Reclassification of Psilophyta

Abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Taxon. SummaryThe historical reasons for the failure to abandon the category Psilophyta until long after it had become a catchall group for unrelated taxa are reviewed. Recent advances in the understanding of the major types of early land plants are summarized in order to test the usefulness of the three Subdivisions of Tracheophyta that were proposed by Banks in 1968; Rhyniophytina, Zosterophyllophytina, Trimerophytina. HISTORICALThe taxon Psilophyta was retained long after its usefulness had passed. The primary reasons were the creation of an image of early Devonian plants as the simplest imaginable vascular land plants and the impact of such plants on morphological thought. The fact that nearly a century elapsed between the first fragmentary descriptions of some taxa and the final discovery of their critical features such as sporangial position and stelar anatomy permitted unrelated plants to be classified together. I begin with a brief historical account which will be neither complete nor wholly chronological. Past and current concepts, descriptions, and nomenclature will be intermixed in an effort to demonstrate why Psilophyta became a concept so difficult to dislodge.Dawson (1859) recognized that his leafless but spiny, dichotomously branching, vascular plant fossils from the Devonian of Gaspd Peninsula, Canada resembled modern Psilotum. Hence he named the fossils Psilophyton. His first species was P. princeps Dawson I859 for which a type specimen was not selected until 1967 (Hueber and Banks, 1967) and for which a suitable description appeared only in 1968 (Hueber, 1968). Drepanophycus spinaeformis, a second notable Devonian vascular plant, had been described from Germany by G6ppert in 1852. Similar specimens from the Gaspe Peninsula were given the name Arthrostigma gracile by Dawson (1971). Many years later Arthrostigma was recognized to be a synonym of Drepanophycus. Psilophyton and Drepanophycus (Arthrostigma), were long regarded as distinct although they were the two best known Psilophyta. Psilophyton bore spiny emergences, Drepanophycus was clothed with leaves. Fructifications assigned to Psilophyton by Dawson (1859) neither resembled sporangia nor were they organically attached. None were known for Drepanophycus. AUGUST 1975 401 Dawson (1871) subsequently described P. princeps var. ornatum. It bore stout spines. Associated with it, but never attached to the main axis, were groups of paired, terminal, recurved sporangia. Despite the warnings of Solms-Laubach (I895) and Halle (1916) that the terminal sporangia were not proven to be organically...

The role of terrestrially derived organic carbon in the coastal ocean: A changing paradigm and the priming effect

“…The oldest fossil proven to be a vascular land plant is Cooksonia, from the late Silurian Period (ca. 420 Ma) (16). Much of the paleobotanical work in the 1970s suggested that the timeframe for the initial diversification of land plants was between the late Silurian and early Devonian (410 Ma).…”

Phylogenetic Analysis of Seed Plants and the Origin of Angiosperms

“…The approach outlined in this paper does not differ fundamentally from approaches previously used in paleobotany to interpret early land plant evolution (Banks, 1975;Chaloner, 1970b), early angiosperm evolution (Doyle, 1978;Doyle & Hickey, 1976), and studies of the major patterns of angiosperm leaf architecture (Hickey & Wolfe, 1975). It differs only in being relatively explicit and in attempting to define a highly resolved hierarchy of relationships.…”

The Middle Devonian plant assemblage from Dechra Aït Abdallah (Central Morocco) revisited

“…Today, the lack of counterpart and absence of fertile organs prevent such a taxonomic identification. Psilophytites was created for vegetative axes of various affinities that, like the specimen described here, present undivided spines scattered on the surface (Høeg, 1952;Banks, 1975;Gerrienne, 1992). The specimen from Dechra Aït Abdallah differs from Psilophytites rectissimus from the Lower Devonian of Norway which is larger in diameter and branches rarely (Høeg, 1967;Gerrienne, 1992).…”