Geographical and climatic limits of needle types of one- and two-needled pinyon pines

Aim The geographical extent and climatic tolerances of one- and two-needled pinyon pines (Pinus subsect. Cembroides) are the focus of questions in taxonomy, palaeoclimatology and modelling of future distributions. The identification of these pines, traditionally classified by one- versus two-needled fascicles, is complicated by populations with both one- and two-needled fascicles on the same tree, and the description of two more recently described one-needled varieties: the fallax-type and californiarum-type. Because previous studies have suggested correlations between needle anatomy and climate, including anatomical plasticity reflecting annual precipitation, we approached this study at the level of the anatomy of individual pine needles rather than species. Location Western North America. Methods We synthesized available and new data from field and herbarium collections of needles to compile maps of their current distributions across western North America. Annual frequencies of needle types were compared with local precipitation histories for some stands. Historical North American climates were modeled on a c. 1-km grid using monthly temperature and precipitation values. A geospatial model (ClimLim), which analyses the effect of climate modulated physiological and ecosystem processes, was used to rank the importance of seasonal climate variables in limiting the distributions of anatomical needle types. Results The pinyon needles were classified into four distinct types based upon the number of needles per fascicle, needle thickness and the number of stomatal rows and resin canals. The individual needles fit well into four categories of needle types, whereas some trees exhibit a mixture of two needle types. Trees from central Arizona containing a mixture of Pinus edulis and fallax-type needles increased their percentage of fallax-type needles following dry years. All four needle types occupy broader geographical regions with distinctive precipitation regimes. Pinus monophylla and californiarum-type needles occur in regions with high winter precipitation. Pinus edulis and fallax-type needles are found in regions with high monsoon precipitation. Areas supporting californiarum-type and fallax-type needle distributions are additionally characterized by a more extreme May–June drought. Main conclusions These pinyon needle types seem to reflect the amount and seasonality of precipitation. The single needle fascicle characterizing the fallax type may be an adaptation to early summer or periodic drought, while the single needle of Pinus monophylla may be an adaptation to summer–autumn drought. Although the needles fit into four distinct categories, the parent trees are sometimes less easily classified, especially near their ancestral Pleistocene ranges in the Mojave and northern Sonoran deserts. The abundance of trees with both one- and two-needled fascicles in the zones between P. monophylla, P. edulis and fallax-type populations suggest that needle fascicle number is an unreliable characteristic for species classification. Disregarding needle fascicle number, the fallax-type needles are nearly identical to P. edulis, supporting Little’s (1968) initial classification of these trees as P. edulis var. fallax, while the californiarum-type needles have a distinctive morphology supporting Bailey’s (1987) classification of this tree as Pinus californiarum

Systematics of the Neotropical Genus Leptodactylus Fitzinger, 1826 (Anura: Leptodactylidae): Phylogeny, the Relevance of Non-molecular Evidence, and Species Accounts

