Szekessy Vilmos (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 59. (Budapest 1967)
Radics, F.: A revision of the Nymphaea material in Hungarian Natural History Museum
ANNALES HISTORICO-NATURALES MUSEI NATIONALIS HUNGARICI Tomus 59. PARS BOTANICA 1967. A Revision of the Nymphaea Material in Hungarian Natural History Museum By F. RADIOS, Budapest According to Soó and JÁVOBKA'S book, "A Manual of the Hungarian Flora", our Nymphaea alba L. (=Castalia alba WOODW. & WOOD) probably belongs mainly to ssp. melocarpa (CASPARY) A. & GR. The occurrence in Hungary of the related ssp. Candida (PRESL) A. & GR. is doubtful, the home data probably refer to var. minoriflora (BORB.) GRÄBN.; the identity of this latter with ssp. occidentalis (OSTENFELD) HYL. (var. minor D C) (BESL.) is controversial" (1). Prior to an examination of this statement, on the basis of the approximately 100 Nymphaea exemplars collected during a century in the Carpathian Basin and deposited in the Botanical Department of the Hungarian Natural History Museum, we must endeavour to disperse the obscurity inherent in the cast of the above dictum. On the basis, namely, that our wild waterlilies "probably belong mainly" to CASPARY'S melocarpa group, one might assume that there also occurs N. alba II. oocarpa CASPARY in Hungary (2) . And the forms of this group correspond, according to CASPARY'S final classification (3) , to N. Candida PRESL. However, the above manual also declares that the home occurrence of N. alba ssp. Candida (PRESL) A. & GR. "is doubtful". The data, it goes on to say, "probably refer to var. minoriflora (BORB.) GRÄBN.". On the other hand, N. alba var. minoriflora (BORB.) GRÄBN., belongs, according to GRÄBNER (4) "probably as a plant race", together with the concurrently listed N. alba minoriflora BORB. (Vésztő, Budapest) and Leuconymphaea alba var. minoriflora BORB. (Hévíz), within the collective species ("Gesamtart") N. alba (HERMANN), to the species N. alba L. As for N. alba var. occidentalis OSTENFELD, this variety is, if by nothing else the relatively long spines (attaining even 8 u.) of its pollen, of a definite alba-type (5), although its synonym, N. alba minor (BESL) DC, is identified by certain authors (e.g., GRAEBNER, c. ; CONARD, 6) with N. Candida PRESL. Accordingly, the possibilities listed in the Soó—JAVORKA Manual had not revealed more than what the final clause of its own identification key contains, namely that our home waterlilies belong to Nymphaea alba L. The unidentified "data" of the Manual probably refer to those literature data which had been listed by L. SIMONKAI (7) as the synonyms of Gastalia minoriflora (BORB.) SIMK., belonging to Gastalia speciosa SALISBURY, namely Leuconymphaea alba var. minoriflora BORB. (Hévíz), and Nymphaea alba var. Candida (Vésztő and Rákospatak). And the more so as SIMONKAI mentioned, with respect to the concurrently treated "race" Castalia Candida (PRESL) SIMK., that "Typicam Gastaliam candidam (PRESL) ex Hungária adhuc non vidi". There are no more relevant data in literature, save maybe in GURKE (8, p. 393) and CONARD (I.e., p. 173) who relegate N. alba var. Candida BORB. to N. alba PRESL. True, it was SJMONKAI himself who, in an earlier paper, mentioned Nymphaea neglecta HAUSLEUTNER from the lí Nymphaea-htook ,, near Arad (9), which would also refer to the occurrence of Nymphaea Candida PRESL in the Carpathian Basin. On the other hand, again, SIMONKAI refuted this occurrence not only by his later statement cited further above, but indirectly also by listing the "Nytnphaea-hrook" (in the "Csala" forest) near Arad
