Philotheca glasshousiensis

Batty, Erin L., Holmes, Gareth D., Murphy, Daniel J., Forster, Paul I., Neal, Will C. & Bayly, Michael J., 2022, Phylogeny, classification and biogeography of Philotheca sect. Erionema (Rutaceae) based on nrDNA sequences, Australian Systematic Botany 35 (4), pp. 326-338 : 336

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.1071/SB22003

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10974402

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03F787B6-BD4E-FFB1-FF49-069BFE76834C

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Philotheca glasshousiensis
status

 

Polyphyly of Philotheca glasshousiensis View in CoL

The polyphyly of P. glasshousiensis View in CoL provides strong evidence that northern and southern populations should be recognised as two distinct species. The southern populations, from the Glasshouse Mountains and Mount Cooroora, represent P. glasshousiensis View in CoL sensu stricto, the type being from the Glasshouse Mountains (Mount Coonowrin). These southern populations are most closely related to but clearly distinct from P. queenslandica , being separated by long branches on the phylogenetic tree ( Fig. 2 View Fig ). Although these two species both occur in south-eastern Qld, there is a clear ecological separation between them, with P. glasshousiensis View in CoL growing in rocky areas towards the summits of the mountains and P. queenslandica restricted to lowland heaths in wallum vegetation that is periodically inundated.

Herbarium specimens from the northern populations, at Cania Gorge (not sequenced here) and Kroombit Tops, were included in the circumscription of P. glasshousiensis View in CoL (or P. myoporoides subsp. leichhardtii (Benth.) Paul G. Wilson ) by Bayly (1998) and Forster (2005) on the basis of morphological resemblance and their occurrence in similar cliff line habitat. Our recent, preliminary comparisons indicate that, although the northern populations resemble P. glasshousiensis View in CoL sensu stricto in most qualitative features (many of which are highly conserved across sect. Erionema), they usually have larger leaves than those of P. glasshousiensis sensu stricto but there is overlap in leaf sizes. More detailed study is needed to clarify the extent to which the two genetic groups can be distinguished morphologically.

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF