[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re:Cotylodons and another question
- To: <Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com>
- Subject: Re:Cotylodons and another question
- From: Thomas Barr <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
- Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 01:24:40 -0500
- In-reply-to: <200211182242.gAIMgpJ3021890 at otter_actwin.com>
- User-agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
> Common ferns
> Water Sprite (Ceratopteris)
Glossostigma is in Scrophulariceae, a quite "advanced" dicot. Scroph's are
> Isoetes (sort of, not truly a fern but the differences are highly
> technical and not worth getting concerned over)
Isoetes is in Lycophtya.
> Mosses and Liverworts are another group of plants that don't fit into
> the groups you asked about. Like ferns they reproduce by spores, but
> they have no vascular tissue (a major reason they stay small).
Some do have simple vascular tissue, but most as a rule do not.
>> "Plant is a noncotyledonous" ?
>> No cotyledons. Everything but Monocots of Dicots.
> Not exactly true.
> An old term for gymnosperms is "polycots" meaning many
You are correct that group does have them(many). A better statement:
"...everything but _seed plants_". Not sure why I did not say that and
forgot about one of my favorite groups:-)
And in the context of aquatic plants, since there is only one gymnosperm
that is commonly aquatic, not that critical.
If you want a question: what is the difference between Chara and Riccia? Why
is one an "alga" and the other a "plant". Chara looks like a whorled stem
plant with internodal development, Riccia look more like algae than this
This will be fun:)