ArticlePDF Available

Molecular systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The four-subfamily subdivision of Rosaceae has been recently replaced by a three-subfamily scheme. The re-circumscribed Rosoideae lacks a solid and well-resolved phylogeny on which a classification can be based. In this study, we sampled 56 genera presumably belonging to Rosoideae and 10 genera belonging to other subfamilies or families and used 12 chloroplast regions (matK, rbcL, trnL, trnL–F, ndhF, ycf1, trnC–ycf6, trnS–G, trnS, psbA–trnH, rpoC1 and trnS–ycf9) to reconstruct their phylogeny. Our results confirmed (1) the exclusion of Rhodotypos and Kerria from Rosoideae and their inclusion in the subfamily Amygdaloideae and (2) the exclusion of Chamaebatia, Cercocarpus, Dryas and Purshia (including Cowania) from Rosoideae and their inclusion in Dryadoideae, the sister subfamily of Rosoideae. Within Rosoideae, there are six strongly supported lineages that correspond to six tribes: Ulmarieae, Colurieae, Rubeae, Roseae, Agrimonieae and Potentilleae. We dated the divergence of Rosoideae back to approximately 69.77 million years ago (Mya; 95% HPD = 61.28–78.33 Mya) and that of the tribes within Rosoideae to from 10.42 to 40.02 million years ago (Mya; 95% HPD = 4.73–59.08 Mya). The subfamily is probably of North American and Asian origin and thrives in the northern hemisphere, especially in Asia. After re-circumscriptions of several genera, there are 36 genera recognized in Rosoideae.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Plant Systematics and Evolution (2020) 306:9
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-020-01629-z
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Molecular systematics ofRosoideae (Rosaceae)
XunChen1,2 · JinluLi1,2· TaoCheng2,3· WenZhang2,3· YanleiLiu2,3· PingWu2,3· XueyingYang4· LingWang1·
ShiliangZhou2,3
Received: 14 August 2019 / Accepted: 8 January 2020
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract
The four-subfamily subdivision of Rosaceae has been recently replaced by a three-subfamily scheme. The re-circumscribed
Rosoideae lacks a solid and well-resolved phylogeny on which a classification can be based. In this study, we sampled 56
genera presumably belonging to Rosoideae and 10 genera belonging to other subfamilies or families and used 12 chloroplast
regions (matK, rbcL, trnL, trnL–F, ndhF, ycf1, trnC–ycf6, trnS–G, trnS, psbA–trnH, rpoC1 and trnS–ycf9) to reconstruct
their phylogeny. Our results confirmed (1) the exclusion of Rhodotypos and Kerria from Rosoideae and their inclusion in the
subfamily Amygdaloideae and (2) the exclusion of Chamaebatia, Cercocarpus, Dryas and Purshia (including Cowania) from
Rosoideae and their inclusion in Dryadoideae, the sister subfamily of Rosoideae. Within Rosoideae, there are six strongly
supported lineages that correspond to six tribes: Ulmarieae, Colurieae, Rubeae, Roseae, Agrimonieae and Potentilleae. We
dated the divergence of Rosoideae back to approximately 69.77 million years ago (Mya; 95% HPD = 61.28–78.33 Mya)
and that of the tribes within Rosoideae to from 10.42 to 40.02 million yearsago (Mya; 95% HPD = 4.73–59.08 Mya). The
subfamily is probably of North American and Asian origin and thrives in the northern hemisphere, especially in Asia. After
re-circumscriptions of several genera, there are 36 genera recognized in Rosoideae.
Keywords Biogeography· Divergence times· Phylogeny· Rosoideae
Introduction
Rosaceae A.L.Jussieu comprises 2825–3500 species
(belonging to 95–125 genera) of trees, shrubs or herbs.
The group is cosmopolitan, mostly occurring in temperate
regions in the northern hemisphere. Many species in this
family are of great economic value, such as strawberries,
apples, cherries, pears and roses.
Several different taxonomic treatments regarding the sub-
division of Rosaceae have been published. The most widely
adopted classification ever (Schulze-Menz 1964) divides the
family into four subfamilies mostly based on fruit types:
Amygdaloideae (Prunoideae), Maloideae, Rosoideae and
Spiraeoideae. Molecular phylogenetic analyses based on
plastid DNA sequences (Morgan etal. 1994; Potter etal.
2002) demonstrated that Schulze-Menz’s (1964) Maloideae,
Prunoideae and most Rosoideae are monophyletic but that
Spiraeoideae is clearly polyphyletic. Based on phylogenetic
analyses of six nuclear and four chloroplast genes, Potter
etal. (2007) subdivided Rosaceae into three subfamilies:
Dryadoideae (comprising nitrogen-fixing species formerly
classified in Rosoideae); Rosoideae and Amygdaloideae.
Handling Editor: Christian Parisod.
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this
article (https ://doi.org/10.1007/s0060 6-020-01629 -z) contains
supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
* Xueying Yang
yxystyhhp@163.com
* Ling Wang
wanglinghlj@126.com
* Shiliang Zhou
slzhou@ibcas.ac.cn
1 College ofLandscape Architecture, Northeast Forestry
University, Harbin150040, China
2 State Key Laboratory ofSystematic andEvolutionary
Botany, Institute ofBotany, Chinese Academy ofSciences,
Beijing100093, China
3 College ofLife Sciences, University ofChinese Academy
ofSciences, Beijing100049, China
4 National Engineering Laboratory forForensic Science,
Key Laboratory ofForensic Genetics, Institute ofForensic
Science, Ministry ofPublic Security, Beijing100038, China
X. Chen etal.
1 3
9 Page 2 of 12
Amygdaloideae includes former Spiraeoideae, Prunoideae,
Maloideae and a few genera formerly in Rosoideae.
The re-circumscribed Rosoideae contains approximately
56 genera and 1500 species of herbs, shrubs and rarely trees.
The fruit type is an achene (torus sometimes fleshy and ber-
rylike) or a drupelet. Plants of the subfamily Rosoideae
occur all over the world, but mainly in the temperate North-
ern Hemisphere, forming intercontinental biogeographic
patterns of disjunction (Li 1952; Raven 1972; Thorne
1972). Among the intercontinental disjunctions, the eastern
Asian and the North American floristic disjunction received
much more attentions (Wen 1998, 1999; Xiang etal. 2000).
However, several genera in Rosoideae such as Acomastylis
Greene, Chamaerhodos Bge. and Waldsteinia Willd. are not
among the 65 genera of seed plants displaying such disjunc-
tion (Wen 1999; Xiang etal. 2000). The North Atlantic Land
Bridges (NALB), which connected eastern North America to
Europe via Greenland and the Bering Land Bridge (BLB),
which connected western North America and northeastern
Asia were used to explain the intercontinental disjunctions
(Tiffney 1985a, b; Tiffney and Manchester 2001; Wen 1999;
Wen etal. 2010). Divergence times of taxa are crucial to
understand which bridge was used by different plant groups
because NALB was closed in the early Eocene (50 Mya) but
BLB remained open until ~ 3.5 Mya. The oldest fossil record
within Rosoideae is Rosa germerensis in the early Eocene
(cf. Palaeobiology database http://paleo db.org). However,
the subfamily was molecularly dated back to 50–80 Mya
(Chin etal. 2014; Xiang etal. 2017; Zhang etal. 2017).
Unfortunately, divergence time estimations of the major
clades in Rosoideae are still lacking. What seems more
important to fill the blanks first is to construct solid phylo-
genetic relationships within Rosoideae.
Rosoideae was divided into different number of tribes
based on morphology (Eriksson etal. 2003; Hutchinson
1964; Kalkman 2004; Schulze-Menz 1964; Takhtajan
1997). The DNA sequence-based studies (Potter etal.
2007; Xiang etal. 2017) suggested six tribes in Rosoideae,
i.e., Agrimonieae, Colurieae, Potentilleae, Roseae,
Rubeae and Ulmarieae. The relationships among some
tribes are still unclear. For example, Roseae was shown
to be sistership to Agrimonieae + Potentilleae (Eriksson
etal. 2003; Xiang etal. 2017) or a relationship between
Roseae + Potentilleae and Agrimonieae (Potter etal. 2007;
Zhang etal. 2017). More phylogenetic and taxonomic
problems within Rosoideae are at generic level. Potentilla
L. is not monophyletic based on molecular phylogenies.
Eriksson etal. (1998) used ITS sequences to investigate
the monophyly of Potentilla in broad sense and found
that Potentilla is a paraphyletic or polyphyletic genus.
The addition of the chloroplast trnL–trnF significantly
improved the resolution of molecular trees, and the genera
Horkelia Cham. & Schltdl. and Ivesia Torr. & A.Gray were
found to be nested within Potentilla (Eriksson etal. 2003).
Still others found that the relationships among Alchemilla
L., Aphanes L. and Lachemilla Focke were uncertain
(Eriksson etal. 2003; Gehrke etal. 2008). These phylo-
genetic uncertainties are probably due to both insufficient
information of DNA sequences and inadequate sampling
of genera, and it is unlikely to provide a comprehensive
and solid phylogeny for the taxonomy of Rosoideae.
