Pollen morphology of Petrosimonia brachiata, P. oppositifolia, and P. triandra (Salsoloideae, Chenopodiaceae s. str. / Amaranthaceae s. l.) of the flora of Ukraine was investigated using light and scanning electron microscopy. For Petrosimonia triandra, such data are provided here for the first time. The objective of the present study was to obtain data on pollen characteristics of these species and to assess the significance of characters for species-specific identification. Pollen grains in the studied species are pantoporate, spheroidal, circular in outline, slightly undulate or undulate on the edges; small- and medium-sized. Exine sculpture is nanoechinate, tectum is psilate-perforate. Pore membranes are nanoechinate. The exine structure (columellae) of pollen grains of all species was analyzed for the first time in the present study. Significance of pollen grain traits for the taxonomy and pollen analysis in paleopalynology is discussed. UPGMA dendrograms based on palynomorphological data support the differentiation of studied species. Pollen grains of P. triandra differ from those of P. brachiata and P. oppositifolia in their size, distances between pores and between pore centers, as well as the number of pores. Pollen grains in P. brachiata have larger size and number of pores, larger nanoechini, and shorter columellae than those in P. oppositifolia.

Keywords: light microscopy, palynomorphology, pollen analysis, scanning electron microscopy, sculpture, structure, UPGMA

Full text: PDF (Eng) 4.02M

1. Akhani H., Edwards G., Roalson E.H. 2007. Diversification of the Old World Salsoleae s. l. (Chenopodiaceae): molecular phylogenetic analysis of nuclear and chloroplast data sets and a revised classification. International Journal of Plant Sciences, 168(6): 931–956. https://doi.org/10.1086/518263
2. Bezusko L.G., Mosyakin S.L., Tsymbalyuk Z.M. 2006. Pollen of Chenopodiaceae Vent. as an indicator of changes of natural conditions in Ukraine in the Pleistocene. Ukrainian Botanical Journal, 63(5): 645–653.
3. Borsch T., Flores-Olvera H. 2025. Extended phylogenetic analysis and morphology of the Iresine cassiniiformis — I. hartmanii alliance (Amaranthaceae) reveals two further geographically distinct species. Botanical Sciences, 103(1): 139–159. https://doi.org/10.17129/botsci.3572
4. Brummitt R.K., Powell C.E. (eds). 1992. Authors of plant names. A list of authors of scientific names of plants, with recommended standard forms of their names, including abbreviations. Kew: Royal Botanic Gardens, 732 pp.
5. De Gregorio M.A., Zhang L., Mahomoodally M.F., Zengin G., Jugreet S., Yildiztugay E., Fiorini A., Lucini L. 2024. Metabolomic profiles and biopharmaceutical properties of Petrosimonia brachiata and P. nigdeensis from Turkey. Plants, 13(15): 2073. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13152073
6. Erdtman G. 1952. Pollen morphology and plant taxonomy. Angiosperms. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell, 539 pp.
7. Feodorova T.A., Aleksandrov O.S. 2015. The molecular-phylogenetic study of Petrosimonia species of Chenopodiaceae Juss. family. Izvestiya of Timiryazev Agricultural Academy, 5: 54–60.
8. Grozeva N., Todorova M., Pavlov D. 2019. Karyological and morphological variation within Petrosimonia brachiata Bunge in Bulgaria. Botanica Serbica, 43(1): 13–21. https://doi.org/10.2298/BOTSERB1901013G
9. Halbritter H., Ulrich S., Grímsson F., Weber M., Zetter R., Hesse M., Buchner R., Svojtka M., Frosch-Radivo A. 2018. Illustrated pollen terminology. 2^nd ed. Cham: Springer, 501 pp. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71365-6
10. Hammer Ø., Harper D.A.T., Ryan P.D. 2001. PAST: Paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologica Electronica, 4(1): 19. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2001_1/past/issue1_01.htm
11. Hernández-Ledesma P., Berendsohn W.G., Borsch T., von Mering S., Akhani H., Arias S., Castañeda-Noa I., Eggli U., Eriksson R., Flores-Olvera H., Fuentes-Bazán S., Kadereit G., Klak C., Korotkova N., Nyffeler R., Ocampo G., Ochoterena H., Oxelman B., Rabeler R.K., Sanchez A., Schlumpberger B.O., Uotila P. 2015. A taxonomic backbone for the global synthesis of species diversity in the angiosperm order Caryophyllales. Willdenowia, 45: 281–383. http://dx.doi.org/10.3372/wi.45.45301
12. Iljin M.M. 1952. Chenopodiaceae. In: Flora URSS. Vol. 4. Ed. M.I. Kotov. Kyiv: AN URSR, pp. 260–400.
13. IPNI. 2025–onward. The International Plant Names Index. The Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Harvard University Herbaria & Libraries and Australian National Botanic Gardens. Available at: https://www.ipni.org/ (Accessed 29 May 2025).
14. Kühn U., Bittrich V., Carolin R., Freitag H., Hedge I.C., Uotila P., Wilson P.G. 1993. Chenopodiaceae. In: The families and genera of vascular plants. Vol. 2: Flowering plants. Dicotyledons: Magnoliid, Hamamelid and Caryophyllid families. Eds K. Kubitzki, J.G. Rohwer, V. Bittrich. Berlin; Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 253–281.
15. Kupriyanova L.A., Aleshina L.A. 1972. Pyltsa i spory rasteniy flory Evropeyskoy chasti SSSR. Vol. 1. Leningrad: Nauka, 171 pp.
16. Lu K.Q., Li M., Wang G.H., Xu L.S., Ferguson D.K., Trivedi A., Xuan J., Feng Y., Li J.F., Xie G., Yao Y.F., Wang Y.F. 2019. New pollen classification of Chenopodiaceae for exploring and tracing desert vegetation evolution in eastern arid central Asia. Journal of Systematics and Evolution, 57(2): 190–199. https://doi.org/10.1111/jse.12462
17. Marinova E., Lazarova M., Ivanov D., Tonkov S. 2023. Holocene vegetation history of the Western Rhodope Mountains (South Bulgaria): the paleoecological record of peat bog Beliya Kanton. Acta Palaeobotanica, 63(1): 87–99. https://doi.org/10.35535/acpa-2023-0006
18. McAndrews J.H., Swanson A.R. 1967. The pore number of periporate pollen with special references to Chenopodium. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 3: 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-6667(67)90044-9
19. Monoszon M.Kh. 1973. Opredelitel pyltsy vidov semeystva marevykh (posobie po sporovo-pyltsevomu analizu). Moscow: Nauka, 96 pp.
20. Mosyakin S.L., Fedoronchuk M.M. 1999. Vascular plants of Ukraine. A nomenclatural checklist. Kyiv, xxiii + 345 pp. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2985.0409
21. Mudie P.J., Aksu A.E., Hiscott R.N. 2025. Late Pleistocene — Holocene palynology and paleoceanography of Imrali Basin, Marmara Sea: Pollen-spore, dinoflagellate cyst and other NPP zonations. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 331: 105179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2024.105179
22. POWO. 2025–onward. Plants of the World Online. Facilitated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Available at: https://powo.science.kew.org/ (Accessed 29 May 2025).
23. Punt W., Hoen P.P., Blackmore S., Nilsson S., Le Thomas A. 2007. Glossary of pollen and spore terminology. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology, 143(1–2): 1–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revpalbo.2006.06.008
24. Qadir M., Oster J.D. 2004. Crop and irrigation management strategies for saline-sodic soils and waters aimed at environmentally sustainable agriculture. Science of the Total Environment, 323(1–3): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2003.10.012
25. Sonyan H., Hayrapetyan A. 2021. Palynomorphological peculiarities of some representatives of the subfamily Salsoloideae (Chenopodiaceae) in South Transcaucasia. III. Genera Petrosimonia Bunge and Halanthium K. Koch. Biological Journal of Armenia, 73(3): 37–45.
26. Sonyan H., Hayrapetyan A., Poghosyan N., Muradyan A. 2022. Pollen typification and palynotaxonomy of subfamily Salsoloideae Ulbr. (Chenopodiaceae Vent.) in the flora of South Transcaucasia. Acta Palaeobotanica, 62(2): 93–107. https://doi.org/10.35535/acpa-2022-0007
27. Thiers B. 2025–onward. Index Herbariorum: A global directory of public herbaria and associated staff. New York Botanical Garden's Virtual Herbarium. Available at: https://sweetgum.nybg.org/science/ih (Accessed 29 May 2025).
28. Tsymbalyuk Z.M. 2005. Palinomorfolohiya predstavnykiv rodyny Chenopodiaceae Vent. (dlya tsiley systematyky y sporovo-pylkovoho analizu). Cand. Sci. Diss. Kyiv, M.G. Kholodny Institute of Botany NAS of Ukraine, 320 pp. (manuscript). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.25941.83680
29. Tsymbalyuk Z.M. 2008. Palinomorfologicheskie osobennosti predstaviteley semeystva Chenopodiaceae. Botanicheskiy Zhurnal, 93(3): 430–438.
30. Tsymbalyuk Z.M., Ivanova D., Nitsenko L.M. 2024. Taxonomic significance of pollen morphology of African Oreobliton, and related genera Aphanisma, Beta, Hablitzia, and Patellifolia (Amaranthaceae). South African Journal of Botany, 169: 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajb.2024.04.017
31. Tsymbalyuk Z.M., Mosyakin S.L., Nitsenko L.M. 2023a. New data on pollen morphology of the genus Camphorosma (Chenopodiaceae). Acta Palaeobotanica, 63(1): 21–31. https://doi.org/10.35535/acpa-2023-0002
32. Tsymbalyuk Z.M., Nitsenko L.M., Mosyakin S.L. 2023b. Taxonomic significance of pollen morphology of selected taxa of Bassia, Sedobassia, Spirobassia and Neokochia (Chenopodiaceae / Amaranthaceae sensu APG IV). Palynology, 47(4): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01916122.2023.2233586
33. Tzvelev N.N. 1996. Petrosimonia. In: Flora Europae Orientalis. Vol. 9. Ed. N.N. Tzvelev. St. Petersburg: Mir i Semia-95, pp. 75–78.
34. Wen Z.B., Zhang M.L., Zhu G.L., Sanderson S.C. 2010. Phylogeny of Salsoleae s. l. (Chenopodiaceae) based on DNA sequence data from ITS, psbB–psbH, and rbcL, with emphasis on taxa of northwestern China. Plant Systematics and Evolution, 288: 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00606-010-0310-5
35. Zhu G., Mosyakin S.L., Clemants S.E. 2003. Chenopodiaceae. In: Wu Z.-Y., Raven P.H., Hong D.-Y. (eds.). Flora of China. Vol. 5: Ulmaceae through Basellaceae. Beijing: Science Press and St. Louis: Missouri Botanical Garden Press, pp. 351–414.