Hi,
I am a first year student studying biology at university.And we have
to elaborate a file whom subject is the evolution of some plants in
specific climates, like cactus, nenuphares, algue and carnivorous
plants. Do you have any informations about this subject, some good
internet sites or books?

Thanks

In article , maureen
writes
I am a first year student studying biology at university.And we have
to elaborate a file whom subject is the evolution of some plants in
specific climates, like cactus, nenuphares, algue and carnivorous
plants. Do you have any informations about this subject, some good
internet sites or books?

The most current single view of plant phylogeny available online is
probably the Angiosperm Phylogeny Website at Missouri Botanic Garden
(http://www.mobot.org). After that, it's a matter of tracking down
recent papers, and unpublished results.

"The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants, Vol. 5" (Kubitzki & Bayer,
2003) says that 5 (out of 8) families of carnivorous plants form a
clade, and refers to a paper

Meimberg et al, "Molecular Phylogeny of Caryophyllales s.l. ... with
special emphasis on carnivorous taxa", Plant Biol. 2: 218-228.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley
http://www.meden.demon.co.uk/Malvaceae/Malvaceae.html

In article , Iris Cohen
writes
Your topic is much too broad.

I interpret the objective to write a report on *one* group of plants,
but the intended scope of the project wasn't clear to me. Not even if it
was a group of plants defined by a common ancestry, or by a common
environment.

Algae are not even considered real plants, as far as I know.

Land plants are nested within Green Algae (Charales is, IIRC, the sister
group to land plants). Whether Green Algae are plants is arbitrary; it
depends where the line is drawn.

Blue-green algae are prokaryotes (hence the alternative name of
cyanobacteria). There's several other groups of algae, which are not
plants by any plausible cladistic definition.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

In article ,
Iris Cohen wrote:
I am a first year student studying biology at university.And we have to
elaborate a file whose subject is the evolution of some plants in specific
climates, like cactus, nenuphares, algue and carnivorous plants.

Boy, is Cereoid going to chop you down! Your topic is much too broad. Algae are
not even considered real plants, as far as I know. This reminds me of the story
of the Roman soldier who came to Hillel and said, "Tell me all about the Torah
while I am standing on one foot."

And Hillel told him: "Don't do to other people what you wouldn't want done
to yourself. The rest is commentary." Hillel has been remembered for 2000
years as a practical, kind and humane man, and some posters to this group
would certainly benefit from his advice.

I'd recommend the original poster pick one group of plants, find out the
scientific name, and do a web search for it until he or she finds some
reliable info on how it evolved and adapted to its difficult environment.
If it's too hard to find the info, pick a different group. Then hit the
library.

I think the original poster may be a Francophone. In English 'nenuphares'
are waterlilies, so using scientific names is important. Carnivorous plants
are not a taxonomic group - this trait has arisen multiple times in unrelated
groups of plants. IIRC, cacti were 'preadapted' to aridity by traits they
developed as epiphytes.

This is an interesting topic for a paper. Good luck!

Actually I couldn't care less.

Their primary assumption that evolution is driven by climate is inadequate.
Evolution is driven by a whole constellation of various environmental
factors.

They could spend a lifetime compiling that file and still not be any closer
to an answer. The whole idea is completely naive and ill conceived.

I would agree that it would be better they focus on one plant group,
particularly a single plant family, and try to establish a thorough working
knowledge of that group before trying to take on nebulous grandiose topics.


I don't agree with your assessment of the Cactaceae. The most primitive
genera are of woody shrubby species that gave rise to various genera of
vining, epiphytic and thick stemmed globose to columnar desert types. The
primitive genera are rarely grown by succulent plant hobbyists but they are
of the most interest to taxonomists.


Beverly Erlebacher wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
Iris Cohen wrote:
I am a first year student studying biology at university.And we have
to
elaborate a file whose subject is the evolution of some plants in
specific
climates, like cactus, nenuphares, algue and carnivorous plants.

Boy, is Cereoid going to chop you down! Your topic is much too broad.
Algae are
not even considered real plants, as far as I know. This reminds me of the
story
of the Roman soldier who came to Hillel and said, "Tell me all about the
Torah
while I am standing on one foot."

And Hillel told him: "Don't do to other people what you wouldn't want done
to yourself. The rest is commentary." Hillel has been remembered for
2000
years as a practical, kind and humane man, and some posters to this group
would certainly benefit from his advice.

I'd recommend the original poster pick one group of plants, find out the
scientific name, and do a web search for it until he or she finds some
reliable info on how it evolved and adapted to its difficult environment.
If it's too hard to find the info, pick a different group. Then hit the
library.

I think the original poster may be a Francophone. In English 'nenuphares'
are waterlilies, so using scientific names is important. Carnivorous
plants
are not a taxonomic group - this trait has arisen multiple times in
unrelated
groups of plants. IIRC, cacti were 'preadapted' to aridity by traits they
developed as epiphytes.

This is an interesting topic for a paper. Good luck!