Go to Naturalis.nl

Search results

Record: oai:ARNO:532491

AuthorC.G.G.J. van Steenis
JournalFlora Malesiana - Series 1, Spermatophyta
AbstractIn the former century Byblis was mostly included in the Droseraceae, for example by BENTHAM & HOOKER. f. (Gen. P1. 1, 1859, 220); even ENGLER had it in that position in 1912 (Syllabus ed. 7, 329). PLANCHON had in 1848 (Ann. Sc. Nat. III, 9, 1848, 80, 90) already pointed to affinity with Cheiranthera of the Pittosporaceae; HALLIER f. merged Byblis and Roridula with Tremandraceae, curiously referring this to an Ochnaceous assemblage (Abh. Gebiete Naturw. Hamburg 18, 1903, 53). About the same time LANG argued (Flora 88, 1901, 179) that on morphological and anatomical grounds Byblis cannot belong to Droseraceae, but should be referred to Lentibulariaceae.
DIELS (Pfl. R. Heft 26, 1907, 51) and DOMIN (Act. Bot. Bohem. 1, 1922, 1) definitely concluded to the alliance with Pittosporaceae, and so did HUTCHINSON (1926, 1959) and SCHULTZE-MENZ (Syllabus 1964): resemblance with Drosera is superficial, sympetaly unimportant. HALLIER f. and HUTCHINSON include the S. African genus Roridula also in the family Byblidaceae, but others regard this as an allied family.
Document typearticle
Download paperpdf document http://www.repository.naturalis.nl/document/570318