26 replies to this topic

[Daniel O.]

Congratulations Fernando (also to the other authors).
It´s really a very interesting paper. I already read it because Andreas send me a copy of the full paper.

Best regards,
Dani

Edited by Daniel O., 31 May 2012 - 16:00 PM.

[Fernando Rivadavia]

Thanks! And thanks also for your help with this paper Dani! ;)

Fernando

[Fernando Rivadavia]

Thought I should add this here for the future reference of those who don't have the paper:

Edited by Fernando Rivadavia, 15 December 2012 - 20:03 PM.

[Ordovic]

I must apologise but I have to point out this particular tree doesn't highlight D. meristocaulis' position among the pygmies but kinda suggests it is sister to all the others. From this, inclusion with/exclusion from subgenus Bryastrum becomes a little arbitrary. Have you got another figure you are able to share?

[Fernando Rivadavia]

Yes, you are correct, this tree does show it as a sister branch. Then again, we need to add a lot more pygmies to the tree, ;)

Read the paper and you'll see there are several other characters that place D.meristocaulis among the pygmies (chromosome number, pollen, glands...). The only characters that differ are the lack of gemmae, sessile flowers, and geography.

Either way, D.meristocaulis is at least very closely related to pygmies - much more so than any other sundew. And *that* is the truly amazing thing about this species, considering where it grows.


Best wishes,
Fernando Rivadavia

[Fernando Rivadavia]

P.S.  I just realized that you may have been mislead by the original title of this post and the history contained here. When I opened this topic several years ago, we had just sequenced the gene RBCL. If you take a look at the images in the paper, you will see that this gene does place D.meristocaulis within the pygmies, whereas the other two genes (sequenced afterwards) place it as a sister branch.

[Ordovic]

Ah. Okay.