



REVISION OF THE BRITISH WILLOWS. 



407 













" 















- 



Nos. 52 & 53), under that name and with citation of the plate, a 

 plant which he says is only a form of Salix nigricans. 



Comparing Leefe's specimens with Forbes's plate and description, 

 I find that they do not agree, and that whilst Leefe's latifolia is 

 nothing more than what he thought it to be, i. e. nigricans, Forbes's 

 plant is evidently a hybrid form. 



From the affinity between 8. Caprea and S. cinerea, their hybrids 

 with 8. nigricans frequently so much resemble each other that it 

 is not easy to separate them. "Wimmer relies on the yellowish- 

 white much thicker capsules, thicker, shorter and broader catkins, 

 the much broader, oval-subrotund young leaves, and the larger, 

 broader, and more hairy old leaves, as characters by which to 

 distinguish the best form of latifolia from hybrids of cinerea with 

 nigricans, but remarks that some specimens show a departure 

 from these points of distincti 



ion. 



wttfoha seems to have been found in a very few places in 

 -Upland, Sweden, and Germany. The only undoubted specimens 



I have 



seen are all # from Perthshire, where three bushes — in 



ft — _ w 



two widely separated localities— have been found by Mr. C. 

 M'Intosh and myself. 



, tne se, one is quite intermediate between S. Caprea and S. ni- 

 gricans • another greatly resembles Sal. Wob. t. 118 and has more 

 nity with the cinerea-nigricans hybrid, but also seems to be, 

 eyond doubt, latifolia ; and the third, in its longer styles, inclines 

 more to nigricans. 



vt S. latifolia the $ only was known to Forbes and to Wira- 



m w bUt Audersson describes the <J . 



Wimmer refers S.frma, Forbes, t. 106, and S. cotinifolia, Sm., 



orbes, t. 114, with some doubt, to S. latifolia ; but Anderssou 



s tnat they represent nigricans only. Of 8. firma I have 



en specimens from Kew Gardens which, though not quite 



1 entlcal wi th the plant figured by Forbes, are probably the 



tvT they possill)1 y represent another form of latifolia, but I 

 lnk a re rather cinerea x nigricans. The plant usually called in 

 ri am cotinifolia does not appear to be the same as Forbes's, and 



18 only nigricans. 











Sin 







labelled ^ ^ *"* Written 1 have found in Edinb - Univ - Herbarium a specimen 

 Ma 9 M S ' W ' cornei% of Duddingston Loch," which must be referred to S. lati- 



+ « 



• 

















■ 















