Families according to Plant theory 2:1.
Rosoideae, subfamily of
Rosaceae2.
Spiroideae, subfamily of
Rosaceae3.
Pyroideae, subfamily of
Rosaceae4.
Ulmaceae, including
Cannabaceae,
Elaeagnaceae,
Dirachmaceae, and
Barbeyaceae.
5.
Moraceae6.
Rhamnaceae7.
UrticaceaeTaxonomyAccording to the App classification the order
Rosales consist of 6 big families:
Rosaceae,
Rhamnaceae,
Moraceae,
Ulmaceae,
Cannabaceae and
Urticaceae.
Rosaceae and
Rhamnaceae were formerly in
Rosales and the other 4 mostly in
Urticales.
Besides of that there are 3 small families:
Barbeyaceae with 1 genus,
Dirachmaceae with 1 genus,
Elaeagnaceae with 4 genera and
Moraceae,
Ulmaceae,
Cannabaceae and
Urticaceae have been placed by many botanist in the past together in
Urticales.
Barbeyaceae was included by most botanists.
Rosaceae was placed mostly in
Rosales together with many other families that are excluded by the
Apg classification.
Dirachmaceae was mostly placed in
Rosales or
Malvales.
Elaeagnaceae was placed in
Rosales,
Celastrales,
Proteales, Rhamnales,
Thymelaeales, Daphnales,
Myrtales,
Asterales or in its own order Elaeagnales.
Rosales was the most common placement. This shows that it was difficult to give
Elaeagnaceae a place.
Rhamnaceae was placed in
Rosales,
Celastrales or in its own order Rhamnales.
Ulmaceae, Celtidaceae,
Cannabaceae and
Moraceae were mostly placed in
Urticales, sometimes in
Rosales.
Urticaceae was mostly placed in
Urticales, sometimes in
Rosales and seldom in
Malvales.
Celtidaceae was placed in
Urticales or
Rosales, in case it was not merged into
Cannabaceae.
Rhamnales contained mostly
Rhamnaceae,
Elaeagnaceae and
Vitaceae, but sometimes other families like
Icacinaceae and Leeaceae.
Urticales has been a quite stable order, containing
Moraceae,
Ulmaceae,
Cannabaceae,
Urticaceae and
Barbeyaceae. Sometimes
Eucommiaceae and
Rhoipteleaceae were included.
In the App classification
Rosales is a combination of
Rosales,
Urticales and Rhamnales, with the exclusion of a big part of
Rosales in the old sense. The Rhamnales if so considered was largely consisting of
Rhamnaceae, which was included anyhow by botanist into
Rosales. So the main new aspect of the App classification was to merge
Urticales and a limited part of
Rosales. Most of the families in
Rosales were transferred to
Saxifragales and Oxalidales, some to
Geraniales,
Asterales,
Cucurbitales, Bruniales,
Lamiales or
Malpighiales.
In most phylogenetic researches there is little doubt about the monophyletic of the order
Rosales. The order
Rosales is confirmed consistently. Overlooking these old classification one can see quite some convergence. The
Rosales and
Urticales were seen as orders already for a long time.
Rhamnaceae seems to have been seen as an intermediate between the 2 orders.
The classification in the order of
Rosales gives more confusion, especially regarding the smaller families.
Rosaceae is mostly the first diverging lineage. This is followed by a diverging of Rhamancaeea, combined with the small families
Barbeyaceae,
Dirachmaceae and
Elaeagnaceae. The next group are the families of the
Urticales:
Moraceae,
Ulmaceae,
Cannabaceae and
Urticaceae. A problem is the
Cannabaceae, which is sometimes seen as a small family with Humulus and cannabis and at other times includes the Celtis group, which is sometimes treated as a separate family Celtidaceae. In new researches the
Barbeyaceae,
Dirachmaceae and
Elaeagnaceae seem to be more closely related to
Ulmaceae and
Cannabaceae than
Rhamnaceae.
Plant theoryIn the first version of the
Plant theory the sulphas were as:
1.
Rosaceae2.
Rhamnaceae, including
Elaeagnaceae3.
Dirachmaceae and
Barbeyaceae4.
Ulmaceae5.
Moraceae6.
Urticaceae7.
CannabaceaeIn the course of time it became clear that
Rhamnaceae lacked the
Phase 2 quality. The
Phase 6 quality is so strong that a double
Phase 6 quality is more appropriate.
The
Rosaceae showed many qualities of
Phase 1 but also of
Phase 2 and 3. It had to split in the
Phase 1,
Phase 2 and
Phase 3.
So
Barbeyaceae and
Dirachmaceae were incorrect in
Phase 3, with is not strange as there are much too small with each 1 genus to be able to express 17
Stages. Without homeopathic information it is difficult to have a certain placement, but including them in
Ulmaceae seems the most appropriate.
Urticaceae were placed in
Subphase 6, but proving of a few of these family showed a strong
Phase 7 quality. This fits with their annoying quality.
Urticaceae thus is transferred to
Subphase 7.
Cannabaceae was placed in
Subphase 7, with the "hallucinogenic" quality of Cannabis. The strange thing is that in newer phylogenetic researches Cannabis was more and more conned too Celtidaceae. But Celtidaceae are close to
Ulmaceae. Cannabis ahs a clear aspect of stage 16 or
Phase 6, being an outsider. This is in contrast with
Phase 4 of
Ulmaceae. But
Rosales as a whole ahas aspects of
Phase 6. Cannabis is now placed in
Stage 17 in
Ulmaceae.
Moraceae stays in Suphase 5 and
Ulmaceae in
Subphase 4.
Left is then thew placement of the small families
Barbeyaceae,
Dirachmaceae,
Cannabaceae and
Elaeagnaceae. In the Apg classifications they are linked to
Rhamnaceae. But that does not fit very well as there are not many cases emerging and it disturbs the classification od
Stages in
Rhamnaceae. In are recent phylogenetic studies they are more linked to
Ulmaceae. Especially Cannabaceeae with inclusion of the Celtis group emphasises that link. Many the Celtis group have local names as a kind of Elm. A very good case of
Elaeagnus rhamnoides has strong
Phase 4 qualities. This in the new version of the
Plant theory these 4 families are included in Suphase 4 in
Ulmaceae. This makes the
Ulmaceae divers enough to fit one Subphase.
1. Rosoideae, subfamily of Rosaceae2.
Spiroideae, subfamily of
Rosaceae3.
Pyroideae, subfamily of
Rosaceae4.
Ulmaceae, including
Cannabaceae,
Elaeagnaceae,
Dirachmaceae, and
Barbeyaceae.
5.
Moraceae6.
Rhamnaceae7.
Urticaceae