Chamireae Sond. in Abh. Naturwiss. Verein Hamburg 1: 267. 1846. (1: 1)

German, Dmitry A., Hendriks, Kasper P., Koch, Marcus A., Lens, Frederic, Lysak, Martin A., Bailey, C. Donovan, Mummenhoff, Klaus & Al-Shehbaz, Ihsan A., 2023, An updated classification of the Brassicaceae (Cruciferae), PhytoKeys 220, pp. 127-144 : 127

Chamireae Sond. in Abh. Naturwiss. Verein Hamburg 1: 267. 1846. (1: 1)

Type.

Chamira Thunb.

Description.

Herbs, annual. Trichomes absent. Leaves sessile or short petiolate, not auriculate at base, lowest pair opposite, representing persistent cotyledons and main photosynthetic part of plant, to 25 cm wide, cauline leaves alternate, much smaller, sometimes fail to develop. Racemes ebracteate, elongated in fruit. Sepals connivent, dimorphic, median (outer) pair not saccate at base, lateral pair with a distinct spur 1-2.5 mm long; petals white, with well-differentiated claw; filaments unappendaged; pollen 3-colpate; ovules 2-8 per ovary. Fruits siliques, dehiscent, terete to sublatiseptate, unsegmented; styles distinct; stigma entire. Seeds uniseriate; cotyledons longitudinally folded and margins deeply folded within. x = 19.

Distribution.

Chamira circaeoides (L. f.) Zahlbr. is endemic to the Western Cape of South Africa.

3d. Dipoma and Hemilophia

Dipoma Franch. was first studied by Warwick et al. (2010) who did not assign it to any tribe, and together with Hemilophia Franch., they were listed as unplaced in Al-Shehbaz (2012). Nikolov et al. (2019) showed the two genera form a monophyletic clade unrelated to any tribe and suggested their placement in a new tribe. However, plastome data by Walden et al. (2020) showed Dipoma to be affiliated with the Crucihimalayeae and not with Hemilophia . The results from the nuclear genome of Hendriks et al. (2022) fully agree with those of Nikolov et al. (2019), and the new tribe Hemilophieae is proposed here to accommodate both genera, leaving incongruent chloroplast and nuclear-based phylogenies.