DOCSLIB.ORG

Male Fructifications : American Species of Dolerotheca, 1Vjti-I Notes Regarding Certain Allied I'orms

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Male Fructifications : American Species of Dolerotheca, 1Vjti-I Notes Regarding Certain Allied I'orms STATE OF ILLINOIS AULAI E. S'TEVENSON, Govei of- DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION AND EDUCATION NOBLE J. PUFFER, Director DIVISION OF THE STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY M. M. LEIGI-IT'ON, CIzief URBAN-4 REPORT OF INVESTIGATlONS-NO. 132 PTERIDOSPERIV~MALE FRUCTIFICATIONS : AMERICAN SPECIES OF DOLEROTHECA, 1VJTI-I NOTES REGARDING CERTAIN ALLIED I'ORMS JAMES M. SCHOPF Rmw~-nsnFROM THE JOURNAL OF PALEONTOLOGY Vor,. 22, No. 6, NOVEMBEI~,1948 PRINTED BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS URBANA, ILLINOIS 1949 STATE OF ILLINOIS RON. ADLAI E. STEVENSON, Govevnov DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION AND EDUCATION HON. NOBLE J. PUFFER, Directov BOARD OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION i- : , . lilga HON. NOBLE J. PUFFER, Cltail-mars W. H. NEWHOUSE, Pi<.D., Gmlogy ROGER ADAMS, Pxx.D., D.Sc., Chemistry LOUIS R. HOWSON, C.E., Enginccrirtg A. E. EMERSON, PILD., Bwlogy LEWIS If. TIFFANY, Pzr.D., Forestry GEORGE D. STODDARD, PII.~.,LITT.D., LLD., L.H.D. Prrs[dent of the University of Illinois GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIVISION M. Ad. LEIGHTOM, Pn.D., Ckief SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL STAFF OF THE STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIVISTON 100 Natzwal Resozarces Building, Urba~za &I. M. LEIGNTON, PI~.D.,Chief ENID TOLVNLEY, M.S., Assistaut to tlzc Clzief VELDAA. MILLARD,Ji~.izior Asst, to the Cliicf HELENE. MCMORRIS,Secretam to tlte Chef BERENICEREED, Sztper~li.so~,jlfccle~tical Assistaizt GEOLOGICAL RESOURCES GEOCIIEMTSTRY FRANKIi. REED,PII.D., Clzief Clzemist (on leave) ARTIIURBEVAX, PJI. D., I).Sc., Pri11cifial Geologist GRACEC. JOTINSON,13. S., Resefl~cizAssistant Cod Cool G. H. CADY,~'H.D., Se1ziol' Geoloqi~fand Head C. R. Yoill.:. P~r.f) Clzer~tistand Head R J. HELFINSTIKERLS., Mec~~a;~icalE?tgineer iiu~rlC. IVILD~AN: M.S., Assistant Chelrzist R~BERT M. KOSAN~E M A. Associate Geolog~st \VM. F. L~RANGER,E.A., Reseal-ch Assista~zt JOHNA. HARRISOX,~I.s.', ~ssistalztGeologist JACKA. SIMON,M.S Asslsta~ttGeologist (on leave) RAYMONDSIEVER, M:k., Asszstn$zt Geologist MARYE. BARNESM.S.. A~szstu~ttGeologist J. S. ~IACIIIX,PJI.~)., Chemisl and Head MARGARETPARK&, B.S., A.ssista+zt Geologist TIN Boo YEE, M.S., Assistant Chemist KENNETHCLEGG, Tc~I~~~rcal Assistalzt I'AULEN~EKU AN, B.A., Rescc~rrlzAssistarzt 1;luor.rpar Oil and Gas G. C. FINGER,1'11. I) Chewist and Head 4. H. BELL,PII.D., Ge010gi.st n~ldHead Ho~srG SCIINEIDER" B S Special Assistant Cke~~zist FREDERICKSQUIRES, A.B., B.S., Petroleunl Elrgi~teer- WILLIA; FREDERICK' BUT;, R.S., Special Researclz ])AVID H. SWANNPH.D., Geologzst Asszstant V~RGINIAI<LI NE,'PII.D Associate Geologist RICHARDBLOUGII, B.A., Research Asststalzt WAYNEF. MEENTS,A&stavt Geologist ROBERTE. OESTERLING,R.A., Sfiecial Research RIC!IARD J. CASSIN,B.S., Assistawt PetvoIe~~~iEll- Assistant g'lneeie J.zhr~sL. FINNERTY,B.S., Sl~eciaIResearch Assistant LESTERW. CLUTTERB.S. Researclz Assistant Nnxcu CASSIN,B.s.,' ~eseirclzAssistant Clz PIIIicoI Efjgis1~erig1.q Id. \Ir. JACK~IIN, M.S.E., Cl~e~iiz~alEagi~zeer and Head J. E. L.~M.~R,B.S., Geologist md Head 3'. 1%' HENLINLM.S., CIZCI~Z~CC~IEltgineer JIOBERTM GHOGANPIT. D., Geologist B. J. 'GREEN WOO;, B. S. Meclzanical E~zgmeer RAYMONDS. SIIROD;, B.S., Assistant Geologist JAMESC. RICCULLOUGII~ Research Associate S-rcry n17d Specilvgraplzy Clay Resources adClay ikli~ze~alTech~zology W. F. BRADLEY,PII.~., Cherriist aud Head RALPH E. GRIM P11.D Petrogt-aplwr and Head WILLIAMA. LVLITE &i?~.Associnte Geologist HERBERTD. GLASS,MA, kssocinte Geologist KENNETIIB. TS~UBISON,1'11.0., PIzy~icist Groundwater Geology and Geophysical R. J. PIERSOL,I'II.T~., Physicist Enzeritus Explomfion CARLA. BAYS,PKD., Geologist curd Engi~zecf;and '0. W. REES, P11.U C'he~?iistand Head Head IJ.D. MCVICKER,B.'s., CIzentist ROBERTR. STORMA.B., Associate Geologist HOWARDS CLARK A.B Assoczate Chemist MERLYN B. BUI~LE, 1I.S. Associnte Geologist EMILI 1). 'PIEIIRO~,&I.$., Assistant Chemist M. W,PULLEN, JR., RLS' Asxocrnte Geologi~t ELIZABETHBARTZ, A.B., Research Assistant JOITN W. FOSTER,R.A., ';lsscstn~tt Geologist T~ONALD RUSSELLHILL, B. S., Research Assistalzt RICIIARDF. 171s1~E~h1.S Ass~sta~ztGeologist RUTH E. KOSKI, B.S., Reseai,ch Assistant MARGARETJ. CASTL~ As&tant Geologzc Drafts~zall ANNABELLEG. ELLIOTT,B. S., Techlzical Assistant ROBERTKNODLE, &I.s'., Assistant Geologist MINERAL ECONOMICS E~gineeringGeology and Topograplaic Milflpiug \V. H. VO~KUILPl1.D Mineral Eco~zornist GEORGEE. EKBLAW.PH.~)., Geologist a~tdHead W L. Bvsclr '~esear&Associate NINA I~AMRICI;,A.M., Assistant Mil~eralEcolzofi~ist Areal Geology and Paleon,tology ETJIELM. KING, Research Assistant H. B. WILLMAN,PH.D., Geologist and Head EDUCATIONAL EXTENSION HEINZA. LOWENSTAM,PII.D., Geologist (on leave) GILBERT 0. RAASCII,PII.D., Associate Geologist J. S. TEMPLETON,PII. I)., Geologi~t i~tClzarge I)OROTRYRANNEY, B.S., Tcch~iicalAssista~zt S~dmwface Geology L. E. WORKMAN,M.S., Geologist a?$d Head LIBRARY ELWOODATITERTON, PII.D., Assocaate Geologist ANNEE. KOYANDA,B.S., B.L.S Librarian PAUL HERBERTJR., B.S., Associate Geologist RUBYD. FREON, Technical ~sssstant DOXALDSAXBY,' M.S., Assistant Geologist ROBERTC. MCDONALD,B.S., Research Assista~qt PUBLICATIONS LOIS TITUS, B.S., Researclz Assistant DOROTSLYE. ROSE B.S. Tech&al Editor 34. ELIZABET~~ST~AKS, B.s., Assistant Editor Mi~zeg~alResource Records MEREDITHM. CALKINS,Geologic Draftsma~z VIVIAN ORD DON Head ARDISD. PYE, Asristant G~ologicDraftsnzan HARRIETC. DA~IELS,B.A., Trclznicnl Assista~zt WAYNEW. NOFFTZ,Tech?zical Assistant DOROTHYGone, B.S., Teclznical Assistaqzt LESLIE 1). VAUGIIAN,Associate Photographer DOROTHYA. FOUTCH,Teclzlzical Assistant EEULAIIM. UNFER,Tech~iical Assistant ZORAM. KAYINSKY, B.E., Teclz~~ictrlAssistrrlrt +tcti~igCl~icf Chemist in interim of ahsence of ELENEROBERTS, Techn~cul Assistnnt Cliief Chemist. Consultants: Geology GEORGEW. WIIITE PH.D University of Illinois eram mi is RALPII K. HURSJI' B.S ?.JniveYsity of Illinois ~echar~ihEnginee~i+zg SE~CIII KONZO M.S University of Illi~~ois Topographic Mapping in Cooperation ;it11 the United htates'beological Survey. January 10, 1949 PTERIDOSPERM MALE FRUCTIFICATIONS : AMERICAN SPECIES OF DOLEROTHECA, WITH NOTES REGARDING CERTAIN ALLIED FORMS JAMES M. SCHOPF U. S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. ABSTRACT-Dolerothecaincludes a group of pteridosperms (Medullosaceae) char- acterized by very large and unusual pollen-bearing organs. Their botanical per- tinence to plant microfossil studies and to phyletic theories, as well as their rarity in good preservation, lends considerable interest to these fossils. The morphology of the polleniferous organs, or male fructifications, is reviewed preliminary to taxonomic treatment of the new American material. Three new species are described in considerable detail both as to general external form and internal organization-a result possible only because of preservation in the limestone concretions in coal beds known as coal balls. The species