CSIRO PUBLISHING © CSIRO 10 November 2003 10.1071/SB03012 1030-1887/03/050581 www.publish.csiro.au/journals/asb Australian Systematic Botany 16, 581–594 A molecular estimate of the phylogeny of Styphelieae (Ericaceae) Christopher J. Quinn A,C , Darren M. Crayn A , Margaret M. Heslewood A , Elizabeth A. Brown A and Paul A. Gadek B A National Herbarium of New South Wales, Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust, Mrs Macquaries Road, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia. B School of Tropical Biology, James Cook University, PO Box 6811, Cairns, Qld 4870, Australia. C Corresponding author; email: chris.quinn@rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au Abstract. Parsimony analyses of sequence data derived from two regions of the chloroplast genome, matK and the atpΒ−rbcL intergenic spacer, separately and together, are reported for Styphelieae. Taxonomic sampling includes representatives of all currently accepted genera apart from the two non-Australian monotypics, Cyathopsis Brongn. & Gris and Decatoca F.Muell., and of all subgenera or informal infrageneric groups except for Trochocarpa subgenus Pseudocyathodes Sleumer. A well resolved estimate of the phylogeny of the tribe is obtained, with high levels of jackknife support for terminal groupings. The results provide support for the current concepts of Acrotriche R.Br., Androstoma Hook.f., Croninia J.M.Powell, Cyathodes Labill. sensu Weiller, Leptecophylla C.M.Weiller , Leucopogon R.Br. sensu Taaffe et al., Pentachondra R.Br., Planocarpa C.M.Weiller and Trochocarpa R.Br., but the following genera appear paraphyletic: Astroloma R.Br., Brachyloma Sond., Cyathodes sensu Labill., Leucopogon R.Br. sensu lato, Lissanthe R.Br., Monotoca R.Br. and Styphelia Sm. (sensu Bentham). Several robust clades are identified as potential new genera but formalisation of nomenclatural changes is left, pending morphological analyses of the various clades to identify synapomorphies with which to characterise generic groupings. The general approach to be adopted in this endeavour is discussed, with narrower generic concepts being favoured as more informative and less disruptive of the existing nomenclature. SB03012 Phyl ogenyofStyphelieae C.J. Quin etal . Introduction The Styphelieae is the largest of the seven currently recognised tribes of epacrids (subfamily Styphelioideae, Ericaceae; Kron et al. 2002). It comprises species with indehiscent fruits, with the exception of the Western Australian monotypic endemics Needhamiella L.Watson and Oligarrhena R.Br., which constitute tribe Oligarrheneae. Styphelieae are woody plants that range from prostrate, mat-forming plants of montane herbfields [e.g. Pentachondra pumila (J.R.Forst. & G.Forst. ) R.Br.] to small rainforest trees (e.g. Trochocarpa laurina R.Br.). Although predominantly Australian in distribution, it is the most widely dispersed of the epacrid tribes, with representatives in New Zealand, the Pacific east to Hawaii, Malesia and South-East Asia as far north as Myanmar. The Styphelieae comprises ~350 species in 19 genera, the largest being Leucopogon R.Br. sensu lato (sens. lat.; approximately 230 spp.), Astroloma R.Br. (18 spp.), Styphelia Sm. (14 spp.) and Acrotriche R.Br. (14 spp.) (Powell 1992; Kron et al. 2002). The first critical treatment of the Australian epacrids (Order Epacrideae) was provided by Brown (1810). He recognised 134 species in 24 genera and established infrafamilial groups based on fruit type. Section One comprised 96 species in 14 genera with fleshy fruits; Section Two comprised 38 species in 9 genera with capsular fruits. Bentham (1869) recognised 15 genera of Styphelieae (which corresponds to Brown’s Section One) in Australia. Broader generic concepts have been proposed from time to time (e.g. Sprengel 1825; Drude 1889). Most noteworthy are those of Mueller (1867, 1889), who expanded Styphelia to include Acrotriche, Astroloma, Cyathodes Labill., Cyathopsis Brongn. & Gris, Leucopogon R.Br., Lissanthe R.Br., Melichrus R.Br., Monotoca R.Br. and Pentachondra R.Br. However, few subsequent authors [Sleumer (1964) notwithstanding] took up his broad concepts, with Bentham (1869) citing reasons of floral diversity and general acceptance for retaining the narrower ones established by Brown (1810). Bentham’s treatment remained essentially unmodified, apart from the addition of species, until recently, when Powell (1993) described the monotypic genus Croninia for Leucopogon kingianus (F.Muell.) C.A.Gardner, and Weiller