In this study, we aim to (1) reconstruct the phylogeny at
generic level within the subfamily Rosoideae; (2) estimate
the divergence times of major clades; and (3) build the
historical biogeography of the subfamily.
Materials andmethods
Plant sampling andgenomic DNA extraction
A total of 48 species from 27 genera in Rosaceae, includ-
ing 39 species from 19 genera in Rosoideae, 3 species
from 2 genera in Prunoideae (= Amygdaloideae), 3 species
from 3 genera in Spiraeoideae and 3 species from 3 genera
in Maloideae (Online Resource 1) were collected based
on the taxonomy of Rosaceae in Flora of China (Lu etal.
2003). Leaves of each species were dried with silica gel.
Genomic DNA was isolated from the dried leaves using
the mCTAB (modified cetyltrimethylammonium bromide)
protocol (Li etal. 2013).
Chloroplast DNA fragment amplication
andsequencing
Six chloroplast regions, trnL–trnF, rbcL, matK, ndhF, ycf1
and rpoC1, were amplified using primers (Online Resource
2) described previously (Dong etal. 2012, 2014, 2015;
Gardens 2007; Taberlet etal. 1991; Yu etal. 2011). PCR
was performed in 20-µL amplification reactions containing
2 µL of DNA solution (20ng), 2 µL of 10× PCR buffer,
2 µL dNTP mix (0.2mM), 1 µL of each primer (5mM),
0.2 µL of Taq DNA polymerase (2.5 U/µL) and 11.8 µL of
ddH2O. The PCR thermal cycling profile was performed
with 3min at 94°C followed by 35 cycles of 30s at 94°C,
40s at 52°C and 1min at 72°C, with a final extension of
10min at 72°C. The PCR products were purified using
PEG8000 and sequenced on an ABI 3730xl DNA analyzer
(Majorbio Company, Beijing, China). The sequences were
manually assembled and edited in Sequencher, version 4.7
(Gene Codes Corporation, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA).
Molecular systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)
1 3
Page 3 of 12 9
Phylogenetic analyses
The DNA sequences of each species in Rosoideae were
downloaded from GenBank (Online Resource 3). Misla-
beled sequences were identified using maximum parsimony
(MP) analysis method with PAUP* (Swofford 2002) and
discarded. Finally, a total of 121 taxa, including 54 genera
of Rosoideae, were included in the phylogenetic analyses
in combination with newly collected sequence data. The
datasets were aligned using MAFFT (Katoh and Standley
2013) and manually adjusted using SE-Al 2.0 (Rambaut
2002). DnaSP 5.0 (Librado and Rozas 2009) was used to
assess the variability of markers, and PAUP 4.0b10 (Swof-
ford 2002) was used to judge the phylogenetic performance
of each gene partition (Table1). Ultimately, 12 chloroplast
regions of 149 species representing 56 presumable genera
in Rosoideae remained in the phylogenetic analysis. After
concatenating these datasets into one big data matrix, two
primary data matrices were constructed: (1) matrix A with
169 taxa for phylogenetic reconstruction and (2) matrix B
with 130 taxa for divergence time and phylogeographical
inference for reducing the computational burden. ModelTest,
version 3.7 (Posada and Crandall 1998), was used to deter-
mine the best fitting model for the concatenated matrix under
the Akaike information criterion (AIC, Posada and Buckley
2004). Phylogenetic analyses of matrix A were performed
using MrBayes, version 3.2.2 (Ronquist and Huelsenbeck
2003), for Bayesian inferences (BI), PAUP* 4.0b10 (Swof-
ford 2002) for maximum parsimony (MP) analyses and
RAxML-HPC2, version 8.2.9 (Stamatakis 2014), for maxi-
mum likelihood analyses. Bayesian analyses were run for
10,000,000 generations with trees sampled every 1000 gen-
erations. The runs were stopped when the standard devia-
tion of split frequencies (SDSF) fell below 0.01. In the MP
analyses, all gaps were considered as missing data, and all
characters were unordered and equally weighted. For heu-
ristic searches, 1000 random sequence addition replicates
were conducted with tree bisection reconnection branch
(TBR) swapping. When running 1000 bootstrap support
(BS) replicates, the random addition sequence was limited
to 100. The ML analyses employed 1000 bootstrap itera-
tions, with default settings for the optimization of individual
per-site substitution rates. We performed all final runs on the
CIPRES Science Gateway (https ://www.phylo .org/porta l2/,
Miller etal. 2010).
Divergence time estimation
To reduce the computational burden, the taxa with more
gene regions in the genera comprising more than three spe-
cies were selected. The topologies of this reduced matrix
B are similar to those of the larger matrix A. Although this
reduced matrix may introduce biases in terms of downstream
analysis (Hillis 1998), the general broad geographic patterns
and divergence times within the subfamily are likely kept
normal. The matrix B was analyzed with BEAST, version
1.8.3 (Drummond etal. 2012). An uncorrelated lognormal
relaxed clock model was used to estimate the rate changes
based on an initial likelihood ratio test. By restricting the
age of Rosales within [96, 90] Mya and calibrating the age
of Rosoideae with two other fossils (Table2), the diver-
gence times of Rosoideae were estimated together with out-
groups. The fossils used to calibrate the molecular clock
were selected from the online fossil resources (Paleobiol-
ogy database, <http://paleo biodb .org>) and literature survey
(Table2). The divergence times of Rosoideae were estimated
together with outgroups (Online Resource 4). BEAST run
was on the CIPRES Web server (http://www.phylo .org/).
Table 1 Variability of twelve
chloroplast regions in Rosoideae
and their maximum parsimony
tree scores
N number of species; La aligned length; Sc sites considered; S number of polymorphic sites, excluding
sites with missing data; NH number of haplotypes; n nucleotide diversity per site after exclusion of sites
with missing data; k average number of nucleotide differences; Vs variable site; Is parsimony-informative
site; L the tree length; CI consistency index; and RI retention index
Chloroplast genes N La Sc S NH πk Vs Is L CI RI
matK 33 1306 820 232 28 0.06136 50.318 347 208 517 0.795 0.891
ndhF 23 1999 1090 194 21 0.04822 44.664 445 260 696 0.767 0.792
psbA–trnH 11 576 246 47 11 0.05255 12.927 95 25 116 0.914 0.818
rbcL 69 1376 460 77 44 0.03484 16.045 231 182 460 0.591 0.851
rpoCl 13 487 380 26 11 0.01849 7.026 36 20 44 0.818 0.800
trnC–ycf6 25 1100 674 145 25 0.05054 34.067 182 102 228 0.89 0.949
trnL 64 1423 445 197 51 0.08362 37.212 461 314 797 0.754 0.923
trnL–F 66 1332 399 171 48 0.09915 34.94 409 304 661 0.784 0.933
trnS 29 548 286 70 24 0.04801 13.732 101 45 125 0.872 0.942
trnS–G 20 1395 851 111 18 0.03595 30.595 189 133 223 0.897 0.953
trnS–ycf9 19 537 432 68 17 0.03698 15.977 76 37 95 0.863 0.900
ycf1 26 930 832 323 21 0.09753 81.148 345 242 614 0.748 0.838
X. Chen etal.
1 3
9 Page 4 of 12
Four independent runs of 300 million generations were
conducted by sampling one tree every 30,000 generations.
Other key settings were set as follows: tree prior = specia-
tion, Yule process; and substitution model = GTR + I+G.
Tracer, version 1.5.0(Rambaut and Drummond 2009), was
used to monitor the Bayesian search until ESS > 200. Log
Combiner (Rambaut and Drummond 2010a) and Tree Anno-
tator, version 1.5.4 (Rambaut and Drummond 2010b), were
used to calculate the maximum clade credibility tree.
Reconstruction ofancestral areas
The same reduced matrix B was used to reconstruct the
ancestral areas. To do this analysis, we collected the geo-
graphical distributions by genera by consulting to the infor-
mation collected from Encyclopedia of Life (EOL, http://
www.eol.org/) and Global Biodiversity Information Facil-
ity (GBIF, https ://www.gbif.org/). The geographical dis-
tributions we used in this study are summarized in Online
Resource 5. The geographical distribution of the extant spe-
cies in Rosoideae was divided into eight biogeographic areas:
(A) North America; (B) South America; (C) Africa; (D)
Asia; (E) Europe; (F) Mediterranean; (G) Oceania; and (H)
Arctic. A statistical dispersal–vicariance analysis (S-DIVA,
Yu etal. 2010) was performed to estimate the ancestral areas
of Rosoideae using RASP, version 3.1 (Yu etal. 2015), to
obtain its dispersal routes. The phylogenetic trees (contains
twenty thousand trees and the condensed tree) derived from
the BEAST analysis were used for S-DIVA. The analysis
included 56 genera in the Rosoideae clades and 10 outgroup
taxa with the number of max area of each node = 2.
Results
Phylogenetic relationships inRosoideae
The final aligned matrix A comprised 169 taxa and 26,474
characters after removing ambiguous aligned characters. The
features of each locus and their maximum parsimony tree
scores are shown in Table1. The ndhF region is the longest,
and the rpoC1 region is the shortest; ycf1 is the most vari-
able, and rpoC1 is the least variable.
