Systematic Revision of Astragalus sect. Adiaspastus, sect. Macrophyllium and sect. Pterophorus (Fabaceae)

Englera ◽  
2000 ◽  
pp. 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahin Zarre-Mobarakeh
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Revision ◽  
Astragalus Sect

Review of the genus Astragalus section Helmia (Fabaceae)

2019 ◽  
pp. 120-131
Author(s):  
M. S. Knyazev
Keyword(s):  
Identification Key ◽  
The Other ◽  
Taxonomic Review ◽  
Narrow Scope ◽  
A Priority ◽  
Astragalus Sect

A taxonomic review of species and intraspecific taxa of the Astragalus L. section Helmia Bunge is presented. We treat the section Helmia in a traditional, narrow scope, including only 9 species and subspecies: A. helmii Fisch. ex DC., A. tergeminus (Knjaz., Kulikov et E. G. Philippov) Knjaz., A. permiensis C. A. Mey. ex Rupr., A. depauperatus Ledeb. (= A. chakassiensis Polozhij), A. kasachstanicus Golosk. subsp. kasachstanicus, A. kasachstanicus subsp. coloratus Knjaz., A. gregorii B. Fedtsch. et Basil. (= A. tuvinicus Timokhina), A. heptapotamicus Sumnev., A. ionae Palib. ex Gontsch. et Popov. With regard to the other 16 species of sect. Helmia in its widest sense, as accepted in the monograph by D. Podlech and Sh. Zarre (2013), we believe it more correct to attribute them to other sections. The rank of A. helmii var. tergeminus Knjaz., Kulikov et E. G. Philippov is raised to the species, A. tergeminus (Knjaz., Kulikov et E. G. Philippov) Knjaz. It is shown that A. gregorii is a priority name of A. tuvinicus. The epitype of A. permiensis C. A. Mey. ex Rupr. is designated. An identification key and a map of distribution for all species and subspecies of Astragalus sect. Helmia are presented.

scholarly journals A systematic revision of Capparaceae and Cleomaceae in Egypt: an evaluation of the generic delimitations of Capparis and Cleome using ecological and genetic diversity

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed Abd. S. El zayat ◽  
Mahmoud El Sayd Ali ◽  
Mohamed Hamdy Amar
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Diversity ◽  
Morphological Characteristics ◽  
Systematic Position ◽  
Diversity Analysis ◽  
Polymorphic Markers ◽  
Ecological Distribution ◽  
Specific Group ◽  
Systematic Revision ◽  
Dna Evidence ◽  
The Family

Abstract Background The Capparaceae family is commonly recognized as a caper, while Cleomaceae represents one of small flowering family within the order Brassicales. Earlier, Cleomaceae was included in the family Capparaceae; then, it was moved to a distinct family after DNA evidence. Variation in habits and a bewildering array of floral and fruit forms contributed to making Capparaceae a “trash-basket” family in which many unrelated plants were placed. Indeed, family Capparaceae and Cleomaceae are in clear need of more detailed systematic revision. Results Here, in the present study, the morphological characteristics and the ecological distribution as well as the genetic diversity analysis among the twelve species of both Capparaceae and Cleomaceae have been determined. The genetic analysis has been checked using 15 ISSR, 30 SRAP, and 18 ISTR to assess the systematic knots between the two families. In order to detect the molecular phylogeny, a comparative analysis of the three markers was performed based on the exposure of discriminating capacity, efficiency, and phylogenetic heatmap. Our results indicated that there is a morphological and ecological variation between the two families. Moreover, the molecular analysis confirmed that ISTR followed by SRAP markers has superior discriminating capacity for describing the genetic diversity and is able to simultaneously distinguish many polymorphic markers per reaction. Indeed, both the PCA and HCA data have drawn a successful annotation relationship in Capparaceae and Cleome species to evaluate whether the specific group sort individual or overlap groups. Conclusion The outcomes of the morphological and ecological characterization along with the genetic diversity indicated an insight solution thorny interspecies in Cleome and Gynandropsis genera as a distinct family (Cleomaceae) and the other genera (Capparis, Cadaba, Boscia, and Maerua) as Capparaceae. Finally, we recommended further studies to elucidate the systematic position of Dipterygium glaucum.

Feather mites of the genera Dubininia and Cacatualges (Acari: Xolalgidae) associated with parrots (Aves: Psittaciformes) of the Old World

Zootaxa ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4272 (4) ◽  
pp. 451 ◽  
Author(s):  
SERGEY V. MIRONOV ◽  
RAINER EHRNSBERGER ◽  
JACEK DABERT
Keyword(s):  
New Species ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
New Guinea ◽  
Melopsittacus Undulatus ◽  
Feather Mites ◽  
Systematic Revision ◽  
Old World ◽  
New Diagnosis ◽  
First Time

This paper gives a systematic revision of feather mites of the genera Dubininia Vassilev, 1958 and Cacatualges Dabert, Badek and Skoracki, 2007 (Xolalgidae: Ingrassiinae) associated with parrots (Aves: Psittaciformes) of the Old World. Five new species are described: Cacatualges probosciger sp. n. from Probosciger aterrimus (Gmelin) (Cacatuidae) from New Guinea, Dubininia charmosynae sp. n. from Charmosyna pulchella Gray GR (Psittaculidae) from New Guinea, D. micropsittae sp. n. from Micropsitta pusio pusio (Scaltter) (Psittaculidae) from New Guinea, D. nestori sp. n. from Nestor notabilis Gould (Strigopidae) from New Zealand, and D. pezopori sp. n. from Pezoporus wallicus (Kerr) (Psittaculidae) from Tasmania, Australia. Four previously described species of Dubininia are redescribed based on material from type hosts: D. curta (Trouessart, 1885) from Platycercus elegans (Gmelin) (Psittaculidae), D. lorina (Trouessart, 1885) from Lorius domicella (Linnaeus) (Psittaculidae), D. melopsittaci Atyeo and Gaud, 1987 from Melopsittacus undulatus (Shaw) (Psittaculidae), and D. psittacina (Trouessart, 1885) from Strigops harboptilus Gray GR (Strigopidae) from New Zealand. A new diagnosis for the genus Dubininia is provided. A key to all presently known Dubininia species is provided for the first time. 

scholarly journals AB1048 RHUPUS SYNDROME IN A TERTIARY HOSPITAL

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1815.1-1815
Author(s):  
I. Martínez Cordellat ◽  
R. Gonzalez Mazario ◽  
M. De la Rubia Navarro ◽  
C. Pávez Perales ◽  
S. Leal Rodriguez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lupus Erythematosus ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Jak Inhibitors ◽  
Systematic Revision ◽  
Erosive Arthritis ◽  
Rheumatoid Nodules ◽  
Clinical Records ◽  
Low Prevalence ◽  
First Diagnosis

Background:Rhupus syndrome (RhS) is a rare combination of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Different studies describe RhS cases that begin with erosive arthritis and the presence of rheumatoid factor (RF) and/or anti CCP and then the SLE symptoms.Objectives:Despite the fact that RhS shows a low prevalence, it would be useful to know clinical characteristics of RhS patients since their therapy and outcome differ from those having RA or SLE alone.Methods:Retrospective study with systematic revision of electronic clinical records of RhS patients was performed. Demographic, clinical and immunological data were collected.Results:Eight RhS patients were included (all fulfilled SLICC 2012 criteria for SLE and ACR 2010 for RA). Mean age was 67.3 (45-84) years (7 were female).In 3 cases RA was the first diagnosis with a mean evolution of 4.5 years until SLE diagnosis. In contrast, in 5 cases SLE was the first diagnosis with a mean evolution of 7.2 years until RA diagnosis. Photosensitivity and arthritis were the predominant clinical manifestations. One patient presents pericarditis and other case showed rheumatoid nodules in elbows. Renal, pulmonary or neurological affection was no reported.4 patients were under biological/JAK inhibitors therapies (2 abatacept, 1 rituximab and 1 baricitinib) with favorable response of treatment.Conclusion:In contrast to other series, only the 37.5% of our RhS cases begins with polyarticular seropositive arthritis. The 62.5% started with SLE symptoms as haematological alterations, cutaneous and serological manifestation, and showed longer progression to have polyarticular affection. Thus, RhS diagnosis is earlier in patients that begin with RA symptoms. 4 RhS patients were refractory to DMARd treatments, where biological/JAK inhibitors therapies are needed.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Systematic revision and cladistic analysis of the South American genus Endeius Coiffait & Sáiz (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae)

2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Chani-Posse de Maus
Keyword(s):  
Cladistic Analysis ◽  
Identification Key ◽  
External Morphology ◽  
Female Genitalia ◽  
Valid Species ◽  
South American ◽  
The South ◽  
Systematic Revision ◽  
Male And Female

AbstractThe genus Endeius Coiffait & Sáiz, 1968 (Staphylininae: Staphylinini), distributed from Chile and Argentina through Juan Fernández Is. and Galapagos Is., is revised using characters of external morphology and male and female genitalia. Endeius comprises seven valid species: E. punctipennis (Solier), E. nitidipennis (Solier), E. subpunctipennis Coiffait & Sáiz, E. loensis Coiffait & Sáiz, E. franzi Sáiz, E. lugubris Sáiz and E. ovaliceps Coiffait. Belonuchus multipunctatus (Coiffait), comb. nov., is excluded from Endeius. An identification key to all species of the genus is provided. Monophyly of Endeius, as considered in the present study, is supported by one synapomorphy from the external morphology. Within the genus, the best supported subgroup consists of E. punctipennis (Solier), E. subpunctipennis Coiffait & Sáiz, E. loensis Coiffait & Sáiz and E. ovaliceps Coiffait.

A Systematic Revision of Gaertnera (Rubiaceae, Gaertnereae)1

2009 ◽  
Vol 96 (4) ◽  
pp. 575-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon T. Malcomber ◽  
Charlotte M. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Revision
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document