A critical review of S. V. Meyen’s “Basic features of gymnosperm systematics and phylogeny as evidenced by the fossil record”

Abstract

Meyen’s “Basic features of gymnosperm systematics and phylogeny as evidenced by the fossil record” departs from the usual Botanical Review article that provides the botanical community with a synthesis of the state of knowledge and understanding of an individual segment of botany, i.e., an interpretation of progress in a specialty for the nonspecialist. Instead, this article appears intended to challenge paleobotanists to reconsider traditional views of the interrelationships of the various gymnospermous groups and the concepts on which they were based. A classification scheme is presented which divides gymnosperms into the Ginkgoopsida, Cycadopsida and Pinopsida. These classes are based on Meyen’s analysis of the structural variation in gymnosperms and his interpretation of homologies of various organs. Too often, however, key plants are reconstructed from parts known only in association and relationships are tied to assumptions of homology that have yet to be documented. The result has value in providing a succinct summary of gymnospermous structure and variation in the different groups. It is also commendable in its attempt to explain and use concepts and terminology designed especially for gymnosperms. This critique shows that in many cases there are alternative interpretations that also fit the evidence.