CAPRIFOLIACEAE. — LONICERA 129 
Linnaea (Abelia) Spaethiana (biflora X rupestris) Graebner in Bot. Jahrb. 
XXIX. 144 (1900). 
Linnaea (Abelia) Perringiana (uniflora X chinensis) Graebner, l. c. 145 (1900). 
This hybrid is not uncommon in cultivation under the name of A. rupestris; 
five of the specimens before me from different gardens are named thus, while one 
is named A. uniflora and one A. chinensis. They differ only slightly from each other 
and are all clearly intermediate between A. chinensis and A. uniflora, and exhibit 
not the slightest trace of an influence of A. biflora which, moreover, so far as I 
know, has never been in cultivation. The hybrid is hardier than either of its 
parents, which accounts for its wider distribution in our gardens. When and where 
it originated I have been unable to find out. The oldest specimen I have seen was 
collected at Kew in 1880 by G. Nicholson under the name of A. rupestris; it may 
be the form sent out by Veitch as A. rupestris grandiflora alba according to André. 
The form described by André as A. rupestris grandiflora originated in the nurseries 
of Rovelli Brothers at Pallanza, Italy. I have before me a specimen collected in 
Lavallé’s Arboretum at Segrez in 1887 where it was, according to the label, received 
from Rovelli under that name. 
SPECIES TO BE EXCLUDED 
Abelia splendens Hort. ex K. Koch, Dendr. II. 1, p. 20 (as synon.) (1872) = 
Lonicera fragrantissima Lindley & Paxton. 
Abelia adenotricha Hance in Jour. Bot. IX. 132, 1871 (Linnaea adenotricha 
Graebner in Bot. Jahrb. XXIX. 144 [1900]) = Lonicera Elisae Franchet. 
Though I have not seen Hance’s specimen, I accept, after comparing his de- 
scription with Lonicera Elisae, as correct Franchet’s suggestion (Plant. David. 
I. 152) that Abelia adenotricha is probably the same as Lonicera Elisae. All the 
ters even including measurements agree with those of L. Elisae, and the 
peculiar inflorescence which seemed so strange to Maximowicz (Mél. Biol. XII. 
479) may be explained, if one imagines that Hance had a specimen like the upper 
part of Franchet’s figure of L. Elisae; Hance may have easily taken the solitary 
peduncle as originating between the two branchlets. Place and time of collection 
of the two species also agree. As there is no other plant among the undoubtedly 
complete set of David’s plants sent to Paris and determined by Franchet, which 
corresponds to A. adenotricha, hardly any doubt seems to be left that Hance’s 
name must be referred as a synonym to L. Elisae. 
LONICERA L. 
Subgen. I. CHAMAECERASUS L. 
Sect. I. ISOXYLOSTEUM Rehd. 
Subsect. microsTYLAE Rehd. 
Lonicera tubuliflora Rehder, n. sp. v 
Frutex erectus 1-4 m. altus ramulis gracilibus, hornotinis plerumque 
purpurascentibus breviter et dense villosis interdum glandulis paucis 
interspersis, annotinis pallide flavido-brunneis, vetustioribus griseis 
cortice fibroso. Gemmae parvae, griseo-flavescentes, 4 perulis exteriori- 
