CONTRIBUTrOXS TO THE HtSTORr OF CEUTAII^ COXIFERS. 207 



Joseph Hooker ; and I can add but little to wliat he has pvib- 

 lished on the subject ; but as the tree is still comparatively little 

 knowD, it may be well to repeat the illustration already published 

 in the ' Grardeners' Chronicle,' and add a few details taken from 

 the cultivated tree. 



The chief interest attaching to the tree lies in its close resem- 

 blance to the Himalayan Pinus eccceha^ a resemblance so close 

 that at first it was considered merely as a geographical variety of 

 that species. On further acquaintance, however, the differences 

 between the two trees become more obvious; and, although the 

 resemblances are sufficiently great to justify the hypothesis that 

 the two may hare had a common origin, the divergences warrant 

 the keeping of the two forms distinct for practical purposes. 



Boissier thus sums up the differences : — '^Affinis P. excelsce a 

 qua tamen differt foliis brevioribus in ramiilo toto persistentibus 

 (nee prope apicem ramulorum confertis) ; strobilis multo brevius 

 pcdunculatis abbreviatis 3-4i pollices uec 6-7 pollices, longis ; 

 squamis superne sulcatis ; seminis ala longiore." 



The trees at Kew, from which the illustration wa^ taken, were 

 derived from seed collected in Grrisebach's original locality by 

 Professor Orphanides, and sown at Kew in 1864. 



The bark of the trunk is smooth smoky brown, that of the 

 branches olive-coloured. The herbaceous shoots are glaucous 

 green, destitute of leaves near the base. The buds, like those of 

 P. excelsa^ are elongate-ovoid, conic, covered by numerous lan- 

 ceolate acuminate brown scales somewhat reflexed at the tips. 

 The leaves are similar to those of P. excelsa, but shorter. Their 



Fig. 31. 



Pinus Peuie, — Portion of leif, magnified. Plan of leaf-section, magnified. 



Imperfect seed, real size. Cultivated specimen. 



