In article , Stewart Robert Hinsley
writes
Yes, but Asteraceae/Compositae seems to be one of the more robust bits
of the classification (excepting the past dismemberment of
Chyrsanthemum). For an overview see

URL:http://www.mobot.org/MOBOT/Research/...ers/asteralesw
eb.htm#Asteraceae

?? Do you mean the section which states:

ASTERACEAE Martynov*//COMPOSITAE Giseke Back to Asterales

Herbs to trees or vines; sesquiterpene lactones, terpenoid essential
oils, various alkaloids, polyacetylenes [cyclic, aromatic, with vinyl
end groups] +, tanniniferous, iridoids 0; cork superficial (deep
seated); (cortical or medullary vascular bundles +); cambium storied or
not; (vessel elements with scalariform or reticulate perforations);
nodes also 5:5; leaves also opposite, often conduplicate or revolute,
margins various; inflorescence capitulate, involucrate, ebracteate;
flowers poly- or variously monosymmetric, K reduced, C split-
monosymmetric, bilabiate, or tubular (deeply lobed), anthers connate
(free), with apical and basal [calcarate] appendages, caudate, tapetum
amoeboid, ovule basal, embryo sac with persistent multinucleate
antipodal cells; (K deciduous); (testa not vascularized), exotestal
cells thickened, palisade or flattened, or undistinguished; endosperm
(nuclear), scanty to 0; protein bodies in nuclei.

For lay gardeners, a little clarification would be helpful.
--
Alan & Joan Gould - North Lincs.