Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Taxonomy and phylogeny

  • Published:
The Botanical Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Adanson, M. Familles des plantes. 1763.

  2. Anderson, E. The problem of species in the northern blue flag,Iris versicolor L. andIris virginica L. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard.15: 241–332. 1928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. — Internal factors affecting discontinuity between species. Am. Nat.65: 144–148. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. — Origin of the angiosperms. Nature133: 462. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. — The species problem inIris Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard.23: 457–509. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. — Supra-specific variation in nature and in classification. Am. Nat.71: 223–235. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. — Cytology in its relation to taxonomy. Bot. Rev.3: 335–350. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. — The hindrance to gene recombination imposed by linkage: an estimate of its total magnitude. Am. Nat.73: 185–188. 1939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. — Recombination in species crosses. Genetics24: 668–698. 1939.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. — The genus concept. A survey of modern opinion. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club67: 363–369. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. —, andAbbe, E. C. A quantitative comparison of specific and generic differences in the Betulaceae. Jour. Arn. Arb.15: 43–49. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  12. —, andOwnbey, R. P. The genetic coefficients of specific difference. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard.26: 325–348. 1939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. —, andTurrill, W. B. Biometrical studies on herbarium material. Nature136: 986. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. — Statistical studies on two populations ofFraxinus. New Phyt.37: 160–172. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Anderson, E., andWhitaker, T. W. Speciation inUvularia Jour. Arn. Arb.15: 28–42. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ankermann, F. Die Phylogenie der Monocotyledonen. Bot. Arch.19: 1–78. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Arber, A. Monocotyledons: a morphological study. 1925.

  18. — The tree habit in angiosperms: its origin and meaning. New Phyt.27: 69–84. 1928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Arber, A. The Gramineae. 1934.

  20. Arber, A. Herbals. 1938.

  21. Arber, E. A. N. Devonian floras: a study of the origin of Cormophyta. 1921.

  22. —, andParkin, J. The origin of angiosperms. Jour. Linn. Soc.38: 29–80. 1907.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Artz, T. Über die Embryobildung von Pseudomonokotylen. Beih. Bot. Centr.50: 671–696. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Avdulov, N. P. Karyo-systematische Untersuchung der Familie Gramineen. Bull. Appl. Bot. Suppl.44: 1–428. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  25. — Karyologische Ergänzungsdaten zur Systematik der Gramineen. Bull. Appl. Bot.2: 131–136. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Babcock, E. B. Phylogeny in the light of genetics and cytology. Current Science, Special Number, 28–30. 1938.

  27. Babcock, E. B., and Stebbins, G. L. Jr. The American species ofCrepis. Carnegie Inst. Wash. 1938.

  28. Bailey, I. W. Reversionary characters of traumatic oak woods. Bot. Gaz.50: 374–380. 1910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Baldwin, I. L., Fred, E. B., andHastings, E. G. Grouping of legumes according to biological reactions of their seed proteins. Bot. Gaz.83: 217–243. 1927.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Bancroft, N. Review of literature concerning the evolution of monocotyledons. New Phyt.13: 285–208. 1914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Bärner, J., and Helwig, B. Beiträge zur serologischen Systematik der Pflanzen. Biol. Bot. Heft94. 1927.

  32. Bartlett, H. H. History of the generic concept in botany. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club67: 349–362. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bather, F. A. Biological classifications, past and future. Quart. Jour. Geol. Soc.83: 62–104. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Bather, F. A.In discussion on Classification with reference to phylogeny and convergence. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1931: 398–399.

  35. Baur, E. Artumgrenzung und Artbildung in der GattungAntirrhinum, SektionAntirrhinastrum. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Ver.63: 256–302. 1932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Beer, G. R. De (editor). Evolutionary essays presented to Professor Goodrich. 1938.

  37. Beer, G. R. De (editor). Embryos and ancestors. 1940.

  38. Bennett, C. W. The nomenclature of plant viruses. Phytopathology29: 422–430. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bentham, G., and Hooker, J. D. Genera Plantarum. 1862–1883.

  40. Berg, H. v. Über serologische Organspezifität bei Pflanzen. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.50: (91)-(106). 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Berg, L. S. Nomogenesis. 1926.

  42. Bertrand, P. Isolement précoce de tous les grands groupes de végétaux vasculaires. Bull. Soc. Bot. France84: 713–720. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  43. —, etCorsin, P. Phylogénie des végétaux vasculaires. Bull. Soc. Bot. France85: 331–348. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Bessey, C. E. The point of divergence of monocotyledons and dicotyledons. Bot. Gaz.22: 229–232. 1895.

    Google Scholar 

  45. — Phylogeny and taxonomy of the angiosperms. Bot. Gaz.24: 145–178. 1897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. — The phylogenetic taxonomy of flowering plants. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard.2: 109–164. 1915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Beurlen, K. Die stammesges Grundlagen der Abstammungslehre. 1937.

  48. Bews, J. W. Studies in the ecological evolution of the angiosperms. New Phyt.26: 1–21, 65–84, 129–148, 209–231, 273–294. 1927.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Bews, J. W. The world's grasses. 1929.

  50. Bitzek, E. Der Centrospermenast der Dikotylen. Bot. Arch.22: 257–384. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Blackman, F. F. The biochemistry of carbohydrate production from the point of view of systematic relationship. New Phyt.20: 2–9. 1921.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Blake, S. F. Systems of plant classification. Jour. Hered.26: 463–467. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Blakeslee, A. F., Murray, M. J., andSatina, S. Crossability in relation to taxonomic classification in the genusDatura. Am. Nat.69: 57. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Bowden, W. M. Diploidy, polyploidy and winter hardiness relationships in the flowering plants. Am. Jour. Bot.27: 357–371. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Bower, F. O. The origin of a land flora. 1908.

  56. — The quest of phyletic lines. Plant World15: 97–109. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Bower, F. O. Presidential address to Sect. K. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1914: 560–572.

  58. Bower, F. O. The Ferns (Filicales).1: 1923;2: 1926;3: 1928.

  59. Bower, F. O. Size and form in plants with special reference to the primary conducting tracts. 1930.

  60. Bower, F. O. Presidential address. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1930: 1–14.

  61. Bower, F. O. Primitive land plants. 1935.

  62. Boyd, L. Monocotylous seedlings. Trans. Bot. Soc. Edinburgh31: 1–224. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Boyden, A. The precipitin reaction in the study of animal relationships. Biol. Bull. Mar. Biol. Lab.50: 73–107. 1926.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. — Precipitins and phylogeny in animals. Am. Nat.68: 516–536. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. — Serology and animal relationship. Trans. N. Y. Acad. Sci. II.2: 195–201. 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  66. — Genetics and animal relationship. Proc. VII Int. Congr. Genet. Edinburgh,1939: 80–81. 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Braun, A. (transl.C. F. Stone) The vegetable individual in its relation to species. Am. Jour. Sci. & Arts II.19: 297–318;20: 181. 1855.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Bremekamp, C. E. B. The principles of taxonomy and the theory of evolution. So. Afr. Biol. Soc. Pamphlet 4: 1–8. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  69. — Phylogenetic interpretations and genetic concepts in taxonomy. Chron. Bot.5: 398–403. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Brierley, W. B. Biological races in fungi and their significance in evolution. Ann. Appl. Biol.18: 420–434. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Brooks, F. T. Some present-day aspects of mycology. Trans. Brit. Myc. Soc.9: 14–32. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Brown, R. Prodromus florae Novae Hollandiae et Insulae Van-Diemen.1. 1810.

  73. Browne, I. The phylogeny and inter-relationships of the Pteridophyta—a critical resumé. New Phyt.7: 93–113, 150–166, 181–197, 230–253. 1908;8: 13–31, 51–72. 1909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. — Some views on the morphology and phylogeny of the leafy vascular sporophyte. Bot. Rev.1: 383–404. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Bruun, H. G. Cytological studies inPrimula. Symbol. Bot. Upsal.1. 1932.

  76. Buhr, H. Parasitenbefall und Pflanzenverwandtschaft. Bot. Jahrb.68: 142–198. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Calestani, V. Le origine e la classificazione della angiosperme. Arch. Bot.9: 274–311. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Calman, W. T., The taxonomic outlook in zoology. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1930: 83–91.

  79. Calman, W. T. The meaning of biological classification. Proc. Linn. Soc. 147th session, 145–159. 1935.

  80. Campbell, D. H. The phylogeny of the angiosperms. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club55: 479–497. 1928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. — The phylogeny of monocotyledons. Ann. Bot.44: 311–331. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  82. — The relationship of the Hepaticae. Bot. Rev.2: 53–66. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Campbell, D. H. The evolution of the land plants (Embryophyta). 1940.

  84. Caruel, T. Pensées sur la taxinomie botanique. Bot. Jahrb.4: 549–616. 1883.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Cavers, F. The interrelationships of the Bryophyta. New Phyt. Reprint No. 4. 1911.

  86. Cavers, F. The interrelationships of Flagellata and primitive algae. New Phyt. Reprint No. 7. 1913.

  87. Chalk, L. The, phylogenetic value of certain anatomical features of dicotyledonous woods. Ann. Bot. N. S.1: 409–428 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Chamberlain, C. J. Gymnosperms: structure and evolution. 1934.

  89. — The Gymnosperms. Bot. Rev1: 183–209. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Chandler, M. E. J. Geological history of the genusStratiotes. Quart. Jour. Geol. Soc.79: 117–138. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Chaytor, D. A., and Turrill, W. B. The genusClypeola and its intraspecific variation. Kew Bull. Misc. Inf.1935: 1–24.

  92. Chester, K. S. Graft-blight: a disease of lilac related to the employment of certain understocks in propagation. Jour. Arn. Arb.12: 79–146. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  93. — Studies on the precipitin reaction in plants. Jour. Arn. Arb.13: 52–74, 285–296. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  94. — A critique of plant serology. Quart. Rev. Biol.12: 19–46, 165–190, 294–321. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Chester, K. S. Arbe, E. C. andVestal, P. A. Studies on the ‘precipitin reaction’ in plants. V. Application to plant relationships. Jour. Arn. Arb.14: 394–427. 1933.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Chodat.In Verh. Schw. Naturf. Ges. 1930. [See Nature127: 647. 1931.]

  97. Child, C. M. The individuality of organisms. 1916.

  98. Church, A. H. Thalassiophyta and the subaerial transmigration. Bot. Mem.3. Oxford. 1919.

  99. Church, A. H. The somatic organization of the Phaeophyta. Bot. Mem.10. Oxford. 1920.

  100. Church, A. H. Elementary notes on the systematy of angiosperms. Bot. Mem.11. Oxford. 1921.

  101. Church, G. L. Cytotaxonomic studies in the Gramineae:Spartina, Andropogon andPanicum. Am. Jour. Bot.27: 263–271. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Clark, A. H. Zoogenesis. Jour. Wash. Acad. Sci.19: 217–231. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  103. Clark, A. H. The new evolution. Zoogenesis. 1930.

  104. Clausen, J. Chromosome number and the relationships of species in the genusViola. Ann. Bot.41: 677–714. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  105. —Viola canina L., a cytologically irregular species. Hereditas15: 67–88. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  106. — Cytogenetic and taxonomic investigations onMelanium violets. Hereditas15: 219–308. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  107. — Principles for a joint attack on evolutionary problems. Proc. VI Int. Congr. Genet.1: 21–23. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  108. — Remarks upon H. G. Brunn's paper onViola canina L. Hereditas17: 67–70. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  109. — Inheritance and synthesis ofMelanium violets. Proc. VI Int. Congr. Genet.1: 346–348. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Clausen, J., Keck, D. D. andHiesey, W. M. The concept of species based on experiment. Am. Jour. Bot.26: 103–106. 1929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Clements, F. E. Plant physiology and ecology. 1907.

  112. Compton, R. H. An investigation of the seedling structure in the Leguminosae. Jour. Linn. Soc.41: 1–122. 1912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. — Theories of the anatomical transition from root to stem. New Phyt.11: 13–25. 1912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Copeland, H. F. The phylogeny of the angiosperms. Madroño5: 209–218. 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  115. Coulter, J. M. The origin of monocotyledony. II. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard.2: 175–183. 1915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Coulter, J. M., and Chamberlain, C. J. Morphology of angiosperms. 1904.

  117. Coulter, J. M. Morphology of gymnosperms. 1917.

  118. —, andLand W. J. G. The origin of monocotyledony. Bot. Gaz.57: 509–519. 1914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Crow, W. B. Phylogeny and the natural system. Jour. Genet.17: 85–155. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  120. Crow, W. B. Contributions to the principles of morphology. 1929.

  121. Cuénot, L. Hypothèse relative à la place des Monocotylédones dans la classification. Bull. Soc. Bot., France79: 365–393. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  122. Cuénot, L. L'Espèce. 1936.

  123. Danser, B. H. Über die niederländisch-indischen Stachytarpheta-Arten und ihre Bastarde, nebst Betrachtungen über die Begrenzung der Arten im Allgemeinen. Ann. Jard. Bot. Buitenzorg40: 1–44. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  124. — Über die Begriffe Komparium, Kommiskuum und über die Entstehungsweise der Konvivien. Genetica11 399–450. 1929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Darlington, C. D. Recent advances in cytology. 1932; 1937.

  126. Darlington, C. D. The evolution of genetic systems. 1939.

  127. —, andMoffett, A. A. Primary and secondary chromosome balance inPyrus. Jour. Genet.22: 129–163. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Darrah, W. C. Principles of paleobotany. 1939.

  129. Darwin, C. The origin of species. 1872. [The quotations are from the Everyman edition.]

  130. Davies, A. M. Evolution and its modern critics. 1937.

  131. Davy, J. Burtt. On the primary groups of dicotyledons. Ann. Bot. N.S.1: 429–437. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  132. de Candolle, A. P. Théorie élémentaire de la Botanique. 1813.

  133. de Candolle, A. P. Prodromus systematis naturalis regni vegetabilis. 1824–1873.

  134. Dendy, A. Outlines of evolutionary biology. 1924.

  135. Diels, L. Die Methoden der Phytographie und der Systematik der Pflanzen. 1921.

  136. Dobzhansky, T. Genetics and the origin of species. 1937.

  137. Domin, K. Phylogenetic evolution of the phyllome. Am. Jour. Bot.18: 237–242. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Durand, (de Gros) J.-P. Aperçus de Taxinomie Générale. 1899.

  139. Du Rietz, G. E. The fundamental units of biological taxonomy. Svensk Bot. Tid.24: 335–428. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  140. Duval-Jouve, M. J. Variations parallèles des types congénères. Bull. Soc. Bot. France12: 196–211. 1865.

    Google Scholar 

  141. Eames, A. J. On the origin of the herbaceous type in the angiosperms. Ann. Bot.25: 215–224. 1911.

    Google Scholar 

  142. Eames, A. J. Morphology of vascular plants, lower groups. 1936.

  143. Edwards, W. N. The systematic value of cuticular characters in recent and fossil angiosperms. Biol. Rev.10: 442–459. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. Engler, A. Übersicht über die Unterabteilungen, Klassen, Reihen, Unterreihen und Familien der Embryophyta siphonogana. Nat. Pflanzenfam. Nachtr. II–IV. 1897.

  145. Engler, A. Die natürlichen Pflanzenfam.14a. 1926.

  146. Epling, C. Scylla, Charybdis and Darwin. Am. Nat.72: 547–561. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Evans, A. W. The classification of the Hepaticae. Bot. Rev.5: 49–96. 1939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Faegri, K. The species problem. Nature136: 954–955. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  149. Fischer, A., undSchanitz, F. Die Bedeutung der Polyploidie für die ökologische Anpassung und die Pflanzenzüchtung. Züchter8: 225–231. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  150. Fischer, R. A. Statistical methods for research workers. 1928.

  151. Fischer, R. A. The genetical theory of natural selection. 1930.

  152. Flovik, K. Cytological studies of Arctic grasses. Hereditas24: 265–376. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  153. Fraine, E. de. The seedling structure of certain Cactaceae. Ann. Bot.24: 125–175. 1910.

    Google Scholar 

  154. Fritsch, F. E. The use of anatomical characters for systematic purposes. New Phyt.2: 177–184. 1903.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  155. Fritsch, F. E. Some aspects of the present-day investigation of Protophyta. Brit. Asso. Rep. 1927: 176–190.

  156. Fritsch, F. E. The structure and reproduction of the algae. 1. 1935.

  157. Fritsch, K. Die systematische Gruppierung der Bryophyten. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.47: 614–618. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  158. — Die systematische Gruppierung der Pteridophyten. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.47: 618–622. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  159. — Die systematische Gruppierung der Monokotylen. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.50 a: 162–184. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  160. Gardner, A. D. Microbes and ultramicrobes. 1931.

  161. Gates, R. R. On the existence of two fundamentally different types of characters in organism. Proc. Linn Soc. 132nd session, 10–11. 1921.

  162. — Adaptations in cell structure. Jour. Roy. Micr. Soc. III.51: 1–13. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  163. — Some phylogenetic considerations on the genusOenothera. Jour. Linn. Soc.49: 173–197. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  164. Gauman, E. A., and Dodge, C. W. Comparative morphology of fungi. 1928.

  165. Gilg, E., undSchürhoff, P. N. Die Serodiagnostik in der botanischen Verwandtschaftsforschung. Bot. Jahrb.60: 439–450. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  166. — Unsere Erfahrungen über die Brauchbarkeit der Serodiagnostik für die botanische Verwandtschaftsforschung. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.45: 315–329. 1927.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  167. Gilmour, J. S. L. A taxonomic problem. Nature139: 1040–1042. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  168. Gilmour, J. S. L.In a discussion of phylogeny and taxonomy. Proc. Linn. Soc. 152nd session, 234–240. 1940.

  169. — andTurrill, W. B. The aim and scope of taxonomy. Chron. Bot.6: 217–219. 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  170. Godron, D. A. De l'espèce et des races dans les êtres organisés et spécialement de l'unité de l'espèce humaine. 1859.

  171. Goebel, K. Organography of plants. 1900.

  172. Goebel, K. Organographie der Pflanzen. 1930.

  173. Goldschmidt, R. Physiological genetics. 1938.

  174. Goodey, T. Biological races in nematodes and their significance in evolution. Ann. Appl. Biol.18: 414–419. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  175. Gray, Asa. Structural botany. 1887.

  176. Greenman, J. M. Morphology as a factor in determining relationships. Am. Jour. Bot.2: 111–115. 1915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  177. Grüneberg, H. An analysis of the “pleitropic” effects of a new lethal mutation in the rat (Mus norvegicus). Proc. Roy. Soc. B.124: 56. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  178. Gulick, J. T. On the variation of species as related to their geographical distribution, illustrated by the Achatinellinae. Nature6: 222. 1872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. — Divergent evolution through cumulative segregation. Journ. Linn. Soc. Zoology20: 189–274. 1890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  180. Gundersen, A. Flower buds and phylogeny of dicotyledons. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club66: 287–295. 1939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  181. Guppy, H. B. Plant-distribution from the standpoint of an idealist. Jour. Linn. Soc.44: 439–472. 1919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  182. Gupta, K. M. On the wood anatomy and theoretical significance of homoxylous angiosperms. Jour. Ind. Bot. Soc.13: 71–101. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  183. Gwynne-Vaughan, H. C. I. Fungi. Ascomycetes, Ustilaginales, Uredinales. 1922.

  184. Gwynne-Vaughan, H. C. I., and Barnes, B. The structure and development of the fungi. 1927.

  185. Haberlandt, G. Physiologische Pflanzenanatomie. 1924.

  186. Hackett, J. W. Malaria in Europe. 1937.

  187. Haeckel, E. H. P. A. Generelle Morphologie der Organismen. 1866.

  188. Hagerup, O. Über Polyploidie in Beziehung zu Klima, Ökologie und Phylogenie. Hereditas16: 19–40. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  189. — Studies on polyploid ecotypes inVaccinium uliginosum L. Hereditas18: 122–128. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  190. — Organogenie und Phylogenie der Koniferen-Zapfen. Kgl. Danske Vid. Selsk. Biol. Meddel.10: 7. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  191. — Zur Abstammung einiger Angiospermen durch Gnetales und Coniferae. Kgl. Danske Vid. Selsk. Biol. Meddel.11: 4. 1934;13: 6. 1936;14: 4. 1938;15: 2. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  192. — Studies on the significance of polyploidy. II.Orchis. Hereditas24: 258–264. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  193. Haldane, J. B. S. The part played by recurrent mutation in evolution. Am. Nat.67: 5–19. 1933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  194. Hall, H. M. The genusHaplopappus, a phylogenetic study in the Compositae. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ.389: 1–32. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  195. Hallier, H. Beiträge zur Morphologie der Sporophylle und des Trophophylls in Beziehung zur Phylogenie der Kormophyten. Jahrb. Hamburg. Wiss. Anstalt.19. 1901 [pp. 1–110 in separate, Hamburg. 1902].

  196. — Über die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse der Tubifloren und Ebenalen, den polyphyletischen Ursprung der Sympetalen und Apetalen und die Anordnung der Angiospermen überhaupt. Abhl. Naturwiss.16. 1901. [pp. 1–101 in separate.]

    Google Scholar 

  197. — Über die Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse bei Engler's Rosalen, Parietalen, Myrtifloren und in anderen Ordnungen der Dikotylen. Abhl. Naturwiss.18: 1903. [pp. 1–98 in separate.]

    Google Scholar 

  198. — Vorläufiger Entwurf des natürlichen (phylogenetischen) Systems der Blüthenpflanzen. Bull. Herb. Boiss. II.3: 306–317. 1903.

    Google Scholar 

  199. — Ein zweiter Entwurf des natürlichen (phylogenetischen) Systems der Blütenpflanzen. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.23: 85–91. 1905.

    Google Scholar 

  200. — Phylogenetic system of flowering plants. New Phyt.4: 151–162. 1905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  201. — L'origine et la système phylétique des Angiospermes exposés à l'aide de leur arbre généalogique. Arch. Néerl. Sci. Exact. & Nat. III. B.1: 146–234. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  202. Handel-Mazzetti, H. Systematische Monographie der GattungLeontopodium. Beih. Bot. Centr.44: 1–178. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  203. Harland, S. C. The genetic conception of the species. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. U.S.S.R. Nouv. Sér. 1933: 181–186.

  204. — The genetical conception of the species. Biol. Rev11: 83–112. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  205. Harland, S. C. Genetics of the cotton plant. 1939.

  206. — Genetical studies in the genusGossypium and their relationship to evolutionary and taxonomic problems. Proc. VII Int. Genet. Congr., Edinburgh1939: 138–143. 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  207. Harris, T. M. A new member of the Caytoniales. New Phyt.32: 97–114. 1933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  208. Harris, T. M. The British Rhaetic flora. 1938.

  209. Harris, T. M. British Purbeck Charophyta. 1939.

  210. Hayata, B. The natural classification of plants according to their dynamic system. Ic. Plant. Formos.10: 97–233. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  211. — The succession and participation theories and their bearings upon the objects of the third pan-Pacific Congress. Proc. III pan-Pacific Congr. Tokyo,2: 1869–1875. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  212. — Über das “Dynamische System” der Pflanzen. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.49: 328–348. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  213. — Le système dynamique des plantes fondé sur la théorie de la participation. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci.192: 1286–1288. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  214. Hayek, A. Zur Systematik der Gramineen. Oest. Bot. Zeits.74: 249–255. 1925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  215. Heilborn, O. Chromosome numbers and dimensions, species formation and phylogeny in the genusCarex. Hereditas5: 129–216. 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  216. — Chromosome studies in Cyperaceae. Hereditas11: 182–192. 1928;25: 224–240. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  217. Henslow, G. A theoretical origin of endogens from exogens through self-adaptation to an aquatic habit. Jour. Linn. Soc.29: 485–528. 1893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  218. — The origin of monocotyledons from dicotyledons through self-adaptation to a moist or aquatic habit. Ann. Bot.25: 717–744. 1911

    Google Scholar 

  219. Hill, A. W. The morphology and seedling structure of the geophilous species ofPeperomia, together with some views on the origin of monocotyledons. Ann. Bot.20: 395–425. 1906.

    Google Scholar 

  220. — The monocotylous seedlings of certain dicotyledons with special reference to the Gesneriaceae. Ann. Bot. N.S.2: 127–144. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  221. Hill, T. G. On the seedling structure of certain Piperales. Ann. Bot.20: 161–175. 1906.

    Google Scholar 

  222. — andde Fraine, E. The seedling structure of gymnosperms. Ann. Bot.22: 689–712. 1908;23: 189–227, 433–458. 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  223. — On the seedling structure of certain Centrospermae. Ann. Bot.26: 175–199. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  224. — On the influence of the structure of the adult plant upon the seedling. New Phyt.11: 319–332. 1912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  225. — The structure of seedlings. Ann. Bot.27: 257–272. 1913.

    Google Scholar 

  226. — On the classification of seed-leaves. Ann. Bot.28: 359–362. 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  227. Hitchcock, A. S. Methods of descriptive systematic botany. 1925.

  228. Hochreutiner, R. P. G. La valeur relative des groupes systématiques. Boissiera fasc.2: 1–7. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  229. Hoeg, O. A. The Devonian floras and their bearing upon the origin of vascular plants. Bot. Rev.3: 563–592. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  230. Holden, H. S. The seedling anatomy of some species ofLupinus. Jour. Linn. Soc.47: 41–53. 1925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  231. Holmes, F. O. Proposal for extension of the binomial system of nomenclature to include viruses. Phytopathology29: 431–436. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  232. Horwood, A. R. The past history of monocotyledons, with some remarks on their origin. Scot. Bot. Rev.1: 164–180, 216–234. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  233. Hunter, A. W. S. A karyosystematic investigation in the Gramineae. Canad. Jour. Res.11: 213–241. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  234. Huskins, C. L. The origin ofSpartina Townsendii. Genetica12: 531–538. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  235. Hutchinson, J. Contributions towards a phylogenetic classification of flowering plants. Kew Bull. Misc. Inf.1923: 65–89;1924: 114–134.

  236. Hutchinson, J. Families of flowering plants.1: 1926;2: 1934.

  237. — A new phylogenetic classification of monocotyledons. Proc. VI Int. Bot. Congr. Amsterdam, 1935,2: 129–131. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  238. Huxley, J. S. The individual in the animal kingdom. 1912.

  239. Huxley, J. S. Clines: an auxiliary method in taxonomy. Bijd. tot de Dierkunde.… Leiden, 491–520. n.d.

  240. — Clines: an auxiliary taxonomic principle. Nature142: 219. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  241. — Species formation and geographical isolation. Proc. Linn. Soc. 150 session, 253–264. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  242. Huxley, J. S. (editor). The new systematics. 1940.

  243. Huxley, L. Life and letters of Sir J. D. Hooker. 1918.

  244. Huxley, T. H. On the morphology of the cephalous Mollusca. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc.143: 29–65. 1853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  245. — On the classification of the animal kingdom. Nature11: 101–102. 1874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  246. Irmscher, E. Pflanzenverbreitung und Entwicklung der Kontinente. I. Hamburg, 1922; II. Hamburg. 1929.

  247. Jackson, B. D. George Bentham. 1906.

  248. Jackson, B. D. A glossary of botanic terms. 1916.

  249. Jeffrey, E. C. The anatomy of woody plants. 1917.

  250. Jussieu, A. L. de. Genera plantarum secundum ordines naturales disposita, juxta methodum in horto regno Parisiensi exaratam, anno M.DCC.LXXIX. 1789.

  251. Kinsey, A. C. A genetic interpretation of categories higher than species. Am. Nat..69: 67–68. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  252. — Supra-specific variation in nature and in classification. Am. Nat.71: 206–222. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  253. Kirstein, K. Serodiagnostische Untersuchungen über die Verwandtschaften innerhalb der Pflanzengruppe der Gymnospermen. Bot. Arch.2: 57–79. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  254. Kojima, H. Serobiological relationship between gymnosperms and dicotyledons. Bot. Mag. Tokyo35: 247–252. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  255. Kostoff, D. Acquired immunity in plants. Genetics14: 37–77. 1929.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  256. Kristofferson, K. B. Species crosses inMalva. Hereditas7: 233–354. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  257. Krohn, V. Eine kritische Nachprüfung der Sympetalen des Königs-berger serodiagnostischen Stammsbaums. Bot. Arch.37: 328–372. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  258. Kunkel, L. O. Possibilities in plant virus classification. Bot. Rev.1: 1–17. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  259. Lam, H. J. Phylogenetic symbols, past and present. Acta Bioth. A.2: 153–194. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  260. — Studies in phylogeny. L. On the relation of taxonomy, phylogeny, and biogeography. Blumea3: 114–158. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  261. Lamarck [J. B. P. A.]. Flore française1. 1778.

  262. Lamarck [J. B. P. A.] Encyclopédie méthodique. 1. 1783.

  263. — Sur les classes les plus convenables à établir parmi les végétaux. Mém. Acad. Roy. Sci.1785: 437–464. 1788.

    Google Scholar 

  264. Lamarck, J.-B., et Mirbel, B. Histoire naturelle les végétaux.2. 1825.

  265. Lamb, W. H. The phylogeny of grasses. Plant World15: 264–269. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  266. Lang, W. D.In discussion on The evidence of palaeontology with regard to evolution. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1931: 373.

  267. Lang, W. D. Classification with reference to phylogeny and convergence. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1931: 399.

  268. Lang, W. H. Presidential address to section K. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1915: 701–718.

  269. Lankester, E. R. In the use of the term homology in modern zoology and the distinction between nomogenetic and homoplastic agreements. Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. IV6: 34–43. 1870.

    Google Scholar 

  270. Laufer, K. Beitrag zur Klärung und zum richtigen Verständnis der organogenetischen Untersuchungen der Coniferen-Zapfen von O. Hagerup. Bot. Jahrb.66: 471–487. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  271. Lee, E. Observations on the seedling anatomy of certain Sympetalae. Ann. Bot.26: 727–746. 1912;28: 303–329. 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  272. Lewis, C. T., and Short, C. A Latin dictionary. 1879.

  273. Lieskes, R. Serologische Studien mit einzelligen Grünalgen. Sitzber. Heidelb. Ak. Wiss.3: 1–47. 1916.

    Google Scholar 

  274. Linder, D. H. Evolution of the Basidiomycetes and its relation to the terminology of the basidium. Mycologia32: 419–447. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  275. Lindinger, L. Bemerkungen zur Phylogenie der Monocotylen. Bot. Jahresb. 19101: 524–525. [Abstract.]

    Google Scholar 

  276. Lindley, J. The vegetable kingdom. 1846, 1847, 1853.

  277. Lotsy, J. P. Vorlesungen über Deszendenztheorien.1: 1906;2: 1908.

  278. Lotsy, J. P. Vorträge über botanische Stammesgeschichte.1: 1907;2: 1909;3: 1911.

  279. Lotsy, J. P. Evolution by means of hybridization. 1916.

  280. Lotsy, J. P. Evolution considered in the light of hybridization. 1925.

  281. — On the species of the taxonomist in its relation to evolution. Genetica13: 1–16. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  282. Lyon, H. L. The phylogeny of the cotyledon. Postelsia1901: 57–86.

  283. Lutjeharms, W. J. Substanzbegriff und Systematik. Blumea1: 160–193. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  284. Macfarlane, J. M. The relation of plant protoplasm to its environment. Jour. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil. II.15: 251–271. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  285. Macfarlane, J. M. The causes and course of organic evolution. 1918.

  286. Macfarlane, J. M. Evolution and distribution of fishes. 1923.

  287. Macfarlane, J. M. Evolution and distribution of flowering plants. 1933.

  288. MacLeod, J. Quantitative description of ten British species of the genusMnium. Jour. Linn. Soc.44: 1–58. 1917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  289. MacLeod, J. The quantitative method in biology. 1919.

  290. Maheshwari, P. A critical review of the types of embryo sacs in angiosperms. New Phyt.36: 359–417. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  291. Magnus, W., undFriedenthal, H.. Ein experimenteller Nachweis natürlichen Verwandtschaft bei Pflanzen. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.24: 601–607. 1906.

    Google Scholar 

  292. Maneval, W. E. The development ofMagnolia andLiriodendron, including a discussion of the primitiveness of the Magnoliaceae. Bot. Gaz.57: 1–31. 1914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  293. Manton, I. Introduction to the general cytology of the Cruciferae. Ann. Bot.46: 509–556. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  294. — The problem ofBiscutella laevigata L. I. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Ver.67: 41–57. 1934. II. Ann. Bot. N.S.1: 439–462. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  295. Marsden-Jones, E. M. and Turrill, W. B. Researches onSilene maritima andS. vulgaris, parts I.–XXV. Kew Bull. Misc. Inf.1928: 1, continued to1940: 73. Further parts in preparation.

  296. Marsden-Jones, E. M. Species studies in plants. Bot. Soc. & Exch. Club Brit. Isles, 1930 Report 416-420. 1931.

  297. —, andTurrill, W. B.. Reports of the transplant experiments of the British Ecological Society at Potterne. Jour. Ecol.18: 352–378. 1930;21: 268–293. 1933;23: 443–469. 1935;25: 189–212. 1937;26: 359–379, 380–389. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  298. —. Studies inRanunculus. III. Further experiments concerning sex inRanunculus acris. Jour. Genet.31: 363–378. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  299. —. Genetical studies inCentaurea Scabiosa L. andCentaurea collina L. Jour. Genet.34: 487–495. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  300. —,Summerhayes, V. S., andTurrill, W. B. Special herbaria as adjuncts to modern botanical research. Jour. Ecol.18: 379–383. 1930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  301. Martin, G. W. The Myxomycetes. Bot. Rev.,6: 356–388. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  302. Matsuura, H. The study of genotypic parallelism as a basis of group-variability. Jour. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Imp. Univ. V.3: 139–167. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  303. — On karyo—ecotypes ofFritillaria camschatcensis (L.) Ker-Garler. Jour. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Imp. Univ. V. Bot.3: 219–232. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  304. Mchauglin, R. P. Systematic anatomy of the woods of the Magnoliales. Trop. Woods No. 34. 3–39. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  305. McNair, J. B. The evolutionary status of plant families in relation to some chemical properties. Am. Jour. Bot.21: 427–452. 1934.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  306. Metcalfe, G. Recent classifications of bacteria. Chron. Bot.6: 79–80. 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  307. Meyer, A. Ueber typologische und phylogenetische Systematik. Proc. VI. Int. Bot. Congr, Amsterdam,2: 58–60. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  308. Mez, C. Morphologie und Serodiagnostik. Bot. Arch.38: 86–104. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  309. —, undGohlke, K. Physiologisch-systematische Untersuchungen über die Verwandtschaften der Angiospermen. Cohn's Beiträge12: 155–180. 1913.

    Google Scholar 

  310. —, undKirstein, K. Sero-diagnostische Untersuchungen über die Gruppe der Gymnospermae. Cohn's Beiträge14: 145–148. 1920.

    Google Scholar 

  311. —, undZiegenspeck, H. Der Königsberger serodiagnostische Stammbaum. Bot. Arch.13: 483–485. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  312. Mielinski, K. Ueber die Phylogenie der Bryophyten mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Hepaticae. Bot. Arch.16: 23–118. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  313. Moffett, A. A. The chromosome constitution of the Pomoideae. Proc. Roy. Soc. B.108: 423–446. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  314. Molisch, H. Pflanzenchemie und Pflanzenverwandtschaft. 1933.

  315. Moll, J. W. Phytography as a fine art. 1934.

  316. Moreau, F. Les Lichens. 1928.

  317. Moritz, H. Serologische Untersuchungen an Getreidebastarden. Ber. Deut. Bot. Ges.51: (52–57). 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  318. Moritz, O. Betrachtungen zum ‘Ende’ der botanischen Serodiagnostik. Beih. Bot. Centr.46: 114–118. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  319. — Die botanische Serologie. Cohn's Beiträge22: 51–90. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  320. Mumford, E. P. Some remarks on the conception of individuality in biology. Sci. Prog.20: 83–91. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  321. Müntzing, A. Über Chromosomenvermehrung inGaleopsis-Kreuzungen und ihre phylogenetische Bedeutung. Hereditas14: 153–172. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  322. — Cyto-genetic investigations on syntheticGaleopsis Tetrahit. Hereditas16: 105–154. 1932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  323. Murray, J. A. H. A new English dictionary.1: 156–157. 1888.

    Google Scholar 

  324. — A new English dictionary.2: 466–467. 1893.

    Google Scholar 

  325. — A new English dictionary.7: 805. 1905.

    Google Scholar 

  326. — A new English dictionary.9; 122. 1916.

    Google Scholar 

  327. Newman, H. H. Evolution, genetics, and eugenics. 1926.

  328. Nicotra, L. Sur le système des monocotyledonées. Oest. Bot. Zeits.59: 15–19. 1909;60: 300–307. 1910.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  329. Nielsen, E. L. Grass studies. III. Additional somatic chromosome complements. Am. Jour. Bot.26: 366–372. 1939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  330. Nilsson, N. H. Experimentelle Studien über Variabilität, Spaltung, Artbildung und Evolution in der GattungSalix. Lunds Univ. Arsskr. N.F. Avd. 2,14: Nr.28. 1918.

