B. Papp szerk.: Studia Botanica Hungarica 33. 2002 (Budapest, 2002)

Erzberger, Peter: Funaria muhlenbergii and Funaria pulchella (Funariaceae, Bryophyta) in Hungary

DISCUSSION In the present study, all herbarium specimens in BP of the F. muhlenbergii group from Hungary have been assigned to either of the two species F. muhlenbergii and F. pulchella according to the morphological features detailed in Table 1 and in part illustrated in Figure 1. No intermediate forms have been found. However, earlier works dealing with this species group in Europe (LOESKE 1929, CRUNDWELL and NYHOLM 1974) come to the conclusion that intermediates do occur and that naming plants is sometimes not possible. In a wider geographical context, the occurrence of other taxa like F. convexa or the recently re-evaluated F. durieui Bescherelle (syn. Entosthodon schimperi Brugués; BRUGUÉS et al. 2001) may complicate the situation. Therefore, it may in part be due to their absence from Hungary that a clear-cut picture was obtained for this country. It follows that the morphological characters summarised in Table 1 are useful for the distinction of the two species in Hungary. It is possible that the use by earlier workers of other features like costa length, the twisting of the seta, exothecial areolation or peristome ornamentation, features less constant and less reliable, had obscured the concepts of the two species (LOESKE 1929, CRUNDWELL and NYHOLM 1974). Although the difference in stomatal number between F. muhlenbergii and F. pulchella had been noted and described in general terms like "frequent" and "less frequent", respectively, by earlier workers (e.g. LlMPRICHT 1895, DE SLOOVER and DEMARET 1968), in this study, for the first time, quantitative data on stomatal number are published. Since the number of stomata per sporophyte does not overlap and the difference in mean value is statistically highly significant, it appears that stomatal number is a discriminating character that can be used profitably in naming plants. Stomatal number in the two species is sufficiently different to allow the use of a less elaborate method for counting stomata than that described in the method section: in fact inspection of one side of an undissected capsule at low magnification (e.g. x40) may be sufficient. In a species complex where naming can be critical (CRUNDWELL and NYHOLM 1974), any additional character should be welcome. Therefore, it might be rewarding to examine other taxa of the F. muhlenbergii group with respect to stomatal number. Stomatal number as an additional sporophytic character could also be useful for the detection of hybrids. In other moss genera, e.g. Ulota, the taxonomic use of stomatal number may be restricted by a greater amount of variation within taxa, at least partly due to environmental conditions (ERZBERGER, in press). No indication for such variation was found in the present study in Hungarian Funaria, but data from wider regions,