Belongs within: Rosoideae.
Contains: Rubus section Rubus.
Rubus is a large cosmopolitan genus of mostly thorny plants, many of them creepers or ramblers. Over 700 species have been described in the genus, but many are difficult to distinguish. Hybrids are common, while some species complexes include apomictic lineages. A number of species, such as the raspberry Rubus idaeus and the blackberries of the Rubus fruticosus group, are widely grown for their fruit. Species such as blackberries with a rambling growth habit are commonly known as brambles. New Zealand species of the genus are known as ‘bush lawyers’ due to their clinging thorns.
The thimbleberry Rubus parviflorus is an erect shrub lacking prickles and with more or less five-lobed leaves, found in North America (Hickman 1993). Species of subgenus Malachobatus are shrubs, generally with simple, lobed or entire leaves, bearing terminal, paniculate inflorescences (Evans et al. 2007).
Systematics of Rubus
Characters (Lu & Boufford): Shrubs or subshrubs, deciduous, rarely evergreen or semievergreen, sometimes perennial creeping dwarf herbs. Stems erect, climbing, arching, or prostrate, glabrous or hairy, usually with prickles or bristles, sometimes with glandular hairs, rarely unarmed. Leaves alternate, petiolate, simple, palmately or pinnately compound, divided or undivided, toothed, glabrous or hairy, sometimes with glandular hairs, bristles, or glands; stipules persistent, ± adnate to petiole basally, undivided or occasionally lobed, persistent or caducous, near base of petiole or at junction of stem and petiole, free, usually dissected, occasionally entire. Flowers bisexual, rarely unisexual and plants dioecious, in cymose panicles, racemes, or corymbs, or several in clusters or solitary. Calyx expanded, sometimes with a short, broad tube; sepals persistent, erect or reflexed, (4 or)5(–8). Petals usually 5, rarely more, occasionally absent, white, pink, or red, glabrous or hairy, margin entire, rarely premorse. Stamens numerous, sometimes few, inserted at mouth of hypanthium; filaments filiform; anthers didymous. Carpels many, rarely few, inserted on convex torus, each carpel becoming a drupelet or drupaceous achene; locule 1; ovules 2, only 1 developing, collateral, pendulous; style filiform, subterminal, glabrous or hairy; stigma simple, capitate. Drupelets or drupaceous achenes aggregated on semispherical, conical, or cylindrical torus, forming an aggregate fruit, separating from torus and aggregate hollow, or adnate to torus and falling with torus attached at maturity and aggregate solid; seed pendulous, testa membranous; cotyledons plano-convex.
Rubus Linnaeus 1753A61
|--R. × novus [R. parvifolius × R. moluccanus var. trilobus]ES07
|--R. subg. RubusES07
| | i. s.: R. caesiusES07
| | R. discolorES07 [=R. fruticosus agamospecies discolor (Weihe & Nees) Löve & Löve 1974ES07; incl. R. procerusH93]
| | R. fruticosusES07 [incl. R. macrophyllusC06, R. rusticanusC06]
| |--R. sect. RubusES07
| |--R. sect. ArgutiES07
| | |--R. laudatus Berger in Hedrick et al. 1925ES07
| | `--R. philadelphicus Blanch. 1907ES07
| |--R. sect. FlagellaresES07
| | |--R. aboriginumES07
| | |--R. flagellarisES07
| | |--R. meracusES07
| | `--R. roribaccus (Bailey) Rydb. in Britton 1901ES07
| `--R. sect. UrsiniES07
| |--R. loganobaccus Bailey 1923 [R. idaeus × R. ursinus]ES07
| `--R. ursinusES07 (see below for synonymy)
|--R. subg. IdaeobatusES07
| |--R. ellipticus Sm. in Rees 1815 (see below for synonymy)ES07
| |--R. idaeus L. 1753ES07
| |--R. parvifolius L. 1753ES07
| `--R. strigosus [=R. idaeus ssp. strigosus]ES07
`--R. subg. MalachobatusES07
|--R. alceifolius Poir. in Lam. 1804 [=R. alcaefolius]ES07
|--R. moluccanusES07
| |--R. m. var. moluccanusES07
| `--R. m. var. trilobusES07
`--R. rugosus Sm. in Rees 1815ES07
Rubus incertae sedis:
R. adenothallus Focke 1913F16b
R. allegheniensisRJ11
R. alpestrisF16a
R. ampliorHH03
R. argentifronsJ87
R. argutusKSM06
R. articusB95
R. australis Forster 1786 [incl. R. australis var. glaber Hooker 1852]A61
R. × barkeri Cockayne 1900 [R. cissoides × R. parvus]A61
R. barkerianusJ87
R. bellobatusH90
R. bogotensisHH03
R. boliviensisHH03
R. brasiliensisHH03
R. canescensH91
R. chamaemorusRJ11
R. chloocladus (n. d.)H90
R. cissoides Cunn. 1839 (see below for synonymy)A61
R. cortifoliusBT87
R. cuneifoliusH06
R. dendrocharisF16a
R. diclinisF16a
|--R. d. var. diclinisF16a
`--R. d. var. papuana Focke 1916F16a
R. eggersiiJ87
R. erectusC17
R. erythrocladosHH03
R. ferdinandiF16a
R. floribundusHH03
R. fragarioidesF16a
R. fraxinifoliusF16a
R. frondosusKSM06
R. geoidesD03
R. glaucifoliusH93
R. gunnianusES07
R. guttans Focke 1916F16a
R. guyanensisHH03
R. haitiensisJ87
R. hayata-koidzumiiCP02
R. helioscopus Focke 1916F16b
R. herbaceusB95
R. hilliiH90
R. humistratusHH03
R. imperialisHH03
R. lasiococcusH93
R. ledermannii Focke 1916F16a
R. leucodermis [incl. R. leucodermis var. bernardinus, R. leucodermis var. trinitatis]H93
R. leyanusV09
R. macgregorii Muell. 1889F16a
R. microspermusJD05
R. mooreiH90
R. nebulosusES07
R. nemoralis [incl. R. laciniatus ssp. selmeri]ES07
R. nivalisH93
R. occidentalisKSM06
R. odoratusES07 [=Rubacer odoratusM27]
R. palmatusS00
R. parviflorus [incl. R. parviflorus var. velutinus]H93
R. parvus Buchan. 1874A61
R. pensilvanicus [incl. R. almus]H93
R. phoenicolasiusH59
R. plicatusC17
R. probusES07
R. × proteusH06
R. pubescensD63
R. pyramidalisH90
R. queenslandicusES07
R. radulaH90
R. rosifoliusES07
R. schiedeanusHH03
R. schmidelioides Cunn. 1839A61 (see below for synonymy)
|--R. s. var. schmidelioidesA61
`--R. s. var. subpauperatus (Cockayne) Allan 1961 (see below for synonymy)A61
R. selleanusJ87
R. sellowiiHH03
R. spectabilis [incl. R. spectabilis var. franciscanus]H93
R. squarrosus Fritsch 1886 [incl. R. cissoides var. pauperatus Kirk 1899]A61
R. thomsoniF16a
R. tomentosusBC01
R. trichomallusHH03
R. urticaefoliusHH03
R. vidaliF16a
Rubus cissoides Cunn. 1839 [=R. australis var. cissoides (Cunn.) Hooker 1852; incl. R. australis var. glaber Kirk 1899 non Hooker 1852]A61
Rubus ellipticus Sm. in Rees 1815 [incl. R. flavus Don 1825, R. ellipticus f. obcordatus Franch. 1890, R. ellipticus var. obcordatus (Franch.) Focke 1911]ES07
Rubus schmidelioides Cunn. 1839A61 [=R. australis var. schmidelioides (Cunn.) Hooker 1852A61; incl. R. cissoides var. coloratus Kirk 1899A61, R. schmidelioides var. coloratusCA27]
Rubus schmidelioides var. subpauperatus (Cockayne) Allan 1961 [=R. subpauperatus Cockayne 1909, R. cissoides var. subpauperatus (Cockayne) Cheeseman 1925]A61
Rubus ursinusES07 [incl. R. vitifolius var. eastwoodianusH93, R. macropetalusH93, R. ursinus var. sirbenusH93, R. vitifoliusH93]
*Type species of generic name indicated
References
[A61] Allan, H. H. 1961. Flora of New Zealand vol. 1. Indigenous Tracheophyta: Psilopsida, Lycopsida, Filicopsida, Gymnospermae, Dicotyledones. R. E. Owen, Government Printer: Wellington (New Zealand).
[BT87] Baker, E. W., & D. M. Tuttle. 1987. The false spider mites of Mexico (Tenuipalpidae: Acari). United States Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin 1706: 1–237.
[B95] Bosc, C. 1795. Economie rurale. Bulletin de la Société Philomatique, a ses Correspondans 41–42: 4.
[BC01] Briese, D. T., & J. M. Cullen. 2001. The use and usefulness of mites in biological control of weeds. In: Halliday, R. B., D. E. Walter, H. C. Proctor, R. A. Norton & M. J. Colloff (eds) Acarology: Proceedings of the 10th International Congress pp. 453–463. CSIRO Publishing: Melbourne.