A phylogeny of the species-rich clade of the Neotropical frog genus Leptodactylus sensu stricto is presented on the basis of a total evidence analysis of molecular (mitochondrial and nuclear markers) and non-molecular (adult and larval morphological and behavioral characters) sampled from > 80% of the 75 currently recognized species. Our results support the monophyly of Leptodactylus sensu stricto, with Hydrolaetare placed as its sister group. The reciprocal monophyly of Hydrolaetare and Leptodactylus sensu stricto does not require that we consider Hydrolaetare as either a subgenus or synonym of Leptodactylus sensu lato. We recognize Leptodactylus sensu stricto, Hydrolaetare, Adenomera, and Lithodytes as valid monophyletic genera. Our results generally support the traditionally recognized Leptodactylus species groups, with exceptions involving only a few species that are easily accommodated without proposing new groups or significantly altering contents. The four groups form a pectinate tree, with the Leptodactylus fuscus group diverging first, followed by the L. pentadactylus group, which is sister to the L. latrans and L. melanonotus groups. To evaluate the impact of non-molecular evidence on our results, we compared our total evidence results with results obtained from analyses using only molecular data. Although non-molecular evidence comprised only 3.5% of the total evidence matrix, it had a strong impact on our total evidence results. Only one species group was monophyletic in the molecular-only analysis, and support differed in 86% of the 54 Leptodactylus clades that are shared by the results of the two analyses. Even though no non-molecular evidence was included for Hydrolaetare, exclusion of that data partition resulted in that genus being nested within Leptodactylus, demonstrating that the inclusion of a small amount of non-molecular evidence for a subset of species can alter not only the placement of those species, but also species that were not scored for those data. The evolution of several natural history and reproductive traits is considered in the light of our phylogenic framework. Invasion of rocky outcrops, larval oophagy, and use of underground reproductive chambers are restricted to species of the Leptodactylus fuscus and L. pentadactylus groups. In contrast, larval schooling, larval attendance, and more complex parental care are restricted to the L. latrans and L. melanonotus groups. Construction of foam nests is plesiomorphic in Leptodactylus but their placement varies extensively (e.g., underground chambers, surface of waterbodies, natural or excavated basins). Information on species synonymy, etymology, adult and larval morphology, advertisement call, and geographic distribution is summarized in species accounts for the 30 species of the Leptodactylus fuscus group, 17 species of the L. pentadactylus group, eight species of the L. latrans group, and 17 species of the L. melanonotus group, as well as the three species that are currently unassigned to any species group.Se presenta una filogenia del género Leptodactylus, un ciado neotropical rico en especies, basada en análises combinados de datos moleculares (marcadores nuclear y mitocondriales) y no moleculares (caracteres de la morfología de adultos y larvas así como de comportamiento) se muestrearon > 80% de las 75 especies reconocidas. Los resultados apoyan la monofília de Leptodactylus sensu stricto, con Hydrolaetare como su grupo hermano. La monofília recíproca de Hydrolaetare y Leptodactylus no requiere considerar a Hydrolaetare como un subgénero o sinónimo de Leptodactylus sensu lato. Se reconocen Leptodactylus sensu stricto, Hydrolaetare, Adenomera y Lithodytes como géneros monofiléticos válidos. Los resultados en general resuelven los grupos tradicionalmente reconocidos de Leptodactylus, con excepciones de algunas especies que son reasignadas sin la necesidad de proponer nuevos grupos o alterar significativamente el contenido de los grupos tradicionales. Los cuatro grupos de especies forman una topología pectinada donde el grupo de L. fuscus tiene una posición basal, seguido por el grupo de L. pentadactylus que es el grupo hermano al clado formado por los grupo de L. latrans y L. melanonotus. Se estimó el impacto de los datos no moleculares en los resultados, comparándose los resultados de evidencia total con los de los análises de datos moleculares solamente. Los datos no moleculares representan un 3.5% de la matriz de evidencia total, pero estos datos tuvieron un impacto significativo en los resultados del análisis de evidencia total. En el análisis estrictamente molecular solamente un grupo de especies resultó monofilético, y el apoyo difirió en 86% de los 54 ciados de Leptodactylus compartidos entre los dos análises. A pesar que datos no moleculares no fueron incluidos para Hydrolaetare, la exclusión de evidencia no molecular resultó en el género estar dentro de Leptodactylus, demostrando que la inclusión de evidencia no molecular pequeña para un subgrupo de especies altera no solamente la posición topológica de esas especies, sino tambien de las especies para las cuales dichos datos no fueron codificados. La evolución de patrones de historia natural y reprodución se evalúan en el contexto filogenético. La invasión de afloramientos rocosos y la construción de cámaras de reprodución subterraneas está limitada a los grupos de Leptodactylus fuscus y L. pentadactylus, mientras que la oofagia larval está restringida al grupo de L. pentadactylus. Por otro lado, los cárdumenes larvales, la proteción del cárdumen, y otros comportamientos parentales complejos carecterizan al clado formado por los grupos de especies de L. latrans y L. melanonotus. Los resúmenes de especies incluyen información de sinonimias, etimología, morfología de adultos y larvas, cantos, y distribución geográfica para las 30 especies del grupo de Leptodactylus fuscus, 17 especies del grupo L. pentadactylus, ocho especies del grupo de L. latrans, 17 especies del grupo de L. melanonotus, así como para las tres especies que actualmente no se encuentran asociadas a ninguno de los grupos de especies.Taran Grant was supported by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico Proc. 307001/2011-3 and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo Proc. 2012/10000-5

Carex marianensis Stacey

https://thekeep.eiu.edu/herbarium_specimens_byname/14533/thumbnail.jp