Drawing phylogenetic trees is a complex process, and with different
genes and sampling and with different samples from species
populations will and do give different results. Choice of outgroups
also have an effect on final tree. In addition, the person making the
phylogany chart often makes decisions to choose among various
options, usually based on obtaining parsimony, sometimes to resolve
perceived conflicts.. She has used more species that the other studies,
but not a final resolved product.
But one example. I. setosa. Carol has setosa and pseudacorous as
sister species, and in a clade with I. siberica, and sanguinea and
typifolia as sister species and in different clade.
The setosa Carol used was one of the Alaska species. The two
following articles deal with setosa in some detail. The various
subspecies of setosa differ largely in size, number of flowers and
leaf width. And it is a widely distributed species. A number of
years ago I crossed I. hookerii with one of the arctic varieties from
SIGNA seed. First generation was intermediate. F2 varied between 5" to
about 40" in height with the tall ones having numerous flowers. So
basically I had representatives in the F2 that could fall into most of
the recognized species/subfamilies in this group. All this suggests
that both hokerii and the Arctic subspecies are both suffering from
inbreeding depression, likely a result of species bottlenecks. The
basal or closed to basal setosa should be found in southern part of
Russia. Makarevitch uses a setosa from this population. His research
group ends up with siberica and sanguinea as sister species and in a
clade with setosa. A much more likely grouping. And has leavigata and
pseudacorous as sister species and part of a larger clade with the
setosa/siberiac/sanguinea clad. Again a more likely senerio. and in
line with Tillie.
Artyukova, E.V., Kozyrenko, M. M. , Ilyushko, M. V., Zhuravlev, Y. N.,
& Reunova, G. D.
2001, Genetic Variability of Iris setosa Molecular Biology,
35:134â138. Translated from Molekulyarnaya Biologiya, Vol. 35, No. 1,
2001, pp. 152â156.
Alexeeva, N.B. 2013 On the taxa of Iris setosa Pall. ex Link affinity
(Iridaceae) // Turczaninowia, T. 16, V. 2. P. 13-29.
Chuck Chapman
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Pries <robertpries@embarqmail.com>
To: iris-species <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 8:03 pm
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Classification of Iridaceae
Â
I attended the conference where Tillie, presented the paper that
appears in Annali di Botanica. I believe Wilson's presentation
incorporates more current data than the Chase lab had and looks at this
in an entirely different way. I am not saying that Wilson's
presentation is the final "truth" there is a great deal of work that
needs to be done. But the statistical level of confidence is much
better than that of the Chase lab. Cladistical presentations are simply
the best fit to the data that has been put in to the database.
Additional data can often change the diagram considerably. Although
these types of analyses are some of the best things we have going they
can also be tricky in that the weighting of characteristics in the
database is still a subjective process.
From: "Chuck Chapman" <irischapman@aim.com>
To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2014 3:54:41 PM
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Classification of Iridaceae
Â
This is based on Carol Wilson's work, particularly her 2011 paper.
Her clasification of a number of specieas are at odds with other
classifications. Particularity of note, I. siberica, i. setosa, I.
pseudacorous, I. versicolor, I.virginica.
Check papers below
Makarevitch, I ; Golvonina, K ; Scherbik, S ; Blinov, A. 2003
Phylogenetic relationships of the Siberian iris species inferred from
noncoding chloroplast DNA sequences International Journal Of Plant
Sciences, 164:229-237
Tillie, N., Chase, M. W., & Hall, T. 2000. Molecular studies in the
genus Iris L.: a preliminary study. Annali di botanica, 58:105-112.
Chuck Chapman
-----Original Message-----
From: Sean Zera <zera@umich.edu>
To: iris-species <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 12:40 pm
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Classification of Iridaceae
Â
There is a newer, expanded version of that cladogram
he re:http://www.rsabg.org/iris/phylogeny
Some of the relationships are fascinating (though perhaps not too
surprising). Nepalensis, evansias and junos are each other's closest
relatives, while the other bulbous species are related to spurias. As
was suggested by Anderson in the '30s, tridentata and virginica are
closely related. The placement of siberica seems unlikely. It's
interesting thatÂcristata/lacustrisÂis the sister group to the rest of
the beardless, andÂI'm surprised Iris verna didn't make it into the
study. The Tenuifoliae are missing as well, but that's less surprising.
Anyone have access to her papers?
Wilson, C. A. (2004). Phylogeny of Iris based on chloroplast matK gene
andÂtrnKÂintron sequence data.ÂMolecular phylogenetics and
evolution,Â33(2), 402-412.
Wilson, C. A. (2011). Subgeneric classification in Iris re-examined
using chloroplast sequence data.Âta xon, 60(1), 27-35.
Sean Z
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 11:08 PM, David Ferguson
<manzano57@msn.com> wrote:
Â
Here is a rather confusing but interesting tidbit which you may have
seen already. Not a classification, but related.
Â
Dave Ferguson
Â
Â
To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com
From: rbartontx@yahoo.com
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2014 08:29:36 -0800
Subject: [iris-species] Classification of Iridaceae
 Hi All,
I'm thinking about a presentation for SIGNA on the "other" irids, and
was considering organizing it by tribes within the family. I have
Innes, 1985, who cites Goldblatt, 1971, as the most recent treatment of
the family. Does any one know of a more recent treatment of the
Iridaceae?
Rodney
