B. Papp szerk.: Studia Botanica Hungarica 33. 2002 (Budapest, 2002)
Erzberger, Peter: Funaria muhlenbergii and Funaria pulchella (Funariaceae, Bryophyta) in Hungary
Baglyas-hegy prope Csór, alt. ca. 2-350 m.s.m. leg. Boros 28.3.1954; BP 114929: Comit. Fejér. In rupestribus dolomiticis montis Baglyas-hegy prope Inota, alt. ca. 2-300 m.s.m. leg. Boros 15.5.1955. Villány Mts - BP 166720: Comit. Baranya. In abrupte loessacea Macskalyuk in decl. merid. montis prope pag. Máriagyüd, alt. ca. 200-250 m.s.m. leg. B. Papp 8.8.1999 (PAPP and ERZBERGER 2000). Appendix 2. Evaluation of collection dates with respect to the phenology of sporophyte ripening In order to take account of the fact that specimens contain sporophytes in different stages of development, an attempt was made to estimate an approximate "day of dehiscence", i.e. the day when just 50% of the sporophytes are deoperculate. This day would be earlier than the date of collection, if the specimen contained mostly deoperculate sporophytes, but it would be later in case of unripe sporophytes. The corrections applied in this study are less than 7 days in all cases and were computed in the following way. First, the fraction of deoperculate sporophytes / was estimated in each specimen./ was then used to compute the "estimated day of dehiscence" d from the date of collection c (both counted in days from the beginning of March), using the following relationship: d = c + r (0.5 - f), where r is the range of the correction. In the present analysis, r = 13. Taking into consideration that in most populations development of sporophytes is not very synchronous, but shows rather great variation among individual plants, the value of 13 for the estimated range r of the correction appears rather low. Using higher values for r (e.g. 30 or 60) does not essentially alter the conclusions of the analysis. It has often been observed that sporophytes continue ripening after collection. Therefore, the phenological stage observed in a specimen need not be identical with the stage at the time of collection, but might show a higher percentage of deoperculate sporophytes. To examine the possible influence of post-collection ripening on the results, the mean value of/was calculated for the two species: In F. muhlenbergii f = 0.4606+0.06676, in F. pulchella f = 0.4711+0.05532 (mean + s.e.). In both cases/is not significantly different from 0.5 (t-test). If post-collection ripening was strong, the mean value for / would be expected to be higher than 0.5, provided the sample of specimens is not biased in favour of unripe sporophytes. However, there is no reason to assume that kind of bias; on the contrary, collectors would tend to pick up plants with rather ripe sporophytes if there is a choice. In principle, post-collection ripening might be different in the two species, especially since they differ in theca size. In a given specimen, post-collection ripening would result in a higher value of/and thus in a lower value of d, depending on the magnitude of the range r of the correction. However, the observed difference in sporophyte ripening of about 12-13 days is independent of the value of r and is also obtained for the uncorrected collection dates. It was therefore concluded that post-collection ripening of sporophytes did not influence the results.
