question on monocot flower development

[JClark]

Hi Elizabeth,

Thanks, that's really helpful. These floral organs have names that will 
distinguish them from dicot floral organs so they will not be a problem 
at all. I will make sure they're on the list to be added. The only thing 
I really need to know about right now is if monocots (or any sub-taxon 
of monocots that is currently being annotated) have e.g. a petal that is 
significantly different from a dicot petal, or a stamen that is 
significantly different from a dicot stamen. Organs that have the same 
name but a significant difference with the dicot thing of the same name 
require a sensu term. If people know of any instance of this I'd really 
like to know:

a) the name of the organ.
b) The latin name of the taxon that has this organ.

Jen



Kellogg, Elizabeth A. wrote:

> Just one slight amendment to the comments below:  Grasses, which are very peculiar monocots, do not have sepals and petals as such, and I think there is still some disagreement about which organs, if any, correspond to the perianth in other monocots.  Hence the terms lodicule (probably a petal or inner tepal), palea, and lemma will be needed.  In other words, we will need terms for grass flowers even though we won't need special terms for most monocots.
>    There's confusion In the literature about the relationship of grasses to other monocots.  It is common to read a paper comparing gene expression or function in (for example) rice and Arabidopsis and find the authors saying that they are comparing monocots and dicots, by implication generalizing from the two models to the entire phylogenetic tree that Jerry sketched in his message.   (Or perhaps implying that the authors think that the only monocots are grasses.)  Presumably this is something that the annotators will have to be aware of.
> Cheers - 
> Toby
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	owner-po-dev at brie4.cshl.org on behalf of Pankaj Jaiswal
> Sent:	Wed 5/26/2004 9:27 AM
> To:	po-dev at plantontology.org
> Cc:	
> Subject:	Re: question on monocot flower development
> 
> Dear Jerry,
> 
> I agree with you and others. We should not make this distinction in the 
> flower development area. We can keep it as generic as possible.
> 
> Pankaj
> 
> Jerrold I Davis wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi --
>>
>>You know your needs best, but if my opinion were sought I would 
>>recommend that you NOT create a separate system for monocots and 
>>dicots.  We do use the same general terms for floral parts in both 
>>groups, and arguments concerning separate origins are fairly 
>>speculative.  On re-reading my earlier note, in which I suggested that 
>>the case for separate origins had been strengthened of late, I feel that 
>>I may have overstated the case.    There really is no compelling case 
>>that I know of for treating the floral parts of monocots and dicots as 
>>different things.
>>
>>Another argument agains a dicot/monocot distinction lies in the fact 
>>that the monocots are phylogenetically nested within the dicots.  Thus, 
>>some dicots are more closely related to monocots than they are to other 
>>dicots:
>>
>>             _____ dicot 1
>>             |
>>--------------    _____ monocots
>>             |    |
>>             |-----
>>                  |____ dicot 2
>>
>>
>>So the old monocot/dicot distinction is misleading, and it might turn 
>>out that any peculiar floral attributes of monocots are shared with some 
>>dicots, but not with others.  By setting up a dichotomy out the outset, 
>>one may tend to obscure this situation.  Better to let the data 
>>accumulate, I would argue, and see how the chips fall.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Jerry Davis
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>At 09:31 AM 5/26/2004 Wednesday +0100, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi Jerrold,
>>>
>>>Thank you for your comments. I think it would be very interesting to 
>>>consider subgroups within the dicots further down the line. However, 
>>>right now we are just trying to cover the two groups: dicot and 
>>>monocot. We've found in the past that if we try to make large sections 
>>>of ontology covering lots of different species at once then things can 
>>>get so complicated that we never reach the implementation stage. 
>>>That's why we're sticking to solving one problem at a time.
>>>
>>>Pankaj has conveyed my question very well below. The motivation behind 
>>>this question is that I need to make the terms: sepal development, 
>>>petal development, stamen development, carpel development, for dicots. 
>>>I would like to know whether the monocot annotators will need a sensu 
>>>version of the same terms, or whether these flower parts would have 
>>>different names in monocots anyway.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Jen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Jerrold I Davis wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Pankaj:
>>>>
>>>>Through the years, it has often been hypothesized that various floral 
>>>>parts of monocots and dicots (generally perianth parts, as opposed to 
>>>>stamen or pistil) have arisen independently.  This view of things has 
>>>>been strengthened in recent years by the placement of various 
>>>>apetalous taxa as early-divering elements within the dicots.  
>>>>However, there are also many potential cases of parallel gains and 
>>>>gain/loss/gain events among dicots alone, so I would be wary of any 
>>>>attempt to distinguish monocots from dicots while failing to address 
>>>>equally or more compelling cases within the dicots.
>>>>
>>>>Jerry
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>At 11:16 AM 5/25/2004 Tuesday -0400, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>>I have a question on flower development in Monocots. The reason I am 
>>>>>asking this is because I am working with Gene Ontology group 
>>>>>(www.geneontology.org) to introduce the biological process that 
>>>>>represent a flower development. While doing this we need to 
>>>>>instantiate whether,
>>>>>
>>>>>-It is possible to do most of the gene expression and phenotype 
>>>>>annotation using a generic term or do we need a monocot and dicot 
>>>>>specific term?.
>>>>>-Is there a conceptual difference between the development of a 
>>>>>monocot and dicot flower and its parts? e.g. is there a difference 
>>>>>between a monocot and dicot anther/carpel/petal/sepal/tepal 
>>>>>development.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>Pankaj
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>______________________________
>>>>
>>>>Jerrold I Davis
>>>>Associate Professor
>>>>
>>>>Department of Plant Biology
>>>>(office: 214 Plant Science Building)
>>>>(mailing address: 228 Plant Science Building)
>>>>Cornell University
>>>>Ithaca, New York 14853
>>>>U.S.A.
>>>>
>>>>phone:   607-255-7980
>>>>fax:     607-255-5407
>>>>e-mail:  JID1 at cornell.edu
>>>>______________________________
>>>>
>>
>>
>