A comparative study of the distribution of genus size in twenty angiosperm floras

The biodiversity of floras has until recently been measured solely in terms of their species number or species density, with little regard to the breadth of phylogenetic diversity represented by the species. The latter is partly a function of the size of the flora, and partly of the pattern of distribution of the species into higher taxa. To determine whether floras differ in this respect, this study compares the frequency distribution of genus size in 20 island and regional floras. Certain floras (Cape Region, S.W. Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii) are found to have high concentrations of genera containing many species. Others are notably lacking in large genera (Java, Jamaica, Nepal, Niger), though this group tend to be family-rich. In floras with high endemism (Cape, New Zealand, Fiji, Jamaica, Hawaii), the level of endemism is consistently higher in larger genera. Possible reasons for the observed differences between floras are geographic and temporal isolation, level of habitat diversity, climatic history, volcanic, orogenic and tectonic events. Clusters of large genera may indicate recent speciation, possibly following the last glaciation. Genus size may be an important consideration when limited conservation resources have to be targetted to retain the maximum phylogenetic diversity in a threatened flora.

[1]  C. Stace.  New Flora Of The British Isles , 1998 .

[2]  Guy L. Bush.  Sympatric speciation in animals: new wine in old bottles. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[3]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  Do Conservationists and Molecular Biologists Value Differences between Organisms in the Same Way , 1994 .

[4]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  Centres of seed-plant diversity: the family way , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[5]  P. Ehrlich,et al.  Biodiversity Studies: Science and Policy , 1991, Science.

[6]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  Measuring biodiversity taxonomic relatedness for conservation priorities , 1991 .

[7]  K. Dial,et al.  Nonrandom Diversification within Taxonomic Assemblages , 1989 .

[8]  K. Dial,et al.  Nonrandom Diversification with in Taxonomic Assemblages , 1989 .

[9]  T. Barkley,et al.  In: Flora of the Great Plains , 1987 .

[10]  E. Vrba,et al.  Macroevolutionary Trends: New Perspectives on the Roles of Adaptation and Incidental Effect , 1983, Science.

[11]  H. Hara,et al.  An enumeration of the flowering plants of Nepal , 1980 .

[12]  Arthur Cronquist,et al.  Floristic Regions of the World , 1978 .

[13]  M. Numata,et al.  The Flora and Vegetation of Japan , 1975 .

[14]  E. B. Ehrle,et al.  The Flora of New England , 1970 .

[15]  T. Böcher,et al.  The Flora of Greenland , 1968, Nature.

[16]  S. M. Walters.  THE SHAPING OF ANGIOSPERM TAXONOMY , 1961 .

[17]  P. Munz,et al.  A California Flora , 1960 .

[18]  R. Good.  The geography of the flowering plants , 1948 .

[19]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  Measuring more of biodiversity: Can higher-taxon richness predict wholesale species richness? , 1994 .

[20]  Ross H. Crozier,et al.  Genetic diversity and the agony of choice , 1992 .

[21]  D. Faith.  Conservation evaluation and phylogenetic diversity , 1992 .

[22]  Paul H. Williams,et al.  What to protect?—Systematics and the agony of choice , 1991 .

[23]  H. Connor,et al.  Name changes in the indigenous New Zealand flora, 1960–1986 and Nomina Nova IV, 1983–1986 , 1987 .

[24]  T. Cope,et al.  Flora Palaestina, Part 4 , 1987 .

[25]  Van Andel,et al.  New views on an old planet. Continental drift and the history of earth. , 1985 .

[26]  P. Goldblatt,et al.  Plants of the Cape flora: A descriptive catalogue , 1984 .

[27]  J. Lebrun,et al.  Catalogue des plantes vasculaires du Niger , 1976 .

[28]  G. Proctor,et al.  Flowering Plants of Jamaica , 1972 .

[29]  David F. Murray,et al.  Flora of Tierra del Fuego , 1968 .