Matskási István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 87. (Budapest 1995)

Erdei, B.: The Sarmatian flora from Erdőbénye-Ligetmajor, NE Hungary

PALAEOCLIMATOLOGICAL RECONSTRUCTION I have attempted the palaeoclimatological reconstruction by means of two methods. 1. On the basis of the relations of species and their climatic demands. The xerophytic elements are dominant in the flora. However, it cannot be considered as being the same as the stereophyllous forests since the ratio of deciduous elements is extremely high. It can be compared principally with stereophyllous forests of the east Mediterranean region in which deciduous elements are also represented. The climate of that region and Ligetmajor must have been similar. The reason for the presence of mesophyl and riparian elements must have been the closeness of water. On the basis of the relations of species and the spread of the relative species we can conclude that the climate must have been a Mediterranean one with dry and hot summer and mild winter. Presumably it was drier than the climate of Kővágó-oldal. However, some tropical species could withdraw to the forest though only in a small number. 2. Another comparative method is leaf statistics. The area of the leaves were calculated from a formula (CAIN & CASTRO 1959): A=2/3(LxW) A = area of the leaf or leaflet in sq cm L = leaf length in cm W = leaf width in cm The leaves of Ligetmajor (916 specimens) and Kővágó-oldal (607 specimens) were ranged among the following leaf-size categories: leptophyll (up to 0.25 sq cm in area) nanophyll (0.25 - 2.25 sq cm in area) microphyll (2.25 - 20.25 sq cm in area) notophyll (20.25 - 45.0 sq cm in area) mesophyl 1 (45.0 - 182.25 sq cm in area) macrophyll (182.25 - 1640.2 sq cm in area) megaphyll ( 1640.2 sq cm in area) I have represented the results in Table 4. The leaf distribution of the two localités (Figs 21- 22) does not differ essentially; only the proportion of notophyll leaves is higher in the flora of Ligetmajor. However, we have to take into consideration that the probability of a bigger leaf's fossilization is much lower than that of a smaller one and the difference may also arise from the collection itself. On the basis of all these we can draw the conclusion that mainly small-sized leaves (nano- and microphyll) formed the floras. It is in accordance with the results of the previous observation since xerophytic elements have generally small-sized leaves. DISCUSSION Besides the classical localities in Erdőbénye (Barnamáj, Kővágó-oldal), another palaeobotanical site was found in a siliceous earth mine in the middle of the 50's. During exploitation deeper layers were opened and remains of plants were found in large quantities under a well stratified rhyolitic tuff layer which had fallen into water. On the basis of the findings we can draw some conclusions: The predominant species of the flora are Podogonium knorrii (A. BRAUN) HEER, Quercus kubinyii (KOVÁTS et ETT.) BERGER and Zelkova zelkovifolia (UNGER) BÖZEK et KOTLÁBA in KOTLÁBA. Since the majority of the flora is formed by Mediterranean and xerophytic elements