Phoenicites BRONGNIART emend. READ ET HICKEY

Teodoridis, Vasilis, Kvaček, Zlatko, Agostini, Silvano, Martinetto, Edoardo, Rossi, Maria Adelaide & Cavallo, Oreste, 2015, Feather Palm Foliage From The Messinian Of Italy (Capo Di Fiume, Palena And Pollenzo Near Alba) Within The Framework Of Northern Mediterranean Late Miocene Flora, Acta Musei Nationalis Pragae Series B 71 (3 - 4), pp. 301-314 : 303-304

Genus Phoenicites BRONGNIART emend. READ ET HICKEY

T y p e. Phoenicites pumila BRONGNIART, 1828, p. 121 , diagnosis generico-specifica.

C o m m e n t s. The type of the fossil genus Phoenicites as emended by Read and Hickey (1972) is a fragmentary palm leaf from the Eocene of France ( Chartreuse-de-Brivés , Haute-Loire , France), housed in the Muséum National d’Histoires Naturelles , Paris, No . F. 1934, collection Bertrand-Roux ).

Phoenicites sp.

Pl. 1, Fig. 1–4; Pl. 2, Fig. 1–2

2008 cf. Calamus sp. ; Bertini and Martinetto, p. 110, pl. 1, fig. 9.

M a t e r i a l. An impression and its counterpart of an incomplete palm leaf (Capo di Fiume) and one incomplete palm leaf (Pollenzo near Alba).

D e s c r i p t i o n. Leaves pinnately dissected (feather palm), simple. Midrib 179 and 297 mm long, straight, at least 3 and 5 mm wide, not tapering significantly over its last quarter. Segments often fragmentary, reduplicate on axial surface, decurrent, sessile, lanceolate to rarely oblong, up to 175 and 164 mm long, up to 12 mm wide, alternate to (sub)opposite in apical part of the blade, originating at an angle of 40° to 55°, irregularly spaced between 2 to 17 mm. Segment bases asymmetrical and cuneate, apices attenuate and often blunt, margin entire, venation poorly preserved, central segment vein distinct, straight, about 1.5 mm wide, venation network thin, parallel, almost indistinct.

D i s c u s s i o n. Fossil evidence of palm remains from the Palaeogene and Neogene of Europe is relatively common and represented by isolated stems, spikes, fruits, seeds and leaves. Read and Hickey (1972) revised the classification of fossil palm and palm-like leaves and provided a key for the nine palm genera including the lists of synonyms. The studied material shows distinct reduplicate and entire leaf segments; hence, it is possible to assign the specimens to the fossil-genus Phoenicites . Read and Hickey (1972, p. 134) also revised the original palm leaf material from Italy and synonymised Geonomites saturnia VISIANI ( Visiani 1864, pl. 21, fig. 1) and Hemiphoenicites dantesiana VISIANI ( Visiani 1864, p. 451, pl. 18) with Phoenicites danteana MASSALONGO ( Massalongo 1858, p. 774) from the Eocene sediments in the surroundings of Verona. Similarly Read and Hickey (1972, p. 134) re-assigned foliage of Kentites pratecinensis BUREAU ( Bureau 1896, p. 285) known from the Tertiary sediments of Pratecini, and Pritchardites wettinioides (MASSALONGO) BUREAU ( Bureau 1896, p. 284) to the genus Phoenicites . The revised specimens included the type material of Phoenicites wettinioides MASSALONGO ( Massalongo 1858, p. 772) . Still not revised are the abundant feather palm leaves (incl. Phoenicites ) from the Oligocene locality Santa Giustina in NW Italy ( Bonci et al. 2011).

The genus Phoenicites was typified by Phoenicites pumila BRONGNIART ( Brongniart 1828, p. 121) plant material described from the above-mentioned Eocene deposit in Chartreuse-de-Brivés, France. Similar Eocene finds from the Eocene sites of Schkopau ( Friedrich 1883, p. 17, pl. 3), Knau, Nobitz, Klausa, Haselbach and Frohnsdorf ( Mai and Walther 1985, pp. 132–133, pl. 35, figs 5–6, pl. 36) and Geiseltal – Kayna ( Rüffle 1976, p. 391, pl. 44, fig. 3, pl. 46, figs 1–5, text-fig. 10), Germany are described as P. borealis FRIEDRICH. In addition to the leaf morphology, this material is also partly characterized by the anatomical structure which suggests closer affinity to the living genus Chamaedorea WILLDENOW ( Rüffle 1976) . However, such an affinity has not been proven for the other material described by Friedrich (1883) and Mai and Walther (1985, p. 133). Other feather palm foliage from the Eocene, Oligocene and Miocene of Europe (e.g., Knobloch et al. 1996 – Staré sedlo, as P. salicifolius (K. PRESL) UNGER, Kvaček 2004 – Flörsheim, as? Phoenicites sp. etc.) have been assigned to Phoenicites . Morphologically similar leaves and fragments are also known as Calamus noszkyi JABLONSZKY ( Jablonszky 1914, pp. 236–244, pl. 9, figs 1–3) from the early Miocene sites of the Czech Republic ( Kvaček and Hurník 2000), Hungary ( Jablonszky 1914, Hably 1983) and Slovakia ( Sitár and Kvaček 1997). In these cases the leaf segments are fine serrate and often associated with sheath fragments and spines of Calamus daemonorops (UNGER) CHANDLER. However , Calamus LINNAEUS is a living genus and its fossil records require revision. The morphologically preserved leaf impressions or compressions such as those from Capo di Fiume and Pollenzo do not exhibit sufficient traits that would allow assignment of these remains to living genera ( Read and Hickey 1972). Therefore the assignment to a fossil-genus is appropriate by virtue of the definite morphological features observed in the fossils.

A further example of this scenario was provided by Ettingshausen (1887, 1891, p. 261, pl. 24, fig. 25), who assigned a fossil leaf from early Miocene deposits of New Zealand ( Seaforthia zeelandica ETTINGSHAUSEN , a synonym of Ptychosperma elegans (R. BROWN) BLUME ) to the living genus Seaforthia R. BROWN. The original material was supplemented by new specimens of foliage, inflorescences and fruits from the Manuherikia Group and reassigned as Phoenicites zeelandica (ETTINGSHAUSEN) POLE ( Pole 1993, pp. 287–288, figs 2–3). Pole (1993) compared this species with the extant New Zealand palm Rhopalostylus sapida H. WENDLAND et DRUDE , however he concluded that the fossil palm is significantly different in leaf venation and in the shape of the nuts from both Rhopalostylus H. WENDLAND et DRUDE and Ptychosperma LABILLARDIÈRE (syn. Seaforthia R. BROWN ). Likewise, the morphological features of the European Miocene fossils are comparable with at least two modern genera documented in the Cainozoic of this continent by fossils more reliable than leaves ( Calamus sheath fragments and spines and Phoenix seeds – e.g., Bůžek 1977, Hably 1983, Sitár and Kvaček 1997, Kvaček and Hurník 2000). A precise determination of the Capo di Fiume and Pollenzo fossils at the species level is also problematic because of the numerous fossil-species which have been described in the area ( Massalongo 1858, Visiani 1864, Bonci et al. 2011), but which have not yet been revised. Hence the use of the open nomenclature Phoenicites sp. is preferable in our case.