DOCSLIB.ORG

ECOLOGY and CONTROL of RHODODENDRON (Rhododendron Ponticum L.) in TURKISH EASTERN BEECH (Fagus Orientalis Lipsky) FORESTS Derya

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ECOLOGY and CONTROL of RHODODENDRON (Rhododendron Ponticum L.) in TURKISH EASTERN BEECH (Fagus Orientalis Lipsky) FORESTS Derya ECOLOGY AND CONTROL OF RHODODENDRON (Rhododendron ponticum L.) IN TURKISH EASTERN BEECH (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) FORESTS 'HU\D(úHQ Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of 'RFWRURI3KÕORVRSK\ in Forestry Shepard M. Zedaker, Chair Jeffrey L. Kirwan Robert H. Jones Paul P. Mou David Wm. Smith June 28, 2000 Blacksburg, Virginia, USA Keywords: anthropogenic, cost, disturbance, ecology of rhododendron and beech, efficacy, fire, herbicides, soil, surfactant, topography, tree growth, woody weed control, herbicide uptake and translocation Copyright 2000, Derya Esen ECOLOGY AND CONTROL OF RHODODENDRON (Rhododendron ponticum L.) IN TURKISH EASTERN BEECH (Fagus orientalis Lipsky) FORESTS by 'HU\D(úHQ ABSTRACT Purple-flowered rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum L.) and yellow-flowered rhododendron (R. flavum Don.) are two dominant shrub species of the eastern beech (Fagus orientalis L.) understories in the eastern and western Black Sea Region (BSR), respectively. These invasive woody species significantly reduce beech growth and can preclude tree regeneration. The ecological consequence is an aging beech overstory with little or no regeneration to replace the mature trees. Great rhododendron (R. maximum L.) has been increasing in the forests of the Southern Appalachians of the United States, reducing tree regeneration and growth. The BSR and Southern Appalachians bear noteworthy similarities in climate, topography, and the forest flora. Purple-flowered and great rhododendrons also show important similarities in their ecology and the forest vegetation problems they can cause. Current rhododendron-dominated and threatened BSR forests may provide an advanced ecological picture of the forests of the Southern Appalachians in which great rhododendron now thrives. Therefore, new information gained on the ecology and effective and cost-efficient control of purple-flowered rhododendron may significantly improve forest management practices, not only for the current rhododendron-invaded BSR ecosystem, but also for other parts of the world. This dissertation consists of five separate yet related chapters. The first gives relevant literature reviewed for the dissertation. The second chapter focuses on various environmental and disturbance factors that may have shaped the current purple-flowered rhododendron-dominated beech forests of the BSR of Turkey. Chapter 3 assesses the effects of various manual and herbicidal woody control techniques on purple-flowered and yellow- flowered rhododendron in two field experiments in the BSR. The fourth chapter relates a study of uptake and translocation behavior of triclopyr ester and imazapyr in great rhododendron. This information is used to determine the optimum herbicide-surfactant combinations for the greatest active ingredient uptake and root translocation in great ii rhododendron. The last chapter is a synthesis of the information gained in all of these different experiments. iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The first acknowledgment goes to my role model, a great forester, my father Ömer (úHQ+HZDVWUXO\P\LQVSLUDWLRQLQSXUVXLQJP\GHJUHHLQIRUHVWU\DVLQHYHU\WKLQJHOVH, can only hope that I lived up to the great fame and expectation that he has left behind. My DXQWDQGXQFOH *OEQDQG$VÕP(úHQ KDYHEHHQDVHFRQGIDPLO\WRPHGXULQJWKH\HDUV, have spent in the United States. I have learned a great deal from both of them. My uncle has always pushed me to be better in my career. I sincerely appreciate all the support that they KDYHJLYHQPH,FDQQRWIRUJHWWKHIULHQGVKLSRIP\FRXVLQV6(YUHQDQG)LOL]1(úHQ They have made my time in the U.S. unforgettable. I am more than grateful to Dr. Shepard M. Zedaker for his great guidance and support during my six years at Virginia Tech as supervisor, teacher, and friend. I have learned a great deal from him in many aspects. In addition, I owe great appreciation to my committee members Dr. Jeffrey L. Kirwan, Dr. Robert H. Jones, Dr. Paul P. Mou, and Dr. David Wm. Smith for their valuable guidance and contributions for my work. I express my gratitude to Düzce University Forestry Faculty, the Turkish Forest Service, and Cynamid in Turkey, and Virginia Polytechic Institute and State University, American Cyanamid, and Dow AgroSciences in the United States for their support in funding WKLVSURMHFW6SHFLDOWKDQNVDUHDOVRGXHWR0U+DVDQ%DVUL&DQOÕ *HQHUDO'LUHFWRURIWKH Turkish Forest Service), Burhanettin Seçkin (former head silviculturalist of the Turkish )RUHVW6HUYLFH 0U2VPDQ(UHQR÷OX IRUPHUGLUHFWRURIWKH=RQJXOGDN5HJLRQDO)RUHVWU\ 'LUHFWRU\ DQG&HQJL]dHWLQWDú KHDGRIWKH6LOYLFXOWXUH'HSDUWPHQWRIWKH=RQJXOGDN Regional Forestry Directorate) for their help and support during my field work in the BSR. Many forest chiefs and rangers who have helped me conduct this research in the BSR are also appreciated. Mrs. Kathryn Hollandsworth is also thanked for her great help on the preparation of this dissertation. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS......................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................viii LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................x CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................1 Ecology of Eastern Beech.................................................................................................1 Distribution..............................................................................................................1 Climate of the Black Sea Region.............................................................................3 Topography throughout Eastern Beech's Distribution ............................................4 Elevational Distribution of Eastern Beech ..............................................................5 Soil Requirements of Eastern Beech .......................................................................6 Shade Tolerance ......................................................................................................7 Sexual Reproduction ...............................................................................................9 Vegetative Reproduction .......................................................................................10 Regeneration Techniques Used for Beech.............................................................14 Ecology of Rhododendron..............................................................................................15 Taxonomical Nomenclature ..................................................................................15 Distribution of Purple- and Yellow-Flowered Rhododendron..............................15 Origin of Rhododendron in Turkey.......................................................................16 Aspect ....................................................................................................................16 Light and Shade Tolerance....................................................................................17 Flowering, Seeding, and Generative Reproduction...............................................19 Root System of Rhododendron .............................................................................20 Vegetation Reproduction.......................................................................................21 Allelopathy ............................................................................................................21 Disturbance: The Essence of Change in Forests ...........................................................22 Development of Beech Forests under Anthropogenic Pressure ............................23 Effects of Fire on Beech Growth and Distribution................................................27 The Rising Population of Rhododendron in Conjunction with Anthropogenic Disturbances and Fires .................................................................................30 v Page Feasibility of Information Transfer between Different Regions of Rhododendron ..............................................................................................33 Manual Rhododendron Control......................................................................................33 Chemical Rhododendron Control...................................................................................35 History of Chemical Control in Turkey.................................................................35 Foliar Chemical Rhododendron Control ...............................................................36 Cut-Stump Treatment ............................................................................................38 The Leaf Cuticle....................................................................................................38 Surfactants .............................................................................................................40 CHAPTER 2: SOIL AND SITE FACTORS INFLUENCING PURPLE-FLOWERED RHODODENDRON AND EASTERN BEECH FORESTS IN TURKEY .............45 Abstract...........................................................................................................................45 Introduction ....................................................................................................................46 Methodology...................................................................................................................49
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province
    Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Regional Guide for Farmers, Land Managers, and Gardeners In the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province Including the states of: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia And parts of: Georgia, Kentucky, and North Carolina, NAPPC South Carolina, Tennessee Table of CONTENTS Why Support Pollinators? 