New York Metropolitan Flora

Family: Rubiaceae

Cephalanthus occidentalis

By Steven D. Glenn

Not peer reviewed

Last Modified 02/01/2013

Nomenclature

List of Rubiaceae Genera

References to Rubiaceae

  • Adema, F.; Rauschert, S. 1979. (464) roposal to conserve 8485 <em>Asperula</em> L. (1753) with a conserved type species, <em>A. Arvensis</em> L., against <em>Asperula</em> L. (1753) with the lectotype species <em>A. Odorata</em> L. (Rubiaceae).
  • Ahlgren, C. E.; Ahlgren, I. F. 1981. Some effects of different forest litters on seed germination and growth. Canad. J. Forest Res. 11: 710-714.
  • Andersson, L. 1999. The rps 16 intron and the phylogeny of the <em>Rubioideae</em> (Rubiaceae). Pl. Syst. Evol. 214: 161-186.
  • Andersson, S. et.al. 2002. Floral scents in butterfly-pollinated plants: Possible convergence in chemical composition. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 140: 129-153.
  • Bacigalupo, N. M.; Cabral, E. L. 1999. Revision of the American species of the genus <em>Diodia</em> (Rubiaceae, Spermacoceae). Darwiniana 37: 153-165. (In Spanish)
  • Baird, J. H. et.al. 1992. Ontogeny, anatomy, and reproductive biology of vegetative reproductive organs of <em>Diodia virginiana</em> L. (Rubiaceae). Int. J. Plant Sci. 153: 320-328.
  • Baird, J. H.; Dickens, R. 1991. Germination and emergence of Virginia buttonweed (<em>Diodia virginiana</em>).
  • Bakhuizen Van Der Brink, R. C. 1970. Nomenclature and typification of the genera of Rubiaceae-Naucleeae and a proposal to conserve the generic name <em>Nauclea</em> L. Taxon 19: 468-80.
  • Battacharya, M.; Primack, R. B.; Gerwein, J. 2003. Are roads and railroads barriers to bumblebee movement in a temperate suburban conservation area? Biol. Conserv. 109: 37-45.
  • Beliveau, B. D.; Wyatt, R. 1999. Compatibility relationships in distylous bluets: <em>Houstonia serpyllifolia</em> and <em>H. longifolia</em> (Rubiaceae). Amer. Midl. Naturalist 141: 217-226.
  • Bremekamp, C. E. B. 1966. Remarks on the position, the delimitation and subdivision of the Rubiaceae. Acta Bot. Neerl. 15: 1-33.
  • Bremer, B. 1996. Combined and seperate analysis of morphological and molecular data in the plant family Rubiaceae. Cladistics 12: 21-40.
  • Bremer, B. 2009. A review of molecular phylogenetic studies of Rubiaceae. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 96: 4-26.
  • Bremer, B. et.al. 1999. More characters or more taxa for a robust phylogeny - case study from the coffee family (Rubiaceae). Syst. Biol. 48: 413-435.
  • Bremer, B.; Andreasen, K.; Olsson, D. 1995. Subfamilial and tribal relationships in the Rubiaceae based on rbcL sequence data. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 383-97.
  • Bremer, B.; Eriksson, T. 2009. Time tree of Rubiaceae: phylogeny and dating the family, subfamilies, and tribes. Int. J. Plant Sci. 170: 766-793.
  • Britton, Nathaniel L. 1920. <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em>. Addisonia 5: 17-8.
  • Burkle, L. A.; Logan, B. A. 2003. Seasonal acclimation of photosynthesis in eastern hemlock and partridgeberry in different light environments. Northeastern Naturalist 10: 1-16.
  • Chauhan, B. S. et.al. 2006. Seed germination and seedling emergence of threehorn bedstraw (<em>Galium tricornutum</em>). Weed Science 54: 867-872.
  • Church, S. A. 2003. Molecular phylogenetics of <em>Houstonia</em> (Rubiaceae): Descending aneuploidy and breeding system evolution in the radiation of the lineage across North America. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 27: 223-228.
  • Church, S. A.; Taylor, D. R. 2005. Speciation and hybridization among <em>Houstonia</em> (Rubiaceae) species: the influence of polyploidy on reticulate evolution. Amer. J. Bot. 92: 1372-1380.
  • Coladoanto, M. 1993. <em>Mitchella repens</em>. ()
  • Darwin, S. P. 1976. The subfamilial, tribal and subtribal nomenclature of the Rubiaceae. Taxon 25: 595-610.
