| 摘要: |
| 银粉背蕨 [Aleuritopteris argentea (S. G. Gmelin)Fée]、假银粉背蕨(A. subargentea Ching)和长尾粉背蕨 [A. michelii (Christ)Ching]隶属于凤尾蕨科(Pteridaceae)碎米蕨亚科(Cheilanthoideae)粉背蕨属(Aleuritopteris)。由于形态相似,它们之间的系统关系一直饱受争议,不同学者的分类处理差异较大。为解决三者分类上的混乱,该文通过分子系统学和形态学证据对银粉背蕨、假银粉背蕨与长尾粉背蕨之间的系统发育关系进行探讨。结果表明:(1)基于叶绿体基因组和核糖体数据集构建的系统发育结果显示,银粉背蕨与假银粉背蕨亲缘关系较远,长尾粉背蕨样品并未聚成单系且样品个体嵌入假银粉背蕨样品构成的单系中。(2)对形态数据的统计分析结果显示,银粉背蕨与假银粉背蕨在形态性状上存在明显的差异; 长尾粉背蕨与假银粉背蕨形态性状不存在明显差异。综上认为,结合分子系统学和形态学的研究结果,该研究支持假银粉背蕨的种级地位,并将长尾粉背蕨处理为假银粉背蕨的异名。 |
| 关键词: 银粉背蕨, 假银粉背蕨, 长尾粉背蕨, 形态学, 分子系统学, 物种界定 |
| DOI：10.11931/guihaia.gxzw202401057 |
| 分类号:Q949.36 |
| 文章编号:1000-3142(2025)05-0824-09 |
| Fund project:国家自然科学基金(31270253,31770221)。 |
|
| Exploring the systematic relationships of Aleuritopteris argentea, A. subargentea and A. michelii based on chloroplast genomic and morphological evidence |
|
HU Hongyu1, YANG Wenli2, YIN Yue1, ZHANG Gangmin1*
|
|
1. School of Ecology and Nature Conservation, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China;2. College
of Landscape Architecture and Tourism, Hebei Agricultural University, Baoding 071000, Hebei, China
|
| Abstract: |
| Aleuritopteris argentea (S. G. Gmelin)Fée, A. subargentea Ching, and A. michelii(Christ)Ching belong to the genus Aleuritopteris of Pteridaceae subfam. Cheilanthoideae. Their phylogenetic relationship has long been in controversy due to morphological similarities, resulting in different classification treatment. To solve the confusion in the classification, the phylogenetic relationships between the three species based on molecular and morphological analyses were investigated. The results were as follows:(1)Based on chloroplast genome and ribosomal DNA, A. argentea and A. subargentea were two distinct species; samples of A. michelii were not clustered into a monophyletic lineage, and individuals were embedded in a monophyletic lineage formed by samples of A. subargentea.(2)Statistical analysis of the morphological data showed that A. argentea and A. subargentea differed significantly in morphological traits; A. michelii and A. subargentea did not differ significantly in morphological traits. In summary, combined with the results of molecular systematics and morphology, this study supports that A. subargentea should be recognized as a distinct species and A. michelii should be treated as a synonymy of A. subargentea. |
| Key words: Aleuritopteris argentea, Aleuritopteris subargentea, Aleuritopteris michelii, morphology, molecular systematics, species delimitation |
