USNM 37637 Vitis populoides Hollick  


Hollick (1930)

Pl. 79 Fig. 1




From Hollick (1930) (p. 104-105)

"Chignik Bay, Alaska Peninsula, about 2 miles northeast of Alaska Packers Association cannery (original No. 958); collected by T. W. Stanton in 1904 (lot 3521)."


Locality Map



From Hollick (1930) (p. 104-105)

"Plate 79, Figure 1"

"Leaf 4 centimeters in length by 4 centimeters across the widest part, ovate-triangular, somewhat asymmetric, rounded and cordate at the base, narrowed above to a wedge-shaped apex; margin dentate except at the base; teeth unequal in size and shape, mostly narrow, long, blunt-apiculate; nervation palmate from the base, craspedodrome; midrib with two weak secondary nerves on each side, toward the summit; lateral primaries in two pairs, the upper pair relatively strong and dichotomously forked, the lower pair weak, with branchlets on the under sides."



From Hollick (1930) (p. 104-105)

"This leaf is so much like Populus craspedodroma Ward (1886; 1887) (p. 550, pl. 36, fig. 1; p. 21, pl. 8, fig. 3) from the Fort Union formation (Eocene) of Montana, that it is somewhat difficult to regard them as distinct species. The outline and nervation in each are practically identical, and apparently our leaf also had a prolonged apex. In our specimen the teeth are longer, but so also is the entire leaf, and the generic identity is strongly supported by a perusal of Ward's discussion (Ward 1887) (p. 22) in which he says:

"It is with grave doubt that I refer this beautiful impression to the genus Populus rather than to Hedera or Vitis. * * * The principal nerves pass directly into the teeth, which have the peculiar narrow but blunt form characteristic of the Vitaceae."

Ward (1886; 1887) (p. 554, pl. 51, figs. 9 - 11; p. 71, pl. 32, figs. 6 - 8) has also described and figured three leaves of diverse but somewhat similar characters to ours, from the same horizon and locality as Populus craspedodroma under the name Vitis cuspidata. It is probable that both of these species belong in the same genus with ours and that the former is also closely related, if not identical, specifically."