Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres
Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres Schriften zu Genetischen Ressourcen - Genres
T. SMEKALOVA seed collection of the Vavilov Institute, and herbarium collections of the Vavilov Institute (WIR), the Komarov Botanical Institute (LE) and other botanical institutions were included in this study. Herbarium work is the most essential step in every taxonomic investigation (MCALISTER 1998), since it gives the opportunity for a comparative study of a great number of specimens from different origins. The worldwide herbarium collection of the Vavilov Institute contains over 500 specimens of 51 species of the genus Lathyrus. Through this research the circumscription, structure and status of the group of species, which earlier were included by different authors in the section Cicercula (Medik.) Gren. and Godr. or in the subgenus Lathyrus, were revised accordingly (KUPICHA 1983). We consider this group of species as a separate subgenus, which includes 21 species. Four subsections and three series are distinguished within it, mainly by a complex of morphological and anatomical characters of flowers, pods and seeds, the structure of the vascular tissue in the stem and the character of the seed coat. The evolution of the genus followed the path of separation of annual from perennial species. The increasingly arid environment played a key role in reducing the life cycle in a number of species and in the development of a complex of specific morphological-anatomical characters of the vegetative and generative organs. A system of intraspecific taxa has also been elaborated for polymorphic species. The most complex intraspecific differentiation is found in the domesticated species Lathyrus sativus. In recent years, systematic investigations have often been based on the application of a single method. Completely new branches of systematics have been established, such as ecosystematics (MELIKYAN 1984), molecular systematics (DOYLE 1992), gene systematics (ANTONOV 2000) and others. Concentration on one particular method and lack of appreciation of others often lead to errors in phylogenetic reconstructions, the latter being the main purpose of systematics. “A system is meant to reflect the results of evolution, and evolution is a permanent search of the new” (SKVORTSOV 1979). A taxon will enter life’s arena only when it finds new ways to live. Consequently, it is not possible to work out some uniform, universal rules for systematic constructions. Systematics is a creative process, it is an interpretation, and although based on concrete data from many sciences, it can be generated only by intellect. “Modern systematics, being a complex and synthetic discipline, … cannot ‘exhaust itself’, but rather the opposite because, due to its exclusive position in the system of sciences, the circle of problems limiting the scope of systematics activity is perpetually enlarging” (TIKHOMIROV 1979). Acknowledgements The assistance of Irina Sokolova (St. Petersburg), Richard Lester (Birmingham), Clive Francis (CLIMA, Australia) and Helmut Knüpffer (Gatersleben) in improving the English language of the manuscript is gratefully acknowledged. 67
Development of Vavilov’s concept of the intraspecific classification of cultivated plants References AGAEV, M.G. (1987): Vavilov’s concept of species and its development. - Genetics 23(11), 1949-1960 (In Russian). ANDREWS, S., A. LESLIE and C. ALEXANDER (Eds.) (1999): Taxonomy of Cultivated Plants. Third International Symposium. Roy. Bot. Gardens, Kew, 553 pp. ANTONOV, A.C. (2000): The basis of genosystematics of higher plants. Moscow, 134 pp. (In Russian). BARULINA, E.I. (1937): Lens (Tourn.) Adans. - In: Flora of cultivated plants. Grain legumes. Moscow, Leningrad, 4, 127-168. (In Russian). BOWDEN, W.N. (1959): The taxonomy and nomenclature of the wheats, barleys and ryes and their wild relatives. - Can. J. Bot. 37(4), 657-684. CLUSIUS, C. (1601): Rariorum plantarum historia (Que accesserium proxima pagina docebit). Ex officina Plantiniana apud Ionannem Moretum. 