  331. Nilsson, N. H.Salix laurina. Die Entwicklung und die Lösung einer mehr als hundertjährigen phylogenetischen Streitfrage. Lunds Univ. Arsskr. N. F. Adv. 2,24: Nr.6. 1928.

  332. Nilsson, N. H. Synthetische Bastardierungsversuche in der GattungSalix. Lunds Univers. Arsskr. N. F. Avd. 2,27: Nr.4. 1930.

  333. — Über das Enstehen eines ganz cinerea-ähnlichen Typus aus dem BastardSalix viminalis x caprea. Hereditas15: 309–319. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  334. Odell, M. E. The determination of fossil angiosperms by the characteristics of their vegetative organs. Ann. Bot.46: 941–963. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  335. Osborn, H. F. The origin and evolution of life. 1925.

  336. Osborn, H. F. Nine new principles of evolution revealed by palaeontology. Brit. Assoc. Rep. 1931: 394.

  337. Owen, R. Lectures on invertebrate animals. 1843.

  338. Owen, R. Report on the archetype and homologies of the vertebrate skeleton. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1846: 169–340.

  339. Parkin, J. The classical flower and some modern views Proc. VI Int. Bot. Congr., Amsterdam, 1935,1: 234–237. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  340. Pearson, H. J. A. The beginning of civilization. Jour. Roy. Anthr. Inst.57: 19–38. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  341. Pearson, H. H. W. Gnetales. 1929.

  342. Philipson, W. R. A revision of the British species of the genusAgrostis Linn. Jour. Linn. Soc.51: 73–151. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  343. Pia, J. Geologisches Alter und geographische Verbreitung der wichtigsten Algengruppen. Oest. Bot. Zeits.73: 174–190. 1924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  344. — Die vorzeitlichen Spaltpilze. Palaeobiologica1: 457–474. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  345. Pledge, H. T. Science since 1500. 1939.

  346. Pope, M. A. Pollen morphology as an index to plant relationship. Bot. Gaz.80: 63–73. 1926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  347. Posthumus, O. On some principles of stelar morphology. Rec. Trav. Bot. Néerl.21: 111–296. 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  348. Prat, H. La systématique des Graminées. Ann. Sci. Nat. X. Bot.18: 165–258. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  349. Przibran, H. Théorie apogénétique de l'évolution des organismes. Rev. Gén. Sci. Pures & Appl.40: 293–299. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  350. Pulle, A. A. Compendium van de Terminologie, Nomenclatuur en Systematiek der Zaadplanten. 1938.

  351. Rabel, G. A decimal system for organisms. Discovery N. S.3: 16–24. 1940.

    Google Scholar 

  352. Ramanujan, S. Cytological studies in the Oryzeae I. Ann. Bot. N. S.2: 107–125. 1938; II. Jour. Genet.35: 183–221. 1937; III. Jour. Genet.35: 223–258. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  353. Ramsbottom, J. The taxonomy of fungi. Trans. Brit. Myc. Soc.11: 25–45. 1926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  354. Ramsbottom, J. Fungi. 1929.

  355. Ramsbottom, J. Linnaeus and the species concept. Proc. Linn. Soc. Lond. 150th session, 192–219. 1938.

  356. Raunkiaer, C. Über den Begriff der Elementarart im Lichte der modernen Erblichkeitsforschung. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Ver.19: 225–240. 1918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  357. Raunkiaer, C. The life forms of plant 1934.

  358. Ray, J. Historia generalis plantarum. 1686–1704.

  359. Record, S. J. Some problems for the wood anatomist. Proc. VI Int. Bot. Congr., Amsterdam 1935,1: 224–228. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  360. Redfield, A. C. The distribution of physiological and chemical peculiarities in the “natural” groups of organisms. Am. Nat.70:110–122. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  361. Reichert, E. T. A biochemic basis for the study of problems of taxonomy, heredity, evolution, etc. with special reference to the starches. 1919.

  362. Reinig, W. F. Elimination und Selektion. 1938.

  363. Rendle, A. B. The classification of flowering plants.1: 1904;2: 1925.

  364. Rensch, B. Das Prinzip geographischer Rassenkreise und das Problem der Artbildung. 1929.

  365. Richards, O. W. The habits of the solitary wasps. Sci. Jour. Roy. Coll. Sci.7: 88. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  366. Roberts, O., andDoyle, J. The pH of conifer leaves in relation to systematy. Sci. Proc. Roy. Dublin Soc.210: 655–674. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  367. Robson, G.C.. The species problem. 1928.

  368. Robson, G. C., and Richards, O. W. The variation of animals in nature. 1936.

  369. Rohweder, H. Die Bedeutung der Polyploidie für die Anpassung der Angiospermen an die Kalkgebiete Schleswig-Holsteins. Beih. Bot. Centr.54 A: 507–519. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  370. Rosa, D. L'Ologenésis. 1931.

  371. Rosenthaler, L. Über die Beziehungen zwischen Pflanzenchemie und Systematik. Beih. Bot. Centr.21: 304–310. 1907.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  372. Rothschild, Lord The pioneer work of the systematist. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1932: 89–102.

  373. Rozanova, M. A. On polymorphic type of species origin. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. U.RR. S. S. N. S.18: 677–679. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  374. Sachs, F. G. J. von. History of botany. (Eng. trans.) 1890.

  375. Sahni, B. Ontogeny of vascular plants and the theory of recapitulation. Jour. Ind. Bot. Soc.4: 202–216. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  376. Sakai, K. Studies on the chromosome number in alpine plants. Jap. Jour. Genet.9: 226–230. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  377. Saltzmann, B. Ergänzende sero-diagnostische Untersuchungen. Bot. Arch.8: Heft 1–2: 3–36. 1924.

    Google Scholar 

  378. Sargant, E. A new type of transition from stem to root in the vascular system of seedlings. Ann. Bot.14: 633–638. 1900.

    Google Scholar 

  379. — A theory of the origin of monocotyledons, founded on the structure of their seedlings. Ann. Bot.17: 1–92. 1903.

    Google Scholar 

  380. — The evolution of monocotyledons. Bot. Gaz.37: 325–345. 1904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  381. — The reconstruction of a race of primitive angiosperms. Ann. Bot.22: 120–186. 1908.

    Google Scholar 

  382. Saunders, E. R. Floral morphology.1. 1937;2. 1939.

  383. Sax, H. J. Chiasma formation inLarix andTsuga. Genetics18: 121–128. 1933.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  384. Sax, K. Chromosome stability in the genusRhododendron. Am. Jour. Bot.17: 247–251. 1930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  385. — The origin and relationships of the Pomoideae. Jour. Arn. Arb.12: 3–22. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  386. — Species hybrids inPlatanus andCampsis. Jour. Arn. Arb.14: 274–278. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  387. — The cytological analysis of species-hybrids. Bot. Rev.1: 100–117. 1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  388. Schaffner, J. H. Phylogenetic taxonomy of plants. Quart. Rev. Biol.9: 129–160. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  389. Schiffner, V. Die systematisch-phylogenetische Forschung in der Hepaticologie seit dem Erscheinen der Synopsis Hepaticarum und über die Abstammung der Bryophyten und Pteridophyten. Prog. Rei Bot.5: 387–520. 1917.

    Google Scholar 

  390. Schurhoff, P. N. Die Zytologie der Blütenpflanzen. 1926.

  391. Scott, D. H. Studies in fossil botany. 1920–1923.

  392. Scott, D. H. Extinct plants and problems of evolution. 1924.

  393. Senn, G. Die Grundlagen des Hallierschen Angiospermensystems. Beih. Bot. Centr.17: 129–156. 1904.

    Google Scholar 

  394. Seward, A. C. Fossil plants. 1898–1919.

  395. — The Cretaceous plant-bearing rocks of western Greenland. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B.215: 57–175. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  396. Seward, A. C. Plant life through the ages. 1931.

  397. Shaparenko, K. K. The evolution of phylogenetic schemes. Akad. Nauk. SSSR. Jour. de Bot.24: 528. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  398. Sharp, L. W. Introduction to cytology. 1926.

  399. Simpson, G. C., and Roe, A. Quantitative zoology. 1939.

  400. Simpson, J. B. Fossil pollen in Scottish Jurassic coal. Nature139: 673. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  401. Simpson, J. B. Fossil pollen in Scottish Jurassic rocks. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1938: 525.

  402. Singer, C. A short history of biology. 1931.

  403. Sinnott, E. W. Comparative rapidity of evolution in various plant types. Am. Nat.50: 466–478. 1916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  404. —, andBailey, I. W. Investigations on the phylogeny of the angiosperms. 4. Ann. Bot.28: 547–601. 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  405. Sinskaia, E. N. The oleiferous plants and root crops of the family Cruciferae. Bull. Appl. Bot., Genet. & Pl. Breed.19: 555–630. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  406. Smith, A. L. Lichens. 1921.

  407. Smith, C. C. A case of “Pollinia”. Phytologia1: 83–88. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  408. Smith, G. M. Cryptogamic botany. 1938.

  409. Smith, L. B. Geographical evidence on the lines of evolution in the Bromeliaceae. Bot. Jahrb.66: 446–468. 1934.

    Google Scholar 

  410. Smith, S. G. Cytology ofAnchusa and its relation to the taxonomy of the genus. Bot. Gaz.94: 394–403. 1932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  411. Smith, W. W. Some aspects of the bearing of cytology on taxonomy. Proc. Linn. Soc. 145th session, 151–181. 1933.

  412. — Problems in classification of plants. Jour. Roy. Hort. Soc.61: 77–90, 117–134. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  413. Smuts, J. C. Holism and evolution. 1927.

  414. Solereder, H. (Engl. trans. Boodle, L. A. & Fritsch, F. E.) Systematic anatomy of the dicotyledons. 1908.

  415. Souèges, R. L'espèce et les classifications actuelles. 1938.

  416. Sprague, T. A. The classification of dicotyledons. Jour. Bot.63: 9–13, 105–133. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  417. Sprague, T. A. A discussion on phylogeny and taxonomy. Proc. Linn. Soc. 152nd session, 243–250. 1940.

  418. Stebbins, G. L. Cytological characteristics associated with the different growth habits in the dicotyledons. Am. Jour. Bot.25: 189–198. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  419. Stojanoff, N. Am Wendepunkte der systematischen Wissenschaft. Spis. Balg. Akad. Nauk.53: 95–131. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  420. Stopes, M. S. Petrifactions of the earliest European angiosperms. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B.203: 75–100. 1912.

    Google Scholar 

  421. Stopes, M. S. Catalogue of the Mesozoic plants in the Department of Geology. British Museum. The Cretaceous flora. Part II. Lower Greensand plants of Britain. 1915.

  422. Stopes, M. C., andFujii, K. Studies on the structure and affinities of Cretaceous plants. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B.201: 1–90. 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  423. Suessenguth, K. Beiträge zur Frage des systematischen Anschlusses der Monokotylen. Beih. Bot. Centrbl.38: 1–79. 1921.

    Google Scholar 

  424. Swingle, D. B. A textbook of systematic botany. 1928.

  425. Swinnerton, H. H. Unit characters in fossils. Biol. Rev.7: 321–335. 1932.

    Google Scholar 

  426. Swinnerton, H. H. Development and evolution. Brit. Assoc. Rep. 1938: 57–84.

  427. — Palaeontology and the mechanics of evolution. Quart. Jour. Geol. Soc. London95: 33–70. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  428. Tackholm, G. Zytologische Studies über die Gattung Rosa. Acta Hort. Berg.7: 97–381. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  429. Tansley, A. G., and Thomas, E. N. The phylogenetic value of the vascular structure of spermatophytic hypocotyls. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1906: 761–763.

  430. Tatuno, S. Weitere Untersuchungen über die Polyploidie und geographische Verbreitung beiDumortiera hirsuta, L. Bot. Mag. Tokyo53: 345–350. 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  431. Theophrastus. Enquiry into plants. [Eng. trans. by Hort, A.] 1916.

  432. Thoday, D. The interpretation of plant structure. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1940: 84–104.

  433. Thomas, E. N. A theory of the double leaf-trace founded on seedling structure. New Phyt.6: 77–91. 1907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  434. — Seedling anatomy of Ranales, Rhoedales, and Rosales. Ann. Bot.28: 695–733. 1914.

    Google Scholar 

  435. Thomas, H. H. The Caytoniales, a new group of angiospermous plants from the Jurassic rocks of Yorkshire. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B.213: 299–363. 1925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  436. Thomas, H. H.In Discussion on the antiquity and early evolution of the angiosperms. Rep. Proc. V Int. Bot. Congr., Cambridge1930: 461–462. 1931.

  437. — The early evolution of the angiosperms. Ann. Bot.45: 647–672. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  438. Thomas, H. H. The old morphology and the new. Proc. Linn. Soc. 145th session, 17–46. 1932.

  439. — The nature and origin of the stigma. New. Phyt.33: 173–198. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  440. — Pteridosperm evolution and the angiospermae. Proc. VI Int. Bot. Congr. Amsterdam2: 230. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  441. — Paleobotany and the origin of the angiosperms. Bot. Rev.2: 397–418. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  442. Thorpe, W. H. Biological races in insects and their significance in evolution. Ann. Appl. Biol.18: 406–414. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  443. Tilden, J. E. Some hypotheses concerning the origin of the algae. Am. Nat.62: 137–155. 1928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  444. Tilden, J. E. The algae and their life relations. 1935.

  445. Tippett, L. H. C. The methods of statistics. 1931.

  446. Tipps, O. Comparative anatomy of the Moraceae and their presumed allies. Bot. Gaz.100: 1–99. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  447. Tischler, G. Die Bedeutung der Polyploidie für die Verbreitung der Angiospermen. Bot. Jahrb.67: 1–36. 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  448. — Die Bedeutung der Polyploidie für pflanzengeographische Probleme. Proc. VI Int. Congr. Amsterdam2: 165–169. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  449. — On some problems of cytotaxonomy and cytoecology. Jour. Ind. Bot. Soc.16: 165–169. 1937.

    Google Scholar 

  450. — Die Bedeutung chromosomaler Rassendifferenzen für Systematik und Pflanzengeographie. Proc. VII Int. Genet. Congr. Edinburgh,1939: 295–298. 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  451. Tobler, F. The organism and development of lichens. Rep. Proc. V Int. Bot. Congr. Cambridge,1930: 325–328. 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  452. Tronchet, A. Recherches sur les types d'organisation les plus répandus de la plantule des Dicotylédons. 1930.

  453. Trueman, A. E. Results of some recent statistical investigations of invertebrate fossils. Biol. Rev.5: 296–308. 1930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  454. Turrill, W. B. Species. Jour. Bot.63: 359–366. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  455. — A new monograph ofColchicum (review). Gard. Chron. III81: 304–305. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  456. Turrill, W. B. Plant-life of the Balkan Peninsula. 1929.

  457. — Biological races in seed-bearing plants and their significance in evolution. Ann. Appl. Biol.18: 442–450. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  458. Turrill, W. B. A study of variation inGlaucium flavum. Kew Bull. Misc. Inf.1933: 174–184.

