abstract |
The development
of botanical science and the improvement of methods
used to identify the boundaries of species lead
to constant changes in the criteria and volume of
species in various systematic groups of plants.
Currently, to solve these problems, modern methods
of geno- and chemosystematics (for example, use
of PCR, ITSS, and other markers), methods of discriminant
and factor analyses, assessment of boundaries of
ecological and climatic niches of different species,
approaches of chemosystematics and metabolomics
are used. However, the emergence of a large number
of different modern approaches to estimate the volume
of species has not simplified the task of plant
taxonomists. Instead, it gave them the task to select
or reasonably combine reliable methods. The latter
would allow to progress in solving this difficult
tasks and set priorities for the development of
an integrated methodological approach to the study
criteria and volumes of species.
|
references |
Dietrich, W., W. Wagner,
P. H. Raven. 1998. Systematics of Oenothera section
Oenothera subsection Oenothera (Onagraceae). Systematic
Botany Monographs, 50: 1–234.
Ereshefsky, M. 2001. The Poverty of the Linnaean
Hierarchy: a Philosophical Study of Biological Tax-onomy.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1–316.
Hudziok, G. 1968. Die Oenothera-Arten der sudlichen
Mittelmark und des angrenzenden Flamings Verh. bot.
Ver. Prov. Brandenb., 105: 73–107.
Kitcher, P. 1984. Species. Philosophy of Science,
51 (2): 308–333.
Kornet, D. J., J. W. McAllister. 2005. The composite
species concept: a rigorous basis for cladistic
per-spective. In: Reyden T. A. C., Hemerik L. (eds).
Current Themes in Theoretical Biology: a Dutch perspective.
Springer Verlag, Berlin, 95–128.
Kulakova, Yu. Yu., VG Kulakov, ES Mazurin, 2015.
Search for molecular markers for the identifica-tion
of weeds. Plant quarantine. Science and Practice,
1 (11): 32–36.
Mosyakin, S. L., L. I. Buyun. 2006. Have a happy
look at the phylogeny that was the birthplace of
Or-chidaceae juss. in systems of monocotyledonous
roslin. Introduction of roslin, No. 2: 3–14.
Mosyakin, S., B. Mandak. 2020. Chenopodium ucrainicum
(Chenopodiaceae, Amaranthaceae sensu APG), a new
diploid species: a morphological description and
pictorial guide. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 77
(4): 237–248.
Mosyakin, S.L. 2008. Species and Speciation in Plants:
Phytoeidological Views of MV Klokov and the Present.
Institute of Botany. N. G. Kholodny, NAS of Ukraine,
Kyiv, 1–72.
Olonova, MV 2008. Assessment of quantitative morphological
characters used in the taxonomy of Si-berian bluegrass
(Poa L.). Botanical research of Siberia and Kazakhstan,
14: 3–12.
Pavlinov, I. Ya. 2009. The problem of the species
in biology — one more look. Proceedings of the Zoo-logical
Institute RAS. Appendix No. 1: 250–271.
Rostanski, K. 1982. The species of Oenothera L.
in Britain. Watsonia, 14: 1–34.
Rostanski, K., A. Rostanski, M. Shevera, V. Tokhtar.
2004. Oenothera in Ukraine. In: The genus Oenothera
L. in Eastern Europe. W. Szafer Institute of Botany.
Cracow, 1–134.
Singer, M., P. Berg. 1998. Genes and Genomes. In
2 volumes. Mir. Moscow, 1–764.
Ter Braak, C. J. F. 1996. Unimodal Models to Relate
Species to Environment. Pudok. Wageningen, 1–262.
Tokhtar, V. 2018. Advanced approaches to the visualization
of data characterizing distribution features of
alien plant species. Russian Journal of Biological
Invasions, 9 (3): 263–269.
Tokhtar, V., S. Groshenko. 2014. Differentiation
of the climatic niches of the invasive Oenothera
L. (Subsect. Oenothera, Onagraceae) species in the
Eastern Europe. Advances in Environmental Biology,
8 (10): 529–531.
Wittig, R., V. Tokhtar. 2003. Die Haufigkeit von
Oenothera-Arten im westlichen Mitteleuropa. Feddes
Repertorium, 114 (5–6): 372–379.
|