The trees based on the cpDNA data built by MP, ML and
BI were nearly identical (Fig.1, Online Resources 6–8).
Three clades within Rosaceae (bp = 100, pp = 1, Online
Resource 6) corresponding to three subfamilies, Amygda-
loideae, Rosoideae and Dryadoideae, were strongly sup-
ported in the ML tree topology. The genera formerly included
in Rosoideae, Purshia, Cowania, Chamaebatia, Cercocar-
pus and Dryas form a clade, and they are sister to all other
Rosoideae members. This clade corresponds to Dryadoideae,
which was recovered as a sister group to Rosoideae.
Within Rosoideae, six strongly supported (bp = 100,
pp = 1) lineages were resolved corresponding to six tribes:
from the basis Ulmarieae, Colurieae, Rubeae, Agrimonieae,
Roseae and Potentilleae (Fig.1, Online Resources 6–8).
Ulmarieae, Rubeae and Roseae are monogeneric tribes each
with a single genus.
Within Colurieae, Fallugia and Sieversia are basal in the
tribe. The remaining genera are very closely related. Eryth-
rocoma was included in Geum in Flora of North America,
but it is more closely related to Acomastylis. Erythrocoma
nests within Acomastylis, indicating that Erythrocoma
should be merged into Acomastylis rather than to Geum if
Acomastylis was accepted as a distinct genus. A very inclu-
sive Geum is a good choice to include them all even together
with Novosieversia.
There are two strongly supported major subclades within
Agrimonieae. The first subclade comprises Aremonia,
Hagenia, Leucosidea and Spenceria with Spenceria on the
basis. The second subclade comprises nine genera, Acaena,
Bencomia, Cliffortia, Marcetella, Margyricarpus, Polylepis,
Sanguisorba, Sarcopoterium and Tetraglochin with Benco-
mia, Marcetella and Sarcopoterium on the basis. Acaena,
Margyricarpus, Polylepis and Tetraglochin are closely
related.
Within Potentilleae, two major subclades were resolved.
The first subclade comprises eight genera: Argentina,
Comarella, Duchesnea, Horkelia, Ivesia, Piletophyllum,
Potentilla and Tylosperma. Very close relationships exist
among Comarella, Horkelia and Ivesia and between Argen-
tina and Piletophyllum. Neither Ivesia nor Potentilla is
monophyletic genus. The second subclade comprises 13
Table 2 Macrofossils of Rosaceae used as calibration points for molecular dating
Anchor fossil Geologic period, Mya Assigned date, Mya Geographic origin References
Rosales crown Cretaceous Fixed (90, 96) Wang etal. (2009)
Cercocarpus myricaefolius Late Eocene 34.07 North America, USA, Colorado MacGinite (1953),
Evanhoff etal.
(2001)
Rosa germerensis Early Eocene 50 North America, USA, Idaho Edelman (1975)
Molecular systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)
1 3
Page 5 of 12 9
Fig. 1 Maximum-likelihood phylogram of Rosoideae based on 12 cpDNA regions. Numeric values at nodes indicate maximum parsimony boot-
strap values, maximum likelihood bootstrap values and Bayesian posterior probability support values. *represents 100 or 1.00
X. Chen etal.
1 3
9 Page 6 of 12
genera: Alchemilla, Aphanes, Chamaerhodos, Comarum,
Dasiphora, Drymocallis, Fragaria, Lachemilla, Potaninia,
Schistophyllidium, Sibbaldia, Sibbaldianthe and Sibbaldiop-
sis. Very close relationships exist between Dasiphora and
Potaninia, between Schistophyllidium and Sibbaldianthe and
between Sibbaldia and Sibbaldiopsis. Two lineages were
revealed in each of Sibbaldia, Sibbaldiopsis and Dasiphora.
Divergence timesofmajor lineages inRosoideae
The crown Rosaceae diversified for ca. 89.56 Mya (95%
HPD = 79.58–96.02 Mya) in the Cretaceous (Fig.2). The
crown Rosoideae began to diverge from Dryadoideae ca.
69.77 (95% HPD = 61.28–78.33) Mya in the late Cretaceous.
The divergence times of the tribes of Rosoideae occurred
in the Paleocene and Eocene. Most genera of the subfamily
diversified in the Miocene.
Reconstruction ofancestral areas
The ancestral area reconstruction within Rosaceae using
S-DIVA suggested at least 398 dispersal, 9 vicariance
and 2 extinction events. Therein, at least 369 dispersal,
8 vicariance and 2 extinction events formed the present
distribution of Rosoideae (Fig.3, Online Resource 9,
Table3). For example, one vicariance event occurred in
the Colurieae crown node, AD A|D, causing isolated
distribution between North America and Asia. An extinc-
tion event, E AD AD, happened ~ 26 Mya ago in
AlchemillaSchistophyllidium, explaining their absence in
Europe and thriving in North America and Asia. The sub-
family probably had an origin in North America (37%) and/
or Asia (63%). Five (Ulmarieae, Colurieae, Rubeae, Roseae
and Potentilleae) out of the six tribes most likely evolved in
Asia and North America. Only Agrimonieae appeared to be
from Africa and Asia.
Discussion
Phylogeny andsubdivision ofRosaceae
andRosoideae
The traditional subdivision of Rosaceae into four subfamilies
is not supported by this study, and a modification of three
subfamilies, Amygdaloideae, Dryadoideae and Rosoideae, is
supported (Potter etal. 2007). Our results strongly supported
the topology (Amygdaloideae(Dryadoideae,Rosoideae)),
which is congruent with previous studies (Chin etal. 2014;
Zhang etal. 2017), instead of (Rosoideae(Dryadoideae,Sp
iraeoideae = Amygdaloideae)) (Potter etal. 2007) or (Dry
adoideae(Rosoideae,Amygdaloideae) (Xiang etal. 2017).
Our results are consistent with the fact that Dryadoideae
and Rosoideae share some morphological features such as
separation of the hypanthium from the ovary, presence of
stipules and usually achenes as fruits.
Six strongly supported lineages correspond well to six
existing tribes, i.e., Ulmarieae, Colurieae, Rubeae, Agrimo-
nieae, Roseae and Potentilleae from the basal position upon.
Ulmarieae significantly diverged from the other tribes, and
its basal systematic position in the subfamily is solid. Dis-
putes may stem from the positions of two monogeneric tribes,
i.e., Rubeae and Roseae. The systematic position of Rubeae
has so far been uncertain. It is resolved in this study to be
between Colurieae and Agrimonieae. This systematic posi-
tion of Rubeae revealed by representative chloroplast genes is
congruent with the phylogeny based on the whole plastomes
(Zhang etal. 2017) but differs from the phylogeny based on
nuclear data, which showed a more basal position than Colu-
rieae (Xiang etal. 2017). Such incongruence between the
topologies based on chloroplast and nuclear genes is prob-
ably due to the nature of sequence data of different genomes
and the exact cause is still unknown. The sister relationship
between Roseae and Potentilleae as shown by Potter etal.
(2007) is recovered, but the clade has an extremely short
branch length, suggesting a close relationship among Roseae,
Potentilleae and Agrimonieae as shown by Eriksson etal.
(2003). Support for either topology ((Potentilleae,Roseae)
Sanguisobeae) or ((Potentilleae,Sanguisobeae)Roseae) is not
overwhelming, indicating a close genetic relationship among
them, and factors such as incomplete lineage sorting may
cause phylogenetic uncertainty.
Phylogenetic relationships ofclosely related genera
In the tribes composed of multiple genera, the generic status
of the very closely related genera is questionable. In Colu-
rieae, Acomastylis is paraphyletic because of the existence
of Erythrocoma. Acomastylis 1 forms a clade together with
Erythrocoma, the same relationship shown by Smedmark
and Eriksson (Smedmark and Eriksson 2002). There are
several similar examples in Potentilleae.
Potentilla is a genus of extensive disputes on its circum-
scription. Broadly defined Potentilla includes (1) Dasiphora,
(2) Drymocallis, (3) ComarellaIvesiaHorkeliaHorke-
liella and (4) Duchesnea. Our results do not support a close
relationship between Alchemilla and Potentilla (Eriksson
etal. 2003). Considering that the members of the broadly
defined Potentilla do not fall into the same clade, such an
all-inclusive genus is not acceptable. Potentilla is better
used in its strict sense, and Dasiphora (including Potaninia)
and Drymocallis are better considered as distinct genera.
Because of the very close relationship among Comarella,
Horkelia, Horkeliella, Ivesia, Duchesnea and Potentilla,
they should be merged into one genus.
Molecular systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)
1 3
Page 7 of 12 9
Fig. 2 BEAST chronogram of Rosaceae based on partitioned analysis of 12 cpDNA regions. Plio Pliocene; Quat Quaternary
X. Chen etal.
1 3
9 Page 8 of 12
Fig. 3 Ancestral area reconstruction of Rosoideae as inferred by S-DIVA. Numbers at the nodes are Bayesian posterior probabilities obtained
from the BEAST tree. Plio Pliocene; Quat Quaternary. *stands for 100 or 1.00
Molecular systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)
1 3
Page 9 of 12 9
Sibbaldia and Sibbaldiopsis are reciprocally non-mono-
phyletic. Although our samples of Sibbaldia only cover par-
tial species in this genus, it is clear that Sibbaldiopsis is very
closely related to Sibbaldia as also shown by Eriksson etal.
