Read Ebook: The Ohio Naturalist Vol. 1 No. 5 March 1901 by Ohio State University Biological Club

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 103 lines and 10113 words, and 3 pages

Entered at the Post Office at Columbus, Ohio, as second class matter.

The Ohio Naturalist

PUBLISHED BY

THE BIOLOGICAL CLUB OF THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY

PERENNIAL TUMBLEWEEDS.

JOHN H. SCHAFFNER.

Tumbleweeds may be classified under three general heads:

Annual tumbleweeds, Tumble-grasses, Perennial tumbleweeds.

The annual tumbleweeds are mostly plants with a small root system which shrivels up or rots away soon after the seed has matured. The plants are then easily torn from the ground or broken off and go tumbling away before the wind. In some cases the roots become quite fleshy and brittle. In the tumble-grasses the panicle is generally the only part which is transported, the stems of the panicle being usually very brittle and breaking readily even in those forms which are easily torn up from the roots.

The perennial tumbleweeds are especially interesting because of the way in which they are separated from the underground parts. Among the perennial forms Psoralea floribunda is one of the most typical. It is a long-lived, perennial crown-former with a very deep root which may be several inches in diameter. From the short terminal stem of this root a number of aerial branches are developed annually. These branches take on a more or less globose or balloon-shaped form. At the base of each aerial stem a number of special joints are formed in which transverse cleavage regions are gradually developed, and when the seed is ripe the whole crown breaks off at these joints with remarkable ease. This is a peculiar case of the development of a self-pruning process in the stem for a very special purpose.

Psoralea argophylla also develops perfect joints but fewer shoots usually make up the crown and it is therefore less conspicuous than P. floribunda. Psoralea esculenta is also a tumbleweed but the writer has not made an examination of the way in which it separates from the thick, tuberous, perennial root.

Psoralea floribunda is very abundant in north-central Kansas where the writer has seen great masses heaped up against hedgerows and wire fences. These plants show a most remarkable responsive adaption to an environment of very definite conditions. They have developed nearly every character possible in harmony with the dry and windy plains of the west and may be regarded as ideal prairie plants.

THE SPROUTING OF COCKLEBUR SEEDS.

E. E. MASTERMAN.

In July, 1896, Dr. E. W. Claypole, then of Buchtel College, Akron, Ohio, asked me how general was the belief that one seed of the cocklebur grew one year and the other the next year or later. Inquiry of about twenty of the older residents resulted in procuring no information touching the same. In 1897, I was told by a German farmer that one seed only grew one year and the other later, never both at the same time. A short time after I noticed the statement of A. D. Selby in Bulletin 83, Ohio Experiment Station, as follows: "Prof. Arthur has recently shown that only one of these seeds can be caused to germinate the first year, the other always remaining until the second year." This was a confirmation of the German's claim, yet I determined to investigate for myself.

I carried on the experiment for three years with the following results:

In 1898, I planted 1000 burs; 917 grew two plants to the bur. In 1899, I planted 1000 burs; 921 grew two plants to the bur. In 1900, I planted 1000 burs; 913 grew two plants to the bur. Total three years, 3000 burs; 2751 grew two plants to the bur.

Perhaps it should be added that I selected only apparently sound burs; soil was taken from a field near a creek where cockleburs grow abundantly. It was passed through a 1/4 inch-mesh wire sieve, and carefully searched over with the aid of a glass. This soil was taken to a distant part of the farm; in it the seeds were planted and nature did the rest.

I also made observations as follows: I searched among specimens growing for a mile along a creek, for two plants growing together and not nearer than five inches to any other plant. Of the 1500 specimens examined each year for three years, two plants always grew from one bur.

Why have I obtained such opposite results as compared with Professor Arthur's? Can it be referred to locality, soil, or some other more favorable conditions?

