Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’. / Monro, Alexandre K.; Dodsworth, Steven; Fu, Longfei; Friis, Ib; Wilmot-Dear, Christine Melanie; Maurin, Olivier.

In: Plant Systematics and Evolution, Vol. 307, 1, 2021, p. 1-3.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Monro, AK, Dodsworth, S, Fu, L, Friis, I, Wilmot-Dear, CM & Maurin, O 2021, 'Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’', Plant Systematics and Evolution, vol. 307, 1, pp. 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01732-1

APA

Monro, A. K., Dodsworth, S., Fu, L., Friis, I., Wilmot-Dear, C. M., & Maurin, O. (2021). Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 307, 1-3. [1]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01732-1

Vancouver

Monro AK, Dodsworth S, Fu L, Friis I, Wilmot-Dear CM, Maurin O. Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’. Plant Systematics and Evolution. 2021;307:1-3. 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01732-1

Author

Monro, Alexandre K. ; Dodsworth, Steven ; Fu, Longfei ; Friis, Ib ; Wilmot-Dear, Christine Melanie ; Maurin, Olivier. / Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’. In: Plant Systematics and Evolution. 2021 ; Vol. 307. pp. 1-3.

Bibtex

@article{d1164b95f8c04d1c92460f0a3a296506,
title = "Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. {\textquoteleft}Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade{\textquoteright}",
abstract = "Boehmeria, as currently circumscribed, comprises 52 species and has a pantropical distribution. Liang et al. propose a sectional classification of Boehmeria based on the phylogenetic analysis of SNP data for 20 species and an additional 10 subspecific taxa of these at the rank of variety or form. They restrict their sampling to species documented in China. We found many shortcomings in the sampling and analyses which we feel have resulted in a misleading phylogeny for the genus and the economically important fibre-plant, Boehmeria nivea. By sampling only Chinese species of this genus for theirin-group and using a single distantly related outgroup, Liang et al. have failed to capture the diversity of the genus and so erroneously concluded that it forms a monophyletic group. Previous published research clearly demonstrates that Boehmeria is paraphyletic and polyphyletic, comprising at least four monophyletic groupings most closely related to several genera within the Boehmerieae. For these reasons, the sections that Liang et al. (Ind Crops Prod 148:112092, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112092) propose for Boehmeria are not effective tools for its classification. The important fibreplant, Boehmeria nivea, should therefore not be considered as part of the genus Boehmeria for the purposes of crop breeding, but as sister to Archiboehmeria. Breeding programmes for ramie should therefore focus on populations and germplasm of Archiboehmeria atrata. We conclude that poor taxon sampling, overlooking relevant molecular and taxonomic literature, internal conflict within their SNP data and the overinterpretation of low support values has resulted in the erroneous conclusion that Boehmeria represents a monophyletic or {\textquoteleft}natural{\textquoteright} genus.",
keywords = "Faculty of Science, Botany, Taxonomy, phylogeny",
author = "Monro, {Alexandre K.} and Steven Dodsworth and Longfei Fu and Ib Friis and Wilmot-Dear, {Christine Melanie} and Olivier Maurin",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.1007/s00606-020-01732-1",
language = "English",
volume = "307",
pages = "1--3",
journal = "Plant Systematics and Evolution",
issn = "0378-2697",
publisher = "Springer Wien",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paraphyly of the genus Boehmeria (Urticaceae): a response to Liang et al. ‘Relationships among Chinese Boehmeria species and the evolution of various clade’

AU - Monro, Alexandre K.

AU - Dodsworth, Steven

AU - Fu, Longfei

AU - Friis, Ib

AU - Wilmot-Dear, Christine Melanie

AU - Maurin, Olivier

PY - 2021

Y1 - 2021

N2 - Boehmeria, as currently circumscribed, comprises 52 species and has a pantropical distribution. Liang et al. propose a sectional classification of Boehmeria based on the phylogenetic analysis of SNP data for 20 species and an additional 10 subspecific taxa of these at the rank of variety or form. They restrict their sampling to species documented in China. We found many shortcomings in the sampling and analyses which we feel have resulted in a misleading phylogeny for the genus and the economically important fibre-plant, Boehmeria nivea. By sampling only Chinese species of this genus for theirin-group and using a single distantly related outgroup, Liang et al. have failed to capture the diversity of the genus and so erroneously concluded that it forms a monophyletic group. Previous published research clearly demonstrates that Boehmeria is paraphyletic and polyphyletic, comprising at least four monophyletic groupings most closely related to several genera within the Boehmerieae. For these reasons, the sections that Liang et al. (Ind Crops Prod 148:112092, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112092) propose for Boehmeria are not effective tools for its classification. The important fibreplant, Boehmeria nivea, should therefore not be considered as part of the genus Boehmeria for the purposes of crop breeding, but as sister to Archiboehmeria. Breeding programmes for ramie should therefore focus on populations and germplasm of Archiboehmeria atrata. We conclude that poor taxon sampling, overlooking relevant molecular and taxonomic literature, internal conflict within their SNP data and the overinterpretation of low support values has resulted in the erroneous conclusion that Boehmeria represents a monophyletic or ‘natural’ genus.

AB - Boehmeria, as currently circumscribed, comprises 52 species and has a pantropical distribution. Liang et al. propose a sectional classification of Boehmeria based on the phylogenetic analysis of SNP data for 20 species and an additional 10 subspecific taxa of these at the rank of variety or form. They restrict their sampling to species documented in China. We found many shortcomings in the sampling and analyses which we feel have resulted in a misleading phylogeny for the genus and the economically important fibre-plant, Boehmeria nivea. By sampling only Chinese species of this genus for theirin-group and using a single distantly related outgroup, Liang et al. have failed to capture the diversity of the genus and so erroneously concluded that it forms a monophyletic group. Previous published research clearly demonstrates that Boehmeria is paraphyletic and polyphyletic, comprising at least four monophyletic groupings most closely related to several genera within the Boehmerieae. For these reasons, the sections that Liang et al. (Ind Crops Prod 148:112092, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112092) propose for Boehmeria are not effective tools for its classification. The important fibreplant, Boehmeria nivea, should therefore not be considered as part of the genus Boehmeria for the purposes of crop breeding, but as sister to Archiboehmeria. Breeding programmes for ramie should therefore focus on populations and germplasm of Archiboehmeria atrata. We conclude that poor taxon sampling, overlooking relevant molecular and taxonomic literature, internal conflict within their SNP data and the overinterpretation of low support values has resulted in the erroneous conclusion that Boehmeria represents a monophyletic or ‘natural’ genus.

KW - Faculty of Science

KW - Botany

KW - Taxonomy

KW - phylogeny

U2 - 10.1007/s00606-020-01732-1

DO - 10.1007/s00606-020-01732-1

M3 - Journal article

VL - 307

SP - 1

EP - 3

JO - Plant Systematics and Evolution

JF - Plant Systematics and Evolution

SN - 0378-2697

M1 - 1

ER -

ID: 253373017