ALBERT

Description: From a bryological point of view Greenland is not well known in detail. Unlike Siberia or Arctic America, it is not known through a few large collections, but through multitudes of mostly relatively small gatherings. In this arctic island that is almost 2000 miles long and extends from below 60° N.lat. to nearly 84° N.lat., travel and logistics are difficult. Consequently no over-all study of the whole island has been made, although many collections have been achieved through casual or intensive studies of small areas. Like the other contributions to the knowledge of the bryoflora of Greenland this paper will only deal with a rather limited area; the Angmagssalik district on the East coast of Greenland, ranging from 65° N.lat. to 67°20' N.lat. In 1887 Lange and Jensen published the first and until now the only comprehensive review of specimens and publications on the Musci of Greenland. In their paper the first moss collection from the Angmagssalik area was reported, made in 1884-1885 in the course of ethnographical studies by Gustav Holm (Sphagnum girgensohnii and Polytrichum juniperinum), the first European to visit this part of East Greenland.

Description: A palynological assemblage obtained from marly limestones of the Dutch Lower Muschelkalk is discussed. A qualitative analysis has disclosed its great resemblance to Upper Bunter (Röt) assemblages ; however, differences in quantitative composition were demonstrated. Utilizing palynological data new information can be added to the knowledge of the European Middle Triassic flora.

Description: Although algology deals with a large group of plants, widespread and of a great morphological diversity, the history of this branch of botany is fairly young. Linnaeus (1753) listed in his Species Plantarum under the heading “Cryptogamia—Algae” only five genera of plants which are still accepted as algae at the present time. Under the same heading he also described a number of liverworts, lichens and sponges and a few other things.

Description: Studies in the Moraceae showed that Acanthinophyllum should be regarded as congeneric with Clarisia, and that Clarisia spruceana and Aliteria sagoti are conspecific with Clarisia ilicifolia. Some characters of the inflorescences and seeds and the position of Clarisia and its relationships with Trophis and Sorocea are discussed.

Description: In February and early March, 1961, the senior author spent three weeks on a small savanna in the approximate centre of Suriname, South of Tafelberg, (map 1). He was accompanied by Mr. W. H. A. Hekking. The time was spent in exploring the flora of the savanna and the adjacent forest. As a detailed study of the vegetation of the savannas of northern Suriname was then in progress, several extensive papers being in preparation (Heyligers, 1963; Van Donselaar, 1965; Van Donselaar-Ten Bokkel Huinink, 1966), it was felt that a more thorough inventory of the vegetation and the flora of the savanna might be rewarding. When a general impression of the plant-cover of the area had been obtained, eight representative sample-plots were selected, their vegetation was analyzed and described after the method of the French-Swiss school of phytosociology, and pits were dug in the soil down to bedrock, samples being taken in every distinctive-looking layer. This work was carried out jointly by the senior author and W. H. A. Hekking; part of the floristic exploration was also done by or with Dr. R. M. Tryon, Harvard Herbarium, Cambridge, Mass. The results are here presented. It was felt that in order to integrate them with those obtained elsewhere in Suriname, the collaboration of a specialist familiar with the Suriname savannas in general was required. This was the junior author’s task, who, after his prolonged work on the savannas of northern Suriname, later expanded his work to those of the southern part of the country. The preliminary results of the last-named study are in the press; more detailed field work is in progress as this paper goes to the press.

Description: When revising the Icacinaceae from SE. Asia and Malesia recently, my interest was drawn again to the genus Lophopyxis Hook. f. Designated by its author (1887) tentatively as a member of the Euphorbiaceae, it was rejected from this family by Pax as early as 1890. Engler (1893) transferred Lophopyxis to the Icacinaceae as the type of a new subfamily Lophopyxidoideae. Hallier f. (1910) disputed Engler’s view and retained it in the Euphorbiaceae, from which it was excluded again by Pax & Hoffmann in 1931. A possible place in the Rhamnaceae and Flacourtiaceae was considered and rejected by Gilg in 1918; Bakhuizen van den Brink Jr. & van Steenis (1966) likewise rejected the former, though its alliance with the Rhamnaceae was firmly expressed by Airy Shaw (1966). Other authors, as Pierre quoted by Boerlage (1890), inserted Lophopyxis in the Saxifragaceae, Schumann (1898) in the Olacaceae, and Ridley (1922) in Bentham’s Olacineae. In more recent times the genus was referred again to the Icacinaceae by Schellenberg (1923) and Kanehira (1931), but excluded from that family by Hallier f. (1921) and Sleumer (1942). Dahl (1955), discussing the pollen morphology of Lophopyxis, stated that the range of pollen forms known to exist within the Euphorbiaceae could include that of Lophopyxis. Erdtman in the newest edition of his ‘Pollen Morphology and Plant Taxonomy’ (1966) still placed it under Euphorbiaceae. Hutchinson (1959), and subsequently Scholz (1964), place it in the Celastraceae. Though Lophopyxis fits in the general circumscription of the Celastraceae, and shares the winged fruit with the subfamily Tripterygioideae, it cannot be placed in the latter, which all have basal ovules, whilst Lophopyxis has pendent (and certainly epitropous) ones. If placed in the Celastraceae, it would keep an isolated position, as, for instance, does Siphonodon. There is thus no certainty as to the right place of this genus, whose gross morphology, wood anatomy, embryology, and pollen morphology is so well known to-day, in one of the established plant families. It therefore seems justified to regard it as the type of a family of its own within the Geraniales-Sapindales-Celastrales. Suggested already by van Tieghem (1897) and Pierre (1897) casually as Lophopyxidacées’, the family was formally described by Pfeiffer (1951) who raised Engler’s Lophopyxidoideae to family rank, and recently conceived by Airy Shaw (1966).

Description: The previous subdivision of Freycinetia Gaud. ( Pandanaceae) into two parts, Sect. Oligostigma Warb. and Sect. Pleiostigma Warb. (now called Sect. Freycinetia) has because of numerous additions to our knowledge of the genus become obsolete. Fifteen new sections are proposed, based on natural species-groups, and the original two sections are restricted and redefined. Species not yet adequately known may be termed Freycinetiae imperfectae, when only staminate specimens are known, or incertae sedis. A map showing the distribution of the genus is included.

Description: During a collecting trip to Thailand, as a member of the Thai-Dutch botanical expedition 1965/1966, I was struck by the excessive amount of mucilage sometimes present on the circinnate fronds of several leptosporangiate ferns. This was especially evident in representatives of the monotypic fern family Plagiogyriaceae and the Thelypteroid ferns. The mucilage is secreted by a multitude of minute glandular hairs. In mature leaves the hairs are shrivelled and easily overlooked, or even have disappeared. Moreover, usually only herbarium specimens are available for investigation.