This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: Actaea - Cimicifuga was; Digest for Gardenwriters@topica.com, issue 3

> From: Joe Seals <gardenguru@yahoo.com>
>> I did know that a couple of Actaeas are now in the
>> genus Cimicifuga but I hadn't heard that Cimicifuga,
> >as a whole, was now considered the genus Actaea.
> What's your reference?
===========^========^============

Joe,

I read the RHS 'The Garden' article (with dismay) in 2000 and posted
to Alpine-L to get the opinion of the taxonomists on that list.  I
received several replies, one of which contained quotes from the
senior author of the paper that proposed the changes in 1998.  I'm
going to paste that post (which contains my second post on the
subject as well as another person's response) FYI.  Since my
surviving current flu attack is not yet certain, am not up to
dissecting the whole thing with clarity. Below my SIG:

Marge Talt, zone 7 Maryland
mtalt@hort.net
Editor:  Gardening in Shade
-----------------------------------------------
Current Article: Leaves - Shape Part 3
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/shade_gardening
------------------------------------------------
Complete Index of Articles by Category and Date
http://mtalt.hort.net/article-index.html
------------------------------------------------
All Suite101.com garden topics :
http://www.suite101.com/topics.cfm/635

============
Dear Marge, Walter, Tom, Carlo, & others,

The senior author of the paper that proposed uniting Cimicifuga &
Actaea
(cited below) is Dr. James A. Compton from the University of Reading.
He
is not only a thorough and versatile scientist, but also an expert
gardener. Several years ago he was speaking to the "Hardy Plants" 
group
here in Victoria and after his lecture we spent the rest of the
evening
talking about Cimicifuga and his research. He wrote me a note for BEN
#
189, April 15, 1998 (see http://www.ou.edu/cas/botany-micro/ben/ ) 
about
his findings that dealt with the North American species of
Cimicifuga. I
sent him the last postings about Cimicifuga from ALPINE-L and got the
following reply.  HIS COMMENTS ARE IN CAPITALS.

Best regards,

Adolf Ceska, Victoria, B.C., Canada - Zone 8+1/2


>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 00:25:35 -0500
> From: Marge Talt <mtalt@CLARK.NET>
>
> Walter, thank you for your reply to my query...
>
> Not that I want to promote this name change at all, but in the
> interest of clarity, I think my first query on the topic may have
> been too short on data to give the authors full
> due....so....reviewing the article once again, it appears that they
> have used more than DNA to formulate their conclusion.

THE SHORT ANSWER TO THIS IS YES. WE INCLUDED ALL TYPES OF
AVAILABLE EVIDENCE INCLUDING POLLEN. BREEDING SYSTEMS, GROSS
MORPHOLOGY,
ANATOMY, MICROMORPHOLOGY, NUMERICAL METHODS AND ALSO DNA. CHROMOSOME
VARIATION WAS WELL COVERED BY KOREAN TAXONOMISTS (PARK & LEE, 1998).

> The article also contains an illustration of a new cladogram for
> Actaea.
> ....
> ....
> Compton, J. A., Culham, A. & Jury, S. L.:  Reclassification of
Actaea
> to include Cimicifuga and Souliea (Ranunculaceae): phylogeny
inferred
> from morphology, nrDNA ITS, and cpDNA trnL-F sequence variation. 
Taxon 47:
> 593-634. 1998.
>
> ....
> ....
>
> I know very little about the scientific end of taxonomy, but if M.
H.
> Hoffmann published his article in 1999, it appears it was published
> after the Compton, Culham, Jury findings in Taxon of 1998.  Does
this
> mean it is a rebuttal to their findings or is it something
completely
> unrelated?

THE HOFFMANN PAPER WAS PUBLISHED WITHOUT TESTING RELATIONSHIPS
BETWEEN
BERRIED AND FOLLICLED TAXA I.E. WITHOUT INCLUSION OF "CIMICIFUGA" AND
AS
SUCH WAS A GOOD EVALUATION IN BIOGEOGRAPHICAL TERMS OF THE BERRIED
SPECIES. HOFFMANN WAS UNAWARE OF OUR RESEARCH AND WOULD HAVE
SUBMITTED HIS
PAPER FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE OURS WAS ACTUALLY PUBLISHED. HIS
PHYLOGENY
WAS BY NATURE RATHER LIMITED AND HAD NO BEARING ON THE RELATIONSHIPS
BETWEEN PLANTS CALLED ACTAEA AND CIMICIFUGA.

> ....
> ....

THE NAME CHANGES DID INDEED OCCUR ON THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE
TAXON PAPER IN 1998.

> I read the article two or three times and while it seemed to state
> certain conclusions, I rather felt something was missing...some
hard
> data I could relate to  that would convince me the change should
> happen.  It is quite possible that I would not have understood it
if
> it had been presented, but my layperson's impression was that they
> were asking me to trust them to have actually proved something
> without telling me why I should believe them, if you see what I
mean.
>  Of course, I was also having visceral reaction (NO NO NO NO), so
it
> is also probable that my brain would not register all the
information
> presented properly..