(2014). The species in Sibbaldiopsis had been transferred to
Sibbaldia (Paule and Soják 2009).
An obvious difference of the clade comprising Alche-
milla, Aphanes and Lachemilla from other such clades is
the relatively long branches. The clade is highly supported.
The long branches are probably due to accelerated evolu-
tion of this clade. Although the monophyly of each genus is
retained, a wider circumscription of Alchemilla to include
Aphanes and Lachemilla was suggested (Gehrke etal. 2008).
Considering the long branches leading to each genus, these
genera should be retained.
Chloroplast versusnuclear gene‑based phylogenies
Chloroplast genes have been more extensively used in plant
phylogenetic reconstructions than nuclear genes with the
exception of nuclear ITS. Although the results are generally
congruent between the two molecular data sources, conflicts
are often reported. Recently, the phylogeny of Rosaceae
was rebuilt using nuclear genes isolated by sequencing
transcriptomes (Xiang etal. 2017). Although the general
phylogenetic patterns at the subfamilial and tribal levels are
the same, there are a few remarkable differences in the tree
topologies based on chloroplast genes and nuclear genes. (1)
Systematic position of Dryadoideae. The chloroplast genes
suggest a sister relationship of Dryadoideae to Rosoideae
(Chin etal. 2014; Zhang etal. 2017), but the nuclear genes
indicate a basal position in the family. From the viewpoint
of morphology, the former scenario appears more natural
because the genera in Dryadoideae were the members of
Rosoideae. (2) Systematic position of Rubeae. As discussed
earlier, the chloroplast genes suggest a position between
Colurieae and Agrimonieae, but the nuclear genes indicate
an earlier divergence than Colurieae. (3) Systematic posi-
tion of Roseae. The chloroplast genes indicate a slightly
closer relationship between Roseae and Potentilleae, but the
nuclear genes indicate an earlier divergence of Roseae than
both Agrimonieae and Potentilleae. (4) Systematic position
of some genera. Different relationships were revealed by
chloroplast and nuclear genes among Coluria, Taihangia and
Waldsteinia in Colurieae, among Aremonia, Hagenia, Leu-
cosidea, Sanguisorba and Sarcopoterium in Agrimonieae,
and among Alchemilla, Comarus and Fragaria in Potentil-
leae. The problematic lineages or clades often showed short
ancestral branches, but this was not the case in the nuclear
gene-based tree (Xiang etal. 2017, Fig.2). More single
copy nuclear genes should be used to resolve the systematic
uncertainties of the tribes as well as genetic relationships
among genera within tribes.
Origin, expansion anddiversication ofRosoideae
Molecular dating and historical biogeography analyses sug-
gest origins and rapid diversification of Rosoideae in Asia
and North America in the Cretaceous. The ages of Rosaceae
and its three subfamilies were estimated to be in the middle
Cretaceous (89.56–82.42 Mya), similar to the earlier estima-
tions (Chin etal. 2014; Zhang etal. 2017). The divergence
time among the six tribes of Rosoideae was inferred to be
between the late Cretaceous to the middle Eocene when the
earth was warmer and moister and tropical forests occurred
worldwide (Zachos etal. 2001). The crown ages of these six
tribes were indicated to be 45.02–10.42 Mya (the middle
Eocene to the late Miocene).
Based on our S-DIVAs, the most recent common ances-
tor (MRCA) for the Rosoideae appeared in Asia and North
America in the late Cretaceous (61.28 to 78.33 Mya), pos-
sibly after the vicariance event. From 55 to 50 Mya, there
was a significant global warming episode known as the
Paleocene–Eocene thermal maximum (PETM) and the
early Eocene climatic optima (EECO) events (McInerney
and Wing 2011; Zachos etal. 2001). Climatic change was
likely a driving force for diversification in Rosoideae during
the PETM. The uplift of Tibetan Plateau caused by collision
of the Indian plate with the Eurasian plate at ~ 50 Mya cre-
ated considerable new ecological niches which would have
Table 3 Vicariance and
extinction events within
Rosoideae
A North America; B South America; C Africa; D Asia; E European
Crown taxon Event Event route Time (Mya)
Leucosidea–Aremonia crown Vicariance CE C|E 6.72
Margyricarpus–Cliffortia crown Vicariance BC B|C 12.92
Horkelia–Potentilla crown Vicariance AD A|D 13.57
Alchemilla–Schistophyllidium crown Vicariance/extinction E AD AD 25.86
Leucosidea–Spenceria crown Vicariance CD C|D 27.11
Alchemilla–Sibbaidia crown Vicariance/extinction AD AAE A|E 28.03
Colurieae crown Vicariance AD A|D 44.94
Rosoideae–Dryadoideae crown Vicariance AD A|D 82.42
X. Chen etal.
1 3
9 Page 10 of 12
contributed to strong vicariance force in shaping the diver-
sification process. The fossil record demonstrates a major
diversification of Rosaceae during the Eocene (DeVore and
Pigg 2007). A continuous forest belt developed from Asia to
North America across the Beringia known as the boreotropi-
cal flora (Lavin and Luckow 1993; Morley 1999; Tiffney
1985a, b; Wolfe 1975; Xiang and Soltis 2001; Zachos etal.
2001), which created habitats for the diversification of
Rosoideae.
During the icehouse of the Oligocene (34–23 Mya),
the climate became cool and dry, and the warm–temperate
boreotropical forests in the Northern Hemisphere receded.
Species adapted to dry and cold environments thrived in
large parts of North America and Eurasia. The MRCA of
Ulmarieae, Rubeae and Roseae was found within Asia (63%)
and North America (37%) in the early to middle Miocene,
the period when rosaceous lineages diversified rapidly. Flo-
ristic exchanges between the two continents are thought to
be by the north Atlantic land bridge at an early time and by
the Bering land bridge at a later time (Tiffney 1985a, b). The
vicariance could have happened between the populations of
Ulmarieae (or Rubeae or Roseae) in the North America and
Asia due to the break of BLB. The ancestor of these three
tribes were inferred to appear 35–20 Mya in North America
and Asia, when the BLB existed.
Diversification of the tribe Potentilleae started at approxi-
mately 45 (38.39–50.12) Mya. The tribe had a widespread
distribution either in Asia (63%) or North America (37%).
The lineage split into two by a dispersal event, and both
had an Asian and North American origin (Dobes and Paule
2010). Similar time (45 Mya) and patterns were postulated
in Colurieae with either Asian and North American (63%)
or North American (37%) origins after a dispersal event.
The MRCA of the tribe Agrimonieae was suggested by
S-DIVA to be of a widespread distribution either between
Africa and Asia (50%) or Africa (50%) approximately 40
(30.42–49.16) Mya after a dispersal event. This was the time
when a global cooling event began at the Eocene–Oligocene
boundary (35 Mya). During this period, the warm-adapted
elements of the boreotropical forests were forced to recede
toward lower latitudes. The climatic change could have
driven floristic exchanges between Asia and Africa.
Conclusions
Rosaceae is subdivided into three subfamilies, Amygda-
loideae, Dryadoideae and Rosoideae, on the basis of molec-
ular phylogeny. Rosoideae is further subdivided into six
tribes, Ulmarieae, Colurieae, Rubeae, Agrimonieae, Roseae
and Potentilleae. After the recircumscription of some gen-
era, 36 genera are recognized in Rosoideae. It is estimated
that Rosoideae diverged from other subfamilies in the late
Cretaceous some 69.77 (61.28–78.33) Mya, but most genera
diverged in the Miocene. Rosoideae is deduced for having
been thriving in North America and Asia for some 70 Mya.
It reached its current geographical distribution through at
least 369 dispersal, 8 vicariance and 2 extinction events. Of
the 8 vicariance events, three occurred within Potentilleae,
three within Agrimonieae, one in the Colurieae crown node
and one in the Rosoideae crown node. The two extinction
events happened within Potentilleae. These findings have
significantly improved our understanding of the evolution
of Rosoideae.
Acknowledgements We thank Dr. Guojin Zhang and Dr. Bao Nie for
their help in the molecular dating and historical biogeography analy-
ses. This study was partly supported by funds from National Natural
Science Foundation of China (NSFC31872679), Chinese Academy of
Sciences (CAS) Biodiversity Conservation and the Collaborative Inno-
vation Plan, Institute of Forensic Science, Ministry of Public Security,
China (2016XTCX01).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflict of interests.
Information onElectronic Supplementary Mate-
rial
Online Resource 1. Material list and newly produced sequences in this
study.
Online Resource 2. Primers and procedures used to amplify DNA frag-
ments.
Online Resource 3. Taxa and GenBank accessions used in this study.
Online Resource 4. Detailed Fig.2 of chronogram of Rosaceae based
on partition of12 cpDNA regions derived from BEAST. Numbers at
nodes are divergencetime of clades.
Online Resource 5. Geographical distributions of extant species in
Rosoideae used inthis study.
Online Resource 6. Detailed Fig.1 of maximum likelihood phylogram
of Rosoideaebased on 12 cpDNA regions of all taxa. Numeric values
at nodes indicate23maximum likelihood bootstrap values.
