Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-mcfzb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-09T21:18:27.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phytogeographical and ecological relations of epiphytic lichens from Lewis and Harris with notes on other cryptogamic epiphytes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

Harald Riedl
Harald Riedl
Affiliation:
Natural History Museum, Vienna
Get access

Synopsis

Fifty-eight epiphytic lichen species are listed from Lewis and Harris, and their geographical connections are discussed. Twenty-nine of them were collected on this island for the first time. Judging from the occurrence of Lecanactis homalotropa, Pyrenula laevigata and Ramalina obtusata (which are confined to very few places in the British Isles today and may be regarded as relics) on a small number of old and mostly dying sycamores near Rodel at the southern end of Harris, there had been an older forest of which these trees form the last remnants and from which the colonization of Stornoway Woods may have originated. Some of the lichens also occur on dwarf-shrubs which have certainly been present all the time, or on rocks or ground. Man may have played a part in introducing lichen-species along with timber. A few notes on epiphytic algae, fungi, mosses and ferns are added.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 77: The Natural Environment of the Outer Hebrides , 1979 , pp. 295 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1979

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

Barkman, J. J., 1969. Phytosociology and Ecology of Cryptogamic Epiphytes. Assen: van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Degelius, G., 1935. Das ozeanische Element der Strauch- und Laubflechtenflora von Skandinavien. Acta Phytogeogr. Suec., 7, 1–411.Google Scholar
Grummann, V., 1963. Catalogus Lichenum Germaniae. Stuttgart: Fischer.Google Scholar
Hawksworth, D. L., 1970. Systematic Studies in the Lichen Genus Alectoria with Particular Reference to the British species. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Leicester Univ.Google Scholar
James, P. W., 1965. A new check-list of British lichens. Lichenologist, 3, 95–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keissler, K. Von, 1938. Pyrenulaceae bis Mycoporaceae. Coniocarpineae. In: Kryptogamen-Flora von Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz, 2nd edn, Rabenhorst, L., Ed. 9/XI/2. Leipzig: Akademische Verlag.Google Scholar
Lamb, I. M., 1945. Lichens. In: The Flora of Uig, Campbell, M. S., Ed. Arbroath: Buncle.Google Scholar
Leighton, W. A., 1879. The Lichen-Flora of Great Britain, Ireland and the Channel Islands, 3rd edn. Shrewsbury.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magnusson, A. H., 1932. Beiträge zur Systematik der Flechtengruppe Lecanora subfusca. Meddn Göteborgs Bot. Trädg., 7, 65–87.Google Scholar
Magnusson, A. H., 1944. Studies in the Ferruginea-group of the genus Caloplaca. Göteborgs K. Vetensk. VitterhSamh. Handl., B, 3, 1–71.Google Scholar
Manning, S. A., 1968. Lichens from Lewis and Harris, Outer Hebrides (V.C. 110). Trans. Proc. Bot. Soc. Edinb., 40, 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poelt, J., 1952. Die Lecanora subfusca-Gruppe in Süddeutschland. Ber. Bayer. Bot. Ges., 29, 58–69.Google Scholar
Poelt, J., 1969. Bestimmungschlüssel europäischer Flechten. Lehre: Cramer.Google Scholar
Redinger, K., 1938. Arthoniacea, Graphidaceae, etc. In: Kryptogamen-Flora von Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz, 2nd edn, Rabenhorst, L., Ed. 9/2/1, 2. Leipzig: Akad. Verlag.Google Scholar
Riedl, H., 1977. Vorstudien zu einer Revision der Gattung Arthopyrenia Mass, sensu amplo III.—Zur nomenklatur und Systematik von Arthopyrenia punctiformis auct. Sydowia, 29, 115–138.Google Scholar
Smith, Annie L., 1926. A Monograph of the British Lichens, 2nd edn, pp. I, ii. London.Google Scholar
Watson, W., 1953. Census Catalogue of British Lichens. London: British Mycol. Soc.Google Scholar