Open Access
How to translate text using browser tools
4 January 2010 Contributions towards a revised infrageneric classification of Crepis (Cichorieae, Compositae)
Neela Enke
Author Affiliations +

A recent molecular analysis of Crepis by Enke & Gemeinholzer based on ITS and matK sequences proved the genus to be polyphyletic and split into three statistically well supported clades. The first clade comprises the majority of the sampled species as Crepis s.str., the second clade species of five Crepis sections (Intybellia, Lagoseris, Phaecasium, Microcephalum and Pterotheca) as well as the genera Lapsana and Rhagadiolus, the third clade C. sect. Ixeridopsis as part of the Youngia group. The present paper summarises and discusses the available molecular, morphological (additional micromorphological data of pollen, achenes and pappus presented in the present paper) and karyological findings, makes suggestions towards delimitation and infrageneric classification of Crepis and specifies problems to be solved by future studies. It is concluded that (1) the recent resurrection of Askellia as a separate genus is well advised, (2) the genera Lapsana and Rhagadiolus should, for the time being, be maintained in their current generic circumscription and (3) Crepis, consequently, be treated as a paraphyletic taxon. A revised infrageneric classification of Crepis, maintaining 21 of Babcock's 27 sections, some in a revised circumscription, is provided; in addition, C. sect. Calliopea is re-established and C. sect. Neglectoides is described as new to science. For several species or species groups the findings are ambiguous or contradicting and their placement questionable. Approximately 55 % of the species were not included in a molecular analysis yet and their sectional placement based on morphological data only is thus tentative.

See the PDF.



T. A. Adylov & T. I. Zuckerwanik 1993: Conspectus florae Asiae mediae. — Tashkent. Google Scholar


P. Avery 1930: Cytological studies of five interspecific hybrids of C. leontodontoides. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Agrie. 6: 135–167. Google Scholar


E. B. Babcock 1947a: The genus Crepis I. The taxonomy, phylogeny, distribution and evolution of Crepis. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 21. Google Scholar


E. B. Babcock 1947b: The genus Crepis II. Systematic treatment. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 22. Google Scholar


E. B. Babcock & M. S. Cave 1938: A study of intra- and interspecific relations of Crepis foetida L. — Z. Indukt. Abstammungs-Vererbungsl. 75: 124–160. Google Scholar


E. B. Babcock & J. A. Jenkins 1943: Chromosomes and phylogeny in Crepis III: The relationships of one hundred and thirteen species. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Agrie. 18: 241–292. Google Scholar


E. B. Babcock & G. L. Stebbins 1937: The genus Youngia. — Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 484. Google Scholar


E. G. Babcock , G. L. Stebbins & J. A. Jenkins 1937: Chromosomes and phylogeny in some genera of the Crepidinae. — Cytologia Fuji Jubilee Volume: 188–210. Google Scholar


S. Blackmore 1984: CompositaeLactuceae. — Pp. 45–85 in: W. Punt & G. C. S. Clarke (ed.), The Northwest European Pollen Flora IV. — Amsterdam. Google Scholar


K. Bremer 1994: Asteraceae. Cladistics and classification. — Portland. Google Scholar


J. L. Collins 1924: Inheritance in Crepis capillaris (L.) Wallr., III: Nineteen morphological and three physiological characters. — Univ. Calif. Publ. Agric. 2: 305– 320. Google Scholar


S. K. Czerepanov 1964: Crepis L., Lagoseris M. B. — Pp. 594–715 in: E. G. Bobrov & N. N. Tzvelev (volume ed.), Flora SSSR 29. — Moskva & Leningrad [English translation: Enfield, 2000]. Google Scholar


D. Dimitrova & J. Greilhuber 2001: C-banding patterns and quantitative karyotype characteristics of Bulgarian species of Crepis (Asteraceae). — Pl. Biol. 3: 88–97.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


D. Don 1829: An attempt at a new classification of the Cichorieae, with some observations on the geographical distribution of this family. — Edinburgh Philos. J. 12: 305–311. Google Scholar


N. Enke & B. Gemeinholzer 2008: Babcock revisited: new insights into generic delimitation and character evolution in Crepis L. (Compositae : Cichorieae) from ITS and matK sequence data. —  Taxon 57: 756– 768. Google Scholar


N. Enke , N. Kilian , S. Nemomissa & B. Gemeinholzer 2008: Afro-alpine Dianthoseris actually a congener of Crepis s.str. (Compositae, Cichorieae, Crepidinae). — Bot. Jahr. Syst. 127: 389–405.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


G. Erdtman 1960: The acetolysis method. A revised description. — Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 54: 561–564. Google Scholar


ICN ( R. Hand , N. Kilian & E. v. Raab-Straube : general ed.) 2009+ (continuously updated): International Cichorieae Network: Cichorieae Portal. — Published at [accessed 15.11.2009]. Google Scholar


C. Jeffrey 1966: Notes on Compositae I. The Cichorieae in East Tropical Africa. — Kew Bull. 18: 427–486.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


G. Kamari 1976: Cytotaxonomic study of the Crepis neglecta complex in Greece. — Dissertation, University of Patras. Google Scholar


N. Kilian , B. Gemeinholzer & H. W. Lack 2009: Tribe Cichorieae. — Pp. 343–383 in: V. Funk , A. Susanna , T. Stuessy & R. Bayer (ed.), Systematics and evolution of the Compositae. — Vienna. Google Scholar


H. Merxmüller 1968: Melitella (Cichoriaceae) — über ein Vorkommen in Australien und die taxonomische Einreihung. — Mitt. Bot. Staatssamml. München 7: 271–275. Google Scholar


A. Monnier 1929: Essai monographique sur les Hieracium. — Nancy. Google Scholar


A. K. E. Osman 2006: Pollen types of the Egyptian species of tribe Lactuceae (subfamily Cichorioidea-Compositae). — Acta Bot. Croat. 65: 161–180. Google Scholar


J. H. Pak 1993: Taxonomic implications of fruit wall anatomy and karyology of Crepis sect. Ixeridopsis (Compositae; Lactuceae). — Korean J. Pl. Taxon. 23: 11–20. Google Scholar


J. H. Pak & K. Bremer 1995: Phylogeny and reclassification of the genus Lapsana (Asteracea : Lactuceae). — Taxon 44: 13–21.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


J. H. Pak & S. Kawano 1990: Biosystematic studies on the genus Ixeris and its allied genera (CompositaeLactuceae) I. Fruit wall anatomy and its taxonomic implications. — Acta Phytotax. Geobot. 41: 43–60. Google Scholar


J. H. Pak & S. Kawano 1992: Biosystematic studies on the genus Ixeris and it allied genera (Compositae-Lactuceae) IV. Taxonomic treatments and nomenclature. — Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyoto Univ., Ser. Biol. 15: 29–61. Google Scholar


P. D. Sell 1976: Crepis. — Pp. 344–357 in: T. G. Tutin , V. H. Heywood , N. A. Burges , D. M. Moore , D. H. Valentine , S. M. Walters & D. A. Webb (ed.), Flora europaea 4. — Cambrigde, etc. Google Scholar


A. N. Sennikov & I. D. Illarionova 2007: Generic delimitation of the subtribe Ixeridinae newly segregated from Crepidiinae (Asteraceae-Lactuceae). — Komarovia 5: 57–115. Google Scholar


S. Siljak-Yakovlev & D. Cartier 1982: Comparative analysis of C-Band karyotypes in Crepis praemorsa subsp. praemorsa and subsp. dinarica. —  Pl. Syst. Evol. 141: 85–90.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


F. Tegel 2002: Die Testaepidermis der Lactuceae (Asteraceae) — ihre Diversität und systematische Bedeutung. — Published at  Google Scholar


H. A. Tobgy 1943: A cytological study of Crepis fuliginosa, C. neglecta and their Fl hybrid, and its bearing on the mechanism of phylogenetic reduction in chromosome number. — J. Genet. 45: 67–111.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


J. P. de Tournefort 1694: Élements de botanique 1–3. — Paris. Google Scholar


N. N. Tzvelev 2008: Slozhnotsvetiye (Tsikorievye) [Compositae (Cichorioideaej). — In: V. I. Grubov (ed.), Rasteniya Tsentral'noi Asii [Plantae Asiae Centralis] 14b. — Moskva. Google Scholar


G. A. Verboom , H. P. Linder & W. D. Stock 2004: Testing the adaptive nature of radiation: growth form and life history divergence in the African grass genus Ehrharta (Poaceae : Ehrhartoideae). —  Amer. J. Bot. 91: 1364–1370.  CrossRef  Google Scholar


W. A. Weber 1984: New names and combinations, principally in the Rocky Mountain flora IV. — Phytologia 55: 1–11. Google Scholar


C. Zidorn 2008: Sesquiterpene lactones and their precursors as chemo systematic markers in the tribe Cichorieae of the Asteraceae. —  Phytochemistry 69: 2270– 2296.  CrossRef  Google Scholar
© 2009 BGBM Berlin-Dahlem.
Neela Enke "Contributions towards a revised infrageneric classification of Crepis (Cichorieae, Compositae)," Willdenowia 39(2), 229-245, (4 January 2010).
Published: 4 January 2010
Back to Top