Online Resource 7. Detailed Fig.1 of BI tree of Rosoideae based on 12
cpDNAregions of all taxa. Numbers at the nodes are Bayesian poste-
rior probabilitiesand PP values ≥0.50 are shown
Online Resource 8. Detailed Fig. 1 of maximum parsimony tree of
Rosoideae basedon 12 cpDNA regions of all taxa. Numbers at the
nodes are bootstrap values,and BP values ≥50 are shown.
Online Resource 9. Detailed Fig.3 of ancestral area reconstruction of
Rosoideaeinferred by S-DIVA. Numbers at the nodes are Bayesian
posterior probabilitiesobtained from the BEAST tree.
Online Resource 10. Sequence matrix A containing 12 chloroplast re-
gions of 169taxa for phylogenetic analyses.
Online Resource 11. Sequence matrix B containing 12 chloroplast re-
gions of 130taxa for molecular dating and biogeographical analyses.
References
Chin SW, Shaw J, Haberle R, Wen J, Potter D (2014) Diversification
of almonds, peaches, plums and cherries—molecular systematics
Molecular systematics of Rosoideae (Rosaceae)
1 3
Page 11 of 12 9
and biogeographic history of Prunus (Rosaceae). Molec Phylogen
Evol 76:34–48. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev .2014.02.024
DeVore ML, Pigg KB (2007) A brief review of the fossil history of
the family Rosaceae with a focus on the Eocene Okanogan High-
lands of eastern Washington State, USA, and British Columbia,
Canada. Pl Syst Evol 266:45–57. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s0060
6-007-0540-3
Dobes C, Paule J (2010) A comprehensive chloroplast DNA-based
phylogeny of the genus Potentilla (Rosaceae): Implications for
its geographic origin, phylogeography and generic circumscrip-
tion. Molec Phylogen Evol 56:156–175. https ://doi.or g/10.1016/j.
ympev .2010.03.005
Dong W, Liu J, Yu J, Wang L, Zhou S (2012) Highly variable chlo-
roplast markers for evaluating plant phylogeny at low taxonomic
levels and for DNA barcoding. PLoS ONE 7:e35071. https ://doi.
org/10.1371/journ al.pone.00350 71
Dong W, Cheng T, Li C, Xu C, Long P, Chen C, Zhou S (2014) Dis-
criminating plants using the DNA barcode rbcLb: an appraisal
based on a large data set. Molec Ecol Resources 14:336–343. https
://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12185
Dong W, Xu C, Li C, Sun J, Zuo Y, Shi S, Cheng T, Guo J, Zhou S
(2015) ycf1, the most promising plastid DNA barcode of land
plants. Sci Rep 5:8348. https ://doi.org/10.1038/srep0 8348
Drummond AJ, Suchard MA, Xie D, Rambaut A (2012) Bayesian phy-
logenetics with BEAUti and the BEAST 1.7. Molec Biol Evol
29:1969–1973. https ://doi.org/10.1093/molbe v/mss07 5
Edelman DW (1975) The Eocene Germer Basin flora of south-central
Idaho. MSc Thesis, University of Idaho, Moscow
Eriksson T, Donoghue MJ, Hibbs MS (1998) Phylogenetic analysis
of Potentilla using DNA sequences of nuclear ribosomal internal
transcribed spacers (ITS), and implications for the classification
of Rosoideae (Rosaceae). Pl Syst Evol 211:155–179. https ://doi.
org/10.1007/bf009 85357
Eriksson T, Hibbs MS, Yoder AD, Delwiche CF, Donoghue MJ (2003)
The phylogeny of Rosoideae (Rosaceae) based on sequences of
the internal transcribed spacers (ITS) of nuclear ribosomal DNA
and the trnL/F region of chloroplast DNA. Int J Pl Sci 164:197–
211. https ://doi.org/10.1086/34616 3
Eriksson T, Lundberg M, Töpel M, Östensson P, Smedmark JEE (2014)
Sibbaldia: a molecular phylogenetic study of a remarkably poly-
phyletic genus in Rosaceae. Pl Syst Evol 301:171–184. https ://doi.
org/10.1007/s0060 6-014-1063-3
Evanhoff E, Gregory-Wodzicki KM, Johnson KR (2001) Fossil flora
and stratigraphy of the Florissant Formation, Colorado. Denver
Museum of Nature & Science, Denver
Gardens RB (2007) DNA barcoding. Available at:http://www.kew.org/
barco ding/proto cols.html. Accessed 21 Apr 2014
Gehrke B, Brauchler C, Romoleroux K, Lundberg M, Heubl G, Eriks-
son T (2008) Molecular phylogenetics of Alchemilla, Aphanes
and Lachemilla (Rosaceae) inferred from plastid and nuclear
intron and spacer DNA sequences, with comments on generic
classification. Molec Phylogen Evol 47:1030–1044. https ://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ympev .2008.03.004
Hillis DM (1998) Taxonomic sampling, phylogenetic accuracy, and
investigator bias. Syst Biol 47:3–8. https ://doi.org/10.1080/10635
15982 60987
Hutchinson J (1964) The genera of flowering plants. Clarendon Press,
Oxford
Kalkman C (2004) Rosaceae. In: Kubitzki K (ed) The families and
genera of vascular plants. Springer, Berlin, pp 343–386. https ://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-07257 -8
Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT multiple sequence alignment
software version 7: improvements in performance and usability.
Molec Biol Evol 30:772–780. https ://doi.org/10.1093/molbe v/
mst01 0
Lavin M, Luckow M (1993) Origins and relationships of tropical North
America in the context of the boreotropics hypothesis. Amer J
Bot 80:1–14. https ://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1993.tb137 61.x
Li H-L (1952) Floristic relationships between eastern Asia and east-
ern North. Trans Amer Philos Soc 42:371–429. https ://doi.
org/10.2307/10056 54
Li J, Wang S, Yu J, Wang L, Zhou S (2013) A modified CTAB protocol
for Plant DNA extraction. Chin Bull Bot 48:72–78. https ://doi.
org/10.3724/SP.J.1259.2013.00072
Librado P, Rozas J (2009) DnaSP v5: a software for comprehensive
analysis of DNA polymorphism data. Bioinformatics 25:1451–
1452. https ://doi.org/10.1093/bioin forma tics/btp18 7
Lu L, Gu C, Li C, Alexander C, Bartholomew B, Brach AR, Bouf-
ford DE, Ikeda H, Ohba H, Robertson KR, Spongberg SA (2003)
Rosaceae. In: Wu Z, Raven PH, Hong D (eds) Flora of China.
Science Press/Missouri Botanical Garden Press, Beijing/St.Louis,
pp 46–434
MacGinite HD (1953) Fossil plants of the Florissant beds of Colorado.
Carnegie Institute of Washington, Washington, DC
McInerney FA, Wing SL (2011) The Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maxi-
mum: a perturbation of carbon cycle, climate, and biosphere with
implications for the future. Annual Rev Earth Planet Sci 39:489–
516. https ://doi.org/10.1146/annur ev-earth -04061 0-13343 1
Miller MA, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T (2010) Creating the CIPRES Sci-
ence Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In: 2010
Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE). IEEE, New
Orleans, pp 1–8
Morgan DR, Soltis DE, Robertson KR (1994) Systematic and evolution-
ary implications of rbcL sequence variation in Rosaceae. Amer J
Bot 81:890–903. https ://doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1994.tb155
70.x
Morley RJ (1999) Origin and evolution of tropical rain forests. Wiley,
Chichester
Paule J, Soják J (2009) Taxonomic comments on the genus Sibbaldiop-
sis Rydb. (Rosaceae). J Natl Mus (Pragus) Nat Hist Ser 178:15–16
Posada D, Buckley TR (2004) Model selection and model averaging
in phylogenetics: advantages of Akaike information criterion and
Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Syst Biol 53:793–
808. https ://doi.org/10.1080/10635 15049 05223 04
Posada D, Crandall KA (1998) MODELTEST: testing the model
of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14:817–818. https ://doi.
org/10.1093/bioin forma tics/14.9.817
Potter D, Gao F, Bortiri PE, Oh SH, Baggett S (2002) Phylogenetic
relationships in Rosaceae inferred from chloroplast matK and
trnL-trnF nucleotide sequence data. Pl Syst Evol 231:77–89. https
://doi.org/10.1007/s0060 60200 012
Potter D, Eriksson T, Evans RC, Oh S, Smedmark JEE, Morgan DR,
Kerr M, Robertson KR, Arsenault M, Dickinson TA, Campbell
CS (2007) Phylogeny and classification of Rosaceae. Pl Syst Evol
266:5–43. https ://doi.org/10.1007/s0060 6-007-0539-9
Rambaut A (2002) Se-Al, sequence alignment editor v2.0a ll [online].
Available at:http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/softw are/seal/
Rambaut A, Drummond AJ (2009) Tracer: MCMC trace analysis tool,
version 1.5.0. Available at:http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/softw are/trace
r/. Accessed 19 May 2014
Rambaut A, Drummond AJ (2010a) LogCombiner: MCMC output
combiner, version 1.5.4. University of Edinburgh, Institute of
Evolutionary Biology
Rambaut A, Drummond AJ (2010b) TreeAnnotator: MCMC output
analysis, version 1.5.4.University of Edinburgh, Institute of Evo-
lutionary Biology
Raven PH (1972) Plant species disjunctions: a summary. Ann Missouri
Bot Gard 59:234–246. https ://doi.org/10.2307/23947 56
Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP (2003) MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic
inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19:1572–1574.
https ://doi.org/10.1093/bioin forma tics/btg18 0
X. Chen etal.
1 3
9 Page 12 of 12
Schulze-Menz GK (1964) Rosaceae. In: Melchior H (ed) In Engler’s
Syllabus der Pflanzenfamilien Gebruder. Borntraeger, Berlin, pp
209–218
Smedmark JEE, Eriksson T (2002) Phylogenetic relationships
of Geum (Rosaceae) and relatives inferred from the nrITS
and trnL-trnF regions. Syst Bot 27:303–317. https ://doi.
org/10.1043/0363-6445-27.2.303
Stamatakis A (2014) RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic
analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics
30:1312–1313. https ://doi.org/10.1093/bioin forma tics/btu03 3
Swofford DL (2002) PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*
and other methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.
https ://doi.org/10.1002/04716 50129 .dob05 22
Taberlet P, Gielly L, Pautou G, Bouvet J (1991) Universal primers for
amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Pl
Molec Biol 17:1105–1109. https ://doi.org/10.1007/BF000 37152
Takhtajan A (1997) Diversity and classification of flowering plants.
Columbia University Press, New York
Thorne RF (1972) Major disjunctions in the geographic ranges
of seed plants. Quatern Rev Biol 47:365–411. https ://doi.
org/10.2307/28207 37
Tiffney BH (1985a) The Eocene North Atlantic land bridge: its impor-
tance in Tertiary and modern phytogeography of the Northern
Hemisphere. J Arnold Arbor 66:243–273. https ://doi.org/10.5962/
bhl.part.13183
Tiffney BH (1985b) Perspectives on the origin of the floristic similarity
between eastern Asia and eastern North America. J Arnold Arbor
66:73–94. https ://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.part.13179
Tiffney BH, Manchester SR (2001) The use of geological and paleon-
tological evidence in evaluating plant phylogeographic hypotheses
in the Northern Hemisphere Tertiary. Int J Pl Sci 162:S3–S17.
https ://doi.org/10.1086/32388 0
Wang H, Moore MJ, Soltis PS, Bell CD, Brockington SF, Alexandre
R, Davis CC, Latvis M, Manchester SR, Soltis DE (2009) Rosid
radiation and the rapid rise of angiosperm-dominated forests.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:3853–3858. https ://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.08133 76106
Wen J (1998) Evolution of the eastern Asian and eastern North Ameri-
can disjunct pattern: insights from phylogenetic studies. Korean
J Pl Tax 28:63–81. https ://doi.org/10.11110 /kjpt.1998.28.1.063
Wen J (1999) Evolution of eastern Asian and eastern North Amer-
ica disjunct pattern in flowering plants. Annual Rev Ecol Syst
30:421–455. https ://doi.org/10.2307/22169 1
Wen J, Ickert-Bond S, Nie ZL, Li R (2010) Timing and modes of evolu-
tion of eastern Asian—North America biogeographic disjunctions
in seed plants. In: Long M, Gu H, Zhou Z (eds) Darwin’s heritage
today—proceedings of the Darwin 200 Beijing international con-
ference. Higher Education Press, Beijing, pp 252–269
Wolfe JA (1975) Some aspects of plant geography of the Northern
hemisphere during the late cretaceous and tertiary. Ann Missouri
Bot Gard 62:264–279. https ://doi.org/10.2307/23951 98
Xiang Q-Y, Soltis DE (2001) Dispersal-vicariance analyses of inter-
continental disjuncts: historical biogeographical implications for
angiosperms in the Northern hemisphere. Int J Pl Sci 162:S29–
S39. https ://doi.org/10.1086/32333 2
Xiang QY, Soltis DE, Soltis PS, Manchester SR, Crawford DJ (2000)
Timing the eastern Asian–eastern North American floristic
disjunction: molecular clock corroborates paleontological esti-
mates. Molec Phylogen Evol 15:462–472. https ://doi.or g/10.1006/
mpev.2000.0766
Xiang Y, Huang CH, Hu Y, Wen J, Li S, Yi T, Chen H, Xiang J,
Ma H (2017) Evolution of Rosaceae fruit types based on nuclear
phylogeny in the context of geological times and genome duplica-
tion. Molec Biol Evol 34:262–281. https ://doi.org/10.1093/molbe
v/msw24 2
Yu Y, Harris AJ, He X (2010) S-DIVA (statistical dispersal-vicari-
ance analysis): a tool for inferring biogeographic histories. Molec
Phylogen Evol 56:848–850. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev
.2010.04.011
Yu J, Xue J-H, Zhou S-L (2011) New universal matK primers for DNA
barcoding angiosperms. J Syst Evol 49:176–181. https ://doi.org/1
0.1111/j.1759-6831.2011.00134 .x
Yu Y, Harris AJ, Blair C, He X (2015) RASP (Reconstruct Ances-
tral State in Phylogenies): a tool for historical biogeography.
Molec Phylogen Evol 87:46–49. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev
.2015.03.008
Zachos J, Pagani M, Sloan L, Thomas E, Billups K (2001) Trends,
rhythms, and aberrations in global climate 65Ma to present. Sci-
ence 292:686–693. https ://doi.org/10.1126/scien ce.10594 12
Zhang SD, Jin JJ, Chen SY, Chase MW, Soltis DE, Li HT, Yang JB, Li
DZ, Yi TS (2017) Diversification of Rosaceae since the Late Cre-
taceous based on plastid phylogenomics. New Phytol 214:1355–
1367. https ://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14461
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
... In the case of LEC1, four loci were detected in Rubus against one locus in the Rosa and Fragaria genome ( Table 2). This could be related with the early Rubus divergency from the lineage of Rosa and Fragaria genus [74]. Interestingly, ABI3 genes seem to have been subjected both to gain and to loss of duplicated genes in the Amygdaloideae subfamily. ...
... For instance, the ABI3 gene was not found in P. communis, while two copies were detected in M. × domestica, compared to one copy found in P. persica (Table 2). This fact suggest that these events have occurred after that Prunus diverged from a common ancestor of Malus and Pyrus [74,75]. ...
... The Rosaceae family is composed of Dryadoideae, Rosoideae, and Amygdaloideae subfamilies [39]. Rosoideae includes Fragaria, Rosa, and Rubus genus, F. × ananassa and F. vesca being evolutionarily closer to R. chinensis than R. occidentalis [74]. On the other hand, Prunus, Malus and Pyrus are members of the Amygdaloideae subfamily [38,75]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Somatic embryogenesis is a plant regeneration method commonly used in tissue culture. Its molecular mechanisms are well-known in model plants such as Arabidopsis thaliana L. LEAFY COTYLEDON1 (LEC1), LEAFY COTYLEDON2 (LEC2), FUSCA3 (FUS3), ABSCISIC ACID INSENSITIVE3 (ABI3), and BABYBOOM (BBM) genes are considered master regulators in the induction, growth, and maturation of somatic embryos. However, the study of these transcription factors in fruit crops with high agronomic and economic value such as cultivated strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa Duch.) and other Rosaceae species is scarce. The purpose of this study was the in silico characterization of LEC1, ABI3, FUS3, LEC2, and BBM(LAFL-B) genes from F. × ananassa genome and the study of the evolutionary relationships within the Rosaceae family. Synteny analyses and molecular evolutionary rates were performed to analyze the evolution of each transcription factor within the Rosaceae family. Synteny was conserved between F. × ananassa and other Rosaceae genomes, and paralogous genes were selected through negative selection. Additionally, the exon–intron organization and multiple alignments showed that gene structure and DNA-binding domains were conserved in F. ×ananassa transcription factors. Finally, phylogenetic trees showed close evolutionary relationships between F. × ananassa and its orthologous proteins in the Rosoideae subfamily. Overall, this research revealed novel insights in the LAFL-B network in F. × ananassa and other species of the Rosaceae family. These results provide useful in silico information and new resources for the establishment of more efficient propagation systems or the study of ploidy effects on somatic embryogenesis.
... As Rosa spp. are thought to have originated from the Asia or North America (Chen et al., 2020;Fougere-Danezan et al., 2015), we hypothesize the rose gallers originate from one of these two regions and have subsequently radiated into the Holarctic, resulting in the distribution that we see today. ...
... We suspect that characteristics of wild roses, such as the fact that they are early successional species with adaptations for dispersal, occurrence of multiple growing points in the form of new meristems and leaf buds, long-lived, high clonability, and the abundance of immature leaves throughout the growing season, provide ample opportunities for Diplolepis to oviposit. Recent studies suggest that Rosa diverged from its sister group Potentilleae around 50-60 million years ago (Chen et al., 2020;Xiang et al., 2017), with the genus being 10-30 million years old (Chen et al., 2020;Fougere-Danezan et al., 2015). The genus Rosa likely originated in Asia or North America, with most extant American species being the result of re-colonization from Asia through the Bering Land Bridge (Chen et al., 2020;Fougere-Danezan et al., 2015). ...
... We suspect that characteristics of wild roses, such as the fact that they are early successional species with adaptations for dispersal, occurrence of multiple growing points in the form of new meristems and leaf buds, long-lived, high clonability, and the abundance of immature leaves throughout the growing season, provide ample opportunities for Diplolepis to oviposit. Recent studies suggest that Rosa diverged from its sister group Potentilleae around 50-60 million years ago (Chen et al., 2020;Xiang et al., 2017), with the genus being 10-30 million years old (Chen et al., 2020;Fougere-Danezan et al., 2015). The genus Rosa likely originated in Asia or North America, with most extant American species being the result of re-colonization from Asia through the Bering Land Bridge (Chen et al., 2020;Fougere-Danezan et al., 2015). ...
Article
Gall wasps in the genus Diplolepis Geoffroy are specialized herbivores that induce galls exclusively on roses (Rosa L. spp.). Despite their wide distribution across the Holarctic, little is known about their evolutionary history. Here we present the first phylogenomic tree of global Diplolepis reconstructed using Ultraconserved Elements (UCEs), resulting in a robust phylogeny based on 757 genes. Results support the existence of two principal clades: a Nearctic stem-galler clade, and a Holarctic leaf-galler clade that further splits into two Palearctic groups and one Nearctic group. This topology is congruent with a previous study based on the mitochondrial gene COI, an unexpected result given the common occurrence of mitonuclear discordance in closely related oak gall wasp lineages. Most Diplolepis species were recovered as reciprocally monophyletic, with some notable exceptions such as the D. polita and the D. ignota complex, for which species boundaries remain unresolved. Historical biogeographic reconstruction was unable to pinpoint the origin of Diplolepis, but confirms two independent incursions into the Nearctic. Ancestral state reconstruction analysis highlights the conservatism of gall location on the host plants, as shifts to different host organs are relatively rare. We suggest that Diplolepis were originally leaf gallers, with a Nearctic stem-galler clade undergoing a major plant organ switch onto rose stems. Host organ switch or reversal is uncommon, which suggests a level of conservatism. Our study showcases the resolving power of UCEs at the species level while also suggesting improvements to improve future Cynipoidea phylogenomics. Our results also highlight the additional sampling needed to clarify taxonomic relationships in the Nearctic and eastern Palearctic regions.
... Recent molecular phylogenetic results in Rosaceae tribe Potentilleae (Ertter et al. 1998, Eriksson et al. 1998, Dobeš & Paule 2010, Töpel et al. 2011, 2012, Feng et al. 2015, 2017, Zhang et al. 2017, Xiang et al. 2017, Persson et al. 2019, 2020a, 2020b, Chen et al. 2020 clearly confirmed that the North American genera Ivesia Torrey & A.Gray (1858: 72), Horkelia Chamisso & Schlechtendal (1827: 26), and Horkeliella (Rydb.) Rydberg (1908: 282) [≡ Horkelia subgen. ...
... Nineteen new combinations (eight species-rank and 11 variety-rank ones) in Potentilla (Rosaceae, Potentilleae) are validated above for North American taxa that were originally validated or treated in Ivesia, Horkelia, and Horkeliella. These nomenclatural combinations can be consistently used by those researchers and users of botanical nomenclature who prefer to submerge ivesioids under a taxonomically re-circumscribed monophyletic Potentilla, following recent molecular phylogenetic evidence (e.g., Eriksson et al. 2003, Dobeš & Paule 2010, Töpel et al. 2012, Feng et al. 2017, Chen et al. 2020, Persson et al. 2020a, 2020b, and references therein) and the principle of strict monophyly (holophyly) in recognition of supraspecific taxa. ...
Article
Nineteen new combinations (eight species-rank and 11 variety-rank ones) in Potentilla (Rosaceae, Potentilleae) are proposed for North American taxa that were originally validated or treated in Ivesia, Horkelia, and Horkeliella. These combinations are needed for those researchers and users of botanical nomenclature who prefer to subsume these taxa in Potentilla in its updated monophyletic (holophyletic) circumscription. That circumscription is mainly based on recent molecular phylogenetic results that demonstrated that the three ivesioid genera form a monophyletic lineage (ivesioid clade) that is phylogenetically rooted in the core clade of Potentilla. Nomenclatural comments are provided, and the rationale of those preferring the continued recognition of Ivesia, Horkelia, and Horkeliella is explained.
... Strawberries belong to the genus Fragaria in the subfamily Rosoideae (family Rosaceae). Although there is broad consensus that the family Rosaceae is divided into three subfamilies (Dryadoideae, Rosoideae, and Amygdaloideae), the genetic relationships among the subfamilies remain controversial [12][13][14] . The tribes Maleae (which includes Malus and Pyrus) and Amygdaleae (which includes Prunus) in the subfamily Amygdaloideae exhibit S-RNase-based GSI, and its mechanism has been studied extensively. ...
Article
Full-text available
Strawberry (Fragaria spp.) is a member of the Rosoideae subfamily in the family Rosaceae. The self-incompatibility (SI) of some diploid species is a key agronomic trait that acts as a basic pollination barrier; however, the genetic mechanism underlying SI control in strawberry remains unclear. Two candidate S-RNases (Sa- and Sb-RNase) identified in the transcriptome of the styles of the self-incompatible Fragaria viridis 42 were confirmed to be SI determinants at the S locus following genotype identification and intraspecific hybridization using selfing progenies. Whole-genome collinearity and RNase T2 family analysis revealed that only an S locus exists in Fragaria; however, none of the compatible species contained S-RNase. Although the results of interspecific hybridization experiments showed that F. viridis (SI) styles could accept pollen from F. mandshurica (self-compatible), the reciprocal cross was incompatible. Sa and Sb-RNase contain large introns, and their noncoding sequences (promotors and introns) can be transcribed into long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs). Overall, the genus Fragaria exhibits S-RNase-based gametophytic SI, and S-RNase loss occurs at the S locus of compatible germplasms. In addition, a type of SI-independent unilateral incompatibility exists between compatible and incompatible Fragaria species. Furthermore, the large introns and neighboring lncRNAs in S-RNase in Fragaria could offer clues about S-RNase expression strategies.
Article
The stigma morphology can provide a reference for exploring plant systematics and pollination biology. In this study, we observed the stigma morphological characteristics of Rosaceae in Beijing urban area in detail using light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. The stigma of Rosaceae is entire or bilobed and mostly baculate, crateriform, cristate, discoid, or flattened. The stigma surface may have irregular, strongly raised ridges; or flat without papillae; or composed of densely or loosely arranged papillary cells. Surface ornamentation includes fossulate, psilate, psilate‐striate, rugulate, scabrate, striate, and striate‐rugulate. There are similarities in stigma morphology among genera and differences in stigma morphology among species within genera. The stigma shape supports the view of molecular systematic classification, that is, the former subfamilies Maloideae, Prunoideae, and Spiraeoideae are grouped into subfamily Amygdaloideae. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to provide high‐quality figures for observing stigma morphology. The data on the morphological diversity of stigma were provided to further explore the systematics and pollination biology of Rosaceae. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) micrographs of Rosaceae.
Article
Full-text available
Aim The aim of the study is to study the elemental composition of the leafy shoots, rhizomes, and roots of D. fruticosa varieties cultivated in Ukraine. Background Dasiphora fruticosa (L.) Rybd. ( Rosaceae ) is a species native to Middle Asia and the Far East. More than 130 D. fruticosa varieties are known; plants have a significant raw material base and are promising objects for phytochemical research. Data only on the elemental composition of the aboveground parts of the wild-grown D. fruticosa is present. No information on the elemental composition of the raw materials of cultivated D. fruticosa varieties is available. Objective A comprehensive analysis of the elemental composition of Dasiphora fruticosa varieties and identification of the features of macro- and microelements translocation. Methods For all D. fruticosa varieties, raw materials were taken from two plants with five replicates per plant. The elemental composition was studied by atomic absorption spectroscopy. Using corresponding formulas, translocation factors of elements were determined, and a hygienic full-value of the raw materials was established. Results In the studied raw materials, fourteen elements were identified and quantified. The translocation factors of potentially toxic elements Mo, Cu, Ni, and Sr indicate a capture of these elements in the root system and a presence of the barrier mechanisms preventing their accumulation in D. fruticosa varieties shoots. Conclusion The results obtained show the presence of the barrier mechanisms preventing the accumulation of potentially toxic elements in aboveground parts of D. fruticosa varieties and justify a need for the study of those mechanisms.
