[Taxacom] Hydatellales (more important than we realized)

[Ken Kinman]

Dear All,
      It was recently revealed that Order Hydatellales is a close relative 
of Order Nymphaeales, NOT to Poales.  Hopefully this will persuade the APG 
group to also exclude the Xyridales and Bromeliales from their bloated 
Poales (as I suggest in 2002).

     But perhaps more importantly, is there any direct link between 
Hydatellales and basal monocots (such as Acorales)?  Monocots are thought by 
some to have had an aquatic origin, so could Hydatellales be the sister 
group of Liliopsida?  Or was the assignment of Hydatellales to monocots 
completely erroneous (lacking any major monocot synapomorphies at all)?

      Another interesting aspect of Hydatellales is that it is largely an 
Australian taxon, but with one odd-ball species occurring in New Zealand.  
Was Hydatella inconspicua another species that dispersed eastward from 
Australia to New Zealand in the middle Cenozoic?  Seems like Hydatellales 
will now play a much greater role, not only in the phylogeny of early 
angiosperms, but their biogeography as well.  Why is it that Nymphaeaceae is 
so widespread, while many other ANITA grade taxa are limited to Australia 
and environs?  In any case, conservation efforts concerning members of 
Hydatellales now have an added urgency.
    -----Ken Kinman

_________________________________________________________________
Search for grocery stores. Find gratitude. Turn a simple search into 
something more. 
http://click4thecause.live.com/search/charity/default.aspx?source=hmemtagline_gratitude&FORM=WLMTAG