SOME PROBLEMS FROM THE SYSTEMATICS OF THE GENUS PRUNUS L.
Our purpose is not a discussion of some of the former systematic classifications worked out by such botanists as: Linne, Miller, Moench, Lamarok, Persoon, Lambert, Koch, Webb, Bentham and Hooker, Heldreich, Koehne, Focke, Schneider, Ingram - but a critical comparison of the three most often nowadays applied classifications that are found in the nowadays used basic handbooks on dendrology according to the authors: A.Rehder (1927), C.I.Sokolow (1954) and G.Grüssmann (1962). Rehder and Krussmann number an overwhelming majority of species from the subfamily Prunoideae Focke among the genus Prunus L. (besides a few ones numbered among the genera Maddenia, Osmaronia and Prinsepia). They divide that genus into several subgenera and sections. The classifications by Rehder and Krüssmann are typical taxonomic ones. Sokolow has applied a rather practical classification, approaching to the classification by Miller; he has divided the genus Prunus within the meaning of Rehder or Krüssmann into several separate genera.
A genealogical tree has been created after and analysis of morphological features of the species from the genus Prunus L. (sensu latissimo) had been carried, G.Krüssmann's