fruit section

[Peter Stevens]

>Looking to the future - all taxa in which there is only a single 
>carpel will now need to have fruits with distinct names - e.g. the 
>nutmeg family (Myristicaceae). No taxon that has several separate 
>carpels can have a legume fruit, even if the individual fruits are 
>indistinguishable from a legume as defined below.  Findings aBout 
>legumes will not easily be generalisable, since nothing else has 
>them.


Thus I would strongly recommend against using the term legume as 
defined below (i.e. the revised definition) - it simply means "fruit 
of Fabaceae".  If there was a legume s. str. - e.g. "fruit of a 
single carpel dehiscing explosively down both sutures/sides" that 
might be OK. I have given up teaching "legume" (or 
silique/silicle/silicula for that matter).

Peter S.



>Elizabeth Kellogg wrote:
>
>>Hi Pankaj -
>>    The problem is that not all legumes dehisce, and the ones that 
>>do  dehisce do not all do it in the same way - some dehisce along 
>>one  suture, some along both, and some dehisce between the seeds. 
>>The term  "legume" can only be defined strictly as "the fruit of a 
>>member of  Leguminosae."   That's why it ends up as an instance 
>>only of fruit and  not of "seed as dispersal unit."
>
>This is fine. I did not know about the situation earlier. Can we 
>revise the definition we have now:
>The fruit of Fabaceae, formed from one carpel and either dehiscent 
>along both sides, explosively so or not, or indehiscent, winged or 
>not, splitting transversely or not.
>
>>   The TPR violation comes from the attempt to include a time axis 
>>(development) in a structural ontology, along the lines that we 
>>were  discussing last week.   The relationships are not 
>>intrinsically  hierarchical.  We could create "floret gynoecium", 
>>but following the  same logic we might also have to create a 
>>separate term for every sort  of gynoecium that developed into a 
>>different kind of fruit.   But I  don't quite understand the 
>>example you've given below.  Aren't there  other instances of 
>>fruit, including indehiscent ones?  I think the TPR  violation in 
>>the example below comes from reading down the hierarchy.  
>>Presumably if you included indehiscent fruits then you could trace 
>>a  true path from caryopsis up to floret.  (I think....)
>
>I guess in this case we may need to pull back the develops from 
>relationship (fruit-gynoecium). Because reading down the hierarchy 
>also matters when we start associating the terms to 
>genes/phenotypes. The asssociations keep adding from  bottom-up. 
>e.g. genes expressed in anthers are also considered to be expressed 
>in stamen as well as its parent terms flower and floret. All the 
>associations of a child term are carried over to the parent term by 
>default in addition to any direct associations that teh parent might 
>have. So anything associated with silique will also show up with 
>floret and its parent spikelet, which should not happen.
>
>>Toby
>>
>>On May 10, 2004, at 1:25 PM, Pankaj Jaiswal wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>I have some comments on fruit section
>>>
>>>-term "legume" is currently  a direct instance of fruit. Do you 
>>>think  it should be placed as an instance of term "seed as 
>>>dispersal unit",  which is an instance of dehiscent fruit.
>>>-do we need all the instances of (sort of attributes) of capsule, 
>>>e.g.  loculicidal, septicidal etc. I know the exclusion of 
>>>"septifragal"  will be difficult because of the following comment. 
>>>Is there a way  out?
>>>-people may like to see "slilique" as a primary term compared to a 
>>>synonym for "septifragal"
>>>-a possible TPR violation..
>>>     generic term gynoecium appears under floret and this may cause 
>>>TPR  violation because not all the fruit types develop from 
>>>"floret  gynoecium" (newly coined term). It's only the "caryopsis" 
>>>which  develops from gynoecium in the floret. We need a resolution 
>>>on this.
>>>
>>>may be we need to pull back the relationship
>>>fruit  develops from gynoecium
>>>
>>>One such example is slilique appearing under floret..
>>>
>>>http://brie.cshl.org:8080/amigo/go.cgi? 
>>>action=replace_tree&search_constraint=terms&query=PO:0020072
>>>
>>>      <inflorescence branch ; PO:0009081 ; synonym:coflorescence
>>>       %spikelet ; PO:0009051
>>>        <floret ; PO:0009082
>>>         <gynoecium ; PO:0009062 ; synonym:pistil < flower ; 
>>>PO:0009046  % reproductive structures ; PO:0009083
>>>          ~fruit ; PO:0009001 % mature dispersal unit ; PO:0009091
>>>           %dehiscent fruit ; PO:0020064
>>>            %seed as dispersal unit ; PO:0020081
>>>             %capsule ; PO:0020067
>>>              %septifragal ; PO:0020072 ; synonym:silicula ; 
>>>synonym:siliqua ; synonym:silique
>>>
>>Elizabeth A. Kellogg
>>E. Desmond Lee and Family Professor of Botanical Studies
>>Department of Biology
>>University of Missouri-St. Louis
>>St. Louis, MO 63121
>>Tel: 314-516-6217
>>FAX: 314-516-6233
>>http://www.umsl.edu/divisions/artscience/biology/Kellogg/Kellogg/ home.html
>>
>
>--
>************************
>Pankaj Jaiswal, PhD
>G15-Bradfiled Hall
>Dept. of Plant Breeding
>Cornell University
>Ithaca, NY-14853, USA
>
>Tel: +1-607-255-3103
>      +1-607-255-4109
>Fax: +1-607-255-6683
>http://www.gramene.org
>************************