Tas. 8104. 
COTYLEDON DEVENSIS, 
Of garden origin. 
CRASSULACER. 
Corytepon, Linn.; Benth. et Hook. f. Gen. Plant. vol. i. p. 659. 
Cotyledon (§ Echeveria) devensis, hybrida (glauca x gibbiflora ?) vel 
forma stature insignite. 
Planta succulenta, caule 13 ped. alto, 12 poll. crasso. Folia laxe rosulata, 
8-10 poll. longa, 3-33 poll. lata, oblanceolata vel elongato-obovata, obtusa, 
apiculata, glauco-virentia, basi roseo-purpureo tincta. Pedunculi duo, 
5-7 ped alti, inferne foliis anguste oblanceolatis 34-44 poll. longis, $-]} 
poll. latis laxe obtecti, superne nudi, rubescentes. Panicule 9 poll. long, 
racemis recurvis 2-43 poll. longis composite. Flores pedicellati, bracteati. 
Sepala 3-4 lin. longa, carnosa, lineari-lanceolata, albo-glauca, leviter roseo- 
tincta. Corolla 6-7 lin. longa, rubra, glauca. 
This plant is so remarkable among its allies for its great 
stature as to be worth a place in this work. Unfortunately 
its history is unknown, except that it was received at 
Kew in 1902 asa hybrid between C. glauca, Baker, and 
C. gibbiflora, Baker (better known in gardens as Echeveria 
metallica), from Messrs. Dicksons, of Chester, who, 
however, are unable to give any information as to its 
origin. How or where it was raised, cannot be ascer- 
tained. If a hybrid, it differs widely from those already 
known in gardens between the same parents—Hcheveria 
glauco-metallica and HH. metallico-glauca, which are stemless 
plants with leaves in a dense rosette about nine inches in 
diam., and flower-stems only one to one and a half feet 
high, whilst this plant has a stout stem a foot high, and 
flower-stems five to seven feet high. ‘hat it is derived in 
some way from C. gibbiflora either as hybrid or chance 
variation is probable. But it seems scarcely credible that 
the small stemless C. glauca should be a parent of the 
most gigantic form of the genus at present known. 
Except in its giant stature it much resembles the form 
figured as Hcheveria gibbiflora in Lindley’s Botanical 
ftegister, t. 1247. The plant attracted considerable atten- 
tion from cultivators of succulent plants when it flowered 
at Kew in February and March of this year, and it is now 
coming into flower again. It may be .conveniently dis- 
NovemBer |Ist, 1906. 
