[Taxacom] Angiosperm origins: Darwin's "abominable" mystery

[Jeremy Bruhl]

Double fertilization of angiosperms and gnetophytes share the name not the
ontogeny; they are different.

e.g. see Ephedra shows double fertilization of a sort, which is
analogous or, in my opinion, homologous to that in
angiosperms (Krassilov, 1997)
http://www.springerlink.com/content/k18165643020v321/fulltext.pdf

Cheers
Jeremy

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Heads
Sent: Saturday, 20 March 2010 2:52 PM
To: Thomas Lammers
Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Angiosperm origins: Darwin's "abominable" mystery


Thomas,
 
I think that's a good characterisation, using population diversity.
Also, the angiosperm characters may have evolved before the angiosperm
clade. This would explain why there is so much incongruence, with
classic angiosperm characters such as double fertilisation occurring in some
gymnosperms and not in all angiosperms.
 
Michael Heads 

Wellington, New Zealand.

My papers on biogeography are at: http://tiny.cc/RiUE0

--- On Sat, 20/3/10, Thomas Lammers <lammers at uwosh.edu> wrote:


From: Thomas Lammers <lammers at uwosh.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Angiosperm origins: Darwin's "abominable" mystery
To: "Curtis Clark" <jcclark-lists at earthlink.net>
Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Received: Saturday, 20 March, 2010, 3:11 PM


----- Original Message -----
From: Curtis Clark <jcclark-lists at earthlink.net>

> Axelrod introduced me to the idea of Triassic angiosperms; his contention
was that, because they evolved in the uplands, we'd be unlikely to see
fossils.<

I try to imagine what it would be like if we could travel back to study in
the field the population to which the angiosperms of today trace their
origin.  I don't imagine we would see anything that, in the context of the
flora of that time, would stand out as all that different.  The
population-biology view of evolution suggests that the characters that today
are hallmarks of a well-distinguished class or phylum would likely have been
mere intrapopulational variation at the earliest points in time. "Oh, look! 
In some of the plants in this population, the second sperm nucleus fuses
with the polar nuclei!  What an odd little aberration!"  

Furthermore, even as some of these traits stabilized in species, it still
may have been awhile before "anything came of it."  Just as the mammals
"hung out" for quite a long while in the Mesozoic before getting their
chance to proliferate, so too might angiosperms have piddled around, cooling
their heels, for millions of years before opportunity came knocking.  We no
doubt have found and named fossils that, if we could study them as living
entities, we would call angiosperms.

Thomas G. Lammers, Ph.D.

Associate Professor and Curator of the Herbarium
Department of Biology and Microbiology
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh

http://www.uwosh.edu/departments/biology/Lammers.htm
http://www.kewbooks.com/asps/ShowDetails.asp?id=615



_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as: 
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here



      
_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here