The substance of the above was presented, December 27, 1900, to the Ohio Academy of Science and it provoked a discussion in which Professors Kellerman, Schaffner, Mosely and others participated. Dr. Kellerman thought that the results of Arthur's experiments were perhaps more nearly in accord with what usually takes place in nature. He pointed out the mistake of quoting or saying that Arthur has shown "that only one of the seeds can be caused to germinate the first year." Turning to the printed report of the experiments in question , I find that, based on many experiments made previous to 1895, he gives the result in round numbers as follows: "Out of every hundred ordinarily well formed cockleburs, seventy will produce one seedling each, and five two seedlings each the first year after maturity; the remaining twenty-five will for various reasons fail to grow. Thirty of the hundred will produce seedlings the second year after maturity, five will produce seedlings the third year after maturity, and two or three seedlings will be produced in subsequent years."

Later experiments by Dr. Arthur seemed to show a lower percentage of cases of the sprouting of both seeds to the bur in one season. In the summary he states: "The germination of both seeds of a bur of Xanthium in one season is exceptional."

In view of the above and in accordance with the suggestions of others I purpose continuing my experiments relative to this subject.

The following interesting statement is made by Dr. Arthur, in the report cited, touching the cause of the difference in the action of the two seeds; he says it "appears to be constitutional; a hereditary character residing in the protoplasm of the embryo."

PLANT REMAINS FROM THE BAUM VILLAGE SITE.

W. C. MILLS.

During the year 1900 the Ohio Archaeological and Historical Society procured from the ash pits of the Baum Village Site, situated near Bournville, Ross county, Ohio, a number of grains and seeds, which were submitted to Prof. J. H. Schaffner for identification. The following is the list:

Corn, Zea mays L.

Great quantities of the eight rowed variety were found. The cobs were usually about one-half inch in diameter. Also a variety with more than eight rows, usually ten rows was found. This variety had a much thicker cob. The grains and cob were in a good state of preservation, having been charred. In several instances the charred remains of a woven fabric were found intermingled with the cobs and grains, showing that the corn had evidently been wrapped in this cloth. In other instances the grains and cobs were found in large pieces of broken pottery and were well preserved. Finding the corn in so many of the pits shows that it largely supplied the food of the camp.

Quantities of charred papaw seeds, Asimina triloba, Dunal, and the wild Hazelnut, Corylus americana Walt. were found in a number of pits showing that these were largely used for food.

Quite a quantity of the seeds of the wild red plum, Prunus americana Marsh. was also taken from the pits. These were, in a number of instances, associated with papaw seeds and the shells of the chestnut, Castanea dentata Borkh.

Great quantities of the broken shells of the butternut, Juglans cinerea L. and the black walnut, Juglans nigra L. were discovered. These were usually found associated together, but in several instances they were found separated, the butternuts being more abundant than the walnuts.

Three species of hickory nuts were procured but none of these were in such quantities as the butternut and black walnut. The three species found were as follows: Hicoria minima Britt., Hicoria ovata Britt., Hicoria laciniosa Britt.

Several specimens of beans, Phaseolus and also a specimen of the grape, Vitis were found in the material, but it was not possible to tell whether the beans were one of our wild species or cultivated.

SPROUTING FLOWER BUDS OF OPUNTIA.

In June of last year I took some Opuntia plants home, and also some top joints heavily set with large buds. The former were planted in the garden, the latter set in an Oleander tub. When, after a month, none of the flower buds had opened, it was thought that they were too many, as the joints bearing them were without roots, and most of them were cut off and left lying on the ground, where a part of them later on became partly or entirely covered with soil. In September, I was surprised to find them all green and fresh; most of them had rooted, and a few even sprouted, sending up shoots from half an inch to over an inch high, being perfect little joints. At the present writing all are alive, and, no doubt, will grow out to plants next summer. They will be watched closely and further report be given.

It might be added that the Opuntia calyx-tube, which is later the fruit, has "eyes," that is buds, of the same character as the ordinary buds of the plant, with clusters of bristles; and out of these the young shoots grew, when the bud took root.

Evidently these buds retain more of the nature of the mother plant than is common in flowers. It is unknown to me whether similar observations have been made before. But it would be of interest to make experiments with different plants. Would the receptacles root and sprout if detached after flowering and fertilization have taken place? Would the buds sprout when left in situ on the mother plant, after the flowering parts had been removed, the receptacle only left in place? Will the buds of other genera of Cacteae, and other similar succulent plants behave in the same way, under favorable conditions?

So-called viviparous plants are, as is well known, rather common, e. g. among Gramineae, Cyperaceae, Polygoneae. But there the actual flower parts develop into leaves, from which they had originally been derived, and while yet remaining on the parent plant.

NOTE ON THE INVOLUCRAL LEAVES OF SYNDESMON.

F. H. BURGLEHAUS.

Syndesmon thalictroides is described in Britton & Brown's Flora as having sessile involucral leaves, which character is contradicted in the plants growing in the vicinity of Toledo. Careful observation during the past season fails to reveal a single instance of sessile involucral leaves, and most of the specimens examined have these leaves borne on petioles from one-fourth to one-half inch in length. Should like to hear from others concerning this feature of one of our most beautiful and dainty spring flowers.

COMPETITION IN BOTANY FOR OHIO SCHOOLS.

W. A. KELLERMAN.

Whatever may contribute to a more direct and real study of the plant kingdom on the part of the pupils can well be encouraged by the teacher. It is an unfortunate fact that in reference to a course in botany the notion largely prevails that it consists of lesson-work with a text-book like a course in history or algebra. It is often more dreaded than the latter because of the supposed necessity of learning a long list of difficult technical terms. Few teachers would be willing to give up the use of the text-book entirely and it is not at all necessary that they should. But every teacher can now choose a modern book of botany from the fairly long list that is offered by American publishers. These are not mainly terminology nor written with the chief aim of enabling the pupil, after having gone through a sufficient number of chapters, to "analyze" flowers. Many of them unfortunately provide no means of identifying the native plants as a part of a school course, but teachers are not left without choice of a good book after such ultra ones are thrown out of the list.

The text of an elementary book on botany should contain the important facts and principles of the science, and give a brief but comprehensive idea of the plant kingdom, in simple and plain language. An intimation and partial elucidation of means and methods employed to test or to verify the principles and inferences should be evident in the text. But this of itself is not sufficient for pedagogical purposes; there should be besides practical work provided, regular in time, ample in amount, that may train in the exercise of observation, experimentation and judgment.

I have for years devoted one-half the time of the botanical courses, both elementary and advanced, to such real work carried on partly in the laboratory, partly in the field. Besides courses here referred to others devoted wholly to laboratory, experimental or observational work are provided; but it is not my purpose to discuss these now. Neither is it necessary to give here a detailed outline of the practical work that should constitute a substantial portion of the elementary work for beginners. Those who wish to use such a simple yet ample course in the public schools can consult the "Practical Studies in Elementary Botany" published by Eldredge & Bro., Philadelphia, Pa.

But I desire to say in this connection that more real work on the native flora than is attempted even by able and enthusiastic teachers in Ohio schools would undoubtedly be advisable. I have outlined some competition work and submitted it to some of the schools looking to more interest in elementary practical work in this science. It has been urged that the project might be made more widely known to our Ohio schools with possible advantage, and therefore I have furnished, though with some misgivings, the following statement of this scheme.

Either of the following subjects may be selected: Mosses, Lichens, or Trees; the work to conform to the suggestions and directions given below. The Report of the work must be completed on or before May 15, 1901, and submitted to the Teacher of Botany, or person designated by him, who--taking into account both the quality and quantity of the work--will forward, if worthy, the best report accompanied by the illustrative material, to the undersigned; whereupon the latter will, on or before May 31, send as a reward to the author of said report a copy of the OHIO NATURALIST VOL. 1.

Pupils now studying, or those who have formerly studied, botany are eligible to enter the competition. No award will be made unless at least two or three pupils undertake the work; it is hoped that every member of the class will compete.

It is desired that the pupils consult teachers, parents, and others, who may be able to advise as to the subject, kind and extent of the work, also as to the best arrangement and wording of the report, and the labelling and preparation of the accompanying illustrative material.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet