Studia bot. hung. 38, pp. 143-153, 2007
D I S T R I B U T I O N O F A L I T T L E K N O W N P L A N T SPECIES, VALERIANELLA
PUMILA
IN HUNGARY
L. S O M L Y A Y and N . B A U E R
Department of Botany, Hungarian Natural History H-1476Budapest, Pf.222, Hungary;
[email protected],
Museum
[email protected]
A l l relevant Hungarian literature and herbarium records o f Valerianellapumila have been gathered and evaluated in order to clarify its distribution in Hungary. Some erroneous or misleading literature records are elucidated and corrected. This sub-Mediterranean spe cies is extremely rare i n Hungary w i t h only a few old and present occurrences. Key words: distribution, phytogeography, sub-Mediterranean elements, pumila
Valerianella
INTRODUCTION Six species o f Valerianella
M i l l , have been registered i n H u n g a r y so far
( S I M O N 2000). Four o f t h e m , V. locusta ( L . ) Laterr., V. carinata dentata
Lois., V.
(L.) Poll, a n d V. rimosa Bast, are m o r e or less widespread ( t h o u g h
w i t h insufficient i n f o r m a t i o n about their occurrences i n some regions), however, V. coronata ( L . ) D C . i n L a m . a n d D C . a n d V. pumila
(L.) D C . i n
L a m . and D C . are m u c h m o r e rare i n H u n g a r y . T h e latter t w o species are sporadic sub-Mediterranean elements o f the dry, w a r m a n d stony slopes o f the T r a n s d a n u b i a n
M o u n t a i n Range a n d the southern
mountains i n
Transdanubia (Mecsek and Villány M t s ) ( H O R V Á T 1942, J Á V O R K A and S O Ó 1951, S I M O N 2000), a n d o n l y a few localities are k n o w n i n the h i l l y region o f H u n g a r y east o f the Danube. W h i l e V. coronata is a w e l l - k n o w n species for H u n g a r i a n botanists ( t h o u g h P E R L A K Y (1894) was arguing t h a t the Panno n i a n taxon is V hamata
Bast, ex D C . and n o t V coronata),
V pumila
is little
k n o w n w i t h very few o l d a n d present records i n H u n g a r y . A c c o r d i n g to S O Ó (1966) V. pumila
is a southern Eurasian species (ex
t e n d i n g eastward t o I r a n and T u r k e s t a n ) . I n Europe its d i s t r i b u t i o n is re s t r i c t e d to southern Europe f r o m Portugal a n d Spain to T u r k e y ; extending n o r t h w a r d s to H u n g a r y ( E R N E T a n d R I C H A R D S O N 1976).
H o w e v e r , the n o r t h e r n m o s t European locality o f V. pumila
belongs to
Slovakia today (Burda M t s (Kovácovské kopce) = Kovácspataki-hegyek). Since this is the only Slovakian occurrence o f the t a x o n (missing i n the Czech Republic), V. pumila
is i n c l u d e d i n the Red B o o k o f Slovakia a n d the
Czech Republic ( M A G L O C K Y 1999). I n H u n g a r y V. pumila
is n o t protected,
however, considered b y N É M E T H (1989) to be a p o t e n t i a l l y threatened taxon. T h e a i m o f our study is to clarify the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f V. pumila
in
Hungary.
MATERIALS A N D M E T H O D A l t h o u g h the species-scale separation o f V. pumila
f r o m V.
