Nova Biologica Reperta

Nutlet micromorphology and its systematic implications in Phlomoides Moench (Lamiaceae)

Authors

Elmira Eyvazadeh Khosroshahi
Yasaman Salmaki

University of Tehran

https://doi.org/10.29252/nbr.5.1.82
Abstract
Nutlets of 20 taxa of Phlomoides, representing most of the currently recognized sections were examined by scanning electron microscopy. The basic shape of nutlets in most taxa studied is broadly ovate, but ovate, triangular and oblong ones can also be found in few species. Regarding the sculpturing pattern of nutlet surface, four basic types can be distinguished: reticulate, scalariform, ruminate and rugose. The reticulate type is the most common among the studied species, but the variation in alignment, size and shape of its composing cells provide further evidence that are useful as diagnostic characteristics. However, the type of sculpturing is more useful for separating species within the sections, rather than correlating them to each other. For example, sect. Filipendula show four different types of sculpturing. Therefore, nutlet microsculpturing is not useful in separating large natural groups like sections in this genus. It seems also that contrary to other genera of Lamiaceae, nutlet characters are of low phylogenetic value in this genus.

Keywords

classification
Labiatae
Lamioideae
Scanning electron microscopy
Taxonomy
Adylov, T.A., Kamelin, R.V. and Machmedov, A.M. 1986. Zametkiosemeistve Lamiaceae 1 [Notes on Lamiaceae 1]. – Novosti Sistematiki Vysshikh Rastenii 23: 110-114.
Adylov, T.A., and Machmedov, A.M. 1987. Phlom-oides Moench. Pp. 82-107. In: Adylov, T.A. (ed.), Conspectus florae Asiae Mediae, vol. 9. – Tashkent: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.
Bentham, G. 1832–36. Labiatarum genera et species. – London: James Ridgway & Sons.
Briquet, J. 1895–1897. Labiatae. Eremostachys Bu-nge, Phlomis L. Pp. 246-249 in: Engler, A. & Pr-antl, K. (eds.), Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien, IV (3a, 134). – Leipzig: Engelmann.
Bunge, A. 1830. Eremostachys Bunge. Pp. 414–416 in: Ledebour, C.F., Meyer, C.A. & Bunge, A. Flora Altaica, vol. 2. – Berlin: G. Reimer.
Bunge, A. 1873. Labiatae persicae. – Mém. Acad. Imp. Sci. Saint Pétersbourg, Sér. 7: 21: 1-84.
Husain, N., Marin, S.Z., Šilic, P.D., Qaiser, C. and Petkovic, B. 1990: A micromorphological study of some representative genera in the tribe Saturejeae (Lamiaceae). − Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 103: 59-80.
Kamelin, R.V., and Machmedov, A.M. 1990. Sist-ema roda Phlomoides (Lamiaceae) [The system of the genus Phlomoides. – Bot. Žhurn. 75: 241-250.
Knorring, O.E. 1954. Eremostachys Bunge and Phlo-mis L. Pp. 3–77 in: Schischkin, B. K. (ed.), Flora of the USSR (English version), vol. 21. – Keter Publishing House.
Link, H.F. 1829. Handbuch zur Erkennung der nutz-barsten und am häufigsten vorkommenden Gewächse, vol. 2. – Berlin: S. J. Joseephy.
Linnaeus, C. 1753. Species plantarum, vol. 2. – Stockholm: Impensis Laurentii Salvii.
Mathiesen, C., Scheen, A.C. and Lindqvist, C. 2011. Phylogeny and biogeography of the lamioid genus Phlomis (Lamiaceae). – Kew Bull. 66: 1-17.
Moench, C., 1794. Methodus plantas horti botanici et agri Marburgensis, a staminum situ describendi. Marburg: Officina Nova Libraria Academiae.
Popov, M.G. 1940. Opyt monografii roda Erem-ostachys Bge. (An attempt of a monograph of the genus Eremostachys Bunge). – Byull. Moskovsk. Obshch. Isp. Prir., Otd. Biol., ser. 2, 19: 1-166.
Oran, S.A. 1996: Ultrastructure of nutlet surface of the genus Salvia L. in Jordan and the neighbouring countries. – Dirasat Nat. Eng. Sci. 23: 393-408.
Rechinger, K.H. 1982. Stachys. In: Rechinger, K.H. (ed.), Flora Iranica, Vol. 150. – Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz, pp 354-396.
Ryding, O. 2008. Pericarp structure and phylogeny of the Phlomis group (Lamiaceae subfam. Lami-oideae). – Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 127: 299-316.
Salmaki, Y., Zarre, S. and Jamzad, Z. 2008. Nutlet morphology of Stachys (Lamiaceae) in Iran and its systematic implication. – Feddes Repert 119: 631-645.
Salmaki, Y., Zarre, S., Ryding, O., Lindqvist, C., Scheunert, A., Bräuchler, C. and Heubl, G. 2012a. Phylogeny of the tribe Phlomideae (Lamioideae: Lamiaceae) with special focus on Eremostachys and Phlomoides: New insights from nuclear and chloroplast sequences. – Taxon 61: 161-179.
Salmaki, Y., Zarre, S. and Heubl, G., 2012b. The genus Phlomoides Moench (Lamiaceae; Lami-oideae; Phlomideae) in Iran: a nupdated synopsis. – Iran. J. Bot. 18: 207-219.
Sennikov, A. and Lazkov, G. 2010. Typification of Eremostachys labiosa (Phlomoides labiosa, Lami-aceae) and its synonyms. – Willdenowia 40: 221-226.
Sennikov, A.N. and Lazkov, G.A. 2013. Taxonomic corrections and new records in vascular plants of Kyrgyzstan. Memoranda Soc. – Fauna Flora Fenn-ica 89: 125-138.
Seyedi, Z. and Salmaki, Y. 2015. Trichome morp-hology and its significance in the systematics of Phlomoides (Lamiaceae; Lamioideae; Phlomideae). – Flora 213: 40-48.
Stearn, W.T. 1992: Botanical latin: terminology and vocabulary. pp 363. – Hafner publishing company London.

  • Receive Date 08 June 2026
  • Publish Date 08 June 2026

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us