Kaszab Zoltán (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 66. (Budapest 1974)

Ujhelyi, J.: Data to the systematics of the sections Bulbosae and Caespitosae of the genus Koeleria, XII.

•Gl 1906, 1935). No other cause can be brought forth for the failure by the Swiss floral work (1967) to revide the older and erroneous communications. Indeed, some of DOMIN'S correct inferences have also been invalidated (HESS, LANDOLT & HERZEL 1967), e. g. the plant Koeleria alpigena DOMIN has never even been menoned. Koeleria mannagettae (DOM.) UJH., was wholly omitted by HEGI'S second edition, — because DOMIN definitely considered it a hybrid. In my experimental garden, I am tending since some years Koeleria eriostachya PANC. from the Mts. Pirin, and Koeleria carniolica KERN, from the Triglav. Apart from becoming more robust and evolving stronger panicles and longer leaves in the optimum garden conditions, neither their morphological nor their anatomical characteristics have changed. The primordia of hairs still remain on the underside of the innovational leaves of Koeleria eriostachya PANC., and the blades of Koeleria •carniolica KERN, are still as glabrous as ever. Koeleria eriostachya species collectiva Subspec. II. K. Schroeteriana Domin DOMIN placed in this taxon plants with a lower stature, gracile and mostly pubescent culm, narrower leaves, entirely pubescent vaginae, (or the upper ones glabruos), less vividly coloured panicles (sometimes pallid), shorter (at most 5 mm long) spicules, and glumae shorter than the lemae. Besides var. typica, DOMIN distinguished four varieties. Two of these, namely 3. var. superba DOMIN and 5. var. pyrenaica DOMIN originate from the Pyrenees Gèdre ; both were collected by Bordere. In a previous paper [when discussing the Series Arenariue UJH. (ÚJHELYI 1969)]. I have pointed out that this Subspecies is a mixture of unrelated species. I have separated Koeleria pyrenaica (DOM.) UJH., as a distinct species, as a selfstanding member of the Series Albescentes, remarking that it is in no way related to the Eastern Balkanian Koeleria eriostachya PANC., or with the alpine Koeleria schroeteriana (DOM.) UJH. I have not seen var. superba DOMIN (it is in HACKEL'S herbarium), only an innovational shoot and a small part of the inflorescence {two spikelets) from the herbarium in Prague, as DOMIN'S authorship duplicate. They agree with Koeleria pyrenaica (DOM.) UJH., with merely their spiculae being bigger. They may represent a more adult or mature specimen, but also a higher ploid grade descendant of Koeleria pyrenaica (DOM.) UJH. DOMIN'S description also suggests this, according to which the panicle of the plant attains a length of 9 cm and a breadth of 3 cm — in no way corresponding to the alpine specimens. There is another duplicate, retained by DOMIN, in the collection of the University of Prague, with the following data: K. pubescens. Juin 70. Bayonne Basse Pyr. Hervier, BORDERE. The specimen is a single shoot with panicle, 14 cm long, the panicle 3,5 cm long. There is a single extravaginal innovation, not longer than 3 cm, from the incrassate rhizome. The plant is quite young, with panicle just having emerged from the vagina of the uppermost culm-blade ; the spikelets are glabrescent. Otherwise it agrees with Koeleria pyrenaica (DOM.) UJH. Nor are the alpine exemplars of Koeleria eriostachya Subspec. II. K. Schroeteriana DOMIN uniform. Among 1. var. typica DOMIN mentions an exsiccatum: Herbier du Pensionat des Frères de Clermont — Ferrand No. 174. K. eristata var. vestita Frère HÉRIBAUD (1877), No. 172. p.p. max., and another one from Vallesia: Kt. Neuchatel, 2. var. glabriglumis DOMIN, and mentioning var. Lehmanniana DOMIN from Vallesia and Cantal. Of the specimen published as C. SCHROETER.