Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Responsive image
Issue: Vol. 616 No. 3: 28 Sept. 2023
Type: Article
Published: 2023-09-28
DOI: 10.11646/phytotaxa.616.3.4
Page range: 247-257
Abstract views: 186
PDF downloaded: 110

Cataracta, a new monotypic genus segregated from Physalis (Solanaceae)

Instituto de Botánica; Departamento de Botánica y Zoología; Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias; Universidad de Guadalajara. Camino Ramón Padilla Sánchez 2100; Nextipac; Zapopan; Jalisco; Mexico
Facultad de Ciencias Naturales; Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro Av. De las Ciencias s/n; Juriquilla; CP 76230; Del. Sta. Rosa Jáuregui Querétaro; Mexico
Instituto de Botánica; Departamento de Botánica y Zoología; Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias; Universidad de Guadalajara. Camino Ramón Padilla Sánchez 2100; Nextipac; Zapopan; Jalisco; Mexico
Eudicots fruit anatomy inflated calyx Cataracta microphysa phylogeny subtribe Physalidinae

Abstract

We describe a new monotypic genus Cataracta based on Physalis microphysa. From 1896 to 2016, five different authors have pointed out that removing P. microphysa from Physalis may contribute to the monophyly of the genus. Recent phylogenetic analyses showed that P. microphysa does not share the most recent common ancestor with Physalis, and its taxonomic position remained uncertain. Therefore, this taxonomic change is necessary. The diagnostic traits of Physalis microphysa are the fruiting calyx that loosely covers the fruit, remaining open apically, with lobes as long as, or longer than the tube, a dry berry with thin pericarp, and a dehiscent epicarp covered by a thick cuticle. In contrast, Physalis species with typical morphologies have an inflated and completely closed fruiting calyx at the apex that fully envelopes the fleshy berry. The anatomical evidence and molecular phylogenetic analysis with six cpDNA and three nDNA regions performed with Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference confirm that P. microphysa can be recognized as a distinct genus from Leucophysalis, Physalis and Quincula. Cataracta gen. nov. is sister to Chamaesaracha and along with the closely related Quincula grows in arid to semi-arid environments in Mexico and North America. An artificial key to Physalidinae genera is included.

References

  1. Averett, J.E. (1973) Biosystematic study of Chamaesaracha (Solanaceae). Rhodora 75: 325–365.
  2. Averett, J.E. & Martínez, M. (2009) Capsicophysalis: A new genus of Solanaceae (Physaleae) from Mexico and Central America. Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas 3 (1): 72.
  3. Averett, J.E. (2009) Schraderanthus, a new genus of Solanaceae. Phytologia 91: 54–56.
  4. Averett, J.E. (2010) The status of Chamaesaracha coniodes and C. coronopus (Solanaceae). Phytoneuron 57: 1–5.
  5. Axelius, B. (1995) A new combination in Physalis (Solanaceae). Phytologia 79: 10–11.
  6. Axelius, B. (1992) Testa Patterns in Some Species of Physalis L. and Some Other Genera in the Tribe Solaneae (Solanaceae). International Journal of Plant Sciences 153: 488–502. https://doi.org/10.1086/297055
  7. Bentham, G. & Hooker, J.D. (1876) Genera Plantarum. London, UK, 1279 pp.
  8. Bolmgren, K. & Eriksson, O. (2005) Fleshy fruits–origins, niche shifts, and diversification. Oikos 109: 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0030-1299.2005.12663.x
  9. Darriba, D., Taboada, G.L., Doallo, R. & Posada, D. (2012) jModelTest 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nature Methods 9: 772. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2109
  10. Deanna, R., Larter, M.D., Barboza, G.E. & Smith. S.D. (2019) Repeated evolution of a morphological novelty: a phylogenetic analysis of the inflated fruiting calyx in the Physalideae tribe (Solanaceae). American Journal of Botany 106: 270–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1242
  11. Don, G. (1837) General system of gardenin and botany. Rivington, London, 908 pp.
  12. Edgar, R.C. (2004) MUSCLE: multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Research 32: 1792–1797. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkh340
  13. Gouy, M., Guidon, S. & Gascuel, O. (2010) SeaView version 4: a multiplatform graphical user interface for sequence alignment and phylogenetic tree building. Molecular Biology and Evolution 27: 221–224. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msp259
  14. Gray, A. (1886) Contributions to American Botany. Proceeding American Academy Arts and Sciences 22: 217–314. https://doi.org/10.2307/25129869
  15. Hendrych, R (1989) Physalis alkekengi in Europa und in der Tschechoslowakei besonders. Acta Universitatis Carollinae-Biologica 33: 1–42.
  16. Hoare, A. & Knapp, S. (1997) A phylogenetic conspectus of the tribe Hyosciameae: Solanaceae. Bulletin Natural History Museum, London (Botany) 27: 11–29.
  17. Hunziker, A.T. (1980) Studies on Solanaceae XII. Additions to the genus Chamaesaracha. Contributions from the Gray Herbarium of Harvard University 210: 23–28. https://doi.org/10.5962/p.336450
  18. Hunziker, A.T. (2001) Genera Solanacearum: The Genera of Solanaceae Illustrated, Arranged According to a New System. A.R.G. Gantner Verlag, Ruggell.
  19. Johansen, D.A. (1940) Plant microtechnique. McGraw Hill, N.Y., 523 pp.
  20. Jussieu, A.L. (1879) Genera Plantarum. Apud viduam Herissant et Theophilum Barrois, Paris, 498 pp.
  21. Knapp, S. (2002) Tobacco to tomatoes: a phylogenetic perspective on fruit diversity in the Solanaceae. Journal Experimental Botany 377: 2001–2022. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erf068
  22. L’Héritier de Brutelle, C.L. (1788) Sertum Anglicum 1: 19.
  23. Linnaeus, C. (1753) Species Plantarum. Impensis Laurentii Salvii, Stockholm, 1200 pp. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316335581
  24. Maddison, W.P. & Maddison, D.R. (2023) Mesquite: a modular system for evolutionary analysis. Version 3.81. [http://www.mesquiteproject.org]
  25. Makino, T. (1914) Observations on the Flora of Japan. Botanical Magazine 28: 20. https://doi.org/10.15281/jplantres1887.28.325_20
  26. Martínez, M. (1999) Infrageneric taxonomy of Physalis. In: Nee, M., Symon, D.E., Lester, R.N. & Jessop, J.P. (Eds.) Solanaceae IV: Advances in Biology and Utilization. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, pp. 275–283.
  27. Miers, J. (1849) Contributions to the Botany of South America. Annals and Magazine of Natural History: ser. 2 v3 & v4. https://doi.org/10.1080/03745486009494812
  28. Miller, M.A., Pfeiffer, W. & Schwartz, T. (2010) Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. 2010 gateway computing environments workshop (GCE): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/GCE.2010.5676129
  29. Moench, C. (1802) Supplementum ad Methodum Plantas: a staminum situ describendi. Austria, 328 pp.
  30. Olmstead, R.G., Bohs, L., Migid, H.A., Santiago-Valentin, E., Garcia, V.F. & Collier, S.M. (2008) A molecular phylogeny of the Solanaceae. Taxon 57: 1159–1181. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.574010
  31. Posada, D. & Crandall, K.A. (1998) Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817–818. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/14.9.817
  32. POWO (2022) Plants of the World Online. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Available from: http://www.plantsoftheworldonline.org/ (accessed 31 July 2022)
  33. Rafinesque, C.S. (1832) Twenty new genera of plants from the Oregon Mountains. Atlantic Journal 149: 236.
  34. Reveal, J.L. (2012) Newly required infrafamilial names mandated by changes in the Code of nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants. Phytoneuron 33: 1–31.
  35. Riddell, J.L. (1853) Botanical contributions: Plants of the South West. New Orleans Medical and surgical Journal 9: 609–618.
  36. Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., van der Mark, P., Ayres, D.L., Darling, A., Höhna, S., Larget, B., Liu, L., Suchard, M.A. & Huelsenbeck, J.P. (2012) MRBAYES 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice Across a Large Model Space. Systematic Biology 61: 539–542. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys029
  37. Ruzin, S.E. (1999) Plant microtechnique and microscopy. Oxford Universitu Press, N.Y., 322 pp.
  38. Rydberg, P.A. (1896) The North American species of Physalis and related genera. Memoirs of the Torrey Botanical Club 4: 297–372. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.97391
  39. Särkinen, T., Bohs, L., Olmstead, R.G. & Knapp, S. (2013) A phylogenetic framework for evolutionary study of the nightshades (Solanaceae): a dated 1000-tip tree. BMC Ecology and Evolution 13: 214. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-214
  40. Schlechtendal, D.F.K. (1838) Index seminum. Hort. Halensis Germany.
  41. Stamatakis, A. (2014) RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30: 1312–1313. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033
  42. Watson, S. (1871) United States Geological Exploration of the Fortieth Parallel.Vol 5, Botany. Washington, U.S.A., 525 pp. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.55176
  43. Whitson, M. & Manos, P.S. (2005) Untangling Physalis (Solanaceae) from the Physaloids: a two-gene phylogeny of the Physalinae. Systematic Botany 30: 216–230. https://doi.org/10.1600/0363644053661841
  44. Whitson, M. (2011) Proposal to conserve the name Physalis (Solanaceae) with a conserved type. Taxon 60: 608–609. https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.602047
  45. Whitson, M. (2012) Calliphysalis (Solanaceae): a new genus from the southeastern USA. Rhodora 114: 133–147. https://doi.org/10.3119/11-10
  46. Zamora-Tavares, M.P., Martínez, M., Magallón, S., Guzmán-Dávalos, L. & Vargas-Ponce, O. (2016) Physalis and physaloids, a recent and complex evolutionary history. Molecular Phylogenetics and. Evolution 100: 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2016.03.032