!"#$








%
 
" 
!

&







' &

( 
)*
!

&


"

"
*)+,-
!










 

 
.
/

 
.
0,)1
%
 
" 
!

&







' &

( 
Step forward in Plant
Taxonomy
Taxonomy, Systematic, History , Systems of
classification
Prof. Dr.Wafaa Kamal Taia

Alexandria Univ.,Fac. Sci., Bot.Dept. Alexandria , Egypt

 2

TREE OF LIFE

The tree of life or universal tree of life is a metaphor, model and research tool used
to explore the evolution of life and describe the relationships between organisms, both
living and extinct, as described in a famous passage in Charles Darwin's On the
Origin of Species (1859).

The tree of life is used to explain the relationships between the different species on
Earth. From microorganisms to trees to fungi and animals, life has evolved through
time down countless pathways to provide us with the marvelous present-day
collection of different species. Some species are closely related and, in other cases, we
have to travel back billions of years to connect other species.

The common belief in biology is that all living things evolved from a common
ancestor more than 4 billion years ago. Now, many millions of different species call
Earth home and, over the past 4 billion years, many more have come and gone.

Many scientists have devoted their lives to the giant task of working out the path life
has taken to evolve from a single species into millions of different species. From one
common ancestor, life has branched out to create a magnificent tree of life.

The branches of the tree of life are formed from different groups of organisms. Two
branches that are close to each other contain closely related organisms. The first and
largest branches from the tree of life are formed by three domains. The branches of
each domain split into many more branches.
 4

Life on Earth can be divided into a series of hierarchically nested

subgroups, starting at the root of all life and ending at the tips in groups
that cannot be further subdivided into distinct genetic lineages,
e.g., Homo sapiens (humans).

DOMAINS

All of life is currently separated into three different domains: Bacteria, Archaea and
Eukaryota. The first two domains, Bacteria and Archaea, consist entirely of
microscopic single-celled organisms. The third domain, Eukaryota, includes many
microscopic organisms but also contains well-known groups such as animals, plants,
and fungi.

Bacteria and archaea are called prokaryotes because their cells do not contain a
nucleus. A nucleus is a membrane that surrounds the genetic material of a cell. The
genetic material in the cells of bacteria and archaea are not enclosed in a membrane
but sit tightly coiled in the center of the cell.
 5

The organisms in the domain Eukaryota have cells with a nucleus. The presence of a
nucleus is the defining feature that identifies these organisms as eukaryotes.

BACTERIA

The origins of bacteria can be traced back to more than 3.5 billion years ago. They are
an ancient group of organisms and are still found almost everywhere on Earth ±
throughout oceans, inside humans, and in the atmosphere.

These single-celled microorganisms are incredibly diverse and are important for a
wide range of reasons. Bacteria help to decompose dead plants and animals and help
animals to digest food. Many species can convert gas in the atmosphere into nutrients
through processes such as photosynthesis. Bacteria can also be deadly and are the
cause of a number of diseases in humans.

Bacteria split into many branches along the tree of life. Different groups are often
separated by their different metabolisms or by the habitat they are found in. For
example, one group known as cyanobacteria is able to convert nitrogen gas into
nitrates. Acidobacteria is another group and they are found in highly acidic soils.

ARCHAEA

The domain Archaea consists of many microscopic organisms that we know very little
about. All archaea are single-celled organisms. Although their cells lack a nucleus and
they are classed as prokaryotes, archaea are believed to be more closely related to
eukaryotes than bacteria.
 6

Archaea cells are structurally diverse and these microorganisms share many
characteristics with both bacteria and eukaryotes. They also have many unique
features.

They are typically a similar size to bacteria cells and lack a nucleus and organelles
just as bacteria do. The membrane that surrounds the cells of archaea microorganisms
is different from the membrane of any other cell.

Originally, archaea were thought to only exist in extreme environments such as

thermal springs and salt lakes. They are now known to exist in many habitats that are
far less difficult to live in.

This domain currently splits the tree of life into four main groups: Korarchaeotes,
Euryarchaeotes, Crenarchaeotes, and Nanoarchaeotes. The majority of the
knowledge that we have on archaea is from euryarchaeotes and the crenarchaeotes.

The euryarchaeotes includes many species of salt-loving archaea and a group known
as methanogens. Methanogens are anaerobic archaea that produce methane gas from
carbon dioxide and hydrogen gas. They can be found in places such as the guts of
cattle and in flooded soils of wetlands.

EUKARYOTA

Eukaryota is the domain for all organisms that have a nucleus in their cell or cells. It
is an extremely diverse and variable domain. It includes thousands of microscopic
organisms plus all the large animal and plant species that are found on land and in
water.
 7

Besides having a nucleus, the cells of eukaryotes almost always have small cellular
VWUXFWXUHV FDOOHG RUJDQHOOHV 2UJDQHOOHV DUH VSHFLDOL]HG FHOOXODU µIDFWRULHV¶ WKDW
perform certain functions such as photosynthesis or protein production.

Eukaryotes have the greatest variation in size of the three domains but the least
amount of variation in other aspects. The smallest eukaryotic organism is less than 1
μm or 0.0001 cm wide. Compare that to a giant sequoia tree by the name of General
Sherman which is over 83m tall, 7.7m wide and has a volume of more than 1,400
m3 (52,000 cu ft).

The domain Eukaryota is often split into animals, fungi, plants, and protists.

PROTISTS

Protists are a broad group of eukaryotes that includes all eukaryotic organisms that are
not plants, animals or fungi. They are not necessarily closely related.

Protists were once considered to be a distinct kingdom just as plants, animals, and
fungi are. It is now well-known that many protists are more closely related to plants,
animals or fungi than they are to other protists. The term is still used for convenience
WRUHIHUWRDQ\HXNDU\RWHWKDWLVQ¶WDSODQWDQLPDORUIXQJL

The vast majority of protists are microscopic single-celled organisms. They are a
hugely diverse group and many new species have only been identified in the past
decade.

Some branches of protists on the tree of life include organisms such as algae (red,
green, brown and golden), ameba, slime molds, diatoms, and dinoflagellates.
 8

A large number of protists live as parasites of animals and plants. Other species
are important photosynthesizers and predators of bacteria.

PLANTS

Plants make up a kingdom of photosynthetic organisms. They are a group of

multicellular organisms that dominate the majority of natural landscapes.

Plants have the ability to make their own food using light energy from the sun.
Through the process of photosynthesis, plants convert carbon dioxide and water into
sugars and oxygen. The production of sugars by plants provides the foundation of
land-based ecosystems such as forests, wetlands, and grasslands.

The kingdom Plantae contains around 400,000 species of plants that we currently
know exist on Earth. The vast majority are flowering plants known as angiosperms.
Other groups of plants include gymnosperms, ferns, lycophytes and non-vascular
plants such as mosses.

FUNGI

Fungi make up another kingdom within the domain Eukaryota. Approximately

100,000 species have been identified by biologists but it is estimated that around 1.5
million species currently exist on Earth.
 9

Fungi were once placed in the plant kingdom but we now know that they are actually
more closely related to animals. Unlike plants, fungi are unable to make their own
food and instead get nutrients by decomposing organic material such as dead plants
and animals.

Fungi come as both single-celled organisms and multicellular organisms. Single-

celled fungi have been referred to as yeasts. Some yeasts are used in food industries to
make products such as bread, wine, and beer.

The majority of fungi are multicellular. These include fungi that produce mushrooms,
molds, and truffles. Around 35,000 of the already identified fungal species produce
mushrooms that assist with reproduction.

ANIMALS

The kingdom Animalia is the final eukaryotic kingdom. This is the most diverse of all
kingdoms, largely due to the huge diversity of insects that have evolved over the last
400 million years.

Animals are multicellular organisms that are unable to make their own food. They
rely on eating other organisms, such as plants and fungi, to secure the energy required
to survive.

The animal kingdom is often separated into vertebrates and invertebrates. A vertebrate
animal is any animal with an internal backbone. Examples include humans, birds,
reptiles, and fish. An invertebrate is any animal that lacks an internal backbone.
Insects, jellyfish, sponges, and worms are all examples of invertebrate animals.
 10

The animal kingdom contains the most advanced organisms on Earth. Many animals
have the ability to think intelligently and solve problems. The heightened intelligence
of animals allows them to perform many complex behaviors that are uncommon in
other organisms.

What a Newfound Kingdom Means for the Tree of Life

Neither animal, plant, fungus nor familiar protozoan, a strange microbe foretells
incredible biodiversity yet to be discovered
By Jonathan Lambert, Quanta Magazine on December 28, 2018.

A micrograph of Hemimastix kukwesjijk, the newly described hemimastigote named

DIWHU D ³KDLU\ UDSDFLRXV RJUH´ IURP WKH WUDGLWLRQV RI WKH 0L¶NPDT )LUVW 1DWLRQ RI
Nova Scotia, where the specimen was collected. Credit: Yana Eglit
From Quanta Magazine (find original story here).

The tree of life just got another major branch. Researchers recently found a certain
rare and mysterious microbe called a hemimastigote in a clump of Nova Scotian
soil. Their subsequent analysis of its DNA revealed that it was neither animal, plant,
fungus nor any recognized type of protozoan²that it in fact fell far outside any of the
known large categories for classifying complex forms of life (eukaryotes). Instead,
this flagella-ZDYLQJ RGGEDOO VWDQGV DV WKH ILUVW PHPEHU RI LWV RZQ ³VXSUD-NLQJGRP´
group, which probably peeled away from the other big branches of life at least a
billion years ago.

Plant Taxonomy

What is Taxonomy and when did it originate?

Taxonomy is the practice and science of classification, the word means order law, or
order science. This branch of science deals with the organization of living creatures
and grouping them according to similarities. Taxonomy is the method by which
 11

scientists, conservationists, and naturalists classify and organize the vast diversity of
living things on this planet in an effort to understand the evolutionary relationships
between them. Classifications in the broad sense are box-in-box, group-in-group, or
part/whole naming devices that we use to communicate aspects of our knowledge of
things in genera. For any classification system to be effective, it must be stable,
universal, i.e., be used by a wide range of people, and it must enhance
communication of knowledge by helping us to relate things in our minds. From this
point of view biological classification systems are no different from any others.
Objectives of Plant Taxonomy:
1-The first object of plant taxonomy is to identify all the kinds of plants on earth with
their names, distinctions, distribution, habit, characteristics and affinities. It also tries
to correlate the studies with scientific data contributed by various researches in the
field of botanical science. It gives an accumulated information and scientific
NQRZOHGJHRIWKHZRUOG¶VSODQWUHVRXUFHV

2-The second objective is to arrange the kinds of plants into a scheme of classification
or an orderly arrangement. There are some species that are closely related to each
other than others. Such species are placed in a higher group; similarly the closely
related higher groups to still higher groups and so on.

3-The third objective is to study the factors of evolution to find out the origin of
species and their interrelationships. Hence a taxonomist not only studies the species
existing today but also reveals the changes that they have undergone through the past.

4-The fourth objective of plant taxonomy is the correct naming of plants according to
the international code of nomenclature. The naming of the plant is guided and
regulated by international rules of botanical nomenclature.

5-The fifth is the documentation which includes the preservation of living or fossil
flora in a herbarium.

Principles of Plant Taxonomy:

Taxonomy is a functional science. The direction and character of its functions are
governed by principles. The principles developed with the increase in knowledge of
plants themselves.
 12

The principles are as follows:

Descriptive taxonomy:
It developed in the nineteenth century. This was mainly concerned with the
observation of similarities, and differences in the gross morphological characters of
plants known at that time. This began with the works of Tournefort, de Jussieu and
Linnaeus. In this principle the plants were described and classified on the basis of
morphological characters.

Experimental taxonomy:
This principle was introduced in the 20th century. Primary importance was given to
morphological distinctness and affinity, but it was influenced appreciably by the
findings of cytologist, geneticist, anatomist, physiologist and embryologist.

Phylogeny:
Modern taxonomists of the 20th century use phylogeny as the main principle of plant
taxonomy. Phylogeny is the evolutionary history of a taxon. By this principle attempt
is made to account for the origin and development of species. To determine the origin
of a species a taxonomist has to depend on the science of palaeobotany which
includes all taxa of extinct plant groups
 13

Classification of Plant Taxonomy:

Classification is the ordering of organisms into groups (or sets) on the basis of their
relationships i.e. phylogenetic relationship.

Types of Botanical Classification:

i. Empirical classification:
,Q WKLV FODVVLILFDWLRQ ERWDQLVWV KDYH DUUDQJHG WKHSODQWV LQ DOSKDEHWLFDO $%& «« 
order. The system may be compared with the alphabetical arrangement of words in
dictionary. There was no character into consideration.
 14

ii. Reasonable classification:

In this classification the plants were placed together on the basis of some natural
characters which may link them.

This type of classification may further be divided into following four types:
(a) Practical classification:
This classification is mainly based on the properties of plants particularly to their
value or use to human race.

(b) Artificial classification:

This is more or less arbitrary as the plants are classified on the basis of one or at the
most few characters, which, however, do not throw any light on the affinities or
relationship of the plants with one another.

According to recent understanding, Artificial classification (key classification) is a

classification structured for convenience, using easily observed phenotypic characters
and not necessarily indicating phylogenetic relationships.

Natural classification (phylogenetic classification) is a hierarchical classification

based on hypothetical phylogenetic relationships such that the members of each
category in the classification share a single common ancestor.

(c) Natural system of classification:

This system is based not only on the characters of reproductive organs and structural
relationship but all the other important characters are also taken into consideration and
the plants are classified according to their related character. It helps us not only to
ascertain the name of a plant but also its relationship and affinities with other plants.
All the modern systems of classification are natural.

(d) Phylogenetic system of classification:

This type of system classifies plants according to their evolutionary and genetic
relationships. It enables us to find out the ancestors or derivatives of any taxon. Our
present day knowledge is insufficient to construct a perfect phylogenetic classification
and all present phylogenetic systems are formed by the combination of natural and
phylogenetic evidences.
 15

Plant taxonomy is one of the earliest scientific disciplines that emerged thousands of
years ago, even before the important contributions of Greeks and Romans (e.g.,
Theophrastus, Pliny the Elder, and Dioscorides). In the fifteenth to sixteenth
centuries, plant taxonomy benefited from the Great Navigations, the invention of the
printing press, the creation of botanic gardens, and the use of the drying technique to
preserve plant specimens. In parallel with the growing body of morpho-anatomical
data, subsequent major steps in the history of plant taxonomy include the emergence
of the concept of natural classification, the adoption of the binomial naming system
(with the major role of Linnaeus) and other universal rules for the naming of plants,
the formulation of the principle of subordination of characters, and the advent of the
evolutionary thought. More recently, the cladistic theory (initiated by Hennig) and the
rapid advances in DNA technologies allowed to infer phylogenies and to propose true
natural, genealogy-based classifications

Though, our universe has faced a lot of trials of classifications since man creature.
Peoples noticed that there are things unchangeable and fixed and others grow,
reproduce and even move. Thus they dicide that there are two groups of things:- 1-
unchangeable things 2- changeable things.
Later on, they found that there are green plants and there are animals and both grow,
reproduce, but they though that plants cannot move. Gradually, things became clearer
and trials of classifications had been made to understand the surroundings.
 19

toward more holistic classification methods, eventually based on evolutionary

relationships
It starts from folk taxonomy through the artificial taxonomy, where one character
only used for classification, and then natural taxonomy begins with the invention
of microscopes and the development of investigating tools, where more characters
have to be considered in classification. Phylogenetic taxonomy is classification
according to developmental relationship and this type of classifications happened
after Darwin theory of evolution. Now, taxonomists have to use any available tool to
reach a more natural and symmetric grouping of taxa.
Taxonomy might be a simple organization of kinds of things into groups, or even very
simple to be putted in alphabetical list. But mathematically, a hierarchical
taxonomy, where more characters have to be considered in grouping the taxa in
an evolutionary aspect, and a tree structure is given for this set of objects. At the
top of this hierarchical structure the root node that applies to all objects, nodes below
this root are more specific classification. So, in common schemes the root is called
organism followed by nodes for the taxonomic ranks which are: Domain,
Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family«HWF

Taxonomy is the method by which scientists, conservationists, and naturalists classify

and organize the vast diversity of living things on this planet in an effort to understand
 20

the evolutionary relationships between them. Thus a family is clearly flagged as

such and is a monophyletic group that can contain several genera, also flagged as
such and also for the most part monophyletic, but a genus can never include
families.
Modern taxonomy originated in the mid-1700s when Swedish-born Carolus
Linnaeus (also known as Carl Linnaeus or Carl von Linné) published his multi-
volume Systema naturae, outlining his new and revolutionary method for classifying
and, especially, naming living organisms. Prior to Linnaeus, all described species
were given long, complex names that provided much more information than was
needed and were clumsy to use. Linnaeus took a different approach: he reduced
every single described species to a two-part, Latinized name known as the
³ELQRPLDO´QDPH. Thus, through the Linnaean system a species such as the dog rose
changed from long, unwieldy names such as Rosa sylvestris inodora seu canina and
Rosa sylvestra alba cum rubore, folio glabro to the shorter, easier to use Rosa canina.
This facilitated the naming of species that, with the massive influx of new specimens
from newly explored regions of Africa, Asia, and the Americas, was in need of a more
efficient and usable system.
Thus taxonomical works must pass by two stages, the first is the morphological
describtion and this called Alpha classification, then the detailed study of its internal
characters and called Omega classification.

Plant classification is the placing of known plants into groups or categories to show
some relationship. Scientific classification follows a system of rules that standardizes
the results, and groups successive categories into a hierarchy. For example, the family
to which the lilies belong is classified as follows:

x Kingdom: Plantae
x Division: Magnoliophyta (Angiosperms)
x Class: Liliopsida
x Order: Liliales
x Family: Liliaceae
x Genera : ... ...
 21

The classification of plants results in an organized system for the naming and
cataloging of future specimens, and ideally reflects scientific ideas about plant inter-
relationships.

Plants are classified in several different ways, and the further away from the garden
we get, the more the name indicates a plant's relationship to other plants, and tell us
about its place in the plant world rather than in the garden. Usually, only the Family,
Genus and species are of concern to the gardener, but we sometimes include
subspecies, variety or cultivar to identify a particular plant.

Starting from the top, the highest category, plants have traditionally been classified as
follows. Each group has the characteristics of the level above it, but has some
distinguishing features. The further down the scale you go, the more minor the
differences become, until you end up with a classification which applies to only one
plant.

CLASS Plants which produce

Angiospermae (Angiosperms)
flowers

Plants which don't

Gymnospermae (Gymnosperms)
produce flowers

SUBCLASS Plants with two seed

Dicotyledonae (Dicotyledons, Dicots)
leaves

Monocotyledonae (Monocotyledons,
Plants with one seed leaf
Monocots)

SUPERORDER A group of related Plant Families, classified in the order in which

they are thought to have developed their differences from a
common ancestor.

There are six Superorders in the Dicotyledonae (Magnoliidae,

Hamamelidae, Caryophyllidae, Dilleniidae, Rosidae, Asteridae),
and four Superorders in the Monocotyledonae (Alismatidae,
 22

Commelinidae, Arecidae, Liliidae)

The names of the Superorders end in -idae

ORDER Each Superorder is further divided into several Orders.

The names of the Orders end in -ales

FAMILY Each Order is divided into Families. These are plants with many
botanical features in common, and is the highest classification
normally used. At this level, the similarity between plants is often
easily recognisable by the layman.

Modern botanical classification assigns a type plant to each

Family, which has the particular characteristics which separate this
group of plants from others, and names the Family after this plant.

The number of Plant Families varies according to the botanist

whose classification you follow. Some botanists recognise only
150 or so families, preferring to classify other similar plants as sub-
families, while others recognise nearly 500 plant families. A
widely-accepted system is that devised by Cronquist in 1968,
which is only slightly revised today. Links to the various methods
of classification are on this website.

The names of the Families end in -aceae

SUBFAMILY The Family may be further divided into a number of sub-families,

which group together plants within the Family that have some
significant botanical differences.

The names of the Subfamilies end in -oideae

TRIBE A further division of plants within a Family, based on smaller

botanical differences, but still usually comprising many different
plants.

The names of the Tribes end in -eae

 23

SUBTRIBE A further division, based on even smaller botanical differences,

often only recognisable to botanists.

The names of the Subtribes end in -inae

GENUS This is the part of the plant name that is most familiar, the normal
name that you give a plant - Papaver (Poppy), Aquilegia
(Columbine), and so on. The plants in a Genus are often easily
recognisable as belonging to the same group.

The name of the Genus should be written with a capital letter.

SPECIES This is the level that defines an individual plant. Often, the name
will describe some aspect of the plant - the colour of the flowers,
size or shape of the leaves, or it may be named after the place
where it was found. Together, the Genus and species name refer to
only one plant, and they are used to identify that particular plant.
Sometimes, the species is further divided into sub-species that
contain plants not quite so distinct that they are classified as
Varieties.

The name of the species should be written after the Genus name, in
small letters, with no capital letter.

VARIETY A Variety is a plant that is only slightly different from the species
plant, but the differences are not so insignificant as the differences
in a form. The Latin is varietas, which is usually abbreviated to var.

The name follows the Genus and species name, with var. before
the individual variety name.

FORM A form is a plant within a species that has minor botanical

differences, such as the colour of flower or shape of the leaves.

The name follows the Genus and species name, with form (or
f.) before the individual variety name.

CULTIVAR A Cultivar is a cultivated variety, a particular plant that has arisen

 24

either naturally or through deliberate hybridisation, and can be

reproduced (vegetatively or by seed) to produce more of the same
plant.

The name follows the Genus and species name. It is written in the
language of the person who described it, and should not be
translated. It is either written in single quotation marks or
has cv. written in front of the name.

From the previous information we have to say that taxonomy must be an inclusive
science i.e. in order to categorize plant specimens in a natural groups, we have to
study all the available characters. Thus, taxonomists have to know more about
morphological, anatomical, cytological, ecological and embryological characters.
Sometimes taxonomists must know the history of the plant and its origin to decide
which the more related group to it is. Here, in our study we have to go through the
morphological characters only as the first step in classifying the most advanced
group of plants the Magnolophyta i.e. the flowering plants.

Thus, taxonomy is the science of grouping organisms into different categories

according to their physical characters. This grouping, or classification, should be
based on homology i.e. the individuals gathered in the same group must shared
characteristics that have been inherited from a common ancestor. Thus, to study the
modern trends in taxonomy we must go through the history of classification and how
this branch has developed with the development of peoples, instruments and
techniques. We must keep in our minds that taxonomy today is a reflection of the
past, meanwhile the systems of classification reflect both needs, level of
knowledge , philosophical concepts and available technology of each historical
period .

History of Plant Classification

The early history of development of botanical science is nothing but a history of
development of plant taxonomy. The herbalists and agriculturists of ancient times gat-
hered some knowledge about plants which was passed on from generation to
generation.
 25

Classification of organisms has been started from the beginning of human existence
basing on their need, shelter, food and medicine. Whenever it started, plant taxonomy
has at least six distinct periods:
1- Preliterature 2- Ancient Literature 3- Medieval or dark ages 4-
Renaissance 5- Theory of Evolution 6- Taxonomy Revolt . Each of these
periods has its own characteristic features and achievements. Until the Renaissance
all the taxonomic trials were Artificial Taxonomy afterwards, more Natural
Taxoponomical trials started. So, if we go quickly through each of these periods we
can recognize how plant taxonomy progress and develop.

1- Preliterature Period (Folk Taxonomy)

In this period people were very close to the earth, got their food from hunting and
gathering. They tried carefully each plant to know how they get used of it. They knew
many plants that are used for food and medicine. They were practical plant
taxonomists; they described the plants, classified them according to whether they are
useful or harmful, identified them and put them in a named category so it could be
easily referred to.
By the 15th.Century peoples called the Methodists started to differentiate between
Minerals, Plants and Animals. They classified them according to logic
considerations at that time.
2- Ancient Literature (beginning of scientific taxonomy)
This is the period of the ancient Greeks in which their conclusions reached by
reasoning instead of analysis of observations. They noted the differences between
external and internal organs. They classified plants by form into trees, shrubs,
undershrubs. They also recognized annuals, biennials, perennials and floral
morphology. Meanwhile, they described many medicinal plants which considered the
basic source of information for more than 1500 years.
Early botanical works

Historians of botany generally begin the history of botanical classification with folk
taxonomy. The plants used by peoples in the folk taxonomy were the first considered
by the early botanical works which started by Theophrastus¶V Historia Plantarum.
Theophrastus (372-287 BC), the Greek philosopher-scientist, placed this knowledge
of plants on a scientific footing. In his ³(QTXLU\LQWR3ODQWV´KHGHDOWZLWKWKHSODQWV
 26

at large and attempted to arrange the plants in several groups. He is, therefore, called
the ³)DWKHU of %RWDQ\´ Theophrastus, a student of Aristotle, did not articulate a
formal classification scheme; instead he relied on the common groupings of folklore
combined with growth form: tree shrub; undershrub; or herb.

A. Theophrastos ca. 300 BC, Greek who studied under Plato and Aristotle who
considered grandfather of botany. From his most important works are:-

1. He wrote more than 200 works only a few of which survived. The most important
were: Enquiry Into Plants, and The Causes of Plants. Was a friend of Alexander
the Great who had a botanical interest and who sent him plants from his travels.

2. Wrote about 500 species of plants and described cotton, pepper, cinnamon, bananas
and named many modern genera including Asparagus and Narcissus. Among his most
significant observations are:

x Distinctions between external (organs) vs. internal (tissue) structures.

x Distinction between different kinds of tissues.
x Classification into trees, shrubs, subshrubs and herbs.
x Distinction between flowerings vs. non-flowering plants.
x Recognition of different kinds of sexual & asexual reproduction.
x Understood basic anatomy, e.g. sepals & petals modified leaves.
x True understanding of fruits.

B. Pliny the Elder Roman (ca. 50 AD) Pliny compiled a monumental work entitled
³+LVWRULD1DWXUDOLV´ZKHUHKHLQFRUSRUDWHGDOOLQIRUPDWLRQDERXWSODQWVJDWKHUHGXSWR
that time and added much to the same collected by himself from his travels far and
wide. chief work was Natural History a multivolume work of which 37 volumes
survives, in which he tried to record everything that was known about the world.
About 1/4 was devoted to Biology. Most of the botany was devoted to medicine or
agriculture. For more than 1,000 yrs. this work revered and it was one of the first to be
printed by movable type.

C. Dioscorides - Greek contemporary of Pliny in 1st century and like him travelled a
lot and gathered information about medicinal plants. He compiled his famous book
 27

³0DWHULD 0HGLFD´ where he described about six hundred species of plants

mentioning their local name and giving their medicinal properties. Along with
descriptions he gave sketches which increased the value of the book very much and
gained much popularity among the herbalists and plant-lovers in Europe.

The world has passed through a dark age without any further valuable
taxonomic works, except that of Albertus Magnus and the Herbalists. Until the
Renaissance (1500's) these were the reference works. During the Dark Ages it was
copied and recopied and the figures redrawn so many times that they bore little
resemblance to the original. However, since the masses couldn't read anyone who
possessed a copy was guaranteed fortune and success, it allowed one to practice
pharmacy and medicine. It recognized some natural families such as the mints
and carrot as well as some modern genera such as Aloe.

In the 16th century, works by Otto Brunfels, Hieronymus Bock, and Leonhart
Fuchs helped to revive interest in natural history based on first-hand observation;
Bock in particular included environmental and life cycle information in his
descriptions. With the influx of exotic species in the Age of Exploration, the number
of known species expanded rapidly, but most authors were far more interested in the
medicinal properties of individual plants than an overarching classification system.
Later influential Renaissance books include those of Caspar Bauhin and Andrea
Cesalpino. Bauhin described over 6000 plants, which he arranged into 12 books and
72 sections based on a wide range of common characteristics. Cesalpino based his
system on the structure of the organs of fructification, using the Aristotelian technique
of logical division

3- Medieval ( dark ages)

In this period a little has been done in plant taxonomy except that of Albertus
Magnus who ZURWHKLV³'H9HJHWDELOLV´ZKHUHWKHGLIIHUHQFHLQWKHVWHPVWUXFWXUHRI
Di-cotyledons and Monocotyledons was shown and the two groups were given the
terms Tunicate and Corticate.
Herbalists are peoples collected plants from different parts of the world and
preserved, without identification or description. They motivated by practical
considerations, i.e. medical and agricultural uses of plants. From the most famous
herbalists are few German herbalists carried their enquiries about plants still farther
 28

making the study of Botany quite popular. Foremost among them was Otto Brunfels,
who published his book (Herbarium vivae Eiconis) in three volumes which was
illustrated with good figures. Another German herbalist, Jerome Bock , who published
his (Nue Kreiterbuch) which contain accurate description of 600 species of flowering
plants. In this book he classified plants into three major groups; herbs, shrubs, and
tree; he also noted the original distribution of wach species.

4- Renaissance

Two major technological innovations contributed to Renaissance and especially to

plant taxonomy:

1. Printing press

2. Science of navigation

The former made knowledge available to all and botanical-medical books called
herbals became popular. Navigation started the age of exploration and almost
immediately the number of known plants increased dramatically. New systems of
classification were needed to handle this increase.

Basically four distinct periods to this era can be noticed as follows:-

First-a. No real systems of classification but marked period of original work rather
than copying the ancient's works. These books were based on first hand observations
by the authors and provided detailed and accurate description of the plants of
medicinal use.

b. Several prominent Germans (herbalists): Brunfels, Bock, Fuchs (Fuchsia) enriched

the world by a lot off wild plant specimens .

Second-17th century - Large numbers of new plants from voyages necessitated

better systems of classification. During this period Aristotle's type concept came into
vogue. Maintained that species non-varying and fixed entities and based on an ideal
 29

or fixed embodiment or type. Generally thought was that species are the ideal created
by god. Not to be confused with nomenclatural type concept.

a-Caesalpino - (Italian) tried to base classification on logic rather than utilitarian

concepts (such as medicinal uses). He realized that some features are more
meaningful than others in classification, a priori reasoning (today emphasis on
floral features). He was the first to notice the presence of latex in some plants. He
also classified the plants on the character of their habit, viz., trees, shrubs, and herbs
but also took into account the characters of ovary, fruit, and seed. He became
IDPRXV IRU KLV ERRN ³De plants´ LQ  YROXPHV WKH ILUVW RI ZKLFK FRQWDLQHG KLV
principles of classification.

b. Reviness classified the angiosperms according to flower characters. He introduced

a system of grouping the plants in similar groups and afterwards used the old systems
of classifications in the identification of the plants (external morphological
characters). He was the first in using the nomenclature system of the genera, by
naming the most ubundant species by the name and then the other related plants
by this name followed by the word modified.

The elder brother Jean (Johna) Bauhin (1541-1631) wrote a book entiWOHG³Historia
SODQWDUXP XQLYHUVDOLV´ which was published after his death. Gaspard (Casper)
Bauhin, the younger brother (1560-1624), published 3 botanical treatises the third
RQHRIZKLFKYL]³Pinax theatri Botanic´EHFDPHYHU\SRSXODU%RWKWKH%DXKLQs
made use of the habit-character of plants in classifying them.

Gaspard Bauhin had formulated the idea of a genus and in many cases gave binary
nomenclature to his plants. He also collected all names of plants published in
different botanical works till his time and referred them as synonyms along with
names he used as correct ones.

c. Gaspard Bauhin (Swiss) Wrote Pinax which was a register of plants know to
science at that time.

1. He also included other names for the plants, i.e. SYNONYMY. In the same time,
he generally credited with modern concept of genera and species.
 30

2. He also experimented with BINOMIAL system of naming plants.

d. John Ray made a classification depending on all the previous works with
distinguishing between the different types of fruits and between dicots and monocots.
He described 1700 species according to morphological characters.  He set himself
seriously to the study of plants and gave much thought in proposing a system of
classification of plants. He also tried to group the plants into several families which he
FDOOHG ³FODVVHV´ +H GLYLGHG WKH SODQW NLQJGRP ILUVW LQWR  JURXSV YL] +HUEDH DQG
Arbores. The Herbae were then divided into Imperfectae and Perfectae, the first of
which included the Cryptogams and the second group, i.e., the Arbores included most
of the flowering plants.

The Perfectae were subdivided into Dicotyledonae and Monocotyledonae and under
Dicotyledonae he placed 25 of his classes and 4 under Monocotyledonae. His system
RIFODVVLILFDWLRQFDPHRXWLQKLV³+LVWRULDSODQWDUXP´RIZKLFKVHYHUDOHGLWLRQVZHUH
published and he revised and improved his system in the later editions.

e. Joseph de Tournefort was a contemporary of John Ray and tried to work out a
system of classification of flowering plants. He too divided the plant kingdom first
into 2 groups as trees and herbs and used the character of inflorescence and flower for
subdividing the latter group. He made a classification system based on the habit of the
plants ( trees, shrubs, subshrubs and herbs).

He distinguished between hypogenous and epigenous flowers and between

syncarpous and apocarpous gynaecia. Joseph Pitton de Tournefort was the first to give
a clear concept of a genus although Gaspard Bauhin mentioned it in his works.
7RXUQHIRUW¶VZRUNSURYHGYHry helpful in identifying the plants up to the species.

He considered the genus the smallest unit of classification.

He followed Reviness system of naming the plants but the word modified has
been changed to a small descriptive sentence descripting that plant. Then the
Bauhin brothers came to the field.

Third. Linnaean period - 18th century. By end of 17th century there were too many
new plants to deal with and plants were referred to by descriptive Latin phrases.
 31

a. Linnaeus, a Swedish physician, a Swedish naturalist (also called Carl von Linne),
who gave a new impetus to the study of plants. He was professor of medicine and
botany in the Upsala University He considered the father of plant taxonomy and one
of his works, Species Plantarum (1753) is the starting point for modern taxonomy.

He himself was a collector of plants and made arrangement of collecting plant-

specimens from different parts of the world by sending his students to countries far
away and through missionary- men and administrators.

The discovery of numerous plants from all over the world led him to think about
bringing an order into the existing chaos and set him in grouping and classifying all
the plants known till his time. He proposed a system of classification which was
publisheGLQKLV³6\VWHPD1DWXUDH´

b. He realized that some characters were more useful than others and he developed a
Sexual System of classification which was based on the numbers of reproductive
parts. Purely artificial but allowed one to easily identify an unknown plant by keying
it out much as we do today.

In this system he used the character of stamens, i.e., the number and nature of
stamens, to distinguish the 20 classes in which he divided the plant kingdom. He also
used the number and nature of carpels to distinguish the orders, i.e., subdivisions of
his classes.

In addition to presenting an excellent system of classification of plants Linnaeus

published many botanical works of monographic and floristic nature and also books
embodying his ideas of nomenclature of plants.

c. He described 100's of species, all binomials that have a L. after them. His most
significant contribution was the consistent use of the binomial system in which each
species was referred to by only two names, the genus and specific epithet.

d. Species Plantarum (May 1, 1753) is the nomenclatural starting point for virtually
all plant names.
 32

e. He classified flowering plants (Angiospermae) into 24 phylla according to stamen

FKDUDFWHUV QXPEHU ILODPHQW OHQJWK DQWKHU PRUSKRORJ\«. Each phylum was
subdivided into orders and families according to pistil characters (Sexual System).

f. He identified 1336 genus in his book Genera Plantarum, then described the species
in another book Species Plantarum, as well as he published 14 important research
papers in taxonomy.

g. He was the first to apply the binomial system of nomenclature in plants.

h. He mafe a school of taxonomies in which his students were fond off taxonomy and
they traveled allover the world gathering plants.

The modern taxonomists have agreed to consider the year 1753 as the starting point of
QRPHQFODWXUH RI 3KDQHURJDPV 3WHULGRSK\WD DQG 6SKDJQXP ,Q KLV ³3KLORVRSKLD
%RWDQLFD´ KH ODLG GRZQ VRPH SULQFLSOHV ZKLFK ODWHU IRUPHG WKH EDVLV RI WKH
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature.

Owing to the efforts of Linnaeus the study of Botanical science entered the modern
age and Linnaeus is rightly called the ³)DWKHU of Modern %RWDQ\´

In spite of all these works, Linaeus System based on the dissimilarities between
plants and on the number of sexual organs, for that species have the same stamen
numbers and has no relations is putted together and vice versa. Many taxonomists
considered Linnaean hierarchy as an example of an aggregative hierarchy with
emergent properties at the different levels, while they dismiss phylogenies as being
simply positional structures lacking emergent properties.

All the previous works considered as Artificial Systems of Classifications because

they were depending on morphological characters only.

Forth. Beginning of Natural systems - by late 1700's botanist began to ponder the
purposes of taxonomy and to try to provide more information content in their
classifications, i.e. they wanted to reflect "natural relationships". Although Linnaeus
had provided a convenient method for identifying plants, it was clearly artificial, e.g.
Cacti and pines were classified together because they had numerous male parts.
 33

a. Lamark the French socialist who recognized that the environment has great effect
on living creature. From that point thinking moved towards the effect of
environmental factors on the characters of plant and ecology has to be considered in
classifications.

b. Adanson - rejected a priori choice of characters and felt that using as many
characters as possible would give the most natural or useful classification.

x This is the precursor of Phenetic or modern computer aided Numerical

Taxonomy which is often called Adansonian Taxonomy.

c. de Jussieu's a French family (mid 1700 to 1800's) included 4 botanists, father and
sons. First to arrange plants into a natural system, i.e. plants which looked alike were
grouped together considering all the previous works and characters provided.

Bernard de who was in charge of the Royal Gardens in France tried to arrange the
plants in the gardens following the system of Linnaeus and in doing so modified the
system to such an extent that it became altogether a new system of classification.

This, however, was not published and later his nephew Antoine Laurent de Jussieu
(1748- SXEOLVKHG WKH VDPH LQ KLV ³Genera plantarum secundum ordines
QDWXUDOHV GHSRVLWD´- with some modifications. This was the first natural system of
classification of plants where he established a hundred Natural Orders as taxa above
the rank of genera giving distinguishing characters of each.

He divided the plant kingdom into 15 classes and placed the classes under 3 major
head; as Acotyledonae, Monocotyledonae and Dicotyledonae. Acotyledonae
consists of only one class which comprises the Cryptogams and the Naiades of the
monocots, while the Monocotyledonae includes the rest of the monocots in 3 classes.

Dicotyledonae comprises all of the dicotyledonous natural orders and also the
&RQLIHUDH LQWKHUHVWRIWKHVHFODVVHV-XVVLHX¶VV\VWHP ³ZDVVOLJKWly modified by
Augustin Pyrame de Candolle who was Professor of Botany in Montpellier.

x Arranged the plants in the Paris botanical garden in such a fashion.

x He divided the dicot. plants into: Apetalae ± Monopetalae ± Polypetalae.
 34

x Then he redivided these groups into 15 pyhlla, taking more morphological

characters intyo his consideration.
x He rearranged Linneous classification in a more natural order.

d. de Candolle a French family who was interested in plants. They take de Jussieu
classification and added new characters in it. He recognised the anatomical characters
along with external morphological characters in distinguishing his divisions in the
system of classification.

He described 161 natural orders as against 100 of de Jussieu and the different groups
or divisions in his system of classification were more natural than those of de Jussieu
although he placed the Pteriydophyta in the same class Endogenae with the
monocotyledons.

Further he treated the Coniferae as an order in the class Exogenae along with other
dicotyledonous orders. De Candolle became famous not for his system of
FODVVLILFDWLRQEXWKLVPRQXPHQWDOZRUNHQWLWOHG³3URGURPXVV\VWHPDWLVQDWXUDOLVUHJQL
YHJHWDELOLV´DERRNLQYROXPHVLQZKLFKKHGHVFULEHGDOOWKHJHQHUDDQGVSHFLHVRI
plants discovered up to that time.

The descriptions are very elaborate and are accompanied by references to previous
literature and to the area of distribution of each species. He published many other
books and formulated a set of rules for naming the plants. It was he who introduced
the term taxonomy to designate the study of classifying and naming of plants.

x They noticed the difference in vascular tissues in plants.

x They classified plants into vascular and nonvascular groups.
x They tried to omit Linneous system by showing the advantages of de Jussieu
system.
x They were the first who add Plant Anatomy as tools in classification.

Stephen Endlicher published his ³*HQHUD 3ODQWDUXP´ (1836-1840) describing

6,835 genera and arranged them in a system of his own. Here he divided the plant
kingdom into 2 regions, viz., Thallophyta and Cormophyta. The Thallophyta
 35

included plants with simple structure, without stem or root or vessels and without
clearly defined sex-organs, e.g., Algae, Fungi and Lichens.

Cormophyta included plants with stem and roots, having vessels and clearly
distinguishable sex-organs. He placed Bryophytes, Pteridophytes and seeds-plants
under Cormophyta. He could not recognise the Gymnospermae as a single distinct
taxon but placed the Zamiae (Cycads) with the Pteridophyta and the Coniferae with
dicotyledons.

e. The best and most popular of the natural systems of classification is that of George
Bentham and Joseph Dalton Hooker, two British Botanists, Bentham & Hooker
Englishmen of late 1800's worked out of Kew Gardens in London and largely
responsible for establishing it as foremost systematic institution in the world. Much of
the material from early explorations was deposited here. They classified the
Phanerogamia and gave an account of 202 Natural Orders under that group. This was
published in their great monumental work ³*HQHUD3ODQWDUXP´ (1862-1883) where
elaborate descriptions of each and every genera and of the Natural Orders were given
together with names of all species under each genus, the synonyms, localities and
reference to literature.

Keys are also provided for easily identifying the Natural Orders and genera. This
book proved to be a very useful reference book which as well as the system of classi-
fication given here became very popular in Great Britain and other countries of the
world including America.

As noted above only the seed-plants were taken up here and this group was divided
into 3 classes, viz., Dicotyledonae, Gymnospermae and Monocotyledonae. The
dicotyledons were subdivided into 3 subclasses, viz.²Polypetalae. Gamopetalae
and Monochlamydeae.

Each of these subclasses included more than one series. The gymnosperms included
only 3 Natural Orders and were not subdivided into subclasses or series. The
monocotyledons included 8 series which were not put under any subclass.
 36

The system of classification of Bentham and Hooker is the best of all the natural
systems. Although it is not a phylogenetic system yet the natural orders (i.e., families)
having close relationship have been grouped together in most cases and in
phylogenetic classifications of later workers many of such groups have been
maintained.

x Wrote Genera Plantarum over 20 years, was a compendium of generic

descriptions arranged in a natural system. Their descriptions were taken from
original material and are noted for their completeness and detail and are still
widely consulted today.
x Descriptions of natural orders and genera are very elaborate and accurate,
being based on actual study of the specimens by the authors. Therefore for
purpose of identification of plants this system is very helpful.

x %HQWKDP DQG +RRNHU¶V V\VWHP LV QRW D SK\ORJHQHWLF V\VWHP DQG LV EDVHG RQ
the idea of fixity of species. The position of gymnosperms in this system is
very unsatisfactory as it has been placed in between the dicots and monocots.
Such anomaly is noted also in other cases in placing the natural orders under
different series.

x The series Curvembryeae with natural orders Nyctaginaceae, Amaranthaceae,

Chenopodiaceae, Polygonaceae, Phytolaccaceae, etc. has been placed in
Monochlamydeae while Caryophyllaceae which is closely allied to the above-
mentioned natural orders has been placed in series Thalamifiorae of
Polypetalae.

x In monocotyledons inclusion of Irideae and Amaryllideae in the same series

with Scitamineae and Bromeliaceae is another example of such anomaly. In
the use of terminology of different rank of taxa there is no uniformity.

x Thus under the subclasses Polypetalae and Gamopetalae of dicotyledons the

natural orders are placed under cohorts which are again placed under series.
But in subclass Monochlamydeae and in the monocotyledons the natural
orders are placed directly under the series. In gymnosperms the 3 natural
orders are not placed under any series or cohort.
 37

x A graphical representation of the outline of the system of classification by

Bentham and Hooker is given below:

x


f. Eichler, the german scientist who was the first to construct a classification based on
genetic thinkings. He divided the plants into two categories 1- Cryptogames (hidden
sexual systems) 2- Phanerogams ( obvious sexual systems). The Cryptogams is
subdivided into Thallophyta, Bryophyta and Pteridophyta.The Phanerogams are
subdivided into Gymnosperms and Angiosperms and the angiosperms are divided
into Monocots. and Dicots.
 38

Eichler considered the complex sexual system is more advanced than the
simple ones and for that many scientists criscized his system.
g. Engler and Prantl, Adolf Engler Professor of Botany, University of Berlin,
published (1887-1899) in collaboration with Karl Prantl a monumental work entitled
³Die naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien´ ZKHUH DOO WKH JHQHUD RI SODQWV ZHUH DUUDQJHG
and described systematically. In doing so they proposed a new system of
classification for the whole plant kingdom. This system was based to some extent on
that of Eichler but is a true phylogenetic system. In this work they tried to use the
terminology for different ranks of taxa in a more scientific way.

The term Natural Order was replaced by the term Family and for a taxon above the
rank of families and containing several closely related families they used the term
5HLKHHTXLYDOHQWWRVHULHVRUFRKRUWVLQ%HQWKDPDQG+RRNHU¶VV\VWHPThey divided
all the plant kingdom into 13 phylla, the latest is the seed plants and they named them
the Embryophyta. Then they divided the embryophyta into Gymnospermae and
Angiospermae, and tha angiospermae into monocots and dicots. Dicots are classified
into two categories according to the perianth characters.

According to Engler the most primitive type of flower is without perianth; the next
higher type has one whorl, then there are flowers with two whorls of perianth. Where
the perianth is in two whorls, they may be distinguishable into calyx or corolla or not.
The gamopetalous condition is advancement over polypetalous condition.

Indefinite number of stamens and carpels is a primitive condition, while definite

number is advanced type. Superior ovary is also a primitive condition from which
inferior ovary has come through perigyny. Here it is presumed that the dicots and
monocots were derived separately from some extinct group of gymnosperms.

Therefore considering that the Pan-danales among the monocots and Amentiferous
dicots nearly approach the ancestral type they are placed at the beginning of the 2
classes of Angiospermae. The Monocotyledonae is placed before Dicotyledonae in
this system.
 39

The classification of Phanerogamia according to Engler and Prantl is shown

below
 40


The Monocotyledonae begins with Typhaceae of Pandanales and ends with
Orchidaceae of Microspermae. Casuarinaceae the only family of the order
Verticillatae is the first family in the Dicotyledonae and the last family is Compositae
which is considered to be most highly evolved among the dicotyledonous families.
 41

After the publication of Pflanzenfamilien Engler in collaboration with Gilg brought

out a single volume book Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien containing the system of
classification of the plants as proposed in Pflanzenfamilien.

Several editions of this book were published later by Engler and Diels with slight
PRGLILFDWLRQVRIWKHV\VWHP$IWHU(QJOHU¶VGHDWK'LHOVSXEOLVKHGWKHWKHGLWLRQLQ
1936 and Hans Melchior published the 12th revised edition of the Syllabus (in two
volumes) in 1954-64.

(QJOHU¶V V\VWHP ZDV DGRSWHG E\ PRVW ERWDQLVWV DQG LW UHSODFHG WKH %HQWKDP DQG
+RRNHU¶VV\VWHPLQPDQ\FRXQWULHVLQ(XURSHDQG$PHULFD,WKDVEHHQUHFRJnised by
the International Botanical Congress. This is a comprehensive system for all groups of
plants and is a phylogenetic system.

In the case of Dicotyledons the amalgamation of Polypetalae and Monochlamydeae

into one group Archichlamydeae is considered justifiable.

Placing of Orchidaceae at the end of monocots and Compositae at the end of dicots is
also considered proper as these 2 families are most highly evolved in their respective
classes. The position of Iridaceae, luncaceae and Amaryllidaceae shown to be closer
to Liliaceae is also supported by many botanists.

This system has, however, been criticized by many. The origin of monocots is now
considered to be from a primitive group of dicots and not separately from the an-
cestral stock that gave rise to the dicots. It is the Ranales from which the monocots
have been derived, and this order is one of the most primitive among the dicotyledons
DQGWKHSRVLWLRQDVVLJQHGWRLWLQ(QJOHU¶VV\VWHPFDQQRWEHMXVWLILHG

The catkin bearing families placed at the beginning of Archichlamydeae are in reality
highly advanced as the simplicity of the flowers is the result of reduction and not due
to primitiveness. In the case of monocotyledons also the Pandanales consists of the
families which are rather recent in the evolutionary line and not at all primitive.
 42

Conclussion
This period had influenced by the following 1- Printing Press was invented 2-
Individuals had confidence to attempt original work 3- Navigation enabled
collection of plants from allover the world . For that, this period was an active
period of learning and exploration, meanwhile many large volumes about plants and
their uses (herbals) were produced. It was the initial efforts of the ancients to structure
and order flowering plant diversity. As well as, many natural and well defined genera
and families were established besides naming of plants as proposed by Carl Linnaeus
(father of plant taxonomy). The beginning of numerical taxonomy (phenetics) has
been started by Adanson . An early thinking of evolution has been achieved by
Lamark as well as the use of internal structures beside the external ones in
classification has been done by de Candolle.

5- Theory of Evolution
Prior to the theory of evolution by Charles Darwin, a geologist called Charles Lyell
proposed a theory of geological gradualism says that * there is a slow, continuous
changes produced features we see today * . Thus, Darwin thought that the earth was
much older than 6000 years and that evolutionary change must occurred through
gradual accumulated differences. He provided conclusive evidence that evolution of
life forms has occurred and proposed natural selection as the mechanism responsible
for these changes. In the same time Alfred Wallace developed a very similar
evolutionary theory and both of them were presented at the meetings of the London
Linnaean Society.
The Evolution and Plant Systematic Diversity
The theory of evolution by Darwin turned all the taxonomical thinkings toward how
new species derived from preexisting ones? This we call Speciation. A lot off
scientific works have been done to explain this process and they concluded that:-
1-Speciation requires variation & isolation
2-Speciation may occur without geographic isolation
3-Hybridization is important cause of speciation
4-Polyploidy is common

Thus, two major concepts impacted on classification:

 43

1. Species have evolved from one another over time, i.e. species have evolutionary
histories - Phylogenies.

2. Species are not represented by ideal types as Aristotle thought, but by variable
populations.

Since Darwin's time most systems of classification have tried to reflect evolutionary
relationships.

1. The first to do so were the Germans, particularly Engler and Prantl who wrote
multivolume Die Naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien from 1887-1915. They arranged the
plants in an evolutionary sequence starting with the presumed primitive ones and
ending with the most advanced.

x One major flaw was their assumption that simple equals primitive. Now
known that many seemingly simple structures evolved from more complex
structures via reductions. E.g. some plants don't have both sepals and petals,
these might be considered as primitive and plants that have both might be
considered advanced. However information from the study of fossils as well as
anatomy indicates that some primitive flowers had both sepals and petals and
the ones that evolved from them lost one or both.
x Until about 1980 it was the world standard and all herbaria and floras
were arranged according to it. Now replaced by Cronquist system which
we'll use.

2-Richard von Wettstein, another German botanist, published a book entitled

³Hand-buch der systematischen Botanik´ LQ  D UHYLVHG HGLWion of which
came out in 1935. Here he proposed a system which was similar to that of Engler
and Prantl but differing in some cases in tracing the relationship of the orders. He
divides dicotyledons into Choripetalae and Sympetalae.

x The Choripetalae is again subdivided into Monochlamydeae and

Dialypetaleae. There are 29 orders under Choripetalae and 10 orders under
Sympetalae. Unlike Engler he considers that the monocots originated from the
dicots and from the order Policaripicae.
 44

x Further according to him Pandanales is not an order of primitive families but

is more advanced over Helobiae and Liliflorae, the two orders from which all
other orders of the monocots have been derived.

3. Bessey - from U. Nebraska early 20th century devised a set of dicta as to what
features were primitive versus what were advanced. Charles E. Bessey, Professor of
Botany, at the University of Nebreska, U.S.A., also tried to work out the phylogeny of
the seed plants, and after several suggestions in that line published in several papers,
finally published his system in 1915 under the title ³7KH Phylogenetic Taxonomy of
Flowering 3ODQWV´
He divided the group Anthophyta or angiosperms into Alternifoliae
(Monocotyledonae) and Oppositifoliae (Dicotyledonae) and each of these 2 classes
was subdivided into Strobiloideae and Cotyloideae.

The subclasses under Alternifoliae are further divided into Orders each having one or
more Families under it, while the subclasses under Oppositifoliae have Super orders
under them and the Super orders have the Orders and Families in descending orders.

Bessey considered that the dicotyledonous line is primitive in comparison to the

monocotyledonous line and among the dicots, plants with strobiloid type of flowers
are very primitive. Therefore he places the Ranales at the beginning of his system of
classification as has been done by Bentham and Hooker.

Magnoliaceae of the order Ranales is the most primitive family and Lactucaceae of
the Asterales is the most advanced among the Dicots. He splits Compositae into
several families and Lactucaceae is one of those new families.

According to Bessey the Anthophyta or the angiosperms originated from the

Benettitalean stock and the Alternifoliae, i.e., the Monocotyledonae was derived from
the primitive group of Oppositioliae, i.e., the Dicotyledonae.

x Primitive refers to those found in the most ancient plants, advanced are found
in the most recently evolved plants. Bessey developed a system of
classification based on these dicta and it resembled a cactus.
 45

Bessey prepared a chart to show the relationship of the orders of the

Anthophyta and the chart is reproduced below

x In this chart the size of the balloons and other figures is proportional to the
number of species in an order. German botanist Hans Hallier proposed another
phylogenetic system in hiV ³/¶RULJLQH HW OH V\VWHPH SK\OHWLTXH GHV
$QJLRVSHUPHV´

4-Hallier considered that the angiosperms were derived from some extinct group
of Cycad allied to Bennettitlaes. Like Bessey he considered the Monocotyledonae
to be more advanced than the Dicotyledonae and the former group was derived
from a stock which he called Proberberideae.

x He divided the angiosperms into 5 major groups, viz:

 46

x (1) Proterogenes.

x (2) Anonophyles,

x (3) Rhodophyles,

x (4) Ochnigenes and

x (5) Monocotyledones.

x There are 29 orders under the Dicotyledonae and 7 orders under the
Monocotyledonae.

x Like Bessey he considered the Ranales to be the most primitive among the
dicots and the plants with amentiferous flowers to be more advanced due to
reduction in floral parts. Liliflorae is the first order in his Monocotyledones.

x From Liliflorae he derives Helobiae Cyperales, Spadiciflorae, Enantioblastae

and Ensatae on one line and Artorrhizae on another line. He splits
Amaryllidaceae of earlier botanists to Agavaceae, Alstroemeriaceae and
Amaryllidaceae and this treatment has met with the approval of modern
workers.

5-Alfred Barton Rendle of British Museum of Natural History published his

ERRN ³&ODVVLILFDWLRQ RI )ORZHULQJ 3ODQWV´ LQ  YROXPHV LQ  DQG  )RU
arranging the families he followeG WKH (QJOHU¶V V\VWHP LQ JHQHUDO ZLWK VOLJKW
PRGLILFDWLRQV $V LQ (QJOHU¶V V\VWHP 0RQRFRW\OHGRQDH ZDV SODFHG EHIRUH WKH
Dicotyledonae. In the Monocotyledonae the Pandanales is the first order and the
Dicotyledonae starts from Salicales.

x He breaks up Archichlamydeae into 2 grades, viz., Monochlamydeae and

Dialypetalae while Sympetalae remains as grade 3. The Dialypetalae is more
advanced over Monochlamydeae and begins with Ranales. Sympetalae
originated from Dialypetalae in several lines.

x It has been subdivided into 2 groups, the Pentacycliae and the Tetracycliae.
Tetracycliae is again divided into Superae and Inferae. In his book the descrip-
 47

tions of families and orders are very elaborate and in many cases the
phylogeny of different groups have been nicely discussed.

x Even then it is considered that his system is important only from the point of
FRQYHQLHQFH WKDQ IURP SK\ORJHQHWLF VWDQGSRLQW $V LQ (QJOHU¶V V\VWHP WKH
Monocotyledonae ends in Orchidaceae and the Dicotyledonae terminates in
the family Compositae. Like Engler he considered that monocots and dicots
originated independently from a common stock.

x August A. Pulle of Utrecht Botanical Museum published a system of

classification of the Spermatophyta in 1938. This was a slight modification of
(QJOHU¶V Vystem. According to him spermatophytes are divided into 4
subdivisions, viz., Pteridospermae, Gymnospermae, Chlamydospermae
(Gnetales) and Angiospermae.

x 7KH ODVW LV GLYLGHG LQWR 0RQRFRW\OHGRQHDH DQG 'LFRW\OHGRQHDH 3XOOH¶V

divisions of the extinct and living gymnosperms are considered to be natural
groups by most modern workers. He also proposed some changes of position
RIDIHZDQJLRVSHUPLFRUGHUVLQWKH(QJOHU¶VV\VWHPWRVKRZWKHLUDIILQLWLHV

6-John Hutchinson, a British Botanist working in the Royal Botanic Garden,

Kew, London, published a phylogenetic system for classifying the families of
DQJLRVSHUPV LQ KLV ERRN ³7KH )DPLOLHV RI )ORZHULQJ 3ODQWV´ 7KH ILUVW YROXPH
containing the dicotyledons appeared in 1926 and the second volume in 1934 and
a revised edition of the 1st volume was published in 1960.

x He divided his Phyla-Angiospermae into 2 subphylas, viz., Dicotyledones and

Monocotyledones. The dicotyledons originated according to him from an
ancestral stock called Proangiospermae allied to Bennettitales. The primitive
dicotyledons developed in 2 separate lines one bing predominantly woody and
the other herbaceous.

x The primitive dicots with hermaphrodite, hypogynous flowers with numerous

free and spirally arranged parts are placed in Archichlamydeae from which the
Metachlamydeae is derived.
 48

x In the revised system he abolished the groups Archichlamideae and

Metachlamideae, and placed the woody families under division Lignosae and
the herbaceous families under division Herbaceae, the 2 groups originating in
2 separate lines from the Proangiospermae.

x The Monocotyledones originated according to him from the Ranales, and were
subdivided by him into 3 divisions, viz., Calyciferae, Corolliferae and
Glumiflorae. Here also those families are considered as primitive which have
usually hermaphrodite, hypogynous flowers with numerous, free and spirally
arranged parts.

x Such families among the monocots are almost all aquatic and therefore he
concludes that the Monocotyledones were derived from primitive
Dicotyledones through aquatic medium. Butomales and Alismatales are
considered most primitive among the monocots from which other families of
Calyciferae have been derived.

x Corolliferae has been derived from Butomales and Commelinales of

Calyciferae. Liliales forms the basal stock of other orders of Corolliferae and
also of Glumiflorae the 3rd divison of the Monocotyledones. He splits
Pandanales of Engler to Pandanales and Typhales and considers the families
under them to be much more recent and not at all primitive.

x He splits Liliaceae of the older botanists to Liliaceae, Tecophilaeaceae,

Trilliaceae, Smilacaceae and Ruscaceae and transfers Draceneae to
Agavaceae, Luzuriageae to Philesiaceae and Allieae to Amaryllidaceae. This
treatment of the older Liliaceae meets with the approval of most modern
botanists.

x The system of classification of the monocots by Hutchinson appears to be

more satisfactory than any other systems proposed by earlier workers on this
line. Reshuffling of the orders and rearrangement of the families have gained
support from anatomy and cytology.
 49

x The origin of monocots from the primitive dicots is now considered a fact
agreed upon by all modern taxonomists. In the case of dicots, however,
dividing the group into 2 separate divisions from the beginning into Lignosae
and Herbaceae seems to be arbitrary and illogical.

x And as a result of this many natural families had to be vivisected

unnecessarily and the phylogeny was mixed up rather than simplified. Placing
of Magnoliales and Ranales at the beginning of dicots and consideration of the
Amentiferae as a more advanced group are the points that have been supported
by other workers.

7-Professor Oswald Tippo of Illinois University, U.S.A., proposed a system of

classification in 1942 for the major taxa of the whole of the plant kingdom. Here he
took into consideration the anatomical, paleobotanical and morphological characters
and followed Gilbert Smith and Eames to a great extent.

x He divided the Plant kingdom into 2 Subkingdoms, viz., Thailophyta and

Embryophyta, each having several Phyllas. In the Embryophyta there are 2
Phyllas, viz., Bryophyta and Tracheophyta. Phyllum Tracheophyta contains 4
subphyllas, viz., Psilopsida, Lycopsida, Sphenopsida and Pteropsida.

x Under Pteropsida there are 3 classes, viz:²Filicinae, Gymnospermae and

Angiospermae. Under class Angiospeimae there are 2 subclasses, viz.,
Dicotyledonae and Monocotyledonae. The arrangement of the orders and
families of these 2 sub classes have not been shown here.

8-Alfred Gunderson published a book in 1950, entitled ³)DPLOLHVRI'LFRW\OHGRQV´

In this book the class Dicotyledonae has been divided into 42 orders to include 242
families of which 240 are distributed under the 42 orders and 2 are placed at the end
as Incertae Sedis (put apart).

x Magnoliales is the first order among the dicots and is followed by Ranales.
The last order is Asterales containing 3 families, viz., Calyceraceae,
Compositae and Chicoriaceae. He has given cytological data for the families
as far as available.
 50

9-In 1954 L. A. Kuprianova, a Russian Botanist, published a scheme to show the

SK\WRJHQ\RIWKHFODVV0RQRFRW\OHGRQDHEDVHGRQ¶DO\QRORJLFDOGDWD6KHFRQFOXGHV
that the monocots have been derived from the Proangiospermae or Protoanthophyta
along different lines directly as well as through the Polycarpicae of the dicots.

x The Monocotyledonae therefore is polyphyletic in origin. The families

Liliaceae and Palmae are derived directly but separately from the
Proangiospermae, Alismataceae and Juncaginaceae from Ranales and Araceae
probably from Piperales of the Dicotyledonae.

x Liliaceae gave rise to Thurniaceae, Juncaceae and Cyperaceae in one line and
from Amaryllidaceae to Orchidaceae in another line. Palmae gave rise to
Cyclanthaceae, etc. to Graminae. Araceae gave rise to Lemnaceae, and the
Helobiae group of families were derived from Alismataceae and
Juncaginaceae.

x The problem of classifying the Angiospermae engaged the attention of many

recent workers and the systems proposed by A. Takhtajan and also by A.
Cronquist have been very popular as these are considered to be very near
perfection and show the natural affinities much more clearly between different
taxa of flowering plants

10-Armen Takhtajan is a reputed Palaeobotanist working in the Komarov Botanical

Institute of Leningrad. He has also made great contributions in the field of angiosperm
taxonomy and proposed a system of classification of angiosperms in 1942 based on
the structural types of gynoecium and placentation.

x Later on the proposed another system in 1959 where he splits Ranales into
Magnoliales, Illiciales, Tochodendrales, Ranales and Dilleniales. He also splits
Nymphaeales into Nymphaeales and Nelumbonales. According to him
Monocotyledonae was derived from Dicotyledonae along Nymphaeales
through aquatic medium.

x Magnoliales is the most primitive order among the Dicotyledonae from which
the other orders of this class originated. He further modified this system and
 51

SXEOLVKHG WKH VDPH LQ KLV ERRN HQWLWOHG ³)ORZHULQJ SODQWV 2ULJLQ DQG
'LVSHUVDO´LQ

x Here he adopted new terminology for the higher taxa also according to the
rules of nomenclature of plants. He therefore, calls the Angiospermae as
Magnoliophyta, the Dicotyledonae as Magnoliatae and the Monocotyledonae
as Liliatae.

x An outline of his system may be graphically represented as shown below

11-Arthur Cronquist of New York Botanic Garden drew out a scheme to show the
relation of the orders of Dicotyledonae in 1957. Later on in 1965 he published a paper
discussing the problem of classification of Flowering Plants where he recognised 5
complexes among the Dicotyledonae.

x Of these 5 complexes Ranalian complex is the most primitive and from this
complex the other complexes of Dicotyledonae as well as the class
Monocotyledonae have been derived. Finally he published his book,
 52

³(YROXWLRQDQG&ODVVLILFDWLRQRI)ORZHULQJ3ODQWV´LQZKHUHKHFODVVLILHG
the Dicots or the Magnoliatae into 6 subclasses, viz., Magnoliidae, Dilleniidae,
Caryophyllidae, Hamamelidae, Rosidae and Asteridae.

x Magnoliidae is the most primitive subclass from which Dilleniidae,

Caryophyllidae, Hamamelidae and Rosidae have been derived while Asteridae
originated from Rosidae. The relationship of these six subclasses has been
shown graphically by him with the help of balloon like figures, the sizes of the
balloons giving an idea of the number of orders and families in each subclass.

x This is reproduced below:

x He derives the names of the subclasses from an order included under it and
what forms the basal stock for the other orders in that subclass except in the
Asteridae where Asterales is the highest order containing the more recent
families among the dicots (or Magnoliatae). The most primitive order in that
subclass is the Gentianales which, however, does not form the basal stock for
other orders in Asteridae.

x As noted before Cronquist considers that the monocots or the class Liliatae
originated from some primitive dicot order included in the Ranalean complex,
 53

i.e., in the subclass Magnoliidae. Like Takhtajan he classifies the Liliatae into
4 subclasses, viz., Alismatidae, Arecidae, Liliidae and Commelinidae and
represents them graphically as shown below:

x In the revised edition of his book Cronquist names the 2 classes of

Angiosperms as Magnoliopsida and Liliopsida. Here he divides the Liliopsida
into 5 subclasses as graphically represented below:
 54

Cronquist from NY Botanical Garden and Takhtajan from Botanical Institute in St.
Petersburg (Leningrad).

x Working independently they both came up with strikingly similar

classifications around 1968. Both represent syntheses of data from virtually all
areas of botanical science, e.g. anatomy, genetics, physiology, paleobotany,
chemistry, etc.
x Cronquist's seems to have gained much wider reception and is now most
popular, probably in large part to being in English.
x Engler and Prantl system was more widely used for being more logic and easy
to use.
x Rendle system has gained, as well, popularity for his division of the dicots into
Apetalae, Monopetalae and Polypetalae.

C. Mez, a German botanist, advanced a theory that relationship between the major
groups of plants could be determined by serochemical tests or serum diagnosis.
Working with H. Ziegenspeck he prepared a phylogenetic tree in 1926 to show the
evolution of plant life from the Thallophyta to Angiosperms.

x Here they showed that among the dicots Trochodendraceae, magnoliaceae,

Anonaceae, Aristolochiaceae, Myrtaceae, etc. are the most primitive families
and the nomocots branched off from a stock which give rise to these primitive
dicots.

x They consider that Compositae is at the highest position in the main line of
evolution. Alismataceae, Juncaginaceae, Butomaceae, etc: occupy the basal
position of the monocotyledonous branch while the grass family,
Eriocaulaceae, Restionaceae, Orchidaceae and Zingiberaceae terminate the
branches at the top.
 55

x This is an attempt to solve the problem of tracing the phylogeny of the plant
groups from a different angle. This, however, has not gained much popularity.

