New York Metropolitan Flora

List of Ulmaceae Genera

References to Ulmaceae

• Ager, A. A.; Guries, R. P. 1982. Barriers to interspecific hybridization in Ulmus americana. Euphytica 31: 909-20.
• Angeles, G.; Evert, R. F.; Kozlowski, T. T. 1986. Development of lenticels and adventitious roots in flooded Ulmus americana seedlings. Canad. J. Forest Res. 16: 585-90.
• Baillon, H. 1877. Ulmacees. Hist. Pl. 6: 137-216. (In French)
• Barton, L. V. 1939. Storage of elm seeds. Contr. Boyce Thompson Inst. Pl. Res. 10: 221-33.
• Bate-Smith, E. C.; Richens, R. H. 1973. Flavonoid chemistry and taxonomy in Ulmus. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1(3): 141-6.
• Beattie, R. K. 1933. How the Dutch elm disease reached America. Proc. Annual Meeting Natl. Shade Tree Conf. 9: 101-5.
• Bechtel, A. R. 1921. The floral anatomy of the Urticales. Amer. J. Bot. 8: 386-410.
• Bernard, C. 1905. Sur la distribution geographique des Ulmacees. Bull. Herb. Boissier 5: 1097-112.
• Billings, F. H. 1905. Precursory leaf-serrations of Ulmus americana. Bot. Gaz. 40: 224-5.
• Bob, C. F.; Redmond, B. L.; Karnosky, D. F. 1986. On the nature of intra- and interspecific incompatability in Ulmus. Amer. J. Bot. 73(4): 465-74.
• Boivin, B. 1867. Les Celtis du Canada. Naturaliste Canad. 94: 621-4.
• Borthwick, H. A. 1957. Light effects on tree growth and seed germination. Ohio J. Science 57: 357-64.
• Broadhurst, J. 1917. Self-pruning in the American elm. Torreya 17: 21-4.
• Brown, R. L. 1904. Wood structure of elms, maples and oaks as a means of identifying species. Rep. Michigan Acad. Sci. 4: 109-12.
• Carter, J. C. 1975. Major tree diseases of the century. J. Arboric. 1(8): 141-7.
• Cathey, H. M.; Campbell, L. E. 1975. Security lighting and its impact on the landscape. J. Arboric. 1: 181-187.
• Charlton, W. A. 1993. The rotated-lamina syndrome: 2. The seedling of Ulmus glabra. Canad. J. Bot. 71(2): 222-8.
• Chernik, V. V. 1980. Peculiarities of structure and development of the pericarp of the representatives of the family Ulmaceae and Celtidaceae. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenengrad) 65(4): 521-31. (In Russian)
• Chernik, V. V. 1975. Arrangement and reduction of perianth and androecium parts in representatives of Ulmaceae Mirbel and Celtidaceae Link. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenengrad) 60(11): 1561-73. (In Russian; English summary. See also Inter. Bot. Congress:12 Leningrad- abstract)
• Choat, B. et.al. 2006. Direct measurements of intervessel pit membrane hydraulic resistance in two angiosperm tree species. Amer. J. Bot. 93: 993-1000.
• Coladoanto, M. 1992. Ulmus americana. ()
• Coladoanto, M. 1993. Ulmus rubra. ()
• Collingwood, G. H. 1942. Slippery Elm. Amer. Forests 48: 364-5.
• Collingwood, G. H. 1940. Hackberry. Amer. Forests 46: 414-5.
• Collins, P. E. 1967. Hybridization studies in the genus Ulmus. Ph.D. Dissertation Univ. Minnesota118 p. (Univ. microfilms Dissert. Abstr. 1968, 28 B (12 Pt. 1) 4828-4829)
• Constantinidou, H. A.; Kozlowski, T. T. 1979. Effects of sulphur dioxide and ozone on Ulmus americana seedlings. I. Visible injury and growth. Canad. J. Bot. 57: 170-5.
• Constantinidou, H. A.; Kozlowski, T. T. 1979. Effects of sulphur dioxide and ozone on Ulmus americana seedlings. II. Carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. Canad. J. Bot. 57: 176-84.
• Cowan, M. R.; Gabel, M. L.; et al. et.al. 1997. Growth and biomineralization of Celtis occidentalis (Ulmaceae) pericarps. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 137: 266-73.
• Crane, P. R.; Blackmore, S. (eds.) (1989): 1989. Evolution, systematics and fossil history of the Hamamelidae. 2 Vols. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Cypher, B. L.; Cypher, E. A. 1999. Germination rates of tree seeds ingested by coyotes and raccoons. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 142: 71-76.
• Dallimore, W. 1920. Elms and elm timber. Quart. J. Forest. 14: 109-18.
• Dame, L. L.; Brooks, H. 1982. The American elm: Ulmus americana L. Arnoldia (Jamaica Plain) 42: 49-60.
• Davis, R. W.; Larimore, R. L.; Ebinger, J. E. 1998. The occurrence of slippery elm (Ulmus rubra Muhl.) root sprouts in forest understories in east-central Illinois. Trans. Illinois State Acad. Sci. 91: 13-7.
• De Steven, D. 1991. Experiments on mechanisms of tree establishment in old-field succession: seedling emergence. Ecology 72: 1066-75.
• De Steven, D. 1991. Experiments on mechanisms of tree establishment in old-field succession: seedling survival and growth. Ecology 72: 1076-88.
• Denk, T.; Grimm, G. W. 2005. Phylogeny and biogeography of Zelkova (Ulmaceae sensu stricto) as inferred from leaf morphology, ITS sequence data and the fossil record. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 147: 129-157.
• Detwiler, S. B. 1916. The American elm (Ulmus americana). Amer. Forests 22: 259-67.
• Earle, F. S. 1904. Proceedings of the club. Torreya 4: 12.
• Ehrenberg, C. E. 1953. Studies on elm pollen. Bot. Not. 3: 308-16.
• Ekdahl, I. 1941. Die Entwicklung von Embryosack und Embryo bei Ulmus glabra Huds. Svensk Bot. Tidskr. 35: 143-56.
• Elias, T. S. 1970. The genera of Ulmaceae in the southeastern United States. J. Arnold Arbor. 51: 18-40.
• Elliot, J. C. 1954. Studies in and near Michigan's tension zone: a northward extension for the range of Ulmus thomasi Sarg. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 52: 370-3.
• Fernald, M. L.; Schubert, B. G. 1948. Studies of American types in British herbaria. Rhodora 50: 149-76, 181-208, 217-33.
• Flora of North America Editorial Committee. 1997. Flora of North America, Volume 3. Magnoliophyta: Magnoliidae and Hamamelidae. Oxford University Press, New York. , 590 pages.
• George, E. J. 1937. Storage and dewinging of American elm seed. J. Forest. 35: 769-72.
• Giannasi, D. 1978. Generic relationships in the Ulmaceae, based on flavonoid chemistry. Taxon 27: 331-44.
• Grudzinskaya, I. A. 1967. Ulmaceae and reasons for distinguishing Celtoideae as a seperate family Celtidaceae Link. Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenengrad) 52: 1723-49. (In Russian; English summary)
• Grudzinskaya, I. A. 1975. On the origin of the American species of Ulmus (hybridogenity and significance of flavonoid score). Bot. Zhurn. (Moscow & Lenengrad) 60(2): 163-9. (In Russian; English summary)
• Gustafson, F. G. 1950. Is the American elm (Ulmus americana) injured by natural gas? Pl. Physiol. (Lancaster) 25: 433-40.
• Heybroek, H. M. 1976. Systematics and nomenclature of the genus Ulmus. Groen (Netherlands) 32(8): 237-40. (In Dutch)
• Higgins, D. J.; Arisumi, T. 1959. Time of floral differentiation in Ulmus americana, U. pumila, and U. carpinifolia. Bot. Gaz. 120(3): 177-80.
• Hill, E. 1900. Celtis pumila Pursh, with notes on allied species. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 27: 496-505.
• Hoppes, W. G. 1988. Seedfall pattern of several species of bird-dispersed plants in an Illinois woodland. Ecology 69: 320-329.
• Hosner, J. F. 1959. Survival, root, and shoot growth of six bottomland tree species following flooding. J. Forest. 57: 927-8.
• Houle, G.; Bouchard, F. 1990. Hackberry (Celtis occidentalis) at the northeastern limit of its distribution in North America: Population structure and radial growth patterns. Canad. J. Bot. 68: 2685-92. (French summary)
• Jacobs, H. L.; Tehon, L. R. 1939. The study of lightening injury to an American elm. Arborist's News 4(6): 41-4.
• Johnson, F. L.; Bell, D. T. 1976. Tree growth and mortality in the streamside forest. Castanea 41: 34-41.
• Johnson, L. P. V. 1946. Fertilization in Ulmus with special reference to hybridization procedure. Canad. J. Forest Res. 24: 1-3.
• Jones, R. H.; Sharitz, R. R.; McLeod, K. W. 1989. Effects of flooding and root competition on growth of shaded bottomland hardwood seedlings. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 121: 165-75.
• Killingbeck, K. T. 1985. Autumnal resorption and accretion of trace metals in gallery forest tress. Ecology 66: 283-6. (Cu, Fe, Mn, & Zn)
• Knudsen, G. J. 1978. Rock elm, Ulmus thomasii. Bull. Nat. Resourc. Wisconsin 41(2): 31. (Ref. in Bibliogr. Agric. 42(2):015931. 1978)
• Kozlowski, T. T.; Pallardy, S. G. 1979. Effects of low temperature on leaf diffusion resistance of Ulmus americana and Fraxinus pennsylvanica seedlings. Canad. J. Bot. 57: 2466-70.
• Laing, C. C. 1966. Structure, formation, and dormancy of terminal buds of Elm. Bot. Gaz. 127(2-3): 127-32.
• Lanier, G. N.; Schubert, D. C.; Manion, P. D. 1988. Dutch elm disease and elm yellows in central New York. Plant Dis. 72: 189-94.
• Lester, D. T. 1971. Self-compatibility and inbreeding depression in American elm. Forest Sci. 17: 321-2.
• Linder, D. H. 1931. Some diseases of elm trees. Missouri Bot. Gard. Bull. 19: 61-9.
• Lodhi, M. A. K. 1977. The influence and comparison of individual forest trees on soil properties and possible inhibition of nitrification due to intact vegetation. Amer. J. Bot. 64(3): 260-4.
• Marshall, P. E.; Kozlowski, T. T. 1974. Photosynthetic activity of cotyledons and foliage leaves of young angiosperm seedlings. Canad. J. Bot. 52(9): 2023-32.
• McDermott, R. E. 1954. Effects of saturated soil on seedling growth of some bottomland hardwood species. Ecology 35: 36-41.
• McDermott, R. E. 1953. Light as a factor in the germination of some bottomland hardwood species. J. Forest. 51: 203-4.
• McGregor, R. L. 1985. Multiple seedlings in Celtis (Ulmaceae): with notes on Ulmus americana. Contr. Univ. Kansas Herb. 17: 1-5.
• Mears, J. A. 1973. Chemical constituents and systematics of Amentiferae. Brittonia 25(4): 385-94.
• Micales, J. A.; Stipes, R. J.; Ratliff, J. L.; Lawrence, S. R. 1981. Botanical aspects of the genus Ulmus. Virginia J. Sci. 32(3): 104. (Abstract)
• Millet, J. et.al. 1998. Plagiotropic architectural development of four tree species of the temperate forest. Canad. J. Bot. 76: 2100-2118.
• Moseley, M. F. 1973. Vegatative anatomy and morphology of Amentiferae. Brittonia 25(4): 356-70.
• Muller, C. H. 1939. Mechanically initiated bark growth in Celtis. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 22: 436-7.
• Newhouse, M. E.; Madgwick, H. A. I. 1968. Comparative seedling growth of four hardwood species. Forest Sci. 14: 27-30.
• Newsome, R. D.; Kozlowski, T. T.; Tang, Z. C. 1982. Responses of Ulmus americana seedlings to flooding of soil. Canad. J. Bot. 60: 1688-95.
• Oginuma, K.; Raven, P. H.; Tobe, H. 1990. Karyomorphology and relationships of Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales). Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 103: 113-31.
• Priemer, F. 1893. Die anatomischen Verholtnisse der Laubblotter der Ulmaceen (einschl. Celtideen) und die Beziehungen zu ihrer Systematik. Bot. Jahrb. Syst. 17: 419-75. (In German)
• Qui, Y. L. et.al. 1998. Phylogenetics of the Hamamelidae and their allies: parsimony analysis of nucleotide sequences of the plastid gene rbcL. Int. J. Plant Sci. 159: 891-905.
• Redenbaugh, K.; Karnosky, D. F.; Westfall, R. D. 1981. Protoplast isolation and fusion in three Ulmus species. Canad. J. Bot. 59: 1436-43.
• Richardson, C. J.; Cares, C. W. 1976. An analysis of elm (Ulmus americana) mortality in a second-growth hardwood forest in southeastern Michigan. Canad. J. Bot. 54(10): 1120-5.
• Richens, R. H. 1980. On fine distinctions in Ulmus. Taxon 29: 305-12.
• Roberts, B. R.; Main, H. V. 1965. The effect of chilling and photoperiod on bud break in American elm. J. Forest. 63(3): 180-1.
• Rosario, L. C. 1988. Celtis occidentalis. ()
• Rothrock, J. T. 1908. Hackberry, sugar-berry (C. occidentalis L.). Forest Leaves 11: 136-7.
• Rowe, J. W.; Seikel, M. K.; Roy, R. N.; Jorgensen, E. 1972. Chemotaxonomy of Ulmus. Phytochemistry 11(8): 2513-7.
• Santamour, F. S. 1971. A triploid elm (Ulmus pumila x U. rubra) and its aneuploid progeny. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 98: 310-4.
• Santamour, F. S. 1970. A natural hybrid between American and Siberian elms. Forest Sci. 16: 149-53.
• Santamour, F. S. 1972. Flavonoid distribution in Ulmus. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 99: 127-31.
• Sargent, C. S. 1895. Ulmus. Silva N. Am. 7: 39-58.
• Sargent, C. S. 1893. Celtis. Silva N. Am. 7: 63-75.
• Sargent, C. S. 1919. Notes on North American trees, IV. Bot. Gaz. 67: 208-42.
• Sax, K. 1933. Chromosome numbers in Ulmus and related genera. J. Arnold Arbor. 14: 82-4.
• Schaffner, J. H. 1904. Twigs of the common hackberry. Ohio Naturalist 5: 215-6.
• Schneck, J. 1897. The hackberries as ornamental and shade trees. Meehans' Monthly 7: 231-2.
• Schweitzer, E. M. 1971. Comparative anatomy of Ulmaceae. J. Arnold Arbor. 52: 523-85.
• Seymour, F. C. 1952. Notes on Moraceae and Ulmaceae. Amer. Midl. Naturalist 48: 249-50.
• Seymour, F. C. 1952. The type of Ulmus americana L. Rhodora 54(641): 138-9.
• Shattuck, C. H. 1905. A morphological study of Ulmus americana. Bot. Gaz. 40: 209-23.
• Sherman, S. L. 1987. Flavonoid systematics of Ulmus L. in the United States. M.S. Thesis Univ. Georgia,
• Sherman, S. L.; Giannasi, D. E. 1988. Foliar flavonoids of Ulmus in eastern North America. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 16(1): 51-6.
• Sinclair, W. A. 1972. Phloem necrosis of American elm and slippery elm in New York. Pl. Dis. Reporter 56: 159-61.
• Sinclair, W. A.; Braun, E. J.; Larsen, A. O. 1976. Update on phloem necrosis of elms. J. Arboric. 2(6): 106-13.
• Sinclair, W. A.; Griffiths, H. M.; Lee, I. M. 1994. Mycoplasmlike organisims as causes of slow growth and decline of trees and shrubs. J. Arboric. 20(3): 176-89. (Fraxinus & Ulmus)
• Smith, N. F. 1951. Hackberry- Celtis occidentalis, Linnaeus. Michigan Conservation 20: 31-2.
• Snetsinger, R.; Himelick, E. B. 1957. Observations on witches'-broom of hackberry (C. occidentalis). Pl. Dis. Reporter 41: 541-4.
• Song, B. H. et.al. 2001. Further evidence for parapyly of the Celtidaceae from the chloroplast gene MATK. Pl. Syst. Evol. 228: 107-115.
• Staub, R. 1967. Some variations in fruit, seed and seedling characteristics in the American elm, U. americana L., in relation to geography of seed source. Diss. Abstr. 28: 511B.
• Steele, F. L. 1978. Range extension of two New Hampshire trees. Rhodora 80(821): 155.
• Steinbauer, C. E.; Steinbauer, G. P. 1932. Effects of temperature and desiccation during storage on germination of seeds of the American elm (Ulmus americana L.). Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 28: 441-3.
• Stern, W. L. 1973. Development of the amentiferous concept. Brittonia 25(4): 316-33.
• Stipes, R. J.; Campana, R. J. (eds.) (1981): 1981. Compendium of Elm Diseases. St. Paul.
• Stone, D. E. 1973. Patterns in the evolution of amentiferous fruits. Brittonia 25(4): 371-84.
• Sweitzer, E. 1971. Comparative anatomy of Ulmaceae. J. Arnold Arbor. 52: 523-85.
• Takahashi, M. 1989. Pollen morphology of Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae: a reinvestigation. In: Evolution, systematics and fossil history of the Hamamelidae. 2: Higher Hamamelidae. Clareson Press, Oxford. , 253-65 pages. (Syst. Assoc. Spec. Vol. 40B)
• Takaso, T. 1987. Ovule ontogeny and morphology in Ulmaceae.
• Takaso, T.; Tobe, H. 1990. Seed coat morphology and evolution in Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales). Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 103: 25-41.
• Terabayashi, S. 1991. Vernation patterns in Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales), and their evolutionary and systematic implications. Bot. Mag. (Tokyo) 104: 1-13.
• Thorn1. 1973. The "Amentiferae" or Hamamelidae as an artificial group: a summary treatment. Brittonia 25(4): 395-405.
• Tiffney, B. H. 1986. Fruit and seed dispersal and the evolution of the Hamamelidae. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 73: 394-416.
• Tippo, O. 1938. Comparative anatomy of the Moraceae and their presumed allies. Bot. Gaz. 100: 1-99.
• Ueda, K.; Kosuge, K.; Tobe, H. 1997. A molecular phylogeny of Celtidaceae and Ulmaceae (Urticales) based on rbcL nucleotide sequences. J. Pl. Res. 110: 171-8.
• Vozzo, J. A.; Hacskaylo, E. 1964. Anatomy of mycorrhizae of selected eastern forest trees. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 91: 378-387.
• Wagner, W. H. 1974. Dwarf hackberry (Ulmaceae: Celtis tenuifolia) in the Great Lakes Region. Michigan Bot. 13: 73-99.
• Walker, R. I. 1932. Chromosome numbers in Ulmus. Science 75: 107.
• Walker, R. I. 1950. Megasporogenesis and development of megagametophyte in Ulmus. Amer. J. Bot. 37: 47-52.
• Walker, R. I. 1938. Macrosporogenesis and embryo development in Ulmus fulva. Bot. Gaz. 99: 592-8.
• Walters, M. B.; Reich, P. B. 1989. Responses of Ulmus americana seedlings to varying nitrogen and water status. 1. Photosynthesis and growth. Tree Physiology 5: 159-72.
• Weber, P. V. V.; Sinclair, W. A.; Peterson, J. L.; Davis, S. H. 1974. New in New Jersey: elm phloem necrosis. Pl. Dis. Reporter 58: 387-8.
• Went, J. C. 1949. Elm nomenclature. Ned. Boschbouw-Tijdschr. 21: 106-8. (In Dutch)
• Wheeler, E.; LaPasha, C. A.; Miller, R. B. 1988. Woody anatomy of elm (Ulmus) and hackberry (Celtis) species native to the United States. IAWA Bull. 10: 5-26.
• Whittemore, A. T.; Olsen, R. T. 2011. Ulmus americana (Ulmaceae) is a polyploid complex. Amer. J. Bot. 98: 754-760.
• Wiegrefe, S. J.; Sytsma, K. J.; Guries, R. P. 1994. Phylogeny of elms (Ulmus, Ulmaceae): molecular evidence for a sectional classification. Syst. Bot. 19: 590-612.
• Wiegrefe, S. J.; Sytsma, K. J.; Guries, R. P. 1998. The Ulmaceae, one family or two? Evidence from chloroplast DNA restriction site mapping. Pl. Syst. Evol. 210: 249-270.
• Wilkinson, G. 1978. Epitaph for the elm. Hutchinson, London. , 159 pages.
• Wilson, C. L. 1975. The long battle against Dutch Elm Disease. J. Arboric. 1(6): 107-12.
• Wolf, F. A. 1910. Formation of adventitious roots by the hackberry tree. Pl. World 13: 174-5.
• Wright, J. W. 1953. Pollen dispersion studies: some practical applications. J. Forest. 51: 114-8.
• Wright, J. W. 1952. Pollen dispersion of some forest trees.
• Wyman, D. 1951. Elms grown in America. Arnoldia (Jamaica Plain) 11: 79-93.
• Zalapa, J. E. et.al. 2009. Patterns of hybridization and introgression between invasive Ulmus pumila (Ulmaceae) and native U. rubra. Amer. J. Bot. 96: 1116-1128.
• Zavada, M. 1983. Pollen morphology of Ulmaceae. Grana 22: 23-30.
• Zavada, M. S.; Kim, M. 1996. Phylogenetic analysis of Ulmaceae. Pl. Syst. Evol. 200(1-2): 13-20. (also considers Moraceae & Cannabaceae)