[C06] Cheeseman, T. F. 1906. Manual of the New Zealand Flora. John Mackay, Government Printer: Wellington.
[C17] Christiansen, W. 1917. Über Rosa venusta Scheutz. [Rosa tomentosa Sm. ssp. scabriuscula (H. Br.) Schwtschl. var. venusta (Scheutz) Crépin]. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie 54 (Beiblatt 120): 190–196.
[CP02] Chung, S.-W., & C.-I. Peng. 2002. Senecio kuanshanensis (Asteraceae), a new species from southern Taiwan. Botanical Bulletin of Academia Sinica 43: 155–159.
[CA27] Cockayne, L., & H. H. Allan. 1927. Notes on New Zealand floristic botany, including descriptions of new species, &c. (No. 5). Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute 57: 48–72.
[D63] Dimelow, E. J. 1963. Mollusks from hardwoods of the Chigneto Isthmus. Nautilus 77 (1): 21–23.
[D03] Dusén, P. 1903. The vegetation of western Patagonia. In: Scott, W. B. (ed.) Reports of the Princeton University Expeditions to Patagonia, 1896–1899 vol. 8. Botany pp. 1–34. The University: Princeton (New Jersey).
[ES07] Evans, K. J., D. E. Symon, M. A. Whalen, J. R. Hosking, R. M. Barker & J. A. Oliver. 2007. Systematics of the Rubus fruticosus aggregate (Rosaceae) and other exotic Rubus taxa in Australia. Australian Systematic Botany 20: 187–251.
[F16a] Focke, W. O. 1916a. Die Rubus-Arten Deutsch-Neu-Guineas. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie 54: 69–73.
[F16b] Focke, W. O. 1916b. Rosaceae andinae. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik, Pflanzengeschichte und Pflanzengeographie 54 (Beiblatt 117): 41.
[H90] Harden, G. J. (ed.) 1990. Flora of New South Wales vol. 1. New South Wales University Press.
[H59] Healy, A. J. 1959. Contributions to a knowledge of the adventive flora of New Zealand, no. 7. Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand 86 (1): 113–118.
[H06] Henderson, L. 2006. Comparisons of invasive plants in southern Africa originating from southern temperate, northern temperate and tropical regions. Bothalia 36 (2): 201–222.
[HH03] Hernández, J. R., & J. F. Hennen. 2003. Rust fungi causing galls, witches’ brooms, and other abnormal plant growths in northwestern Argentina. Mycologia 95 (4): 728–755.
[H93] Hickman, J. C. (ed.) 1993. The Jepson Manual: Higher Plants of California. University of California Press: Berkeley (California).
[H91] Hubálek, Z. 1991. Biogeographic indication of natural foci of tick-borne infections. In: Dusbábek, F., & V. Bukva (eds) Modern Acarology: Proceedings of the VIII International Congress of Acarology, held in České Budĕjovice, Czechoslovakia, 6–11 August 1990 vol. 1 pp. 255–260. SPB Academic Publishing: The Hague.
[J87] Judd, W. S. 1987. Floristic study of Morne La Visite and Pic Macaya National Parks, Haiti. Bulletin of the Florida State Museum—Biological Sciences 32 (1): 1–136.
[JD05] Junge, F. W., M. Dolezych, H. Walther, T. Böttger, A. Kühl, L. Kunzmann, P. Morgenstern, T. Steinberg & R. Stange. 2005. Ein Fenster in Landschaft und Vegetation vor 37 Millionen Jahren: Lithologische, sedimentgeochemische und paläobotanische Befunde aus einem Paläoflusssystem des Weißelsterbeckens. Mauritiana 19 (2): 185–273.
[KSM06] King, R. C., W. D. Stansfield & P. K. Mulligan. 2006. A Dictionary of Genetics 7th ed. Oxford University Press.
[M27] Murray, B. J. 1927. Four fungi on the endemic species of Rubus in New Zealand. Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute 57: 218-225.
[RJ11] Rising, J. D., A. Jaramillo, J. L. Copete, P. G. Ryan & S. C. Madge. 2011. Family Emberizidae (buntings and New World sparrows). In: Hoyo, J. del, A. Elliott & D. A. Christie (eds) Handbook of the Birds of the World vol. 16. Tanagers to New World Blackbirds pp. 428–683. Lynx Edicions: Barcelona.
[S00] Siddiqi, M. R. 2000. Tylenchida: Parasites of plants and insects 2nd ed. CABI Publishing: Wallingford (UK).
[V09] Verdcourt, B. (ed.) 2009. Additions to the wild fauna and flora of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. XXVI. Miscellaneous records. Kew Bulletin 64 (1): 183–194.