of Dolerotheca are assembled in a new sub-tribe called the Dolerothecinae. The evidence for relating these forms with other coal- ball fossils known as Myeloxylon, and, in turn, with Medullosa, is discussed with par- ticular reference to one species where the peduncular organ of attachment seems to be preserved. Notes are also included regarding a specimen of Dolerotheca pre- served in surface imprint in an ironstone concretion, and regarding the allied Whit- tleseyinean group classed as Codonotheca. The relationships and comparative anatomy of Dolerotheca with other pteridosperm groups that present homologous features are discussed and a tentative evolutionary interpretation presented. Hetero- theca of the Lower Carboniferous appears to represent a plausible ancestral type, combining features of both the lyginopterid and medullosan lines of descent. The morphology of Dolerotheca suggests, however, that evolutionary modification has been by elaboration and septation of a single telomic structure rather than by adna- tion and concrescence of many. INTRODUCTION that differ radically from organs known in HE male fructifications of pteridosperms ferns. A more complete understanding of the are less well understood than most of characteristics and the nature of the diver- the other organs pertaining to this large sity of male fructifications in pteridosperms group of ancient plants. The fact that a will have important influence on ideas of considerable number of the Paleozoic fern- phylogeny and relationship among this like plants bore seeds and hence were not large, chiefly Paleozoic, plant alliance. true ferns, in spite of their highly dissected Among the pteridosperms the plants or pinnatifid leaves, became established classified as Dolerothecn display conspicuous about 45 years ago. Since then a number of differences with regard to their male fruc- pteridosperm seed types have become well tifications. Such fructifications of Dolerotheca known; on the other hand an equivalent have not been comnlonly reported, and up amount of information has not been ob- to the time specimens here described were tained about the male fructifications de- discovered, only a single fragment was spite the fact they must have been numer- known which showed well preserved tissue ous. Some of the first recognized pterido- structures. A few surface impressions and sperms seemed to have male fructifications coalified compressions of sirnilar fructi- resembling the synangia of ferns. These fications have been recognized, but these are organs were presumed to be conservative difficult to interpret and naturally afforded and little modified in the evolutionary tran- much less conclusive information about sition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Translation of the Linnaean Dissertation the Invisible World
    BJHS 49(3): 353–382, September 2016. © British Society for the History of Science 2016 doi:10.1017/S0007087416000637 A translation of the Linnaean dissertation The Invisible World JANIS ANTONOVICS* AND JACOBUS KRITZINGER** Abstract. This study presents the first translation from Latin to English of the Linnaean disser- tation Mundus invisibilis or The Invisible World, submitted by Johannes Roos in 1769. The dissertation highlights Linnaeus’s conviction that infectious diseases could be transmitted by living organisms, too small to be seen. Biographies of Linnaeus often fail to mention that Linnaeus was correct in ascribing the cause of diseases such as measles, smallpox and syphilis to living organisms. The dissertation itself reviews the work of many microscopists, especially on zoophytes and insects, marvelling at the many unexpected discoveries. It then discusses and quotes at length the observations of Münchhausen suggesting that spores from fungi causing plant diseases germinate to produce animalcules, an observation that Linnaeus claimed to have confirmed. The dissertation then draws parallels between these findings and the conta- giousness of many human diseases, and urges further studies of this ‘invisible world’ since, as Roos avers, microscopic organisms may cause more destruction than occurs in all wars. Introduction Here we present the first translation from Latin to English of the Linnaean dissertation published in 1767 by Johannes Roos (1745–1828) entitled Dissertatio academica mundum invisibilem, breviter delineatura and republished by Carl Linnaeus (1707– 1778) several years later in the Amoenitates academicae under the title Mundus invisibi- lis or The Invisible World.1 Roos was a student of Linnaeus, and the dissertation is important in highlighting Linnaeus’s conviction that infectious diseases could be trans- mitted by living organisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Sahanaj Jamil Associate Professor of Botany M.L.S.M. College, Darbhanga
    Subject BOTANY Paper No V Paper Code BOT521 Topic Taxonomy and Diversity of Seed Plant: Gymnosperms & Angiosperms Dr. Sahanaj Jamil Associate Professor of Botany M.L.S.M. College, Darbhanga BOTANY PG SEMESTER – II, PAPER –V BOT521: Taxonomy and Diversity of seed plants UNIT- I BOTANY PG SEMESTER – II, PAPER –V BOT521: Taxonomy and Diversity of seed plants Classification of Gymnosperms. # Robert Brown (1827) for the first time recognized Gymnosperm as a group distinct from angiosperm due to the presence of naked ovules. BENTHAM and HOOKSER (1862-1883) consider them equivalent to dicotyledons and monocotyledons and placed between these two groups of angiosperm. They recognized three classes of gymnosperm, Cyacadaceae, coniferac and gnetaceae. Later ENGLER (1889) created a group Gnikgoales to accommodate the genus giankgo. Van Tieghem (1898) treated Gymnosperm as one of the two subdivision of spermatophyte. To accommodate the fossil members three more classes- Pteridospermae, Cordaitales, and Bennettitales where created. Coulter and chamberlain (1919), Engler and Prantl (1926), Rendle (1926) and other considered Gymnosperm as a division of spermatophyta, Phanerogamia or Embryoptyta and they further divided them into seven orders: - i) Cycadofilicales ii) Cycadales iii) Bennettitales iv) Ginkgoales v) Coniferales vi) Corditales vii) Gnetales On the basis of wood structure steward (1919) divided Gymnosperm into two classes: - i) Manoxylic ii) Pycnoxylic The various classification of Gymnosperm proposed by various workers are as follows: - i) Sahni (1920): - He recognized two sub-divison in gymnosperm: - a) Phylospermae b) Stachyospermae BOTANY PG SEMESTER – II, PAPER –V BOT521: Taxonomy and Diversity of seed plants ii) Classification proposed by chamber lain (1934): - He divided Gymnosperm into two divisions: - a) Cycadophyta b) Coniterophyta iii) Classification proposed by Tippo (1942):- He considered Gymnosperm as a class of the sub- phylum pteropsida and divided them into two sub classes:- a) Cycadophyta b) Coniferophyta iv) D.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxonomic Utility of Old Names in Current Fungal Classification and Nomenclature: Conflicts, Confusion & Clarifications
    Mycosphere 7 (11): 1622–1648 (2016) www.mycosphere.org ISSN 2077 7019 Article – special issue Doi 10.5943/mycosphere/7/11/2 Copyright © Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences Taxonomic utility of old names in current fungal classification and nomenclature: Conflicts, confusion & clarifications Dayarathne MC1,2, Boonmee S1,2, Braun U7, Crous PW8, Daranagama DA1, Dissanayake AJ1,6, Ekanayaka H1,2, Jayawardena R1,6, Jones EBG10, Maharachchikumbura SSN5, Perera RH1, Phillips AJL9, Stadler M11, Thambugala KM1,3, Wanasinghe DN1,2, Zhao Q1,2, Hyde KD1,2, Jeewon R12* 1Center of Excellence in Fungal Research, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai 57100, Thailand 2Key Laboratory for Plant Biodiversity and Biogeography of East Asia (KLPB), Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Science, Kunming 650201, Yunnan China3Guizhou Key Laboratory of Agricultural Biotechnology, Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guiyang 550006, Guizhou, China 4Engineering Research Center of Southwest Bio-Pharmaceutical Resources, Ministry of Education, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, Guizhou Province, China5Department of Crop Sciences, College of Agricultural and Marine Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University, P.O. Box 34, Al-Khod 123,Oman 6Institute of Plant and Environment Protection, Beijing Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, No 9 of ShuGuangHuaYuanZhangLu, Haidian District Beijing 100097, China 7Martin Luther University, Institute of Biology, Department of Geobotany, Herbarium, Neuwerk 21, 06099 Halle, Germany 8Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Uppsalalaan 8, 3584CT Utrecht, The Netherlands. 9University of Lisbon, Faculty of Sciences, Biosystems and Integrative Sciences Institute (BioISI), Campo Grande, 1749-016 Lisbon, Portugal. 10Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Faculty of Agriculture, Chiang Mai University, 50200, Thailand 11Helmholtz-Zentrum für Infektionsforschung GmbH, Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Male Fructifications of Glossopteridales
    SOME MALE FRUCTIFICATIONS OF GLOSSOPTERIDALES K. R. SURANGE & SHAlLA CHANDRA Birbal Salmi Institute of Palaeobotany, Lucknow ABSTRACT Surange and Maheshwari (1970) recently A long, slender, stalked cylindrical male fructi• described two spt;cies of Eretmonia from fication, described earlier by Surange (1957), has India which differed from each other in the been named here as Kendastrabus cylindricus gen. shape aad size of their fertile leaves. They et sp. novo4-5 sporangia are arranged in whorls and bore sporangia in two clusters carried on these whorls are borne in close spirals on the cone axis. Its monolete, striped spores are named Ken• a pair of branches which were attached on dasparites. A new species of Eretmania, E. avata, the leaf stalk. The sporangia were found another male fructification, is also described. It is in groups of 6 to 8. shown that in Eretmania, as in Glassatheca, the Another male fructification of Glossop• sporangia are carried on the ultimate branches of a teris known from India is Glossotheca dichotomizing branch system. (Surange & Maheshwari, 1970; Surange & Chandra, 1974). It consists of a INTRODUCTION stalked fertile leaf with Glossopteris type of venation. The stalk of the fertile leaf bears three or more pedicels. Each pedicel ARBERfrom Australia(1905) wasretort-shapedthe first to discoversporan-, bifurcates into two branches and eacq gia associated with the scale leaves branch further divides by repeated dicho• of Glossopteris browniana, agreeing more tomy. The final slender branches bear closely with the microsporangia of a cycad. one sporangium each. Du Toit (1932) described a scale leaf as These are the only records of sporangia Eretmonia, which bore sporangia similar and male fructifications with suspected to those described by Arber and regarded affinities to Glossopteridales.
