**3. Results**

#### *3.1. Characters of Inflorescences*

The spikelets of *F. vaginata* consisted of 4–5 flowers and those of F. tomanii comprised 5–6 flowers at (Figures 1 and 2). Most of the spikelets of *F. pseudovaginata* included five flowers with an infertile flower at the tip of the spikelets. Awns of the *F. vaginata* lemma were between 0.2–0.4 mm and those of *F. pseudovaginata* between 1–1.5 mm, and the awns of F. tomanii were longer than 2 mm.

Di fferences were found between the taxa based on the inflorescence data. The most important distinctive feature was the shorter inflorescence (13.47 ± 2.64 cm), the length of the longest branch on the 1st node (5.28 ± 1.78 cm), which were longer and larger (*F. pseudovaginata*: 6.97 ± 0.96 cm, *F. tomanii*: 8.83 ± 1.78 cm). In addition, the significantly shorter and smaller parameters measured included the length of the 4th spikelet from the top of the branch (*F. vaginata*: 6.20 ± 0.85 cm. *F. pseudovaginata*: 7.91 ± 0.52 cm, *F. tomanii*: 8.46 ± 0.61 cm), the length of the 4th spikelet from the top of the inflorescence (*F. vaginata*: 6.02 ± 0.77 cm. *F. pseudovaginata*: 8.69 ± 0.61 cm, *F. tomanii*: 8.49 ± 0.90 cm), the length of the upper glume (19: *F. vaginata*: 6.02 ± 0.77, 3.06 ± 0.55 mm, *F. pseudovaginata*: 8.69 ± 0.61, 3.70 ± 0.56 mm, *F. tomanii*: 8.49 ± 0.90, 3.80 ± 0.37 mm), the length of the lower glume (20 *F. vaginata*: 2.10 ± 0.22, 2.31 ± 0.42 mm, *F. pseudovaginata*: 2.79 ± 0.19, 2.58 ± 0.41 mm, *F. tomanii*: 2.48 ± 0.23, 2.69 ± 0.33 mm), the length of 1st flower's awn (24: *F. vaginata*: 0.18 ± 0.16, 0.12 ± 0.11 mm, *F. pseudovaginata*: 1.64 ± 0.20, 1.51 ± 0.19 mm, *F. tomanii*: 2.13 ± 0.30, 1.93 ± 0.34 mm) and the length of 2nd flower's awn (21: *F. vaginata*: 0.17 ± 0.08, 0.21 ± 0.14 mm, *F. pseudovaginata*: 1.34 ± 0.16, 1.47 ± 0.20 mm, *F. tomanii*: 2.15 ± 0.26, 2.21 ± 0.36 mm).

**Figure 1.** Typical spikelets of *Festuca vaginata* W. K. (**A**), *Festuca pseudovaginata* Penksza (**B**) and *Festuca tomanii* Korneck & T.Gregor (**C**).

**Figure 2.** Tipycal lemma of *F. vaginata* (**A**), *F. pseudovaginata* (**B**) and *F. tomanii* (**C**).

The length of the generative stem showed no difference between the three taxa, and was omitted when analyzing the data. The hair of the spikelet was also not informative

The minimum spanning tree (Figure 3) and biplot options of the ordination (PCA) analysis highlighted the most responsible morphological features for species differences (Figure 4). *Festuca vaginata* separates from the other two species at a grea<sup>t</sup> degree. Within *F. vaginata,* there are two more groups, based on geographical location. Inflorescneces of samples originating from the southern part of the area (Balta Verde, Deliblát, Imrehegy, Tatárszentgyörgy) are relatively larger, which make them separate. The separation of *F. vaginata* was represented by the following stamps: the other two species had a much longer inflorescence (13.5 cm), the longest branch on the first node and the short awn of lemma

**Figure 3.** Classification inflorescence parameters of investigated *Festuca* taxa (V: *F. vaginata*, P: *F. pseudovaginata*, H: *F. tomanii*, Bö: Böhönye, Ho: Momoktövis TT, C: Cenkov, Gy: Gy˝ ´ orszentiván, Ki: Kisoroszi, Th: Tahitótfalu, Vv: Balta Verde, Tt: Tatárszentgyörgy, D. Deliblato, Ih: Imrehegy, Ku: Kunpeszér, Kunadacs, Sz: Szigetszentmiklós).

**Figure 4.** Classification inflorescence parameters of investigated *Festuca* taxa (V: *F. vaginata*, P: *F. pseudovaginata*, H: *F. tomanii*, Bö: Böhönye, Ho: Momoktövis TT, C: Cenkov, Gy: Gy˝ ´ orszentiván, Ki: Kisoroszi, Th: Tahitótfalu, Vv: Balta Verde, Tt: Tatárszentgyörgy, D. Deliblato, Ih: Imrehegy, Ku: Kunpeszér, Kunadacs, Sz: Szigetszentmiklós).

Figure 4 also highlights the morphological parameters which made *F. pseudovaginata* and *F. tomanii* different. The spikelet was also a distinctive feature of *F. vaginata* and *F. pseudovaginata* of the fourth spikelet from the top of the branch, as the fourth spikelet from the top of the branch. In the case of *F. tomanii*, this length was reversed and the fourth spikelet from the top of the branch was shorter. In these cases, similarly to *F. vaginata*, there was a difference according to their geographical distribution with the size of the specimens (Ku: Kunpeszér, Kunadacs) from the southern part of the studied areas and the south part (central Kiskunság) being smaller (north part: 8.18 ± 0.55 mm, south part: 7.56 ± 0.14 mm).

Differences between *F. pseudovaginata* and *F. tomanii*: length of the 2nd flower's awn, length of the 2nd flower's lemma, the length of the lemma awn, length of upper glume, length of 1st flower's lemma, length of 1st flower's awn.

A radar chart with polar grid type options illustrate differences in the taxa studied. The four morphological parameters were highlighted (Figure 5). The length of inflorescence (Figure 5A), which shows that the length values of *F. vaginata* were almost twice as long as the values of *F. pseudovaginata* inflorescence and the *F. tomanii* inflorescence was between the two. The difference in the length of the fourth spikelet from the top of the branch (Figure 5B) was barely significant but here the species differences could be detected, with the highest values appearing in *F. pseudovaginata* and the lowest in *F. vaginata*. The most striking differences were the length of the second flower's awn (Figure 5C). The awn lemma in *F. vaginata* was absent or very short, the longest in the *F. tomanii* taxon. The length of the upper glume (Figure 5D) had a smaller difference in size, with the highest values given by *F. pseudovaginata* and the smallest length values given by *F. vaginata*.

**Figure 5.** Radar chart with polar grid type options of some morphologycal marcs of investigated *Festuca* taxa (**A**: the length of inflorescence, **B**: length of the 4th spikelet from the top of branch, **C**: the length of the 2nd flower's awn, **D**: length of upper glume, V: *F. vaginata*, P: *F. pseudovaginata*, H: *F. tomanii*, Bö: Böhönye, Ho: Momoktövis TT, C: Cenkov, Gy: Gy˝ ´ orszentiván, Ki: Kisoroszi, Th: Tahitótfalu, Vv: Balta Verde, Tt: Tatárszentgyörgy, D. Deliblato, Ih: Imrehegy, Ku: Kunpeszér, Kunadacs, Sz: Szigetszentmiklós).

## *3.2. Leaf Micromorphology*
