| 1. |
- Bruneau, Anne, et al.
(författare)
-
Advances in Legume Systematics 14. Classification of Caesalpinioideae. Part 2: Higher-level classification
- 2024
-
Ingår i: PhytoKeys. - Sofia : Pensoft Publishers. - 1314-2011 .- 1314-2003. ; 240, s. 1-552
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Caesalpinioideae is the second largest subfamily of legumes (Leguminosae) with ca. 4680 species and 163 genera. It is an ecologically and economically important group formed of mostly woody perennials that range from large canopy emergent trees to functionally herbaceous geoxyles, lianas and shrubs, and which has a global distribution, occurring on every continent except Antarctica. Following the recent re-circumscription of 15 Caesalpinioideae genera as presented in Advances in Legume Systematics 14, Part 1, and using as a basis a phylogenomic analysis of 997 nuclear gene sequences for 420 species and all but five of the genera currently recognised in the subfamily, we present a new higher-level classification for the subfamily. The new classification of Caesalpinioideae comprises eleven tribes, all of which are either new, reinstated or re-circumscribed at this rank: Caesalpinieae Rchb. (27 genera / ca. 223 species), Campsiandreae LPWG (2 / 5-22), Cassieae Bronn (7 / 695), Cera-tonieae Rchb. (4 / 6), Dimorphandreae Benth. (4 / 35), Erythrophleeae LPWG (2 /13), Gleditsieae Nakai (3 / 20), Mimoseae Bronn (100 / ca. 3510), Pterogyneae LPWG (1 / 1), Schizolobieae Nakai (8 / 42-43), Sclerolobieae Benth. & Hook. f. (5 / ca. 113). Although many of these lineages have been recognised and named in the past, either as tribes or informal generic groups, their circumscriptions have varied widely and changed over the past decades, such that all the tribes described here differ in generic membership from those previously recognised. Importantly, the approximately 3500 species and 100 genera of the former subfamily Mimosoideae are now placed in the reinstated, but newly circumscribed, tribe Mimoseae. Because of the large size and ecological importance of the tribe, we also provide a clade-based classification system for Mimoseae that includes 17 named lower-level clades. Fourteen of the 100 Mimoseae genera remain unplaced in these lower-level clades: eight are resolved in two grades and six are phylogenetically isolated monogeneric lineages. In addition to the new classification, we provide a key to genera, morphological descriptions and notes for all 163 genera, all tribes, and all named clades. The diversity of growth forms, foliage, flowers and fruits are illustrated for all genera, and for each genus we also provide a distribution map, based on quality-controlled herbarium specimen localities. A glossary for specialised terms used in legume morphology is provided. This new phylogenetically based classification of Caesalpinioideae provides a solid system for communication and a framework for downstream analyses of biogeography, trait evolution and diversification, as well as for taxonomic revision of still understudied genera.
|
|
| 3. |
- Marcer, Arnald, et al.
(författare)
-
Quality issues in georeferencing : From physical collections to digital data repositories for ecological research
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Diversity and Distributions. - : Wiley. - 1366-9516 .- 1472-4642. ; 27:3, s. 564-567
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Natural history collections constitute an enormous wealth of information of Life on Earth. It is estimated that over 2 billion specimens are preserved at institutions worldwide, of which less than 10% are accessible via biodiversity data aggregators such as GBIF. Moreover, they are a very important resource for eco-evolutionary research, which greatly depends on knowing the precise location where the specimens were collected in order to characterize the environment in which they lived. Yet, only about 55% of the accessible records are georeferenced and only 31% have coordinate uncertainty information, which is critical for conducting rigorous studies. The awareness of this gap of knowledge which hinders the enormous potential of such data in research led to the organization of a workshop which brought together key players in georeferencing of natural history collections. The discussion and outcomes of this workshop are here presented.
|
|
