phylogeny”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 8–159 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The carpel of Drimys is ascidial and not conduplicate.

Taxon
DrimysDrimyse2
Outcome
the carpel of Drimys is ascidial and not conduplicatee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Drimys
Drimys · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Eric Hunt · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“Recent ontogenetic studies have shown that the carpel of Drimys is ascidial and not conduplicate as earlier suggested”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 583–700 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Morphological data do not support including Degeneria in the Winteraceae.

Taxon
DegeneriaDegeneriae3
Outcome
inclusion of Degeneria in the Winteraceaee3

Verbatim

e3

“The inclusion of Degeneria in the Winteraceae is not supported by morphological data”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 702–786 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Schisandra pollen is interpreted as derived and specialized rather than primitive.

Taxon
SchisandraSchisandrae4
Outcome
pollen of Schisandra is interpreted as derived and specialized rather than primitivee4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Schisandra
Schisandra · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Doronenko · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“The pollen of Schisandra is interpreted as derived and specialized rather than primitive as previously supposed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 879–990 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Berberidaceae, Lardizabalaceae and Menispermaceae share several embryological features.

Taxon
Berberidaceae, Lardizabalaceae and MenispermaceaeMenispermaceaeLardizabalaceaeBerberidaceaee5
Outcome
share several embryological featurese5

Verbatim

e5

“Berberidaceae, Lardizabalaceae and Menispermaceae share several embryological features”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3402–3488 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Myristicaceae is not closely related to the Annonaceae or the Lauraceae.

Taxon
MyristicaceaeMyristicaceaee6
Outcome
closely related neither to the the Annonaceae nor to the Lauraceaee6

Verbatim

e6

“Myristicaceae has been shown to be closely related neither to the the Annonaceae nor to the Lauraceae”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1866–1967 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Lauraceae and Calycanthaceae are highly similar in wood, node, flower structure and embryology.

Taxon
Lauraceae and CalycanthaceaeCalycanthaceaeLauraceaee7
Outcome
wood, node, flower structure and embryologye7

Verbatim

e7

“A great deal of similarity has been found between Lauraceae and Calycanthaceae in wood, node, flower structure and embryology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2232–2357 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The Ranales are believed to be polyphyletic.

Taxon
Ranalese0
Outcome
polyphyletice0

Verbatim

e0

“The Ranales are believed to be polyphyletic”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 4236–4279 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Ceratophyllaceae is a highly reduced ranalian family derived from a nymphaeaceous stock.

Taxon
CeratophyllaceaeCeratophyllaceaee1
Outcome
derived most probably from a nymphaeaceous stocke1

Verbatim

e1

“Ceratophyllaceae is regarded as a highly reduced ranalian family derived most probably from a nymphaeaceous stock”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3160–3273 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationreview summarybasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Numerous primitive features in Paeonia are an argument for retaining it in the Ranales.

Taxon
PaeoniaPaeoniae2
Outcome
numerous primitive featurese2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Paeonia
Paeonia · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)No machine-readable author provided. MPF assumed (based on copyright claims). · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e2

“The occurrence of numerous primitive features in Paeonia has been suggested as an argument for its retention in the Ranales”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 3830–3953 · show in text ↑