    [Show full text]
  • Zingiberaceae)
    Breeding Science Preview This article is an Advance Online Publication of the authors’ corrected proof. doi:10.1270/jsbbs.13070 Note that minor changes may be made before final version publication. Research Paper Differentiation in fructification percentage between two morphs of Amomum tsaoko (Zingiberaceae) Yao-Wen Yang1,2), Zi-Gang Qian1), Ai-Rong Li2), Chun-Xia Pu1,2), Xiao-Li Liu1) and Kai-Yun Guan*2) 1) The Center for Reproducing Fine Varieties of Chinese Medicinal Plants, Yunnan College of TCM, Kunming 650500, China 2) Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650204, China Amomum tsaoko is a flexistylous ginger. Flexistyly is a unique floral mechanism promoting outcrossing, which is known only in some species of Zingiberaceae till date. This is a pioneer report on flexistyly in A. tsaoko from the aspect of fructification percentage to clarify its influence on reproduction. We observed in 2007 and 2008 that the fructification percentage of the anaflexistyled and the cataflexistyled inflorescence were 14.89 ± 10.35% and 11.31 ± 7.91% respectively, with significant difference (d.f. = 141.920, t = 2.518, P = 0.013 < 0.05). The greatly significant difference between 2007 and 2008 were present in both the flower number (d.f. = 93, t = –2.819, P = 0.006 < 0.01) and the fructification percentage (d.f. = 93, t = –2.894, P = 0.005 < 0.01) of the cataflexistylous inflorescence. Although the two morphs were similar in morpho- logical characteristics, there was some gender differentiation between them, showing a possibility that the anaflexistylous morph might function more as females and the cataflexistylous morph more as males.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Full Text PDF (646KB)
    88 ELBERT L. SLEEPER Vol. 60 SOME NEGLECTED ASPECTS OF PLANT MICROFOSSIL RESEARCH CHARLES J. FELIX Sun Oil Company, Richardson, Texas The increased utilization of plant microfossils, especially by industry, has served to emphasize problems which have existed for many years. One of these is the difficult problem of classification and the urgent need of giving it serious attention. There is also an increasing disregard for the botanical affinities of microfossils. This is somewhat disturbing since we are dealing with the field of biology and with entities possessing botanical significance. There are numerous reasons for the existing ambiguity in plant microfossil classification, and con- tinuance of many present practices may well result in a taxonomic maze that will serve to impede progress in pollen and spore research. A general tendency to ignore natural affinities of dispersed spores is evident with even a brief perusal of current literature, and the presence of a few arbitrary features common between entities is being increasingly used as a classification tool. Part of the cause is readily apparent since plant microfossils have proven to be useful operational tools with industrial applications, and there is a natural desire to put the entities to practical usage as quickly as feasible. Very often it is possible to make stratigraphic correlations with plant spores or pollen without regard to their natural affinities. There are numerous classification systems, all probably useful to some degree, none completely satisfactory, and all contributing further to the entangled nomen- clature of plant reproductive disseminules. Most of these studiously avoid any systematic treatment using demonstrated connections between fructifications and their spores.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Structures of the Glossopteridales in the Plant Fossil Collection of the Australian Museum
    AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS White, M. E., 1978. Reproductive structures of the Glossopteridales in the plant fossil collection of the Australian Museum. Records of the Australian Museum 31(12): 473–505, including Acknowledgments and References published in October, 1978. [30 June 1978]. doi:10.3853/j.0067-1975.31.1978.223 ISSN 0067-1975 Published by the Australian Museum, Sydney naturenature cultureculture discover discover AustralianAustralian Museum Museum science science is is freely freely accessible accessible online online at at www.australianmuseum.net.au/publications/www.australianmuseum.net.au/publications/ 66 CollegeCollege Street,Street, SydneySydney NSWNSW 2010,2010, AustraliaAustralia REPRODUCTIVE STRUCTURES OF THE GLOSSOPTERIDALES IN THE PLANT FOSSIL COLLECTION