Tas. 7421. 
ROSA Louora. 
Native of Japan and China. 
Nat. Ord. Rosacka#.—Tribe Rosra. 
Genus Rosa, Linn. ; (Benth. & Hook. f. Gen. Plant. vol. i. p. 625.) 
Rosa (Synstyle) Duet; frutex ramis prostratis, ramulis floriferis glabris 
sparse aculeatis, aculeis uncinatis, foliolis 5-9 ovatis elliptico-ovatis v. 
ovato-rotundatis utrinque glabris firmis mucronatis simpliciter dentatis 
superioribus breviter acuminatis, stipulis strictis denticulatis v. fimbriatis 
longe acuminatis rectis v. divaricatis auriculis angustis, petiolo glabro 
nudo y. aciculato v. subglanduloso, floribus solitariis v. subcorymbosis, 
bracteis caducis integris denticulatisve, pedicellis glabris subglandulosis 
v. rarius dense glanduloso-pubescentibus et aciculiferis, calycis tubo obo- 
voideo ellipsoideo v. globoso glabro raro glanduloso-pubescente, sepalis 
ovato-oblongis lanceolatisve breviter v. longius acuminatis caudatisve 
integris pinnatifidisve deciduis, petalis 3-3 poll. latis orbiculari-obovatis 
retusis albis, disco prominulo, stylis velutinis inferne connatis, fructibus 
parvis globosis levibus purpureis v. coccineis. 
R. Lucie, Franch. et Rochebr. in Bull. Soe. Bot. Belg. vol. x. (1871), p. 324, 
et vol. xv. (1876), p. 204. Crepin Prim. Monogr. Ros. fase 3, p. 258; et in 
Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xiii. (1874), p. 251, & vol. xvii. (1879), p. 285 ; et 
in Comt. Rend. Bot. Soc. Belg. vol. xxv. ii. p.13. Franch. & Sav. Enum. 
Pl, Jap. vol. i. p. 135, et vol. ii. p.344. Forbes & Hemsl. in Journ, Linn. 
Soc. vol. xxiii. (1887), p. 251. 
R. Wichuraiana, Crepin et Desegl. in Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg. vol. xiv. (1876), 
p- 204, et vol. xxvii. (1888), p. 189. J. G. Jack in Gard. & Forest. vol. iv.1 
(1891), p. 44, e¢ vol. v. (1892), p. 367. Sargent I. c. vol. iv. ii. (1891), 
p. 570, fig. 89. 
R. Maximovicziana, Regel in Act. Hort. Bot. Petrop. vol. v. (1877), p. 378. 
R. moschata, Benth, Fl. Hongkong, p. 106. 
Rosa Lucie is most closely allied to R. multiflora, 
Thunb., figured at t. 7119 of this work, is as variable, and 
occupies precisely the same geographical area. It differs 
remarkably from that plant in its prostrate habit, much 
smaller, rounder leaflets; usually much larger flowers, not 
collected in large compound corymbs, and in its pisiform 
fruit. Franchet and Savat enumerate no fewer than eight 
_ Japanese varieties of it, differing in foliage, naked or 
glandular-pubescent pedicels, form and length of sepals, 
‘size of the petals, &c. It is so difficult to distinguish 
several of these varieties from those of F. microphylla, that 
June Isr, 1995. | | 7 
