Comparative Pollen Morphology of Selected Species of Blumea DC. and Cyathocline Cass. and Its Taxonomic Significance

Abstract

The pollen morphology of 20 species from Blumea and Cyathocline Cass. was investigated using a light microscope (LM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to explore their taxonomic significance. This study showed that pollen grains of these species were usually tricolporate, rarely tetracolporate (B. sinuata). Nine pollen types were distinguishable through the exine sculpture characters and the number of apertures. It was easily distinguished Cyathocline from species of Blumea s. str. by its much smaller size (15.04 μm × 15.07 μm) and sparse and longer spines (24 spines, spine length 4.23 μm) with acute apex, which suggest that C. purpurea might not belong to the genus Blumea s. str. The palynological characteristics indicated that Section Macrophllae and Section Paniculatae of Blumea were not monophyletic groups. The pollen morphology differentiation of B. lacera clade is consistent with the interspecific relationship revealed by the molecular phylogenetic tree. However, the pollen morphology of the Blumea densiflora clade is inconsistent with the interspecific relationship based on molecular phylogenetic analysis. This palynology research can only partly support the previously published molecular phylogeny of Blumea s. str.

1. Introduction

Blumea DC. is the largest genus in the tribe Inuleae [1], comprising 50–100 species [2,3,4]. The taxonomy of this genus is notoriously difficult because there is a lack of distinguishing features among species and related genera. Many new species were described and based on limited specimens in the herbaria [4,5,6,7,8,9]. Moreover, a lack of deep morphological study led to errors in taxonomic treatment and great controversy in the classification of Blumea [4,5,6,10,11,12]. In recent years, molecular phylogenetic studies supported that Blumea was a monophyletic group, excluding Laggera Sch. Bip. ex Benth. & Hook. f., Placus Lour., Doellia Sch.-Bip. and Blumeopsis Gagnep. [12,13,14]. Although Cyathocline Cass. has long been placed in the tribe Astereae Cass., recent systematic study has found that Cyathocline purpurea (Buch.—Ham. ex De Don) O. Kuntze belongs to the genus Blumea [15]. The capitula of C. purpurea are small, with 2- or 3-seriate phyllaries, pinnatifid leaves and purple florets. The morphological characteristics of C. purpurea are very different from other members of the genus Blumea. Therefore, the relationship between Cyathocline and Blumea needs further study.

Blumea duclouxii is different from other species of Blumea in that they possess the capitula with only one layer of phyllary. Its system position is still uncertain. The genus Blumea was established by De Candolle (1833) [16]. The species boundaries are still difficult to delimit. For example, B. riparia and B. megacephala were treated as two variants under the same species by Randeria [2] and Pornpongrungrueng et al. [4]. While Zhang & Yu [17]. Chen & Anderberg [3] divided them into two different species. De Candolle [5] divided the species of Blumea into two series. Randeria [2] interpreted the proposed groups of De Candolle [5] as the sectional rank of Blumea. Then sectional classifications were applied and revised by Randeria [2] and Dakshini & Prithipalsingh [18]. However, molecular phyogenetic studies of Pornpongrungrueng et al. [12] were not congruent with those of this genus’s previously published sectional classification. Therefore, more discriminative evidence of these species is needed for the taxonomic revision of the genus Blumea.

The mature pollen of plants has unique morphological characteristics, including pollen size, shape, number of apertures, etc., which is of great significance for plant classification and plant origin inference. Pollen morphology sometimes has important taxonomy value in problematic taxa and is widely used in the taxonomic treatment of Asteraceae [19,20,21]. Wortley et al. [20] found that pollen characters may help place rogue genera of Asteraceae. Since Asteraceae pollen was first studied by Fischer [22], several studies of this family were investigated by Wodehouse [23,24,25], Erdtman [26], Stix [27] and Skvarla and Turner [28] by light microscope. Modern research indicated that more subtle morphological differences could be exhibited by electron microscopy [29,30,31,32,33,34]. The study of Reshmi & Rajalakshm showed that palynological characteristics such as aperture type and spine length were significant in the delimitation of taxa in the interspecific levels [29]. The survey of 132 genera and 266 species of the tribe Inuleae by Wittenbach [30] indicated that the tribe Inuleae pollen exhibited a wide diversity. Three pollen types were found in the tribe Inuleae from Egypt [31]. The study of Coutinho & Dinis [32] found that all pollen grains of seven genera and nine species of the subtribe Inulinae had a senecioid pattern of exine, and all quantitative traits had a continuous transition among the different species. It was also found that the exine sculpture characters, especially the spines, were the most useful in defining the genus Pulicaria pollen types and distinguishing the species [33].

Until now, only a few species of the genus Blumea have been investigated in palynology [30,35,36]. Pollen morphology of two species of Blumea s. str. was studied by Wittenbach [30] using the light microscope (LM), including B. mollis (D. Don) Merr. (synonym of B. axillaris (Lamarck) Candolle) and B. laciniata (Roxb.) DC. (synonym of B. sinuata (Loureiro) Merrill). LM study of B. axillaris found its shape was sub-spheroidal with hetropolar polarity [35]. The pollen morphology of B. lacera and B. obliqua were similar in both LM and SEM studies [36]. The palynological characteristics of most species in Blumea are still unclear.

The systematic development research outlined above indicates that the boundaries of Blumea are unclear. Besides the problematic delimitation of the genus itself, the species-level taxonomy of Blumea is partly unresolved. This study aims to explore the palynological properties of Blumea and the putatively related genus Cyathocline and try to estimate their possible taxonomic positions based on pollen morphology.

