June 2, 1884.] 



THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 



899 



Footnotes to Table of Iteport on Anahjscs. 



(1.) This and two following samples are from C. Condam- 

 inea^ how. variety. 



(2.) These botanical specimens and also the bark were 

 taken from coppice shoots. 



(3.) The bark belonging to this specimen is renewed 

 after the tree had been subjected to the Java shaving process. 

 In this the outer cellular portion is shaved or pared 

 off, the inner vascular layer being left intact. 



(4.) Bark covered extei-nally with a thick corky layer, 

 very peculiar, of ojficinnlh iyye but undetermined species. 

 (6.)Large leafed or C. UritHsh^f/c, Pavon type. 

 (7.) This is the No. 2 variety, in the estate nomenclature, 

 of tlie variety C. angiistiforta^ How. 



(M.) This species was discovered by Hasskarl, cultivated 

 on a large scale in Java and found to be worthless. 



From Java it was introduced into India, where its cult- 

 ure never went beyond the stage of an experiment. 



(17.) This plant was said by Cross, on his recent visit 

 to the Nilgiris, to be the C. erispa of which he sent seeds 

 from the Loxa Mountains. That it came from Loxa there 

 is no doubt, as the few specimens of it on the estate of 

 Dodabetta are growing amongst the " crown " barks in- 

 troduced from that region. It differs, however, very much 

 from the 0. erispa of Tafalla, which belongs to the C. 

 qfficuialis group of Weddell. In general appearance it is 

 more nearly allied to Weddell's section Fahiidiante. Its 

 bark is also very peculiar, in fact unique. 



(20.) This fonn of the 0. Calisaija grows to a con- 

 siderable size and has bright green shining leaves, some of 

 which measure from G to 7 inches in length by ;U to 4 

 inchee in widtli. Flowers pink, very sweetly scented. 



(21.) Thia p';nit approaches the Boliviaua form of Wed- 

 dell, but the cnitsaifus arc most variable. 



(23.) This pliint, according to Howard, is a hybrid be- 

 tween C. caliv'iiin and (.'. finrcinibra. On the other hand, it is 

 said to come perfectly true from seed. ISfr. Surgeon-Major 

 Bidie tliinks it to be only a variety of C. calisaija. 



(2(j.) This is not the C. puheseens of Vahl, but a plant 

 which was considered to be a hybrid by the Superintend- 

 ent of the Cinchona estates, the late Mr. Mclvor. Mr. 

 Cross regards it as the pubescent form of " Cuchicara," 

 referred to by Dr. Spruce in the Parliamentary Blue 

 Book of 1863, p. 116. Mr. Mclvor stated that it is a 

 hybrid between Chichona snccirubra and Cinchona officinalis. 

 (29.) Fata de GaU'imizo of Cross. 



When the valuable series of specimens of Madras Cinchona 

 bark was presented to the Museum of the Pharmaceutical 

 Society by the Indian Government through Dr. Bidie it ap 

 peared to be important that analyses should bemade.in order 

 liat the specimens might be rendered thereby more use- 

 ful for reference and that the analyses might be available 

 for comparison with others, which might be made sub- 

 sequently on the plantations. Therefore having learnt 

 from Mr. Holmes, the Curator of the Society's Museum, 

 that portions could be spared irom the Museum specimens 

 without destroying their value for reference, I undertook 

 to carry out the examination. Unfortunately, the small, 

 ness of some of the samples precluded the possibility o- 

 dividing them. Only eleven specimens, however, out of 

 the forty-nine received, were too small to be dividedf 

 The proceeding table gives the results obtained. The foot- 

 notes are taken from remarks written ou the herbarium, 

 specimens by Dr. Bidie. The Specimens, No. 39 to 43, 

 marked, *■ India," are barks which were forwarded last 

 year from Darjeeling by Dr. King. 



Thesespecimens of bark illustrate very well the influenceof 

 hybridization in making [^masking] the characteristic features 

 of the bark of particular species of cinchona, and the diffic- 

 ulty of forming an opinion as to the source of samples 

 as well as their value in regard to amount of alkaloid. 



I learn from Mr. Holmes that a comparison of the 

 samples of C. officinalis bark indicates that the only one 

 which could be easily recognized is No. 4. In this sample 

 the bark presents an extraordinai-y development of the 

 suberous or corky layer, which is divided into angular 

 pi eces about half an inch square, each piece exhibiting 

 a stratified appearance. It ia totally different from Nos. 

 17 and 18 in which the suberous layer, although very 

 much developed, presents a rough granular appearance 

 more like toasted bread-crumbs and is very friable. The 

 coik C. officinalis also possesses mpre quinidine (0'45) 



than the other varieties, and a good percentage (4'08) of 

 quinine. No. 1 is evidently the bark referred to by Dr. 

 Trimen in his report " On the Nilgui Plantations" as 

 beiug the ''Crispa" of Mclver and Beddome, of which a 

 vigorous propagation was going on by .seed. If it can 

 be shown, therefore, by further analyses on the plant- 

 ations, that thi-se percentages are tolerably constant, this 

 variety would appear in every way to be specially suited 

 for pharmacy. 



On examination of the several specimens of renewed 

 bark of C. offiicin(di<i, Mr. Holmes is of opinion that 

 it would not be possible to recognize by physical charac- 

 ters bark rich in alkaloids from a poor one, and that, 

 however valuable such bark may be to the quinine 

 manufacturer it would not be expedient for phar- 

 maceutical use unless a guarantee as to alkaloidal 

 strength were supplied to the retail pharmacist. It is also 

 of interest to note that in Nos. 2, 6, and 8 the smaller 

 amount of quinine found by analysis is associated with an 

 increased amount of cinchonidine. The fact that No. 2 

 was obtained from coppice shoots adds weight to the sup- 

 position that the age of the tree may have something to 

 do witii the yinld of cinchonidine ; while the fact that the 

 renewed (No. G) and the natural (No. 8) C^r?/KSi»;/rt varieties 

 yield less quinine than the angustifolia and Condaminea 

 points to the latter as being the better varities, i.e., so far 

 at least as can be gathered from a limited number of 

 analyses. 



The bark of C. Pahiidiana might easily be mistaken by 

 an unpractised eye for that ot C. officinalis, and it seemi* 

 desirable that such an inferior bark should be eliminated 

 from the plantations as speedily as possible, lest by cross- 

 fertilization it should deteriorate the seed of more valuable 

 species. The same remark applies to the corky barks, 

 Nos. 17 and 18, which, although very different in appear- 

 ance from C. I'ahudtana, are produced by a tree which has 

 on its young shoots and capsules the peculiar coarse 

 hairiness of that species, although in a less degree, form- 

 ing a feature by which it is easily distinguished. The 

 specimens of the bark C. anf/tica, from the Nilgiris, are not 

 easily recognizable by physical characters, and Mr. Holmes 

 considers that they bear evidence of the hybridization of the 

 plants with C. sued rubra, particularly No. 23, which gives 

 1"90 of cinchonine. This, he thinks, is further confirmed 

 by the large leaves, rcdembling in size, shape and veneration 

 those of V. suecirvhra. The capsides also more nearly 

 approach in size those of that species, being much larger 

 than those of 0. calisai/a. 



With respect to the barks from Darjeeling, No. 39 to 43, 

 Mr. Holmes is of opinion that the snmplbs, judging from 

 their physical appearance, were evidently collected from 

 several different varieties of each species, and therefore the 

 analyses cannot reveal anything special concerning them. 



Judging from its physical characters the Ledger bark, 

 No. 42, is good typical calisaya bark, and does not at all 

 resemble the thick bark with scattered warts which was 

 recognized by Mr. Howard as Ledger bark, amlofwbich 

 samples presented by him exist in the Museum of the Society. 

 Taki'u in conjunction with the analysis, the characters of the 

 No. 42 bark indicate that it approaches most nearly to the 

 Boliviana variety of Calisaya. 



The Nilgiri calisai/a, No. 21, appears to be identical with 

 that of Darjeeling. The herbarium specimen of the latter 

 IS marked 2,000 feet, an elevation that isliardly high enough 

 to dovelope the alkaloidal richness of the ccdisat/a to its ut- 

 most degree. 



In Dr. Trimeu's recent report on the cinchonas of the 

 Nilgiris, be lays great stress on the importance of analysis as 

 a guide in the selection of plants for cultivation, and he 

 expresses his conviction that, in the present state of our 

 knowledge, selection based on analysis is the most promising 

 direction for the improvement of the trees as alkaloid 

 yielders. From this point of view, he recommends the 

 isolation of trees with high analysis, together with other 

 precautions to prevent cross- fertilization, care in collecting 

 seed, analysis of a selection of the resulting plants, aud de- 

 struction of all that do not reach the standard of their 

 parent. It is by the continuation of this mode of procedure 

 in the cinchona districts of the Madras Presidency that, Dr. 

 Trimen considers the interests of the great industry of 

 ciiicliona-growing in India can alone be efficiently promoted. 

 The attempt to draw deductions from the figures of the 