  459. — The correlation of morphological variation with distribution in some species ofAjuga. New Phyt.33: 218–230. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  460. — Natural selection and the distribution of plants. Proc. Roy. Soc. B.121: 49–52. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  461. — Contacts between plant classification and experimental botany. Nature137: 563–566. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  462. — Taxonomy and genetics. Jour. Bot.76: 33–39. 1938.

    Google Scholar 

  463. — The expansion of taxonomy with special reference to the Spermatophyta. Biol. Rev.13: 342–373. 1938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  464. Turrill, W. B. The principles of plant geography. Kew Bull. Misc. Inf.1939: 208–237.

  465. — Taxonomy and cytogenetics in plants. Proc. VII Int. Genet. Congr., Edinburgh,1939: 301–305. 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  466. Tuzson, J. Zur phyletisch-paläontologischen Entwicklungsgeschichte des Pflanzenreichs. Bot. Jahrb. 43: 461–473. 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  467. — Beiträge zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Monokotylen. Proc. VI Int. Bot. Congr., Amsterdam, 1935,1: 324–329. 1936.

    Google Scholar 

  468. Valleau, W. D. The binomial system of nomenclature for plant viruses. Chron. Bot.6: 223–224. 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  469. Vandel, A. Polyploidy and geographical distribution. Brit. Assoc. Rep.1940: 89–90.

  470. Vaviloff, N. I. The law of homologous series in variation. Jour. Genet.12: 47–89. 1922.

    Google Scholar 

  471. Vaviloff, N. I. Studies on the origin of cultivated plants. 1926.

  472. — Geographical regularities in the distribution of the genes of cultivated plants. Bull. Appl. Bot., Genet. & Pl. Breed.17: 420–428. 1927.

    Google Scholar 

  473. — Geographische Genzentren unserer Kulturpflanzen Zeits. Ind. Abst. Ver. Suppl.1: 1928, 342–369.

    Google Scholar 

  474. Verdoorn, F. (editor). Manual of bryology. 1932.

  475. Verdoorn, F. (editor). Manual of pteridology. 1938.

  476. Vesque, J. L'èspèce végétale considérée au point de vue de l'anatomie comparée. Ann. Sci. Nat. VI Bot.13: 5–135. 1882.

    Google Scholar 

  477. — Contributions à l'histologie systématique de la feuille des Caryophyllinées. Ann. Sci. Nat. VI Bot.15: 105–148. 1883.

    Google Scholar 

  478. Vigano, L. Practical serology. [Engl. trans. by Heffer, E. M., edited by Wolf, C. G. L.] 1928.

  479. Vines, S. H., and Druce, G. C. An account of the Morisonian Herbarium. 1914.

  480. Vuillemin, P. Les principes de la classification botanique. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci.167: 449, 477, 510. 1918.

    Google Scholar 

  481. — Classification des Monocotyledones. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci.166: 23–25. 1923.

    Google Scholar 

  482. Waddington, C. H. An introduction to modern genetics. 1939.

  483. Wahl, H. A. Chromosome numbers and meiosis in the genusCarex. Am. Jour. Bot.27: 458–470. 1940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  484. Walton, J. Carboniferous Bryophyta. Ann. Bot.39: 563–572. 1925;42: 707–716. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  485. Wangerin, W. Die Wertigkeit der Merkmale im Hallierschen System. Bot. Jahrb.43: Beibl. 99, 120–141. 1909.

    Google Scholar 

  486. Warming, E. Observations sur la valeur systématique de l'ovule. 1913.

  487. Watkins, A. E. The wheat species: a critique. Jour. Genet.23: 173–263. 1930.

    Google Scholar 

  488. Watkins, A. E. Heredity and evolution. 1935.

  489. Wermund, R. Untersuchungen über die Brauchbarkeit der Serodiagnostik für die botanische Verwandtschaftsforschung. Cohn's Beiträge16: 39–80. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  490. Wernham, H. F. Floral evolution: with particular reference to the sympetalous dicotyledons. New Phyt. Reprint No. 5. 1912.

  491. Wettstein, R. von. Grundzüge der geographisch-morphologischen Methode der Pflanzensystematik. 1898.

  492. Wettstein, R. von. Handbuch der systematischen Botanik. 1901–1908; 1933–1935.

  493. Wettstein, R. Die Bedeutung der Sero-diagnostischen Methode für die phylogenetische-systematische Forschung. Zeits. Ind. Abst. Ver.36: 438–445. 1925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  494. Whitaker, T. W. Chromosome number and relationship in the Magnoliales. Jour. Arn. Arb.14: 376–385. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  495. White, M. J. D. The chromosomes. 1937.

  496. White, P. B. Biological races in bacteria and their significance in evolution. Ann. Appl. Biol.18: 434–456. 1929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  497. Wieland, G. R. Antiquity of the angiosperms. Proc. V Int. Congr. Pl. Sci. Ithaca,1: 429–456. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  498. Wilkoewitz, K. Über die Serologie und Morphologie des Farnastes. Bot. Arch.23: 445–531. 1929.

    Google Scholar 

  499. —, undZiegenspeck, H. Die verschiedenen Generationen und Jugend-und altersform in ihrer Einwirkung auf den Ausfall der Präcipitinreaktionen. Bot. Arch.22: 229–244. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  500. Willis, J. C. The course of evolution by differentiation or divergent mutation rather than by selection. 1940.

  501. Wilson, C. L. The phylogeny of the stamen. Am. Jour. Bot.24: 686–699. 1937.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  502. Wodehouse, R. P. The morphology of pollen grains in relation to plant classification. Jour. N. Y. Bot. Gard.27: 145–154. 1926.

    Google Scholar 

  503. — The phylogenetic value of pollen-grain characters. Ann. Bot.42: 891–934. 1928.

    Google Scholar 

  504. — Pollen grains in the identification and classification of plants. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club55: 181–198, 449–462. 1928;56: 123–138. 1929;57: 21–46. 1930;63: 495–514. 1936; Am. Jour. Bot.16: 297–312. 1929;18: 749–764. 1931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  505. — The origin of symmetry patterns of pollen grains. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club56: 339–350. 1929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  506. Wodehouse, R. P. Pollen grains. 1935.

  507. — Evolution of pollen grains. Bot. Rev.2: 67–84. 1936.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  508. Woodward, A. S. Palaeontology and the Linnean classification. Proc. Linn. Soc. 150th session, 238–241. 1938.

  509. Worsdell, W. C. Principles of plant teratology.1: 1915;2: 1916.

  510. Yamaura, A. Karyologische und embryologische Studien über einige Bambusarten. Bot. Mag. Tokyo47: 551–555. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  511. Zade, A. Biological method of identifying seeds by means of serum precipitation method. Bull. Agr. Intel. & Pl. Dis.4: 200–201. 1913.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  512. Zade, A. Serologische Studien an Leguminosen und Gramineen. Zeits. Pflanzenzüchtung2: Heft. 4. 1914.

  513. Ziegenspeck, H. Der serologische Stammbaum des Pflanzenreiches und die Phytopalaeontologie. Bot. Arch.9: 37–48. 1925.

    Google Scholar 

  514. Zimmermann, W. Die Phylogenie der Pflanzen. 1930.

  515. — Researches on phylogeny of species and of single characters. Am. Nat.68: 381–384. 1934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  516. Zimmermann, W. Vererbung “erworbener Eigenschaften” und Auslese. 1938.

  517. Evolution in the light of modern knowledge. A collective work. 1925.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Surrey, England

    W. B. Turrill

Authors
  1. W. B. Turrill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Turrill, W.B. Taxonomy and phylogeny. Bot. Rev 8, 655–707 (1942). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02879054

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02879054

Keywords

Search

Navigation