Going Against the Phylogeny Party Line

Cereoid* cereoid at prodigy.net
Mon Oct 22 15:56:05 EST 2001


The real question is whether the Charophyta are a link between Bryophyta and
green algae or are they derived from the Bryophyta and lost certain
characters as a result of their returning to being completely aquatic.

What do you say Poul?


Cereoid* <cereoid at prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:wHkA7.1365$h33.257808547 at newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
> Of course, they're not salamanders & lizards of the plant world. Its only
an
> analogy, dude. Its just not a very good analogy. Don't try to take it
> literally.
>
> Very few liverworts and mosses are amphibious. Most are terrestrial but
> there are a few that are strictly aquatic. Do you know which ones they
are?
>
> A more important question would be: Which came first, the bryophyta or the
> charophyta?
>
>
> Greg <gbarclay at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4cb15b04.0110180649.12007e26 at posting.google.com...
> > I am trying to gather information that refutes the textbook idea that
> > liverworts and mosses are the salamanders & lizards of the plant
> > world. Stebbins and Hill's paper "Did Multicellular Plants Invade the
> > Land?" does this in an advanced style, but what I need are references
> > to more approachable literature or websites. I would appreciate your
> > suggestions.
> > Greg
>
>





More information about the Plantbio mailing list