OF THE AUSTRALIAN MUSEUM MARY E. WHITE, Research Associate, The Australian Museum, Sydney. SUMMARY A new, Late Permian Glossopteris fructification genus Squamella is erected. It comprises cones (the 'terminal buds' of Walkom, 1928) which are aggregations of 'scale-fronds' bearing sporangia or seeds. The cones are borne terminally on branch lets which had foliage leaves in whorls or close spiral arrangement, and modified, gangamopteroid leaves preceded the cones. Scale-fronds were composed of a deciduous scale (the 'squamae' of Glossopteris assemblages) and a laminal segment. Fructifications were attached to the scale-fronds at the line of junction of scale and lamina. Three new species of the genus are described: Squamella australis, which is the male cone of Glossopteris linearis McCoy and is known in attachment to a leaf whorl of that species; Squamella amp/a, which is referred to G/ossopteris amp/a Dana'; and Squamella ovulifera, which is a female cone whose foliage is unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • Transactions Geological Society of Glasgow
    Downloaded from http://trngl.lyellcollection.org/ at Carleton University Library on June 30, 2015 TRANSACTIONS OP THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF GLASGOW. No. I.—ON THE FRUCTIFICATION AND INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF CARBONIFEROUS FERNS IN THEIR RELATION TO THOSE OF EXISTING GENERA, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO BRITISH PALAEOZOIC SPECIES. WITH FOUR PLATES [NOS. I. TO IV.] By ROBERT KIDSTON, F.R.S.E., F.G.S. [Read 14th March, 1889.) I HAVE great pleasure in acceding to the request of your Secretary to bring this paper before the members of the Geological Society of Glasgow, especially as immediately surrounding this city are large coal-fields, rich in the remains of the extinct flora which is to engage our attention for a short time this evening. This paper has been suggested to me from a question often asked by beginners in the study of Palaeozoic Botany, " In what book can I find the descriptions of British species?" Unfortu­ nately this question cannot be answered, as no complete work on the British palaeozoic flora has yet been published, and what has been written on the subject is, with few exceptions, scattered through the IVansactions of various Societies which are frequently inaccessible to students of fossil botany, except to those in some of our large centres of population. But let us suppose that the beginner has access to all papers hitherto published on British palasozoic botany, none the less will he soon meet with species which, if previously recorded from Britain, are certainly not described in any English work. One therefore must make their identifications in great part from the writings of foreign authors.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbals, Their Origin and Evolution, a Chapter in the History of Botany
    CORNELL UNIVEkSITY LIBRARY BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE Library cornel, university ^^ ^^"^^ a ch „ and evolution, DATE DUE HERBALS THEIR ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION A CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY OF BOTANY 1470— 1670 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS aonDon: FETTER LANE, E.G. C. F. GLAY, Manager EBiniutgf) : loo, PRINCES STREET ILantOn: WILLIAM WESLEY & SON, 28, ESSEX STREET, STRANU Berlin : A. ASHER & CO. Ecipjig: F. A. BROCKHAUS i^cbj iorft: G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS Bombag anS Calcutta: MACMILLAN & CO., Ltd. Ail rights reserved LEONHARI) KUCHS (1501 — 1566). hntoria stufijnn, 1542 [Enura\'ing by Sperklc in l)e Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924019103872 HERBALS THEIR ORIGIN AND EVOLUTION A CHAPTER IN THE HISTORY OF BOTANY 1470— 1670 BY AGNES ARBER (Mrs E. A. NEWELL ARBER) D.Sc, F.L.S., FELLOW OF NEWNHAM COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE AND OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, LONDON G>K c. /^^4 !\i.lz^^zZ CTambttiigE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVEKSITY PRESS -,3" TO MY FATHER H. R. ROBERTSON "Wherefore it maye please your...gentlenes to take these my labours in good vvorthe, not according unto their unworthines, but accordinge unto my good mind and will, offering and gevinge them unto you." William Turner's Herbal, 1568. PREFACE TO add a volume such as the present to the existing multitude of books about books calls for some apology.
    [Show full text]
  • Systema Naturae '735
    ~j loe ,1 ,', Qt. ,;t Ll3 573 IIi,l /735 II "Ii ,I ,, CAROLUS LINNAEUS SYSTEMA NATURAE '735 FACSIMILE OF THE FIRST EDITION With (m introductioll alJd a first Ellgiish trallsiatioll of thc IfObscrvatioticS" BY DR M. S. J. ENGEL·LEDEBOER AND DRR. ENGEL Professor of Zoology at the University of Amsterdam LlNNAEUS ~ENC'LD"AW'NC BY AN UNKNOWN MASTER (from T. Tullberg, LinncpOItriitt. Stockhohn, 1907. Plate 1lI) NIEUWKOOP 0 B. DE GRAAF MCMLXXY Introduction CAROLUS LINNAEUS AND THE SYSTEMA NATURAE HEN LINNAEUS arrived in Holland in 1735 the Systema Naturae, as here again Wwe present it to the public, was among the many unpublished manuscripts he had taken with him in his 'luggage. His life has been told over and over again, by himself and by others1). From his biographies we learn how Linnaeus became interested in the secrets of nature, how he had a feeling that God Himself led him during his life, permitted him to have a look into His secret council chamber2). He considered the discovery of the p!Ocre­ ation in plants his most important contribution to botany, as it revealed "the very footprints of the Creator"S). The system of nature was to him the wOIkingplan underlying Creation. That is why he tried. to trace a "Systema Naturae", in botany first, then also in zoology and in mineralogy. It was first announced by him in Hamburgische Berichte von nenen gelehrten Sachen auf das Jahr 1735, nr. 46, 10 Juni, p. 3864). It was the first MS to be printed (after the Doctor's Thesis) in Holland.
    [Show full text]
  • Systems and How Linnaeus Looked at Them in Retrospect
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE Systems and How Linnaeus Looked at Them in Retrospect AUTHORS Müller-Wille, S JOURNAL Annals of Science DEPOSITED IN ORE 04 December 2013 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10871/14147 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication This article was downloaded by: [62.56.100.106] On: 03 December 2013, At: 13:20 Publisher: Taylor & Francis Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Annals of Science Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tasc20 Systems and How Linnaeus Looked at Them in Retrospect S. Müller-Wille a a University of Exeter , UK Published online: 08 Jun 2013. To cite this article: S. Müller-Wille (2013) Systems and How Linnaeus Looked at Them in Retrospect, Annals of Science, 70:3, 305-317, DOI: 10.1080/00033790.2013.783109 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00033790.2013.783109 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between a Plant and Its Place in Sixteenth
    Gardens & Landscapes ‘Where have all the flowers grown’: the relationship between a plant and its place in sixteenth-century botanical treatises Lucie Čermáková DOI 10.2478/glp-2019-0010 Gardens and Landscapes, Sciendo, nr 6 (2019), pp. 20-36. URL: https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/glp/glp-overview.xml ABSTRACT The article investigates Renaissance naturalists’ views on the links between plants and places where they grow. It looks at the Renaissance culture of botanical excursions and observation of plants in their natural environment and analyses the methods Renaissance naturalists used to describe relations between plants and their habitat, the influence of location on plants’ substantial and accidental characteristics, and in defining species. I worked mostly with printed sixteenth-century botanical sources and paid special attention to the work of Italian naturalist Giam- battista Della Porta (1535–1615), whose thoughts on the relationship between plants and places are original, yet little known. Keywords: History of Botany, History of Ecology, History of Empiricism, Giambattista Della Porta ARTICLE Introduction: Context Matters In the context of emergence of modern botany, some historians speak of a ‘decontextualization’ of plants. In the sixteenth century, we witness the development of new practices and methodological approaches which took plants out of their natural environment and placed them in new contexts. Plants were transplanted, pulled out, and dried to be measured and compared (JACOBS 1980; ATRAN 1990: 134; OGILVIE 1996: 222). But that is only part of the story of flourishing specialised interest in plants in the sixteenth century. Andrea Ubrizsy Savoia recently drew attention to the fact that Renaissance scholars were also interested in the relationship between plants and their environment.
    [Show full text]