• K. Kubitzki
Part of the The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants book series (FAMILIES GENERA, volume 2)


Deciduous, anemophilous trees or shrubs; branchlets sometimes differentiated into long and short shoots; bark close or exfoliating in thin layers, often marked with prominent lenticels; winter buds naked or covered with two smooth, valvate, stipular scales or with few to many imbricate scales. Leaves simple, petiolate, alternate, spirally arranged, or distichous, blades serrate, abaxially sometimes covered with resinous glands, pinnately veined; stipules present, free, deciduous. Plants monoecious, flowers unisexual, much reduced. Inflorescences pendulous or erect catkins, consisting of reduced, 3-flowered cymules, or reduced to compact clusters of several minute flowers (florets); catkins terminal or lateral on the branchlets; staminate catkins precocious or developing during the current season, pendulous, conspicuously bracteate, the scales consisting of 1–5 fused bracts; pistillate inflorescences erect to pendulous, bracts 1–5 per scale, variously fused and often large and subfoliaceous or woody in the infructescence.


Staminate Flower Pistillate Flower Arnold Arbor Partial Inflorescence Floating Leaf 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Selected Bibliography

  1. Abbe, E. C. 1935. Studies in the phylogeny of the Betulaceae. I. Floral and inflorescence anatomy and morphology. Bot. Gaz. 97: 1–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbe, E. C. 1938. Studies in the phylogeny of the Betulaceae. II. Extremes in the range of variation of floral and inflorescence morphology. Bot. Gaz. 99: 431–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Behnke, H.-D. 1989. Sieve element plastids, phloem proteins, and the evolution of flowering plants. IV. Hamamelidae. In: Crane, P.R., Blackmore, S. (Eds.) Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, Vol.1. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 105–128.Google Scholar
  4. Corner, E. J.H. 1976. See general references.Google Scholar
  5. Crane, P. R. 1989. Early fossil history and evolution of the Betulaceae. In: Crane, P.R., Blackmore, S. (Eds.) Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, Vol.2. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 87–116.Google Scholar
  6. Dahlgren, R. 1980, 1983. See general references.Google Scholar
  7. Davis, G.L. 1966. See general references.Google Scholar
  8. Endress, P. K. 1977. Evolutionary trends in the HamemelidalesFagales group. Pl. Syst. Evol. Suppl. 1: 321–347.Google Scholar
  9. Erdtman, G. 1952. See general references.Google Scholar
  10. Fedorov, A. A. 1969. See general references.Google Scholar
  11. Furlow, J. J. 1979. The systematics of the American species of Alnus (Betulaceae). Rhodora 81: 1–121, 151–248.Google Scholar
  12. Furlow, J. J. 1990. The genera of Betulaceae in the southeastern United States. J.Arnold Arbor. 71: 1–67.Google Scholar
  13. Hall, J.W. 1952. The comparative anatomy and phylogeny of the Betulaceae. Bot. Gaz. 113: 235–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hardin, J. W., Bell, J. M. 1986. Atlas of foliar surface features in woody plants, IX. Betulaceae of eastern United States. Brittonia 38: 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hegnauer, R. 1964, 1989: See general references.Google Scholar
  16. Hjelmqvist, H. 1948. Studies on the floral morphology and phylogeny of the Amentiferae. Bot. Not. Suppl. 2: 1–171 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Jäger, E. J. 1980. Progressionen im Synfloreszenzbau und in der Verbreitung bei den Betulaceae. Flora (Jena) 170: 91–113.Google Scholar
  18. McVean, D.N. 1953. Alnus Mill. In: Biological flora of the British Isles. J. Ecol. 41: 447–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McVean, D.N. 1956. Ecology of Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertn. IV. Root system. J.Ecol. 44: 219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Metcalfe, C.R., Chalk, L. 1950. See general references.Google Scholar
  21. Neal, J.L., Jr., Trappe, J.M., Lu, K. G, Bollen, W.B. 1968. Some ectotrophic mycorrhizae of Alnus rubra. In: Trappe, J.M., Franklin, J.F., Tarrant, R.F., Hansen, G.M. (Eds.) Biology of alder. Portland., pp. 179-185.Google Scholar
  22. Palo, R.T., Sunnerheim, K., Theander, O. 1985. Seasonal variation of phenols, crude protein and cell wall content of birch (Betula pendula Roth) in relation to ruminant in vitro digestibility. Oecologia 65: 314–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rodriques-Barrueco, C., Bond, G. 1969. Nodule endophytes in the genus Alnus. In: Trappe, J.M., Franklin, J.F., Tarrant, R.F., Hansen, G.M. (Eds.) Biology of alder. Portland., pp. 185-192.Google Scholar
  24. Willson, M.F., Burley, N. 1983. Mate choice in plants. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Winkler, H. 1904. Betulaceae. In: Engler, A. (Ed.) Das Pflanzenreich IV, 61. Leipzig: W. Engelmann, 149 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Zavada, M.S., Dilcher, D.L. 1986. Comparative pollen morphology and its relationship to phylogeny of pollen in the Hamamelidae. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 73: 348–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Kubitzki

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations