Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-j4qg9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T22:17:04.312Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IV.—The Gametophyte Generation of the Psilotaceæ

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

A. Anstruther Lawson
A. Anstruther Lawson
Affiliation:
Professor of Botany, University of Sydney.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the preliminary announcement of the discovery of the prothalli of Tmesipteris and Psilotum communicated to the Royal Society of Edinburgh in June 1916, a considerable amount of additional material has been found, and it seems therefore desirable to place on record a more detailed account of these interesting structures. The preliminary description, as published, was based upon but a few specimens, and these were not sufficient to reveal all of the vegetative and reproductive features, nor enough to justify any broad general conclusions as to the phylogenetic position of the Psilotaceæ. The discoyery, however, has filled in an important and interesting gap in our knowledge; for the Psilotaceæ are the very last of the known Pteridophytes to surrender their gametophytes to the light of science.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , 1918 , pp. 93 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1918

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Bertrand, C. Eg., “Recherches sur les Tmesipteridées,” Archives botaniques du Nord de la France, Lille, 1881–1883.Google Scholar
Bertrand, C. Eg., “Le type Tmesipteridée,” Bull, de la Soc. Bot. de France, Lille, t. xxx, Paris, 1883.Google Scholar
Bertrand, C. Eg., “Note sur la nature morphologique des rameaux aeriens des Psilotums adultes,” Bull, de la Soc. Bot. de France, 1883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boodle, L. A., “Secondary Tracheids in Psilotum,” New Phytologist, Feb. 1904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boodle, L. A., “On the Occurrence of Secondary Xylems in Psilotum,” Ann. Bot., No. 71, p. 505, 1904.Google Scholar
Bower, F. O., “Studies in the Morphology of Spore-producing Members, Equisetineæ and Lycopodineæ,” Phil. Trans., 1894.Google Scholar
Bower, F. O., “General Comparisons and Conclusions,” Phil. Trans., 1903.Google Scholar
Bower, F. O., The Origin of a Land Flora, Macmillan & Co., London, 1908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruchmann, H., Ueber die Prothallien und die Keimpflanze mehrerer europaiseher Lycopodien, Gotba, 1898.Google Scholar
Bruchmann, H., “Ueber das Prothallium und die Keimpflanze von Ophioglossum vulgatum,” Bot. Zeit., lxii, p. 227, 1904.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. H., Mosses and Ferns, London, 1913.Google Scholar
Darnell-Smith, G. P., “The Prothallus of Psilotum,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., 1916.Google Scholar
Ford, S. O., “The Anatomy of Psilotum triquetrum,” Ann. Bot., vol. xviii, No. 72, p. 589, 1904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, E. C., “The Structure and Development of the Stem in Pteridophyta and Gymnosperms,” Phii. Trans. Roy. Soc., 1902.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, E. C., “The Gametophyte of Botrychium virginianum,” Proc. Can. Inst., v, 1898.Google Scholar
Lang, W. H., “On the Prothalli of Ophioglossum pendulum, Helminthostachys zeylanica, and Psilotum” Proc. Roy. Soc., 1901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, W. H., “On the Prothallus provisionally referred to Psilotum” Ann. Bot., vol. xviii, 1904.Google Scholar
Lawson, A. A., “The Prothallus of Tmesipteris,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., 1916.Google Scholar
Lignier, O., “Equisétales et Sphenophyllales: leur origine Filicinéenne commune,” Bull, de la Soc. Linn. de Normandie, sér. 5, vol. vii, Caen, 1903.Google Scholar
Scott, D. H., Studies in Fossil Botany, London, 1900.Google Scholar
Scott, D. H., “On Cheirostrobus, a new type of Fossil Cone from the Lower Carboniferous Strata,” Phil. Trans., 1897.Google Scholar
Seward, A. C., Fossil Plants, Cambridge University Press, 1910.Google Scholar
Sykes, M. G., “The Anatomy and Morphology of Tmesipteris,” Ann. Bot., vol. xxii, No. 85, p. 63, 1908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A. W. P., “The Affinities of Tmesipteris with the Sphenophyllales,” Proc. Roy. Soc., vol. lxix, 1902.Google Scholar
Treub, M., “Études sur les Lycopodiacées,” Ann. du Jard. Bot. de Buitenzorg, 1886.Google Scholar
Vaughan Jennings, A., and Hall, K. M., “Notes on the Structure of Tmesipteris,” Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1891.Google Scholar
Whitelegge, T., “Notes and Exhibits,” Proc Linn. Soc. New South Wales, April 26, 1916.Google Scholar