Advances in Flowering Plant Evolution

Abstract

Flowering plants are the most important plants in the terrestrial ecosystem at most latitudes and altitudes and they are of direct and critical economic importance to our society in many dimensions. They are the most variable seed plants in terms of morphological characteristics and habit and are the most diverse of all plants. It is no surprise that they have been the objects of a great deal of attention from the research community. What is surprising is the scale of the uncertainty surrounding our basic knowledge of angiosperms. Angiosperm relationships are only now being resolved through the application of various algorithms to the combination of molecular geneticsā€derived data and morphological data. Yet the relationship of the angiosperms themselves to nonangiospermous seed plants, or understanding the origin of this major group, still remains a hotly contested mystery and explanations for the relative and stunning success of the angiosperms are still being debated. Even precise knowledge of timing in the history of angiosperms is unsettled due to conflicts between timing implied by existing fossil evidence and timing suggested from extrapolations from molecular clock timing models. Finally, questions remain as to the causes of the remarkable success of angiosperms relative to all other plants and seed plants in species numbers and ecological dominance. Recent advances provide insights into some of these persistent questions, whereas others remain unresolved in spite of advances in investigatory techniques now being applied to them.

Key Concepts:

  • The importance of an improved fossil record in understanding angiosperm evolution is considered with respect to angiosperm origins and success.

  • The importance of new algorithms in reducing the level of subjectivity in assessments of flowering plant relationships is discussed.

  • This article contains an appraisal of angiosperm aspects that might be related to their successful species diversity.

  • The idea of inevitable subjectivity in attempts to determine angiosperm relationships based on morphological characters is discussed.

  • Historical development of views on angiosperm relationships is considered in this article.

Keywords: flowering plants; algorithm; molecular genetics; objectivity; abominable mystery

Figure 1.

Percentage distribution of extant species assigned to different embryophyte plant groups. For convenience, some species groupings are polyphyletic and thus represent a grade level of reproductive organisation (e.g. gymnosperms). Redrawn from Crepet and Niklas, . © Botanical Society of America.

Figure 2.

Turonian‐aged (Late Cretaceous, ∼92mybp) fossil flower, Raritaniflora tomentosa. From Crepet et al., . © University of Chicago Press.

Figure 3.

Phylogenetic tree of the flowering plants (angiosperm). Redrawn from the APG III web site. © Angiospern Phylogeny Group.

Figure 4.

First appearances of key floral characters and character states and standing extant species diversity in angiosperm families cooccurring in the fossil record. Bold lines highlight geological periods for which data are available; thin lines and question marks indicate predicted numbers of floral character states based on standing species numbers. Redrawn from Crepet and Niklas, . © Botanical Society of America.

close

References

APG 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: 105–121.

Armbruster WS, Xiao‐Qing S and Shuang‐Quan H (2014) Do specialized flowers promote reproductive isolation? Realized pollen accuracy of three sympatric Pedicularis species. Annals of Botany 113: 331–340.

Bomblies K and Weigel D (2007) Hybrid necrosis: autoimmunity as a potential gene‐flow barrier in plant species. Nature Reviews Genetics 8: 382–393.

Burnham R (2008) Hide and go seek: what does presence mean in the fossil record? Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 95: 51–71.

Coulter JM and Chamberlain CJ (1903) Morphology of Angiosperms. New York: Appleton.

Coulter JM and Chamberlain CJ (1910) Morphology of Gymnosperms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Crane PR (1985) Seed plant phylogenetics. Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 72: 716–793.

Crepet WL (2008) The fossil record of angiosperms: requiem or renaissance? Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 95: 3–33.

Crepet WL, Dilcher DL and Potter FW (1974) Eocene angiosperm flowers. Science 185: 781–782.

Crepet WL and Herendeen PS (1992) Papilionoid flowers from the early eocene of southeastern North America. In: Herendeen PS and Dilcher DL (eds) Advances in Legumes Systematics, Part 4 The Fossil Record, pp. 43–55. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens.

Crepet WL and Niklas KJ (2009) Darwin's second ‘abominable mystery’: why are there so many angiosperm species? American Journal of Botany: Darwin Bicentenial 96: 366–381.

Crepet WL and Nixon KC (1998a) Fossil Clusiaceae from the Late Cretaceous (Turonian) of New Jersey and implications regarding the history of bee pollination. American Journal of Botany 85: 1122–1133.

Crepet WL and Nixon KC (1998b) Two new fossil flowers of magnoliid affinity from the Late Cretaceous of New Jersey. American Journal of Botany 85: 1273–1288.

Crepet WL, Nixon KC and Daghlian CP (2013) Fossil Ericales from the Upper Cretaceous of New Jersey. International Journal of Plant Sciences 174: 572–584.

Crepet WL, Nixon KC and Gandolfo MA (2004) Fossil evidence and phylogeny: the age of major angiosperm clades based on mesofossil and macrofossil evidence from Cretaceous deposits. American Journal of Botany 91: 1666–1682.

Crepet WL and Taylor DW (1985) The diversification of the Leguminosae: first fossil evidence of the Mimosoideae and Papilionoideae. Science 228: 1087–1089.

