Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
Thehttps:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

NIH NLM Logo
Log inShow account info
Access keysNCBI HomepageMyNCBI HomepageMain ContentMain Navigation
pubmed logo
Advanced Clipboard
User Guide

Full text links

Silverchair Information Systems full text link Silverchair Information Systems Free PMC article
Full text links

Actions

Share

.2005 Jan;95(1):207-17.
doi: 10.1093/aob/mci014.

Evolution of DNA amounts across land plants (embryophyta)

Affiliations

Evolution of DNA amounts across land plants (embryophyta)

I J Leitch et al. Ann Bot.2005 Jan.

Abstract

Background and aims: DNA C-values in land plants (comprising bryophytes, lycophytes, monilophytes, gymnosperms and angiosperms) vary approximately 1000-fold from approx. 0.11 to 127.4 pg. To understand the evolutionary significance of this huge variation it is essential to evaluate the phylogenetic component. Recent increases in C-value data (e.g. Plant DNA C-values database; release 2.0, January 2003; http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/cval/homepage.html) together with improved consensus of relationships between and within land plant groups makes such an analysis timely.

Methods: Insights into the distribution of C-values in each group of land plants were gained by superimposing available C-value data (4119 angiosperms, 181 gymnosperms, 63 monilophytes, 4 lycophytes and 171 bryophytes) onto phylogenetic trees. To enable ancestral C-values to be reconstructed for clades within land plants, character-state mapping with parsimony and MacClade was also applied.

Key results and conclusions: Different land plant groups are characterized by different C-value profiles, distribution of C-values and ancestral C-values. For example, the large ( approximately 1000-fold) range yet strongly skewed distribution of C-values in angiosperms contrasts with the very narrow 12-fold range in bryophytes. Further, character-state mapping showed that the ancestral genome sizes of both angiosperms and bryophytes were reconstructed as very small (i.e. < or =1.4 pg) whereas gymnosperms and most branches of monilophytes were reconstructed with intermediate C-values (i.e. >3.5, <14.0 pg). More in-depth analyses provided evidence for several independent increases and decreases in C-values; for example, decreases in Gnetaceae (Gymnosperms) and heterosperous water ferns (monilophytes); increases in Santalales and some monocots (both angiosperms), Pinaceae, Sciadopityaceae and Cephalotaxaceae (Gymnosperms) and possibly in the Psilotaceae + Ophioglossaceae clade (monilophytes). Thus, in agreement with several focused studies within angiosperm families and genera showing that C-values may both increase and decrease, it is apparent that this dynamic pattern of genome size evolution is repeated on a broad scale across land plants.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

F<sc>ig</sc>. 1.
Fig. 1.
Land plant phylogeny (left; based on Pryeret al., 2001) and C-value data (middle) showing the mean (•) followed by the range of nuclear DNA C-values encountered in each group. The number in brackets following the group name gives the number of species with C-value data. Land plants and their major subdivisions are shown on the right.
F<sc>ig</sc>. 2.
Fig. 2.
Histograms showing the distribution of DNA C-values for (A) 4119 angiosperms, (B) 181 gymnosperms, (C) 63 monilophytes, (D) 4 lycophytes, and (E) 171 bryophytes. The maximum C-value for each group is indicated.
F<sc>ig</sc>. 3.
Fig. 3.
Molecular phylogeny (left) and C-value data (middle) showing the mean (•) followed by the range of nuclear DNA C-values encountered in each group or family of (A) angiosperms, (B) gymnosperms, (C) monilophytes and lycophytes, and (D) bryophytes. The number in brackets following the group or family name gives the number of species with C-value data. Major subdivisions within the angiosperms are shown on the right. Phylogenetic trees taken from the following sources: angiosperms, APG II (2003); gymnosperms, Soltiset al. (2002); monilophytes and lycophytes, Pryeret al. (2001); bryophytes, Beckertet al. (1999).
F<sc>ig</sc>. 4.
Fig. 4.
Parsimony reconstruction of C-value diversification in the angiosperms using the ‘all most-parsimonious states’ resolving option of MacClade (based on Soltiset al., 2003). Sant = Santalales.
F<sc>ig</sc>. 5.
Fig. 5.
Parsimony reconstruction of C-value diversification in the monocots using the ‘all most-parsimonious states’ resolving option of MacClade (based on Soltiset al., 2003). Families containing species with very large C-values (i.e. ≥35·0 pg) are marked in bold.
F<sc>ig</sc>. 6.
Fig. 6.
Distribution of DNA C-values for 62 species of Santalales. The C-values for twoViscum species are arrowed. Data taken from the Plant DNA C-values database (Bennett and Leitch, 2003).
F<sc>ig</sc>. 7.
Fig. 7.
Parsimony reconstruction of C-value diversification across land plants using the ‘all most-parsimonious states’ resolving option of MacClade.Equisetum 1 and 2 =Equisetum subgenusEquisetum and subgenusHippochaete, respectively. ANGIOS. = angiosperms; LYCO. = lycophytes; BRYO. = bryophytes.
F<sc>ig</sc>. 8.
Fig. 8.
Parsimony reconstruction of C-value diversification across land plants using the ACCTRAN option of MacClade.Equisetum 1 and 2 =Equisetum subgenusEquisetum and subgenusHippochaete, respectively. ANGIOS. = angiosperms; LYCO. = lycophytes; BRYO. = bryophytes.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Abraham A, Ninan CA, Mathew PM. 1962. Studies on the cytology and phylogeny of the pteridophytes VII. Observations on one hundred species of South Indian ferns. Journal of the Indian Botanical Society 41: 339–421.
    1. APG II. 2003. An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 141: 399–436.
    1. Beckert S, Steinhauser S, Muhle H, Knoop V. 1999. A molecular phylogeny of bryophytes based on nucleotide sequences of the mitochondrial nad5 gene. Plant Systematics and Evolution 218: 179–192.
    1. Bennett MD. 1972. Nuclear DNA content and minimum generation time in herbaceous plants. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, Biological Sciences 181: 109–135. - PubMed
    1. Bennett MD. 1987. Variation in genomic form in plants and its ecological implications. New Phytologist 106: 177–200.

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources

Full text links
Silverchair Information Systems full text link Silverchair Information Systems Free PMC article
Cite
Send To

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSHPMCBookshelfDisclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.


[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp