According to different accounts, the number of species in the family is about 810[12] or about 860.[7] The last monograph of the entire family was published in 2004.[7] In that work, 104 genera were recognized. Since that time, molecular phylogeneticstudies have greatly clarified relationships within the family, and the number of accepted genera is now between 80 and 85.[13]
Lianas of the tribe Bignonieae have a unique vascularstructure, in which phloem arms extend downward into the xylem because certain segments of the cambium cease the production of xylem at an early stage of development. The number of these arms is four or a multiple thereof, up to 32.[14] When four, the phloem arms appear as a cross, hence, the common name "cross vine". The phloem in the arms has wider sieve tubes and less parenchyma than the ordinary phloem.[15]
The fruit is usually a bivalvedcapsule, often with a replum. Dehiscence is septicidal or loculicidal. The three exceptions are the genera Kigelia, Crescentia and its close relatives, and Colea and its close relatives. In these, the fruit is indehiscent, not a capsule, and the seeds are not winged. The fruit is a berry in Colea. Seeds are usually flat and winged. Aril is absent. Endosperm usually absent, and sometimes sparse.[7]
As the number of known species gradually increased, a great deal of confusion developed over the delimitation of genera. New genera were frequently erected for species that did not clearly belong to any of the previously described genera. This resulted in a proliferation of monotypic genera. Gentry reduced the number of genera in 1973, 1976, and 1979.[14] Nevertheless, the revision of 2004 described 104 genera, 38 of them monotypic.[7]
This problem was especially acute in the tribe Bignonieae. In that tribe, many species of uncertain affinity were assigned to a vaguely defined Arrabidaea, turning that genus into a dumping ground of about 100 species.[14]
Since 2004, molecular phylogenetic studies have shown a substantial revision of the genera is necessary. Much work toward this goal can be viewed online,[13] but little of it has yet been published in scientific papers.
A detailed taxonomic history of Bignoniaceae was published in 1980.[10] A summary of this history was published in 1999.[23]
The composition of Bignoniaceae has been relatively stable and has not varied at all in the 21st century.[25] In the 20th century, the only issues of circumscription were whether Paulowniaceae and Schlegeliaceae should be merged into Bignoniaceae, or accepted as separate families.[6] The Paulowniaceae consist of one to four genera: Paulownia, Shiuyinghua, Wightia, and Brandisia.[12] Whatever their circumscription, Paulowniaceae are now known to be close to Phrymaceae and Orobanchaceae, rather than to Bignoniaceae. The family Schlegeliaceae has been included in Bignoniaceae, as tribe Schlegelieae, as recently as 1980.[10] It is now accepted as a distinct family, but its relationships with several other families remain unresolved.[4]
In molecular phylogenetic analyses, Bignoniaceae has surprisingly weak bootstrap support, given its morphological coherence. The tribe Jacarandeae (Digomphia and Jacaranda) is sister to the rest of the family, which is known as the Core Bignoniaceae. The Core Bignoniaceae is strongly supported in all molecular phylogenetic analyses, but has no known morphological synapomorphy.[6]
No subfamilies have been proposed for Bignoniaceae in recent taxonomy, but in 2004, Fischer et al. divided the family into seven tribes: Tourrettieae, Eccremocarpeae, Tecomeae (sensu lato), Bignonieae, Oroxyleae, Crescentieae, and Coleeae.[7] Since that time, Tourrettieae and Eccremocarpeae have been merged under the name Tourrettieae.[6] Tecomeae sensu lato has been shown to be polyphyletic, consisting of the following groups: Astianthus, Jacarandeae, Argylia, Delostoma, Perianthomega, Catalpeae, Tecomeae sensu stricto, and all of Crescentiina except those genera placed in Crescentieae or Coleeae. All of these groups are monophyletic except Crescentiina pro parte. The whole Crescentiina is monophyletic. Crescentiina is one of a type of name with no definite taxonomic rank.[26] Crescentiina is composed of two strongly supported clades, informally named the Tabebuia alliance and the Paleotropical clade. The tribe Crescentieae is embedded in the Tabebuia alliance and might be expanded to include Spirotecoma.[27] Coleeae sensu Fischer et al. (2004) is polyphyletic because of the inclusion of Kigelia, and it is nested within the Paleotropical clade.[28]Perianthomega has been transferred from Tecomeae sensu stricto to Bignonieae, where it is sister to the remainder of the tribe.[14] Thus, Bignoniaceae can be divided into 10 monophyletic groups.
Phylogeny
The phylogenetic tree shown below is based on the results of four phylogenetic studies.[6][14][27][28] For all clades, posterior probability is at least 0.95 and bootstrap support is at least 70%, except where indicated otherwise.
In 2009, a phylogenetic study divided Bignoniaceae into 10 monophyleticgroups, as shown in the genus list below.[citation needed] Six of these groups have been recognized as tribes at one time or another, and are represented by their tribal names. Two of the groups are monogeneric and are designated by their constituent genera, Argylia and Delostoma. The other two groups are given informal names, pending a formal revision of the infrafamilial classification.
Astianthus has never been sampled for DNA and its systematic position within the family remains obscure. Likewise, the placement of Romeroa in the Tabebuia alliance and the placement of Sphingiphila in Bignonieae are in doubt.
Tecomaria is not included in the list below, and its recognition is controversial. It is monotypic (Tecomaria capensis), and had been long accepted, but was returned to Tecoma in 1980.[10] A molecular phylogenetic study resolved it as sister to another South African genus, Podranea, but with only weak bootstrap support.[6]Tecomaria has not yet been resurrected or transferred to another genus.[13]
The tribe Bignonieae has been the subject of considerable revision since 2006. Fischer et al. placed 46 genera in this tribe.[7] Afterward, Perianthomega was transferred to it from Tecomeae sensu lato[14] and Pachyptera was resurrected from Mansoa. Twenty-five of the genera of Fischer have been subsumed into other genera as follows: Gardnerodoxa into Neojobertia; Memora into Adenocalymma; Leucocalantha into Pachyptera; Pseudocatalpa, Paragonia, Periarrabidaea, Spathicalyx, and Ceratophytum into Tanaecium; Arrabidaea and Piriadacus into Fridericia; Clytostoma, Cydista, Macranthisiphon, Mussatia, Phryganocydia, Potamoganos, Roentgenia and Saritaea into Bignonia; also Distictis, Glaziovia, Haplolophium, and Pithecoctenium into Amphilophium. Thus, 23 genera are now recognized in Bignonieae.[13]
Many species of Bignoniaceae have some use, either commercially or ethnobotanically, but the most important, by far, are those planted as ornamentals, especially the flowering trees. Jacaranda, Campsis, Pyrostegia, Tabebuia, Catalpa, Roseodendron, Handroanthus and Crescentia all have species of horticultural significance, at least in warm climates.[7][27] Several others, including Tecoma, Podranea, Pandorea, Bignonia and Mansoa are frequently grown as ornamentals, at least in certain areas of the tropics.[8] A great many species are known in cultivation, if only rarely.[9]
Handroanthus and the unrelated Guaiacum (Zygophyllaceae) have the hardest, heaviest, and most durable wood of the American tropics. Important timber trees in Handroanthus include H. heptaphyllus, H. serratifolius, H. guayacan, H. chrysanthus, and H. billbergii.[11]Tabebuia rosea (including Tabebuia pentaphylla) is harvested for lumber throughout the New World tropics.[30]Tabebuia heterophylla, and Tabebuia angustata are important sources of lumber for some of the Caribbean islands. Several species of Catalpa are also important timber trees.
Paratecoma was once the most important timber tree of the Rio de Janeiro area, but relentless exploitation has brought it to the verge of extinction.[11] Several of the rare species of Bignoniaceae produce excellent wood, but are often not recognized by lumberjacks.[30]
In northern Colombia, shavings of the stems of Dolichandra quadrivalvis are added to bait which is left overnight near the burrows of crabs. The crabs are paralyzed for a few hours after eating the bait and are picked up by crabbers in the morning. The crabs recover before they reach market, and no harm from eating them has been reported.[11]
Medical claims are innumerable and usually spurious. Gentry describes an especially ludicrous example.[11]
Misidentification of plants, even by botanists, continues to be a big problem for ethnobotany, and it is especially severe for Bignoniaceae. Voucherspecimens are often sterile and fragmentary, making them nearly impossible to identify. False medical claims are often based on mistaken identification.[11]
The bark of several species of Handroanthus is sold in South American markets. Similar-looking bark is often fraudulently passed off as Handroanthus. It is used in various ways to relieve certain symptoms of certain cancers.[11] No evidence shows it prevents the disease or slows its progression, as is often claimed.
^Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (2009), "An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III", Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 161 (2): 105–121, doi:10.1111/j.1095-8339.2009.00996.x, hdl:10654/18083
^ abVernon H. Heywood, Richard K. Brummitt, Ole Seberg, and Alastair Culham. Flowering Plant Families of the World. Firefly Books: Ontario, Canada. (2007). ISBN978-1-55407-206-4.
^ abcdefOlmstead, Richard G.; Zjhra, Michelle L.; Lohmann, Lúcia G.; Grose, Susan O.; Eckert, Andrew J. (2009). "A molecular phylogeny and classification of Bignoniaceae". American Journal of Botany. 96 (9): 1731–1743. doi:10.3732/ajb.0900004. PMID21622359.
