identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03E7F60A857C4869FF016CDFFDBDE3AA.text	03E7F60A857C4869FF016CDFFDBDE3AA.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cuscuta chinensis	<div><p>Cuscuta chinensis and Cuscuta applanata: one species with disjunct distributions</p> <p>In the identification key of his monograph, Yuncker (1932) separated C. chinensis and C. applanata as follows: C. chinensis —“flowers mostly 3–3.5 mm long, styles commonly stoutish and not especially exserted”; C. applanata —“flowers mostly about 2–2.5 mm long; styles commonly slender and exserted”. In the text, however, he described C. chinensis flowers to be 2–3.5 mm long with “stoutish or slender” styles, while C. applanata had 2- to 3-mm-long flowers (the thickness of the styles was not mentioned). After a detailed examination of the types and numerous herbarium specimens we can affirm that the morphological distinction between C. chinensis and C. applanata is tenuous at best. Although we did not perform a morphometric analysis, the morphology and micromorphology of the flowers are remarkably similar in both C. chinensis and C. applanata (Figs. 1, 2; Costea 2007 -onwards). Flowers and seeds tend to be slightly larger in C. chinensis, but the ranges of variation overlap with those of C. applanata (particularly of the flowers; see the description of C. chinensis). Indeed, without knowing their geographical provenence, many herbarium specimens of these two taxa would be difficult, if not impossible, to identify as C. chinensis or C. applanata. Together with the phylogenetic data, the morphological similarity strongly suggests that C. chinensis and C. applanata represent one single species with two geographical varieties. Therefore, C. applanata is retained as a variety of C. chinensis, and a new nomenclatural combination is proposed.</p> <p>Cuscuta chinensis clade is one of the eight major groups of subg. Grammica that have originated and diversified in Mexico and the adjacent areas (Stefanović et al. 2007), and all other species of this complex are restricted to Mexico and southern US. Therefore, long-distance dispersal is the mostly likely explanation for the presence of var. chinensis in Australasia, Indo-Malaysia and the Asian part of Palearctic. However, in the absence of more data, the timeline and route of dispersal are difficult to hypothesize. Several other strongly supported cases of long-distance dispersal have been uncovered by the phylogeny of Cuscuta subg. Grammica (Stefanović et al. 2007), but nearly all these events are likely to be older because they are associated with completed speciation events. For example C. victoriana and C. tasmanica are endemic to Australia yet they belong to a large Mexican and Central American clade of subg. Grammica (“clade G”; Stefanović et al 2007). Similarly, C. hyalina from Eastern Africa, India and Pakistan is the only species of the C. umbellata complex, a clade otherwise distributed from the southern US to northern South America (Costea and Stefanović 2010). While these, presumably older, long-distance dispersal events also await an explanation, at the opposite end of the time scale are cases of dodder species that have managed to spread over large geographical areas in the last two centuries following anthropogenic pathways. One such example is C. campestris. This weedy species is inferred to be North American in origin but has dispersed successfully worldwide despite the protection and quarantine legislative measures adopted by most countries (reviewed by Costea and Tardif 2006). Yet there is no indication that populations of C. campestris found on different continents have acquired sufficient genetic and/or morphological divergence to justify even the recognition of infraspecific taxa (Costea et al. 2006a). Instances of putative long-distance dispersal events that involve allopatric varieties are less common and not as distant geographically as the C. chinensis case. For instance, C. obtusiflora var. obtusiflora is encountered in South America while C. obtusiflora var. glandulosa and the majority of the clade members (“clade B”, Stefanović et al 2007) are centered in North America. In the case of C. chinensis, more sampling from Asia- Australia and the use of faster evolving molecular markers would be necessary to recover the routes of migration that led to its extensive geographical distribution.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E7F60A857C4869FF016CDFFDBDE3AA	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Stefanović, Mihai Costea Ian Spence Saša	Stefanović, Mihai Costea Ian Spence Saša (2011): Systematics of Cuscuta chinensis species complex (subgenus Grammica, Convolvulaceae): evidence for long-distance dispersal and one new species. Organisms Diversity & Evolution (New York, N. Y.) 11 (5): 373-386, DOI: 10.1007/s13127-011-0061-3, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0061-3
