3.2 Phylogeny Reconstruction
The ML and BI topologies of ITS and cpDNA haplotype phylogenetic
trees were consistent on branches with strong support (Figure
6) . Partial inconsistencies between the ITS and cpDNA trees
occurred regarding the phylogenetic relationships of N.
bulbuliferum and N. macrophyllum . In the ITS haplotype
phylogenetic trees, N. bulbuliferum and N. macrophyllumeach had a haplotype (N7 and N26) embedded in the branch of the other(Figure 6a) . In the cpDNA haplotype phylogenetic trees, the
haplotypes of all species are well clustered into a single branch,
forming a good monophyletic clade (Figure 6b) . Overall, no
haplotypes were shared among the three Notholirion species, and
each species in general formed ITS own individual branch in theITS and cpDNA trees. The ITS haplotype network map and theITS haplotype phylogenetic tree constructed by TCS network were
consistent, with N. bulbuliferum and N. macrophyllum each
having a haplotype (N7 and N26) embedded in the branch of the other(Figure 3) . while in cpDNA, the haplotype network map and
haplotype phylogenetic tree were consistent, with each of the three
species forming a separate monophyletic (Figure 5) .