Numerical classification of the Phyllanthaceae Martinov based on gross morphology | ||
| Egyptian Journal of Botany | ||
| Article 19, Volume 64, Issue 3, September 2024, Pages 270-279 PDF (1.73 M) | ||
| Document Type: Regular issue (Original Article) | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/ejbo.2024.273554.2739 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Nashwa Abd Alla Moustafa* 1; Adel Elgazzar2; Hasnaa A. Hosny3; Omnia H.F. Hafez4 | ||
| 1Department of Botany and Microbiology, Faculty of Science, El-Arish University, N. Sinai, Egypt | ||
| 2Numerical Taxonomy | ||
| 3The Herbarium, Botany Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University | ||
| 4Botany Department, Faculty of Science, El-Arish University | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Phyllanthaceae Martinov is considered the second-largest family that is segregated from Euphorbiaceae. s.l. Previous taxonomic studies of Phyllanthaceae relied on phylogeny and the floral minutiae, with gross morphology negligence, which is various and more obvious. In this study, a states of 24 characters were recorded comparatively for a cosmopolitan sample of 37 species belonging to 12 genera of the Phyllanthaceae. The data matrix was subjected to numerical analysis using seven radically different combinations of similarity measures and clustering methods. Of the seven resulting dendrograms, two are nearly identical and show that the species are divisible neatly into two major groups which coincide with and support the two subfamilies Phyllanthoideae and Antidematoideae currently recognized in the phylogenetic classification of the Phyllanthaceae. Similarity between the two groups extends to all levels in the dendrograms. Gross morphology is as important as phylogenetic and anatomical characters and can give a complete vision to group classification, especially leaf morphology, which provides most of the characters that define the groups of species at all hierarchical levels. By comparing these results with previous studies, it's important to refer to that the generic concept in the Phyllanthaceae is fraught with instability and needs a major taxonomic re-appraisal, especially the largest genus Phyllanthus. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Cluster analysis; dendrograms; morphology; Phyllanthopsis; Phyllanthus; taxonomy | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 161 PDF Download: 233 |
||
