\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T2A]{fontenc}
\usepackage[polish,ngerman,greek,english]{babel}



\usepackage{float}








\begin{document}

\title{Taxonomic significance of morphological and elemental characteristics of
achenes of Artemisia genus from Turkey}



\author[1]{Mehmet Cengiz KARAİSMAİLOĞLU}%
\author[2]{Nagihan POLAT ALKAN}%
\author[2]{Murat KÜRŞAT}%
\author[3]{Şemsettin Civelek}%
\affil[1]{Bartın University}%
\affil[2]{Bitlis Eren University}%
\affil[3]{Fırat University}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{May 24, 2024}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
In the study, the achene macro and micro morphological characters of the
genus \emph{Artemisia} distributed in Turkey have been researched with
the target to know systematically important carpological structures for
the examined species. Color, shape and dimension of achene have
macro-morphologically shown variations. The examined achenes are
separated into 4 shapes; fusiform-oblong, oblong, oblong-ovate and
ovate. Oblong-ovate is the most common type. However, oblong is typical
form for \emph{A. abrotanum}. Achene dimensions range from 0.62 mm to
2.48 mm in length, from 0.30 mm to 1.21 mm in width. As \emph{A.
santonicum} subsp. \emph{patens} is of the largest achenes \emph{, A.
annua} and \emph{A. verloitorum} have the smallest achenes. Also,
carpopodium diameter vary between 0.10 mm and 0.19 mm. The largest
carpopodium diameter is found in taxa \emph{A. fragrans} and \emph{A.
taurica} var. \emph{vanensis} , while the narrowest one is \emph{A.
alpina} species. Achene surfaces of the examined taxa are
micro-morphologically assessed, and the substantial differences are
noticeably detected on behalf of the surface structures for instance,
surface ornamentation, anticlinal and periclinal cell walls, epidermal
cells and presence of secondary structures of the achenes. Surface
ornamentation is separated into 10 types: irregularly sulcate, regularly
sulcate, ruminate, sulcate-scalariform, rugose, favulariate, slightly
sulcate, alveolate, tuberculate and reticulate. The most common types
are irregularly sulcate (in 7 taxa) and regularly sulcate (in 7 taxa),
while ruminate (in \emph{A. abrotanum}), rugose (in \emph{A.
chamaemelifolia}), favulariate (in \emph{A. arborescens}), alveolate (in
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp. \emph{patens}), tuberculate (in \emph{A.
taurica} var. \emph{vanensis}) and reticulate (in \emph{A.
bashkalensis}) ornamentation types are found as taxon-specific. A
percentage comparison of the elements in the achene pericarp of the
studied taxa have performed with SEM-EDS. Accordingly, pericarps in taxa
include C, Ca, K, Mg, Cl, Si, Na and S elements. The most common seen
element is C, which ranges from 77.4 (in \emph{A. austriaca}) to 96.2
(in \emph{A. absinthium}). Na element is observed only in \emph{A.
santonicum} subspecies and \emph{A. arborescens} species. On the other
hand, S element is found in low amounts only in \emph{A. alpina}
species. In the taxonomy of the genus \emph{Artemisia}, the achene
morphological characters are very significant characteristics that
disclose inter-specific relations among the examined taxa. Moreover, a
dichotomous key is offered for the identification of the studied taxa
based on achene characters.%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy


\textbf{Taxonomic significance of morphological and elemental
characteristics of achenes of \emph{Artemisia} genus from Turkey}

\textbf{Running title:} \textbf{Morphological and elemental
characteristics of achenes of \emph{Artemisia}}

Mehmet Cengiz KARA\selectlanguage{polish}İ\selectlanguage{english}SMA\selectlanguage{polish}İ\selectlanguage{english}LO\selectlanguage{polish}Ğ\selectlanguage{english}LU\textsuperscript{1,}*, Nagihan POLAT
ALKAN\textsuperscript{2}, Murat K\selectlanguage{ngerman}ÜR\selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}AT\textsuperscript{2}, \selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}emsettin
C\selectlanguage{polish}İ\selectlanguage{english}VELEK\textsuperscript{3}

\textsuperscript{1}Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Faculty
of Science, Bart\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}n University, 74110, Bart\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}n, Turkey; corresponding
author's mail:\emph{mkaraismailoglu@bartin.edu.tr}

\textsuperscript{2}Bitlis Eren University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences,
Department of Biology, 13000 Bitlis, Turkey

\textsuperscript{3}F\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}rat University, Faculty of Sciences, Department of
Biology, 23119 Elaz\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}g, Turkey

\textbf{ACKNOWLEDGEMENT}

We are indebted to T\selectlanguage{ngerman}ÜB\selectlanguage{polish}İ\selectlanguage{english}TAK (Project no. TBAG106T559) and Bitlis Eren
University Scientific Research Projects Coordinatorship (Proje No BEBAP
2023.09) for its financial support. In addition, this study includes
achenes results from the master's thesis of Nagihan POLAT ALKAN.

\textbf{ABSTRACT}

In the study, the achene macro and micro morphological characters of the
genus \emph{Artemisia} distributed in Turkey have been researched with
the target to know systematically important carpological structures for
the examined species. Color, shape and dimension of achene have
macro-morphologically shown variations. The examined achenes are
separated into 4 shapes; fusiform-oblong, oblong, oblong-ovate and
ovate. Oblong-ovate is the most common type. However, oblong is typical
form for \emph{A. abrotanum} . Achene dimensions range from 0.62 mm to
2.48 mm in length, from 0.30 mm to 1.21 mm in width. As \emph{A.
santonicum} subsp. \emph{patens} is of the largest achenes\emph{, A.
annua} and \emph{A. verloitorum} have the smallest achenes. Also,
carpopodium diameter vary between 0.10 mm and 0.19 mm. The largest
carpopodium diameter is found in taxa \emph{A. fragrans} and \emph{A.
taurica} var. \emph{vanensis} , while the narrowest one is \emph{A.
alpina} species. Achene surfaces of the examined taxa are
micro-morphologically assessed, and the substantial differences are
noticeably detected on behalf of the surface structures for instance,
surface ornamentation, anticlinal and periclinal cell walls, epidermal
cells and presence of secondary structures of the achenes. Surface
ornamentation is separated into 10 types: irregularly sulcate, regularly
sulcate, ruminate, sulcate-scalariform, rugose, favulariate, slightly
sulcate, alveolate, tuberculate and reticulate. The most common types
are irregularly sulcate (in 7 taxa) and regularly sulcate (in 7 taxa),
while ruminate (in \emph{A. abrotanum} ), rugose (in \emph{A.
chamaemelifolia} ), favulariate (in \emph{A. arborescens} ), alveolate
(in\emph{A. santonicum} subsp. \emph{patens} ), tuberculate (in \emph{A.
taurica} var. \emph{vanensis} ) and reticulate (in \emph{A.
bashkalensis} ) ornamentation types are found as taxon-specific. A
percentage comparison of the elements in the achene pericarp of the
studied taxa have performed with SEM-EDS. Accordingly, pericarps in taxa
include C, Ca, K, Mg, Cl, Si, Na and S elements. The most common seen
element is C, which ranges from 77.4 (in \emph{A. austriaca} ) to 96.2
(in \emph{A. absinthium} ). Na element is observed only in \emph{A.
santonicum} subspecies and \emph{A. arborescens} species. On the other
hand, S element is found in low amounts only in \emph{A. alpina}species.
In the taxonomy of the genus \emph{Artemisia} , the achene morphological
characters are very significant characteristics that disclose
inter-specific relations among the examined taxa. Moreover, a
dichotomous key is offered for the identification of the studied taxa
based on achene characters.

\textbf{KEYWORDS:} \emph{Artemisia} , Cypsela, EDS, SEM, Turkey

\textbf{RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS:}

\begin{itemize}
\tightlist
\item
  The achenes of Turkish \emph{Artemisia} taxa have been examined in
  depth.
\item
  The morphological characteristics of achenes of
  Turkish\emph{Artemisia} taxa have been studied using SEM and LM for
  the first time, and debated the systematic practice of these
  characters.
\item
  The elemental content of the achene pericarp has been systematically
  evaluated for the first time.
\end{itemize}

\textbf{1. INTRODUCTION}

The \emph{Artemisia} L. is of the largest genera in the tribe
Anthemideae Cass. of the family Asteraceae Dumort., comprises 550
species distributed in the Northern Hemisphere (Mungalov, 2004; Beer,
2005; Boyko, 2011; Vakulenko et al., 2020) with aromatic herbaceous
plant, subshrubs, or shrubs (Al-Ajmi et al., 2021). Taxa of the
genus\emph{Artemisia} are usually utilized in folk and modern medicine
for curing illnesses like malaria, hepatitis, cancer, and infections
induced by fungi, bacteria, and viruses (Willcox, 2009; Abad et al.,
2012; Al-Ajmi et al., 2021). The genus \emph{Artemisia} has been
separated into 5 sections (\emph{Absinthium, Artemisia, Dracunculus,
Seriphidium} , and \emph{Tridentatae} ) (Torrell et al., 1999). There
are 26\emph{Artemisia} taxa distributed in different phytogeographic
regions in Turkey (G\selectlanguage{ngerman}üner et al., 2012), belonging to \emph{Artemisia}
,\emph{Dracunculus} and \emph{Seriphidium} sections. This infrageneric
classification of the genus does not represent as a normal grouping
(Valles \& McArther, 2000). The genus includes the taxonomical
difficulties due to the infra-spesific diversity of the used diagnostic
morphological characters in the classification. This triggers the search
for new diagnostic characteristics.

The fruits or seeds have the typical morphological characters such as
shape, color, dimension and surface ornamentation structures, and they
can reflect valuable in the clarifying of taxonomic difficulties and in
the establishment of systematic relationships (Barthlott, 1981;
Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu \& Erol, 2018). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) is
very significant for the carpological micromorphology. It permits to
examine the ultrastructure of integuments in more data and to clarify
extra fruit characters, such as the features of the carpopodium and the
apical bowl, primary and secondary surface structures ultrastructure of
the surface (Mukherjee \& Nordenstam, 2010; Boyko, 2011; Vakulenko et
al., 2020).

SEM with energy dispersive X-ray spectrometry (SEM-EDS) is an elemental
microanalysis technique broadly practical across a wide range of the
physical and biological sciences, technology, and forensic studies
(Goldstein et al., 2003). In this technique, electron-excited
characteristic X-ray peaks offer characterization and quantification for
all elements of the periodic table (Dale \& Ritchie 2013). SEM-EDS is
able to quantitative analysis with correctness and precision equivalent
to wavelength dispersive spectrometry (WDS) analysis (Ritchie et al.,
2012). This application has not been used for systematic purposes, so
far. A percentage comparison of the elements in the achene pericarp
would be helpful in systematically determining the correlation.

Some morphological, anatomical, cytological and palynological studies on
some taxa of the genus \emph{Artemisia} have been made, so far\textbf{(}
P\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}nar \& Ad\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}g\selectlanguage{ngerman}üzel, 1998; Nourbakhsh et al., 2008; Kursat \& Civelek,
2011; Kur\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}at et al., 2011a, 2011b; Tabur et al., 2012; Tabur et al.,
2014; Kursat et al., 2014; Kur\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}at et al., 2015; Kur\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}at et al., 2018;
Sancar et al., 2021). Also, morphological characters of the achenes have
been taken into account for diagnosis of a small number
of\emph{Artemisia} taxa in different countries (Boyko, 2013;
Abdel-Hamid, 2020; Vakulenko et al., 2020; Al-Ajmi et al., 2021).
However, the significance of the achene in the genus has often been
ignored in Turkey, where is one of the centers of diversity for the
genus. The target of this study is to examine the macro and micro
morphological characteristics of achenes of Turkish \emph{Artemisia}
taxa for the first time, and debate the systematic practice of these
characters. Also, the taxa within the genus will be compared for the
first time, with elemental analyzes in the achene pericarp.

\textbf{2. MATERIAL AND METHODS}

The studied Artemisia taxa were collected from various phytogeographical
areas of Turkey by Dr. Murat K\selectlanguage{ngerman}ÜR\selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}AT and Dr. \selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}emsettin C\selectlanguage{polish}İ\selectlanguage{english}VELEK, and
stored in F\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}rat University. The studied taxa and their locations were
presented in Table 1.

Macro-morphological structures of the achenes including color, shape,
dimension and carpopodium diameter were studied with 100 achenes of 10
specimens per taxa utilizing a Leica EZ4 binocular microscope with a HD
camera (Figure 1 and Table 2).

Micro-morphological features of the achenes containing surface
ornamentation, anticlinal and periclinal cell walls, epidermal cells and
presence of secondary structures were examined with a Scanning Electron
Microscope (Figure 2, Table 3). Initially, achenes were located on the
stubb with a carbon tape or silver agar and covered with gold-palladium,
then detected with a TESCAN MAIA3 XMU SEM (Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, 2015).

EDS (Oxford Instruments, INCA ENERGY) analyzes were performed with a
TESCAN MAIA3 XMU SEM. EDS analyzes were carried out by selecting the
same spot on the sample surface at 80 sec under 30 \selectlanguage{greek}µ\selectlanguage{english}m aperture size,
with 20 kV acceleration voltage, 8 mm operating distance, high current
and processing time conditions. All analyzes were performed at three
different points, and the average percentage of the quantitative values
obtained were used (Table 4).

The grouping of the examined taxa was performed with using the
clustering analysis method (UPGMA) in MultiVariate Statistical Package
(MVSP) according to the 44 characters in Tables 2-3 (Figure 4). The
characteristics in statistical analysis were used achene color:
brown-dark brown (1), straw yellowish-light brown (2), light brown-brown
(3), yellowish-light brown-brown (4), dark brown (5), dark
brown-blackish brown (6); achene figure: fusiform-oblong (7), oblong
(8), oblong-ovate (9), ovate (10); achene dimension: length (11), width
(12), length/width (13); achene surface structures: bare, deeply
longitudinally striate (14), bare, finely longitudinally striate (15),
rough, deeply longitudinally striate (16); carpopodium diameter (17);
achene ornamentation type: irregularly sulcate (18), regularly sulcate
(19), ruminate (20), sulcate-scalariform (21), rugose (22), favulariate
(23), slightly sulcate (24), alveolate (25), tuberculate (26),
reticulate (27); anticlinal cell wall: unclear (28), raised (29), sunken
(30); periclinal cell wall: unclear (31), concave (32), convex (33),
flat (34); epidermal cell structure: unclear (35), polygonal (36),
alveolar (37), rectangular (38), arched-rectangular (39); presence of
secondary structures: irregular lines (40), irregular epicuticular
wrinkles (41), irregular epicuticular protrusions (42), epicuticular
wrinkles (43), dome-shaped protrusion (44). The dissimilarity matrix of
the studied taxa was formed with MVSP (Kovach 2007) (Table 5). A
dendrogram was designed. Moreover, the cophenetic correlation
coefficient was calculated to clarify the relative between the
dendrogram and dissimilarity matrix (Table 5 and Figure 4).

\textbf{3. RESULTS}

This work evaluates macro-morphologically the achene structures of the
examined taxa containing color, figure, dimension and carpopodium
diameter. Achene color has shown variation; brown-dark brown (in 3
taxa), straw yellowish-light brown (in 2 taxa), light brown-brown (in 12
taxa), yellowish-light brown-brown (in 6 taxa), dark brown (1 taxon) and
dark brown-blackish brown (in 2 taxa). The figure and dimension of
achenes vary markedly. The examined achenes are separated into 4 shapes;
fusiform-oblong, oblong, oblong-ovate and ovate. Oblong-ovate is the
most common type (noted in 20 taxa). However, oblong is typical form
for\emph{A. abrotanum} . Achene dimensions range from 0.62 mm to 2.48 mm
in length, from 0.30 mm to 1.21 mm in width. As \emph{A. santonicum}
subsp.\emph{patens} is of the largest achenes, \emph{A. annua} and
\emph{A. verloitorum} have the smallest achenes (Table 2, Figure 1).
Achene macromorphological surface structures are of 3 different types;
(1) bare, deeply longitudinally striate (in 3 taxa), (2) bare, finely
longitudinally striate (in 18 taxa) and (3) rough, deeply longitudinally
striate. Carpopodium diameter vary between 0.10 mm and 0.19 mm (Table
2). The largest carpopodium diameter is found in taxa \emph{A.
fragrans}and \emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{vanensis} , while the
narrowest one is\emph{A. alpina} species (Table 2).

Achene surfaces of the examined taxa are micro-morphologically assessed,
and the substantial differences are noticeably detected on behalf of the
surface structures for instance, surface ornamentation, anticlinal and
periclinal cell walls, epidermal cells and presence of secondary
structures of the achenes. Surface ornamentation is separated into 10
types: irregularly sulcate, regularly sulcate, ruminate,
sulcate-scalariform, rugose, favulariate, slightly sulcate, alveolate,
tuberculate and reticulate. The most common types are irregularly
sulcate (in 7 taxa) and regularly sulcate (in 7 taxa), while ruminate
(in \emph{A. abrotanum} ), rugose (in \emph{A. chamaemelifolia} ),
favulariate (in\emph{A. arborescens} ), alveolate (in \emph{A.
santonicum} subsp.\emph{patens} ), tuberculate (in \emph{A. taurica}
var. \emph{vanensis} ) and reticulate (in \emph{A. bashkalensis} )
ornamentation types are found as taxon-specific (Table 3, Figure 2). The
structures of the anticlinal cell walls of the studied taxa are unclear,
raised and sunken. As raised cell walls are mostly detected in the
irregularly sulcate, ruminate, sulcate-scalariform, alveolate and
reticulate ornamentation types, the favulariate and tuberculate types
are found where epidermal cells are enclosed by sunken walls. Rugose
type is connected with unclear type (Table 3). There is no link between
concave or convex periclinal cell walls and surface ornamentation type.
In the rugose type is observed only unclear periclinal cells. Moreover,
the structure of epidermal cells on the achene surface has displayed
variation. It is rectangular, arched-rectangular, polygonal and unclear
forms. The most common cell type is rectangular, while
arched-rectangular and polygonal are fairly rare (Table 3). 13 of the
examined taxa have secondary structures, which are irregular lines,
irregular epicuticular wrinkles, irregular epicuticular protrusions,
epicuticular wrinkles and dome-shaped protrusion. The most common type
is epicuticular wrinkles; however, dome-shaped protrusions and
epicuticular wrinkles are for characteristic for \emph{A. marschalliana}
.

A percentage comparison of the elements in the achene pericarp of the
studied taxa have performed with SEM-EDS. Accordingly, pericarps in taxa
include C, Ca, K, Mg, Cl, Si, Na and S elements. The most common seen
element is C, which ranges from 77.4 (in \emph{A. austriaca} ) to 96.2
(in \emph{A. absinthium} ). Along with C, Ca element is also found in
the pericarps of all taxa examined. It is between 0.6 (in \emph{A.
arborescens} ) and 12.2 (in \emph{A. austriaca} ). K element is observed
in other taxa except \emph{A. abrotanum} and \emph{A. marschalliana} ,
albeit in low amounts. Mg element is found in the pericarps of 12 of the
examined taxa; the amount varies between 0.6 (in \emph{A.
tournefortiana} ) and 1.2 (in \emph{A. austriaca} ). Si element is only
found in trace amounts in taxa \emph{A. chamaemelifolia} (0.6), \emph{A.
tournefortiana} (0.8) and \emph{A. fragrans} (0.5). Na element is
observed only in \emph{A. santonicum}subspecies and \emph{A.
arborescens} species. On the other hand, S element is found in low
amounts only in \emph{A. alpina} species (Table 4).

The numerical evaluations of the achene morphological characteristics
allow the creation of a dendrogram, which discloses the
differences-similarities among the examined taxa. A dendrogram is made
as a result of the cluster analysis of the examined taxa
of\emph{Artemisia} based on the variation of 44 characters in 26 taxa.
The cophenetic-correlation coefficient is defined to explain the
relationship between the dendrogram and dissimilarity matrix (Figure 3,
Table 5). The cophenetic-correlation between the dissimilarity matrix
and dendrogram has been calculated as 0.61, signifying a good-match.
Cluster analysis has detached the taxa into 2 major groups of A and B:
Cluster A includes \emph{A. araratica, A. scoparia} and \emph{A.
verloitorum} (A1), \emph{A. abrotanum} , \emph{A. annua} , \emph{A.
austriaca} , \emph{A. campestris} , \emph{A. incana} , \emph{A. alpina}
,\emph{A. spicigera} , \emph{A. tournefortiana} , \emph{A. absinthium}
,\emph{A. fragrans} and \emph{A. armeniaca} (A21), \emph{A. splendens}
,\emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{taurica} , \emph{A. haussknechtii} ,
\emph{A. sieberi} subsp. \emph{sieberi} , \emph{A. marschalliana} and
\emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{vanensis} (A22). Cluster B1 comprises
A\emph{. chamaemelifolia} and \emph{A. arborescens} . Cluster B2
contains \emph{A. santonicum} subsp. \emph{santonicum} , \emph{A.
bashkalensis} and\emph{A. santonicum} subp. \emph{patens} .
\emph{Artemisia vulgaris} has formed a clade outside these clusters in
the dendrogram (Figure 3).\emph{A. splendens} and \emph{A. taurica} var.
\emph{taurica} are the most closely correlated taxa (dissimilarity
coefficient: 0.069), while\emph{A. vulgaris} and \emph{A. marschalliana}
are the most distantly correlated taxa (dissimilarity coefficient:
0.716) (Table 5). Cluster A has the highest number of taxa compared to
another cluster (Figure 3).

\textbf{4. DISCUSSION}

The morphological structures of the achenes offer important data in
connection with evolutionary relationships of the flowering plants
(Corner, 1976; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, 2015). Achene morphological
characteristics have so far been comprehensively performed to elucidate
inter-species relatives within various genera of the family Asteraceae
(Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, 2015; \selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}irin et al., 2017; Ghimire et al., 2018; Bona,
2020; Bona et al., 2023). This is the first investigation to display the
morphological features and elemental contents of the achenes of
Turkish\emph{Artemisia} , and it could be a pioneering work for next
studies in many related genera.

The macro-morphological characters of the achenes reveal variances among
the examined \emph{Artemisia} taxa (Figure 1 and Table 2). The taxa
examined in our study are very different with regard to achene color.
Light brown-brown dominates in the genus, whereas brown-dark brown,
straw yellowish-light brown, dark brown and dark brown-blackish brown
have a distinctive character among taxa by having a small number of
taxa. \emph{Artemisia annua} (ovate) and \emph{A.
tournefortiana}(fusiform-oblong) taxa are more or less similar in terms
of the population appearance and flower structures, but they can be
basically distinguished with relating of achene shape.

The investigates containing surface micro-morphological features of the
fruits in various plant families such as Asteraceae, Umbelliferae,
Chenopodiaceae, Boraginaceae, Scrophulariaceae, Brassicaceae, Lamiaceae,
Solanaceae offer taxonomically valuable information (Juan et al., 2000;
\selectlanguage{ngerman}Özcan, 2004; Karcz et al., 2005; Binzet \& Akçin, 2009; Kaya et al.,
2011; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, 2015b; Khafagi et al., 2018; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu \&
G\selectlanguage{ngerman}üner, 2019). Also, the significance and usefulness of SEM in solving of
taxonomic problems and in describing of taxa have been emphasized by
many researchers (Heywood, 1971; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu \& Erol, 2018; Ero\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu et
al., 2022). However, there are few studies on the importance of achene
micromorphology in the genus \emph{Artemisia} (Boyko, 2013; Abdel-Hamid,
2020; Vakulenko et al., 2020; Al-Ajmi et al., 2021). In this study,
Turkish \emph{Artemisia} taxa have been examined for the first time. We
determined ten types of achene surface ornamentation in this study. In
the genus, the most common achene ornamentation type is irregularly or
regularly sulcate. Contrary to this study, reticulate or
reticulate-areolate surface ornamentation types have been commonly
encountered among species from many angiosperm families (Erol et al.,
2006; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, 2015a; \selectlanguage{ngerman}Özbek et al., 2018; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu \& Erol,
2018; Ero\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu et al., 2021; Ero\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu et al., 2022). The ruminate
(in\emph{A. abrotanum} ), rugose (in \emph{A. chamaemelifolia} ),
favulariate (in \emph{A. arborescens} ), alveolate (in \emph{A.
santonicum} subsp.\emph{patens} ), tuberculate (in \emph{A. taurica}
var. \emph{vanensis} ) and reticulate (in \emph{A. bashkalensis} )
ornamentation types are taxon specific. Moreover, ornamentation types
facilitate the separation of closely correlated taxa like \emph{A.
annua}(sulcate-scalariform)-\emph{A. tournefortiana} (irregularly
sulcate), \emph{A. alpina}(sulcate-scalariform)- \emph{A. splendens}
(irregularly sulcate),\emph{A. santonicum} subsp.
\emph{santonicum}(sulcate-scalariform)-\emph{A. santonicum} subsp.
\emph{patens}(alveolate) and \emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{taurica}
(irregularly sulcate)- \emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{vanensis}
(tuberculate) taxa (Figure 2 and Table 3). Also, previous seed or fruit
surface examinations have displayed that the types and arrangements of
the anticlinal and periclinal cell walls are diagnostic features in the
formation of inter-taxa relations (Barthlott, 1981; Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu et
al., 2018; \selectlanguage{ngerman}Özbek et al., 2018; Ero\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu et al., 2022). The kinds of
anticlinal and periclinal cell walls, and epidermal cell forms of the
examined taxa disclose differences among taxa. The macro and
micro-morphological results of this search are separated all taxa
studied from each other, and they are consistent with the previous works
including the exomorphic characters of achenes of the family Asteraceae
(Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, 2015; Co\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}kun\selectlanguage{ngerman}çelebi et al., 2016; \selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}irin et al., 2017;
\selectlanguage{ngerman}Özbek et al., 2018; Bona, 2020; Ayaz et al., 2020; Vakulenko et al.,
2020; Bona et al., 2023).

The elemental data of the examined taxa show that the achene samples are
composed of over 77\% C and a lesser amount of Mg, Cl, Si, Na and S. The
distribution of elements in each achene is given in Table 4. The amounts
of elements present have showed considerable variation among the taxa
studied. \emph{A. austriaca} contains more than 5 times more Ca element
than the average of other studied taxa. Elements or percentage of
elements contained by closely related taxa are different, for
example\emph{A. annua} (C, Ca and K)-\emph{A. tournefortiana} (C, Ca, K,
Mg, Cl and Si), \emph{A. alpina} (C, Ca and K)-\emph{A. splendens} (C,
Ca, K, Mg and Cl), and \emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{taurica} (C, Ca and
K )-\emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{vanensis} (C, Ca, K, Mg and Cl) taxa
(Table 4). \emph{A. alpina} species is also distinguished from the
others by having the S element among the studied taxa. In general,
achene elemental content or frequency varies in all studied taxa.

A dendrogram has been formed to assess the morphological characters of
the achenes of Turkish \emph{Artemisia} taxa with UPGMA cluster analysis
(Figure 3). The dendrogram, showing 2 major groups, is partially
suitable with the consequences of Cullen (1975), Davis (1975) and Davis
et al. (1988). As stated by the descriptions in the Flora of Turkey, the
taxonomic closeness in the \emph{A. annua} -\emph{A. tournefortiana}
,\emph{A. alpina} -\emph{A. splendens} , \emph{A. santonicum}
subsp.\emph{santonicum} -\emph{A. santonicum} subsp. \emph{patens} and
\emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{taurica} -\emph{A. taurica} var.
\emph{vanensis} taxa is somewhat conserved. On the other hand, a logical
relationship could not be established in determining the section
boundaries (Figures. 3-4 and Table 5). Moreover, \emph{A. vulgaris} has
been defined as an isolated species with a very dissimilar description
as a consequence of its unique leaf features within the genus in the
Flora of Turkey. This species has exhibited parallel characters in the
dendrogram formed according to achene morphological features, and
consisted of a clade apart from two major groups.

\textbf{5. CONCLUSION}

This study demonstrate that macro and micro morphological achene
characters of Turkish \emph{Artemisia} taxa offer important and reliable
insights into the systematic of taxa within the genus.So much so that a
dichotomic key is given at the end of this section that allows to
distinguish the taxa studied only according to these characters. In
addition, elemental content of achene pericarps has played an active
role in separating some taxa from each other.

\textbf{Key to Turkish \emph{Artemisia} taxa, based on achene
characters}

\textbf{1.} Achene color brown-dark brown, dark brown or dark
brown-blackish
brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}2

\textbf{2.} Achene shape
fusiform-oblong\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}3

\textbf{3.} Surface ornamentation type irregularly sulcate. Anticlinal
cell wall raised. Achene length \textgreater{} 2 mm. Secondary
structures irregularly
lines\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..

A. vulgaris

\textbf{3.} Surface ornamentation type regularly sulcate. Anticlinal
cell wall sunken. Secondary structures
absent\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..

A. verloitorum

\textbf{2.} Achene shape
oblong-ovate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\textbf{4}

\textbf{4.} Achene color dark brown-blackish
brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\textbf{5}

\textbf{5.} Ornamentation type slightly sulcate. Epidermal cell unclear.
Secondary structures dome-shaped protrusions and epicuticular
wrinkles\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}..

A. marschalliana

\textbf{5.} Ornamentation type regularly sulcate. Epidermal cell
rectangular type. Secondary structures
absent\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..

A. araratica

\textbf{4.} Achene color dark brown or brown-dark
brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}6

\textbf{6.} Achenes dark brown. Ornamentation type slightly sulcate.
Secondary structures
absent\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. campestris

\textbf{6.} Achenes brown-dark brown. Ornamentation type regularly
sulcate. Secondary structures irregular
lines\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}.

A. scoparia

\textbf{1.} Achene color light brown-brown, straw yellowish-light brown
or yellowish-light
brown-brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..7

\textbf{7.} Straw yellowish-light brown, yellowish-light
brown-brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}8

\textbf{8.} Straw yellowish-light
brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}9

\textbf{9.} Achene shape oblong. Ornamentation type
ruminate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..

A. abrotanum

\textbf{9.} Achene shape ovate. Ornamentation type sulcate-scalariform.
\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.

A. annua

\textbf{8.} Yellowish-light
brown-brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}10

\textbf{10.} Achene shape ovate. Ornamentation type regularly
sulcate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. armeniaca

\textbf{10.} Achene shape oblong-ovate. Ornamentation types rugose,
favulariate, sulcate-scalariform, alveolate or
reticulate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.11

\textbf{11.} Reticulate or
alveolate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..12

\textbf{12.}
Reticulate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. bashkalensis

\textbf{12.}
Alveolate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.

\emph{A. santonicum} \textbf{subsp\emph{. patens}}

\textbf{11.} Rugose, favulariate or
sulcate-scalariform\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}.13

\textbf{13.}
Rugose\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.

A. chamaemelifolia

\textbf{13.} Favulariate or
sulcate-scalariform\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}14

\textbf{14.}
Favulariate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}.

A. arborescens

\textbf{14.}
Sulcate-scalariform\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}.

\emph{A.santonicum} \textbf{subsp. \emph{santonicum}}

\textbf{7.} Light
brown-brown\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.15

\textbf{15.} Achene shape
fusiform-oblong\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}.

A. tournefortiana

\textbf{15.} Achene shape
oblong-ovate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..16

\textbf{16.} Achene length \textgreater{} 2
mm\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..17

\textbf{17.} Ornamentation types irregularly sulcate or regularly
sulcate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}18

\textbf{18.} Regularly sulcate. Epidermal cells
rectangular\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. fragrans

\textbf{18.} Irregularly sulcate. Epidermal cells
unclear\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. splendens

\textbf{17.} Ornamentation types tuberculate or
sulcate-scalariform\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.
\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}19

\textbf{19.}
Tuberculate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..

\emph{A. taurica} \textbf{var\emph{. vanensis}}

\textbf{19.}
Sulcate-scalariform\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. spicigera

\textbf{16.} Achene length \textless{} 2
mm\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..20

\textbf{20.} Ornamentation type
sulcate-scalariform\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}21

\textbf{21.} Secondary structures
absent\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.

A. incana

\textbf{21.} Secondary structures irregular epicuticular
protrusions\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.

A. alpina

\textbf{20.} Ornamentation type irregularly sulcate or regularly
sulcate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}22

\textbf{22.} Regularly
sulcate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}

\emph{A. sieberi} \textbf{subsp. \emph{sieberi}}

\textbf{22.} Irregularly
sulcate\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.23

\textbf{23.} Epidermal cells
rectangular\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..24

\textbf{24.} Secondary structures
absent\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}.\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}..

A. austriaca

\textbf{24.} Secondary structures irregular epicuticular
wrinkles\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}..

A. absinthium

\textbf{23.} Epidermal cells unclear
\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}25

\textbf{25.} Apocolpidium diameter 0.15
mm\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

\emph{A. taurica} \textbf{var\emph{. taurica}}

\textbf{25.} Apocolpidium diameter 0.10
mm\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}..\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}\ldots{}

A. haussknechtii

\textbf{Conflict Of Interest}

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states no conflict of
interest.

\textbf{References}

Abad, M.J., Bedoya, L.M., Apaza, L., \& Bermejo, P. (2012).
The\emph{Artemisia} L. genus: a review of bioactive essential
oils.\emph{Molecules} , 17, 2542--2566.

Abdel-Hamid, A.M.E. (2020). Micromorphological and genetic molecular
variations in some taxa of Asteraceae and its importance as grazing
plants. \emph{Pakistan Journal of Botany,} 52(4), 1379--1388.

Al-Ajmi, A.H., AL-Wahibi, M.S., Mustafa, A.E.Z., Soliman, D.A., \&
Dewir, Y.H. (2021). Morphological and Molecular Assessment of Genetic
Diversity of Seven Species of the Genus \emph{Artemisia} L.
(Asteraceae). \emph{Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering} ,
46(6), 5361--5371.

Ayaz, S., Ahmad, M., Zafar, M., Ali, M.I., Sultana, S., Mustafa, M.R.U.,
Kilic, O., Çobano\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, D.N., Demirpolat, A., Ghani, A., Afza, R., Ahmad,
K., Munir, M., Kalsoom, N., \& Raza, J. (2020). Taxonomic significance
of cypsela morphology in tribe Cichoreae (Asteraceae) using light
microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. \emph{Microscopy Research
and Technique,} 83(3), 239--248.

Barthlott, W. (1981). Epidermal and seed surface characters of plants:
Systematic applicability and some evolutionary aspects. \emph{Nordic
Journal of Botany} , 1, 345--355.

Binzet, R., \& Ak\selectlanguage{ngerman}çin, Ö.E. (2009). Nutlet size, shape and surface
ornamentation in 14 \emph{Onosma} species (Boraginaceae). \emph{Acta
Botanica Croatica} , 68(1), 117--126.

Bona, M. (2020). Systematic importance of achene
macro-micromorphological characteristics in selected species of the
genera \emph{Crupina, Jurinea} , and \emph{Klasea} (Asteraceae) from
Turkey. \emph{Microscopy Research and Technique} , 83(11), 1345--1353.

Bona M., Çiftçi A., \& Ek\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}i G. (2023). Cypsela micro-macromorphological
characteristics of selected taxa of \emph{Centaurea} L. from Turkey and
their systematic importance. \emph{Adansonia,} 45 (2): 27--39.

Boyko, E.V. (2013). Micromorphology of achenes of species of the
genus\emph{Artemisia} (Anthemideae -- Asteraceae). \emph{Turczaninowia}
, 16(2), 91--105.

Corner, E.J. (1976). \emph{The Seeds of Dicotyledons} . Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Co\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}kun\selectlanguage{ngerman}çelebi, K., Makbul, S., \& Okur, S. (2016). Studies on the achene
morphology of Turkish species of \emph{Scorzonera} L. (Asteraceae) using
light and scanning electron microscopy. \emph{Phytotaxa} , 247(1),
1--26.

Cullen, J. (1975). \emph{Artemisia} L. In: Flora of Turkey and the East
Aegean Islands, Volume 5. Ed.: Davis, P.H. pp: 311-325. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.

Dale, E.N., \& Ritchie, N.W.M. (2013). Is Scanning Electron
Microscopy/Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectrometry (SEM/EDS)
Quantitative?.\emph{Scanning,} 35: 141--168.

Davis, P.H. 1975. \emph{Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands} ,
vol. 5. pp. 311--324. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Davis P.H., Mill, R.R., \& Tan, K. (1988). \emph{Flora of Turkey and the
East Aegean Islands} , vol. 10. pp.163--164. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.

Ero\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, H., Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M.C., Pinar, S. M., \& Fidan, M. (2021).
Seed micromorphology and anatomy of 36 \emph{Muscari} (Asparagaceae)
taxa from Turkey with notes on their systematic importance. \emph{Acta
Botanica Croatica,} 80(2), 146--157.

Ero\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, H., Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M. C., Fidan, M., \& Pinar, S. M. (2022).
Seed Morphological and Anatomical Structures as Taxonomy Tool for
Turkish \emph{Hyacinthella} Schur (Asparagaceae) Taxa\emph{.
Phytotaxa,}564 (2): 191--207.

Erol, O., \selectlanguage{ngerman}Üzen, E., \& Küçüker, O. (2006). Preliminary SEM observations
on the seed testa structure of \emph{Gladiolus} L. species from
Turkey.\emph{International Journal of Botany} , 2: 125--127.

Ghimire, B., Suh, G.U., Lee, C.H., Heo, K., \& Jeong, M.J. (2018).
Cypsela morphology of \emph{Cirsium} species (Asteraceae) and its
taxonomic implications. \emph{Flora,} 249, 40--52.

Goldstein, J.I., Newbury, D.E., Joy, D.C., Lyman, C.E., Echlin, P.,
Lifshin, E., Sawyer, L., \& Michael, J. (2003). \emph{Scanning electron
microscopy and X-ray microanalysis} . New York: Springer.

Heywood, V.H. (1971). \emph{Scanning Electron Microscopy.} London:
Systematic and Evolutionary Applications.

Juan, R., Pastor, J., \& Fernandez, I. (2000). SEM and light microscope
observations on fruit and seeds in Scrophulariaceae from southwest Spain
and their systematic significance. \emph{Annals of Botany} , 86(2),
323--338.

Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M.C. (2015a). Morphological and anatomical features of
seeds of Turkish \emph{Romulea} taxa (Iridaceae) and their taxonomic
significance. \emph{Acta Botanica Croatica} , 74(1), 31--41.

Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M.C. (2015b). Morphological and anatomical features of
cypsela of some \emph{Crepis} taxa (Asteraceae) from Turkey and their
taxonomic importance. \emph{Pakistan Journal of Botany,} 47(4),
1473--1480.

Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M.C., \& Erol, O. (2018). Seed structure and its
taxonomic implications for genus \emph{Thlaspi} sensu lato
sections\emph{Nomisma} , \emph{Thlaspi} , and \emph{Pterotropis}
(Brassicaceae).\emph{Turkish Journal of Botany} , 42, 591--609.

Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M.C., \selectlanguage{polish}Şı\selectlanguage{english}k, L., Gemicio\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, A., \& Erol, O. (2018). Seed
structure of some taxa of the genus \emph{Crocus} L. (Iridaceae)
series\emph{Crocus} . \emph{Turkish Journal of Botany} , 42(6),
722--731.

Karaismailo\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, M.C., \& G\selectlanguage{ngerman}üner, Ö. (2019). Nutlet structures of
subsection \emph{Fragiles} of the genus \emph{Stachys} (Lamiaceae) from
Turkey and their systematic applications. \emph{Turkish Journal of
Botany} , 43(5), 659--672.

Karcz, J., Kolano, B., \& Maluszynska, J. (2005). SEM studies on fruit
and seed of some \emph{Chenopodium} L. species
(Chenopodiaceae).\emph{Acta Biologica Cracoviensia Series Botanica,}
Supplement, 47(1).

Kaya, A., Ünal, M., Özgökçe, F., Do\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}an, B., \& Martin, E. (2011). Fruit
and seed morphology of six species previously placed in
\emph{Malcolmia}(Brassicaceae) in Turkey and their taxonomic value.
\emph{Turkish Journal of Botany} , 35(6), 653--662.

Khafagi, A., El-Ghamery, A., Ghaly, O., \& Ragab, O. (2018). Fruit and
seed morphology of some species of Solanaceae. \emph{Taeckholmia,}38(1),
123--140.

Kovach, W.L. (2007). \emph{MVSP - A MultiVariate Statistical Package for
Windows, Ver. 3.1.} Pentraeth: Kovach Computing Services.

Kur\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}at, M., \& Civelek, \selectlanguage{polish}Ş. \selectlanguage{english}(2011). The investigation of three species
belong to \emph{Artemisia} L. (Asteraceae) grown naturally in Turkey in
point of morphological features. \selectlanguage{ngerman}\emph{Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Orman
Fakültesi Dergisi,} 12(1), 15-25.

Kursat, M., Civelek, S., Turkoglu, I., \& Tabur S.
(2011a).\emph{Artemisia sieberi} Besser subsp. \emph{sieberi} a new
record for Turkey and a delete record for Turkey \emph{Artemisia
herba-alba} Asso. (Asteraceae). \emph{Pakistan Journal of Botany,}
43(4), 1819--1821.

Kursat, M., Turkoglu, I., Civelek, S., \& Tabur, S. (2011b). A new
subspecies records for the flora of Turkey: \emph{Artemisia
santonicum}L. subsp. \emph{patens} (Neilr.) K.M. Perss. (Asteraceae).
\emph{Turkish Journal of Botany} , 35(1), 89.

Kursat, M., Sancar, P.Y., \& Civelek, S. (2014). New record for the
flora of Turkey, \emph{Artemisia fragrans} Willd. (Asteraceae). \emph{OT
Sistematik Botanik Dergisi} , 21(2), 49--58.

Kursat, M., Civelek, S., Turkoglu, I., Tabur, S., \& Gur, N. (2015). A
new species of the subgenus \emph{Seriphidium} of the
genus\emph{Artemisia} L. (Asteraceae) from Turkey. \emph{Turkish Journal
of Botany,} 39, 88--95.

Kursat, M., Civelek, S., Sancar, Y.P., \& Turkoglu I.
(2018).\emph{Artemisia taurica} Willd. var. \emph{vanensis} Kursat \&
Civelek (Asteraceae: Anthemideae), a new variety from Eastern Anatolia
of Turkey. \emph{Biological Diversity and Conservation} , 11(3),
106--114.

Nourbakhsh, S.N., Ghahraman, A., Atar, F., \& Mahdigholi, K. (2008).
Leaf anatomy of \emph{Artemisia} (Asteraceae) in Iran and its taxonomic
implications. \emph{Iran Journal of Botany,} 14(1), 54--69.

Özbek, M.U., Özbek, F., \& Vural, M. (2018). Achene morphology of the
genus \emph{Cota} J.Gay (Asteraceae) from Turkey and its taxonomic
significance. \emph{Turkish Journal of Botany,} 42(2), 208--223.

Özcan, T. (2004). Analysis of the fruit surfaces in
\emph{Bupleurum}L.(Umbelliferae) with SEM. \emph{Plant Systematics and
Evolution,} 247, 61--74.

P\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}nar, N.M., \& Ad\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}g\selectlanguage{ngerman}üzel, N. (1998). Pollen morphology of some
Turkish\emph{Artemisia} L. (Compositae) species. \emph{Ot Sistematik
Botanik Dergisi,} 5(2), 87--92.

Ritchie, N., Newbury, D., \& Davis, J. (2012). EDS Measurements of X-Ray
Intensity at WDS Precision and Accuracy Using a Silicon Drift
Detector.\emph{Microscopy and Microanalysis,} 18(4), 892--904.

Sancar, P.Y., Civelek, S., \& Kursat, M. (2021). The morphological,
karyological and phylogenetic analyses of three
\emph{Artemisia}L.(Asteraceae) species that around the Van Lake in
Turkey.\emph{Caryologia,} 74(3), 53--63.

\selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}irin, E., Ertu\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}rul, K., \& Uysal, T. (2017). Achene Micromorphology of
the Genus \emph{Cyanus} Mill. (Compositae) in Turkey and its Taxonomic
Importance. \emph{Phytotaxa,} 313(1), 77--90.

Tabur, S., Civelek, \selectlanguage{polish}Ş., \selectlanguage{ngerman}Öney, S., Ergün, \selectlanguage{polish}Ş.\selectlanguage{english}B.Y., K\selectlanguage{ngerman}ür\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}at, M., \&
T\selectlanguage{ngerman}ürko\selectlanguage{polish}ğ\selectlanguage{english}lu, \selectlanguage{polish}İ. \selectlanguage{english}(2012). Chromosome counts and karyomorphology of some
species of \emph{Artemisia} (Asteraceae) from Turkey. \emph{Turkish
Journal of Botany,} 36(3), 235--246.

Tabur, S., Kur\selectlanguage{polish}ş\selectlanguage{english}at, M., \selectlanguage{ngerman}Öney, S., Özmen, S., \& Civelek, \selectlanguage{polish}Ş. \selectlanguage{english}(2014). New
or rare data on chromosome numbers and karyomorphology of some taxa in
the subgenus \emph{Seriphidium} (Bess.) Rouy. (\emph{Artemisia} ,
Asteraceae) in Turkey. \emph{Caryologia,} 67(4), 305--313.

Torrell, M., Garcia-Jacas, N., Susanna, A., \& Vall\selectlanguage{ngerman}ès, J. (1999).
Phylogeny in \emph{Artemisia} (Asteraceae, Anthemideae) inferred from
nuclear ribosomal DNA (ITS) sequences. \emph{Taxon,} 48, 721--736.

Valles, J., \& McArther, E.D. (2000). Artemisia systematic and phylogeny
cytogenetic and molecular insight. In: McArthur E.D., Fairbanks D.J.
(eds.), comps. Shrubland Ecosystem Genetics and Biodiversity:
Proceedings; (June 13--15); Provo, U.T. Proc. RMRS P-21.

Willcox, M. (2009). \emph{Artemisia} species: from traditional medicines
to modern antimalarials---and back again\emph{. J. Altern Complement
Med,} 15, 101--109.

\textbf{TABLES}

\textbf{TABLE 1. The examined taxa and their locations.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lllll@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{No} & \textbf{Subgenus} & \textbf{Taxa} & \textbf{Location} &
\textbf{Collection number}\tabularnewline
1 & \emph{Artemisia} & \emph{Artemisia vulgaris} & Mus: Airport
crossroad, Toprakbaba Park, 1300 m, 23.11.2007 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat
1108\tabularnewline
2 & & \emph{A. verloitorum} & Giresun: Espiye, Gelevare Stream Sides,
2m, 10.12.2007 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat 1136\tabularnewline
3 & & \emph{A. abrotanum} & Mus: Center Entrance, Passing Vocational
School, Roadsides, 1266 m, 23.11.2007 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat
1107\tabularnewline
4 & & \emph{A. austriaca} & Van: Gurpinar, Slopes Between Hamurkesen
Village and Isikpinar Village, 1975 m, 20.09.2007 & S. Civelek \& M.
Kursat 1054\tabularnewline
5 & & \emph{A. incana} & Mus: Manzikert, Aktuzla Village-Karncal\selectlanguage{polish}ı
\selectlanguage{english}Village Between, 1550 m,26.11.2007 & M. Kursat 1120\tabularnewline
6 & & \emph{A. armeniaca} & Agri: Dogubeyazit, Igd\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}r Road, South of Kori
Mountains slopes, 2565m,23.09.2007 & S. Civelek \& M.
Kursat1068\tabularnewline
7 & & \emph{A. chamaemelifolia} & Agri: Dogubeyazit, Igd\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}r Road, South
of Kori Mountains slopes, 2565m,23.09.2007 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat
1069\tabularnewline
8 & & \emph{A. annua} & Trabzon: Ma\selectlanguage{ngerman}çka Road, Around Esiroglu Kenan Oltan
High School, 164 m, 30.10.2007 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat
1106\tabularnewline
9 & & \emph{A. tournefortiana} & Van: G\selectlanguage{ngerman}ürp\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}nar, Hamurkesen Village,
Water The Edges of the Trenches, 1953m, 24.11.2007 & S. Civelek \& M.
Kursat 1113\tabularnewline
10 & & \emph{A. absinthium} & Mus: Manzikert, Aktuzla Village-Karncal\selectlanguage{polish}ı
\selectlanguage{english}Village Between, 1550 m,24.09.2007 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat
1080\tabularnewline
11 & & \emph{A. arborescens} & Hatay: Samandagi, Musa Mountain, \selectlanguage{ngerman}Çevlik
Locality, Titus Tunnel Surroundings, 53 m, 12.09.2007 & S. Civelek \& M.
Kursat 1040\tabularnewline
12 & & \emph{A. splendens} & Van: G\selectlanguage{ngerman}ürp\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}nar, Sapakonak Village, Slopes,
2692m, 25.07.2008 & M. Kursat 1153\tabularnewline
13 & & \emph{A. alpina} & Nigde: \selectlanguage{ngerman}Çamard\selectlanguage{polish}ı, \selectlanguage{english}Around Demirkaz\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}k Village,
Steppe Fields, 1560 m,03.09.2007 & M. Kursat 1019\tabularnewline
14 & & \emph{A. haussknechtii} & Hakkari: Hakkari, K\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}r\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}kdag Village,
K\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}rbas Castle, K\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}rbas District, Rockies, 31.10.2008 & M. Kursat
1183\tabularnewline
15 & \emph{Dracunculus} & \emph{A. campestris} & Ankara: Polatl\selectlanguage{polish}ı
\selectlanguage{english}Highway, 3 km from Temelliye, Roadside, 843m, 23.10.2007 & M. Kursat
1096\tabularnewline
16 & & \emph{A. marschalliana} & Bitlis: Tatvan- Ahlat Aras\selectlanguage{polish}ı, \selectlanguage{english}Tatvan
\selectlanguage{ngerman}Ç\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}k\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}s\selectlanguage{polish}ı \selectlanguage{english}(Sorgun), Askeri Alan Civar\selectlanguage{polish}ı, \selectlanguage{english}1715 m, 19.09.2007 & S. Civelek \&
M. Kursat 1047\tabularnewline
17 & & \emph{A. araratica} & Malatya:Dogansehir, Dedeyaz\selectlanguage{polish}ı \selectlanguage{english}K\selectlanguage{ngerman}öyü, Çanakc\selectlanguage{polish}ı
\selectlanguage{english}Mevkii, Step, 1495 m, 20.10.2007 & M. Kursat 1084\tabularnewline
18 & & \emph{A. scoparia} & Mus: Malazgirt, Malazgirt- Aktuzla Aras\selectlanguage{polish}ı,
\selectlanguage{english}Nuretin K\selectlanguage{ngerman}öyü Çevresi, 1620 m, 26.11.2007 & M. Kursat 1115\tabularnewline
19 & \emph{Seriphidium} & \emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. santonicum}
& Ankara: Serefliko\selectlanguage{ngerman}çhisar- Ankara Highway, 6 km from Sereflikoçhisar,
Roadside, 938 m, 06.12.2007 & M. Kursat 1130\tabularnewline
20 & & \emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. patens} & \selectlanguage{ngerman}Çanakkale: Çanakkale-
Kesan Road, Old \selectlanguage{polish}İ\selectlanguage{english}stanbul Road, Kavak Delta, 4m, 08.12.2007 & M. Kursat
1134\tabularnewline
21 & & \emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. taurica} & Ankara: Serefliko\selectlanguage{ngerman}çhisar,
Hamzal\selectlanguage{polish}ı \selectlanguage{english}village, Kayac\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}k (Mutlucan) surroundings, 933 m, 06.12.2007 & M.
Kursat 1129\tabularnewline
22 & & \emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. vanensis} & Van: Van -Hakkari
Highway, North Slopes of Zernek Dam, 24.11.2007 & M.Kursat
1112\tabularnewline
23 & & \emph{A. spicigera} & Mus: Malazgirt, Between Aktuzla Village and
Karncal\selectlanguage{polish}ı \selectlanguage{english}Village, Slopes, 1550 m, 26.11.2007 & M. Kursat
1118\tabularnewline
24 & & \emph{A. sieberi} subsp\emph{. sieberi} & \selectlanguage{polish}Ş\selectlanguage{english}anliurfa: Between
Islet and Mezrah, Exit of Adacik Village, Slopes, 350 m, 05.12.2007 & S.
Civelek \& M. Kursat 1127\tabularnewline
25 & & \emph{A. fragrans} & Van: Between Tatvan and Van, Kuzgun K\selectlanguage{polish}ı\selectlanguage{english}ran
Pass,2142 m,31.10.2009 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat 1207\tabularnewline
26 & & \emph{A. bashkalensis} & Hakkari: Van - Hakkari Highway, 58 km
from Hakkariye, Slopes,1805m, 01.11.2009 & S. Civelek \& M. Kursat
1210\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\textbf{TABLE 2. Macromorphological features of the studied
\emph{Artemisia} taxa.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}llllllll@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{Taxa} & \textbf{Shape} & \textbf{Achene dimension} &
\textbf{Achene dimension} & \textbf{L/W} & \textbf{Colour} &
\textbf{Surface structures} & \textbf{Carpopodium}\tabularnewline
& & \textbf{Length} & \textbf{Width} & & & &
\textbf{diameter}\tabularnewline
\emph{Artemisia vulgaris} & fusiform-oblong & 2.22\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.21 & 0.53\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 &
4.18 & brown-dark brown & bare, deeply longitudinally striate &
0.15\tabularnewline
\emph{A. verloitorum} & fusiform-oblong & 0.80\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.07 & 0.30\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 2.66 &
brown-dark brown & bare, deeply longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. abrotanum} & oblong & 0.89\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.15 & 0.42\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.05 & 2.11 & straw
yellowish- light brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. austriaca} & oblong-ovate & 1.11\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.12 & 0.51\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.06 & 2.17 &
light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. incana} & oblong-ovate & 1.36\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.12 & 0.54\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 2.51 & light
brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate & 0.13\tabularnewline
\emph{A. armeniaca} & ovate & 1.68\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.17 & 0.79\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.14 & 2.12 & yellowish-
light brown-brown & bare, deeply longitudinally striate &
0.18\tabularnewline
\emph{A. chamaemelifolia} & oblong-ovate & 1.14\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.18 & 0.51\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 2.23
& yellowish- light brown-brown & rough,deeply longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. annua} & ovate & 0.62\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.10 & 0.38\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.05 & 1.63 & straw
yellowish- light brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. tournefortiana} & fusiform-oblong & 1.05\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.12 & 0.42\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.05 &
2.50 & light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. absinthium} & oblong-ovate & 0.98\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.10 & 0.41\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 2.39 &
light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.18\tabularnewline
\emph{A. arborescens} & oblong-ovate & 1.46\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.18 & 0.58\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.11 & 2.51 &
yellowish- light brown-brown & rough,deeply longitudinally striate &
0.13\tabularnewline
\emph{A. splendens} & oblong-ovate & 2.10\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 0.93\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.17 & 2.25 &
light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.15\tabularnewline
\emph{A. alpina} & oblong-ovate & 1.72\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.21 & 0.69\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.12 & 2.49 & light
brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate & 0.09\tabularnewline
\emph{A. haussknechtii} & oblong-ovate & 1.26\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.12 & 0.53\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.05 & 2.37 &
light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. campestris} & oblong-ovate & 1.15\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.11 & 0.56\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 2.05 &
dark brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate & 0.16\tabularnewline
\emph{A. marschalliana} & oblong-ovate & 1.91\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.16 & 1.01\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.13 & 1.89 &
dark brown-blackish brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.16\tabularnewline
\emph{A. araratica} & oblong-ovate & 1.21\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.14 & 0.55\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.09 & 2.20 & dark
brown-blackish brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. scoparia} & oblong-ovate & 1.01\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.08 & 0.50\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.06 & 2.02 &
brown-dark brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. santonicum} & oblong-ovate & 2.33\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.40
& 1.15\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.23 & 2.02 & yellowish- light brown-brown & rough, finely
longitudinally striate & 0.10\tabularnewline
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. patens} & oblong-ovate & 2.48\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.27 &
1.21\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.24 & 2.04 & yellowish- light brown-brown & rough, finely
longitudinally striate & 0.14\tabularnewline
\emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. taurica} & oblong-ovate & 1.68\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.24 &
0.76\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.18 & 2.21 & light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally
striate & 0.15\tabularnewline
\emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. vanensis} & oblong-ovate & 2.24\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.21 &
0.92\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.18 & 2.43 & light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally
striate & 0.19\tabularnewline
\emph{A. spicigera} & oblong-ovate & 2.30\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.22 & 0.99\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.11 & 2.32 &
light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate &
0.18\tabularnewline
\emph{A. sieberi} subsp\emph{. sieberi} & oblong-ovate & 1.46\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.16 &
0.60\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.09 & 2.43 & light brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally
striate & 0.15\tabularnewline
\emph{A. fragrans} & oblong-ovate & 2.82\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.42 & 1.16\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.23 & 2.43 & light
brown-brown & bare, finely longitudinally striate & 0.19\tabularnewline
\emph{A. bashkalensis} & oblong-ovate & 1.54\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.10 & 0.54\selectlanguage{ngerman}±0.06 & 2.85 &
yellowish- light brown-brown & rough, finely longitudinally striate &
0.15\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\textbf{TABLE 3. Micromorphological features of the studied
\emph{Artemisia} taxa.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}llllll@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{Taxa} & \textbf{Surface ornamentation type} &
\textbf{Anticlinal} & \textbf{Periclinal} & \textbf{Epidermal cell} &
\textbf{Presence}\tabularnewline
& & \textbf{cell wall} & \textbf{cell wall} & \textbf{structures} &
\textbf{of secondary structures}\tabularnewline
\emph{Artemisia vulgaris} & Irregularly sulcate & Raised & Concave &
Rectangular & Irregular lines\tabularnewline
\emph{A. verloitorum} & Regularly sulcate & Sunken & Convex &
Arched-Rectangular & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. abrotanum} & Ruminate & Raised & Concave & Unclear &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. austriaca} & Irregularly sulcate & Raised & Flat & Rectangular
& -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. incana} & Sulcate-scalariform & Raised & Convex or concave &
Rectangular & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. armeniaca} & Regularly sulcate & Raised & Flat or Concave &
Rectangular & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. chamaemelifolia} & Rugose & Unclear & Unclear & Unclear &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. annua} & Sulcate-scalariform & Raised & Flat & Rectangular &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. tournefortiana} & Irregularly sulcate & Raised & Concave &
Rectangular & Irregular epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. absinthium} & Irregularly sulcate & Raised & Concave &
Rectangular & Irregular epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. arborescens} & Favulariate & Sunken & Convex & Unclear &
Irregular epicuticular protrusions\tabularnewline
\emph{A. splendens} & Irregularly sulcate & Unclear & Unclear & Unclear
& Epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. alpina} & Sulcate-scalariform & Raised & Concave & Rectangular
& Irregular epicuticular protrusions\tabularnewline
\emph{A. haussknechtii} & Irregularly sulcate & Unclear & Unclear &
Unclear & Epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. campestris} & Slightly sulcate & Raised & Flat & Rectangular &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. marschalliana} & Slightly sulcate & Sunken & Convex & Unclear &
Dome-shaped protrusions and epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. araratica} & Regularly sulcate & Sunken & Convex & Rectangular
& -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. scoparia} & Regularly sulcate & Sunken & Convex & Rectangular &
Irregular lines\tabularnewline
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. santonicum} & Sulcate-scalariform &
Raised & Concave & Polygonal & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. patens} & Alveolate & Raised & Concave
& Alveolar & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. taurica} & Irregularly sulcate & Unclear &
Unclear & Unclear & Epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. vanensis} & Tuberculate & Sunken & Convex &
Unclear & Epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. spicigera} & Sulcate-scalariform & Raised & Concave &
Rectangular & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. sieberi} subsp\emph{. sieberi} & Regularly sulcate & Unclear &
Unclear & Unclear & Epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. fragrans} & Regularly sulcate & Raised & Concave & Rectangular
& Epicuticular wrinkles\tabularnewline
\emph{A. bashkalensis} & Reticulate & Raised & Concave & Polygonal &
~-\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\textbf{TABLE 4.} \textbf{The EDS reports of the examined
\emph{Artemisia} achenes.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lllllllll@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{Taxa} & \textbf{C} & \textbf{Ca} & \textbf{K} & \textbf{Mg} &
\textbf{Cl} & \textbf{Si} & \textbf{Na} & \textbf{S}\tabularnewline
& \textbf{(\%)} & \textbf{(\%)} & \textbf{(\%)} & \textbf{(\%)} &
\textbf{(\%)} & \textbf{(\%)} & \textbf{(\%)} &
\textbf{(\%)}\tabularnewline
\emph{Artemisia vulgaris} & 93.3 & 4.9 & 1.1 & 0.7 & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. verloitorum} & 90.4 & 5.8 & 2.8 & 1.0 & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. abrotanum} & 96.1 & 3.0 & - & 0.9 & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. austriaca} & 77.4 & 12.2 & 9.2 & 1.2 & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. incana} & 87.5 & 5.2 & 7.3 & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. armeniaca} & 81.9 & 5.7 & 11.3 & - & 1.1 & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. chamaemelifolia} & 93.1 & 4.8 & 0.7 & 0.8 & - & 0.6 & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. annua} & 94.1 & 3.7 & 2.2 & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. tournefortiana} & 89.5 & 4.4 & 3.8 & 0.6 & 0.9 & 0.8 & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. absinthium} & 96.2 & 2.8 & 1.0 & - & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. arborescens} & 91.2 & 0.6 & 3.9 & - & 2.9 & - & 1.4 &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. splendens} & 87.0 & 3.6 & 8.0 & 0.9 & 0.5 & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. alpina} & 91.6 & 5.7 & 1.8 & - & - & - & - & 0.9\tabularnewline
\emph{A. haussknechtii} & 93.6 & 3.7 & 1.8 & 0.9 & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. campestris} & 89.8 & 2.2 & 6.1 & 0.7 & 1.2 & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. marschalliana} & 91.1 & 8.9 & - & - & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. araratica} & 90.8 & 3.8 & 3.9 & - & 1.5 & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. scoparia} & 94.2 & 4.5 & 0.7 & 0.6 & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. santonicum} & 91.3 & 1.6 & 2.9 & - &
2.0 & - & 2.2 & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. santonicum} subsp\emph{. patens} & 92.6 & 0.9 & 4.2 & - & 0.6 &
- & 1.7 & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. taurica} & 93.3 & 3.4 & 3.3 & - & - & - & -
& -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. taurica} var\emph{. vanensis} & 91.4 & 2.4 & 5.0 & 0.5 & 0.7 &
- & - & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. spicigera} & 91.4 & 2.5 & 6.1 & - & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. sieberi} subsp\emph{. sieberi} & 91.7 & 2.3 & 5.3 & - & 0.7 & -
& - & -\tabularnewline
\emph{A. fragrans} & 90.5 & 1.8 & 5.5 & 0.7 & 1.0 & 0.5 & - &
-\tabularnewline
\emph{A. bashkalensis} & 94.5 & 2.0 & 3.5 & ~- & ~- & ~- & ~- &
-\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\textbf{TABLE 5. The dissimilarity matrix of the examined
\emph{Artemisia} taxa (see Table 1 for taxon abbreviation).}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{longtable}[]{@{}lllllllllllllllllllllllllll@{}}
\toprule
\textbf{Taxa} & \textbf{1} & \textbf{2} & \textbf{3} & \textbf{4} &
\textbf{5} & \textbf{6} & \textbf{7} & \textbf{8} & \textbf{9} &
\textbf{10} & \textbf{11} & \textbf{12} & \textbf{13} & \textbf{14} &
\textbf{15} & \textbf{16} & \textbf{17} & \textbf{18} & \textbf{19} &
\textbf{20} & \textbf{21} & \textbf{22} & \textbf{23} & \textbf{24} &
\textbf{25} & \textbf{26}\tabularnewline
\textbf{1} & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{2} & 0.551 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{3} & 0.623 & 0.571 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{4} & 0.570 & 0.572 & 0.478 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{5} & 0.555 & 0.552 & 0.462 & 0.343 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{6} & 0.535 & 0.529 & 0.517 & 0.463 & 0.484 & 0 & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\textbf{7} & 0.674 & 0.571 & 0.524 & 0.522 & 0.546 & 0.552 & 0 & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\textbf{8} & 0.676 & 0.586 & 0.434 & 0.386 & 0.436 & 0.441 & 0.577 & 0 &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\textbf{9} & 0.482 & 0.546 & 0.457 & 0.341 & 0.373 & 0.493 & 0.586 &
0.475 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{10} & 0.538 & 0.586 & 0.455 & 0.265 & 0.308 & 0.493 & 0.545 &
0.470 & 0.214 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{11} & 0.663 & 0.512 & 0.554 & 0.549 & 0.522 & 0.569 & 0.404 &
0.613 & 0.607 & 0.570 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{12} & 0.638 & 0.626 & 0.538 & 0.431 & 0.495 & 0.607 & 0.429 &
0.601 & 0.510 & 0.466 & 0.535 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{13} & 0.546 & 0.604 & 0.474 & 0.354 & 0.221 & 0.48 & 0.553 &
0.453 & 0.385 & 0.325 & 0.524 & 0.483 & 0 & & - & - & - & - & - & - & -
& - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{14} & 0.643 & 0.591 & 0.505 & 0.401 & 0.477 & 0.609 & 0.400 &
0.564 & 0.478 & 0.429 & 0.524 & 0.142 & 0.483 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{15} & 0.616 & 0.575 & 0.479 & 0.302 & 0.406 & 0.461 & 0.523 &
0.384 & 0.458 & 0.404 & 0.550 & 0.524 & 0.414 & 0.503 & 0 & - & - & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{16} & 0.716 & 0.571 & 0.553 & 0.543 & 0.520 & 0.624 & 0.543 &
0.606 & 0.612 & 0.574 & 0.471 & 0.457 & 0.554 & 0.474 & 0.496 & 0 & - &
- & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{17} & 0.639 & 0.438 & 0.525 & 0.427 & 0.402 & 0.507 & 0.522 &
0.493 & 0.503 & 0.455 & 0.456 & 0.521 & 0.461 & 0.501 & 0.427 & 0.393 &
0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{18} & 0.606 & 0.413 & 0.544 & 0.453 & 0.436 & 0.534 & 0.545 &
0.507 & 0.527 & 0.480 & 0.487 & 0.552 & 0.495 & 0.526 & 0.453 & 0.479 &
0.264 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{19} & 0.604 & 0.630 & 0.535 & 0.521 & 0.441 & 0.466 & 0.474 &
0.557 & 0.552 & 0.512 & 0.484 & 0.547 & 0.421 & 0.577 & 0.517 & 0.568 &
0.557 & 0.587 & 0 & - & - & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{20} & 0.642 & 0.604 & 0.587 & 0.572 & 0.542 & 0.518 & 0.484 &
0.645 & 0.601 & 0.564 & 0.444 & 0.549 & 0.523 & 0.585 & 0.568 & 0.531 &
0.524 & 0.557 & 0.37 & 0 & & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{21} & 0.644 & 0.607 & 0.517 & 0.410 & 0.482 & 0.603 & 0.409 &
0.576 & 0.491 & 0.443 & 0.526 & 0.069 & 0.479 & 0.076 & 0.508 & 0.458 &
0.506 & 0.534 & 0.556 & 0.561 & 0 & - & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{22} & 0.661 & 0.554 & 0.547 & 0.489 & 0.450 & 0.611 & 0.531 &
0.614 & 0.558 & 0.519 & 0.446 & 0.371 & 0.485 & 0.402 & 0.532 & 0.351 &
0.433 & 0.474 & 0.548 & 0.507 & 0.381 & 0 & - & - & - & -\tabularnewline
\textbf{23} & 0.537 & 0.619 & 0.485 & 0.359 & 0.220 & 0.464 & 0.556 &
0.469 & 0.397 & 0.340 & 0.562 & 0.454 & 0.182 & 0.484 & 0.415 & 0.530 &
0.462 & 0.500 & 0.373 & 0.481 & 0.463 & 0.450 & 0 & - & - &
-\tabularnewline
\textbf{24} & 0.668 & 0.556 & 0.510 & 0.457 & 0.477 & 0.568 & 0.403 &
0.572 & 0.527 & 0,483 & 0.522 & 0.241 & 0.479 & 0.216 & 0.505 & 0.469 &
0.455 & 0.486 & 0.569 & 0.575 & 0.220 & 0.390 & 0.474 & 0 & - &
-\tabularnewline
\textbf{25} & 0.580 & 0.619 & 0.572 & 0.411 & 0.414 & 0.489 & 0.590 &
0.566 & 0.493 & 0,451 & 0.588 & 0.416 & 0.383 & 0.473 & 0.460 & 0.503 &
0.453 & 0.497 & 0.487 & 0.528 & 0.440 & 0.410 & 0.313 & 0,400 & 0 &
-\tabularnewline
\textbf{26} & 0.548 & 0.577 & 0.500 & 0.492 & 0.456 & 0.467 & 0.441 &
0.571 & 0.509 & 0,466 & 0.455 & 0.561 & 0.457 & 0.550 & 0.495 & 0.589 &
0.534 & 0.564 & 0.289 & 0.426 & 0.553 & 0.560 & 0.454 & 0.550 & 0.530 &
0\tabularnewline
\bottomrule
\end{longtable}

