Scribd
Upload
17 views4 pages

Plant Classification Systems

The document outlines five systems of classification in angiosperms: Bentham and Hooker, Engler and Prantl, Hutchinson, Takhtajan, and the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG). Each system has its historical background, basic importance, and shortcomings, highlighting the evolution of plant classification from morphological to molecular approaches. The APG system is noted for its global acceptance and reflection of true evolutionary relationships, despite challenges with frequent updates.

Uploaded by

veers91111
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
17 views4 pages

Plant Classification Systems

The document outlines five systems of classification in angiosperms: Bentham and Hooker, Engler and Prantl, Hutchinson, Takhtajan, and the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG). Each system has its historical background, basic importance, and shortcomings, highlighting the evolution of plant classification from morphological to molecular approaches. The APG system is noted for its global acceptance and reflection of true evolutionary relationships, despite challenges with frequent updates.

Uploaded by

veers91111
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Systems of Classification in Angiosperms

1. Bentham and Hooker System of Classification

History:

- Developed by George Bentham and Joseph Dalton Hooker.

- Published in "Genera Plantarum" (1862-1883) in 3 volumes.

- Non-phylogenetic, based on morphological characters.

Basic Importance:

- Practical and widely used in British botanical gardens and Indian floras.

- Comprehensive and detailed account of plant genera.

- Aided identification and naming of species.

Shortcomings:

- Did not reflect evolutionary relationships.

- Gymnosperms placed between dicots and monocots.

- Some families placed artificially.

2. Engler and Prantl System of Classification

History:

- Developed by Adolf Engler and Karl Prantl.

- Published in "Die Natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien" (1887-1915).

- Attempted a phylogenetic system based on simplicity.

Basic Importance:
- Early evolutionary classification.

- Monocots considered primitive.

- Based on floral structure.

Shortcomings:

- Simplicity equated with primitiveness.

- Monocots wrongly considered primitive.

- Unnatural groupings in some families.

3. Hutchinson System of Classification

History:

- Proposed by John Hutchinson.

- Published from 1926 to 1973.

- Phylogenetic, incorporated evolutionary and growth habits.

Basic Importance:

- Classified dicots into Lignosae and Herbaceae.

- Suggested herbs evolved from trees.

- Based on floral and vegetative characters.

Shortcomings:

- Habit used excessively for classification.

- Some natural families split unnaturally.

- Not fully supported by molecular data.

4. Takhtajan System of Classification


History:

- Developed by Armen Takhtajan.

- English version published in 1969, updated in 1980s-1990s.

- Based on evolution and biogeography.

Basic Importance:

- Detailed hierarchical structure.

- Used fossil, morphological, and biogeographic data.

- Split angiosperms into Magnoliopsida and Liliopsida.

Shortcomings:

- Over-splitting created complexity.

- Some placements not confirmed by molecular data.

- Not widely adopted in practical taxonomy.

5. Angiosperm Phylogeny Group (APG) System

History and Development:

- APG I (1998), APG II (2003), APG III (2009), APG IV (2016).

- Based on molecular phylogenetics (chloroplast DNA sequences).

- International collaboration.

Basic Importance:

- Reflects true evolutionary relationships.

- Globally accepted and monophyletic groupings.

- Used in modern floras and herbaria.


Shortcomings:

- Frequent updates cause confusion.

- Some groupings lack clear morphological features.

- Early diverging lineages still unresolved.

Summary Table:

| System | Type | Key Feature | Shortcoming |

|---------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|

| Bentham & Hooker | Natural | Practical and widely used | Non-evolutionary,

unnatural groupings |

| Engler & Prantl | Phylogenetic | Based on floral simplicity | Primitive traits

misunderstood |

| Hutchinson | Phylogenetic | Habit-based, herb from tree | Over-splitting, unverified

assumptions |

| Takhtajan | Phylogenetic | Biogeography + morphology | Over-complex and

over-split |

| APG | Molecular | DNA-based, globally accepted | Technical, frequent

revisions |

You might also like