Doyle JA and Donoghue MJ (1986) Seed plant phylogeny and the origin of the angiosperms: an experimental cladistic approach. Botanical Review 52: 321–431.

Endress PR and Doyle JA (2009) Reconstructing the ancestral angiosperm flower and its initial specializations. American Journal of Botany 96: 5–21.

Farris JS (1970) Methods for computing Wagner trees. Systematic Zoology 19: 83–92.

Farris JS (1988) Hennig86, ver. 1.5. Program and Documentation. Port Jefferson Station, New York.

Farris JS (1989) The retention index and the rescaled consistency index. Cladistics 5: 417–419.

Felsenstein J (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. Journal of Molecular Evolution 17: 368–376.

Friedman WE (2009) The meaning of Darwin's ‘abominable mystery’. American Journal of Botany 96: 5–21.

Friis EM, Crane PR and Pedersen KR (2011) Early Flowers and Angiosperm Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Friis EM, Doyle JA, Endress PK and Leng Q (2003) Archaefructus – Angiosperm precursor or specialized early angiosperm? Trends in Plant Science 8: 369–373.

Gandolfo MA, Nixon KC and Crepet WL (2008) Selection of fossils for calibration of molecular dating models. Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 95: 34–42.

Grant V (1949) Pollination systems as isolating mechanisms in flowering plants. Evolution 3: 82–97.

Graur D and Martin W (2004) Reading the entrails of chickens: molecular timescales of evolution and the illusion of precision. Trends in Genetics 20: 80–86.

Grimaldi D and Engel MS (2005) Evolution of the Insects. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 755 pp.

Hennig W (1950) Grundzüge einer Theorie der phylogenetischen Systematik. Berlin: Deutscher Zentralverlag.

Hochuli PA and Feist‐Burkhardt S (2013) Angiosperm‐like pollen and Afropollis from the Middle Triassic (Anisian) of the Germanic Basin (Northern Switzerland). Frontiers in Plant Science. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2013.00344.

Lavin M, Herendeen PS and Wojciechowski MF (2005) Evolutionary rates analysis of Leguminosae implicates a rapid diversification of lineages during the Tertiary. Systematic Biology 54: 575–594.

Magallon‐Puebla SA and Sanderson MJ (2005) Angiosperm divergence times: the effect of genes, codon positions, and time constraints. Evolution 59: 1653–1670.

Matthews S (2009) Phylogenetic relationships among seed plants: Persistent questions and the limits of DNA sequence data. American Journal of Botany 96: 228–236.

Nixon KC, Crepet WL, Stevenson DM and Friis EM (1994) A reevaluation of seed plant phylogeny. Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 81: 484–533.

Palmer JD, Jorgensen RA and Thompson WF (1985) Chloroplast DNA variation and evolution in Pisum: patterns of changes and phylogenetic analysis. Genetics 109: 195–213.

Palmer JD, Shields CR, Cohen DB and Orten TJ (1983) ChloroplastDNA evolution and the origin of Brassica species. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 65: 181–189.

Palmer JD and Zamir D (1982) Chloroplast DNA evolution and phylogenetic relationships in Lycopersicon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 79: 5006–5010.

Rothwell GW, Crepet WL and Stockey RA (2009) Is the anthophyte hypothesis alive and well? New evidence from the reproductive structures of Bennettitales. American Journal of Botany: Darwin Bicentenial 96: 296–322.

Rudall PJ, Eldridge T, Tratt J et al. (2009) Seed fertilization, development, and germination in Hydatellaceae (Nymphaeales): implications for endosperm evolution in early angiosperms. American Journal of Botany 96: 1581–1593.

Saklani A and Kutty SK (2008) Plant derived compounds in clinical trials. Drug Discovery Today 13: 161–171.

Sanderson MJ (1997) A nonparametric approach to estimating divergence times in the absence of rate constancy. Molecular Biology and Evolution 14: 1218–1232.

Sanderson MJ, Thorne JL, Wilk N and Bremer KG (2004) Molecular evidence on plant divergence times. American Journal of Botany 91: 1656–1665.

Soltis DE, Soltis PS, Chase MW et al. (2000) Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S rDNA, rbcL, and atpB sequences. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 133: 381–461.

Stevens PF (2001 onwards) Angiosperm Phylogeny Website. Version 12, July 2012 (and more or less continuously updated since). http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/research/APweb/

Sun G, Dilcher DL, Zheng S and Zhou Z (1998) In search of the first flower: a Jurassic angiosperm, Archaefructus, from northeast China. Science 282: 1692–1695.

Sun G, Ji Q, Dilcher DL et al. (2002) Archaefructaceae, a new basal angiosperm family. Science 296: 899–904.

Tiffney BH (1984) Seed size, dispersal syndromes, and the rise of the angiosperms. Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 71: 551–576.

Tiffney BH (2008) Phylogeography, fossils, and Northern Hemisphere biogeography: the role of physiological uniformitarianism. Annals of the Missouri Botanic Garden 95: 135–143.

Further Reading

Taylor TN, Taylor EL and Krings M (2008) Paleobotany, The Biology and Evolution of Fossil Plants. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 978 pp.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Crepet, William L(Mar 2014) Advances in Flowering Plant Evolution. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0023964]