4 Getting Started 5 Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest 6 Meet the Pollinators 8 Plant Traits 10 Developing Plantings 12 Far ms 13 Public Lands 14 Home Landscapes 15 Bloom Periods 16 Plants That Attract Pollinators 18 Habitat Hints 20 This is one of several guides for Check list 22 different regions in the United States. We welcome your feedback to assist us in making the future Resources and Feedback 23 guides useful. Please contact us at [email protected] Cover: silver spotted skipper courtesy www.dangphoto.net 2 Selecting Plants for Pollinators Selecting Plants for Pollinators A Regional Guide for Farmers, Land Managers, and Gardeners In the Ecological Region of the Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest Coniferous Forest Meadow Province Including the states of: Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia And parts of: Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee a nappc and Pollinator Partnership™ Publication This guide was funded by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the C.S. Fund, the Plant Conservation Alliance, the U.S. Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management with oversight by the Pollinator Partnership™ (www.pollinator.org), in support of the North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (NAPPC–www.nappc.org). Central Appalachian Broadleaf Forest – Coniferous Forest – Meadow Province 3 Why support pollinators? In theIr 1996 book, the Forgotten PollInators, Buchmann and Nabhan estimated that animal pollinators are needed for the reproduction “ Farming feeds of 90% of flowering plants and one third of human food crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhododendron Ferrugineum L
    Volume 18(1), 123- 130, 2014 JOURNAL of Horticulture, Forestry and Biotechnology www.journal-hfb.usab-tm.ro Rhododendron ferrugineum L. and Rhododendron myrtifolium Schott & Kotschy in habitats from Eastern Alps mountains and Carpathian Mountains Căprar M.1,2, Cantor Maria2*, Szatmari P.1, Sicora C.1 1)Biological Research Center, Botanical Garden ,,Vasile Fati” Jibou, Parcului Street,no.14,455200 Jibou, Romania; 2)University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Faculty of Horticulture, Mănăștur Street, no 3-5,4000472 Cluj-Napoca, Romania; * Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] Abstract This paper presents results of research carried on two species Key words of Rhododendron in habitats from different regions of Central and Eastern Europe (Rhododendron ferrugineum and Rhododendron myrtifolium). It rhododendrons species, presents the ecological requirements of each habitat, their spread, main plant habitats, plant communities, association and floristic composition based on the dominance of probative Carpathian Mountains, Alps species. A correlation is made between habitats from different classifications, Mountains but with the same features, mentioning EUNIS codes, Emerald, Natura 2000, Palaearctic Habitats and the European forest types. This paper presents information on the spread of two types of habitats containing Rhododendronfrom Europe, the environmental conditions in which they live and the accompanying species involved, more or less, in the composition of habitats. It describes the types of vegetation in the Alps (Austria) and the Carpathian Mountains (Romania). Vegetation was observed following the research in the field. Knowledge of the habitats in which of Australia, with over 200 species only in the island of Rhododendron species live becomes an important New Guinea [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Characterizing the Genetic Variation in Seven Species of Deciduous Native Azaleas and Identifying the Mechanism of Azalea Lacebug Resistance in Deciduous Azalea
    CHARACTERIZING THE GENETIC VARIATION IN SEVEN SPECIES OF DECIDUOUS NATIVE AZALEAS AND IDENTIFYING THE MECHANISM OF AZALEA LACEBUG RESISTANCE IN DECIDUOUS AZALEA by MATTHEW RANDOLPH CHAPPELL (Under the direction of Dr. Carol Robacker) ABSTRACT Despite the ecologic and economic importance of native deciduous azaleas (Rhododendron spp. section Pentanthera), our understanding of interspecific variation of North American deciduous azalea species is limited. Furthermore, little is known concerning intraspecific or interpopulation genetic variation. The present study addresses questions of genetic diversity through the use of amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) analysis. Twenty-five populations of seven species of native azalea were analyzed using three primer pairs that amplified a total of 417 bands. Based on analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) and estimates of Nei’s coefficients of gene diversity (HS, HT, and GST), the majority of variation in deciduous azalea occurs within populations. Both among species and among population variation was low, likely the effect of common ancestry as well as frequent introgression among members (and populations) of section Pentanthera. The majority of populations were grouped into species based on Nei’s unbiased genetic distances viewed as a UPGMA phenogram. The significance of these results is discussed in relation to breeding in section Pentanthera. In addition to the lack of information concerning genetic variation in North American native azaleas, little is known concerning the insect-plant interaction between the primary azalea pest in the United States, azalea lace bug (ALB) (Stephanitis pyrioides Scott), and deciduous azalea. Azaleas are largely resistant to predation by insects, with the exception of ALB. Within deciduous azalea (Rhododendron section Pentanthera) varying levels of resistance to ALB is observed with a continuous distribution from susceptible to highly resistant.
    [Show full text]
  • A Taxonomic Revision of Rhododendron L. Section Pentanthera G
    A TAXONOMIC REVISION OF RHODODENDRON L. SECTION PENTANTHERA G. DON (ERICACEAE) BY KATHLEEN ANNE KRON A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 1987 , ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I gratefully acknowledge the supervision and encouragement given to me by Dr. Walter S. Judd. I thoroughly enjoyed my work under his direction. I would also like to thank the members of my advisory committee, Dr. Bijan Dehgan, Dr. Dana G. Griffin, III, Dr. James W. Kimbrough, Dr. Jonathon Reiskind, Dr. William Louis Stern, and Dr. Norris H. Williams for their critical comments and suggestions. The National Science Foundation generously supported this project in the form of a Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant;* field work in 1985 was supported by a grant from the Highlands Biological Station, Highlands, North Carolina. I thank the curators of the following herbaria for the loan of their material: A, AUA, BHA, DUKE, E, FSU, GA, GH, ISTE, JEPS , KW, KY, LAF, LE NCSC, NCU, NLU NO, OSC, PE, PH, LSU , M, MAK, MOAR, NA, , RSA/POM, SMU, SZ, TENN, TEX, TI, UARK, UC, UNA, USF, VDB, VPI, W, WA, WVA. My appreciation also is offered to the illustrators, Gerald Masters, Elizabeth Hall, Rosa Lee, Lisa Modola, and Virginia Tomat. I thank Dr. R. Howard * BSR-8601236 ii Berg for the scanning electron micrographs. Mr. Bart Schutzman graciously made available his computer program to plot the results of the principal components analyses. The herbarium staff, especially Mr. Kent D. Perkins, was always helpful and their service is greatly appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Trees of Georgia
    1 NATIVE TREES OF GEORGIA By G. Norman Bishop Professor of Forestry George Foster Peabody School of Forestry University of Georgia Currently Named Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources University of Georgia GEORGIA FORESTRY COMMISSION Eleventh Printing - 2001 Revised Edition 2 FOREWARD This manual has been prepared in an effort to give to those interested in the trees of Georgia a means by which they may gain a more intimate knowledge of the tree species. Of about 250 species native to the state, only 92 are described here. These were chosen for their commercial importance, distribution over the state or because of some unusual characteristic. Since the manual is intended primarily for the use of the layman, technical terms have been omitted wherever possible; however, the scientific names of the trees and the families to which they belong, have been included. It might be explained that the species are grouped by families, the name of each occurring at the top of the page over the name of the first member of that family. Also, there is included in the text, a subdivision entitled KEY CHARACTERISTICS, the purpose of which is to give the reader, all in one group, the most outstanding features whereby he may more easily recognize the tree. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to express his appreciation to the Houghton Mifflin Company, publishers of Sargent’s Manual of the Trees of North America, for permission to use the cuts of all trees appearing in this manual; to B. R. Stogsdill for assistance in arranging the material; to W.
