Free Standard AU & NZ Shipping For All Book Orders Over $80!
Register      Login
Australian Systematic Botany Australian Systematic Botany Society
Taxonomy, biogeography and evolution of plants
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > SB > SB08022
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 22(2)

Electrophoretic analysis of Geoffroea (Leguminosae, Papilionoideae): taxonomic inferences in Argentinean populations

Alicia L. Lamarque A , Diana O. Labuckas A , Julián Greppi B and Renée H. Fortunato C D
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Cátedra de Química Orgánica, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales, IMBIV (CONICET), Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Avda. Vélez Sarsfield 1600, 5016 Córdoba, Argentina.

B Instituto de Floricultura, CIRN, INTA, 1712 Castelar, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

C Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET); Instituto de Recursos Biológicos, CIRN, INTA, 1712 Castelar and Universidad de Morón, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

D Corresponding author. Email: rfortunato@cnia.inta.gov.ar

Australian Systematic Botany 22(2) 137-142 https://doi.org/10.1071/SB08022
Submitted: 26 April 2008  Accepted: 2 March 2009   Published: 30 April 2009

Abstract

The genus Geoffroea Jacq. was circumscribed to two species without varietal division. Nevertheless, in the taxonomic treatment of Argentinean dry-forest flora, on the basis of habit and foliar and floral features, it was possible to distinguish G. decorticans (Hook. & Arn.) Burkart var. decorticans from var. subtropicalis (Lillo) Burkart and to recognise intraspecific variation among the populations of G. spinosa. The purposes of the present study were to provide seed-protein data of Geoffroea species, and to analyse the relationships among them. Sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS–PAGE) was carried out on mature seeds harvested at different locations. Electrophoretic profile analysis showed outstanding differences between G. decorticans var. decorticans and var. subtropicalis and supported the view that these two taxa are less closely related than previously assumed, warranting their recognition at the varietal level. Moreover, attentive to the differences in the protein patterns from the analysed population of G. spinosa (Argentina: Chaco and Salta provinces), in addition to phenotypic differences, materials from other disjunct areas where this species grows need to be studied to verify their taxonomic status.


Acknowledgements

Support for this work was provided by the National Research Council of Argentina (CONICET) and by Myndel Botanica Fundation Grants 2003 and 2005 to Renée H. Fortunato.


References


Açik L, Ekici M, Selebi A (2004) Taxonomic relationships in Astragalus sections Hololeuce and Synochreati (Fabaceae): evidence from RAPD.PCR and SDS–PAGE of seed proteins. Annales Botanici Fennici 41, 305–317. [Verified March 2009]

Ireland H, Pennington RT (1999) A revision of Geoffroea (Leguminosae–Papilionoideae). Edinburgh Journal of Botany 56, 329–347. open url image1

Laemmli UK (1970) Clevage of structural protein during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 227, 680–685.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | open url image1

Lamarque AL, Fortunato RH (2003) Taxonomic significance of seed protein profiles in Acacia, with special reference to Acacia emilioana. Australian Systematic Botany 16, 35–39.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Maestri DM, Fortunato RH, Greppi JA, Lamarque AL (2001) Compositional studies of seeds and fruits from two varieties of Geoffroea decorticans. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 14, 585–590.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Maestri DM, Fortunato RH, Guzmán CA, Torres MM, Lamarque AL (2002) Seed compositional studies of some species of Papilionoideae (Leguminosae) native to Argentina. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 82, 248–251.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Naciri-Graven Y, Caetano S, Prado D, Pennington RT, Spichiger R (2005) Development and characterization of 11 microsatellite markers in widespread neotropical seasonally dry forest tree species, Geoffroea spinosa Jacq. (Leguminosae). Molecular Ecology Notes 5, 542–545.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Niknam V, Sharifizadeh B, Ebrahimzdeh H, Zarre Sh, Izadpanah M (2004) Comparative study of protein in seeds of some species of Trigonella from Iran. Iranian International Journal of Science 5, 1–11.
|  CAS |
open url image1

Pedalino M, D’Urzo MP, Donne GD, Grillo S, Rao R (1992) The structure of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) seed storage proteins. Seed Science and Techology 20, 223–231. open url image1

Potokina E, Vaughan DA, Eggi EE, Tomooka N (2000) Population diversity of the Vicia sativa agg. (Fabaceae) in the flora of the former USSR deduced from RAPD and seed protein analyses. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 47, 171–183.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Prado DE, Gibbs PE (1993) Patterns of species distributions in the dry seasonal forests of South America. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 80, 902–927.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Przybylska J, Przybylska ZZ (1995) Electrophoretic seed albumin patterns and species relationships in Vicia sect. Faba (Fabaceae). Plant Systematics and Evolution 198, 179–194.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Rholf RJ (1998) ‘NTSYSpc numerical taxonomy and multivariate analysis system – user guide, version 2.01b.’ (Exeter Software Applied Biostatistics Inc.: Setauket, New York)

Sanchez O, Aguirre Z, Kvist LP (2006) Timber and non-timber uses of dry forests in Loja Province. Lyonia 10, 73–82. open url image1