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


Shrubs or small trees, usually aromatic and resinous, evergreen or deciduous; roots commonly with nitrogen-fixing nodules. Trichomes of various kinds, eglandular ones elongate, unicellular, and colourless, glandular ones with a multicellular, basally embedded stalk and a multicellular peltate, later balloon-shaped head with golden-yellow content. Leaves alternate, simple, rarely pinnatifid, serrate to irregularly dentate; stipules absent except in Comptonia. Plants monoecious or dioecious. Flowers inconspicuous, unisexual, borne in spicate aments; each flower usually subtended by a bract, two bracteoles, and sometimes additional bracts; perianth generally absent, present in Canacomyrica; stamens 2–8 (very rarely up to 20), progressively fewer in the more distal flowers of the spike; anthers tetrasporangiate, extrorse, opening by longitudinal slits; gynoecium 2-carpellate, the ovary unilocular, superior (Comptonia), or ± inferior (other genera); styles distinct or united at the base; ovule solitary, orthotropous, unitegmic, crassinucellar, in Canacomyrica with an elongate, recurved micropylar tube. Fruit drupaceous, or almost a nutlet, often covered by variously shaped protuberances, frequently with a coating of wax, enclosed or not by persistent bracts. Seeds with little or no endosperm; embryo straight, dicotyledonous. x = 8.


Female Flower Male Flower Pollen Morphology Arnold Arbor Pollen Spore 
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. 1974. Flowers and inflorescences of the “Amentiferae”. Bot. Rev. 40: 159–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bond, G. 1951. The fixation of nitrogen associated with the root nodules of Myrica Gale L., with special reference to its pH relation and ecological significance. Ann. Bot. (London) II, 15: 447–459.Google Scholar
  3. Chevalier, A. 1901. Monographie des Myricacées; anatomie et histologie, organographie, classification et déscription des espèces, distribution géographique. Mém. Soc. Sci. Nat. Cherbourg 32: 85–340.Google Scholar
  4. Chourey, M.S. 1974. A study of the Myricaceae from Eocene sediments of southeastern North America. Palaeonto-graphica B 146: 88–153.Google Scholar
  5. Coetzee, J. A., Praglowski, J. 1984. Pollen evidence for the occurrence of Casuarina and Myrica in the Tertiary of South Africa. Grana 23: 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Del Tredici, P. 1977. The buried seeds of Comptonia peregrina, the Sweet Fern. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 104: 270–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Engler, A. 1894. Myricaceae. In: Engler, A., Prantl, K. (Eds.) Die natürlichen Pflanzenfamilien III, 1. Leipzig: Engelmann, pp. 26–28.Google Scholar
  8. Fletcher, W.W. 1955. The development and structure of root nodules of Myrica gale L. with special reference to the nature of the endophyte. Ann. Bot. (London) II, 19: 501–513.Google Scholar
  9. Friis, E.M. 1983. Upper Cretaceous (Senonian) floral structures of juglandalean affinity containing Normapollis pollen. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol. 39: 161–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gladkova, A. N. 1962. Fragments of the history of the Myricaceae family. Pollen Spores 4: 345.Google Scholar
  11. Guillaumin, A. 1940. Matériaux pour la flore de la Nouvelle-Calédonie. LVII. La présence d’une Myricacée. Bull. Soc. Bot. Fr. 87: 299–300.Google Scholar
  12. Håkansson, A. 1955. Endosperm formation in Myrica gale L. Bot. Not. 108: 6–16.Google Scholar
  13. Hegnauer, R. 1969, 1990: see general references.Google Scholar
  14. Hjelmqvist, H. 1948. Studies on the floral morphology and phylogeny of the Amentiferae. Bot. Not., Suppl. 2, 1: 1–171.Google Scholar
  15. Kershaw, E.M. 1909. The structure and development of the ovule of Myrica gale. Ann. Bot. (London) 23: 353–362.Google Scholar
  16. Kotlaba, F. 1961. Taxonomic-nomenclatural notes on the fossil Comptonia difformis (Sternb.) Berry and the recent Comptonia aspleniifolia (L.) Aiton. (In Czech, Engl. summary). Preslia 33: 130–140.Google Scholar
  17. Leroy, J.-F. 1949. De la morphologie florale et de la classification des Myricaceae. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 229: 1162–1163.Google Scholar
  18. Leroy, J.-F. 1957. Sur deux amentifères remarquables de la flore asiato-pacifique. Proc. Eighth Pacific Sci. Congr. 4: 459–464.Google Scholar
  19. Lloyd, D.G. 1981. The distribution of sex in Myrica gale. Pl. Syst. Evol. 138: 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Macdonald, A.D. 1989. The morphology and relationships of the Myricaceae. In: Crane, P. R., Blackmore, S. (Eds.) Evolution, systematics, and fossil history of the Hamamelidae, Vol.2 Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 147–165.Google Scholar
  21. Meurer, B., Wiermann, R., Strack, D. 1988. Phenylpropanoid patterns in Fagales pollen and their phylogenetic relevance. Phytochemistry 27: 823–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Metcalfe, R.C., Chalk, L. 1950: see general references.Google Scholar
  23. Muller, J. 1981. Fossil pollen records of extant angiosperms. Bot. Rev. 47: 1–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sundberg, M.D. 1985. Pollen of the Myricaceae. Pollen Spores 27: 15–28.Google Scholar
  25. Thorne, R.F. 1973. The “Amentiferae” or Hamamelidae as an artificial group: a summary statement. Brittonia 25: 395–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Youngken, H.W. 1919. The comparative morphology, taxonomy and distribution of the Myricaceae of the eastern United States. Contrib. Bot. Lab. Morris Arbor. Univ. Pen-sylvania 4: 339–400.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Kubitzki

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations