Rhizome and root anatomy of 14 species of Bromeliaceae

Suzana Lúcia Proença,Maria Das Graças Sajo

doi:10.1590/2175-7860200859106

Abstract

ABSTRACT The anatomy of rhizomes and roots of 14 species of Bromeliaceae that occur in the cerrado biome were studied with the aim of pointing out particular anatomical features of the family and possible adaptations related to the environment. All the rhizomes are similar although some have root regions growing inside the cortex. In some species the vascular cylinder of the rhizome is clearly limited from the cortex. The roots are also very similar, although the coating tissue differs in roots growing inside the rhizome or externally to it and the cortex has a variable organization according to the region. The studied species present anatomical features that are associated to water absorption and storage, showing that they are adapted to the cerrado environment.

Highlights

Bromeliaceae is included in the order Poales (APG II 2003) and comprises 56 genera and around 3000 species (Luther 2002) that, except for Pitcairnia feliciana
Bromeliaceae has traditionally been divided in three subfamilies: Pitcairnioideae, Tillandsioideae and Bromelioideae (Smith & Downs 1974, 1977, 1979; Dahlgren et al 1985), recent phylogenetic analyses do not confirm the monophyly of Pitcairnioideae (Crayn et al 2000; Horres et al 2000)
The present study describes the morpho-anatomy of the rhizomes and roots of epiphytic and terrestrial bromeliads from the cerrado of São Paulo State, with the aim of pointing out particular features of the Bromeliaceae as well as possible adaptive features found in the cerrado vegetation

Summary

Introduction

Bromeliaceae is included in the order Poales (APG II 2003) and comprises 56 genera and around 3000 species (Luther 2002) that, except for Pitcairnia feliciana Bromeliaceae has traditionally been divided in three subfamilies: Pitcairnioideae, Tillandsioideae and Bromelioideae (Smith & Downs 1974, 1977, 1979; Dahlgren et al 1985), recent phylogenetic analyses do not confirm the monophyly of Pitcairnioideae (Crayn et al 2000; Horres et al 2000). The subfamilies are separated according to the growth habit, the fruit and seed morphology and the ovary position (Smith & Downs 1974, 1977, 1979).

Methods

Results

Conclusion