Derrick Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 This Botanicus link has corrupted data so its spelling can not be trusted. http://www.botanicus.org/primeocr/mbgserv14/botanicus5/b13058551/31753003431209/31753003431209_0481.txt http://www.plantsystematics.org/imgs/robbin/re/Polypodiaceae_Microgramma_bifrons_38501.html http://www.plantsystematics.org/imgs/robbin/r/Polypodiaceae_Microgramma_brunei_7592.html http://tcf.bh.cornell.edu/imgs/robbin/r/Polypodiaceae_Microgramma_brunei_2979.html http://www.plantsystematics.org/cgi-bin/dol/dol_image_frame.pl?image_id=7595&image_file=http://www.plantsystematics.org/users/robbin/8_16_04/upload52/Micro_tuber.jpg&squeeze=off&family=Polypodiaceae&genus=Microgramma&species=brunei Whether we like it or not the truth remains that if one is to thoroughly research these plants on the Internet, both Solanopteris and Microgramma need to be 'Googled'. Certainly highly influential fern experts such as Robbin Moran use the genus name of Microgramma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Bonjour you know Brian Swale , to NZ ? you know this document http://homepages.caverock.net.nz/~bj/fern/solanopteris.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Wistuba Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Maybe I am too much an ignorant... However, as long as no good DNA-data are available to allow a really good phylogeny for my taste many of the attempts to create groups within genera or families (sub-genera or sub-families) remain highly speculative. They imply lineages we often cannot prove without a good analysis on genetic level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 yes ANDREAS I am OK , but the phylogeny make not everything , it only gives outlines. then we can apply the international code of nomenclature ( ICBN) to MELBOURNE the sub genus may well have to be raised in genus ? may be also take into account the anteriority of names ? or write Microgramma (Solanopteris) brifons for example jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted April 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2014 http://amerfernsoc.org/ffa/Fiddlehead%20Forum/FF%20Volume%2035-36/Fiddlehead%20Forum%20Vol%2036%20No%202-3.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted April 24, 2014 Report Share Posted April 24, 2014 Bonjour merci, very good document For my part, I remain on my hunger. I would have preferred a more complete study (well if it was possible) on the phylogeny of these two genera, species by species, in order to see their evolutions and their differenceselsewhere is that the phylogeny has been made for the tree on the genus Microgramma and subgenus or simply for the genus? may be counting chromosomes would have been a good thing , also amicalement jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted May 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2014 http://2004.botanyconference.org/engine/search/index.php?func=detail&aid=434 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted May 21, 2014 Report Share Posted May 21, 2014 merci for this document do you know if a DNA analysis was made on the microgramma type and the solanopteris to see their relationship or their divergence. jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted May 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 22, 2014 do you know if a DNA analysis was made on the microgramma type and the solanopteris to see their relationship or their divergence. Nothing specific. Incidentally, although the following refers to Lecanopteris the Haufler et al., assumption may apply equally to Microgramma sub-genus Solanopteris. Hence patience is required in the hope that future science may provide better evidence than does comparing morphologies, which is proving to be suspect in many examples. Lecanopteris, the Ant-fern, is an Old World group with hollow rhizomes that serve as ant-domatia. It is only distantly related to the New World Potato fern, Microgramma sub-genus Solanopteris. The large (a few cm.), hollowed out or stacked, flattened, and clumped rhizomes are the signature item. Other unique characters are hard to find, and Haufler et al.(2003) describes it as "systematically intractable". The case is made that "an ant/plant association may result in a relaxation of selective pressure on some morphological features. With less pressure to eliminate morphological variants, new lineages may arise quickly". For example, species closest to the root of the polypod phylogeny have rhizome scales; the later-evolving Lecanopteris species have hairs. The bottom line is that without the hollow rhizomes, these species are very difficult to place. Lecanopteris is immersed phylogenetically in the sprawling Microsorum". . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted May 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 23, 2014 A relatively recent classification of ferns. http://www.biostim.com.au/pdf/fichier-749.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted August 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2015 Maybe I am too much an ignorant... However, as long as no good DNA-data are available to allow a really good phylogeny for my taste many of the attempts to create groups within genera or families (sub-genera or sub-families) remain highly speculative. They imply lineages we often cannot prove without a good analysis on genetic level. This may be good phylogenetic evidence. Reading the free abstract should suffice. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40211932?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Stable URL, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40211932 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted August 15, 2015 Report Share Posted August 15, 2015 Bonjour for me these documents are not enough, a DNA analysis between Microgramma normal and Microgramma subsp solanopteris would also be very interesting. jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted August 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2015 Bonjour for me these documents are not enough, a DNA analysis between Microgramma normal and Microgramma subsp solanopteris would also be very interesting. jeff Have you not read the article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted August 16, 2015 Report Share Posted August 16, 2015 Bonjour I have read but I do not see the tree of the Bayesian analysis ( or the phylogram) for me more interessant. jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted August 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 I will also duplicate this here. M. megalophylla. "A New Species of Microgramma (Polypodiaceae) from Brazil and Recircumscription of the Genus Based on Phylogenetic Evidence. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40211932. Alexandre Salino , Thais Elias Almeida , Alan R. Smith , Adrianna Navarro Gómez , Hans-Peter Kreier and Harald Schneider, Systematic Botany,Vol. 33, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 2008), pp. 630-635. This re-circumscription of the genus includes Solanopteris and has also found that Microgramma bifrons (that some still think is a Solanopteris) is sister species to Microgramma lycopodioides. Surely incontrovertible evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted August 17, 2015 Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 Bonjour it is just a abstract , have you the complet document? jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted August 17, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2015 In a word no: however, by registering with jstor one may read the entire article on line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted September 1, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 1, 2015 I will repeat a previous sentence of mine. "This re-circumscription of the genus includes Solanopteris and has also found that Microgramma bifrons (that some still think is a Solanopteris) is sister species to Microgramma lycopodioides. Surely incontrovertible evidence." The article is "A New Species of Microgramma (Polypodiaceae) from Brazil and Recircumscription of the Genus Based on Phylogenetic Evidence". Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40211932. I will try to make this as clear as possible. The genetic evidence provided by this study showed that Microgramma bifrons, a species that has ant-domatia tubers, is sister species to M. lycopodioides, a species that DOES NOT have tubers. This means that the possession of tubers is NOT a synapomorphy, in other word it does NOT, repeat NOT, form a separate branch of a phylogenetic tree. Therefore, unless a new study is able to prove the current one wrong, Solanopteris CAN NOT be maintained as a new clade whether we call it a genus or even a sub genus. It is not impossible that future evidence may refute these findings but this seems unlikely. I fully expect to see future work for all tuberous species to use the genus Microgramma. A tutorial on phylogenetics. FIXED. http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/phylogenetics_01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted September 2, 2015 Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 Bonjour have you the consensus tree for all the solanopteris (microgramma) an the others microgramma like the lecanopteris genus (systematics of the ant fern genus lecanopteris from HAUFLER;GRAMMER;HENNIPMAN;RANKER;SMITH;SCHNEIDER) in french we have a excellent book with a electronic version " la reconstruction phylogenetique ;concepts et methodes" from pascal TASSY and pierre DARLU avril 2004 jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted September 2, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2015 This 2003 study, is easily found and free to read on the WWW and is covered in my latest book. http://www.academia.edu/3196478/Systematics_of_the_ant-fern_genus_Lecanopteris_Polypodiaceae_testing_phylogenetic_hypotheses_with_DNA_sequences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted September 3, 2015 Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 Bonjour I have this document ,that comes perfectly complement the document to GAY;HENNIPMAN;HUXLEY;PARROTT. we can see on the consensus tree all the lecanopteris species ( with the ancestor; the2 subgenus, the sisters) on the genus solanopteris(microgramma) we have not a similar tree with all the species ? may be by lack fresh specimens ? jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrick Posted September 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 3, 2015 I suggest that it is far more useful to concentrate on what we do have and not on what we don't. For myself this subject is closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.