384 



DB. F. BUCHANAN WHITE S 



.• 



r 



and glabrous, in cinerea stouter and pubescent ; leaves, in aurita 

 smaller, softer, and more rugose ; catkins, in aurita much smaller 

 and with more distinct leafy bracts at the base ; scales, in aurita 

 narrower, more ferruginous, and less black at the tips ; capsules, 

 in aurita smaller, whiter, more pubescent, less subulate and more 

 cylindrical, with no style and with short stigmas. 



Theoretically the hybrid should have characters altogethe 

 intermediate, but practically it will be found that in some points 

 the cinerea-inftixence predominates, and in others the aurita. The 

 twigs are usually more slender than in cinerea and either pubes- 

 cent or glabrous : the leaves are very variable, and from them 

 alone it is impossible to determine the hybrid ; but compared with 

 those of cinerea, they are usually smaller and show, especially in 

 a living state, more rugosity, whilst their shape and general 

 appearance suggest a mixture with aurita ; the catkins are inter- 

 mediate in size and shape ; the scales, whilst retaining a resem- 

 blance to those of aurita, are blacker at the tips ; the capsules 

 show an evident relationship with aurita in their whiter colour 

 and more cylindrical form, whilst, in being more evidently though 

 very shortly styled, they betray affinity with cinerea. In the 6 

 plant reliance can be placed only in the intermediate size of the 

 catkins and nature of the scales, taken, of course, in combination 

 with twig- and leaf -characters. 



Whilst these noints indicate e^nerallv what is to be expected 





in the hybrid, every specimen must be judged on its own merits, 

 and due weight allowed to certain features indescribable, but yet 

 easily recognized by the practiced eye. 



In Britain I believe that Salix lutescens is not an uncommon 

 plant. Though British authors seem to have overlooked the 

 record, Winimer, so far back as 1866, mentions that he had seen 

 specimens from Coventry Park, Warwickshire, collected by 













w 



leifi 



This 



the case, that in British herbaria S. lutescens has often been 





oleifolia 



As has 



been mentioned under S. cinerea, several of Leefe's published 

 specimens of this group must be referred to 8. lutescens. Some 





oleifoli 



(all 



No. 103 (from Northumberland), must be called more or less 

 good lutescens, as is possibly also No. 41 (of Pasc. i.). As note(l 



■ 









■3 





