12 pp. DITMER, E.E. (1937): Stizolobium P. Browne. In: Flora of cultivated plants. Grain legumes. Moscow, Leningrad, 4, 389-409. (In Russian). DOYLE, J.J. (1992): Gene trees and species trees: Molecular systematics as onecharacter taxonomy. - Syst. Bot. 17, 144-163. FLORA OF THE USSR (1924-1957): Moscow, Leningrad, vol. 1-24 (In Russian). GOVOROV, L.I. (1937): Pisum Tourn. In: Flora of cultivated plants. Grain legumes. Moscow, Leningrad, 4, 231-321. (In Russian). GRENIER, J.C. and D.A. GODRON (1848): Flore de France 1, 478-492. Paris, Besançon. GREUTER, W., BARRIE, F.R., BURDET, H.M., CHALONER, W.G., DEMOULIN, V., HAWKSWORTH, D.L., JØRGENSEN, P.M., NICOLSON, D.H., SILVA, P.C., TREHANE, P. and MCNEILL, J. (Eds.) 1994: International code of botanical nomenclature (Tokyo Code) adopted by the 15th International Botanical Congress, Yokohama, 1993. - Regnum Veget. 131, 389 pp. [http://www.bgbm.fu-berlin.de/iapt/nomenclature/code/tokyo-e/Contents.htm]. HETTERSCHEID, W.L.A. and W.A. BRANDENBURG (1995): Culton versus taxon: conceptual issues in cultivated plant systematics. - Taxon 44, 161-173. KNÜPFFER, H., I. TERENTYEVA, K. HAMMER, O. KOVALEVA and K. SATO (2003): Ecogeographical diversity - a Vavilovian approach. In: R. VON BOTHMER, TH.J.L. VAN HINTUM, H. KNÜPFFER and K. SATO (Eds.), Diversity in Barley (Hordeum vulgare). Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 53-76. KOMARNITSKY, N.A., L.V. KUDRJASHOV and A.A. URANOV (1975): Systematics of plants. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 608 pp. (In Russian). KOMAROV, V.L. (1940): Doctrine about species. Academy of Sciences (In Russian). KONAREV, V.G. (1995): The species as a biological system in evolution and breeding. Biochemical and molecular-biochemical aspects. St. Petersburg (In Russian). KUPICHA, F.K. (1983): The intraspecific structure of Lathyrus. - Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinburgh 41(2), 209-244. 68
- Page 27 and 28: R. Mansfeld’s scientific influenc
- Page 29 and 30: History of Plant Genetic Resources
- Page 31 and 32: History of Plant Genetic Resources
- Page 33 and 34: Mansfeld's Encyclopedia of Agricult
- Page 35 and 36: Mansfeld's Encyclopedia of Agricult
- Page 37 and 38: Mansfeld's Encyclopedia of Agricult
- Page 39 and 40: Mansfeld's Encyclopedia of Agricult
- Page 41 and 42: Mansfeld's Encyclopedia of Agricult
- Page 43 and 44: The "Mansfeld Database" in its nati
- Page 45 and 46: The "Mansfeld Database" in its nati
- Page 47 and 48: A Species Compendium for Plant Gene
- Page 49 and 50: A Species Compendium for Plant Gene
- Page 51 and 52: A Species Compendium for Plant Gene
- Page 53 and 54: Some notes on problems of taxonomy
- Page 55 and 56: Some notes on problems of taxonomy
- Page 57 and 58: Some notes on problems of taxonomy
- Page 59 and 60: Some notes on problems of taxonomy
- Page 61 and 62: Some notes on problems of taxonomy
- Page 63 and 64: Theoretical and practical problems
- Page 65 and 66: Theoretical and practical problems
- Page 67 and 68: Theoretical and practical problems
- Page 69 and 70: Theoretical and practical problems
- Page 71 and 72: Development of Vavilov’s concept
- Page 73 and 74: Development of Vavilov’s concept
- Page 75 and 76: Development of Vavilov’s concept
- Page 77: Development of Vavilov’s concept
- Page 81 and 82: Development of Vavilov’s concept
- Page 83 and 84: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 85 and 86: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 87 and 88: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 89 and 90: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 91 and 92: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 93 and 94: Multiple domestications and their t
- Page 95 and 96: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 97 and 98: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 99 and 100: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 101 and 102: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 103 and 104: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 105 and 106: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 107 and 108: Ethnobotanical studies on cultivate
- Page 109 and 110: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 111 and 112: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 113 and 114: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 115 and 116: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 117 and 118: Inventorying food plants in France
- Page 119 and 120: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 121 and 122: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 123 and 124: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 125 and 126: The neglected diversity of immigran
- Page 127 and 128: The neglected diversity of immigran
Development of Vavilov’s concept of the intraspecific classification of cultivated plants<br />
References<br />
AGAEV, M.G. (1987): Vavilov’s concept of species and its development. - Genetics<br />
23(11), 1949-1960 (In Russian).<br />
ANDREWS, S., A. LESLIE and C. ALEXANDER (Eds.) (1999): Taxonomy of Cultivated<br />
Plants. Third International Symposium. Roy. Bot. Gardens, Kew, 553 pp.<br />
ANTONOV, A.C. (2000): The basis of genosystematics of higher plants. Moscow, 134<br />
pp. (In Russian).<br />
BARULINA, E.I. (1937): Lens (Tourn.) Adans. - In: Flora of cultivated plants. Grain legumes.<br />
Moscow, Leningrad, 4, 127-168. (In Russian).<br />
BOWDEN, W.N. (1959): The taxonomy and nomenclature of the wheats, barleys and<br />
ryes and their wild relatives. - Can. J. Bot. 37(4), 657-684.<br />
CLUSIUS, C. (1601): Rariorum plantarum historia (Que accesserium proxima pagina<br />
docebit). Ex officina Plantiniana apud Ionannem Moretum. 12 pp.<br />
DITMER, E.E. (1937): Stizolobium P. Browne. In: Flora of cultivated plants. Grain legumes.<br />
Moscow, Leningrad, 4, 389-409. (In Russian).<br />
DOYLE, J.J. (1992): Gene trees and species trees: Molecular systematics as onecharacter<br />
taxonomy. - Syst. Bot. 17, 144-163.<br />
FLORA OF THE USSR (1924-1957): Moscow, Leningrad, vol. 1-24 (In Russian).<br />
GOVOROV, L.I. (1937): Pisum Tourn. In: Flora of cultivated plants. Grain legumes.<br />
Moscow, Leningrad, 4, 231-321. (In Russian).<br />
GRENIER, J.C. and D.A. GODRON (1848): Flore de France 1, 478-492. Paris, Besançon.<br />
GREUTER, W., BARRIE, F.R., BURDET, H.M., CHALONER, W.G., DEMOULIN, V.,<br />
HAWKSWORTH, D.L., JØRGENSEN, P.M., NICOLSON, D.H., SILVA, P.C., TREHANE, P.<br />
and MCNEILL, J. (Eds.) 1994: International code of botanical nomenclature (Tokyo<br />
Code) adopted by the 15th International Botanical Congress, Yokohama,<br />
1993. - Regnum Veget. 131, 389 pp.<br />
[http://www.bgbm.fu-berlin.de/iapt/nomenclature/code/tokyo-e/Contents.htm].<br />
HETTERSCHEID, W.L.A. and W.A. BRANDENBURG (1995): Culton versus taxon: conceptual<br />
issues in cultivated plant systematics. - Taxon 44, 161-173.<br />
KNÜPFFER, H., I. TERENTYEVA, K. HAMMER, O. KOVALEVA and K. SATO (2003): Ecogeographical<br />
diversity - a Vavilovian approach. In: R. VON BOTHMER, TH.J.L. VAN<br />
HINTUM, H. KNÜPFFER and K. SATO (Eds.), Diversity in Barley (Hordeum vulgare).<br />
Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 53-76.<br />
KOMARNITSKY, N.A., L.V. KUDRJASHOV and A.A. URANOV (1975): Systematics of plants.<br />
Moscow, Prosveshchenie, 608 pp. (In Russian).<br />
KOMAROV, V.L. (1940): Doctrine about species. Academy of Sciences (In Russian).<br />
KONAREV, V.G. (1995): The species as a biological system in evolution and breeding.<br />
Biochemical and molecular-biochemical aspects. St. Petersburg (In Russian).<br />
KUPICHA, F.K. (1983): The intraspecific structure of Lathyrus. - Notes Roy. Bot. Gard.<br />
Edinburgh 41(2), 209-244.<br />
68
Change language