The study is devoted to historian J. V. Šimák as one of the principal initiator of the establishment of the manuscript commission of the Czech Academy of Sciences and Arts (1907). The impulse for this came from the professional Historical Association and followed the trend of institualisation of specialised branches of historical research. Šimák is presented here as a methodologist and cataloguer of manuscripts. Although his scientific work took another direction, his contribution to the cataloguing of manuscripts is worth recalling.
On a semiarid sand grassland (Festucetum vaginatae) colonised by juniper (Juniperus communis L.) shrubs terricolous lichens and mosses segregate strongly between microhabitats: certain species grow in the open grassland, others almost exclusively in the shade of junipers. The contrasting irradiances of these microhabitats influence much the metabolism of these organisms, and thus affect their small-scale distribution. This was confirmed by determining the efficiency of photochemical energy conversion by measuring chlorophyll a fluorescence parameters. In the open grassland maximum photochemical efficiency of photosystem 2 (PS2, Fv/Fm) declined from the humid spring to the hot and dry summer in all species, and this was caused by an increase in base fluorescence (F0), but not by the decrease in fluorescence maximum (Fm). In summer, mosses and lichens growing in the open grassland generally possessed lower Fv/Fm than cryptogams growing in the shade cast by juniper shrubs. Thus mosses and lichens in the open grassland suffer lasting reduction in photochemical efficiency in summer, which is avoided in the shade of junipers. Juniper shrubs indeed influence the composition and small-scale spatial pattern of sympatric terricolous lichen and moss communities by-among others-providing a shelter against high light in summer. and T. Kalapos, K. Mázsa.
In the epiphytic tillandsioids, Guzmania monostachia, Werauhia sanguinolenta, and Guzmania lingulata (Bromeliaceae), juvenile plants exhibit an atmospheric habit, whereas in adult plants the leaf bases overlap and form water-holding tanks. CO2 gas-exchange measurements of the whole, intact plants and δ13C values of mature leaves demonstrated that C3 photosynthesis was the principal pathway of CO2 assimilation in juveniles and adults of all three species. Nonetheless, irrespective of plant size, all three species were able to display features of facultative CAM when exposed to drought stress. The capacity for CAM was the greatest in G. monostachia, allowing drought-stressed juvenile and adult plants to exhibit net CO2 uptake at night. CAM expression was markedly lower in W. sanguinolenta, and minimal in G. lingulata. In both species, low-level CAM merely sufficed to reduce nocturnal respiratory net loss of CO2. δ13C values were generally less negative in juveniles than in adult plants, probably indicating increased diffusional limitation of CO2 uptake in juveniles., J. D. Beltrán ... [et al. ]., and Obsahuje bibliografii
Comparison of one of the commentaries on the Apocalypse which originated at the Prague University and is contained in the manuscript Osek Cist. 37 of the Prague National Library, ff . 1–129, coming from Osek, dating from 1402 and used to this day by experts, with a copy of the same work in the manuscript I Q 16 of the University Library in Wroclaw, created 1378, has excluded the hitherto assumed authorship of Heřman Švab of Mindelheim, as well as the authorship of Heřman of Prague, assumed, not beyond doubt, by Fr. Stegmüller. Temporal relationship and the data of the colophones of both of these preserved manuscripts lead to the conclusion that the author of this Commentary is an other „Doctor Heřman“, Heřman of Winterswick, a member of the Prague university who composed the Commentary sometime in the late seventies of the 14th century.
After a historic introduction the author deals with the manuscript of the Museum of Western Bohemia in Pilsen (5 MA 11). The manuscript entitled „Inventarium Bibliothecae Archidiaconatus Plsnensis“ came into being at the Pilsen archdean Jan Václav Emerich´s instance. Emerich wrote the book in part (ff . 51r, 54v) himself and in part (ff . 52r–54v) got an unknown scribe (X) to do so. Should an edition of the book be prepared, the complete text by the scribe (X) on ff . 52r–54v will be decisive. This scribe wrote – maybe by mistake.