coronata
has been challenged by DEVESA et al (2005) (V. coronata f. pumila (L.) Devesa, J. Lopez et R. Gonzalo), we consider V. pumila
as a separate species u n t i l
their treatment is w i d e l y accepted. T o collect H u n g a r i a n records o f V. pumila,
data f r o m all relevant liter
ature a n d specimens o f the f o l l o w i n g herbaria were checked: H u n g a r i a n N a t u r a l H i s t o r y M u s e u m , Budapest (BP); Eötvös Loránd U n i v e r s i t y , B u dapest ( B P U ) ; B a k o n y N a t u r a l H i s t o r y M u s e u m , Z i r c ; Pécs U n i v e r s i t y , Pécs (JPU); Debrecen U n i v e r s i t y , Debrecen ( D E ) . A l l relevant literature and v e r i f i e d h e r b a r i u m records o f V. pumila
are
presented. I n case o f h e r b a r i u m m a t e r i a l the records are separated by semi colons i n the e n u m e r a t i o n . T h e relevant part o f the label's text, collector, date o f collecting a n d annotations (inch revision(s), identifications) are i n cluded. Revisional data are i n d i c a t e d o n l y i n case o f true revisions, i.e. w h e n the collector h a d used a taxon name referring to another species. Revisions restricted to simple name corrections (i.e. replacing synonyms o f V. such as V. membranacea
Loisel., V. mutica (L.) A . K e r n . , Fediapumila
pumila, auct.
etc.) are n o t indicated. Abbreviations o f revisers: BA = Ádám Boros, JS = Sándor Jávorka, SL = Lajos Somlyay. Records o f V. pumila are grouped geographically, enumerated from the north eastern to southwestern and southern regions o f Hungary (Fig. 1). Literature and herba r i u m records o f each region are evaluated and commented.
RESULTS A N D D I S C U S S I O N Börzsöny M t s "prope pag. Nagymaros, Ördöghegy, in decliv. m. meridion", leg.: Pénzes, 17. V. 1928 [BP]. T h i s r e c o r d ( n o t c o n f i r m e d recently) has been c o m p l e t e l y i g n o r e d i n H u n g a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e ( S I M O N 2000). H o w e v e r , the "Visegrád" l o c a l i t y m e n t i o n e d by J Á V O R K A and SOÓ (1951), S O Ó (1966) and S O Ó and K A R P Á T I (1968) possibly refers t o Ördög-hegy near the t o w n o f N a g y m a r o s ( n o r t h e r n p a r t o f the Visegrád M t s ) , b u t l o c a t e d o n the opposite side o f the
Danube
( s o u t h e r n p a r t o f the Börzsöny M t s ) . Ördög-hegy is also close t o the Slovak i a n l o c a l i t y o f V. pumila
(Burda).
Fig. 1 . Distribution of Valerianella pumila i n Hungary. Filled circles indicate records sup ported by herbarium specimen(s), empty circles indicate records not supported by herbar i u m specimen(s). I n case o f overlapping only füled circles are indicated. Localities: 1 = Esztergom: Szamár-hegy, 2 = Nagymaros: Ördög-hegy and Visegrád, 3 = Pilis Mts, 4 = Pomáz: Messelia, 5 = Budapest: Rákos, 6 = Budapest: Szent Gellért-hegy, Sas-hegy, Kelenföld, 7 = Budapest: Rupp-hegy and Budaörs: Csíki-hegyek, 8 = Mór: Csóka-hegy, 9 = Tihany Peninsula and surroundings, 10 = Keszthely Mts, 11 = Mecsek Mts, 12 = Nagyharsány: Szársomlyó and Villány: Fekete-hegy, 13 = Villány: Somsich-hegy.
Visegrád M t s "Pomdz, a Messelje alatt", leg.: Jávorka, 12.V.1904 [BP]. T h i s r e c o r d ( n o t c o n f i r m e d r e c e n t l y ) refers t o a l o c a l i t y ( t h e f o o t o f M t Messelia) i n the s o u t h e r n m o s t p a r t o f the Visegrád M t s . A s this site is f o u n d at the f o o t h i l l b o r d e r o f the Pilis M t s (s. str.), this m i g h t be the r e c o r d t h a t appeared i n H u n g a r i a n l i t e r a t u r e ( J Á V O R K A a n d SOÓ 1951, SOÓ 1966, SOÓ a n d K Á R P Á T I 1968) as being located i n the Pilis M t s . Nevertheless, n o voucher specimen o f V. pumila
is k n o w n f r o m the Pilis M t s so far. Recently
D O B O L Y I (1995, 1998) has p u b l i s h e d some relevés c o n t a i n i n g V. ( w i t h h i g h constancy value) f r o m
pumila
Szamár-hegy ( n o r t h e r n p a r t o f the
Visegrád M t s ) . Since this r e c o r d has n o voucher, f u r t h e r m o r e , the relevés c o n t a i n no other Valerianella
species, this r e c o r d is d o u b t f u l .