  • Faber-Langendoen, D.; Dina, S. J. 1987. Growth response of <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em> L. (buttonbush) to varying light levels and flooding. Trans. Missouri Acad. Sci. 21: 55-62.
  • Faber-Langendoen, D.; Maycock, P. F. 1989. Community patterns and environmental gradients of buttonbush, <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em>, ponds in lowland forests of southern Ontario. Canad. Field-Naturalist 103: 479-85.
  • Ganders, F. R. 1975. Fecundity in distylous and self-incompatible homostylous plants of <em>Mitchella repens</em> (Rubiaceae). Evolution 29: 186-188.
  • Glenn, Steven D. 1997. <em>Bombus</em> sp. visiting flowers of <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em>.
  • Gould, A. M. A.; Gorchov, D. L. 2000. Effects of the exotic invasive shrub <em>Lonicera maackii</em> on the survival and fecundity of three species of native annuals. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 144: 36-50.
  • Heinken, T. 2000. Dispersal of plants by a dog in a deciduous forest. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 122: 449-467.
  • Hereford, J.; Moriuchi, K. S. 2005. Variation among populations of <em>Diodia teres</em> (Rubiaceae) in environmental maternal effects. J. Evol. Biol. 18: 124-131.
  • Hicks, D. J. et.al. 1985. Reproductive biology of distylous partridgeberry <em>Mitchella repens</em>. Amer. J. Bot. 72: 1503-1514.
  • Hillebrand, G. R.; Fairbrothers, D. E. 1970. Serological investigation of the systematic position of the Caprifoliaceae. I. Correspondence with selected Rubiaceae and Cornaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 57(7): 810-5. (Also Nyssa)
  • Imbert, F. M.; Richards, J. H. 1993. Protandry, incompatibility, and secondary pollen presentation in <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em> (Rubiaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 80(4): 395-404.
  • Jennings, D. L. 1971. Some genetic factors affecting the development of endocarp, endosperm and embryo in raspberries. New Phyt. 70: 885-95.
  • Jennings, D. L. 1971. Some genetic factors affecting fruit development in raspberries. New Phyt. 70: 361-70.
  • Jordan, N. 1992. Path analysis of local adaptation in two ecotypes of the annual plant <em>Diodia teres</em> Walt. Rubiaceae. Amer. Naturalist 140: 149-165.
  • Kiehn, M. 1995. Chromosome survey of the Rubiaceae. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 82: 398-408.
  • Lawrey, J. D. 1977. Trace metal accumulation by plant species from a coal strip-mining area in Ohio. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 104: 368-375.
  • Lee, Y. S.; Fairbrothers, D. E. 1978. Serological approaches to the systematics of the Rubiaceae and related families. Taxon 27: 159-85.
  • Lewis, W. H. 1961. Merger of the North American <em>Houstonia</em> and <em>Oldenlandia</em> under <em>Hedyotis</em>. Rhodora 63: 216-223.
  • Lewis, W. H. 1962. Phylogenetic study of <em>Hedyotis</em> (Rubiaceae) in North America. Amer. J. Bot. 49: 855-865.
  • Mack, R. N. 2003. Plant naturalizations and invasions in the eastern United States: 1634-1860. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 90: 77-90.
  • Malik, N. et.al. 1988. The biology of Canadian weeds 86. <em>Galium aparine</em> L. and <em>Galium spurium</em> L. Canad. J. Pl. Sci. 68: 481-500.
  • Manen, J. F. et.al. 1994. Phylogeny of Rubiaceae-Rubieae inferred from the sequence of a cpDNA intergene region. Pl. Syst. Evol. 190: 195-211.
  • McCarron, J. K.; McLeod, K. W.; Conner, W. H. 1998. Flood and salinity stress of wetland woody species, buttonbush (<em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em>) and swamp tupelo (<em>Nyssa sylvatica</em> var. <em>biflora</em>). Wetlands 18: 165-175.
  • Meehan, T. 1868. <em>Mitchella repens</em>, a dioecious plant. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 20: 183-4.