2. Results

2.1. Pollen Shape

The results showed that the pollen grains of the studied species were radially symmetrical and isopolar, most of these pollen grains were subprolate to spherical and occasionally triangular (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5), and the ratio of polar axis length to equatorial axis length (P/E) was ranging from 0.97 to 1.11. The measured morphological characteristics of pollen are shown in Table S1. Pollen grains of Blumea were 15.07–23.09 μm in equatorial diameter (Table S1). Significant differences existed in the P, E and P/E of pollen between different species (p < 0.01).

2.2. Apertures

In this study, pollen apertures were tricolporate and tetracolporate [Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 5] [Table S2]. The tricolporate was easily observed under both light and scanning electron microscopy. Under SEM, more subtle characters of apertures could be observed. Colpus was usually rather long, not curved, with a narrower end and a wider middle. Excluding pollen grains of B. sinuata (Loureiro), Merrill was tetracolporate [Figure 5(C-1,C-2)], and the pollen grains of the other species were tricolporate.

2.3. Pollen Exine Ornamentation

All the pollens were echinate. Exines of the pollen grain were microperforate and spinose. Spines were attenuated or contracted in acute or blunt apex. The spines were roughly conical or distinctly broader at their bases and ranged from 2.78–5.23 μm in length (Table S2). There were significant differences in the quantity and length of spines among different species (p < 0.01). The exines of pollen grains were microperforate, with round or irregular perforations of varying sizes. Pollens could be roughly divided into two types according to the different densities of interspinular microperforations. The first type was microperforations sparsely distributed in the gap among the base of spines, such as B. balsamifera [Figure 3(A-1,A-2)] and B. repanda [Figure 4(H-1,H-2)]. The second type was dense microperforations between the spines of all outer walls of pollen, such as B. martiniana [Figure 4(G-1,G-2) ] and B. sinuata [Figure 5(B-1,B-2)].

2.4. Multivariate Analysis

For cluster analysis (UPGMA), the pollen characteristics of 20 taxa were analyzed, and their infrageneric and interspecific relationships were observed based on these sampling (Tables S1 and S2, Figure 6). The delimitation of these groups was mainly based on the number of spines, spine length, polar diameter and equator diameter, tip shape of spines and density of interspinular microperforations (p < 0.001). In the dendrogram tree (Figure 6), the 20 taxa were divided into four major groups. Except for Cythocline purpurea and Blumea sinuata, the other groups were divided into four subclusters. Blumea paniculata and B. napifolia and B. fistulosa formed a subcluster (Figure 6).

2.5. Pollen Descriptions for the Taxa Studied

2.5.1. Blumea Section Macrophllae DC.

The equatorial length of pollen grains ranged from 15.91 µm to 21.41 µm, and the polar axis length ranged from 16.07 µm to 21.37 µm. Pollen grains were spherical or triangular in equatorial view, tricolporate and echinate, with 27–34 spines in the exines. The spines were 2.78 µm to 4.32 µm in length. Exines of the pollen grain were densely microperforate in most species, except sparse inter-spinular perforations in B. balsamifera.

Species examined: Blumea aromatica [Figure 1(A-1,A-2) and Figure 3(A-1,A-2)], B. balsamifera [Figure 1(B-1,B-2,C-1,C-2)], B. densiflora (Figure 1(B-1,B-2) and Figure 3(B-1,B-2)], B. martiniana [Figure 2(B-1,B-2) and Figure 4(G-1,G-2)], B. hookeri [Figure 1(J-1,J-2) and Figure 4(C-1,C-2)].

2.5.2. Blumea Section Paniculatae DC.

The equatorial length of pollen grains ranged from 14.47 µm to 23.09 µm, and the polar axis length ranged from 16.03 µm to 23.69 µm. Pollen grains were oblate-spheroidal, spherical in equatorial view, tricolporate or tetetracolporate, and echinate. The polar areas were large, each with 33–79 spines. The spines were roughly conical or distinctly broader at their bases and ranged from 3.37 µm to 5.23 µm in length.

Species examined: Blumea clarkei [Figure 1(C-1,C-2) and Figure 3(E-1,E-2)], B. fistulosa [Figure 1(H-1,H-2) and Figure 3(H-1,H-2)], B. hieraciifolia [Figure 1(I-1,I-2) and Figure 4(A-1,A-2)], B. lacera [Figure 2(A-1,A-2) and Figure 4(E-1,E-2)], B. sinuata [Figure 2(H-1,H-2) and Figure 5(C1,C-2)], B. duclouxii [Figure 1F and Figure 3D], B. napifolia [Figure 2(D-1) and Figure 4(D-2)], B. sessiliflora [Figure 2(G-1,G-2) and Figure 5(A-1,A-2)] and B. virens [Figure 1(J-1,J-2) and Figure 5(D-1,D-2)].

2.5.3. Blumea Section Semivestitae DC.

The equatorial length of pollen grains ranged from 17.84 µm to 20.77 µm, and the polar axis length ranged from 17.34 µm to 21.71 µm. Pollen grains were spherical, tricolporate and echinate. The spine numbers were 26–33, average 29 (Table S1). The spines were roughly conical or distinctly broader at their bases, ranging from 3.21 µm to 5.75 µm in length, acute or blunt.

Species examined: B. eberhardtii [Figure 1(G-1,G-2) and Figure 3(F-1,F-2)], B. megacephala [Figure 2(G-1,G-2) and Figure 4(B-1,B-2)], B. repanda [Figure 2(F-1,F-2) and Figure 4(H-1,H-2)] and B. riparia [Figure 2(E-1,E-2) and Figure 4(F-1,F-2)].

2.5.4. Cythocline Purpurea

The equatorial length of pollen grains ranged from 13.15 µm to 16.33 µm, and the polar axis length ranged from 14.14 µm to 17.13 µm. Pollen grains of this species were spherical, tricolporate and echinate. The polar areas were large, each with 21–28 spines, an average of 24. Spines are conical, acute, 3.46–4.56 μm in length, average 4.23 μm. The tips of the spines were sharp.

Specimen examined: SE01957, SE02153 [Table 1, Figure 1(D-1,D-2) and Figure 3(G-1,G-2)].

2.6. Pollen Types Description

According to the comparative study of pollen morphology, the pollen of all these species could be divided into nine categories, i.e., Blumea sinuata pollen type, Cythocline purpurea pollen type, B. densiflora pollen type, B. napifolia pollen type, B. aromatica pollen type, B. virens pollen type, B. repanda pollen type, B. balsamifera pollen type and B. clarkei pollen type. A brief description of each pollen type was as follows:

• Type A. Blumea sinuata pollen type

The typical characteristics of this kind of pollen were tetracolporate, spherical, with denser and longer spines. The pollen grain size was large, 19.52–23.90 μm in equatorial diameter, and the polar axis was 19.72–24.30 μm. This pollen was only found in B. sinuata [Figure 5(C-1,C-2)].

• Type B. Cythocline purpurea pollen type

Pollen size of this type was much smaller (13.15–16.33 µm × 14.14–17.13 µm), tricolporate, spherical, with sparse and longer spines (number of spines < 30, the average length of spine > 4 µm), dense interspinular perforations. The tips of the spines were sharp. This type of pollen was only found in C. purpurea [Figure 3(G-1,G-2)].

• Type C. Blumea densiflora pollen type

This type of pollen was triangular or spherical, with sparse (the number of spines < 33) and short spines (the length of spines < 3 µm). This type of pollen was only found in B. densiflora (Figure 4A).

• Type D. Blumea napifolia pollen type

The typical characteristics of this kind of pollen were tricolporate, spherical, with denser and longer spines. This type was similar to B. sinuata type, except it was tricolporate. This kind of pollen was found in B. napifolia [Figure 4(D-1,D-2)], B. fistulosa [Figure 3(H-1,H-2)] and B. paniculata [Figure 5(B-1,B-2)]. The pollen grain size of B. paniculata was smaller than that of B. napifolia and B. fistulosa.

• Type E. Blumea virens type

This type was similar to B. aromatica type, but the grooves of apertures were deeper than those of B. aromatica type. This pollen was only found in B. virens [Figure 5(D-1,D-2)].

• Type F. Blumea repanda pollen type

The typical characteristics of this kind of pollen were tricolporate and spherical, with longer and sharp spines and relatively dense inter-spinular perforations. This type of pollen was found in B. repanda [Figure 4(H-1,H-2)] and B. lacera [Figure 4(E-1,E-2)].

• Type G. Blumea balsamifera pollen type

This type of pollen was spherical, tricolporate, with a medium number of spines. Pollen grains were trifid in polar view. Spines were short, with a blunt apex. Exines were relatively sparse microperforate.

• Type H. Blumea clarkei pollen type

This type of pollen was spherical, tricolporate, with a medium number of spines. Pollen grains were trifid in polar view. Spines were long, with acute apex. Exines were relatively sparse microperforate. This type of pollen was found in B. hieraciifolia [Figure 4(A-1,A-2)] and B. clarkei [Figure 4(E-1,E-2)].

• Type I. Blumea aromatica pollen type

This type of pollen was spherical, tricolporate, with a medium number of spines. Pollen grains were trifid in polar view. Exines were relatively dense microperforate, with sparse spines. Spines were short and blunt. Most species had this pollen type. We found this type of pollen in B. hookeri [Figure 4(B-1,B-2)], B. martiniana [Figure 3(D-1,D-2)], B. riparia [Figure 4(F-1,F-2)] and B. megacephala [Figure 4(B-1,B-2)].

See the following key for a comparison of different pollen types.

3. Discussion

All the studied pollen grains had common characteristics such as spines and inter-spinular perforations on their exines, which were nearly spherical and were typical types of pollen grains of the tribe Inuleae, some similar to that of the other entomophilous Inuleae species such as Pulicaria and Inula [31,32,33], indicating a close genetic relationship between these species. The pollen morphology of Blumea was similar to those of Blumea species of Wittenbach [30]. In this study, pollen showed significant interspecific variation in size and exine spines.

3.1. Size Range

Among all the studied species, the pollen grains were highly variable in size. Although pollen size of Inuleae species had not been used as a primary factor for delimitation of pollen types alone, because of pollen grain size possibly related to polyploidy within a species of Asteraceae [37,38,39,40]. The environmental and nutritional conditions, as well as the processing methods of pollen, also affected the size of the pollen grain [41]. The Blumea sinuata type pollen was quite different from the other species. This species was also significantly different from the allied species in that the stem of B. sinuata was noticeably stouter. It was possibly related to the polyploidy of this species, according to the chromosome number counts. But under similar environmental conditions and the same treatment method for pollen grains, there were still significant differences in pollen size among some species. Of all the species studied, Cythocline purpurea has the smallest pollen grains.

3.2. Apertures

The aperture structure also contributed to differentiating Blumea sinuata from the other investigated taxa, which was characterized by both 3-zonocolporate and 4-zonocolporate pollen grains, while the other taxa exhibited only 3-zonocolporate pollen grains. The tetracolporate form pollen was unusual in the Asteraceae, although this type had been reported by Wodehouse [25], Wittenbach [30], Osman [31], and Wortley [20]. Wodehouse [25] believed that tetracolporate aperture, perhaps, was related to the irregular distribution of chromosomes or as the result of hybridity. Among all studied species, only B. sinuata was tetracolporate. This was also possibly related to its polyploidy.

3.3. Exine Sculpturing

The pollen sculpture was somewhat uniform in most investigated species. The pollen grains were spiny with perforate sculpture. In this study, the pollens examined were highly variable regarding the number and shape of exine spines. Although the tendency toward spine reduction of Inuleae was considered an advancement character in the Asteraceae family [23], we believed that the high number of spines in Blumea sinuata pollen was possibly related to its polyploidy. Spine length and density were stable morphological characters for generic differentiation [23,25]. Among all investigated species, spine length, density and shape could also be used as species delimitation. The inter-spinular perforation density varied among different species (Table S2). Compared to other species, the pollen of Cythocline purpurea had the least number of spines and longer spines.

3.4. Taxonomic Significance of Pollen Features

Three pollen types could be found in Blumea Section Macrophllae DC., i.e. B. densiflora type, B. balsamifera type and B. aromatica type. The pollen grains of B. densiflora were smaller, triangular or spherical, with the shortest and least spines, and were quite easily distinguished from the other species in this section. The pollen grains of most species in this section were spherical, occasionally, with few triangular pollen in B. martiniana. The palynological characteristics of other species in the Section Macrophllae had little variation, except in pollen grain size and the number and length of spines and microperforations of exines. The pollen grains of B. balsamifera were the smallest, with the most exine spines in this section and sparsely inter-spinular microperforations. The pollen grain of B. hookeri had the longest spines in this section, followed by B. aromatica. Although B. hookeri and B. densiflora were treated as one species by some botanist, the pollen morphological characteristics were significantly different.

The palynological characteristics of species in Section Paniculatae DC. varied greatly. The pollen grains were tricolporate or tetracolporate. The pollen of Blumea sinuata was different from that of the other species, with four germination holes, the greatest number of spines and the longest spines. The pollen grains of B. napifolia and B. fistulosa were larger, with more and longer spines. The pollen morphological characters of B. paniculata were similar to those of B. napifolia in that polar region fissures were not obvious, and spines were denser. But the pollen grain size was smaller than that of B. napifolia. Blumea duclouxii had the smallest pollen grains in this section, followed by B. lacera. The palynological characteristics of B. duclouxii were very similar to those of B. lacera. It was difficult to decide its taxonomic position only by pollen morphology.

The morphological characteristics of all the species studied in Blumea Section Semivestitae were relatively consistent, except for slightly larger pollen grains and the relatively sparse microperforate exines with longer acute spines in B. repanda. Pollen morphological characteristics of B. riparia and B. megacephala in Section Semivestitae were similar to that of B. aromatica, B. hookeri, B. martiniana in Section Macrophllae.

From the pollen characteristics of all studied species, we can find that the palynological characteristics of species do not support the taxonomic classification of the sections of Blumea De Candole [5]. The pollen morphology of different sections may be consistent. On the other side, the division of the sections of Blumea was artificial by various authors [2,5,18]. Blumea Section Macrophllae and Section Paniculatae were probably not monophyletic groups, with different evolutionary directions and variable pollen morphology. However, pollen characteristics have a certain significance in the species identification of Blumea. For example, pollen grains of B. sinuata were tetracolporate, while pollen grains of B. densiflora pollen were triangular, sparsely microperforate. However, species with similar pollen types were difficult to segregate.

Cythocline purpurea had the smallest pollen grains, with the least spines, of all the species studied. Spines were long, with acute apices in C. purpurea. This combination of characters was quite different from the other studied species. The pollen morphological characters of C. purpurea were easily distinguished from other species of Blumea s. str., which suggested that C. purpurea might not belong to the genus Blumea s. str.

Two major well-supported clades of Blumea s. str. were recognized based on a molecular phylogenic tree by Pornpongrungrueng et al. [12], including Blumea densiflora clade and B. lacera clade. Our study showed polymorphism in the pollen morphology of the B. densiflora clade and the B. lacera clade. The pollen morphology differentiation of the B. lacera clade was consistent with the interspecific relationship revealed by the molecular phylogenetic tree. For example, B. napifolia and B. paniculata were closely related in the molecular tree and showed similar pollen characteristics. But pollen morphology of B. densiflora clade, including B. densiflora, B. aromatica, B. balsamifera and B. martiniana displayed significant variation, which is inconsistent with the interspecific relationship suggested by the molecular morphology tree [12]. Therefore, our palynology research can only partly support the previously published molecular phylogeny of Blumea s. str.

4. Methods and Materials

4.1. Plant Materials

Mature pollen samples were obtained by removing one or two florets from dried specimens. Voucher specimens were deposited in the Herbarium of Chengdu Institute of Biology (CDBI). The herbarium voucher details were included in the specimens investigated list (Table 2).

4.2. Micromorphological Examination

Pollen samples were prepared by acetolysis as described by Erdtman [42] and viewed with a light microscope (LM). Pollen mounted in neutral gum was examined under transmission light using Olympus microscopes BX43. Pollen samples were prepared for the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Pollen grains were dried in the air, then directly mounted on stubs and sputter-coated with gold-palladium for five minutes. SEM examination was carried out by Phenom Pro microscope, operating at 10 kV. Images were digitally processed, and the final plates were prepared using Adobe PhotoShop 7.0. Pollen characteristics, including polar length of pollen grains (P), and equatorial length (E), were measured using digital light microscopy images based on 20 pollen grains from every investigated species by software Image J [43]. Due to the small size of the pollen in the genus Blumea, the length and quantity of spines were observed and measured more accurately under scanning electron microscopy. The ratio of polar length to equatorial length (P/E) of pollen was calculated. Pollen morphology was described according to the standards of Erdtman [44] and Wang [45]. If the pollen shape index (P/E) > 2, the pollen was considered perprolate. If 1.32 < P/E ≤ 2, the pollen was considered prolate. If 1.14 < P/E ≤ 1.32, the pollen was considered as subprolate. If 0.88 < P/E ≤ 1.14, the pollen was considered spherical. Descriptive terminology follows Punt et al. [46].

4.3. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using PAST version 4.04 for Windows software [47]. For each pollen morphological character (7 quantitative values), a one-way ANOVA technique was used to identify the statistical significance of differences in mean values among the taxa studied. A cluster analysis method-based UPGMA tree was constructed to examine the relationship among the taxa based on pollen characters of 20 species. After assigning quality traits of all pollen, they were used for clustering analysis along with quantitative traits.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, nine pollen types were found in all studied species. The pollen morphology did not support an assumption that Cyathocline Cass. was a member of Blumea. The palynological characteristics suggested that Section Macrophllae and Paniculatae of Blumea were not monophyletic groups. The pollen morphology of different sections could be consistent but was variable in the same section. Pollen characteristics have a certain significance for the species identification of Blumea. Our palynology research can only partly support the previously published molecular phylogeny of Blumea s. str.. In the future, it is necessary to conduct palynological studies on more species of this genus and allied genera and other morphological studies, such as the structural characteristics of leaf epidermal cells, which may help to understand the systematic classification of Blumea.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.P. and Q.Y.; methodology, Q.Y., H.Z. and T.H.; software, X.P.; validation, X.P. and Y.P.; formal analysis, X.P. and Y.P.; investigation, Y.P.; resources, Y.P.; data curation, X.P. and Y.P.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.P. and X.P.; writing–review & editing, Y.P., X.P., B.X. and X.G.; visualization, X.P. and H.Z.; project administration, Y.P.; funding acquisition, Y.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Do Van Truong, Ngan Thi Lu, Scientist of Vietnam National Museum of Nature, Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology, and Phetlasy Souladeth, Faculty of Forest Science, National University of Laos, for their help in the fieldwork. The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers and editors for their constructive comments on the revisions to this manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Figures and Tables

Figure 1. LM micrographs of pollen grains. (A) B. aromatica (400×), (A-1) Polar view, (A-2) Equatorial view; (B) B. balsamifera (400×), (B-1) Equatorial view, (B-2) Polar view; (C) B. clarkei (400×), (C-1) Equatorial view, (C-2) Polar view; (D) Cyathocline purpurea (400×), (D-1) Equatorial view, (D-2) Polar view; (E) B. densiflora (400×), (E-1) Equatorial view, (E-2) Polar view; (F) B. duclouxii (400×), (F-1) Polar view, (F-2) Equatorial view; (G) B. eberhardtii (400×), (G-1) Equatorial view, (G-2) Polar view; (H) B. fistulosa (400×), (H-1) Equatorial view, (H-2) Polar view; (I) B. hieraciifolia (400×), (I-1) Equatorial view, (I-2) Polar view; (J) B. hookeri (400×), (J-1) Equatorial view, (J-2) Polar view.

Figure 2. LM micrographs of pollen grains in Blumea. (A) B. lacera (400×), (A-1) Equatorial view, (A-2) Polar view; (B) B. martiniana (400×), (B-1) Equatorial view, (B-2) Polar view; (C) B. megacephala (400×), (C-1) Equatorial view, (C-2) Polar view; (D) B. napifolia (400×), (D-1) Equatorial view, (D-2) Polar view; (E) B. riparia (400×), (E-1) Equatorial view, (E-2) Polar view; (F) B. repanda (400×), (F-1) Equatorial view, (F-2) Polar view; (G) B. sessiliflora (400×), (G-1) Equatorial view, (G-2) Polar view; (H) B. sinuata (400×), (H-1) Equatorial view, (H-2) Polar view; (I) B. paniculata (400×), (I-1) Equatorial view, (I-2) Polar view; (J) B. virens (400×), (J-1) Equatorial view, (J-2) Polar view.

Figure 3. SEM micrographs of pollen grains in Blumea. (A) B. aromatica (8500×), (A-1) Polar view, (A-2) Equatorial view; (B) B. densiflora (8500×), (B-1) Polar view, (B-2) Equatorial view; (C) B. balsamifera (8400×), (C-1) Equatorial view, (C-2) Polar view; (D) B. duclouxii (8500×), (D-1) Equatorial view; (D-2) Polar view; (E) B. clarkei (8400×), (E-1) Polar view, (E-2) Equatorial view; (F) B. eberhardtii (8400×), (F-1) Equatorial view, (F-2) Polar view; (G) Cyathocline purpurea (8400×), (G-1) Polar view, (G-2) Equatorial view; (H) B. fistulosa (8500×), (H-1) Polar view; (H-2) Equatorial view.

Figure 4. SEM micrographs of pollen grains in Blumea. (A) B. hieraciifolia (8500×), (A-1) Polar view, (A-2) Equatorial view; (B) B. megacephala (8500×), (B-1) Equatorial view, (B-2) Polar view; (C) B. hookeri (8400×), (C-1) Polar view, (C-2) Equatorial view; (D) B. napifolia (8000×), Polar view; (E) B. lacera (8500×), (E-1) Equatorial view, (E-2) Polar view; (F) B. riparia (8500×), (F-1) Polar view, (F-2) Equatorial view; (G) B. martiniana (8500×), (G-1) Polar view, (G-2) Equatorial view; (H) B. repanda (8400×), (H-1) Polar view, (H-2) Equatorial view.

Figure 5. SEM micrographs of pollen grains in Blumea. (A) B. sessiliflora (8400×), (A-1) Polar view, (A-2) Equatorial view; (B) B. paniculata (8400×), Polar view; (C) B. sinuata (8400×), (C-1) Polar view, (C-2) Equatorial view; (D) B. virens (8500×), (D-1) Equatorial view, (D-2) Polar view.

Figure 6. UPGMA Cluster analysis using characteristics of investigated taxa.

Table 1

Key to the pollen types delimited in this study.

1. Pollen tetracolporate	Blumea sinuata pollen type
–Pollen tricolporate	2
2. Pollen size small (10.51–14.86 µm × 12.01–16.37 µm), spine’s length 3.46 µm to 4.56 µm
spines number 21–28	Cythocline purpurea pollen type
–Pollen size larger (13.71–23.90 µm × 12.53–26.67 µm), spine’s length 2.31 µm to 5.75 µm, spines number 27–58	3
3. Pollen grain triangular, spines short and sparse, spine’s length 2.29–3.43 µm, spines number 20–31	Blumea densiflora pollen type
–Pollen is nearly spherical, occasionally triangular, spine length 3.0–5.2 µm	4
4. Spines number 41–49	Blumea napifolia pollen type
Spines number 23–37	5
5. Grooves of apertures are deep	Blumea virens pollen type
–Grooves of apertures are shallow	6
6. Exines with sparse interspinular microperforations	7
–Exines with dense interspinular microperforations	9
7. Spines long with an acute apex	Blumea repanda pollen type
–Spines short with a blunt apex	8. Blumea balsamifera pollen type
9. Spines long with an acute apex	Blumea clarkei pollen type
–Spines short with a blunt apex	10. Blumea aromatica pollen type

Table 2

Specimens investigated.

Species	Collection Number	The Individual Number	Collection Site	Collection Date
Blumea aromatica DC.	SE02118	3	Yunnan, China	11 January 2019
Blumea aromatica	SE02485	3	Yunnan, China	21 January 2019
Blumea balsamifera (L.) DC.	SE001856	3	Lam Dong, Vietnam	2 April 2018
Blumea balsamifera	SE01483	3	Kontum, Vietnam	26 March 2018
Blumea clarkei Hook. f.	SE01183	3	Ninh Binh, Vietnam	21 March 2018
Blumea densiflora DC.	SE00759	3	Cao Bang, Vietnam	10 March 2018
Blumea densiflora	SE01644	3	Kontum, Vietnam	31 March 2018
Blumea duclouxii Vaniot	SE01407	3	Ninh Binh, Vietnam	25 March 2018
Blumea duclouxii	SE01426	3	Quang Nam, Vietnam	26 March 2018
Blumea eberhardtii Gagnep.	SE02259	3	Yunnan, China	14 January 2019
Blumea eberhardtii	SE02448	3	Yunnan, China	20 January 2019
Blumea fistulosa (Roxb.) Kurz	SE01055	3	Ha Giang, Vietnam	16 March 2018
Blumea fistulosa	SE01975	3	Yunnan, China	6 January 2019
Blumea hieraciifolia (Sprengel) Candolle	SE02423	3	Yunnan, China	17 January 2019
Blumea hookeri C. B. Clarke ex Hook. f.	SE00934	3	Ha Giang, Vietnam	14 March 2018
Blumea hookeri	SE02414	3	Yunnan, China	17 January 2019
Blumea lacera (Burm. F.) DC.	SE001023	3	Ha Giang, Vietnam	15 March 2018
Blumea lacera	SE01022	3	Ha Giang, Vietnam	15 March 2018
Blumea martiniana Vaniot.	SE02327	3	Yunnan, China	16 January 2019
Blumea martiniana	THP-KD-2601	3	Yunnan, China	7 January 2019
Blumea megacephala (Randeria) Chang et Tseng	SE002279	4	Yunnan, China	16 January 2019
Blumea megacephala	SE01151	3	Ninh Binh, Vietnam	19 March 2018
Blumea napifolia DC.	SE00117	4	Bolikhamxai, Laos	20 January 2018
Blumea napifolia	SE01269	3	Ninh Binh, Vietnam	22 March 2018
Blumea paniculata (Willd.) M. R. Almeida	SE02007	4	Yunnan, China	7 March 2019
Blumea paniculata	SE01962	3	Yunnan, China	6 March 2019
Blumea repanda (Roxb.) Hand.-Mazz.	SE02245	3	Yunnan, China	14 January 2019
Blumea repanda	SE02278	3	Yunnan, China	16 January 2019
Blumea riparia (Bl.) DC.	SE00875	3	GiangYen Minh, Vietnam	13 March 2018
Blumea riparia	SE001243	3	Ninh Binh Nho Quan, Vietnam	21 January 2018
Blumea sessiliflora Decne.	SE00547	3	Yunnan, China	17 January 2019
Blumea sessiliflora	SE01956		Yunnan, China	6 January 2019
Blumea sinuata (Loureiro) Merrill	SE01092	3	Laocai, Vietnam	16 March 2018
Blumea sinuata	SE02272	3	Yunnan, China	15 January 2019
Blumea virens DC.	SE0154	3	Bolikhamxai, Laos	20 January 2018
Blumea virens	SE0148	3	Bolikhamxai, Laos	20 January 2018
Cyathocline purpurea (Buch.-Ham. ex De Don) O. Kuntze.	SE01957	3	Yunnan, China	6 January 2019
Cyathocline purpurea	SE02153	3	Yunnan, China	6 January 2019

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/plants12162909/s1, Table S1: Summary showing the pollen grains dimensions (LM) in Blumea and Cyathocline; Table S2: Pollen characters for the species examined in this study by SEM (only great variable characters are shown).

References

1. Anderberg, A.A. Taxonomy and phylogeny of the tribe Inuleae (Asteraceae). Plant Syst. Evol.; 1991; 176, pp. 75-123. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00937947]

2. Randeria, A.J. The Compositae genus Blumea: A taxonomic revision. Blumea; 1960; 10, pp. 176-317.

3. Chen, Y.S.; Anderberg, A.A. Inuleae. Flora of China; Wu, Z.Y.; Raven, P.H. Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis, MO, USA, 2011; Volume 20–21, pp. 829-837.

4. Pornpongrungrueng, P.; Gustafsson, M.H.G.; Borchsenius, F.; Koyama, H.; Chantaranothai, G. Blumea (Compositae: Inuleae) in continental Southeast Asia. Kew Bull.; 2016; 71, 1. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12225-016-9612-2]

5. De Candolle, A.P. Compositae. Prodromus Systematis Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis; Treuttel & Würtz: Paris, France, 1836; Volume 5.

6. Schultz-Bipontinus, C.H. Reportorium Botanices Systematicae; Walpers, G.G. Tomus II Sumtibusfridericihofmeister: Lipsiae, Germany, 1843.

7. Bentham, G. Flora Hongkongensis: A Description of the Flowering Plants of the Island of Hongkong; L. Reeve: London, UK, 1861.

8. Craib, W.G. Florae Siamensis Enumeratio; The Bangkok Times Press: Bangkok, Thailand, 1932; Volume 2, pp. 255-264.

9. Hayata, B. Compositae Formosanae; The Journal of the College of Science, Imperial University of Tokyo: Tokyo, Japan, 1904; Volume 18, pp. 1-45.

10. Bentham, G.; Hooker, J.D. Genera Plantarum; Reeve & Co.: London, UK, 1873; Volume 3.

11. Gagnepain, M.F. Un genre nouveau de Composées. Blumeopsis. Bull. Muséum Natl. D’Histoire Nat.; 1920; 26, pp. 75-76.

12. Pornpongrungrueng, P.; Borchsenius, F.; Englund, M.; Anderberg, A.A.; Gustafsson, M.H.G. Phylogenetic relationships in Blumea (Asteraceae: Inuleae) as evidenced by molecular and morphological data. Plant Syst. Evol.; 2007; 269, pp. 223-243. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-007-0581-7]

13. Gustafsson, M.; Borchsenius, F.; Pornpongrungrueng, P. Relationships within Blumea (Inuleae, Asteraceae) and the utility of the 5s-nts in species-level phylogeny reconstruction. Taxon; 2009; 58, pp. 1181-1193. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tax.584011]

14. Englund, M.; Pornpongrungrueng, P.; Gustafsson, M.; Anderberg, A.A. Phylogenetic relationships and generic delimitation in Inuleae subtribe Inulinae (Asteraceae) based on its and cpDNA sequence data. Cladistics; 2009; 25, pp. 319-352. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00256.x] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34879610]

15. Li, W.P.; Qian, F.M.; Yang, X.L.; Chen, S.M. Systematic position of Cyathocline Cass. (Asteraceae): Evidences from molecular, cytological and morphological data. Plant Syst. Evol.; 2014; 300, pp. 595-606. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-013-0905-8]

16. De Candolle, A.P. Generes nouveaux appartenant à la famille des Composées ou Synanthéeres. Archives de Botanique; Guillemin, J.B.A. Au Bureau des Archives: Paris, France, 1833; Volume 2, pp. 514-519.

17. Zhang, X.Z.; Yu, C.H. Blumea DC. Flora Reipublicae Popularis; Editorial Board of Flora of China, Ed. Science Press: Beijing, China, 1979; Volume 75, pp. 7-41.

18. Dakshini, K.M.M.; Singh, P. Section Hieraciifoliae Randeria of Blumea DC. (Asteraceae-Inuleae). Taxon; 1978; 27, pp. 45-49. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1220478]

19. Wang, H.; Wortley, A.H.; Blackmore, S. Pollen morphology of Crepidinae and Lactucinae (Asteraceae: Cichorieae) and its systematic significance. Grana; 2009; 48, pp. 160-178. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00173130902931209]

20. Wortley, A.H.; Funk, V.A.; Robinson, H.; Skvarla, J.J.; Blackmore, S. A search for pollen morphological synapomorphies to classify rogue genera in Compositae (Asteraceae). Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.; 2007; 146, pp. 169-181. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2007.03.003]

21. Peng, Y.L.; Gao, X.F.; Peng, L. Pollen morphology of Youngia and six related genera (Asteraceae: Cichorieae) and its systematic significance. Phytotaxa; 2013; 139, pp. 39-62. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.139.1.2]

22. Fischer, H. Beitrage zur Vergleichenden Morphologie des Pollenkorens; Diss. Breslau: Berlin, Germany, 1890; 72.

23. Wodehouse, R.P. The phylogenetic of pollen grain characters. Am. J. Bot.; 1928; 42, pp. 891-934. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a090149]

24. Wodehouse, R.P. Pollen grains in the identification and classification of plants. IV. The Mutisieae. Am. J. Bot.; 1929; 16, pp. 297-313. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1537-2197.1929.tb09484.x]

25. Wodehouse, R.P. Pollen Grains; McGraw Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1935.

26. Erdtman, G. Pollen Morphorlogy and Plant Taxonomy. I. Angiosperms; Chronica Botanica: Waltham, MA, USA, 1952.

27. Stix, E. Pollen morphologis che untersuchungen an Compositen. Grana Palynol.; 1960; 2, pp. 41-114. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00173136009429443]

28. Skvarla, J.J.; Larson, D.A. An electron microscope study of pollen morphology in the Compositae with special reference to the Ambrosieae. Grana Palynol.; 1965; 6, pp. 210-269. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00173136509429147]

29. Reshmi, G.R.; Rajalakshm, R. Systematic significance of pollen morphology of the genus Acmella Rich. (Heliantheae: Asteraceae). Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. A Sci.; 2019; 43, pp. 1469-1478. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40995-018-0660-3]

30. Wittenbach, A.J. A light and Electron Microscope study of Inuleae (Compositae) Pollen. Ph.D. Thesis; The University of Oklahoma: Norman, OK, USA, 1970; pp. 1-231.

31. Osman, A.K. Contributions to the pollen morphology of the tribe Inuleae (subfamily Asteroideae-Compositae) in the flora of Egypt. Feddes Repert.; 2006; 117, pp. 193-206. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fedr.200511096]

32. Coutinho, P.A.; Dinis, A.M. A contribution to the ultrastructural knowledge of the pollen exine in subtribe Inulinae (Inuleae, Asteraceae). Plant Syst. Evol.; 2007; 269, pp. 159-170. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-007-0585-3]

33. Coutinho, A.P.; Aguiar, C.F.; Bandeira, D.S.; Dinis, A.M. Comparative pollen morphology of the Iberian species of Pulicaria (Asteraceae, Inuleae, Inulinae) and its taxonomic significance. Plant Syst. Evol.; 2011; 297, pp. 171-183. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00606-011-0505-4]

34. Guillermina, G.M.; Gómez-Lizarraga, L.E.; Joaquin, M.G. SEM and TEM Cross-section films study of Chrysanthemum leucanthemum (Asteraceae) pollen from Costa Rica. Microsc. Microanal.; 2021; 27, (Suppl. S1), pp. 1722-1723.

35. Bahadur, S.; Taj, S.; Long, W.Q.; Ahmad, M. Pollen morphology and its implication in the taxonomy of some selected tribes of the Asteraceae of Hainan Island South China. Bot. Rev.; 2022; 88, pp. 271-298. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12229-022-09277-3]

36. Perveen, A. Contributions to the pollen morphology of the family Compositae. Turk. J. Biol.; 1999; 23, pp. 523-536.

37. Stebbins, G.L. Variation and Evolution in Plants; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1950.

38. Gould, F.W. Pollen size as related to polyploidy and speciation in Andropogon saccharoides—A. barbinoides complex. Brittonia; 1957; 9, pp. 71-75. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2804771]

39. Powell, A.M. Taxonomy of Tridax (Compositae). Brittonia; 1965; 17, pp. 47-96. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2805391]

40. Gifford, K.L.; Larson, D.A. Effects of polyploidy on pollen grain diameter and other exomorhic exine features in Tridax cronipfolia. Pollenet Spores; 1970; 11, pp. 203-221.

41. Kurtz, E.B.; Liverman, J.L. Some effects of temperature on pollen characters. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club; 1958; 85, pp. 136-138. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2483028]

42. Erdtman, G. The acetolysis method. A revised description. Sven. Bot. Tidskr.; 1960; 54, pp. 561-564.

43. Abramoff, M. Image processing with image J. Biophotonics Int.; 2004; 11, pp. 36-42.

44. Erdtman, G. Handbook of Palynology: Morphology-Taxonomy-Ecology: An Introduction to the Study of Pollen Grains and Spores; Munksgaard: Copenhagen, Denmark, 1969.

45. Wang, F.X.; Qian, N.F.; Zhang, Y.L.; Yang, H.Q. Pollen Morphology of Chinese Plants; 2nd ed. Science Press: Beijing, China, 1995.

46. Punt, W.; Hoen, P.P.; Blackmore, S.; Nilsson, S.; Thomas, L.A. Glossary of pollen and spore terminology. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.; 2007; 143, pp. 1-81. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2006.06.008]

47. Hammer, Ø.; Harper, D.A.T.; Ryan, P.D. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol. Electron.; 2001; 4, 1.