Buda M t s O n l y the first three ( a n d p r o b a b l y the f i f t h ) localities b e l o n g t o the h i l l y region o f Budapest a n d Budaörs (i.e. t o the Buda M t s ) . T h e f o u r t h l o cality is c o n f i n e d to the l o w l a n d (Kelenföld) south o f Szent Gellért-hegy a n d Sas-hegy i n Budapest. 1. Budapest, Szent Gellért-hegy "in prato montis Bloksberg meridional?, leg.: Sadler, s.d. [BP]; leg.: Kováts Gy., s.d. [BP]; leg.: Tauscher, s.d. [BP]; leg.: Heuffel, IV. 1825 [BP]; leg.: Borbás, IV.1872, (sub V. dentata P o l l , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Simonkai, 22.V.1872 et 17.V.1873 [BP]; "am Blocksberge bei Ofen. Dolomit", leg.: Freyn, 13.IV. 1873 et 4.V.1873 [BP]; "a Sz. Gellérthegy déli oldalán", leg.: Borbás, 6.V.1873 [BP]; "in latere meridionali m. Sancti Gerardi ad Budam", leg.: Borbás, 6.V.1873 [BP]; "Ofen: Blocksberg Kalk", leg.: Bohatsch, 8.V.1876 [BP]; "Blocksberg Dolomit", leg.: Richter, VI.1876 [BP]; leg.: Hermann, 20.V.1883 [BP, D E ] ; leg.: Czakó, 1 I.V. 1887 [DE]; leg.: Perlaky, 15.V.1888 (sub V. auricula D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; "locis herbidis apertis", leg.: Borbás, 18.V.1889 (det.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Thaisz, 18.V.1889 [BP]; "in locis saxosis graminosis", leg.: Perlaky, 13.V.1891 (sub V. auricula D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; "in herbidis montis Scti Gerardi", leg.: Perlaky, 28.V.1891 (sub V. dentata Poll., rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Grósz, 22.IV. 1899 (sub V. coro nata D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Grósz, 28.IV. 1899 (sub V. coronata D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Grósz, 7.V.1899 (sub V. coronata D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Grósz, 1 I.V. 1899
(sub V. coronata D C . et V. hamata Kit., rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Borbás, 14.V.1899 [BP]; leg.: Torday, 4.V.1904 [BP]; leg.: Jávorka, 9.V.1904 [BP]; leg.: Lengyel, 9.V.1904 [BP]; "in decl. graminosis montis Sti Gerardi", leg.: Zsák, 10.V.1918 [BP]; "in declivibus siccis meridionalibus montis Gellérthegy", leg.: Boros, U.V.1919 (sub V. rimosa Bast., rev.: BÁ, 1932 sub V. coronata (L.) D C , SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Zsák, 13.V.1920 [BP]; "in declivibus merid. montis S. Gerardi", leg.: Degen, 14.V.1920 (det.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Degen, 20.V.1923 [BP]; leg.: Lengyel, 20.V.1923 [BP].
Szent Gellért-hegy was the first location o f V. pumila
reported from
the c u r r e n t t e r r i t o r y o f H u n g a r y . T h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f the species t o o k place relatively late, since K i t a i b e l h a d n o t f o u n d i t d u r i n g his large-scale trips i n the Carpathian Basin (see J Á V O R K A 1929, 1936, G O M B O C Z 1945, L Ő K Ö S
2001), and i t was u n k n o w n even for Sadler and H e u f f e l for some t i m e (SADLER 1818,1825, H E U F F E L 1827). T h e species is first m e n t i o n e d , w i t h o u t
exact locality, by FEUREGGER (1837) ("In herbidis et circa Budam
in montium parte meridionali"),
siccis Litoralis
hungarici
w h o made his dissertation
under the direction and w i t h the powerful help o f his professor, J ó z s e f Sadler ( K A N I T Z 1861, G O M B O C Z 1936). As a definite record, the locality Szent Gellért-hegy first appears i n SADLER ( 1840) (see N E I L R E I C H 1866). Based o n
the large n u m b e r o f h e r b a r i u m sheets deposited at BP, this species must have for a long t i m e been c o m m o n on the m o u n t a i n . T h e last specimens f r o m this location were collected i n 1923. Unfortunately, the presence o f V. pumila
on
Szent Gellért-hegy has n o t been c o n f i r m e d since then ( H E G E D Ű S 1994). 2. Budapest, Sas-hegy "in graminosis montis Adlerberg (Dolomit)", leg.: Kováts Gy., s.d. [BP]; leg.: Kováts Gy., s.d. [BP]; leg.: Haynald, s.d. [BP]; leg.: Steinitz, s.d. [BP]; leg.: Steinitz, 7.V.1879 [BP]; leg.: Vajda, 3.V.1927 (sub V. coronata (L.) D C , rev.: JS, s.d. sub V. membranacea) [BP]; leg.: Degen, 12.V.1929 (det.: SL, 2004) [BP]; "in dolomiticis apricis montis Sashegy", leg.: Boros, 18.V.1929 [BP]; leg.: Boros, 1.VI.1929 [BP]; "in declivibus siccis loessaceis pedis montis Sas-hegy", leg.: Boros, 6.V.1945 (det.: SL, 2004) [BP]; "in dolomiticis montis Sas-hegy", leg.: Boros, 6.V.1945 (det.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Bánó, 17.IV. 1948 (sub V. dentata Poll., rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Siroki, 15.V.1951 [DE]; "in declivibus graminosis siccis montis Sashegy", leg.: Kárpáti, 20.V.1951 [BP].
I t is unclear whether Gyula Kováts or A n t o n Kerner collected V. pumila o n Sas-hegy first, nevertheless, this r e c o r d appears i n K E R N E R (1870) and later i n B O R B Á S (1879). A b o u t 100 years later PAPP (1977) c o n f i r m e d the
occurrence o f the species here, referring also to his o w n manuscript (check list). However, his reference to BOROS (1949) is false since no record o f Valerianella
is m e n t i o n e d i n Boros's paper. Actually, the last h e r b a r i u m spe
cimen o f V. pumila collected o n Sas-hegy is that o f Zoltán Kárpáti f r o m 1951. 3. Budapest - Budaörs, Csíki-hegyek "in colle aprico Ruppbegy ad Farkasrét", leg.: Boros, 28.IV. 1919 (sub V. rimosa Bast., rev.: BÁ, 1932 sub V. coronata D C , SL, 2004) [BP]; "in declivibus siccis montium Csiki hegyek", leg.: Boros, 11.VI. 1944 (sub V. coronata (L.) Lam. et D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; "in declivibus montis Csiki-hegyek supra pag. Budaörs in graminosis", leg.: Vajda, 18.VI.1944 [BP]; "in declivibus siccis montium Csíki-hegyek"', leg.: Hegedűs, 11.IV.1977 (sub V. dentata Poll., rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]? T h e t h o r o u g h floristical research o f the hills at Budaörs (called "Csíki hegyek") i n the v i c i n i t y o f Budapest began relatively late. V. pumila
was col
lected here o n four occasions, t h o u g h the o n l y correct i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was made by V a j d a i n 1944. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , the exact localities o f V.
pumila
w i t h i n the hill-range are p a r t l y u n k n o w n (see also A N O N Y M U S 1944). A p a r t f r o m the specimen collected by Hegedűs i n 1977, w h i c h is n o t ripe enough t o determine i t unequivocally ( i t c o u l d be V. coronata as w e l l ) , the existence o f V. pumila
here has n o t been c o n f i r m e d i n the last decades.
4. Budapest, Kelenföld "in pratispaludosusprope
Kelenföld ad Budam", leg.: Hermann, 20.V.1883 [BP].
T h i s r e c o r d represents the only t y p i c a l l o w l a n d l o c a l i t y o f V. pumila
in
H u n g a r y k n o w n so far (obviously a secondary a n d ephemeral occurrence). " R á k o s " e n u m e r a t e d by SOÓ (1966) a n d SOÓ and K Á R P Á T I (1968) as a l o cality o f V. pumila
p r o b a b l y refers to Kelenföld, since they are n e i g h b o u r i n g
l o w l a n d areas w i t h i n Budapest. H o w e v e r , Rákos is located on the left side, while Kelenföld on the r i g h t side o f the Danube. 5. Budapest, w i t h o u t exact ( t h o u g h probably h i l l y ) locality s.coll. (Sándor?), s.d. [BP]; leg.: Sadler, s.d. (sub V. coronata D C , rev.: SL, 2004) [BP]; leg.: Kováts Gy., s.d. [BP]; leg.: Hazslinszky, s.d. [BP]; leg.: Richter, s.d. [BP]; leg.: Freyn, 4.V.1873 [BP].
Vértes M t s "in calcareis merid. montis Csóka-hegy prope Mór", leg.: Boros, 26.IV.1953 (det.: SL, 2004) [BP]; "Csóka hegy, Mór felett", leg.: Vajda, 26.IV.1953 [BP]; "Csóka-hegy", leg.: Bauer and Somlyay, 8.V.2007 [BP]. T h e h e r b a r i u m specimens collected o n Csóka-hegy (near the t o w n o f M ó r , Fejér c o u n t y ) represent the o n l y r e c o r d o f V. pumila
k n o w n f r o m the
Vértes M t s so far. Consequently, "Vértes M t s " c i t e d i n some w o r k s ( S O Ó 1966, S O Ó a n d K Á R P Á T I 1968, S I M O N 2000) as a p a r t o f the H u n g a r i a n l o cal area o f V. pumila
is somewhat misleading, t h o u g h there are m a n y suit
able habitats for the species i n the region.
Balaton U p l a n d "Peninsula Tihany Balatonis: in siccis m. Csúcshegy", leg.: Jávorka, 21.V.1924 [BP]; "in declivibus apricis montis Csúcshegy prope Tihany", leg.: Boros, 21.VI. 1928 [BP]; "penin sula Tihany, in graminosis mt. Csúcshegy", leg.: Soó, 8.VIII(?).1928 [BPU]; "In Festucetis summae montisKiserdő-tetőpr. pag. Tihany", leg.: Felföldy, 30.V.1956 [BPU]; "ad aggerem viae ferreae inter pag. Aszófő et Örvényes", leg.: Felföldy, 12.V.1959 [BPU]; "Tihany: Nyereg-hegy, in pratis siccis, in rupibusgejziritis", leg.: Bauer, 28.V.2005 [BP]. I t was Sándor J á v o r k a w h o discovered (1924) V. pumila
i n the region
o f Lake Balaton ( J Á V O R K A 1924-1925, see also B O R B Á S 1900). H o w e v e r , except a small t e r r i t o r y ( T i h a n y Peninsula), no further localities o f the spe cies have been f o u n d since then ( J Á V O R K A a n d S O Ó 1951, S O Ó 1966, S o ó a n d K Á R P Á T I 1968, S I M O N 2000).
Keszthely M t s O n l y one literature record o f V. pumila
has been p u b l i s h e d f r o m the
Keszthely M t s ( S Z A B Ó 1990). Since n o t even a single h e r b a r i u m specimen is k n o w n f r o m the region, and the l o c a t i o n f r o m where the species was re p o r t e d has recently been destroyed (Szabó ex verb., 2007), this r e c o r d is doubtful.
Mecsek a n d Villány M t s "ad Quinqueecclesias in monte Mecsek", leg.: Simonkai, 5.VI.1873 [BP]; "ad Harsány", leg.: Simonkai, 7.VI.1873 [BP]; "mont. Nagyharsány supra pag. Nagyharsány", leg.: Soó, 24.V. 1956 (sub V. locusta (L.) Betcke, rev.: SL, 2007) [BPU]; "Nagyharsány, Szársomlyó pusztafüves-lejtő", leg.: Vöröss, 8.V.1962 [JPU]; "Nagyharsány, Szársomlyó D-i pusztafüves lejtő", leg.: Vöröss, 15.VI.1962 [JPU]; "Szársomlyó", leg.: Bauer, 12.V.2007 [BP]. As the m a j o r i t y o f floristical w o r k s o f southern T r a n s d a n u b i a refers to b o t h m o u n t a i n s we discuss t h e m together. I t was Lajos S i m o n k a i , w h o first collected the species i n b o t h the Mecsek a n d Villány M t s (SlMONKAI 1876). Nevertheless, HORVÁT (1942) refers to a V. pumila
specimen collected by
T a m á s N e n d t v i c h ( 1 7 8 2 - 1 8 5 8 ) i n the Mecsek M t s . H o w e v e r , Horvát's ref erence seems t o be erroneous, because the specimen collected by N e n d t v i c h i n the region ("Quinqueecl." = Pécs) labelled as "Fediapumila"
is actually V.
coronata (deposited at BP). T h i s m i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was corrected i n JANKA (1872), and m u c h later (2004) by the revision o f Somlyay. I t is w o r t h men t i o n i n g that no r e c o r d o f V. pumila
(Fedia pumila
or any other synonyms)
can be f o u n d i n the papers o f Károly and T a m á s N e n d t v i c h ( N E N D T V I C H 1836 - see also KERNER 1863, N E N D T V I C H 1846). A p a r t f r o m synoptical w o r k s using o l d data (HORVÁT 1942, JÁVORKA a n d SOÓ 1951, SOÓ 1966, L E H M A N N 1975, SIMON 2000) the o n l y 2 0 t h cen t u r y literature records o f V. pumila
f r o m the region are those o f N A G Y and
VÖRÖSS (1967) and VÖRÖSS (1966). However, the record f r o m Somsichhegy published by NAGY a n d VÖRÖSS (1967) is very uncertain, since the only k n o w n specimen collected there (Vöröss, A p r i l 1966) i d e n t i f i e d as V. pumila
is p r o b a b l y V. coronata, although the specimen is u n r i p e (JPU). T h i s
is the case w i t h other specimens at J P U i d e n t i f i e d as V. pumila,
such as
those collected by Vöröss ( M a r c h 1961 a n d A p r i l 1965) i n the Villány M t s as w e l l as by Pásztor ( M a r c h 1951) and T i h a n y i ( A p r i l 1951 ) i n the Mecsek M t s . A t present we can o n l y c o n f i r m the presence o f V. pumila Szársomlyó (Villány M t s ) .
on M t
Acknowledgements - Our thanks are expressed to János Csiky, István Galambos, István Isépy, Balázs Kevey and Gábor Sramkó for the access to the collections under their supervision and help while w o r k i n g i n the herbaria o f BPU, DE, JPU and the Bakony Natural History Museum.
REFERENCES A N O N Y M U S (1944): Szakosztályi kirándulás. [A field trip o f the Hungarian Botanical Soci ety.] - Bot. Közlem. 4 1 ( 3 - 5 ) : 168. BORBÁS, V. ( 1879): Budapest- és környékének növényzete. [ T h e flora of Budapest and its sur roundings.] - Magy. Kir. Egy. Könyvny., Budapest, 172 pp. BORBÁS, V. ( 1900): A Balaton tavának és partmellékének növényföldrajza és edényes növény zete. [The vascular flora and phytogeography o f Lake Balaton and its surroundings.] - A Balaton tudományos tanulmányozásának eredményei 1, Budapest, 432 pp. BOROS, Á. (1949): Florisztikai közlemények I I I . [Floristical notes I I I . ] - Borbásia 9 ( 3 - 5 ) : 28-34. DEVESA, J. A., LOPEZ, J. and G O N Z A L O , R. (2005): Notas taxonómicas sobre elgénero Vale rianella M i l l . (Valerianaceae) para la Flora Ibérica. - Acta Bot. Malacit. 30: 41-48. D O B O L Y I , Z. K. (1995): Phytosociological studies o f the habitat o f Achillea ochroleuca Ehrh. on Szamár-hegy (Visegrád Mts, Hungary). - Studia bot. hung. 2 6 : 15-24. D O B O L Y I , Z. K. (1998): Phytosociological studies on the andésite rocky grasslands i n Visegrád Mountains (Hungary). - Annls hist.-nat. Mus. natn. Hung. 90: 91-113. ERNET, D . and R I C H A R D S O N , I . B. K. (1976): Valerianella Miller. - I n : T U T I N , T . G., H E Y W O O D , V . H . , BURGES, N . A., M O O R E , D . M . , V A L E N T I N E , D . H . , W A L T E R S , S. M .