  • Mennan, H. et.al. 2006. Seasonal cycles in germination and seedling emergence of summer and winter populations of catchweed bedstraw (<em>Galium aparine</em>) and wild mustard (<em>Brassica kaber</em>). Weed Science 54: 114-120.
  • Mersereau, D.; DiTommaso, A. 2003. The biology of Canadian weeds. 121. <em>Galium mollugo</em> L. Canad. J. Pl. Sci. 83: 453-466.
  • Middleton, B. 2000. Hydrochory, seed banks, and regeneration dynamics along the landscape boundaries of a forested wetland. Plant Ecology 146: 169-184.
  • Myers, J. A. et.al. 2004. Seed dispersal by white-tailed deer: implications for long-distance dispersal, invasion, and migration of plants in eastern North America. Oecologia 139: 35-44.
  • Paratley, R. D. 1986. Vegetation-environment relations in a conifer swamp in central New York. J. Torrey Bot. Soc. 113: 357-371.
  • Puff, C. 1977. The <em>Galium obtusum</em> group ({Galium</em> sect. {Aparinoides</em>, Rubiaceae). Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 104: 202-208.
  • Puff, C. 1976. The <em>Galium trifidum</em> group (<em>Galium</em> sect., <em>Aparinoides,</em> Rubiaceae). Canad. J. Bot. 54: 1911-1925.
  • Quimby, M. W. 1934. The morphology and anatomy of certain above-ground parts of <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em> L. M.S. Thesis Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY24 figs. + 45 p.
  • Ridsdale, C. E. 1976. A revision of the tribe Cephalantheae (Rubiaceae). Blumea 23: 177-88.
  • Robbrecht, E. et.al. 1991. The genera <em>Mitchella</em> and <em>Damnacanthus</em>, evidence for their close alliance, comments on the campylotropy in the Rubiaceae, and the circumscription of the Morindeae. Blumea 35: 307-346.
  • Robbrecht, E.; Puff, C.; Smets, E. 1996. Second International Rubiaceae Conference: proceedings. (ISBN 9072619293)
  • Robertson, C. 1892. Flowers and insects. IX. Bot. Gaz. 17: 269-276.
  • Rogers, G. K. 2005. The genera of Rubiaceae in the southeastern United States, part II. Subfamily Rubioideae, and subfamily Cinchonoideae revisited. Harvard Papers in Botany 10: 1-45.
  • Snyder, S. A. 1991. <em>Cephalanthus occidentalis</em>. ()
  • Soza, V. L.; Olmstead, R. G. 2010. Evolution of breeding systems and fruits in New World <em>Galium</em> and relatives (Rubiaceae). Amer. J. Bot. 97: 1630-1646.
  • Soza, V. L.; Olmstead, R. G. 2010. Molecular systematics of tribe Rubieae (Rubiaceae): evolution of major clades, development of leaf-like whorls, and biogeography. Taxon 59: 755-771.
  • Taylor, K. 1999. <em>Galium aparine</em> L. J. Ecol. 87: 713-730.
  • Terrell, E. E. 1991. Overview and annotated list of North American species of <em>Hedyotis, Houstonia, Oldenlandia</em> Rubiaceae and related genera. Phytologia 71: 212-243.
  • Terrell, E. E. et.al. 1986. Phylogenetic implications of diverse seed types, chromosome numbers, and pollen morphology in <em>Houstonia</em> Rubiaceae. Amer. J. Bot. 73: 103-115.
  • Terrell, E. E.; Wunderlin, R. P. 2002. Seed and fruit characters in selected Spermacoceae and comparison with Hedyotideae (Rubiaceae). Sida 20: 549-557.
  • Tessier, J. T. 2008. Leaf habit, phenology, and longevity of 11 forest understory plant species in Algonquin State Forest, northwest Connecticut, USA. Botany 86: 457-465.
  • Tooker, J. F.; Reagel, P. F.; Hanks, L. M. 2002. Nectar sources of day-flying lepidoptera of central illinois. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 95: 84-96.
  • Verdcourt, B. 1958. Remarks on the classification of the Rubiaceae. Bull. Jard. Bot. Etat 28: 209-314.
  • Wagenitz, G. 1959. Die systematische Stellung der Rubiaceae. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 79: 17-35. (In German)
  • Wang, R. J. et.al. 2001. The origin and distribution on genus <em>Hedyotis</em> L. J. Trop. Subtrop. Bot. 9: 219-228. (In Chinese)
  • Wyatt, R. 1979. Factors determining fruit set in heterostylous bluets <em>Houstonia caerulea</em> Rubiaceae. Syst. Bot. 4: 103-114.