Newsletter - Hawaiian Botanical Society

H73

of the

Hawaiian Botanical Society

volume x ' ^ji MFARTMENT OF BOTANY

number i UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII

FEBRUARY 1971 f ^ HONOLULU , HAWAII 96822

U AUG i o mo n

Nsv-^./flgABIES /

DEPARTMENTS

Principal paper page 1 Proceedings page 10

Events " 8 Publications " 10

PRINCIPAL PAPER

SOME BOTANICAL OBSERVATIONS ON KOA—/

Charles H. Lamoureux — /

Introduction Koa, in the broadest sense, includes a number of closely related
species and varieties of the genus Acacia native to the Hawaiian Islands and apparently
endemic to these islands.

The genus Acacia is one of the largest genera of higher plants, including perhaps 500
species native to the tropical and subtropical areas of the world. Of these 500
about 300 are native to Australia, perhaps 50 to Africa, and most of the rest to
tropical America and Asia. The African species all possess bipinnate leaves on mature
branches, as do most of the American and Asian ones, and need not concern us further
as potential close relatives of koa. However, about 250 of the 300 Australian acacias
are phyllodineous — the leaves on mature plants are reduced to flattened petioles --
phyllodes -- as is the case with the native Hawaiian acacias.

Origin and Dispersal Phyllodineous acacias are also known from New Caledonia,

Tahiti, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, the New Hebrides, New Guinea, the Philippines and Taiwan
(Acacia confusa) . From our point of view the most interesting species is Acacia
heterophylla native to Mauritius and Reunion Islands of the Mascarene group in the
Indian Ocean. This species is so similar to Acacia koa that some of the earliest
botanists concerned with the Hawaiian flora considered koa to belong to the species
Acacia heterophylla. In fact, Asa Gray, when he described Acacia koa as a species new
to science in 1854 stated: "In distinguishing the two trees, peculiar to these most

widely separated stations, perhaps I incur the charge of being influenced by geograph-
ical considerations rather than botanical characters." However, since we still have

1/ Paper presented at Koa Seminar, sponsored by Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry,
U. S. Forest Service, October 9, 1970.

2/ Department of Botany, University of Hawaii.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 2 February 1971

no complete comparisons of Hawaiian koa with the plants from Mauritius and Reunion — ,
it is probably more in accord with modern biogeographic theory to consider that the
two groups are different species, perhaps descended from a common ancestor.

This ancestral type, at least for koa, was probably a species such as Acacia
melanoxylon. the blackwood of Australia. All but one of the botanists who have con-
sidered the origin of koa in any depth have suggested that its closest relatives are
species from Australia or some of the islands in the South Pacific (in addition to the
Mauritius species). The only exception was Forrest Brown, who attributed the origin
of the bulk of the Hawaiian flora to Tropical America while essentially all other
workers have considered that most Hawaiian plants have their closest relatives in the
Australasian regions. Brown (1921) wrote: "a cusp-pointed phyllode of the same

size and outline as the Hawaiian Acacia koa var. lanaiensis has been found in the
American Lower Eocene." Despite Brown's comments, I think we must look toward the
south and west for the original immigrant which, once established in Hawaii, developed
into our native acacias.

How did the first seeds get here from Australia or the Australasian region? Acac ia
seeds are obviously too heavy to be carried by wind currents. Rock (1919) suggested
that they were carried here by birds which "do not exist today" (in Hawaii) , "but
were in all probability the now extinct columbae and their relatives." On the other
hand, Carlquist (1966) has suggested that rafting was responsible for the seeds
which reached Hawaii from elsewhere. Although seeds of Hawaiian koas will not float,
Carlquist suggested that perhaps a branch bearing unopened but mature seed pods could
have drifted here. In Acacia simplicif olia , from Samoa and Tonga, each seed is
contained in a loment-like segment which contains an air space sufficient to float
the seed for at least a few days. This is not a very efficient means of dispersal
but one which might have been successful at least once during the past 20 million
years or so. Carlquist further suggested that koa could have been distributed among
the islands, once it reached here, by seed-eating birds such as Psittacirostra.

All we really know, then, is that koa got here, by some natural means, from some
other area - the rest is all speculation at this stage. But, while we're speculating,
let's go one step further and suggest that the immigration of the ancestors of koa to
Hawaii probably occurred only once, and that this one occurrence was some time ago
(on the order of perhaps a few million years). The arguments in favor of a single
introduction rather than repeated introductions are twofold - first, the chances of
the occurrence of a successful natural introduction to Hawaii are fairly small when
the dispersal mechanisms available are no more efficient that they are in these
acacias, and thus the probability of two successful introductions at different times
from the same source is extremely small; second, the Hawaiian acacias seem to be
fairly closely related, and it is probable that they have developed from a single
ancestral type. The evidence in favor of a relatively long time since the ancestors

3/ After this paper was delivered, Mr. Craig Whitesell called to my attention a
recent paper by Vassal (A propos de Acacias heterophy 11a et koa . Bull. Soc.
d'Hist. Nat. de Toulouse 105:443-447. 1969) who demonstrates that on the basis

of corolla structure, fruit and seed size, and morphology of the first two leaves
on the seedlings, Acacia heterophylla from the Mascarene Islands differs signifi-
cantly from A. koa of Hawaii. Vassal therefore considers the two species to be
distinct. He also reports that in A. heterophylla , as in A. koa, the chromosome
number is 2N = 52.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 3

February 1971

of koa became established in the islands is also of at least two types - first, the
fact that local populations have become established to the extent that taxonomists
have recognized at least three species, one of which has three varieties; second, a
large number of endemic insects restricted to koa have also had time to evolve
(Swezey, 1954; Gressitt & Davis, 1969).

Taxonomy There are five taxa of Hawaiian acacias which are more or less generally
recognized. These are:

1. Acacia koa (Gray, Bot. U. S. Expl. Exped. 480. 1854, variety koa (A. heterophylla

Willd. according to Gaudichaud and according to Hooker and Arnott) .

2. Acac ia koa Gray var . lanaiensis Rock, T. H. Bd. Agr. For. , Bot. Bull. 5:21. 1919.

(A. koa B var. Hillebrand, Flora Haw, Isl. 113. 1888).

3. Acacia koa Gray var. hawaiiensis Rock, T. H. Bd. Agr. For. , Bot. Bull. 5:23. 1919.

This is the type with broad phyllodes from Hawaii. It is of special interest
as it is the type most likely to be used as a source of timber. It should be
noted that Gray (1854), Hillebrand (1888), and Skottsberg (1944) did not
consider this taxon to be distinct from var. koa .

4.

Acacia

koaia Hillebrand, Flora Haw.

Isl.

113.

1888.

5.

Acacia

kauaiensis Hillebrand, Flora

Haw.

Isl.

113. 1888

Table I gives the distribution of these taxa and a list of their distinguishing
features as indicated by Rock (1919; 1920) and Judd (1920). This summarizes our know-
ledge of the systematics of Hawaiian acacias, which is not in a very satisfactory
state. We really need to make careful and complete collections from throughout the
islands, and to study them using modern techniques. For example, there is only one
recorded chromosome count for "Acacia koa" (2N = 52, Atchison, 1948). This is of
interest as the other phyllodineous species reported by Atchison had 2N = 26, suggest-
ing that the Hawaiian material he studied was tetraploid. A complete cytological
study would be most helpful in interpreting the evolutionary history of Hawaiian
acacias. Little attention has been paid to characters exhibited by the juvenile
foliage. While the wood anatomy of A. koa and A. koaia has been described (Brown,
1922; Lamberton, 1955), there have been no other anatomical studies. Newer methods
of comparisons of bio-chemical constituents using electrophoretic and chromatographic
techniques might provide useful systematic information.

We know that koa varies morphologically from place to place, but we really don't have
any idea how much of this variation is genetically controlled and how much is environ-
mentally controlled. For example, both Rock (1919) and Judd (1920) suggested that
the broad phyllodes of var. hawaiiensis are a response to high altitude with conse-
quent fog and mist. Rock even cited an example of var. hawaiiensis grown from seed
in San Francisco which had wider phyllodes than any observed in Hawaii. Yet, on
Hawaii, although there is considerable variation in phyllode width, not all the plants
with very broad phyllodes are restricted to higher, moister areas. In Kipahulu
Valley on Maui , on the other hand, koa grows in areas which seem to be wetter than
most other areas in the islands where it is found, yet the phyllodes are quite narrow.
I suspect that we are dealing with both genetic and environmental factors here.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 4

February 1971

r-l 33

G

G

G

G

.

G

G

33

•

CO

-X

•»

&

G

g

G

G

50

0)

co

i-H

G

g

o

C

£

>

G

3

G

E

M

G

£

G

G

•l—l

G

42

•rH

CO

G

G

G

iM

c

G

CO

O

O

CO

1

B

o

G

CX

o

.

3

45

G

CN

G

3

c

i—H

G

G

•rl

G

G

G

g

O

co

G

i — 1

G

X

G

3

50

I 1

O

?— 1

G

G

g

43

r

•H

G

d)

G

45

+»

C

50

CM

o

x

G

G

CO

co

50

X

a

O

**

"(—1

3

CM

G

53

rM

O

G

G

0)

G

a

G

G

G

G

•H

r.

G

3

G

CN

r\

i— i

0)

G

a

G

G

G

G

G

CO

CO

T— 1

G

G

G

G

CM

•H

rH

o

O

r\

G

G

rH

G

tG

cti

i — l

G

X

42

*

cti

cti

CM

G

42

C

G

45

g

G

a

3

co

3

50

53

•<

•I— 1

D

•rH

43

•H

G

£

O

c

£

G

•i— i

G

rH

•

e

•M

G

33

o

cti

G

G

rH

o

G

G

G

3

42

•rH

B

•M

G

G

G

G

G

33

3

G

3

G

i

rH

C

B

o

33

o

kD

33

G

3

4-1

G

co

G

G

3

U

G

G

o

cti

•H

o

3

G

G

11

G

G

G

G

G

G

CO

G

G

O

<

X

H

i — 1

pH

rH

(0

e

CX

G

vf*

cx

4-J

3-

ex

CM

4d

rH

CO

CO

04

33

X

03

i

G

CO

o

1

G

G

G

42

r\

1

00

i

3

33

g

•rH

r — 1

00

1

G

>

G

G

I — 1

CN

G

33

4->

O

G

g

•H

rH

rM

G

G

G

•

rH

•H

•

X

a

G

Xl

•H

G

cti

cti

X

G

3

G

3

G

rH

&

X

co

G

o

>

b0

G

CO

cO

•

*

5

e

Pm

•M

3

G

G

•iH

rH

G

G

a

05

G

•rH

G

G

•rH

G

CO

33

B

rM

G

G

>

X

CO

r — 1

a

>

G

3

rH

•M

3

r

50

G

G

G

cti

32

G

G

.

G

G

»

G

G

G

•H •

•

G

CO

G

G

50

3

G

•M

•rH

r

rM

g

r

o

3

a

G

G CO

3

CO

g

G

G

3

O

G

G

G

O

•rH

G

G

CN

g

G

X

42

G

•rH

<o

G

G

G -O

•H •

rH

g

G

xi

CO

£

O

rM

a

G

O

t—H

3

G

G

rM

G

G

G

G

Ctil

G

3

a g

G|

i

G

4-J

3

G

4 1

G

G

X

o

G

G

3

1

O

G

cx

•rH

3

CO

o

G

G

O G

co O

o

o

42

•rH

O

G

43

3

•pH

<d

£

E

H

50

c£>

iM

G

G

&

a

<d

G

50

CO 42

< 54|

rH

rM

£

£

G

45

O

*M

33

I

G

50

G

CO

cO

G

3

33

G

cO

.

•M

CN

G

O

G

G

•

g|

•

CM

•

co

>

t 1

>

o

3

rH

o

g

X

o

/M

3

r-~N

X

33

O

43

G

G

•M

CO

CO

g

44 1

£

G

>

33

G

G

+

G

O

3

G

+ *

1

33

g

O

G

G

z

33

•M

50

G

B

O

O

!

G

G

3

r—H

G

•

LO

£

N

G

3

■M

G

CM

G

G

G

G

G

3

co

G

CO

G

CN

.4

•H

33

*“5

•

G

G

P3

G

X

3

G

x:

42

.

G

G

X

•

CO

G

' — ^

M

S

i — i

O

v G

G

G

T 1

G

r*

i — i

-U

3

tM

>

X

42

rH

CO

G

G

•rH

o

i — 1

•

G

3

G

G

G

G

•rH

G

O

G

50

G

C

<D

G

G

W

42

•rH

4—1

1

g

G

•rH

42

CO

3

£

G

G

3

E

•rl

42

•H

O

G

4-1

•

cti

G

CO

g

>

r H

50

X

3

3

£

42

•H

•H

o

G

50

bO

•pH

3

44

P3

G

&

G

o

•

O

•rH

G

G

33

r*

O

G

32

G

•rH

u

>

42

G

<3

G

G

G

G

CN

O

45

o

rH

ex

43

G

g

rH

G

G

CO

rH

G

pH

cti

H

G

G

H

>

32

H

i — 1

cO

O

G

CO

G

O

ex

e

Mn

G

ex

<2

rH

C/5

CO

E

r

O

33

co

G

X

1

•M

1

G

G

O

G

a

O

ex

G

3

3

a

G

G

G

•H

X

4 — 1

3

•

'M

33

<

r

a

G

G

G

a

G

G

3

a

G

g

42

>

3

3

G

g

50

G

5

£

4— i

•H

r

33

00

•M

G

•

3

0

O

•

G

G

G

I

CO

G

3

G

■M

•

3

3

G

3

G

N

cO

rM

G

G

G

G|

44

44

G

G

G

•M

•

8

G

43

G

G

0

3

3

>

4-3

H

G

CO

00

G

O

3

<d

44|

X

35

O

Nf

G

• r £

,

G 33

O. r

G

CN

CN

O

G -M

cO

42 G

3 -G

8

G

rM

ex

rH

50 33

G G

a

•

cO

r

O

X

3

•

33

•H 33

•M G

G 44

3

33

G

+ «

G

•H

G

G

G G

•

X

G G

G

G

G O

•M

G

X

G

G

G

4 — 1

G

G

CM

G G

O

O

G rM

33

N

G

G

G

G

33

•H

3

O 3

4 1

a

G 1

44

44

G O

G

•rH

a

G

3

G

•rH

G

X

CM

G Cm

G

0

05 CN

G S

a

CO

0

rM

G

•

rM

r—H

4 — 1

G

42

4M

G

•

0

G

G

G

G

0

G

G

X G

co

0

G

•H ^

n

0)

cO

Pm

G

3

G

•M

G

4 — I

rH 1 — 1

G

rH

a g

G

G

G 3

•pH

G

00

4 — 1

X

3

3

G

G

G

G G

G

8

a 3

G

>

3 42

3

G

u

i

.

G

G

33

r

G

ex

ex

G G

LO

0

G

G G

G

G

cti

O

a

ex

45

G

a

G

a

G

G G

O

•

CO 43

c

X O

s

EM

rH

rM

a

G

O

ex

a

CM

3

C/5

3 CX rM

4 — i G

3

&

O

G

54

G

3

G

r

G

N

33

43

*M

G

G

G

44

2

G

G

r

G

44

G

33

O

rM

G

CX

#\

tM

cx

4-J

43

G

Cti

r—H

O

CM

f-H

G

O

S

0

O

'Z

(M

H

EM

CO

U

23

W

CO

eq

Px5

O

[x5

CO

M

2

O

2

04

04

s

mJ

O

CO

EH

Em

HI

HI

s

CO

Q

C/5

<!

X

Px

0

Q

w

M

H

W

Z

HI

O

P4I

Q

C/5

ex

M

Pm

Oh

CO

Data from Rock (1919; 1920) and Judd (1920).

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 5

February 1971

Ecology Let us take a brief look at some environmental parameters. Whitesell (1964)
indicated that koa will grow in areas with 25-75 inches average annual rainfall, but
that it does best in areas of from 75 to more than 200 inches. It has been suggested
that koa grows in all forest areas of the state except the very wettest and the very
dryest. On the lower islands (those less than about 6000 feet altitude) this means
that koa forests are generally located at lower elevations, in somewhat less wet areas
than the ohia (Metros ideros) forests which extend to the summits of the mountains.

On the other hand, where mountains are higher, and where the maximum rainfall is in a
belt along the windward slopes, there was apparently, at least originally, a band of
koa forest below and another band above the ohia forest. Some evidence of this still
exists in places on the island of Hawaii, but the original situation on the slopes
of Haleakala, Maui is not clear.

We know little of the role of edaphic factors in koa distribution, Forbes (1912)
indicated that, in the Kona district of Hawaii, koa forests tended to occupy weathered
pahoehoe lava flows while aa flows supported ohia forests. However, Forbes himself
suggested and later workers have tended to support the hypothesis that the phenomenon
described may merely have reflected different stages in succession. Observations
have generally confirmed the fact that koa is not a pioneer species on new volcanic
surfaces - rather, it becomes established at later stages of succession. Thus, Forbes'
suggestion that koa forests tended to occupy pahoehoe flows may merely have reflected
differences in the rates of succession on pahoehoe and aa lava flows of comparable
ages .

The altitudinal limits of distribution of koa have been mentioned by many workers.
Whitesell (1964) indicated that koa occurred between 600 and 7000 feet. MacCaughey
(1917a) gave the distribution of A. koaia as 1000 to 3000 feet. MacCaughey (1917b),
in describing the phytogeography of Manoa Valley stated that "koa thrives in Manoa
at elevations as low as 50 feet and was at one time fairly plentiful in the valley
floor”, but he cited no evidence for this. I have seen koa, probably planted, grow-
ing well at 100-150 feet elevation in Manoa Valley in recent years, and at elevations
of perhaps 300 feet in the upper part of the valley it still grows naturally.

MacCaughey (1917b) further stated that in Manoa the upper limits of koa averaged 1200
feet, sometimes rising to 1800 feet. This is approximately the maximum altitude to
which koa can be found commonly in the Koolau Mountains. At Salt Lake on Oahu there
are fossils of koa, about 400,000 years of age, found in an area not more than ten
feet above current sea level, but we do not know where sea level was at the time the
fossils were formed. Hartt and Neal (1940) gave the altitudinal range of A. koa var.
hawaiiensis as 3000 to 6000 feet, then indicated that they found it on Mauna Kea at
5800 to 7000 feet. Mueller-Dombois and Krajina (1968) reported koa growing up to
elevations of 6600 to 7000 feet on the east flanks of both Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea.

Yet on the southeast slopes of Haleakala, in Kipahulu Valley, koa was not present
above 4000 feet (Warner, 1968) (koa may extend a bit higher on the northern slopes
of Haleakala). On Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea there is an extensive koa forest above
the ohia forest -- in Kipahulu Valley this is not the case.

From this somewhat disjointed series of observations, about all we can conclude is
that we don't know nearly as much as we should about the factors that influence the
distribution of koa. However, the facts do suggest that the koa on Mauna Kea behaves
differently from that in Kipahulu Valley which behaves differently from that in the
Koolau Mountains. I suspect that we may be dealing with a series of ecotypes here,
but the necessary work to verify this hypothesis still remains to be done. The
evidence that we do have, meager as it is, suggests that if we are to exploit as
many areas as possible for koa production on a sustained-yield basis we are going to
have to take such possibilities into account.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 6

February 1971

Reproduction As a final point, I would like to discuss some aspects of koa reproduc-
tion. The evidence seems to indicate that koa reproduction is notably scarce in the
undisturbed forest (Scowcroft, 1970). Certainly after land clearing, exposure of
mineral soil, or fire, in appropriate areas one finds impressive crops of koa seed-
lings, while in mature koa forests few seedlings can be found. Yet reproduction must
be occurring in those areas which have healthy koa forests today. Such reproduction
need not be especially frequent to maintain the forest -- perhaps the establishment
of one or two seedlings or root sprouts in an opening created when a mature tree dies
or blows over is sufficient to maintain the population at a uniform level. Of course
the picture has been greatly complicated by disturbance -- but some natural balance
must have existed in the past in maintaining extensive koa forests. The Kipahulu
forest, for example, seems to be perpetuating itself. We must be careful to distinguish
between a natural koa ecosystem, which may be able to maintain itself with a very low
rate of koa reproduction, and a greatly disturbed or managed or recently burned koa
forest in which, at an early stage of secondary succession, many thousands of koa seed-
lings per acre can be observed.

Foresters have shown me areas on the Hamakua Coast of Hawaii where there is an ohia-
tree fern forest with an occasional mature koa tree. It has been suggested that in
such areas koa forest is being replaced by ohia forest. This may be the case, but I
am not yet convinced by the evidence. While these areas could represent a successional
stage on the way to an ohia climax forest, I think it is more likely that this is
merely the transition zone between koa and ohia forest types, and that at very infrequent
intervals a koa may manage to become established in an opening in this forest.

Although it is possible that, as a natural stage of succession on a new lava flow,
ohia forest could replace koa forest, I think that the information we do have (summa-
rized in Doty and Mue ller-Dombois , 1966) suggests that the opposite is more likely
to occur -- i.e., in areas where climatic, edaphic, and other factors are optimal to
support a koa forest, koa may well replace a pioneer ohia forest and become a climax
forest type. Another possible interpretation is that after disturbance, by cattle or
fire, for instance, an area in which factors are optimal to support an ohia forest
or a mixed ohia-koa forest may pass through an early stage of secondary succession
dominated by koa. However, I have not yet been convinced that in any area in which
environmental factors favor a koa forest climax, there is evidence of replacement of
koa by ohia. Perhaps in some of these areas koa may be replaced by such exotic species
as strawberry guava or banana poka, and in many areas affected by cattle koa is re-
placed by grassland, but there is no evidence that ohia is replacing koa in such areas.

If replacement of koa by ohia is occurring in some areas, this would suggest that
there is probably some related climatic or edaphic change which is basically
responsible .

LITERATURE CITED

ATCHISON, E. 1948. Studies on the Leguminosae II. Cy togeography of Acacia (Tourn.)
L. Amer. J. Bot. 35:651-655.

BROWN, F. B. H. 1921. Origin of the Hawaiian flora. Proc . 1st Pan-Pacific Sci.
Congress. B. P. Bishop Mus . , Spec. Pub. 7, part 1:132-142.

. 1922. The secondary xylem of Hawaiian trees. B. P. Bishop Mus.,

Occ. Pap. 8:215-371.

CARLQUIST, S. 1966. The biota of long-distance dispersal. III. Loss of dispersi-
bility in the Hawaiian flora. Brittonia 18:310-335.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 7

February 1971

DOTY, M. S. & D. MUELLER -DOMBOIS . 1966. Atlas for bioecology studies in Hawaii

Volcanoes National Park. Univ. of Hawaii, Hawaii Botanical Science Paper No. 2,
507 pp.

FORBES, C. N. 1912. Preliminary observations concerning the plant invasion on some
of the lava flows of Mauna Loa, Hawaii. B. P. Bishop Mus., Occ. Pap. 5:15-23.

GRAY, A. 1854. United States Exploring Expedition during the years 1838, 1839, 1840,
1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N., Botany, Phanerogamia
1: 1-777.

GRESSITT, J. L. 6c C. J. DAVIS. 1969. Studies in the Plagithmysines , endemic
Hawaiian Cerambycidae (Coleopt.). Haw. Ent. Soc., Proc. 20:331-393.

HARTT, C. E. 6c M. C. NEAL. 1940. The plant ecology of Mauna Kea , Hawaii, Ecology
21:237-266.

HILLEBRAND, W. 1888. Flora of the Hawaiian Islands. Williams 6c Norgate, London.

673 pp.

JUDD, C. S. 1920. The koa tree. Hawaiian For. Agr. 17:30-35.

LAMBERTON, A. R. H. 1955. The anatomy of some woods utilized by the ancient
Hawaiians. M. S. Thesis, Univ. of Hawaii. 105 pp.

MAC CAUGHEY, V. 1917a. An annotated list of the forest trees of the Hawaiian
Archipelago. Torrey Bot. Club, Bull. 44:145-157.

. 1917b. The phytogeography of Manoa Valley, Hawaiian Islands.

Amer. J. Bot. 4:561-603.

MUELLER-DOMBOIS , B. 6c V. J. KRAJINA. 1968. Comparison of east-flank vegetations on
Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea, Hawaii. Proc. Symp. Recent Adv. Trop. Ecol. 508-520.

ROCK, J. F. 1919. The arborescent indigenous legumes of Hawaii. T. H. Bd. Agr.

For., Bot. Bull. 5, 53 pp.

. 1920. The leguminous plants of Hawaii. Expt. Sta. , H.S.P.A.,

234 pp.

SCOWCROFT, P. 1970. Acacia koa Gray - monarch of Hawaiian forests. A problem
analysis. 28 pp., mimeo.

SKOTTSBERG, C. 1944. Vascular plants from the Hawaiian Islands. IV. Planerogams
collected during the Hawaiian Bog Survey 1938. Acta Horti Gotob. 15:275-531.

SWEZEY, 0. H. 1954. Forest entomology in Hawaii. B. P. Bishop Mus., Spec. Pub.

44, 266 pp.

WARNER, R. E. (Editor). 1968. Scientific report of the Kipahulu Valley Expedition.
The Nature Conservancy, 184 pp.

WHITESELL, C. D. 1964. Silvical characteristics of koa (Acacia koa Gray). U. S.

For. Serv. Res. Pap. PSW-16, 12 pp.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 8

February 1971

EVENTS

First Steps to Rehabilitate Kahoolawe

During the period January 11 to 14, the Division of Forestry planted small plots of
around 35 species of trees and shrubs, as well as sisal and several grasses in
Kahoolawe. The plantings were made within six "goat-proof" fenced areas each 100 x
200 feet in size. The fences were installed in October, 1970. These fenced areas
sampled a variety of conditions from sandy beach to some of the windiest and most
severely eroded part of the central mesa.

Species included several indigenous Hawaiian plants such as coconut, beach naupaka,
milo, koaia and wiliwili. These and non-indigenous plants such as eucalypts and
casuarinas were planted in units where they were believed to be suited to the habitat.
High mortality is expected because, at best, growing conditions on this dry, windy
island are severe. Hopefully a few of the hardiest species and individuals will
survive to show which are more promising. At the time of planting the soil contained
abundant moisture.

Half of each fenced area was left unplanted for observation of the development of
existing vegetation.

The Navy transported the work crew from Maui with helicopters, and assisted in check-
ing unexploded ordnance, and in construction of the fences. William Sager, Assistant
District Forester, Maui supervised the forestry work.

Letter to the Editor

Dear Sir:

I read with interest the paper on Kahoolawe in the last issue of the Newsletter,
but noticed that it did not mention any Hibiscus from that island. In Sister Margaret
James Roe's article on Hawaiian Hibiscus (Pacific Science 15:11, 1961) she mentions
(without reference to her source of information) that H. brackenridgei Gray was
reportedly collected by Jules Remy on Kahoolawe but that the plants are unavailable.

I am happy to be able to report to the Society, as well as to Pacific botanists
in general, that they are available again. For decades, many Old World unmounted
collections in the Paris herbarium, especially Pacific collections, have been accumu-
lating in a hopeless backlog, piled up in(recent years in an attic. Mr. N. Halle,
Sous-Directeur of the Laboratoire de Phanerogamie has undertaken the immense task
of sorting these out by family and large geographical region, so they can be accessi-
ble, at least. I recently worked my way through the Pacific and Asiatic Malvaceae
and found a Hibiscus collection from Kahoolawe, very likely the missing Remy 559. I
put it on a pile of collections of special interest or value which Mr. Halle assured
me he would have mounted and inserted in the Herbier General right away, for safety's
sake .

I might add here that Mr. Halle is prepared to have mounted and made available
material in any family, provided that botanists intending to visit the Paris
herbarium and interested in this treasure trove take the trouble to notify the
Laboratoire of their planned visit and interests sufficiently ahead of time. Pacific

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 9

February 1971

botanists should by all means take advantage of this offer and will be richly rewarded.
We owe Mr. Halle a great deal for tackling this huge "hay stack" and bringing to light
rare and long-lost collections.

i »

/s/ Marie-Helene Sachet
Department of Botany
Museum of Natural History
Smithsonian Institution
Washington D. C. 20560

Schiedea and Pleomele -- Comments by Otto and Isa Degener

Dr. St. John's interesting observations regarding Schiedea in Pac. Sci. 24:245-254.
1970, prompt us to draw to the attention of local botanists an obscure publication by
Franz Buxbaum, appearing in Egle & Troll's "Beitrage zur Biologie der Pflanzen." In
Dr. Buxbaum's reprint, appearing Jan. 1, 1961, he writes, among a few other paragraphs
of special interest:

"Kraft has already (1917) expressed the view that the origin of the
Caryophy llaceae doubtless should be looked for in these Alsinoideae
which are closely related in their flower structure to the Stellaria .

This point of view can be definitely represented morphologically.

Nevertheless it appears to be difficult from the 1 Stellaria-Typus 1 to
establish a connection to any other family of the Centrospermea because
Stellaria typically is so much like a Caryophy llaceae „ In the last
analysis, the species of the Alsinoideae , Schidea (incl. Alsinodendron) ,
which as woody plants typically deviate from the other Caryophy llaceae .
would offer a connection. As an endemic species of the Sandwich Islands
it does represent without question a very old relic. It is especially
striking that the ' S taminodien ' which correspond to the petals of other
Alsinoideae superpose the sepalous sections of the perianth (the calyx
of other Alsinoideae) . The origin of the stamens from a' tender discus
ring' however, is homologous to the growing together of the primary
stamens in Phytolacca ; this association is also noticeable in the obviously
similar very old species Dry-maria . 11

Buxbaum's reference to the herbarium specimen No. 25,047 should not read "Otto
Degener, Isa Degener et Ward Hening, " but ". . . . et Ward Fleming."

The Lanai endemic Pleomele is presently burdened with the two following binomials:

Pleomele lanaiensis Degener, FI. Haw. fam. 68: Aug. 10, 1932.

Pleomele f ernaldii St. John in Contrib. Gray Herb. 65:39-42. 1947.

If we follow the reasoning expressed in Taxon 12:202. 1963, the correct name for this
halapepe appears to be the more appropriate P. lanaiensis Deg.

Editors Note: The above quoted text was translated by a friend of the editor for the

convenience of non-German-speakers .

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 10

February 1971

Research Review

The Department of Land and Natural Resources has sent invitations to approximately
100 persons including the scientific community and representatives of business and the
public to participate in updating its forestry research program. The revised plan
will be called "Forest Conservation Research Plan for the Seventies". Institute of
Pacific Islands Forestry of the U. S. Forest Service is assisting in the planning.

Study and Survey of Ohia Decline.

Plans are underway to study the extent of the decline of ohia on the island of Hawaii,
as well as the rate of spread and the cause. Dr. Franklin F. Laemmlen, Plant Pathology
at the University, Clifton Davis of the Hawaii Dept, of Agriculture, State Forester
Tom K. Tagawa, and Robert E. Nelson of the U. S. Forest Service are among those who
will take part.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY
(Highlights only; not the complete minutes)

January 4, 1971

1. A very favorable report was heard on the Botanical Society's handling of the
Smoker during the Annual Meeting of the Society of Western Naturalists with special
thanks to Beatrice Krauss who had charge and Gladys Baker, Mrs. Max Doty, Ron
Hurov, and Steve Montgomery who assisted.

2. After extended discussion of the desirability of inventorying and labeling
arboreta and plant collections in Hawaii, Robert Osgood, H.S.P.A., was appointed
interim chairman.

3. Speaker of the evening. Dr. Theodor Philip Haas, retired Plant Taxonomist,
Philadelphia College of Pharmacy, formerly Assistant Curator, Botanical Gardens,
Munich. The biology of flowers. Presented with many beautiful color trans-
parency photographs to illustrate the great range in morphology of flowers and
the many specialized adaptations of the various organs and parts.

PUBLICATIONS

Abstrac t . Zepernick, Bernhard. Pf lanzennamen als Hinweis auf kulturelle Beziehungen
innerhalb Polynesiens. Festschr. 100 jahr. Fest. Berl. Ges. Anthrop. Ethnol. Urg.
Pt. 2:202-206. 1970. Comparing the names used in various Polynesian (and Micronesian)
dialects for seven common plant species, the author concludes that the vernacular
names were brought from the western archipelagoes to the eastern without touching the
Tahiti-Tubuai area. Otto & Isa Degener.

Recent Literature

Degener, Otto and Isa 1970

Flora Hawaiiensis Eight new insert leaves dated June 10, 1970; 1 leaf, Crotalaria
anagyroides; 1 leaf, Vicia menziesii; 2 leaves. Key to Genus ^elea; 2 leaves,

Key to Family Umbellif erae ; 1 leaf, Bidens awaluana; 1 leaf, Gnaphalium peregrinum.

Hawaiian Botanical Society Newsletter - page 11

February 1971

Degener, 0. & I. Degener 1970

Book Review. The genus Pelea , with pertinent and impertinent remarks.

Phytologia 19:313-319.

Doty, M. S. & G. Aguilar-Santos 1970

Transfer of toxic algal substances in marine food chains. Pac . Sci. 24:351-355.

Gill, A. M. & P. B. Tomlinson 1969

Studies on the growth of red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle L.) Biotropica 1:1-9.

Gillett , G. W. & E. K. S. Lim 1970

An experimental study of the genus Bidens (Asteraceae) in the Hawaiian Islands.
Univ. Calif. Pub Bot. 56:1-63.

Gilmartin, A. J. 1969

Numerical phenetic samples of taxonomic circumscriptions in the Bromeliaceae .
Taxon 18:378-392.

Hawaii. Department of Land and Natural Resources 1970

1969-1970 Report to the Governor. Department of Land and Natural Resources,
State of Hawaii, 89 pp.

Lanner, R. M. & E. H. Hinkle 1970

Some shoot and cone characteristics of Taiwan red pine. Pac. Sci. 24:414-416 .

LeBarron, Russell K.

The Tree that Refuses to Die. Journ. of Forestry 68(12): 771.

1970

Lloyd, R. M. 1970

A survey of some morphological features of the genus Elaphoglossum in Costa Rica
Amer. Fern Journal 60:73-83.

McCall, W.

The Climate of Hawaii. U. H. Leaflet No. 147,

1970

McCall, W. W. , G. T. Shigemura & Y. N. Tamimi 1970

Windbreaks for Hawaii. Univ. Hawaii, Coop. Ext. Serv. Circular 438, 10 pp.

Moore, Lucy B. 1970

Some implications of precocious flowering in Collospermum. Pac. Sci. 24:409-413

Mueller-Dombois , Dieter. 1967

"Ecological relations in the alpine and subalpine vegetation on Mauna Loa ,
Hawaii", J. Indian Bot. Soc. XLVI(4) :403-411.

Mueller-Dombois, Dieter & V. J. Krajina 1968

"Comparison of east-flank vegetations on Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea , Hawaii", Proc .
Sym. Recent Adv. Trop. Ecol . , pp. 508-520.

Nakagawa, Y. 1969

A weed is a plant growing out of place. Univ. Hawaii, Coop. Ext. Serv. Leaflet
144, 20 pp.

Newell, Thomas K. 1969

A study of the genus Joinvellea (Flagellariaceae) . Jour. Arnold Arboretum
50(4) :527-555.

c/o

HAWAIIAN BOTANICAL SOCIETY

3 9088 01540 7042

Department of Botany, University of Hawaii
3190 Maile Way, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822

OFFICERS

PRESIDENT H. Ronald Hurov

(Pacific Bio-Med. Res. Center, U.H.)
VICE-PRESIDENT. .. Stephen L. Montgomery
(Dept, of Entomology, U. H. )

SECRETARY John R. Porter

(Dept, of Botany, U. H.)

TREASURER Paul C. Ekern

(Agronomy and Soil Science, U. H.)

TRUSTEES Beatrice Krauss

(Dept, of Botany, U. H.)

Clifford W. Smith

(Dept, of Botany, U. H.)

MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE:

Chairman Donald Meredith

(Plant Pathology, U. H. )

THE HAWAIIAN BOTANICAL SOCIETY NEWSLETTER
is published in February, April, June,
October, and December. It is distributed
to all Society members for the purpose of
informing them about botanical news and
progress in Hawaii and the Pacific. News
contributions and articles are welcomed.

Editor Russell K. LeBarron

(Hawaii Division of Forestry)

THE HAWAIIAN BOTANICAL SOCIETY was founded
in 1924 to "advance the science of Botany
in all its applications, encourage research
in Botany in all its phases," and "promote
the welfare of its members and to develop
the spirit of good fellowship and coopera-
tion among them. " Any person interested
in the plant life of the Hawaiian Islands
is eligible for membership in this
Society. Dues, regular, $3.00 per year;
college students, $2.00; students below
college level, $1.00.

HAWAIIAN BOTANICAL SOCIETY
c/o Department of Botany
University of Hawaii
3190 Maile Way
Honolulu, Hi. 96822

— 1

' JfTjlPOSTAG

f-T CY^_/Vr

rEB-8’7i „

if & J -*

r n D Ni t l C K fl

r.D.l

06

DR. MARIE HELENE SACHET
SMITHSONIAN INST.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20560

Please Post