Primitive and Advanced Characters in Angiosperms:

It is presumed that the immediate ancestor of the angiosperms had a strobilus-like
flower. In such a flower the thalamus was long and on this there were indefinite
QXPEHU RI VWDPHQV PLFURVSRURSK\OO¶V DQG SLVWLOV PHJDVSRURSK\OOV VSLUDOO\
arranged. In habit the plants were trees with secondary growth and broad net-veined
leaves. In course of evolution modifications appeared in all parts of the plant and in
tracing the phylogeny of different groups of plants are necessary to realise and
distinguish the primitive and advanced characters manifested in different groups
 56

In angiosperms the primitive and advanced characters are noted below

6-Taxonomy Revolt
From the time of Charles Darwin, it has been the dream of many biologists to
reconstruct the evolutionary history of all organisms on Earth and express it in the
form of a phylogenetic tree. Phylogeny uses evolutionary distance, or evolutionary
relationship, as a way of classifying organisms (taxonomy).
From the preceding survey of the development of plant taxonomy, we can observe
that the rules of classification are purely human invention and arbitrary, simply they
are matter of choice. Thus, taxonomists started to revolute with the revolution in the
microscopes and modern techniques. The invention of the scanning microscopes
made things easy to know and internal structures become more obvious. DNA
 57

sequences and the study of comparative genome organization in plants made it more
precise in detecting the relationships between the taxa. Simply, we can say that new
era of taxonomy has been started.
I. By the beginning of the 20th century most botanists realized there were some
problems with species concepts but most agreed that species were morphologically
distinct entities. Also by beginning of this century the floras of Europe and Northern
America were largely past the pioneer and consolidation phases and sufficiently well
known that many scientists began experimental or biosystematics investigations of
plants. Although not necessarily taxonomists and some not even botanists, their work
has had profound influences on plant systematic.
II- After the use of protein analyses in taxonomy, Plants become obvious that they are
photosynthetic eukaryotes and they are also called embryophytes since they produce
an embryo that is protected by tissues of the parent plant. Plants are derived from a
single branch of the evolutionary tree and hence said to be monophyletic. As per the
fossil evidence, plants were derived from green algae, 500 million years ago. Invading
the land was difficult for plants to adapt for several reasons. Hence, plants underwent
a number of adaptations like development of roots, stems, leaves and seeds.

Systematics takes taxonomy one step further by elucidating new methods and theories
that can be used to classify species. This classification is based on similarity traits and
possible mechanisms of evolution. In the 1950s, William Hennig, a German biologist,
proposed that systematics should reflect the known evolutionary history of lineages,
an approach he called phylogenetic systematics. Therefore, phylogenetic systematics
proposed that systematics should reflect the known evolutionary history of lineages,
an approach he called phylogenetic systematics. Therefore, phylogenetic
systematics is the field that deals with identifying and understanding the evolutionary
relationships among many different kinds of organisms. Phylogenic relationships have
been traditionally studied based on morphological data. Scientists used to examine
different traits or characteristics and tried to establish the degree of relatedness
between organisms. Then scientists realized that not all shared characteristics are
useful in studying relationships between organisms. This discovery led to a study of
systematics called cladistics. Cladistics is the study of phylogenetic relationships
based on shared, derived characteristics. There are two types of characteristics,
primitive traits and derived traits. Primitive traits are characteristics of organisms that
 58

were present in the ancestor of the group that is under study. They do not indicate
anything about the relationships of species within a group because they are inherited
from the ancestor to all of the members of the group. Derived traits are characteristics
of organisms that have evolved within the group under study. These characteristics
were not present in the ancestor. They are useful because they can help explain why
some species have common traits. The most likely explanation for the presence of a
trait that was not present in the ancestor of the whole group is that it evolved from a
more recent ancestor.

Two extensive groups of analyses exist to examine phylogenetic relationships:

Phenetic methods and cladistic methods. Phenetic methods, or numerical
taxonomy, use various measures of overall similarity for the ranking of species. They
can use any number or type of characters, but the data has to be converted into a
numerical value. The organisms are compared to each other for all of the characters
and then the similarities are calculated. After this, the organisms are clustered based
on the similarities. These clusters are called phenograms. They do not necessarily
reflect evolutionary relatedness. The cladistic method is based on the idea that
members of a group share a common evolutionary history and are more closely
related to members of the same group than to any other organisms. The shared
derived characteristics are called synapomorphies.

Phylogenetics can use both molecular and morphological data in order to classify
organisms. Molecular methods are based on studies of gene sequences. The
assumption of this methodology is that the similarities between genomes of organisms
will help to develop an understanding of the taxonomic relationship among these
species. Morphological methods use the phenotype as the base of phylogeny. These
two methods are related since the genome strongly contributes to the phenotype of the
organisms. In general, organisms with more similar genes are more closely related.
The advantage of molecular methods is that it makes possible the study of genes
without a morphological expression.

The relationships between species can be represented by a phylogenetic tree. This is a

graphical representation that has nodes and branches. The nodes represent taxonomic
units. Branches reflect the relationships of these nodes in terms of descendants. The
branch length usually indicates some form of evolutionary distance. The actual
 59

existing species called the operational taxonomic units (OTUs) are at the tip of the
branches on the external nodes.

Tree construction methods

Some methods have been proposed for the construction of phylogenetic trees. They
can be classified into two groups, the cladistic methods (maximum parsimony and
maximum likelihood) and the phenetic method (distance matrix method).

Maximum parsimony trees imply that simple hypotheses are more preferable than
complicated ones. This means that the construction of the tree using this method
requires the smallest number of evolutionary changes in order to explain the
phylogeny of the species under study. In the procedure, this method compares
different parsimonious trees and chooses the tree that has the least number of
evolutionary steps (substitutions of nucleotides in the context of DNA sequence).

Maximum likelihood This method evaluates the topologies of different trees and
chooses the best based on a specified model. This model is based on the evolutionary
process that can account for the conversion of one sequence into another. The
parameter considered in the topology is the branch length.

Distance matrix is a phenetic approach preferred by many molecular biologists for

DNA and protein work. This method estimates the mean number of changes (per site
in sequence) in two taxa that have descended from a common ancestor. There is much
information in the gene sequences that must be simplified in order to compare only
two species at a time. The relevant measure is the number of differences in these two
sequences, a measure that can be interpreted as the distance between the species in
terms of relatedness.

Molecular phylogeny was first suggested in 1962 by Pauling and Zuckerkandl. They
noted that the rates of amino acid substitution in animal hemoglobin were roughly
constant over time. They described the molecules as documents of evolutionary
history. The molecular method has many advantages. Genotypes can be read directly,
organisms can be compared even if they are morphologically very different and this
method does not depend on phenotype.
 60

Phylogeny is currently used in many fields such as molecular biology, genetics,

evolution, development, behaviour, epidemiology, ecology, systematics, conservation
biology, and forensics. Biologists can infer hypotheses from the structure of
phylogenetic trees and establish models of different events in evolutionary history.
Phylogeny is an exceptional way to organize evolutionary information. Through these
methods, scientists can analyse and elucidate different processes of life on Earth.

Today, biologists calculate that there are about 5 to 10 million species of organisms.
Different lines of evidence, including gene sequencing, suggest that all organisms are
genetically related and may descend from a common ancestor. This relationship can
be represented by an evolutionary tree, like the Tree of Life. The Tree of Life is a
project that is focused on understanding the origin of diversity among species using
phylogeny.

In this age new terminologies have been arisen;

Evolutionary relationships of a species or group of species can be used to build
taxonomic groups; the evolutionary history of a species or group of species is called
phylogeny.

R A phylogenetic tree is a hypothesis that depicts the evolutionary

relationships among groups of organisms; in detailed phylogenetic
trees, branch points indicate when new species diverged from a
common ancestor.

R Species (or groups of species) and their most recent common ancestor
form a clade within a phylogenetic tree.

R Phylogenetic trees constructed by modern methods can depict the

relationship between clades and taxonomic groups.

adaptation -- Change in a organism resulting from natural selection; a structure

which is the result of such selection.

anagensis -- Evolutionary change along an unbranching lineage; change

without speciation.
 61

ancestor -- Any organism, population, or species from which some other

organism, population, or species is descended by reproduction.

basal group -- The earliest diverging group within a clade; for instance, to
hypothesize that sponges are basal animals is to suggest that the lineage(s)
leading to sponges diverged from the lineage that gave rise to all other
animals.

clade -- A monophyletic taxon; a group of organisms which

includes the most recent common ancestor of all of its members
and all of the descendants of that most recent common ancestor.
From the Greek word "klados", meaning branch or twig.

cladogenesis -- The development of a new clade; the splitting of

a single lineage into two distinct lineages; speciation.

cladogram -- A diagram, resulting from a cladistic analysis,

which depicts a hypothetical branching sequence of lineages
leading to the taxa under consideration. The points of branching
within a cladogram are called nodes. All taxa occur at the
endpoints of the cladogram.

convergence -- Similarities which have arisen independently in

two or more organisms that are not closely related. Contrast with
homology.

Monophyletic taxon : A group composed of a collection of organisms, including the

most recent common ancestor of all those organisms and all the descendants of that
most recent common ancestor. A monophyletic taxon is also called a clade.
Monophyletic groups and lineages are the fundamental basis of taxonomy and
evolution as a whole really. Everything within a monophyletic group is the
descendent of a single common ancestor and thus are the clades we typically talk
about in biology and palaeontology.
 62

Paraphyletic taxon : A group composed of a collection of organisms, including the

most recent common ancestor of all those organisms. Unlike a monophyletic group,
a paraphyletic taxon does not include all the descendants of the most recent common
ancestor. Paraphyletic groups do not include all of the descendents of a single
common ancestor

Polyphyletic taxon : A group composed of a collection of organisms in which the

most recent common ancestor of all the included organisms is not included, usually
because the common ancestor lacks the characteristics of the group.

Polyphyletic taxa are considered "unnatural", and usually are reclassified once they
are discovered to be polyphyletic.  Polyphyletic groups are those which have multiple
origins and thus do not share a common ancestor or indeed much in common at all
aside from whatever trait holds them together.
 63

In phylogenetics, the crown group of a collection of species consists of the living

representatives of the collection together with their ancestors back to their most recent
common ancestor as well as all of that ancestor's descendants. It is thus aclade, a
group consisting of a species and all its descendants.

A pan-group or total group is the crown group and all organisms more closely
related to it than to any other extant organisms.

A stem group is a paraphyletic group composed of a pan-group or total

group, minus the crown group itself (and therefore minus all living members of the
pan-group). Total taxa and crown taxa require stem- based and node-based
definitions, respectively. Given that a total taxon includes all cur rently known and
potential extinct out- groups that are most closely related to a particular crown taxon
(Table 1), the total taxon must have a stem-based definition.
 64

A taxon (pl. taxa) is any group of organisms that is given a formal taxonomic
name. Loosely, a monophyletic taxon is one that includes a group of organisms
descended from a single ancestor, whereas a polyphyletic taxon is composed of
unrelated organisms descended from more than one ancestor.

These loose definitions fail to recognize the fact that all organisms are related,
therefore any conceivable group is logically "monophyletic". In modern usage,
 65

a monophyletic taxon is defined as one that includes the most recent common
ancestor of a group of organisms, and all of its descendents [as in (a)]. Such groups
are sometimes called holophyletic. It is also possible to recognize a
paraphyletic taxon as one that includes the most recent common ancestor, but not all
of its descendents [as in (c)]. A polyphyletic taxon is defined as one that does not
include the common ancestor of all members of the taxon [as in (b)].

Systems of plant taxonomy

A taxonomic system is a coherent whole of taxonomic judgments on circumscription
DQGSODFHPHQWRIWKHFRQVLGHUHGWD[D,WLVRQO\ D³V\VWHP´ LI LW is applied to a large
group of such taxa (for example, all the flowering plants).

There are two main criteria for this list. A system must be taxonomic, that is deal
with a large number of plants, by their botanical names. Secondly it must be a
system, i.e. deal with the relationships of plants. Although thinking about
relationships of plants had started much earlier (see history of plant systematic), such
systems really only came into being in the nineteenth century, as a result of an ever
increasing influx from all over the world of newly discovered plant species. The
eighteenth century saw some early systems, which are perhaps precursors rather than
full taxonomic systems.

Taxonomists tend to fall into two schools, "Evolutionary" or "traditional"

systematics versus "Phylogenetic" or "cladistic" systematics. Since the 1970s,
"phylogenetic systematics" has been replacing "traditional systematics" Because the
older literature and textbooks often use "evolutionary" classifications, taxonomists
must understand both systems.

An unfortunate circumstance for the taxonomists is that the two schools use the
same terms, but in different ways, and often refuse to recognize the alternative usage.
Evolutionary taxonomists claim to recognize only "monophyletic" taxa, but use the
term to include both holophyletic and paraphyletic taxa. Phylogenetic taxonomists
also claim to recognize only "monophyletic" taxa, but limit the term to what is
defined above as "holophyletic," although most reject that particular term. Both
schools reject the use of polyphyletic taxa, although most phylogenetic taxonomists
 66

would use that term to included paraphyletic taxa. Thus, the term holophyletic
applied to a taxon that includes all descendants of the common ancestor. The term is a
special case of monophyletic.

Trials of Plant classification

Within each Kingdom, the organisms are grouped into several Phyla (sing. Phylum),
also known as Divisions, which represent smaller groupings of more recognizable
forms. Although the Kingdom Animalia contains a large number of Phyla (such as
chordates [including vertebrates], echinoderms, annelids, arthropods, etc.), Kingdom
Plantae contains only ten phyla.

1. The Phylum Bryophyta (mosses, liverworts, hornworts), the most

primitive of all true plants, differs from other plant Phyla in that it is non-
vascular, meaning that it lacks water-conducting tissues which bring
water from the roots of the plant up into the crown, and that the
gametophyte (vegetative) generation predominates over the sporophyte
(reproductive) generation.
2. The Phyla Psilophyta (whisk ferns),
3. Lycopodiophyta (club-mosses, spike-mosses, quillworts),
4. Equisetophyta (horsetails),
5. Polypodiophyta (true ferns), including all vascular plants that reproduce
using spores, also form an ancient, though largely artificial, grouping and
are often referred to as Pteridophytes.
6. The Phyla Cycadophyta (cycads),
7. Ginkgophyta (ginkgo),
8. Gnetophyta (vessel-bearing gymnosperms),
9. Coniferophyta (conifers) form a second primitive grouping of vascular
plants, known as Gymnosperms, which are characterized by the presence
RIQDNHGVHHGVWKHOLWHUDOWUDQVODWLRQRI³J\PQR-VSHUP´
10. The final Phylum, Magnoliophyta, contains all of the vascular, flowering
plants that are considered to be the most advanced and recently-evolved
plants occurring on the planet today.
 71

They used both the chloroplasts and mitochondrial DNA sequences in their
classifications of the flowering plants. They tried to make a new classifications based
on new understanding of the evolutionary lines. Their classifications were much
similat to both Takhtayan and Cronquist, in spite of the ontogeny of both the
Magnoliophyta and Liliopsida. They considered each of them with separate root and
subdivided them into classes, superorders, orders and families.

The Evolution and Plant Systematic Diversity

The theory of evolution by Darwin turned all the taxonomical thinkings toward how
new species derived from preexisting ones? This we call Speciation. A lot off
scientific works have been done to explain this process and they concluded that:-
1-Speciation requires variation & isolation
2-Speciation may occur without geographic isolation
3-Hybridization is important cause of speciation
4-Polyploidy is common
At this stage scientists started to differentiate between plant taxonomy and plant
systematic. Plant systematics related to the science of diversity of plants & their
phylogenetic relationships keeping in mind that evolution is underlying process for
phylogeny and there are more than 270,000 spp of plants on Earth.

Another important aspect of plant systematics includes the collection of evidence for
determining relationships among species, that is, reconstructing phylogenies (the
development of hypothesis of evolutionary history; these are depicted as
(phylogenetic trees). Ultimately, these phylogenetic trees are used for revising
classifications. Classifying organisms in a manner that reflects evolutionary history
has been a longstanding goal of systematics since the work of Charles Darwin. An
evolutionary biologist of the twentieth century, Theodosius Dobzhansky, stated that
"Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." Modern
systematists feel that an important corollary of this famous statement is that "things
make much more sense in light of phylogeny." That is, understanding the
evolutionary history of organisms and their closest relatives is central to comparative
biology.
 72

Finally, systematists are often involved in elucidating the processes of evolution.

Through their study of plant diversity and natural populations , systematists may be
involved in analyzing the levels and distribution of genetic variation within and
among populations, estimating gene flow, analyzing isolating mechanisms and
species origins, and investigating evolutionary mechanisms such as
hybridization, polyploidy , and apomixis . As a result, one area of the broad
discipline of systematics becomes intertwined with the field of evolutionary biology.

Hierarchical classification systems, such as those we use today, can be traced to the
late 1600s and the work of Englishman John Ray. Ray developed a classification
system for eighteen thousand species and introduced the concept of
placing morphologicallysimilar species together in a larger group, the genus. The
most notable contributions during the 1600s and 1700s were those of Carl von Linné,
a Swedish naturalist better known as Carolus Linnaeus. Linnaeus is considered the
father of taxonomy, and is best remembered for developing the binomial system of
nomenclature, that is, the use of a two-part name for each species; the species name
consists of the genus name and the specific epithet. Linnaeus also wrote several major
books, including his two-volume catalog for plant identification, Species Plan-tarum,
which was published in 1753.

All of biology, including systematics, was changed by the publication of Charles

Darwin's The Origin of Species in 1859. Darwin's theory of evolution had an
important message for systematists: Species are dynamic, changing entities, and
classification is a way to order the products of evolution. Through efforts to reflect
evolutionary history in classifications, we see the first evidence of phylogenetic
classifications in the latter part of the nineteenth century²these are the roots of those
systems in use today. Throughout the 1900s, improved means of data gathering and
improved knowledge of the world's flora contributed to improvements in plant
classifications. As noted, current efforts in phylogeny reconstruction are being
incorporated into classifications, and systematics has expanded to include studies of
speciation as well as phylogeny and classification.

As the branch of biology concerned with understanding phylogeny and with

organizing biological diversity, systematics also encompasses the development of
classification systems for storage and retrieval of information. The major categories
 73

(ranks) of the botanical classification system still in wide use today are, in descending
order. Each organism can be placed into such a hierarchical system. Biological
systematists attempt to create classifications that reflect phylogeny; that is, a group of
closely related species will be classified into a genus; closely related genera are
placed in a family, and so on.

Recent analytical developments in inferring phylogeny have improved our estimates

of evolutionary history: now, in many groups of organisms, we can identify
specific lineages , or clades, of related species. Unfortunately, our classification
systems have not kept pace with our improved understanding of phylogeny. For this
reason, clades and formal classifications do not always agree. For example, many
textbooks follow the Five Kingdom approach to classification of life on Earth:
Kingdoms Monera, Protista, Fungi, Plantae, and Animalia. However, although this
approach was a vast improvement over previous Two Kingdom classifications
(Plantae and Animalia), it does not accurately reflect what we know about the history
of life on Earth. Other classification systems have been proposed, some recognizing
as many as eight or ten kingdoms, in an attempt to include the various major lineages
of life in a classification system. At present, none of these classifications adequately
meets the challenge of representing current hypotheses of the phylogeny of life.
Similar inconsistencies between estimates of phylogeny and classification can also be
seen at other levels of the taxonomic hierarchy; thus systematists are torn between
scientific reality and the tradition of classification. This inconsistency should not be
viewed as a failure of systematics; instead, it should indicate that biological
systematics is a dynamic area of biology, an unending synthesis that seeks to
incorporate new information into our estimates of phylogeny and our classification
systems that organize biological diversity. To improve the connection between our
understanding of phylogeny and classification, some systematists are attempting to
develop new methods of classification. One approach is to abandon the traditional
Linnaean hierarchy in favor of a strictly phylogenetic system of classification.

Because systematics is such a large, diverse field, a distinction is often made

among subdisciplines or subareas of endeavor. For example, plant nomenclature is the
application of names to taxafollowing a strict set of published rules (the International
Code of Botanical Nomenclature). Another key aspect is classification, which
 74

involves the organization of plants into groups or categories. As noted above,

classification traditionally has employed the taxonomic hierarchy of categories
established by Linnaeus (e.g., kingdom, division, class, etc.), but the utility of this
approach to classification has recently been questioned. Some would collectively
consider nomenclature and classification to represent the field of taxonomy and thus
make a distinction between this and systematics, the latter focusing on the study of
phylogeny and evolutionary biology. An integral part of modern systematics is
phylogeny reconstruction. Phylogenetic trees showing evolutionary relationships may
be reconstructed by using characters from a number of different sources, including
morphological, anatomical, chemical, and palynological (pollen). Cytogenetics
involves the study of chromosome morphology , as well as the investigation of
chromosome pairing at meiosis . This field of systematics has enjoyed a recent revival
with the application of chromosome painting techniques that facilitate the study of
chromosomal evolution. Chemosystematics is the application of chemical data in a
comparative fashion to study problems in systematics and to infer relationships based
on the presence or absence of certain chemical compounds in the organisms studied.
Recently, deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequence data have been employed to
reconstruct phylogeny, and at present serves as a major source of information to
establish evolutionary relationships.

Systematists are often broadly trained, having not only a knowledge of field biology,
but also ecology, life history, plant chemistry, population biology, speciation,
phylogenetics, and molecular biology. A modern system-atist is often, therefore, a
jack of all trades. The research of a systematist may involve field work and collection
in the tropics, as well as extensive laboratory work involving DNA sequencing and
gene cloning.

A fundamental goal of the field of systematics understands biological diversity and

the organization of this knowledge into a classification system that reflects the
evolutionary history of life. Hence, much of modern systematics is devoted to
building evolutionary trees of relationships. The ultimate goal of this massive
enterprise is the reconstruction of the "tree of life." Historically, most systematic
research was based on morphological and anatomical similarities of organisms.
Recently, however, the relative ease of DNA sequencing has provided another, very
 75

powerful approach to investigate relationships among species. DNA sequences and

other molecular data not only are of enormous utility for inferring phylogenetic
relationships, but also have other important applications. In much the same way that
DNA markers can be used with human subjects to determine paternity, these same
approaches can also be used for determining the parents of suspected plant and animal
hybrids. This too is yet another aspect of the highly diverse field of systematics.

Genetic differences in species

What causes differences? This explained as Darwinian evolution (struggle for
existence)
What is evolution?
Changes in gene frequencies; cumulative changes in genetics; descent with
modification
Sources of natural variation (i.e., genetic variability)
1. mutation
2. natural selection
3. genetic drift
4. gene flow
5. genetic recombination
The evidences for natural variations come from fossil record, structural & genetic
similarities, biogeography.
Evolution is ongoing

Thus, two major concepts impacted on classification:

1. Species have evolved from one another over time, i.e. species have evolutionary
histories - Phylogenies.

2. Species are not represented by ideal types as Aristotle thought, but by variable
populations.
 76

Since Darwin's time most systems of classification have tried to reflect evolutionary
relationships.

6-Taxonomy Revolt
The invention of the scanning microscopes made things easy to know and internal
structures become more obvious. DNA sequences and the study of comparative
genome organization in plants made it more precise in detecting the relationships
between the taxa. Simply, we can say that new era of taxonomy has been started.
I. By the beginning of the 20th century most botanists realized there were some
problems with species concepts but most agreed that species were morphologically
distinct entities.
II- After the use of protein analyses in taxonomy, Plants become obvious that they are
photosynthetic eukaryotes and they are also called embryophytes since they produce
an embryo that is protected by tissues of the parent plant. Plants are derived from a
single branch of the evolutionary tree and hence said to be monophyletic. As per the
fossil evidence, plants were derived from green algae, 500 million years ago. Invading
the land was difficult for plants to adapt for several reasons. Hence, plants underwent
a number of adaptations like development of roots, stems, leaves and seeds.

Recent systems of plant taxonomy

A taxonomic system LVD³V\VWHP´ LI LW LVDSSOLHGWRD large group of such taxa (for
example, all the flowering plants).

There are two main criteria for this list. A system must be taxonomic, that is deal
with a large number of plants, by their botanical names. Secondly it must be a
system, i.e. deal with the relationships of plants.

Evolutionary classification (includes both traditional systematics and modern

phylogenetics) 1. Living species are related to one another by descent from common
ancestors 2. Shared character states are clues to relatedness.

Plant classification

Kingdom Plantae contains only ten phyla.

 77

1-The Phylum Bryophyta (mosses, liverworts, hornworts),

2-The Phyla Psilophyta (whisk ferns),

3-Lycopodiophyta (club-mosses, spike-mosses, quillworts),

4- Equisetophyta (horsetails),

5- Polypodiophyta (true ferns),

6-The Phyla Cycadophyta (cycads),

7- Ginkgophyta (ginkgo),

8-Gnetophyta (vessel-bearing gymnosperms),

9- Coniferophyta (conifers)

10-The final Phylum, Magnoliophyta, contains all of the vascular, flowering

plants.

There were a lot off old and new systems in plant classifications, From the recent
ones are those of the APG group (Angiosperm Phylogeny Group) which will be
discussed below.

APG I ,II & III SYSTEMS

A fairly late development was the advent of cladistics, which only came into its own
with the availabity of the computer and the enormous flood of molecular data: the
APG III system is only the latest in a long line of systems. These systems considered
as artificial systems for its depending on one character only, molecular data.

In this systems molecular data were the tool of constructing these systems, and
according to these data the angiosperms classified into eight categories as
follows:-

x Amborella - a single species of shrub from New Caledonia

x Nymphaeales - about 80 species - water lilies and Hydatellaceae
 78

x Austrobaileyales - about 100 species of woody plants from various parts of the
world
x Mesangiospermae which divided into five groups:-

1- Chloranthales - several dozen species of aromatic plants with toothed

Leaves

2- Ceratophyllum - about 6 species of aquatic plants, perhaps most familiar as

aquarium plants

3- magnoliids - about 9,000 species, characterized by trimerous flowers, pollen

with one pore, and usually branching-veined leaves - for example magnolias, bay
laurel, and black pepper

4- eudicots - about 175,000 species, characterized by 4- or 5- merous flowers,

pollen with three pores, and usually branching-veined leaves - for example
sunflowers, petunia, buttercup, apples and oaks

5- monocots - about 70,000 species, characterized by trimerous flowers, a single

cotyledon, pollen with one pore, and usually parallel-veined leaves - for example
grasses, orchids, and palms

The exact relationship between these eight groups is not yet clear, although it has
been determined that the first three groups to diverge from the ancestral angiosperm
were Amborellales, Nymphaeales, and Austrobaileyales, in that order.

Details of APGII Classification System

The classification below is based on that presented on the Angiosperm Phylogeny.

1- Order: Amborellales

Contains a single species, Amborella trichopoda, endemic to the island of New

Caledonia and not encountered in southern Africa.

2-Order: Nymphaeales
 79

Contains two families: the Cabombaceae and the Nymphaeaceae (water lily family).
There are eight genera and 64 species worldwide, with two genera and three species
indigenous to southern Africa.

3-Order: Austrobaileyales

Contains three families: Austrobaileyaceae, Illiciaceae and Trimeniaceae, none of

which has indigenous representatives in southern Africa. However, Illicium verum
(Star anise) in the Illiciaceae, is cultivated in the region

4- Mesangiospermae group

1-Order: Chloranthales

Contains a single family, the Chloranthaceae, which is not encountered in southern

Africa.

2-Order: Ceratophyllales

Contains a single family, the Ceratophyllaceae, containing a single genus

Ceratophyllum. There are about six species, of which three are indigenous to southern
Africa.

3-Magnoliids

1-Order: Magnoliales

There are a total of five families of which one, the Annonaceae, is indigenous to
southern Africa. In addition the Magnoliaceae (magnolias) and Myristicaceae
(includes Nutmeg tree) are cultivated in southern Africa. Globally, there are about
154 genera and 2929 species of which eight genera and 14 species (all in
Annonaceae) are indigenous to southern Africa.

2-Order: Laurales
 80

There are seven families of which four are encountered in southern Africa. The
Lauraceae is the most diverse in the region with four indigenous genera and 10
species (including Stinkwood) as well as important cultivated species such as
Avocado, Cinnamon and Bay laurel (yielding bay leaves).

3-Order: Canellales

Nine genera and about 88 species in two families, Canellaceae and Winteraceae. Only
one species is indigenous to southern Africa and there is also one species cultivated in
the region.

4-Order: Piperales

This order contains four families, 17 genera and 2090 species, with three families,
four genera and six species indigenous to southern Africa. An additional one species
is naturalised and an additional 20 species are cultivated in the region.

4-Eudicotyledons

1-Order: Ranunculales

Seven families, 199 genera and 4445 species, with 18 genera and 47 species
indigenous to southern Africa, and four genera and six species naturalised. An
additional 24 genera and 57 species are cultivated in the region.

2-Order: Sabiales

One family, Sabiaceae, not encountered in southern Africa.

3-Order: Proteales

4-Order: Trochodendrales

5-Order: Buxales

6-Order: Gunnerales
 83

Three of the five families are encountered in southern Africa, Dioscoreaceae (yam
family), being by far the largest. Worldwide there are about 21 genera and 1037
species, of which two genera and 17 species (mainly Dioscorea) are indigenous to
southern Africa. In addition, one genus (Tacca) with two species is cultivated in the
region.

5- Order: Pandanales

Two of the five families are indigenous to southern Africa. There are 36 genera and
1345 species worldwide of which three genera (Talbotia, Xerophyta and Pandanus),
and 11 species are indigenous to southern Africa. An addition genus and two species
are cultivated in the region.

6- Order: Liliales

Four of the eleven families are encountered in southern Africa but only two of them
are indigenous. There are about 67 genera and 1558 species, of which 13 genera and
68 species are indigenous to southern Africa. An additional six genera and 17 species
are cultivated in southern Africa.

7- Order: Asparagales

Twenty-four families of which 17 are encountered in southern Africa. There are 1122
genera and 26071 species, of which 156 genera and 2849 species are indigenous to
southern Africa. An additional three genera and six species are naturalised, and an
additional 155 genera and 576 species are recorded as being cultivated in southern
Africa.

8-Commelinids group which include the following orders:-

1-Order: Arecales (palms)

The Arecaceae is the only family in the order. There are 189 genera and 2361 species
(cosmopolitan, mainly warmer regions), with five genera and six species indigenous
to southern Africa. An additional 103 genera and 276 species are cultivated in the
region.
 84

2- Order: Poales

Seven-teen families of which 10 are encountered in southern Africa.

There are 997 genera and 18325 species recorded worldwide, of which
230 genera and 1621 species are indigenous to southern Africa. An
additional 33 genera and 129 species are naturalised, and an additional 43
genera and 344 species are recorded as being cultivated in southern
Africa.

3- Order: Commelinales

Five families of which three are encountered in southern Africa. There are 68 genera
and 812 species recorded worldwide, of which 12 genera and 51 species are
indigenous to southern Africa. An additional two genera and two species are
naturalised, and an additional six genera and 16 species are recorded as being
cultivated in southern Africa.

4- Order: Zingiberales

Eight families of which seven are encountered in southern Africa. There are 92 genera
and 2111 species recorded worldwide, of which three genera and eight species are
indigenous to southern Africa. An additional two genera and four species are
naturalised, and an additional 15 genera and 35 species are recorded as being
cultivated in southern Africa.

Today, using DNA and other chemical properties, as well as electron microscopic
(EM) data of for example pollen grains, spores and flagellae, significantly different
results are reached, compared to the conceptions of, say, 10 years ago, when such data
were much less available. Another major development in this field of expertise is the
systematic processing of very high quantities of data with the computer. This
phylogenetic knowledge serves as the basis for a taxonomic system like the one
above, which gives the major branches of the tree a name. Developments are still very
much in progress, and they may be monitored almost live on the Angiosperm
Phylogeny Website*.
85
 86

Objections on the APG Systems of classification

1-Many orders and families were uncertain placed with unrelated groups.

2-There are many monophyletic orders.

3-Many orders represented by a single family.

4-The group Amborellales is represented by one species only.

5-There are numbers of families putted without assignment to orders.

6-The prefix Eu- isnot accepted by many scientists.

7-The Water Lily and a Magnoliad putted in a basal angiosperm clade without
assignment to either monocots or dicots.

8-The Liliales: the Liliaceae were split up into several families, and many of them
were moved over to a new order of Asparagales, which also holds the the Orchids.

9-A major change within Poales: the grasses putted far from the sedges, cattails
and even the... Bromeliads.

10-The change in Scrophulariaceae, who lost many species to Plantaginaceae, but

gained Buddlej, is unacceptable.

11-Many unrelated families joined together according to their DNA sequences.

12- Family Nymphaeaceae and Schisandraceae donot belonging to neither

monocots or dicots.

For that and many other objections, the APG systems considered artificial systems of
classification because it depends on one character only (DNA sequences).
Accordingly, taxonomists tried to achieve more natural system combining both the
DNA sequences with he other tools of taxonomy, such as palynology, seed
PRUSKRORJ\DQDWRP\«HWF
 87

Shipnov system (2005)

Recent cladistic analyses are revealing the phylogeny of flowering plants in

increasing detail, and there is support for the monophyly of many major groups above
the family level. With many elements of the major branching sequence of phylogeny
established, a revised suprafamilial classification of flowering plants becomes both
feasible and desirable. In this system a classification of 462 flowering plant families
in 40 putatively monophyletic orders and a small number of monophyletic,
informal higher groups. The latter are the monocots, commelinoids, eudicots, core
eudicots, rosids including eurosids I and II, and asterids including euasterids I and II.
Under these informal groups there are also listed a number of families without
assignment to order. At the end of the system is an additional list of families of
uncertain position for which no firm data exist regarding placement anywhere within
the system.

This system (Shipnov System) basically reflects the work of the Angiosperm
Phylogeny Group (APG)*. Today, using DNA and other chemical properties, as
well as electron microscopic (EM) data of for example pollen grains, spores and
flagellae, significantly different results are reached, compared to the conceptions of,
say, 10 years ago, when such data were much less available. Another major
development in this field of expertise is the systematic processing of very high
quantities of data with the computer. The results are visualized in cladograms; a
sort of evolutionary trees, showing the exact relationships between examined
specimen.

First: have a look at the old Monocots and Dicots. You'll find them now
accompanied by two sister groups: a grade of "basal Angiosperms" including the
Water Lily and a Magnoliad clade. So, the latter two do no longer belong to the
true Dicots, or to the Monocots. Another major new development took place within
and around the Liliales: the Liliaceae were split up into several families, and many
of them were moved over to a new order of Asparagales, which also holds the the
Orchids. A major change within Poales too: the grasses got company here from
the sedges, cattails and even the... Bromeliads. Not directly visible in the above
 88

system is the change in Scrophulariaceae, who lost many species to Plantaginaceae,

but gained Buddleja. And these are just a few examples of the many changes...

Shipnov has replaced some of the names used by Judd and the APG with alternatives
that are more in line with standards in the field of taxonomical nomenclature. From
his observations and rejection in the APG systems the following items:-

1- For instance, "Euasterids I" became "Lamianae".

2-The termination -anae indicates a superorder; Shipnov has used this throughout,
instead of the obsolete -iflorae.

3- So the author doesn't like numbers in names, or Eu- prefixes when they are not
explicit: what is eu/good then (Eukaryotes is OK, but he find Euasterids a bad name).