I UNDERSTAND ANY RELUCTANCE TO ACCEPT CHANGES TO NAMES HOWEVER THE
EVIDENCE IS REALLY VERY STRONG INDEED. WITH NO ARGUMENT OVER THE
CLOSENESS
OF THE RELATIONSHIPS OF THE TAXA. AS STATED BOTH IN GROSS MORPHOLOGY,
POLLEN, CHROMOSOME STRUCTURE AND NUMBER, MICROMORPHOLOGY, GROSS
MORPHOLOGY
AND DNA FROM TWO SOURCES THERE IS GREATER VARIATION BETWEEN TWO
FOLLICLED
SPECIES FORMERLY CALLED CIMICIFUGA THAN THERE IS BETWEEN ANY ACTAEA
AND
CIMICIFUGA SPECIES. THE BERRY AS A GENERIC CHARACTER DOES NOT PROVIDE
US
WITH AN ADEQUATE BASIS FOR SEGREGATION.
THE FULL LIST OF TAXA, DATASET MAKEUP AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS ARE
GIVEN IN
THE TAXON PAPER.

> > From: Walter Kittredge <kittredg@OEB.HARVARD.EDU>
> > Date: Thursday, January 13, 2000 10:57 AM
> >
> > I was surprised to see this and have only now gotten around to
> > looking into
> > the issue.  The most recent information I found is from an
article
> > in the
> > journal Plant Systematics and Evolution (vol. 216: 251-263.
1999),
> > The
> > phylogeny of Actaea (Ranunculaceae) a biogeographical approach,
by
> > M. H.
> > Hoffmann.  Hoffmann maintains Actaea and Cimicifuga as separate
> > sister taxa
> > in the tribe Cimicifugeae with Anemonopsis and Souliea, all
having
> > ternately
> > compound leaves.

I HAVE ANSWERED THIS ALREADY. ACTUALLY IT SHOULD BE THE TRIBE
ACTAEEAE A
NAME WHICH PREDATES THAT OF CIMICIFUGEAE (SEE REVEAL ET AL., TAXON
47,
1999)

> > Several other articles are cited for molecular and
> > morphological data that support this taxonomy.

NO THERE ARE NO OTHER MOLECULAR WORKS CITED IN THIS PAPER AND THE
MORPHOLOGY CITED ONLY RELATES TO THE BERRIED SPECIES, ALTHOUGH
HOFFMANN
CITES THE APPARENT CLOSENESS OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HIS SENSE OF
ACTAEA
(THE TRADITIONAL NUTTALL SENSE) AND CIMICIFUGA IN THE OLD SENSE.

> > Being in the midst of much molecular sequencing I am hearing of
> > conflicting molecular phylogenies depending on which gene is
> > selected and the kind and extent of sampling being done.
> > I remain skeptical of any phylogeny based solely on molecular
> > data.  A wholistic approach that also includes chromosomes,
> > breeding systems, gross morphology, anatomy, pollen,
> > biogeography etc is still the best way to formulate stable
> > robust phylogenies.

TO SOME EXTENT I AGREE THAT CONFLICTS CAN OCCUR HOWEVER IN THIS CASE
THERE
IS NO CONFLICT WHATSOEVER BETWEEN OUR MOLECULAR DATA AND THAT OF THE
CHINESE (WANG ET AL., 1998 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BOTANY SUPPLEMENT) AND
THE
KOREANS WORK ( PARK & LEE UNPUBLISHED). FURTHER WORK ON THIS GROUP
INCLUDING BEESIA USING THE MITOCHONDRIAL GENE REGION NAD1 AS WELL AS
THE
RAPIDLY EVOLVING NUCLEAR GENE 5S ALSO ON THIS GROUP HAVE SHOWN
COMPLETE
AGREEMENT. TO SOME EXTENT DISAGREEMENTS BETWEEN MOLECULAR PHYLOGENIES
CAN
ARISE THROUGH INADEQUATE SAMPLING. THESE ANALYSES USE A COMPLETE SET
OF
SPECIES AS THEIR BASIS. IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE THAT THE DNA DATA AGREES
IN
A VERY BROAD SENSE WITH THAT OF THE GROSS MORPHOLOGY, POLLEN ETC.
(INFORMATION GIVEN IN TAXON). THE TOTAL EVIDENCE APPROACH WAS INDEED
GIVEN
TO THIS PROBLEM.

PS MUCH HELP WAS GIVEN TO US BY EMILY WOOD AT HARVARD HERBARIA.
> >
> > Walter Kittredge   Harvard University Herbaria, Cambridge,
> Massachusetts, US

I HOPE THIS ANSWERS SOME OF YOUR POINTS ON THIS TOPIC. I CAN ONLY
REITERATE THAT THE RESULTS WERE A SURPRISE TO US INITIALLY HOWEVER
SCIENCE
RELIES ON PROGRESS AND THE EVIDENCE HERE IS UNEQUIVOCAL.

KIND REGARDS,

JAMES
----------

------------------------------------------------------------
Join "Aiken's Short Laugh A Day" now!
http://www.AikensLaughs.com
More CLEAN laughs than you can imagine -> FREE!

GWL has searchable archives at: 
http://www.hort.net/lists/gardenwriters/
If you have photos for GWL, send them to gwlphotos@hort.net and they will show up at  http://www.hort.net/lists/gwlphotos/ 
**************************************************

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: topica.com@spamfodder.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrGSS.bVSZwB
Or send an email to: Gardenwriters-unsubscribe@topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index