    [Show full text]
  • Native Plants for Conservation, Restoration & Landscaping
    ABOUT THE NATIVE PLANTS FOR CONSERVATION, WHAT ARE NATIVES? For more information, refer to field guides and publications RESTORATION AND LANDSCAPING PROJECT Native species evolved within specific regions and dispersed on local natural history for color, shape, height, bloom times This project is a collaboration between the Virginia Depart- throughout their range without known human involvement. and specific wildlife value of the plants that grow in your ment of Conservation and Recreation and the Virginia Native They form the primary component of the living landscape region. Visit a nearby park, natural area preserve, forest or Plant Society. VNPS chapters across the state helped to fund and provide food and shelter for wildlife management area to learn about common plant the 2011 update to this brochure. native animal species. Native associations, spatial groupings and habitat conditions. For The following partners have provided valuable assistance plants co-evolved with specific recommendations and advice about project design, throughout the life of this project: native animals over many consult a landscape or garden design specialist with thousands to millions of experience in native plants. The฀Nature฀Conservancy฀–฀Virginia฀Chapter฀•฀Virginia฀ years and have formed Tech฀Department฀of฀Horticulture฀•฀Virginia฀Department฀of฀ complex and interdependent WHAT ARE NON-NATIVE PLANTS? Agriculture฀and฀Consumer฀Services฀•฀Virginia฀Department฀ relationships. Our native Sometimes referred to as “exotic,” “alien,” or “non- of Environmental Quality, Coastal Zone Management fauna depend on native indigenous,” non-native plants are species introduced, Program฀•฀Virginia฀Department฀of฀Forestry฀•฀Virginia฀ flora to provide food and Department฀of฀Game฀and฀Inland฀Fisheries฀•฀Virginia฀ Native intentionally or accidentally, into a new region by cover.
    [Show full text]
  • Beekeeping in Turkey: Past to Present
    IRFAN KANDEMIR 85 BEEKEEPING IN TURKEY: PAST TO PRESENT Irfan Kandemir Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Ankara University, Turkey [email protected] Abstract Turkey is on the intersection of three continents and also located on two important trade routes of the past, namely the Spice and Silk Roads. Thus it played a very important role bridging Asia, Europe and Africa. Indeed Turkey was also the place where very important civilizations such as the Roman, Hittite, Byzantine, Ottoman and finally the modern Turkish Republic became established. Covering all of these civilizations beekeeping can be divided into three main periods, supported by archeological findings, the written laws of Ottomans and the present period of the new Republic. Although the findings in archeology and in the Ottoman period are scarce, the present period has Fig. 1 Two tablets found in Boğazköy (Hattuşaş) related to lots of information regarding beekeeping in Turkey. beekeeping laws (Sarıöz, 2006; Akkaya and Alkan, 2007). Archeological evidence of the Hittite Period main part, called Anatolian, is in Asia and the much comes from excavations in two sites in Turkey. Comb, smaller part is Thrace, the European part of Turkey. figures on the walls and the buzzing bees on the The whole country covers a total of approximately carpets are the signs of beekeeping in that area. 800,000 km2. In this vast geographical area different topographical and climatological features, shaped by In the Ottoman period, although there is not evolution, make for a wide variety of flora and fauna. much direct evidence of beekeeping, there are Over 10,000 plant species create huge biodiversity several laws attributable to beekeeping.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing and Controlling Invasive Rhododendron
    Practice Guide Managing and controlling invasive rhododendron Colin Edwards Forestry Commission: Edinburgh © Crown Copyright 2006 Applications for reproduction of any part of this publication should be addressed to: HMSO, Licensing Division, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. First published in 2006 by the Forestry Commission 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT. ISBN 0 85538 704 1 EDWARDS, C. (2006). Managing and controlling invasive rhododendron. Forestry Commission Practice Guide. Forestry Commission, Edinburgh. i–iv + 1–36 pp. Keywords: herbicides, invasive rhododendron, rhododendron control, Rhododendron ponticum. Printed in the United Kingdom on Robert Horne Hello Matt FCPG017/FC-GB(ECD)/IA-2K/SEP06 Enquiries relating to this publication should be addressed to: Forestry Commission 231 Corstorphine Road Edinburgh EH12 7AT T: 0131 334 0303 F: 0131 316 4344 E: [email protected] The author may be contacted at: Forest Research Northern Research Station Roslin Midlothian EH25 9SY T: 0131 445 2176 F: 0131 445 5124 E: [email protected] Acknowledgements The field experiments using herbicides were managed by the Technical Support Unit of Forest Research, especially D. Tracy. Bush growth and dispersal experiments were organised by D. Kohn, J. Travis, C. Stephenson and R. Atkinson. Disclaimer The list of products referred to in the tables of this Practice Guide is not comprehensive; other manufacturers may be able to provide products with equivalent characteristics. Reference to a particular
    [Show full text]
  • The Mechanisms for Terrorizing Minorities: the Capital Tax and Work Battalions in Turkey During the Second World War
    Çetinog˘lu: The Mechanisms for Terrorizing Minorities 15 The Mechanisms for Terrorizing Minorities: The Capital Tax and Work Battalions in Turkey during the Second World War Sait Çetinog˘lu Two policies against non- Muslim minorities implemented during the Second World War by the Turkish government are analyzed in this essay: (1) the Capital Tax (Varlik Vergisi) implemented as a means of economic destruction of these minorities from November 1942 to March 1944 and (2) the mobiliza- tion of minority young men aged 18 to 45 into the so- called work battalions (amele taburlari) from May 1941 to September 1942 as a reprise of the work battalions during World War I. The motivations, conditions, and implemen- tation of both antiminority measures are examined and their consequences discussed. The Capital Tax The Varlik Vergisi constitutes a dark chapter in the history of modern Tur- key. It was implemented during 1942 – 44 under the pretext of controlling the price of goods and preventing accumulation of capital in a few hands, even though the very same government had taken no measures to stop the expansion of a black market and consequent increase of illegal profits in the previous two years. Passed under the pretext of public complaints, this measure implemented a devastating economic destruction policy against non- Muslim minorities through heavy taxation, confiscation of properties, and exile of members of these groups to work camps. The aim was to destroy the economic and cultural base of these minorities, loot their properties and means of livelihood, and, at the same time, “turkify” the economy of Turkey.
    [Show full text]
  • Gene Conservation in European Beech (Fagus Sylvatica L.)
    Bocconea 7 - 1997 367 Gene conservation in European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) Ladislav Paule Abstract Paule, L.: Gene conservation in European beech (Faf!.us sylva/ica L.). - Bocconea 7: 367- 381. 1997. - ISSN 1120-4060. The European beech is one of the mOSl important broadleaved forest lree species in Europe occun'ing in vanous ecological conditions. After the establishment of numerolls provenance experirnents in this species (the last one containing 188 provenances and 23 trials), extensive genetic inventories in most part of ElIrope has been carri ed out. In si/u and ex si/u gene conservation in European beech is olltlined. Introduction The European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) is considered at present as the most common economically important broadleaved tree species in Europe. The extent of beech forests (Fagus sylvatica and F. orientalis together) in Europe andAsia Minor is estimated to be between 17 and 20 million ha (e.g. Milescu & al. 1967 estimate 16.8 million ha) and represents approximately IO % of European forests. The proportions of beech forests in individuaI regions represent frequently up to 30% of the total forest area (e.g the former Yugoslavia, Slovakia, Romania etc.) Both Fagus sylvatica and F. orientalis belong to the forest tre e species with the widest natural range in the western part of Eurasia (Fig. I). F. sylvatica is distributed in western, centrai and southern Europe with individuaI occurrences in southern England and southern Scandinavia. F. orientalis is distributed in Asia Minor, in Caucasus, in the Amanus mountains (Syria), and in the Elburz mountains (Iran). Contact zone between the natural ranges of both species runs in northern Greece and Bulgaria.