^ abcdefghijklEberhard Fischer, Inge Theisen, and Lúcia G. Lohmann. 2004. "Bignoniaceae". pages 9-38. In: Klaus Kubitzki (editor) and Joachim W. Kadereit (volume editor). The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants volume VII. Springer-Verlag: Berlin; Heidelberg, Germany. ISBN978-3-540-40593-1
^ abGeorge W. Staples and Derral R. Herbst. 2005. "A Tropical Garden Flora" Bishop Museum Press: Honolulu, HI, USA. ISBN978-1-58178-039-0
^ abAnthony Huxley, Mark Griffiths, and Margot Levy (1992). The New Royal Horticultural Society Dictionary of Gardening. The Macmillan Press, Limited: London. The Stockton Press: New York. ISBN978-0-333-47494-5 (set).
^ abcdeGentry, Alwyn H. (1980). ""Bignoniaceae: Part I (Crescentieae and Tourrettieae)". Flora Neotropica". Monograph. 25 (1): 1–130. JSTOR4393736.
^ abDavid J. Mabberley. 2008. Mabberley's Plant-Book third edition (2008). Cambridge University Press: UK. ISBN978-0-521-82071-4
^ abcdeLúcia G. Lohmann and Carmen U. Ulloa. 2007 onward. Bignoniaceae in iPlants prototype Checklist. (See External links below).
^ abcdefgLohmann, Lúcia G. (2006). "Untangling the phylogeny of neotropical lianas (Bignonieae, Bignoniaceae)". American Journal of Botany. 93 (2): 304–318. doi:10.3732/ajb.93.2.304. PMID21646191.
^Pace, Marcelo R.; Lohmann, Lúcia G.; Angyalossy, Veronica (2011). "Evolution of disparity between the regular and variant phloem in Bignonieae (Bignoniaceae)". American Journal of Botany. 98 (4): 602–618. doi:10.3732/ajb.1000269. PMID21613161.
^Robert Hegnauer. 1989. Chemotaxonomie der Pflanzen 8:128–138. Birkhäuser Verlag: Basel, Switzerland; Boston MA, USA; Berlin, Germany. ISBN978-3-7643-1895-6
^Goldblatt, Peter; Gentry, Alwyn H. (1979). "Cytology of Bignoniaceae". Botaniska Notiser. 132 (4): 475–482.
^James L. Reveal. 2008on. "Bignoniaceae" In: A checklist of suprageneric names for extant vascular plants At: Home page of James L. Reveal & C. Rose Broome. (See External links below).
^Bignonia In: International Plant Names Index. (see External links below).
^Umberto Quattrocchi. 2000. CRC World Dictionary of Plant Names volume I. CRC Press: Boca Raton; New York; Washington, DC;, USA. London, UK. ISBN978-0-8493-2675-2 (vol. I).
^George Bentham and Joseph D. Hooker. 1876. Genera plantarum :ad exemplaria imprimis in Herberiis Kewensibus servata definita vol. 2 part 2:1026-1053. Reeve & Co. London, England. (See External links below).
^Russell E. Spangler and Richard G. Olmstead. 1999. "Phylogenetic Analysis of Bignoniaceae Based on the cpDNA Gene Sequences of rbcL and ndhF". Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden86(1):33-46. (See External links below).
^ abcdSusan O. Grose; Richard G. Olmstead (2007), "Evolution of a Charismatic Neotropical Clade: Molecular Phylogeny of Tabebuia s.l., Crescentieae, and Allied Genera (Bignoniaceae)", Systematic Botany, 32 (3): 650–659, doi:10.1600/036364407782250553, JSTOR25064274, S2CID8824926
^ abZjhra, Michelle L.; Sytsma, Kenneth J.; Olmstead, Richard G. (2004). "Delimitation of Malagasy tribe Coleeae and implications for fruit evolution in Bignoniaceae inferred from a chloroplast DNA phylogeny". Plant Systematics and Evolution. 245 (1–2): 55–67. doi:10.1007/s00606-003-0025-y. S2CID13203053.
^Susan O. Grose; Richard G. Olmstead (2007), "Taxonomic Revisions in the Polyphyletic Genus Tabebuia s.l. (Bignoniaceae)", Systematic Botany, 32 (3): 660–670, doi:10.1600/036364407782250652, S2CID86256518
^ abRecord, Samuel J.; Hess, Robert W. (1940). "American timbers of the family Bignoniaceae". Tropical Woods. 63: 9–38.
^Christian Rätsch. 2005. The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants (translated by John R. Baker). Park Street Press: Rochester VT, USA. ISBN978-0-89281-978-2.
^Gentry, Alwyn H.; Cook, Kathleen (1984). "Martinella (Bignoniaceae): a widely used eye medicine if South America". Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 11 (3): 337–343. doi:10.1016/0378-8741(84)90079-5. PMID6482483.
Sources
Alwyn H. Gentry. 1992. "Bignoniaceae: Part II (Tecomeae)". Flora Neotropica Monograph 25(2):1-150. (See External links below).
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Bignoniaceae.