2=8 C. SKOTTSBERG 



south, one species going north as far as Mexico and the West Indies, i extending 

 east from Fuegia to the Falkland Is. and Tristan da Cunha. On the opposite side 

 of Antarctica are i8 species, 14 of these indigenous in New Zealand, where 8 are 

 endemic, the remainder scattered along the route Macquarie I.-Auckland and Camp- 

 bell Is.-Tasmania-Australia-Xew Zealand-Lord Howe and Norfolk Is.; one New 

 Zealand species reappears in Hawaii, another on Kerguelen and New Amster- 

 dam I., and Marion I. has an endemic species. Finally, 2 species are found in New- 

 Guinea, one of them also reported from Borneo, and the Philippines have i en- 

 demic species. Both sections of subg. Eu-Uncinia are represented in America, only 

 Stenandrae in the opposite sector. The monotypical subg. Pseudocarex is Magel- 

 lanian. 



It is not easy to find one's way through the labyrinth of the enormous and 

 still growing genus Carex, world-wide but unbalanced as the tropics are poor in 

 species in comparison with the temperate and cold zones. Our two island species, 

 the endemic C. berteroniana and the south Andean Bcviksii, belong to different 

 sections and different geographic groups, the former to sect. Echinochlaenae: of 

 20 species 16 are endemic in New Zealand (one with a variety on Norfolk I.), 

 I in Australia, i in Tasmania; the little known Chilean C. laviprocarpa Phil, and 

 C. berteroniana are far-flung outposts, but it lies near at hand to assume that they 

 or their ancestors migrated across Antarctica. C. Banksii belongs to P'rigidae- 

 Fuliginosae, a boreal group centering in Eurasia with one species in Pacific North 

 America, but I cannot tell if Banksii comes near this species. 



The systematic position of Juania australis was briefly discussed in 22g. 

 109 and above p. 202, but whether we bring it to Morenieae or Iriarteae or let it 

 form a separate subtribe it remains a member of the neotropical element. HuTCHlX- 

 SOX followed Bentham and Hooker in placing it next to Ceroxylon, but this 

 genus is polygamo-monoecious and the stigma becomes basal in fruit. To me 

 Croizat's opinion lacks foundation; he solves what he calls "a hopeless conflict 

 among taxonomists" (//. 85) by deriving Jtiania from "a massive center of origin 

 of angiospermy at the Mascarenes " (p. 103). 



Ochagavia and Hesperogreigia belong to an Andean-neotropical assemblage 

 of genera, with close relatives in Chile. 



To judge from BuCHENAU's monograph of the Juncaceae in Pflanzenreich 

 Luzula masafuerana must be referred to a group of Andean species, L. racemosa 

 Desv. (Mex.-S. Chile), excelsa Buch. (Boliv.), H ie rony mi ^wc\\. (Argent.), Leyboldit 

 Buch. (Chile), and cJiilensis Nees et Mey. (Chile, south to Fuegia), but in the same 

 group we find L. spicata (L.) DC. (Arct.-circump. and Alpine) and abyssinica Pari. 

 (Ethiop., Brit. E. Afr.), and the possibility that the Andine species are of boreal 

 origin should be considered. On the other hand much speaks in favour of a south- 

 ern origin of Juncaceae: the subantarctic genera Marsippospermuni 2,nd Rostkovia^ 

 the isolated Priojiiuni in South Africa, endemic Andine genera like Oxychloe and 

 Patosia, well-marked endemic species of Luzula in New Zealand and the Magel- 

 lanian region, and the subantarctic-bicentric Juncus scheuchzerioides group. It is 

 true that 4 of the 5 Juncus species reported from Juan Fernandez — some of them 

 perhaps not native — inhabit the Andes, 3 going east to Brazil, Argentina and Uru- 



