Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Merosity in flowers: Definition, origin, and taxonomic significance

  • Published:
Plant Systematics and Evolution Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The term merosity stands for the number of parts within whorls of floral organs, leaves, or stems. Trimery is considered to be a basic condition that arose through the cyclisation of a spiral flower. Pentamery is mostly derived from trimery by the repetitive fusion of two different whorls. Dimery is either directly derived from trimery, or through pentamery as an intermediate stage. Tetramery is linked with pentamery and should not be confused with dimery. Possible causes for a change in merosity are the reduction of the number of carpels and zygomorphy in flowers. Derivations of different merosities have important consequences for the arrangement of the androecium (the insertion of stamen whorls, their identifications, and their number). It is concluded that two main groups can be identified within the angiosperms: magnolialean and monocotyledonean taxa are mostly trimerous or dimerous; non-magnolialean dicots are mostly pentamerous or tetramerous.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Armstrong, J. E., 1988: The suppression and loss of androecial primordia and their affect on corolla form inScrophulariaceae. — Amer. J. Bot.75, Suppl., Abstr.: 17–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batenburg, L.H., Moeliono, B.M., 1982: Oligomery and vasculature in the androecium ofMollugo nudicaulis Lam. (Molluginaceae). — Acta Bot. Neerl.31: 215–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bersillon, G., 1955: Recherches sur les Papavéracées. Contribution à l'étude du développement des Dicotylédones herbacées. — Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot.16: 225–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlquist, S., 1992a: Wood anatomy and stem ofChloranthus; summary of wood anatomy ofChloranthaceae, with comments on relationships, vessellessness, and the origin of Monocotyledons. — IAWA Bull. n.s.13: 3–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1992b: Wood anatomy ofChloranthaceae: a summary, with comments on origin of Monocotyledons. — Amer. J. Bot.79, Suppl., Abstr.: 137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cejp, K., 1925: Beitrag zur vergleichenden Morphologie der dimerischen Blüten. — Beih. Bot. Centralbl.41: 128–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatin, A., 1873: Sur l'organogénie de l'androcée des Labiées, des Globulariées et des Scrofularinées. — Bull. Soc. Bot. France20: 41–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronquist, A., 1981: An integrated system of classification of flowering plants. — New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, R., 1983: General aspects of angiosperm evolution and macrosystematics. — Nordic J. Bot.3: 119–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1984: The orderMyrtales: circumscription, variation and relationships. — Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.71: 633–699.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1982: The monocotyledons — a comparative study. — London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1985: The families of the monocotyledons — structure, evolution and taxonomy. — Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrendorfer, F., 1977: New ideas about the early differentiation of angiosperms. — Pl. Syst. Evol. Suppl. 1: 227–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eichler, A. W., 1875–1878: Blüthendiagramme I and II. — Leipzig: Engelmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endress, P. K., 1987: Floral phyllotaxis and floral evolution. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.108: 417–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1990: Patterns of floral construction in ontogeny and phylogeny. — Biol. J. Linn. Soc.39: 153–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1992: Evolution and floral diversity: the phylogenetic surroundings ofArabidopsis andAntirrhinum. — Int. J. Pl. Sci.153: s106-s122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erbar, C., Leins, P., 1981: Zur Spirale in Magnolien-Blüten. — Beitr. Biol. Pfl.56: 225–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1983: Zur Sequenz von Blütenorganen bei einigen Magnoliiden. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.103: 433–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich, H.-C., 1956: Studien über die natürliche Verwandtschaft derPlumbaginales undCentrospermae. — Phyton6: 220–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galle, P., 1977: Untersuchungen zur Blütenentwicklung der Polygonaceen. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.98: 449–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geitler, L., 1929: Zur Morphologie der Blüten von Polygonum. — Österr. Bot. Z.78: 229–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, H., 1913: Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Polygonaceen. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.49: 234–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guédès, M., 1967: The cruciferous flower. — Adv. Front. Pl. Sci.18: 169–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, D., Singh, V., 1983: Floral organogenesis ofRanunculus sceleratus L. — Proc. Indian Natl. Sci. Acad.B49: 273–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiepko, P., 1965: Vergleichend morphologische und entwicklungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen über das Perianth bei denPolycarpicae. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.84: 359–508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirmer, M., 1918: Beiträge zur Morphologie polyandrischer Blüten. — Flora110: 140–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, U., 1973: Centrospermen-Studien 6: Morphologische Untersuchungen zur Umgrenzung und Gliederung der Aizoaceen. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.93: 247–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1990:Morina L. undTriplostegia Wall. ex DC. im Vergleich mitValerianaceae undDipsacaceae. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.111: 499–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, H., 1977: The treatment of the monocotyledons in an evolutionary system of classification. — Pl. Syst. Evol. Suppl.1: 285–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1982: Die zweikeimblättrigen Gehölze im System der Angiospermen. — Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München18: 59–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karrer, A. B., 1991: Blütenentwicklung und systematische Stellung derPapaveraceae undCapparaceae. — Doctoral Dissertation University of Zürich.

  • Kubitzki, K., 1969: Monographie der Hernandiaceen. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.89: 78–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1973: Probleme der Großsystematik der Blütenpflanzen. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.85: 259–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1987: Origin and significance of trimerous flowers. — Taxon36: 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacroix, C., Sattler, R., 1988: Phyllotaxis theories and tepal-stamen superposition inBasella rubra. — Amer. J. Bot.75: 906–917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leins, P., 1964: Die frühe Blütenentwicklung vonHypericum hookerianum Wight etArn. undH. aegypticum L. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.77: 112–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1967: Die frühe Blütenentwicklung vonAegle marmelos (Rutaceae). — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.80: 320–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1971: Das Androeceum der Dikotylen. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.84: 191–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1991: Entwicklungsmuster in Blüten und ihre mutmaßlichen phylogenetischen Zusammenhänge. — Biol. Unserer Zeit21: 197–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1979: Entwicklungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen anCapparis-Blüten. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.100: 542–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyndon, R. F., 1978: Flower development inSilene: morphology and sequence of initiation of primordia. — Ann. Bot.42: 1343–1348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, B., 1969: Ontogenetische Studien anMyrtales-Blüten. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.89: 210–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier-Weniger, E., 1977: Die Morphogenese der Blüte vonPedicularis recutita L. (Scrophulariaceae). — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.90: 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merxmüller, H., Leins, P., 1966: Zum Blütenbau derBrassicaceae. — Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges.79: 250–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1967: Die Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der Kreuzblütler und Mohngewächse. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.86: 113–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mione, T., Bogle, A. L., 1990: Comparative ontogeny of the inflorescence and flower ofHamamelis virginiana andLoropetalum chinense (Hamamelidaceae). — Amer. J. Bot.77: 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishino, E., 1988: Early floral organogenesis inTripetaleia (Ericaceae). — InLeins, P., Tucker, S. C., Endress, P. K., (Eds): Aspects of floral development, pp. 181–190. — Berlin: Cramer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payer, J. B., 1857: Traité d'organogénie comparée de la fleur. — Paris: Masson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radford, A. E., Dickison, W. C., Masset, J. R., Bell, C. R., 1974: Vascular plant systematics. — New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez-Domenech, J. I., Tucker, S. C., 1989: Phylogenetic implications of inflorescence and floral ontogeny ofMimosa strigillosa. — Amer. J. Bot.76: 1583–1593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robyns, W., 1972: Outline of a new system of orders and families ofSympetalae. — Bull. Jard. Bot. Natl. Belg.42: 363–372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roels, P., 1993: Lengtepolymorfisme van chloroplast-DNA restrictiefragmenten en bloemontogenie in deDipsacales. — Unpubl. thesis: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

  • Ronse Decraene, L. P., 1989: The flower ofKoenigia islandica L. (Polygonaceae): an interpretation. — Watsonia17: 419–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • - 1992: The androecium of theMagnoliophytina: characterisation and systematic importance. Unpubl. Doctorate thesis: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

  • —, 1988: Generic limits inPolygonum and related genera (Polygonaceae) on the basis of floral characters. — Bot. J. Linn. Soc.98: 321–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1987: The distribution and the systematic relevance of the androecial characters oligomery and polymery in theMagnoliophytina. — Nordic J. Bot.7: 239–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1990a: The floral development ofPopowia whitei (Annonaceae). — Nordic J. Bot.10: 411–420 [correction in Nordic J. Bot.11: 420, 1991].

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1990b: The systematic relationship betweenBegoniaceae andPapaveraceae: a comparative study of their floral development. — Bull. Jard. Bot. Natl. Belg.60: 229–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1991a: Androecium and floral nectaries ofHarungana madagascariensis (Clusiaceae). — Pl. Syst. Evol.178: 179–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1991b: The floral ontogeny of some members of thePhytolaccaceae (subfamilyRivinoideae) with a discussion of the evolution of the androecium in theRivinoideae. — Biol. Jaarb. Dodonaea59: 77–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, —, 1992: Complex polyandry in theMagnoliatae: definition, distribution and systematic value. — Nordic J. Bot.12: 621–649.

    Google Scholar 

  • - - 1993: The distribution and systematic relevance of the androecial character Polymery. — Bot. J. Linn. Soc.113 (in press).

  • Salisbury, E. J., 1919: Variation inEranthis hyemalis, Ficaria verna, and other members of theRanunculaceae, with special reference to trimery and the origin of the perianth. — Ann. Bot.33: 47–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sands, M. J. S., 1973: New aspects of the floral vascular anatomy in some members of the orderRhoeadales sensuHutch. — Kew Bull.28: 211–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattler, R., 1973: Organogenesis of flowers, a photograpic text-atlas. — Toronto, Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1982: Floral development ofBougainvillea spectabilis Willd.,Boerhaavia diffusa L. andMirabilis jalapa L. (Nyctaginaceae). — Bot. J. Linn. Soc.84: 161–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, R., Carlquist, S., Hufford, L. D., Webster, G. L., 1984: Systematic anatomy ofOceanopapaver, a monotypic genus of theCapparaceae from New Caledonia. — Bot. J. Linn. Soc.89: 119–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schöffel, K., 1932: Untersuchungen über den Blütenbau der Ranunculaceen. — Planta17: 315–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, V., 1979: Early floral development inDigitalis purpurea. — Phytomorphology29: 239–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, D. R., Bowman, J. L., Meyerowitz, E. M., 1990: Early flower development inArabidopsis. — Pl. Cell2: 755–767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterk, A. A., 1970: Reduction of the androecium inSpergularia marina (Caryophyllaceae). — Acta Bot. Neerl.19: 488–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoudt, H. N., 1941: The floral morphology of some of theCapparidaceae. — Amer. J. Bot.28: 604–675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takhtajan, A., 1991: Evolutionary trends in flowering plants. — New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, D. W., Hickey, L. J., 1992: Phylogenetic evidence for the herbaceous origin of angiosperms. — Pl. Syst. Evol.180: 137–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tepfer, S. S., 1953: Floral anatomy and ontogeny inAquilegia formosa var.truncata andRanunculus repens. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot.25: 513–648.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, S. C., 1984: Unidirectional organ initiation in leguminous flowers. — Amer. J. Bot.71: 1139–1148.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1988: Dioecy inBauhinia resulting from organ suppression. — Amer. J. Bot.75: 1584–1597.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, 1989: Overlapping organ initiation and common primordia in flowers ofPisum sativum (Leguminosae: Papilionoideae). — Amer. J. Bot.76: 714–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhl, N. W., Moore, H. E., 1980: Androecial development in six polyandrous genera representing five major groups of palms. — Ann. Bot.45: 57–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Heel, W. A., 1992: Floral morphology ofStemonaceae andPentastemonaceae. — Blumea36: 481–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Steenis, C. G. G. J., 1982:Pentastemona, a new 5-merous genus of Monocotyledons from North Sumatra (Stemonaceae). — Blumea28: 151–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanvinckenroye, P., Cresens, E., Ronse Decraene, L. P., Smets, E., 1993: A comparative floral developmental study inPisonia, Bougainvillea andMirabilis (Nyctaginaceae) with special emphasis on the gynoecium and the floral nectaries. — Bull. Jard. Bot. Natl. Belg.62: 69–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vautier, S., 1949: La vascularisation florale chez les Polygonacées. — Candollea12: 219–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volgin, S. A., 1988: Vergleichende Morphologie und Gefäßbündelanatomie der Blüte bei denRivinoideae (Phytolaccaceae). — Flora181: 325–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenitz, G., 1992: TheAsteridae: evolution of a concept and its present status. — Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard.79: 209–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter, H., 1906: Die Diagramme der Phytolaccaceen. — Bot. Jahrb. Syst.37, Beibl. 85: 1–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, J. C., 1966: A dictionary of the flowering plants and ferns. 7th edn. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Systematics, Botanical Institute, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Kardinaal Mercierlaan, 92, B-3001, Heverlee (Leuven), Belgium

    L. P. Ronse Decraene & E. F. Smets

Authors
  1. L. P. Ronse Decraene
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. F. Smets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ronse Decraene, L.P., Smets, E.F. Merosity in flowers: Definition, origin, and taxonomic significance. Pl Syst Evol 191, 83–104 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00985344

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00985344

Key words

Search

Navigation