Phylogeny and evolution of the epiphytic Rhipsalideae (Cactaceae) [Elektronische Ressource] / Nadja Korotkova. Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakultät

Nadja Korotkova

Sujets

• Biologie

Informations

• Publié par: rheinische_friedrich-wilhelms-universitat_bonn
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2011
• Nombre de lectures: 41
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 16 Mo

Extrait

Phylogeny and evolution of the epiphytic
Rhipsalideae (Cactaceae)



Dissertation



zur
Erlangung des Doktorgrades (Dr. rer. nat.)
der
Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät
der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn




vorgelegt von

Nadja Korotkova

aus Moskau



Bonn, Juni 2011

Angefertigt mit Genehmigung der Mathematisch–Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät
der Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhems-Universität Bonn.





Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Wilhelm Barthlott
Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Thomas Borsch






























Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 8. August 2011



Diese Dissertation ist auf dem Hochschulschriftenserver der ULB Bonn
http://hss.ulb.uni-bonn.de/diss_online elektronisch publiziert.




Erscheinungsjahr 2011 Preface and Acknowledgements
First of all, I want to thank my supervisor Prof. Wilhelm Barthlott. His lectures
were the main reason why I became interested in botany as a student. He made my
PhD study possible by funding my position and he continuously supported me. I am
thankful for the many things that I could learn from him. I could also benefit much
from his knowledge on the Rhipsalideae. I am also grateful that he gave me the
opportunity to teach systematics here at the Nees-Institute. I enjoyed teaching a lot
and it was a very valuable experience.
I am as much indebted to Prof. Thomas Borsch, my second supervisor. He awoke
my interest in molecular phylogenetics. He was also largely responsible for the
conception and the methodological approaches of this study. He continuously
encouraged me and helped me a lot. I am very grateful for his advice and his valuable
comments on all parts of my thesis. I also thank him very much for inviting me to
Berlin several times and for giving me the opportunity to do some parts of the
molecular work there and also and for enabling each time a pleasant stay.
I thank Prof. Dietmar Quandt (Nees Institute, Bonn) for giving me the
opportunity to work in the molecular laboratory of the Nees Institute after he took over
as head of this laboratory. I also thank him for help with the alignments and for
helpful discussions and advice on the molecular aspects of my work.
I wish to express thanks to Prof. Kai Müller (Institute of Evolutionary Biology,
Münster) for help in the initial phase of my dissertation and especially for
programming the scripts for the OTU recognition analyses in Chapter 3.
This study would not have been possible without the Rhipsalideae living
collections at the Botanical Gardens Bonn, the Botanical Garden Berlin-Dahlem and
the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew. I am therefore very grateful to those people who
maintain these collections since many years. In Bonn, these are especially W. Lobin
(curator) as well as Otto Kriesten and Birgit Emde.
I thank Nigel Taylor (RBG Kew) for proving material from the living collection in
Kew. As he is one of the world’s experts on the Rhipsalideae, my sincere thanks for
letting me benefit from his knowledge on the morphology and ecology of this plant
group. I further thank him for helpful comments on the Chapters 2 and 3.
Other people and institutions kindly provided material for this study. I thank Urs
Eggli, Sukkulenten Sammlung Zürich, Switzerland, for material of Calymmanthium
substerile, Ralf Bauer (Offenburg) for material of Schlumbergera microsphaerica and
Graham Charles for material of Lymanbensonia brevispina. This study could also
benefit a lot from the fieldwork of Pierre Ibisch who collected a lot of Bolivian epiphytic
cacti.
I Preface and Acknowledgements

I am grateful to David Hunt (Milborne Port, UK) for fruitful discussions and
comments and advise, especially on taxonomic and nomenclatural questions and for
comments on Chapter 2.
Eberhard Fischer (Universität Koblenz-Landau) kindly provided the Latin
diagnosis for the Lymanbensonieae (Chapter 2).
Thanks to Laurens Geffert from the BIOMAPS working group of the Nees
Institute, Bonn, for creating the diversity map of the Rhipsalideae and the distribution
map of Rhipsalis baccifera.
The molecular work has been carried out in the molecular laboratory of the Nees
Institute, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität Bonn and in the laboratories of
the B Systematic Botany working group at the Institute for Biology, Freie Univesität
Berlin. I would like to thank the many people who assisted with the laboratory work or
data analysis. First of all, many thanks to Kim Govers who supported a lot me in the
lab in Bonn and later during my visits to Berlin. In Bonn, I got much help in the lab
from Monika Ballmann, Leonie Zabel and Bernadette Große-Veldmann and Michael
Krug helped with the analyses of the phylogenetic structure.
I am grateful to many people in Berlin for their assistance. I thank Monika
Lüchow for help with the chromosome counts. For the development of the
microsatellite markers, I could benefit a lot from the experience and knowledge of Ludo
Muller and Martina Nagy (Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin). Also thanks to Susan
Mbedi (Berlin Center for Genomics in Biodiversity Research) for carrying out the 454
sequencing. Finally, thanks to Susy Fuentes for all kinds of help during my visits to
Berlin, and for her friendship.
Thanks to Karola Maul, Jasmin Obholzer, and especially Bernadette Große-
Veldmann for extensive proof-reading.
The years that I have spent at the Nees Institute have been a very enjoyable time
for me. I thank all the colleagues for their sympathy and for making this institute such
a pleasant place to work.
The study was largely supported by the Akademie der Wissenschaften und der
Literatur, Mainz in the context of the project “Biodiverstät im Wandel”. Molecular
parts were done also in cooperation with the working group of my second supervisor
Prof. Thomas Borsch (Freie Universität Berlin) and partly supported there.

II Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Chapter 1
General Introduction ..........................................................................................1
1.1 Evolution and systematics of the Cactaceae .......................................................1
1.2 Subject to debates: Cactaceae classification .......................................................2
1.3 Current understanding of phylogenetic relationships in Cactaceae .................3
1.4 Epiphytic Cactaceae lineages..............................................................................4
1.4.1 Origin of the epiphytic cacti, their phylogenetic position and putative closest
relatives and overview on earlier taxonomic treatments ..................................... 5
1.4.2 The tribe Rhipsalideae DC. .................................................................................... 7
1.5 Phylogeny inference at species level..................................................................11
1.6 Marker choice for species-level studies .............................................................12
1.7 Plant DNA barcoding.........................................................................................13
1.8 Background, aims and outline of this study .....................................................14
1.8.1 Study outline.........................................................................................................15

Chapter 2
A phylogenetic analysis of Pfeiffera and the reinstatement of
Lymanbensonia as an independently evolved lineage of epiphytic
Cactaceae within a new tribe Lymanbensonieae .......................................17
2.1 Introduction........................................................................................................18
2.2 Material and Methods ........................................................................................21
2.2.1 Plant material and taxon sampling ..................................................................... 21
2.2.2 Isolation of genomic DNA ..................................................................................... 21
2.2.3 Amplification and sequencing .............................................................................. 21
2.2.4 Alignment, coding of length mutational events .................................................. 22
2.2.5 Outgroup definition...............................................................................................23
2.2.6 Phylogenetic analyses...........................................................................................23
2.3 Results.................................................................................................................24
2.3.1 Success of amplification, sequencing and alignability........................................ 24
2.3.2 Sequence characteristics.......................................................................................24
2.3.3 Inversions........................