Fig 1.
A, plants; B, dried rhizome (Rhizoma Coptidis); C, carpels.
Table 1.
Summary of the taxonomic history of Coptis, showing the main systems of classification.
Fig 2.
A. C. trifolia; B. C. morii; C. C. chinensis; D. C. laciniata; E. C. aspleniifolia; F. C. japonica.
Fig 3.
A. C. trifolia; B. C. quinquefolia; C. C. morii; D. C. asplenifolia; E. C. laciniata; F. C. japonica; G. C. chinensis; H. C. deltoidea; I. C. omeiensis.
Table 2.
Statistics from the analyses of the various datasets.
Fig 4.
Bayesian phylogram inferred from the combined plastid DNA and ITS data.
Numbers above the branches are Bayesian posterior probabilities. Tamura’s [19] classification is shown on the right.
Fig 5.
The distributions for the SOWH test of the three alternative topologies.
The histogram shows the distribution of 100 replicates. The 1%, 5% significance levels and the observed log-likelihood difference are shown for each hypothesis in the chart (See text for details).
Table 3.
Bayesian tests on the alternative hypotheses.
Fig 6.
The evolutionary reconstruction of selected morphological characters in Coptis.
Color-coded pie diagrams at each node show the relative probabilities of alternative ancestral states.
Table 4.
Probability of observed pattern of correlated evolution between pairs of characters.