8o THE PEACHES OF NEW YORK 



ment of the species-maker. Were the authors of this text to divide Prunus 

 persica, the cleavage hnes would be other than those indicated in the fore- 

 going paragraphs. Pruniis persica might be divided, though there is no 

 intention of furthering confusion by the addition of new names, into two 

 species. One would include the white-fleshed, clingstone peaches, with 

 large flowers and calyx greenish -yellow inside; the other the yellow- 

 fleshed, freestone peaches, with small flowers and calyx-cups orange 

 inside. Primitive forms in China indicate such a division, the evolution 

 of varieties suggests it and the present disposition of the characters named 

 as separating these theoretical species attest the reasonableness of such a 

 separation. The primitive forms have been described and the descent 

 of varieties may be traced in the last two chapters, so that we need only 

 amplify the statement as to the present disposition of characters. 



The characters in the two hypothetical species have been thoroughly 

 shuffled by hybridization but even if there is not correlation, as there 

 certainly is between color in calyx-cup and color of flesh, it might be 

 expected that those associated in the primitive plant, the Adam of the race, 

 would, despite the shuffling, still be most often associated. What are the 

 facts? In the Station orchard are 109 white-fleshed peaches; 40 per ct. 

 of these are semi-cling or clingstones leaving 60 per ct. nearly or quite free 

 (there is constant selection for freestones); 64 per ct. have large flowers; 

 all have calyx-cups yellowish-green inside. There are in this orchard 

 106 yellow-fleshed peaches; but 17 per ct. of these are cling or semi-cling, 

 the remainder being either quite free or nearly so; 73 per ct. have small 

 or medium-sized flowers; all have calyx-cups deeply colored with orange 

 inside. 



Similarities in characters indicate so close a relationship between the 

 almond and the peach that one might well suspect many hybrids between 

 the two. Yet there appear to be but few clear cases of peach and almond 

 crosses. Knight ^ reports crossing the two, the doubtful results of which 

 led him to believe, as we have seen, that the peach is but a modified almond. 

 Several such crosses are indicated in botanical literature - but whether all 

 refer to one or several supposed crosses there is no way of knowing — 

 probably to one. The almond blooms so much earlier than the peach 

 that crosses could hardly occur in nature. A hybrid between the two 



' Trans. Hort. Soc. Land. 3:1. 1820; 4:396. 1822. 



■ See Duhamel Traile Arb. Ed. 2, IV: 112. 1809; Seringe in DC. Prodr. II: 531. 1825; Reichenback 

 Fl. Cer. Exc. 647. 1830-32. 



