1919] SCHNEIDER, NOTES ON AMERICAxN WILLOWS. V 25 



Camuguey, " ad las Pedras," February, 1824, which have been distributed 

 as >S. occidentalis Bosc represent the typical form of this species. Unfortu- 

 nately this name cannot be used on account of the older S. occidentalis ^Ya^ 

 ter (1788). This Willow is apparently mentioned next in 1824 by Elliott 

 (Sketch Bot. S. -Carol. Georg. ii. 671) who says: " We have a remarkable 

 variety of this plant [S. nigra], the young branches and leaves pubescent, 

 somewhat hoary, almost tomentose; but I have been able to perceive no 

 other difference either in the shape or size of the leaves of the tree or in the 

 period of flowering." To this willow Nuttall (N. Am. Sylva i. 79 [1843]) 

 refers as follows: '' S. nigra, Mich. Arb. vol. 2, plate 125, fig. 1. A variety 

 of this tree occurs in South Carolina and Florida in which the leaves are 

 villous and the scales of the ament densely lanuginous. In the herbarium 

 of Mr. Schweinitz it is marked, on the authority of Elliott, as a species S. 

 subvillosa.'' This name has to be regarded as nomen nudum. The next 

 name given to our willow is S. longipes Shuttleworth apud Andersson (1858). 

 Andersson describes at the same time a var. puhcsccns with the synonym 

 S, gongylocarpa Shuttleworth, and he cites for both: '' Ilab. prope St. 

 Marks, Florida: Ruel " (corrected in Proc. Am. Acad. iv. 53 [Sal. Bor.-Am. 7] 

 into Rugel). In this publication Gray says in a note to var. puhescens: 

 ** This is the S. subvillosa Ell. in Herb. Schweinitz ex Nutt. N. Am. Sylva, 



1, p. 79, — a work to which Prof. Andersson had no access, — also men- 

 tioned in Ell. Bot. S. Car. & Georg. 2, p. 671, under S. nigra.'" So far as I 

 can see the typical S. longipcs as well as the type of var. puhescens cannot be 

 separated, but represent only extreme states of the same form. In 1858 An- 

 dersson made no mention of S. occidentalis Bosc but in 1867 (Monog. Salic. 

 23) he treats it as a separate species, and refers S. longipes as a subspecies 

 to S. nigra with the varieties venulosa and gongylocarpa, now using the last 

 name for his var. puhescens of 1858. The same treatment is given by him 

 in the Prodromus in 1868, but here he reduces S. longipes to a distinct vari- 

 ety of S. nigra with the forms venulosa and gongylocarpa. In his remarks 

 to 5. occidentalisy Andersson, in 1867, said that this species " perspectis 

 formis intermediis S. nigrae, quas venulosam et gongylocarpam hie nominavi" 

 is connected with 5. nigra, and in 1868 he stated that f . venulosa is " ad S. 

 nigram transitus " while f. gongylocarpa is " S. Occident aliproximvL.''' There 

 is hardly any doubt that S, occidentalis from Cuba and S. longipes (sensu 

 str.) from Florida cannot be separated even as varieties. The last one has 

 been ai^ain described by Chapman (1860) as S, floridana ^ and by Small 



venii 



with which I have to deal later. 



According to the material I have seen the range of typical S. longipes 

 extends from Cuba to northern Florida from which state I have examined 



M 



Lee 



Palm Beach, and from Folkston, Charlton County, in adjacent south- 



^ S. floridana Small, Florida Shrubs (1013), with 2 stamens is unknown to me, and I do 

 not know whether or not it represents Chapman's species. 



