













EEVISION OF THE BBITISH WILLOWS. 421 



Comparing Leefe's specimens (Sal. Brit. Exs. No. 37, and Sal. 

 Exs. ii. No. 27) of Salix acuminata with Wimmer's dasyclados 

 (Coll. No. 99) I find that they are practically identical. Wim- 

 mer's exponent (Coll. No. 100) of acuminata is also like Leefe's 

 specimens, but with a somewhat greater look of Caprea. Of 

 Leefe's No. 37, Andersson remarked that it was most certainly 

 dasyclados, and very markedly distinct from acuminata, Sm. ; but 

 Leefe maintained that it was the acuminata, Sm., Eug. Bot.,aud 

 cites Borrer as confirming the name. From a capsule preserved 

 with Smith's original drawings, I have no doubt that Leefe is 

 right as regards his plant, and I have also no doubt that dasyclados 

 is a synonym of acuminata. 



From the specimens which I have seen I am rather inclined to 

 think that acuminata deserves a more distinct position than the 

 other varieties of Smithiana ; but as Andersson has placed it 

 among them, I do not venture to remove it. Its large catkins, 

 densely hairy with crisped hairs, and the long erect woolly 

 pubescence of the capsules, make it easily recognizable. The 

 stout twigs are also most generally densely tomentose, and the 

 large leaves are usually broader upwards and glaucous below. 



Andersson defines three modifications— glabrescens (to which 



vtrescens 





(also British). 



The parentage of acuminata is doubtful. Andersson, by saying 

 that its characters are intermediate between 8. viminalis and 

 8. Caprea, seems to think that it has sprung from these species. 

 But Wichura has proved by experiment that sericans is produced 

 by the union of viminalis and Caprea ; and it is difficult to believe 

 that in acuminata we have not a different combination, arising 

 perhaps from a second hybridization with 8. Caprea. 



From the dubiety which involves the parentage of most of the 

 varieties of Smithiana, a series of experiments in hybridizing 

 8. viminalis with 8. Caprea, S. cinerea, and S. aurita— both sepa- 

 rately and in combination with the resulting hybrids— is much 

 to be desired. Till this is done it seems hopeless to expect that the 

 various forms can be extricated from the confusion in which they 

 are at j. resent. 



Group 8. Nive^!. 

 12. Salix lanata, L. 

 This handsoms species seeais to be a little more variable thau 















