Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A numerical analysis of species of five genomically defined genera of the Triticeae was undertaken, based on 42 morphological characters and 142 operational taxonomic units (OTUs). The primary goal was to determine the degree of congruence between morphological variation and genomic constitution. The second goal was to determine which existing supraspecific classification, if any, best reflected the morphological variation encountered. The five genera investigated were Thinopyrum (J genome), Lophopyrum (E genome), Pseudoroegneria (S genome), Trichopyrum (EES genome) and Elytrigia (SJE/SSX genome). Both principal co-ordinate and cluster analysis of the data placed the OTUs in supraspecific groups that reflected their genomic constitution. Monogenomic taxa were clearly separated. Allotetraploids between the E and S genomes were situated between E and S monogenomic taxa. Allotetraploids between the J and E genomes were situated closest to J genome taxa. The EES taxa of Trichopyrum were placed closest to Lophopyrum. OTUs of Elytrigia overlapped those of Pseudoroegneria, but not those of Lophopyrum or Thinopyrum.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jarvie et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: