基于标本-形态-分子特征的肉苁蓉与盐生肉苁蓉分类修订研究

Taxonomic Revision of Cistanche Deserticola Ma and Cistanche Salsa (C. A. Mey.) Beck Based on Specimen, Morphological, and Molecular Characteristics

  • 摘要:
    目的 厘清肉苁蓉Cistanche deserticola Ma和盐生肉苁蓉Cistanche salsa(C. A. Mey.)Beck二者分类学地位,建立可靠鉴定体系,支撑产业精准溯源。
    方法 通过本草考证与文献梳理,结合标本核查,并利用在线植物标本数据库进行形态比较分析。开展野外调查,观察不同寄主植株的鳞叶、花部等外部形态及横切面结构差异,探讨其分类学意义。在分子系统发育方面,基于质体基因matK和线粒体基因matR序列,分别利用MAFFT进行比对,并以IQ-tree构建最大似然树,外类群分别选用拟南芥/烟草和拟南芥/番茄,采用1 000次Bootstrap重复检验节点支持率。综合运用标本考证、形态学及分子系统学,厘清两物种的分类学地位与种间关系。
    结果 文献考证结果表明,盐生肉苁蓉在医籍中出现与应用的年代早于肉苁蓉,而二者在长期的药用实践中经历了由混称并用到逐渐区分为“肉苁蓉”与“盐生肉苁蓉”的过程。形态学结果表明肉苁蓉和盐生肉苁蓉在苞片、花萼、花冠筒等形态上差异较小,二者均属多寄主型,寄主涵盖梭梭属、滨藜属等,形态上高度重叠。质体、线粒体和核基因序列的系统发育分析表明,肉苁蓉和盐生肉苁蓉形成高支持率单系分支,亲缘关系相近。
    结论 肉苁蓉与盐生肉苁蓉为近缘种复合体。本研究为肉苁蓉属及其他属内存疑种的科学分类和鉴定提供参考,为“一药多原”中药的“正本溯源”提供新思路。

     

    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE To clarify the taxonomic status of Cistanche deserticola Ma (C. deserticola) and Cistanche salsa (C. A. Mey.) Beck (C. salsa), establish a reliable identification system, and support precise traceability within the industry.
    METHODS Based on botanical literature review and specimen verification, morphological comparisons were performed using online herbarium databases. Field investigations were conducted to examine external morphology (including scale leaves and floral characteristics) and cross-sectional structural variations among plants from different host species, to assess their taxonomic significance. For molecular phylogenetic analysis, plastid matK and mitochondrial matR gene sequences were aligned with MAFFT, and maximum likelihood trees were constructed using IQ-tree. Arabidopsis thaliana and Nicotiana tabacum were set as outgroups for the matK analysis, while Arabidopsis thaliana and Solanum lycopersicum were used for matR. Branch support was evaluated with 1 000 bootstrap replicates. Integrating morphological and molecular systematic evidence, the taxonomic delineation and interspecific relationship between the two species were clarified.
    RESULTS Historical literature review indicated that records and medicinal use of C. salsa predated those of C. deserticola, and that the two taxa were long conflated in practice before gradually being distinguished as "C. deserticola" and "C. salsa". Morphological comparisons revealed only minor differences and a high degree of overlap in characters such as bracts, calyx, and corolla-tube morphology; both taxa exhibited multi-host parasitism (e.g., hosts in genera such as Haloxylon and Suaeda), resulting in substantial morphological convergence. Phylogenetic reconstructions from plastid, mitochondrial, and nuclear markers recovered C. deserticola and C. salsa as well-supported, closely related monophyletic lineages.
    CONCLUSION C. deserticola and C. salsa constitute a closely related species complex. The integrative taxonomic evidence provided here supports clarification of their taxonomic status and supplies a foundation for developing reliable identification methods and precise, species-level traceability for multi-origin medicinal materials.

     

/

返回文章
返回