\textbf{FIGURES}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image1/image1}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 1.} The achenes of the examined Artemisia
taxa;\textbf{1:} \emph{A. vulgaris} , \textbf{2:} \emph{A. verloitorum}
,\textbf{3:} \emph{A. abrotanum} , \textbf{4:} \emph{A. austriaca}
,\textbf{5:} \emph{A. incana} , \textbf{6:} \emph{A. armeniaca}
,\textbf{7:} \emph{A. chamaemelifolia} , \textbf{8:} \emph{A. annua}
,\textbf{9:} \emph{A. tournefortiana} , \textbf{10:} \emph{A.
absinthium} ,\textbf{11:} \emph{A. arborescens} , \textbf{12:} \emph{A.
splendens} ,\textbf{13:} \emph{A. alpina} , \textbf{14:} \emph{A.
haussknechtii} ,\textbf{15\emph{:}} \emph{A. campestris,}
\textbf{16\emph{:}} \emph{A. marschalliana} , \textbf{17:} \emph{A.
araratica} , \textbf{18:} \emph{A. scoparia} , \textbf{19:} \emph{A.
santonicum} subsp. \emph{santonicum} ,\textbf{20:} \emph{A. santonicum}
subsp. \emph{patens} , \textbf{21:}\emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{taurica}
, \textbf{22:} \emph{A. taurica}var. \emph{vanensis} , \textbf{23:}
\emph{A. spicigera} , \textbf{24:}\emph{A. sieberi} subsp.
\emph{sieberi} , \textbf{25:} \emph{A. fragrans}and \textbf{26:}
\emph{A. bashkalensis} (Scale bars= 1 mm)\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image2/image2}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 2.} SEM pictures of the achene surfaces of the
examined\emph{Artemisia} taxa: \textbf{1:} \emph{A. vulgaris} ,
\textbf{2:}\emph{A. verloitorum} , \textbf{3:} \emph{A. abrotanum} ,
\textbf{4:}\emph{A. austriaca} and \textbf{5:} \emph{A. incana.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image3/image3}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 2.} SEM pictures of the achene surfaces of the
examined\emph{Artemisia} taxa: \textbf{6:} \emph{A. armeniaca} ,
\textbf{7:}\emph{A. chamaemelifolia} , \textbf{8:} \emph{A. annua} ,
\textbf{9:}\emph{A. tournefortiana} and \textbf{10:} \emph{A.
absinthium.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image4/image4}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 2.} SEM pictures of the achene surfaces of the examined
\emph{Artemisia} taxa:\textbf{11:} \emph{A. arborescens} , \textbf{12:}
\emph{A. splendens} ,\textbf{13:} \emph{A. alpina} , \textbf{14:}
\emph{A. haussknechtii} and\textbf{15\emph{:}} \emph{A. campestris.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image5/image5}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 2.} SEM pictures of the achene surfaces of the
examined\emph{Artemisia} taxa: \textbf{16\emph{:}} \emph{A.
marschalliana} ,\textbf{17:} \emph{A. araratica} , \textbf{18:} \emph{A.
scoparia} ,\textbf{19:} \emph{A. santonicum} subsp. \emph{santonicum}
and\textbf{20:} \emph{A. santonicum} subsp. \emph{patens}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image6/image6}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 2.} SEM pictures of the achene surfaces of the
examined\emph{Artemisia} taxa: \textbf{21:} \emph{A. taurica}
var.\emph{taurica} , \textbf{22:} \emph{A. taurica} var. \emph{vanensis}
,\textbf{23:} \emph{A. spicigera} , \textbf{24:} \emph{A. sieberi}
subsp.\emph{sieberi} , \textbf{25:} \emph{A. fragrans} and \textbf{26:}

\emph{A. bashkalensis.}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image7/image7}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 3.} The cluster analysis of the examined
\emph{Artemisia}taxa.\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/image8/image8}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\textbf{FIGURE 4.} Principal component analysis of the
examined\emph{Artemisia} taxa.

\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`Figures.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/653668/articles/660504-taxonomic-significance-of-morphological-and-elemental-characteristics-of-achenes-of-artemisia-genus-from-turkey}

\textbf{Hosted file}

\verb`Tables.docx`  available at \url{https://authorea.com/users/653668/articles/660504-taxonomic-significance-of-morphological-and-elemental-characteristics-of-achenes-of-artemisia-genus-from-turkey}

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{document}