    [Show full text]
  • Pseudodidymellaceae Fam. Nov.: Phylogenetic Affiliations Of
    available online at www.studiesinmycology.org STUDIES IN MYCOLOGY 87: 187–206 (2017). Pseudodidymellaceae fam. nov.: Phylogenetic affiliations of mycopappus-like genera in Dothideomycetes A. Hashimoto1,2, M. Matsumura1,3, K. Hirayama4, R. Fujimoto1, and K. Tanaka1,3* 1Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Hirosaki University, 3 Bunkyo-cho, Hirosaki, Aomori, 036-8561, Japan; 2Research Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, 5-3-1 Kojimachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, 102-0083, Japan; 3The United Graduate School of Agricultural Sciences, Iwate University, 18–8 Ueda 3 chome, Morioka, 020-8550, Japan; 4Apple Experiment Station, Aomori Prefectural Agriculture and Forestry Research Centre, 24 Fukutami, Botandaira, Kuroishi, Aomori, 036-0332, Japan *Correspondence: K. Tanaka, [email protected] Abstract: The familial placement of four genera, Mycodidymella, Petrakia, Pseudodidymella, and Xenostigmina, was taxonomically revised based on morphological observations and phylogenetic analyses of nuclear rDNA SSU, LSU, tef1, and rpb2 sequences. ITS sequences were also provided as barcode markers. A total of 130 sequences were newly obtained from 28 isolates which are phylogenetically related to Melanommataceae (Pleosporales, Dothideomycetes) and its relatives. Phylo- genetic analyses and morphological observation of sexual and asexual morphs led to the conclusion that Melanommataceae should be restricted to its type genus Melanomma, which is characterised by ascomata composed of a well-developed, carbonaceous peridium, and an aposphaeria-like coelomycetous asexual morph. Although Mycodidymella, Petrakia, Pseudodidymella, and Xenostigmina are phylogenetically related to Melanommataceae, these genera are characterised by epi- phyllous, lenticular ascomata with well-developed basal stroma in their sexual morphs, and mycopappus-like propagules in their asexual morphs, which are clearly different from those of Melanomma.
    [Show full text]
  • The Red Beech at the “Montagna Di Torricchio”, Marche Region, Central Italy
    Available online: www.notulaebotanicae.ro Print ISSN 0255-965X; Electronic 1842-4309 Notulae Botanicae Horti AcademicPres Not Bot Horti Agrobo, 2019, 47(3):860-866. DOI:10.15835/nbha47311583 Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca Original Article The Red Beech at the “Montagna di Torricchio”, Marche Region, Central Italy Kevin CIANFAGLIONE 1,2 *, Franco PEDROTTI 1 1University of Camerino, School of Biosciences and Veterinary Medicine, Camerino (MC), Italy; [email protected] (*corresponding author); [email protected] 2Université de Bretagne Occidentale, EA 7462-Geoarchitecture, Brest, France Abstract For many centuries, red beech [( Fagus sylvatica L. var. purpurea (Ait.) Schneid.] was known as a botanical abnormality in botanical gardens and arboretums. Widespread artificially, red beech trees have been exploited for cultural, landscaping and botanical purposes, showing a wide horticultural, silvicultural and arboricultural interest. Over time, they may have escaped from cultivations or have been incorporated into forests by secondary successions, showing an important ecological and forestry interest. Red beeches represent a complex of phenotypes described under systematic critical taxa, showing an important floristic and taxonomic interest. Samples of red beech were found in nature, in central Adriatic Italy, in a fully protected area, namely the “Riserva Naturale Statale Montagna di Torricchio”. In order to analyse the origin of this odd shape beech variation, an interdisciplinary study was carried out integrating geography, ecology and forestry, analysing the bibliography, archival data, leaf traits, potential vegetation and the issues concerning the human-ecology relation. The results we obtained showed no evidence of artificial or accidental introduction for these specimens, suggesting treating them as a native and natural mutation in the beech forest secondary succession.
    [Show full text]