and W E B B , D . A . (eds): Flora Europaea 4, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 48-52. FEUREGGER, K. (1837): Dissertatio inauguralis medico-botanica de Valerianeis Hungáriáé, Croatiae, Transylvaniae, Dalmatiae, et Lit oralis Hungarici. - Pestini, 30 pp. G O M B O C Z , E. (1936): A magyar botanika története. [The history of botany i n Hungary.] Magy. T u d . Akad., Budapest, 636 pp. G O M B O C Z , E. (1945): Diaria itinerum Pauli Kitaibelii 1-2. - Verl. Ung. Naturwiss. M u seums, Budapest, 1082 pp. H E G E D Ű S , Á. (1994): Budapest jelenlegi virágos flórája. [The present state of flowering flora of Budapest.] - Animula Kiadó, Budapest, 68 pp. H E U F F E L , J. (1827): Dissertatio inauguralis medico-botanica de distributione plantarum geographica per comitatum Hungáriáé Pestiensem. - Pestini, 39 pp. H O R V Á T , A . (1942): A Mecsekhegység és déli síkjának növényzete. [The flora and vegeta t i o n o f the Mecsek Mts and its southern foreground.] - Ciszt. Rend kiad., Pécs, 103 + 159 pp. J A N K A , V. (1872): Zur Flora Ungarns. - Oest. Bot. Zeitschrift 2 2 ( 5 ) : 152-157. J Á V O R K A , S. (1924-1925): Magyar Flóra (Flora Hungarica) 1-2. - Studium, Budapest, 1307 pp.
JÁVORKA, S. (1929): Kitaibel herbáriuma. Herbarium Kitaibelianum. I I . - Ann. Mus. Nat. Hung. 2 6 : 97-210. JÁVORKA, S. (1936): Kitaibel herbáriuma. Herbarium Kitaibelianum. V . - Ann. Mus. Nat. Hung. 3 0 : 7 - 1 1 8 . J Á V O R K A , S. and S o ó , R. (1951): A magyar növényvilág kézikönyve 1. [The handbook o f Hungarian flora 1.] - Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 582 pp. K A N I T Z , A. (1861): Beiträge zur Botanik Ungarns. - Oest. Bot. Zeitschrift 11(12): 404-407. KERNER, A. (1863): Nachtrag zu C. M . Nendtvich's Enumeratio plantarum territorii Quinque-Ecclesiensis. - Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. in Wien 13: 561-574. KERNER, A . (1870): Die Vegetations-Verhältnisse des mittleren und östlichen Ungarns und angrenzenden Siebenbürgens X X X V I I I . - Oest. Bot. Zeitschrift 20(12): 356-363. L E H M A N N , A. (1975): A nagyharsányi Szársomlyó-hegy és növényzete. [The flora and veg etation o f M t Szársomlyó at Nagyharsány.] - MTA Dunánt. Tud. Int. Közlem. 20: 1-185. L Ő K Ö S , L . (2001) (ed.): Diaria itinerum Pauli Kitaibelii III. 1805-1817. - H u n g . Nat. Hist. Mus., Budapest, 460 pp. M A G L O C K Y , S. (1999): Valerianella pumila (L.) DC. - I n : C E R O V S K Y , J., F E R Á K O V Á , V., H O L U B , J., M A G L O C K Y , S. and P R O C H Á Z K A , F . (eds): Cervená Kniha ohrozenych a vzácnych druhov rastlín a zivocichov SR a CR 5, Vyssie rastliny, Priroda a. s., Bratislava, p. 394. N A G Y , I . and VÖRÖSS, L . Zs. (1967): A villányi Somsich-hegy növényzete. [ T h e flora and vegetation o f Somsich-hegy at Villány.] - Pécsi Tanárképző Főisk. Tud. Közlem. 1967: 3-15. N E I L R E I C H , A . (1866): Aufzählung der in Ungarn und Slavonien bisher beobachteten Gefässpßanzen nebst einer pflanzengeografischen Uebersicht. - Wien, 390 pp. N E N D T V I C H , K. (1836): Dissertatio inauguralis historico-naturalis exhibens enumerationem plantarum in territorio Quinque-Ecclesiensi sponte crescentium praemisso tractatu generali de natura geognostica montium deque situ climate et vegetatione ejusdem regionis. - Budae, 38 pp. N E N D T V I C H , T. (1846): Pécs és környékének viránya. [The flora of Pécs and its surround ings.] - A m . orvosok és természetvizsgálók Pécsett tartott hatodik nagygyűlésének történeti vázlata és munkálatai, Pécs, pp. 288-291. N É M E T H , F. (1989): A potenciálisan veszélyeztetett száras növényfajok. [Potentially threat ened vascular plants o f Hungary.] - I n : R A K O N C Z A Y , Z. (ed.): Vörös Könyv, A Magyarországon kipusztult és veszélyeztetett növény- és állatfajok, Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 272-281. P A P P , J . (1977): A budai Sashegy élővilága. [The flora and fauna of Sas-hegy i n Budapest.]Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 99 pp. PERLAKY, G. (1894): Florisztikai közlemények főkép Pestmegye flórájáról. [Floristical notes mostly on the flora o f Pest county.] - Természetrajzi Füzetek 17(3-4): 100-111. SADLER, J . (1818): Verzeichniss der um Pesth und Ofen wildwachsenden phanerogamischen Gewächse mit Angabe ihrer Standorte und Blüthezeit. - Pesth, 79 pp.
SADLER, J. (1825): Flora comitatus Pestiensis. - Pestini, 335 pp. SADLER, J. (1840): Flora comitatus Pesthinensis. Ed. 2. - Pesthini, 499 pp. S I M O N , T . (2000): A magyarországi edényes flóra határozója. [Key to the vascular flora o f Hungary.] - Tankönyvkiadó, Budapest, 976 pp. SlMONKAl, L. (1876): Adatok Magyarhon edényes növényeihez. [Contributions to the vas cular flora o f Hungary.] - Math. Term.tud. Közlem. 11(6): 157-211. SOÓ, R. (1966): A magyar flóra és vegetáció rendszertani-növény földrajzi kézikönyve II. (Synopsis systematico-geobotanica florae vegetationisque Hungáriáé I I ) . Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 655 pp. SOÓ, R. and K Á R P Á T I , Z. (1968): Növényhatározó II. Harasztok - virágos növények. [Key to the flora o f Hungary I I . Pteridophytes - flowering plants.] - Tankönyvkiadó, Buda pest, 846 pp. SZABÓ, I . (1990): Investigations on the flora and vegetation of Keszthely Hills (Hungary) with special regard to their southern elements. - I n : SZABÓ, I . (ed.): Illyrische Ein strahlungen i m ostalpin-dinarischen Raum, Keszthely, pp. 79-88. VÖRÖSS, L. Zs. (1966): A Ranunculus psilostachys Griseb. társulási viszonyai. (Die zönologischen Verhältnisse von Ranunculus psilostachys Griseb. in Ungarn). - Bot. Köziem. 5 3 ( 3 ) : 165-170.
(Received 1 February, 2007)
