You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
DODGE--<strong><strong>LICHEN</strong>S</strong> <strong>AND</strong> <strong>LICHEN</strong> <strong>PARASITES</strong><br />
GEOGRAPHICAL UISTRIHI1TTIr)N.<br />
The lichens herewith reported, represent three distinct floras, apparently unrelated and<br />
will be discussed separately.<br />
MACQUARIE ISL<strong>AND</strong>. (For a complete account of the geography and geology, see Mawson,<br />
1943). This flora 'seems very uniform with that of the islands of the New Zealand Submarine<br />
Plateau (Auckland and Campbell Islands and usually the mountains of the South Island of New<br />
Zealand). Only five fragmentary specimens of conspicuous species from the Australasian<br />
*4ntarctic Exhibition, collected by Mr. H. Hamilt on, were received,* the rest of the specimens cited<br />
being from the British, Australian, and New Zealand Antarctic Research Expedition, collected<br />
in two days in the v'cinity of Hasselborough and Buckle's Bays. Hence the sampling error is<br />
\<br />
very large, as only four localities are represented, all in the north end of the island from the<br />
younger basic group of rocks, most of the material coming from Featherbed Flats (Mawson, 1943,<br />
47). Our knowledge of the Aucklaad fslands is almost wholly based on collection's of Sir. J. D.<br />
Hooker (Voy. "Erebus & Terror") over a century ago (Hook. f. & Tayl., 1844, 1845, 1847).<br />
The lichens of Campbell Island are known from collections of Hooker f. (loc. cit.) and of Filhol<br />
on the French Transit of Venus Expedition Ny lander, 1876). Some collections have been made<br />
since, but have not been published so far as I can learn. The literature on the lichens of the<br />
South Island of New Zealand is extensive but very scattered. In the genera concerned, I have<br />
read all the descriptions of New Zealand, Tasmanian and Australian species listed in Zahlbruckner<br />
(1921-1940) before describing Macquarie Island species as new.<br />
About one-third of the species have been described as endemic, although I expect many if<br />
not most of them will later be found on other islands of the New Zealand Submarine Plateau,<br />
as we have more knowledge of their floras. Fifteen families, twenty-three genera and thirtyeight<br />
species are represented in Macquarie Island, five of the latter in such fragmentary state<br />
as to be unidentifiable beyond genus.<br />
~h; present flora is of comparatively recent origin as the present Island seems to have been<br />
completely denuded by an ice sheet during the Glacial Epoch (Mawson, 1943, 92). Since, the<br />
lichens df Macquarie Island seem wholly unrelated to those of Antarctica (except for Mastodia<br />
sp. with another species in MacRobertson Land), they furnish no ancillary evidence that Mac-.<br />
quarie Island was "land coextensive with Antarctica, and that it was the Antarctic ice sheet<br />
that over-rode it" as Blake suggested (Mawson, 1943, 92, footnote), although a submarine ridge<br />
extends most of the way to South Victoria Land via the Balleny Islands.<br />
The source of the species for re-population, presents a difficult problem. The submarine<br />
' ridge connecting the island to the New Zealand Submarine Plateau is submerged about 1,200,.<br />
fathoms, if one can rely on the relatively few soundings available along the ridge. Probably i6<br />
did not supply a land bridge or a chain of islands by which Macquarie Island could be re-popu,<br />
latcd from the Auckland Islands. Unless wind direction has reversed in recent times, there<br />
seems little likelihood that it has served to re-populate Macquarie Island. Wind might have<br />
served to bring in species from Tasmania, and five of the thirty-eight species also occur in Tasmania.<br />
Four of these are wide ranging species, also occurring in New Zealand and the Auckland<br />
group and the fifth is so fragmentary that it can only be referred to a species group, members<br />
of which also occur in New Zealand and the Auckland group, hence there is no clear evidence<br />
that Tasmania has been the source.<br />
Hamilton 'a collection, erroneously labelled "algae ", was included by mistake with the Expedition 'a main<br />
botanical collection which was forwarded to the British &iuseum for report. Ui~fortunately the lichens thus forwarded<br />
in error have not been recoverable for reference to Dr. Dodge for they were destroyed by bomb blast during<br />
the blitz.