[Taxacom] Lamiaceae clade--Acanthaceae clade divergence time

Alan Franck afranck at mail.usf.edu
Wed Nov 9 10:36:58 CST 2011


Ashley,

I believe they cite the 3 references below for the inferred relationship.
There may be more but I am not familiar with the order.


Wagstaff, S. J., & Olmstead, R. G. 1997. Phylogeny of Labiatae and
Verbenaceae inferred from *rbc*L sequences. *Syst. Bot.* 22: 165-179.

Olmstead, R. G. [et al. 2001], dePamphilis, C. W., Wolfe, A. D., Young, N.
D., Elisens, W. J., & Reeves, P. A. 2001. Disintegration of the
Scrophulariaceae. *American J. Bot.* 88: 348-361.

Xia, Z. [et al. 2009], Wang, Y.-Z., & Smith, J. F. 2009. Familial placement
and relations of *Rehmannia* and *Triaenophora* (Scrophulariaceae s.l.)
inferred from five gene regions. *American J. Bot.* 96: 519-530.

Also perhaps:

Bremer, B. [et al. 2002], Bremer, K., Heidari, N., Erixon, P., Olmstead, R.
G., Anderberg, A. A., Källersjö, M., & Barkhordarian, E. 2002.
Phylogenetics of asterids based on 3 coding and 3 non-coding chloroplast
DNA markers and the utility of non-coding DNA at higher taxonomic levels. *Mol.
Phyl. Evol.* 24: 274-301.

Regards,

-- 
Alan Franck, Ph.D. candidate
Herbarium Assistant
Dept. of Cell Biology, Microbiology, and Molecular Biology
ISA 2015
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida 33620-5150
1(813)974-7602

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 9:01 AM, John Grehan <jgrehan at sciencebuff.org> wrote:

> Don't just take the word of 'experts' (experts in what anyway). You
> should be able to determine for yourself what the empirical reality is
> and what is theoretically claimed. With molecular clocks you will often
> see the dates represented as actual or maximal, but the empirical proof
> of that is lacking (that you can read for yourself, no need to take
> anyone's word for it either way). You will also see so-called
> mathematical modeling or statistic estimations claiming some sort of
> average and probability spread which is ok as it stands as a theoretical
> claim that may or may not have an empirical foundation. You will also
> see authors contradict themselves within a paper, saying on the one hand
> that the dates are minimal and then later ignoring that understanding.
> Anyway, glad you are aware of the pitfalls.
>
> John Grehan
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Ashley Nicholas [mailto:nicholasa at ukzn.ac.za]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:38 AM
> To: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; John Grehan
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Lamiaceae clade--Acanthaceae clade divergence
> time
>
>
>
> Thank John,
>
>
>
> I am well aware of the problems surrounding the accuracy (and
> theoretical problems) of molecular clocks -- and so would like to
> consult a range of views as expressed by the experts (which I am not).
> My interest is not in the actual divergent date (maximal [crown taxa] or
> minimal) -- I am presently trying to learn more about possible
> homologous micromorphological and ultrastructural characteristics
> exhibited by extant Lamiaceae and Acanthaceae. I am just wanting to
> explore the literature at the moment. I need to contextualize some SEM
> and TEM work we are doing. Understanding anything about the cladogenic
> event that eventually lead to these two families would be helpful.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Ashley
>
> >>> On 11/11/08 at 18:47, in message
> <26DA12164B238549B6D89A2F2A8EE799026EB77D at bmsmail.sciencebuff.org>,
> "John Grehan" <jgrehan at sciencebuff.org> wrote:
>
> Revised wording in caps below just to be picky.
>
> John Grehan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Ashley Nicholas
> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 10:27 AM
> To: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; taxacom-request at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: [Taxacom] Lamiaceae clade--Acanthaceae clade divergence time
>
> Dear Taxacomers,
>
> The APG website shows that two related clades -- Lamiaceae & allies and
> Acanthaceae & allies diverged from a common ancestor. Can anyone direct
> me to papers that have been published on this major dicotomy; in
> particular papers that might suggest a MINIMAL date for this divergence?
>
> Thank you
> Ashley Nicholas
> Durban
>
> Please find our Email Disclaimer here: http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer/
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
>
>
> Please find our Email Disclaimer here-->:
> http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer <http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer/>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>



More information about the Taxacom mailing list