Article
Pollinators of most of the plants cultivated in the Mediterranean regions of Europe are still unknown. We provide new data and we review previously available information on bees (Apoidea) associated with three economically important crops in Spain: melon (Cucumis melo L.), watermelon (Citrullus lanatus (Thunb.) Matsum. & Nakai) and almond (Prunus dulcis (Mill.) D.A.Webb). We found that, overall, 98 bee species spanning four families visit flowers of the studied crop species, and 46 additional species were sampled within the crops with pan-traps. The bee assemblages visiting melon include 7-33 species, with moderate to high importance of small Lasioglossum (Halictidae) and of honey bee (Apis mellifera Linnaeus, 1758: Apidae), and in one case of small Ceratina: Apidae. Watermelon flowers are visited by 11-14 species of bees, with highest abundance of honey bees or of small Lasioglossum, depending on the locality. Bees collected on almond trees included 12-37 species, with the honey bee and medium-size to large Andrena (Andrenidae) and Osmia (Megachilidae) being predominant. The new samples expanded the geographical distributions of nearly one-fourth of the collected species. Diversity estimators slightly varied even within fields of the same crop, and a cluster analysis suggested both a certain overlap between melon and watermelon and a role of geographical distance on similarity among bee assemblages, though these patterns were much clearer using presence data rather than abundances. Below-ground-nesting and solitary species were more frequently collected than above-ground-nesting and eusocial species, but for melon and watermelon the highest abundances were recorded for eusocial species. Almost exclusively polylectic species visited the flowers of the three studied crops. The results of this study could help in planning conservation actions to maintain this important diversity of potential pollinators in Spanish areas covered by these crops.
Article
Ethnopharmacological relevance: Potentilla plants are still common herbal medicines used in folk medicine. This review provides an update of research undertaken on Potentilla from 2009 until 2020. Aim of the study: This comprehensive review considers biological updates, recent advances in phytochemical and pharmacological research, and toxicological reports on Potentilla sensu lato based on available data since 2009. Methods: A literature search was conducted using available databases including ScienceDirect, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Google Scholar. Results: Until now, more than 210 new and known compounds, including flavonoids, tannins, triterpenes and phenolic compounds, have been confirmed and elucidated for numerous Potentilla species, i.e., in the underground and aerial parts of this genus. Modern pharmacology studies have revealed that those structures are responsible for a broad spectrum of pharmacological activities, such as anti-neoplastic, antihyperglycemic, anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, hepatoprotective, neuroprotective, antibacterial and anti-yeast effects. Conclusions However, in vitro studies must be re-considered due to the discovery of urolithins and their origins, including microbiota, which can lead to different results when applying Potentilla species and their extracts to in vivo conditions. Thus, future research should focus more on in vivo and particularly clinical studies to confirm the validity and safety of traditional uses. Particularly, the use of Potentilla alba extracts in the treatment of thyroid gland disorders should be further explored to confirm the underlying mechanism of their action, efficacy and safety. In addition, more clinical studies should focus on Potentilla erecta rhizome extracts for application as herbal remedies against dysentery, diarrhoea and inflammation of the skin.
Article
Full-text available
Fruits are the defining feature of angiosperms, likely have contributed to angiosperm successes by protecting and dispersing seeds, and provide foods to humans and other animals, with many morphological types and important ecological and agricultural implications. Rosaceae is a family with ~3000 species and an extraordinary spectrum of distinct fruits, including fleshy peach, apple, and strawberry prized by their consumers, as well as dry achenetum and follicetum with features facilitating seed dispersal, excellent for studying fruit evolution. To address Rosaceae fruit evolution and other questions, we generated 125 new transcriptome and genomic datasets and identified hundreds of nuclear genes to reconstruct a well-resolved Rosaceae phylogeny with highly supported monophyly of all subfamilies and tribes. Molecular clock analysis revealed an estimated age of ~101.6 Mya for crown Rosaceae and divergence times of tribes and genera, providing a geological and climate context for fruit evolution. Phylogenomic analysis yielded strong evidence for numerous whole genome duplications (WGDs), supporting the hypothesis that the apple tribe had a WGD and revealing another one shared by fleshy fruit-bearing members of this tribe, with moderate support for WGDs in the peach tribe and other groups. Ancestral character reconstruction for fruit types supports independent origins of fleshy fruits from dry-fruit ancestors, including the evolution of drupes (e.g., peach) and pomes (e.g., apple) from follicetum, and drupetum (raspberry and blackberry) from achenetum. We propose that WGDs and environmental factors, including animals, contributed to the evolution of the many fruits in Rosaceae, which provide a foundation for understanding fruit evolution.
Article
The boreotropics hypothesis postulates a preferential tropical biotic interchange between North America and Eurasia during the early Tertiary that was directed by Eocene thermal maxima and the close proximity of these two continental plates. This preferential interchange occurred at a time when South America was geologically and biotically isolated. A prediction of this hypothesis posits that a taxon with a present-day center of diversity in tropical North America, and with an early Tertiary fossil record from any region there, has a high probability of having sister-group relatives in the Paleotropics and derived relatives in South America. We propose a test of this prediction with phylogenetic studies of two pantropical taxa of Leguminosae that have early Tertiary North American fossil records. Our findings are consistent with the boreotropics hypothesis, and additional evidence suggests that many tropical elements in North America could be descendants of northern tropical progenitors. Ramifications of this hypothesis include the importance of integrating the fossil record with cladistic biogeographic studies, theoretical bases for recognizing tropical taxa with such disjunct distributions as Mexico and Madagascar, identification of taxa that may be most useful for testing vicariance models of Caribbean biogeography, and integrating the study of disjunct distributions in temperate regions of the northern hemisphere with those in the neo- and paleotropics.
Article
The angiosperm family Rosaceae poses a number of noteworthy systematic problems as well as many questions concerning morphological and chromosomal evolution. Phylogenetic analysis of rbcL gene sequences was performed to address systematic and evolutionary problems of Rosaceae. Both rbcL sequence variation and the presence of duplicated sequences near the 3' end of rbcL were useful in determining phylogenetic relationships in this family. Analyses of rbcL sequences indicate that there are groups of genera within Rosaceae comparable to the subfamilies Maloideae, Amygdaloideae, and Rosoideae, although the composition of each group differs from traditional circumscriptions. According to analysis of rbcL data, Maloideae and Amygdaloideae each include additional taxa not normally associated with them. All members of Rosoideae with x = 9 are phylogenetically well separated from the x = 8 and 7 members of the subfamily. In addition, Spiraeoideae are not monophyletic but appear to consist of several distinct evolutionary lineages. The rbcL-based phylogenies suggest that chromosome numbers are more reliable indicators of some generic alliances than the more commonly used fruit types. Sequence data are also useful in determining the alliances of several problematic genera, suggesting that the capsular and follicular-fruited genera Vauquelinia, Lindleya, and Kageneckia (usually placed in Spiraeoideae) should be included in the pome-fruited subfamily Maloideae, and that Quillaja is not a member of Rosaceae. Molecular data are consistent with several suggestions for the ancestral chromosome numbers and fruit types of Rosaceae, but do not support any one hypothesis for either. This study also suggests that the subfamily Maloideae may have descended from spiraeoid ancestors and that the pome is derived from follicular or capsular fruit types.
Article
Phylogenetic relationships in Rosaceae have long been problematic because of frequent hybridisation, apomixis and presumed rapid radiation, and their historical diversification has not been clarified. With 87 genera representing all subfamilies and tribes of Rosaceae and six of the other eight families of Rosales (outgroups), we analysed 130 newly sequenced plastomes together with 12 from GenBank in an attempt to reconstruct deep relationships and reveal temporal diversification of this family. Our results highlight the importance of improving sequence alignment and the use of appropriate substitution models in plastid phylogenomics. Three subfamilies and 16 tribes (as previously delimited) were strongly supported as monophyletic, and their relationships were fully resolved and strongly supported at most nodes. Rosaceae were estimated to have originated during the Late Cretaceous with evidence for rapid diversification events during several geological periods. The major lineages rapidly diversified in warm and wet habits during the Late Cretaceous, and the rapid diversification of genera from the early Oligocene onwards occurred in colder and drier environments. Plastid phylogenomics offers new and important insights into deep phylogenetic relationships and the diversification history of Rosaceae. The robust phylogenetic backbone and time estimates we provide establish a framework for future comparative studies on rosaceous evolution.
Chapter
Woody or herbaceous. Leaves usually alternate, sometimes distichous, rarely opposite, simple or compound; stipules on the twig or on the base of the petiole, free or adnate to the petiole, rarely O. Inflorescences various, usually terminal, usually (compound) racemes. Flowers actinomorphic, mostly (4)5-merous, mostly bisexual, rarely unisexual and then the plants monoecious or dioecious; hypanthium usually well-developed (not evident in some staminate flowers), from saucer-shaped to tubular or camp anulate, the epicalyx, sepals, petals, and stamens inserted on its rim, its inside usually lined by nectariferous tissue; disk sometimes distinct, intrastaminal; epicalyx + in some genera; sepals free; petals free, from large and showy to small and not or hardly distinct from sepals, rarely 0; stamens few to numerous, often their number distinctly related to the number of perianth parts; filaments free; anthers bilocular, dehiscing longitudinally; carpels 1-many, free or variously connate with each other and/or adnate to the hypanthium, forming 1 or more superior to inferior ovary(ies); stylodia (in monocarpellate ovaries styles) +, these sometimes (some Maleae) fused into a common, branched style; ovules 1-several (often 2) per carpel, anatropous, ascending or pendulous. Fruits various, fleshy or dry, dehiscent or not; seeds 1-several, testa usually firm, endosperm 0 or a thin layer, cotyledons fleshy or flat.