1913
DOI: 10.5962/bhl.title.150544
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Die Oberschlesische Steinkohlenflora. I. Teil, Farne und farnähnliche Gewächse (Cycadofilices besw. Pteridospermen)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

1917
1917
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A more complete account of the taxonomy of Laveineopteris bohemica can be found in Šimůnek & Cleal (2011). Suffice it to say that it is conspecific with the specimens described from Upper Silesia by Gothan (1913) as Neuropteris nicolausiana Gothan and as Neuropteris nikolausii from Saar-Lorraine by Bertrand (1930) -these are merely orthographic variants of the same species name -, and the specimens from West and Central Bohemia described by Havlena (1953) as Neuropteris attenuata Lindley & Hutton. It is unknown from the lowland, parallic basins of the Variscan Foreland.…”
Section: Systematic Positionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…A more complete account of the taxonomy of Laveineopteris bohemica can be found in Šimůnek & Cleal (2011). Suffice it to say that it is conspecific with the specimens described from Upper Silesia by Gothan (1913) as Neuropteris nicolausiana Gothan and as Neuropteris nikolausii from Saar-Lorraine by Bertrand (1930) -these are merely orthographic variants of the same species name -, and the specimens from West and Central Bohemia described by Havlena (1953) as Neuropteris attenuata Lindley & Hutton. It is unknown from the lowland, parallic basins of the Variscan Foreland.…”
Section: Systematic Positionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…3). Gothan (1913) recognised these species as forming a clear cluster but did not formally designate them as a (fossil‐)genus; this was done later by Simson‐Scharold (1934). In addition to their distinctive pinnules with more rounded lobes, Eusphenopteris species differ from Sphenopteris in sometimes having pinnae attached below the main dichotomy of the frond.…”
Section: Taxonomic Consequencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, Laveine et al (1977) provisionally maintained the distinction until a more complete analysis could be undertaken, a view with which we agree. (Gothan 1913) and Neuropteris nikol ausii Gothan from Saar-Lorraine (Bertrand 1930), and ap pears to be a species characteristic of more upland wetland habitats. The attribution of the specimens from the Radnice Member figured by Ettingshausen (1854) as N. rubescens to L. bohemica is based on the comments by Němejc (1929, p. 5; see also Gothan 1913, p. 213 andHavlena 1953).…”
Section: A B Cmentioning
confidence: 99%