03E7F60A857F4868FF016CB1FDF8E783.text	03E7F60A857F4868FF016CB1FDF8E783.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cuscuta alata	<div><p>Cuscuta alata is a “good” species</p> <p>Cuscuta alata described by Brandegee (1909) from Sinaloa was considered by Yuncker (1921) a “strongly keeled form” of C. applanata and the author considered the two names likely trees (ITS). Closely related C. americana and C. victoriana are used as outgroups. Branch lengths are drawn at the same scale for all three phylograms. ML bootstrap values are indicated for nodes supported ≥ 50%. Numbers following species names correspond to DNA accessions (see Appendix 2)</p> <p>synonymous, which is how C. alata has been viewed since. Although it shares some morphological similarities with C. chinensis (incl. var. applanata), C. alata is the most dissimilar species of this clade both from a molecular and morphological point of view (Figs. 1, 2, 3). Multicellular projections in the form of crests or wings develop on the keels of both the calyx and the corolla lobes (Figs. 1, 2). In addition, the corolla lobes in C. alata are lanceolate and acute to acuminate, while in C. chinensis they are ovate and obtuse to rounded. More remarkably, flowers of C. alata often develop small external infrastaminal scales with 1–2 fimbriae on the dorsal part of the corolla tube, below the sinuses of the corolla lobes (Fig. 2h–i). In view of these findings, C. alata is reinstated as a species.</p> <p>The former Cuscuta potosina includes two species</p> <p>Cuscuta potosina var. globifera and C. yucatana formed a well-supported clade in the C. chinensis species complex, while C. potosina (var. potosina) was part of the sister clade that included both varieties of C. chinensis (Fig. 3). Cuscuta potosina var. globifera is also clearly distinct morphologically from C. potosina (var. potosina), C. chinensis, and C. yucatana (see identification key and descriptions below). Consequently, C. potosina var. globifera is described as a new species, C. azteca. Cuscuta globifera W.Schaffn. ex Yunck. is an invalid name, and we preferred to avoid a new combination based on the basyonim of var. globifera Yunck. because several other very similar species epithets are already in use (e.g., C. globosa Ridl.; C. globulosa Benth., C. globiflora Engelm.).</p> <p>Cuscuta potosina (var. potosina) was similar to C. chinensis var. applanata from a molecular point of view. However, it stands apart in this complex of species through its 4-merous flowers and 1-seeded capsules (see the identification key and descriptions). In this latter case, we considered appropriate to maintain C. potosina as a species based on its morphological distinction.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E7F60A857F4868FF016CB1FDF8E783	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Stefanović, Mihai Costea Ian Spence Saša	Stefanović, Mihai Costea Ian Spence Saša (2011): Systematics of Cuscuta chinensis species complex (subgenus Grammica, Convolvulaceae): evidence for long-distance dispersal and one new species. Organisms Diversity & Evolution (New York, N. Y.) 11 (5): 373-386, DOI: 10.1007/s13127-011-0061-3, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0061-3
03E7F60A857E4868FF0168DBFBAEE41E.text	03E7F60A857E4868FF0168DBFBAEE41E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cuscuta yucatana	<div><p>Cuscuta yucatana and C. acuta: convergent or reticulate evolution?</p> <p>Cuscuta yucatana not only exhibits the same type of umbelliform inflorescence that characterizes the C. umbellata species complex (“clade L”, Costea and Stefanović 2010), but it also resembles morphologically C. acuta —a species that belongs to the latter clade and grows in the Galapagos Islands and the Pacific coast of Ecuador and Peru. Both species have indehiscent fruit in clades with dehiscent (or preponderantly dehiscent) capsules. The similarity between the two species was also noted by Yuncker (1935), who included C. yucatana in the same subsection as C. acuta (subsect. Acutae) and differentiated the former species by the smaller flowers, longer pedicels, and obovoid shape of its capsules. Homoplasy is observed for many morphological characters in Cuscuta; for example, fruit indehiscence (Stefanović et al. 2007), pollen features (Welsh et al. 2010), and numerous gynoecium characters (Wright et al. 2011). Species from different clades of subg. Grammica may share some elements of morphology (e.g., the same type of inflorescence, flower parts or capsule). Unfortunately, too little is known about the ecology and host range of the two species to attempt a biological explanation of convergent evolution. One common ecological factor may be the halophytic habitat— coastal (C. acuta) or mainland (C. yucatana)—that these species apparently inhabit. Alternatively, the morphological similarity between C. acuta and C. yucatana may be explained through putative hybridization involving species from both clades. The evolutionary history of the C. umbellata clade has been marked by extensive reticulation among its members (Costea and Stefanović 2010), and hybridization involving the C. chinensis complex and species from another major clade of subg. Grammica (“clade B”) have also been documented (Stefanović and Costea 2008). Although reticulation involving species from C. chinensis and C. umbellata clades was not been detected with the molecular markers used in this study, it may be revealed in the future by low-copy nuclear genes (Stefanović and Costea 2008).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03E7F60A857E4868FF0168DBFBAEE41E	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		Plazi	Stefanović, Mihai Costea Ian Spence Saša	Stefanović, Mihai Costea Ian Spence Saša (2011): Systematics of Cuscuta chinensis species complex (subgenus Grammica, Convolvulaceae): evidence for long-distance dispersal and one new species. Organisms Diversity & Evolution (New York, N. Y.) 11 (5): 373-386, DOI: 10.1007/s13127-011-0061-3, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13127-011-0061-3