4-As far as he is concerned, Dicots and Gramineae may stay; they apparently
deserved their unique names, and some respect for this is only befitting.

The author goals

1) A clade is a group of plants, animals or other organisms, consisting of an ancestral

species and all her descendants (= a monophyletic group = a natural group = a particular
branch of the tree of life, including all side-branches of that branch). The word clade
comes from cladogram and cladistics, and the stem of those words was taken from Greek:
klados = branch. An evolutionary grade is a set of neighboring side-branches (clades),
having a similar degree of development. The common ancestor is not exclusive here, but is
also an ancestor of an apical (higher developed) clade. A grade is often defined in relation to
the apical clade, which is by the absence of higher developed characters. But when a higher
developed group is a clade, it does not follow that the remaining lower developed species also
belong to a single clade.

2) The names Malvanae and Lamianae are intended as formal taxonomic counterparts for the
informal phylogenetic terms of the APG, viz.: "Eurosids II" and "Euasterids I", respectively.

3) The termination -iflorae for superorders reminds of the 19th century order of Tubiflorae, later
elevated to the rank of superorder (and in the above system to subclass). Armen Takhtajan
 89

proposed the termination -anae for superorders in 1967, and by the end of the 1980s this was in
common use ("florae" does sound odd for non-floweringplants).

4) Take the example of the Monocots and Dicots. There have been attempts in the recent past to
replace these names by Liliidae and Magnoliidae, respectively. That is, when the author ranked
them as subclasses. In the above system they are seen as classes, so it should have been
Liliopsida and Magnoliopsida then. Such systematic names are not explicit; they depend on
context, the view of the author. Another argument against such names is that they need to be
replaced when there are new insights in phylogeny. In fact, this is the case with both names
in this example.

5-The Liliads do not get any higher than the level of order at the moment (Liliales); the
superorder turned out to be not a clade, it's a grade at best.

6- The Magnoliads are taken out of the Dicots, so the name Magnoliopsida now only refers to a
small group, sister to Monocots and Dicots s.s.. The familiarity, stability and the unambiguous
character of many older names would compensate for a possible minor shift in signification.
What counts is that the reader has a clue about the nature of the group in question.

Now a day the Aristotle Type Concept ( Maintained that species non-varying and
fixed entities and based on an ideal or fixed embodiment or type) came into
consideration and taxonomists feel convenient on relaying on it.
The Botanical Classification of Angiospermae by APG III, 2009
The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group
The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group Webside
with the classification of the orders
and families of flowering plants according APG III.
The APG III system is a modern system of plant taxonomy for flowering plant
classification. It was published in October 2009 by the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group
APG, in the Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 6½ years after its predecessor,
the APG II system was published in the same journal.

The APG III system recognized all of the 45 orders of the previous system, as well as
14 new ones. The order Ceratophyllales was erroneously marked as a new order, but it
had been recognized in both of the previous APG systems.
 90

The designation of alternaWLYH³EUDFNHWHGIDPLOLHV´ZDVDEDQGRQHGLQ$3*,,,

because its inclusion in the previous system had been unpopular. APG III recognized
415 families, 42 fewer than in the previous system. Forty-IRXURIWKH³EUDFNHWHG
IDPLOLHV´ZHUHGLVFRQWLQXHGDQGother families were discontinued as well.

20 families were accepted in the APG III system which had not been in the previous
system, and a few families were moved to a different position.

The number of families not placed in any order was reduced from 39 to 10.
Apodanthaceae and Cynomoriaceae were placed among the angiosperms, incertae
sedis, that is, not in any group within the angiosperms. Eight other families were
placed incertae sedis in various supra-ordinal groups within the angiosperms.

The circumscription of the family Icacinaceae remains especially doubtful. Apodytes,

Emmotum, Cassinopsis, and a few other genera were provisionally retained within it
until further studies can determine whether they properly belong there.

Three genera Gumillea, Nicobariodendron, and Petenaea were placed within the
angiosperms incertae sedis. Gumillea had been unplaced in APG II. Nicobariodendron
and Petenaea were newly added to the list.

Herbaria and botanic gardens such as RBG Kew, RBG Edinburgh, the Natural History
0XVHXP/RQGRQWKH0XVpH1DWLRQDOG¶+LVWRLUHQDWXUHOOH3DULV&RQVHUYDWRLUHHW
Jardin Botaniques (Geneva) and the Nationaal Herbarium Nederland (Leiden, Utrecht
and Wageningen) have started to take up the APG system for organising their
collection. Below is a summary of the APG III classification.

Angiospermae
1- Basal Order - Basis-Ordnungen Roots
Amborellales , Nymphaeales (incl.: Barclayaceae, Euryalaceae, Cabombaceae,
Hydatellaceae), Austrobaileyales (Incl.:Austrobaileyaceae, Trimeniaceae,
Schisandraceae (incl.: Illiciaceae) & Chloranthales
 91

2-Magnoliids (Magnoliopsida, fr.: Magnoliidées)

Canellales (Incl. Canellaceae, Winteraceae) ;Piperales (Incl. Aristolochiaceae,
Hydnoraceae, Lactoridaceae, Piperaceae (Pfeffergewächse) (incl.: Peperomiaceae),
Saururaceae ;Laurales (Incl. Atherospermataceae, Calycanthaceae (incl.:
Idiospermaceae), Gomortegaceae, Hernandiaceae (incl.: Gyrocarpaceae), Lauraceae
(Lorbeergewächse) (Incl.: Cassythaceae), Monimiaceae, Siparunaceae) &
Magnoliales (Incl. Annonaceae, Degeneriaceae, Eupomatiaceae, Himantandraceae,
Magnoliaceae (Magnoliengewächse), Myristicaceae).

3-Monocotyledoneae (Monocots, fr.: Monocotylédones)

former: Non-Commelinids
Acorales (Incl. Arocaceae); Alismatales (Incl. Alismataceae (Froschlöffelgewächse)
(incl.: Limnocharitaceae), Aponogetonaceae, Araceae (incl.: Lemnaceae),
Butomaceae (Schwanenblumengewächse), Cymodoceaceae, Hydrocharitaceae (incl.:
Najadaceae), Juncaginaceae, Posidoniaceae, Potamogetonaceae (incl.:
Zannichelliaceae), Ruppiaceae, Scheuchzeriaceae, Tofieldiaceae, Zosteraceae);
Asparagales (Incl. Amaryllidaceae, (incl.: Agapanthaceae, Alliaceae
(Zwiebelgewächse)), Asparagaceae (Spargelgewächse) (incl.: Agavaceae,
Anemarrhenaceae, Anthericaceae, Aphyllanthaceae, Hesperocallidaceae,
Hyacinthaceae, Laxmanniaceae, Ruscaceae, Convallariaceae, Eriospermaceae,
Dracaenaceae, Nolinaceae, Behniaceae, Herreriaceae, Hostaceae, Themidaceae),
Asteliaceae, Blandfordiaceae, Boryaceae, Doryanthaceae, Hypoxidaceae, Iridaceae
(incl.: Geosiridaceae), Ixioliriaceae, Lanariaceae, Orchidaceae, (incl.: Apostasiaceae,
Cypripediaceae), Tecophilaeaceae (incl.: Cyanastraceae), Xanthorrhoeaceae, (incl.:
[+Asphodelaceae] (Affodillgewächse), +Hemerocallidaceae], (incl.: Phormiaceae ),
Xeronemataceae, Dioscoreales (Incl. Burmanniaceae, (incl.: Thismiaceae),
Dioscoreaceae (Yamswurzelgewächse), (incl.: Taccaceae, Trichopodaceae),
Nartheciaceae); Liliales (Incl. Alstroemeriaceae, (incl.: Luzuriagaceae),
Campynemataceae, Colchicaceae (incl: Uvulariaceae), Corsiaceae, Liliaceae (incl.
Calochortaceae), Melanthiaceae (incl.: Trilliaceae (Dreiblattgewächse)),
Petermanniaceae Philesiaceae, Ripogonaceae, Smilacaceae); Pandanales (Incl.
Cyclanthaceae, Pandanaceae (Schraubenbaumgewächse), Stemonaceae (incl.:
 92

Pentastemonaceae), Triuridaceae (incl.: Lacandoniaceae), Velloziaceae &

Petrosaviales (Incl. Petrosaviaceae, (incl.: Japonoliriaceae)
Commelinids (fr.: Commelinidées) unassigned at ordinal level
no order Dasypogonaceae (incl. Calectasiaceae)
Arecales (Arecaceae = Palmae (Palms - Palmen); Poales (Incl. Bromeliaceae,
graminoid: Poaceae (Gräser), Anarthriaceae, Centrolepidaceae, Ecdeiocoleaceae,
Flagellariaceae, Joinvilleaceae, Restionaceae, cyperoid: Cyperaceae, Juncaceae,
Thurniaceae, Sparganiaceae (Igelkolbengewächse), Typhaceae
(Rohrkolbengewächse), Eriocaulaceae, Hydatellaceae, Mayacaceae, Rapateaceae,
Xyridaceae (incl. Abolbodaceae); Commelinales (Incl. Commelinaceae
(Scheibenblumengewächse), (incl.: Cartonemataceae), Haemodoraceae,
Hanguanaceae, Philydraceae, Pontederiaceae ) ; Zingiberales (Incl. Cannaceae,
Costaceae, Heliconiaceae, Lowiaceae, Marantaceae, Musaceae (Bananengewächse),
Strelitziaceae, Zingiberaceae & Ceratophyllales (Incl. Ceratophyllaceae )
4-Eudicotyledons / Eudicots
Peripheral Eudicots
Unassigned to order Sabiaceae (Incl.: Meliosmaceae)
Buxales (Incl. Buxaceae (incl.: Stylocerataceae, [+Didymelaceae]), Haptanthaceae)
Proteales (Incl. Nelumbonaceae (Lotusgewächse), Platanaceae Proteaceae
(Silberbaumgewächse).
Ranunculales (Incl. Berberidaceae (incl.: Leonticaceae, Nandinaceae, dophyllaceae),
Circaeasteraceae, (incl.: Kingdoniaceae), Eupteleaceae, Lardizabalaceae (incl.:
Sargentodoxaceae), Menispermaceae, Papaveraceae (incl.: Hypecoaceae,
[+Fumariaceae], [+Pteridophyllaceae]), Ranunculaceae (Hahnenfussgewächse) (incl.:
Glaucidiaceae, Hydrastidaceae)).
Trochodendrales (Incl. Trochodendraceae, [+Tetracentraceae])

5-Core-Eudicots / Core 'Eudicotyledons

non-Rosid, non-Asterid
Unassigned to order Dilleniaceae
Berberidopsidales (Incl. Aextoxicaceae, Berberidopsidaceae);Caryophyllales
(Incl.three clades A- Clade of 'core caryophyllids': Achatocarpaceae,
Amaranthaceae (Fuchsschwanzgewächse) (incl,: Chenopodiaceae, Dysphaniaceae),
Caryophyllaceae (Nelkengewächse),
 93

B-'succulent' clade: Basellaceae, Cactaceae (Kakteen), Didiereaceae,

Halophytaceae., Portulacaceae (incl.: Hectorellaceae), C-'third' clade: Aizoaceae
(incl.: Tetragoniaceae), Asteropeiaceae, Barbeuiaceae, Dioncophyllaceae,
Molluginaceae, Nepenthaceae, Nyctaginaceae, Physenaceae, Phytolaccaceae (incl.:
Agdestidaceae), Gisekiaceae, Anacampserotaceae (n), Eggli & Nyffeler (2010),
Limeaceae (n), Lophiocarpaceae (n), Doweld & Reveal (2008), Montiaceae (n),
Talinaceae (n), Rhabdodendraceae, Sarcobataceae, Simmondsiaceae,
Stegnospermataceae, Ancistrocladaceae, Droseraceae (Sonnentaugewächse),
Drosophyllaceae , Frankeniaceae, Tamaricaceae, Plumbaginaceae, Polygonaceae
(Knöterichgewächse),
Gunnerales (Incl. Gunneraceae, [+Myrothamnaceae]); Santalales (Incl.
Balanophoraceae (n), Loranthaceae, Olacaceae (incl.: Erythropalaceae ,
Octoknemaceae), Opiliaceae, Misodendraceae, Santalaceae (Sandelholzgewächse)
(incl.: Eremolepidaceae, Viscaceae), Schoepfiaceae (n); Saxifragales (Incl. three
subclasses : possible subclass 1:Crassulaceae, Aphanopetalaceae (formerly in
Cunoniaceae), Haloragaceae (Haloragidaceae), [+Penthoraceae], [+Tetracarpaeaceae],
possible subclass 2: Grossulariaceae, Iteaceae, (incl.: [+Pterostemonaceae]), possible
subclass 3: Saxifragaceae (Steinbrechgewächse), Altingiaceae, Cercidiphyllaceae,
Paeoniaceae, Daphniphyllaceae, Hamamelidaceae (incl.: Rhodoleiaceae),
Peridiscaceae, (incl.: Medusandraceae)

6-Rosids (fr.: Rosidées)

Vitales (Incl. Vitaceae (incl.: Leeaceae)
7- Core-Eudicots: Rosids: Eurosids (I)
Celastrales (Incl. Celastraceae (incl.: Brexiaceae, Canotiaceae, Plagiopteraceae,
Siphonodontaceae, Stackhousiaceae, [+Lepuropetalaceae] Parnassiaceae,
Pottingeriaceae), Lepidobotryaceae);
Cucurbitales (Incl. nisophylleaceae, Begoniaceae, Coriariaceae, Corynocarpaceae,
Cucurbitaceae, Datiscaceae, Tetramelaceae); Fabales (Incl. Fabaceae = Leguminosae
(Schmetterlingsblütler), Polygalaceae (incl.: Xanthophyllaceae), Quillajaceae,
Surianaceae (incl.: Stylobasiaceae); Fagales (Incl. Betulaceae (birch -
Birkengewächse) (incl. Carpinaceae, Corylaceae), Casuarinaceae, Fagaceae (beech
family - Buchengewächse), Juglandaceae (walnut family - Walnussgewächse), (incl.
[+Rhoipteleaceae]), Myricaceae, Nothofagaceae, Ticodendraceae); Malpighiales
 94

(Incl. Achariaceae, Balanopaceae, Bonnetiaceae, Calophyllaceae, Caryocaraceae,

Centroplacaceae, Chrysobalanaceae, Clusiaceae = Guttiferae, [+Dichapetalaceae],
[+Euphroniaceae], Ctenolophaceae, Elatinaceae, Euphorbiaceae (incl.: Peraceae,
Stilaginaceae), Goupiaceae, Humiriaceae, Hypericaceae, Irvingiaceae, Ixonanthaceae,
Lacistemataceae, Linaceae (incl.: Hugoniaceae), Lophopyxidaceae, Putranjivaceae,
Rafflesiaceae (n), Malpighiaceae, Ochnaceae, (incl.: [+Medusagynaceae],
[+Quiinaceae]), Pandaceae, Passifloraceae, (incl.: [+Malesherbiaceae],
[+Turneraceae]), Peridiscaceae, Phyllanthaceae (incl.: Bischofiaceae,
Hymenocardiaceae, Uapacaceae), Picrodendraceae (incl.: Androstachydaceae),
Podostemaceae, Rhizophoraceae, [+Erythroxylaceae], Salicaceae (incl.:
Flacourtiaceae, Neumanniaceae, Scyphostegiaceae), [+Trigoniaceae], Violaceae;
Oxalidales (Incl. Brunelliaceae, Cephalotaceae, Connaraceae, (incl.: Baueraceae,
Davidsoniaceae, Eucryphiaceae), Cunoniaceae Elaeocarpaceae (incl.:
Tremandraceae). Huaceae, Oxalidaceae (incl.: Averrhoaceae));
Rosales (Incl. Barbeyaceae, Cannabidaceae = Cannabaceae, Dirachmaceae,
Elaeagnaceae, Moraceae, Rhamnaceae, Rosaceae, Ulmaceae, Urticaceae (incl.:
Cecropiaceae); Zygophyllales (Incl. Krameriaceae, Zygophyllaceae (incl.:
Balanitaceae))

8- Core-Eudicots: Rosids: Eurosids II (malvids)

Brassicales (Incl. Akaniaceae, (incl.: [+Bretschneideraceae]), Bataceae,
Brassicaceae, Capparaceae = Capparidaceae (~ in Brassicaceae)(incl.:
Oceanopapaveraceae), Caricaceae, Cleomaceae, Emblingiaceae, Gyrostemonaceae,
Koeberliniaceae, Limnanthaceae, Moringaceae, Pentadiplandraceae, Resedaceae,
Salvadoraceae, Setchellanthaceae, Tovariaceae, Tropaeolaceae); Crossosomatales
(Incl. Crossosomataceae, Aphloiaceae., Geissolomataceae, Guamatelaceae,
Stachyuraceae, Staphyleaceae, Strasburgeriaceae, (incl.: Ixerbaceae)); Geraniales
(Incl. Geraniaceae (Storchschnabelgewächse), (incl.: [+Hypseocharitaceae]),
Melianthaceae, (incl.: Greyiaceae), Francoaceae, ivianiaceae, Ledocarpaceae;
Huerteales (Incl. Dipentodontaceae. Gerrardinaceae. Tapisciaceae.);
Malvales (Incl. Bixaceae, (incl.: [+Cochlospermaceae], [+Diegodendraceae]),
Cistaceae, Cytinaceae*, Dipterocarpaceae, Malvaceae (incl.: Bombacaceae,
Sterculiaceae, Tiliaceae), Muntingiaceae, Neuradaceae, Sarcolaenaceae,
Sphaerosepalaceae, Thymelaeaceae (incl.: Aquilariaceae, Gonystylaceae,
 95

Tepuianthaceae)); Myrtales (Incl. Alzateaceae, Combretaceae, Crypteroniaceae,

Heteropyxidaceae, Lythraceae (incl.: Punicaceae, Sonneratiaceae, Trapaceae),
Melastomataceae, (incl.: [+Memecylaceae]), Myrtaceae (Myrtengewächse), (incl.:
Heteropyxidaceae, Psiloxylaceae), Onagraceae, Penaeaceae, (incl.: Oliniaceae,
Rhynchocalycaceae), Vochysiaceae); Picramniales (Incl. Picramniaceae);
Sapindales (Incl. Anacardiaceae (incl.: Blepharocaryaceae, Julianaceae, Pistaciaceae,
Podoaceae), Biebersteiniaceae, Burseraceae, Kirkiaceae, Meliaceae (incl.:
Aitoniaceae), Nitrariaceae, (incl.: [+Peganaceae], Tetradiclidaceae), Rutaceae, (incl.:
Cneoraceae, Flindersiaceae, Ptaeroxylaceae), Sapindaceae (incl.: Aceraceae,
Hippocastanaceae), Simaroubaceae (incl.: Leitneriaceae)

9-Core-Eudicots: Asterids
Cornales (Incl. Cornaceae (incl.: Alangiaceae, Davidiaceae, Mastixiaceae,
[+Nyssaceae]), Curtisiaceae, Grubbiaceae, Hydrangeaceae (incl.: Philadelphaceae),
Hydrostachyaceae, Loasaceae); Ericales (Incl. Actinidiaceae, Balsaminaceae,
Clethraceae, Cyrillaceae, Diapensiaceae, Ebenaceae (incl.: Lissocarpaceae), Ericaceae
(incl.: Empetraceae, Epacridaceae, Monotropaceae, Pyrolaceae), Fouquieriaceae,
Lecythidaceae (incl.: Asteranthaceae, Barringtoniaceae, Foetidiaceae,
Napoleonaeaceae, Scytopetalaceae), Marcgraviaceae, Mitrastemonaceae*,
Pentaphylacaceae, (incl.: [+Ternstroemiaceae]), Polemoniaceae (incl.: Cobaeaceae),
Primulaceae, (incl.: Maesaceae, Myrsinaceae, Aegicerataceae, Coridaceae,
Theophrastaceae), Roridulaceae, Sapotaceae (incl.: Sarcospermataceae),
Sarraceniaceae, [+Sladeniaceae], Styracaceae, Symplocaceae, Tetrameristaceae,
(incl.: [+Pellicieraceae]), Theaceae,

10-Core-Eudicots: Asterids, Euasterids I (lamiids)

Unassigned to order Boraginaceae, Icacinaceae, Metteniusaceae, Oncothecaceae,
Vahliaceae
Garryales (Incl. Eucommiaceae, Garryaceae, (incl.: [+Aucubaceae]); Gentianales
(Incl. Apocynaceae (incl.: Asclepiadaceae, Periplocaceae), Gelsemiaceae,
Gentianaceae (incl. (incl.: Potaliaceae, Saccifoliaceae), Loganiaceae, (incl.:
Antoniaceae, Geniostomaceae, Mitreolaceae, Polypremaceae, Spigeliaceae,
Strychnaceae), Rubiaceae (incl.: Dialypetalanthaceae, Henriqueziaceae, Naucleaceae,
Theligonaceae)); Lamiales (Incl. Acanthaceae (incl. (incl.: Avicenniaceae,
 96

Mendonciaceae, Nelsoniaceae, Thunbergiaceae), Bignoniaceae, Byblidaceae,

Calceolariaceae, Carlemanniaceae, Gesneriaceae, Lamiaceae = Labiatae (incl.:
Dicrastylidaceae = Chloanthaceae, Symphoremataceae), Lentibulariaceae,
Linderniaceae*, Martyniaceae, Oleaceae, Orobanchaceae, Paulowniaceae,
Pedaliaceae Trapellaceae), Phrymaceae, Plantaginaceae (incl.: Callitrichaceae,
Ellisiophyllaceae, Globulariaceae, Hippuridaceae), Plocospermataceae,
Schlegeliaceae, Scrophulariaceae (incl.: Buddlejaceae, Myoporaceae), Stilbaceae
(incl.: Retziaceae), Tetrachondraceae, Thomandersiaceae*, Verbenaceae); Solanales
(Incl. Convolvulaceae, (incl.: Cuscutaceae, Humbertiaceae), Hydroleaceae,
Montiniaceae (incl.: Kaliphoraceae), Solanaceae (incl.: Duckeodendraceae,
Goetzeaceae, Nolanaceae), Sphenocleaceae)

11-Core-Eudicots: Asterids, Euasterids II (campanulids)

(fr.: Campanulidées ou Euastéridées II)

Apiales (Incl. Apiaceae, (incl.: Mackinlayaceae = Actinotaceae = Mackinlayoideae),

Araliaceae, Griseliniaceae, Myodocarpaceae, Pennantiaceae, Pittosporaceae,
Toricelliaceae (incl.: Aralidiaceae, Melanophyllaceae)); Aquifoliales (Incl.
Aquifoliaceae, Cardiopterigaceae = Cardiopteridaceae, (incl.: Leptaulaceae),
Helwingiaceae, Phyllonomaceae, (=Dulongiaceae), Stemonuraceae); Asterales (Incl.
Alseuosmiaceae, Argophyllaceae, Asteraceae = Compositae (Sunflower family -
Korbblütengewächse), Calyceraceae, Campanulaceae, (incl.: [+Lobeliaceae]),
Goodeniaceae (incl.: Brunoniaceae), Menyanthaceae, Pentaphragmataceae,
Phellinaceae, Rousseaceae, Stylidiaceae (incl.: [+Donatiaceae]), Bruniales (Incl.
Bruniaceae, Columelliaceae, (incl.: Desfontainiaceae)); Dipsacales (Incl. Adoxaceae
(incl.: Sambucaceae, Viburnaceae), Caprifoliaceae, (incl.: [+Diervillaceae],
[+Dipsacaceae] Triplostegiaceae, [+Linnaeaceae], [+Morinaceae], [+Valerianaceae]));
Escalloniales (Incl. Escalloniaceae, (incl.: Eremosynaceae, Polyosmaceae));
Tribelaceae); Paracryphiales (Incl. Paracryphiaceae, (incl.: Quintiniaceae*,
Sphenostemonaceae).

Taxa of uncertain position at the highest group level

Unassigned to order
 97

Apodanthaceae (3 genera), Cynomoriaceae, Gumillea Ruiz & Pav., Petenaea Lundell

(probably: Malvales) Nicobariodendron (Simmons, 2004; probably: Celastraceae).

What is Biodiversity?

Biodiversity or biological diversity in full has been defined as "the variability among
living organisms from all sources including, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic
systems and the ecological complexes of which they are part: this includes diversity
within species, between species and of ecosystems".

Illustrations of various levels of biodiversity

Why taxonomy is important for biodiversity-based science

 98

Taxonomy usually refers to the theory and practice of describing, naming and
classifying living things. Such work is essential for the fundamental understanding of
biodiversity and its conservation. Yet the science behind delimiting the natural world
LQWR ³VSHFLHV´ LV RIWHQ QHJOHFWHG PLVXQGHUVWRRG RU HYHQ GHULGHG LQ VRPH TXDUWHUV
Whether we realise it or not, we are all inherent taxonomists. We classify things
around us much in the same way as taxonomists distinguish between species; by
assigning similar objects into recognisable groups. In the kitchen we separate our
FXWOHU\E\NQLIHIRUNDQGVSRRQDQGZRXOGQ¶WGUHDPRISXWWLQJDQRQLRQRUDpotato in
the fruit bowl. In fact our lives are filled with the need to separate and classify the
many different objects that surround us.

It is the same with biodiversity. Most people concerned with biodiversity conservation
FRPPRQO\XVHWKHWHUP³VSHFLHV´ZLWKRXWDFOHDUXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIZKDWVHSDUDWHVRQH
species from another, and why. This is where the science of taxonomy plays an
integral role. Species are distinguished from each other in a number of ways.
Although the definition of species has been the cause of significant historical debate,
put simply, species are organisms usually recognized as morphologically distinct from
other groups.

Despite the on-going biodiversity crisis, the number of new species described per
scientist has not increased in the past 60-70 years. This is having a huge impact on
conservation science. Many species will become extinct before they are described and
we remain continually unaware of the total numbers of species that comprise global
biodiversity. This is acknowledged by the Convention of Biodiversity and its
VLJQDWRULHVDVD³WD[RQRPLFLPSHGLPHQW´

In short, taxonomy provides the basic foundations of conservation practice and

sustainable management of the world remaining resources. It is perhaps time to better
integrate the science of taxonomy back into the conservation world to meet the global
biodiversity challenge that we currently face.

Taxonomy is a scientific discipline that has provided the universal naming and
classification system of biodiversity for centuries and continues effectively to
accommodate new knowledge. A recent publication by Garnett and Christidis
expressed concerns regarding the difficulty that taxonomic changes represent for
 99

conservation efforts and proposed the establishment of a system to govern taxonomic

FKDQJHV 7KHLU SURSRVDO WR ³UHVWULFW WKH IUHHGRP RI WD[RQRPLF DFWLRQ´ WKURXJK
JRYHUQLQJVXEFRPPLWWHHVWKDWZRXOG³UHYLHZWD[RQRPLFSDSHUVIRUFRPSOLDQFH´DQG
WKHLUDVVHUWLRQWKDW³WKH VFLHQWLILFFRPPXQLW\¶V IDLOXUHWRJRYHUQWD[RQRP\WKUHDWHQV
the effectiveness of global efforts to halt biodiversity loss, damages the credibility of
VFLHQFH DQG LV H[SHQVLYH WR VRFLHW\´ DUH IODZHG LQ PDQ\ UHVSHFWV 7KH\ DOVR DVVHUW
that the lack of governance of taxonomy damages conservation efforts, harms the
credibility of science, and is costly to society.

Taxonomy and associated nomenclature are not without problems. Even with a
common set of facts, alternative interpretations of how to classify organisms can lead
to differing classifications. However, the science of taxonomy is increasingly
rigorous, which can improve the foundation for targeted legislative action regarding
species. Taxonomic instability does not affect all taxonomic groups equally.

Does taxonomy hamper conservation?

*DUQHWW DQG &KULVWLGLV ³FRQWHQG WKDW WKH VFLHQWLILF

community's failure to govern taxonomy threatens the
effectiveness of global efforts to halt biodiversity loss,
damages the credibility of science, and is expensive to
VRFLHW\´:HGLVDJUHH

Literature
Angiosperm Phylogeny Group I (1998): "An ordinal classification for the
families of flowering plants" . Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 85 (4):
531±553.
Angiosperm Phylogeny Group II (2003): An update of the Angiosperm
Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants :
APG II. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 141: 399±436.
Angiosperm Phylogeny Group III (2009): "An update of the Angiosperm
Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG
III", Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 161 (2): 105±121.
 100

- Cavalier - Smith, T. (1981): Eukaryote kingdoms : Seven or nine. BioSystems 14 :

461 ± 481.
Cotterill, F.P., Groves, C.P. and Taylor P.J. (2017). Taxonomy: refine rather than
stabilize. Nature, 547(7662), pp.162±162.
Cronquist, A. 1981. An integrated system of classification of flowering plants.
Copyright © Columbia University press. Usado conpermiso de la editorial.
Davis P. H. & Heywood V. H. (1973): Principles of Angiosperm Taxonomy. R. E.
Krieger Pub. Co. New York. 558 pp.
Dahlgren, R. (1983): General Aspects of Angiosperm Evolution and
Macrosystematics, Nocaric Journal of Botany 3 : 119 ± 149.
Endo T., Ogishima S., Tanaka H. (2003). Standardized phylogenetic tree: a
reference to discover functional evolution J Mol Evol; 57 Suppl 1:S174-81. Plant
Species Biology.
Engler, A. (1931): Engler, A. & Prantl, K. eds. Die natürliche Pflanzenfamilien, 2nd
edition, Leipzig, Engelmann.
Felsenstein, J. (1981). Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum
likelihood approach, Journal of Molecular Evolution 17:368-376.
Garnett, S.T. and Christidis L. (2017).Taxonomy anarchy hampers
conservation. Nature. 2017;546(7656):25±27.
Holstein, N. and Luebert, F. (2017). Taxonomy: stable taxon
boundaries. Nature, 548(7666), pp.158±158.
Judd, W. S., C. S.; Campbell, E. A.; Kellogg, and Stevens, P.F. (1999). Plant
Systematics²A Phylogentic Approach. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
Kenrick, P., and Crane, P.R. (1997). The Origin and Early Diversification of Land
Plants: A Cladistic Study. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.
Kubitzki, K. (general editor) (1990): onward. The Families and Genera of
Vascular Plants Springer -Verlag: Berlin; Heidelberg, Germany.
Melchior, H. (1964): Adolf Engler, ed. Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien (12th ed.).I.
Band: Allgemeiner Teil. Bakterien bis Gymnospermen. II. Band: Angiospermen.
Murren C. (2002). Phenotypic integration in plants. Plant Species Biology. Volume
17 Issue 2-3 Page 89.
National Center of Biotechnology Information. Systematics and Molecular
Phylogenetics.
 101

Reveal, J. L. (1999): Appendix F. Additional nomenclature, pp. 355 ± 357. In:

G.E. Moulton (ed.), the journals of the Lewis & Clark Expedition. Volume. 12.
Herbarium of the Lewis & Clark Expedition. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
359 pp.
Pagel, M. (1999). Inferring historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401,
877±884.
Sereno, P.C. (1999). Definitions in Phylogenetic Taxonomy: Critique and Rationale
Syst. Biol. 48(2):329±351
Shipunov, A.B. (2009): Systema angiospermarum. Version. 4.974. website
http://herba.msu.rushipunovangcurrentsyang.
Shipunov, A.B. (2010): Systema angiospermarum.Version.5.1. website
http://herba.msu.rushipunovangcurrentsyang.
Shipunov, A.B. (2014): Systema angiospermarum. Version.5.15.website
http://herba.msu.rushipunovangcurrentsyang.
Sinnott, 1935 ex Cavalier-smith, T. (1998): A revised six-kingdom system of life.
Biol. Rev. 73: 203 - 266.
Takhtajan, A. (1969): Flowering plants: origin and dispersal. Oliver and Boyd.
Edinburgh.
Takhtajan , A. (1980): "Outline of the classification of flowering plants
(Magnoliophya)". Botanical Review 46 (3): 225±359.
Takhtajan, A. (1987): Systema magnoliophytorum. Nauka. Leningrad.
Takhtajan, A. (1997): Diversity and Classification of Flowering Plants (1-9). New
York Columbia University Press.
Takhtajan, A. (2009): Flowering plants, 2nd ed.
Thorne, R.F. (1992): "An updated phylogenetic classification of the flowering
plants". Aliso13: 365±389.
Tree of life web project. What is phylogeny?
Wen-Hsiung Li. (1997). Molecular Evolution. Sinauer Associates.
Wettstein, R. (1935): Handbuch der systematischen Botanik (4th.Edit.). Leipzig and
Wien.
Whelan S., Lio P., Goldman N., (2001). Molecular phylogenetics: state-of-the-art
methods for looking into the past. Trends in Genetics, Volume 17, Issue 5( 1):262-272
Whittaker, R. H. & Margulis, L. (1978): Protist classification and kingdoms of
organisms. Bio Systems 10: 3-8.
 

7DEOHRI&RQWHQW

7UHHRI/LIH

3ODQW7D[RQRP\

+LVWRU\RI3ODQW&ODVVLILFDWLRQ

6\VWHPVRI3ODQW7D[RQRP\

7ULDOVRI3ODQW&ODVVLILFDWLRQ

*HQHWLF'LIIHUHQFHV,Q6SHFLHV

5HFHQW6\VWHPVRI3ODQW7D[RQRP\

2EMHFWLRQV2Q7KH$3*6\VWHPV2I&ODVVLILFDWLRQ

6KLSQRY6\VWHP

/LWHUDWXUH
Buy your books fast and straightforward online - at one of world’s
fastest growing online book stores! Environmentally sound due to
Print-on-Demand technologies.
Buy your books online at
www.morebooks.shop
Kaufen Sie Ihre Bücher schnell und unkompliziert online – auf einer
der am schnellsten wachsenden Buchhandelsplattformen weltweit!
Dank Print-On-Demand umwelt- und ressourcenschonend produzi
ert.
Bücher schneller online kaufen
www.morebooks.shop
KS OmniScriptum Publishing
Brivibas gatve 197
LV-1039 Riga, Latvia [email protected]
Telefax: +371 686 204 55 www.omniscriptum.com