1919] SCHNEIDER, XOTES ON AMERICAN WILLOWS. VI 73 



inclined to be bushy, 8 feet high"); ridge north of camp 8/5-8, 1150 m., common at 

 high elevations, August 8, 190^2, W. L, Polo (No. 131, fr.; W.; "1-2 ft. high"). 



The systematic position of >S. pidchra is by no means certain to me. As 

 already stated it difTers from all the other Willows of this group by the 

 development of large persistent stipules, a character found in species like 

 S, Richardsonii to whicli var. yukonensis bears a certain resemblance, but 

 S. Richardsonii has a much more hirsute pubescence and glabrous ovaries. 



2. S. phylicifolia Linnaeus, Spec. ii. lOlG (1753), exclud. var. /3. — For 

 further literature see Schneider in Sargent, PI. Wils. in. 123 (191G). — 

 The first author who adopted Linnaeus* name for an American Willow was 

 Tuckcrnian (1843), who was followed by Carey (1848) as stated later under 

 S. planifolia. When, in 1858, Andersson commenced his study of American 

 Salix he referred Carey's plant with a query to what he then called S. {phy- 

 IwifoHa*) discolor, and said: " Specimina nimierosa, quae attente exarainavi, 

 parum differunt a vera >S. phylicifolia ..." In 1867, however, he pro- 

 posed S. chlorophylla for these forms, saying '' est si:>ecies parum dubiac afhiii- 

 tatis, ut jam propositum est, inter S. discolorem americanam et S. phijlicijo' 

 Ham boreali europaeam evidenter ambigans, nunc illi nunc huic adscripta." 

 In the 5th edition of his Manual (p. 464 [1867]) Gray followed Andersson 

 in taking up the name S. chlorophylla^ but Bebb who (in 1889) studied the 

 matter, first expressed the opinion that the differences between S. phylici- 



Hi 



He said: ''Carey, 



Tuckerman, Carratt and all the early New England botanists were quite right 

 in referring the plant in question to the old Linnean species." Therefore, 

 in the 6th edition of the Manual, Bebb reinstated the name S. phylicifolia 

 but, as explained later, his own remarks prove that he was not fully con- 

 vinced of the identity of the two plants. Robinson & Fernald (1908) and 

 Britton & Brown (1913) also have adopted the name phylicifolia. 



In 1899, Ball dealt with the 'western' S. chlorophylla, and he explained 



ifol 



He came 



if' 



and that "the few White Mt. specimens examined, tliough old and imper- 

 fect, present a decidedly American variation towards the Rocky Mt. form." 

 Ball gave a comparison of pfujUcifoHa with chloroplujUa, but, at that time, 

 he, apparently, was very imperfectly acquainted with the eastern forms. 

 To decide the question whether or not the true S. phjlicifolia, or a form in- 

 separable specifically from it occurs in North America we must determine 

 the characters by which this species is to be recognized. 



Linnaeus' type is "351. Salix fohis serratis glabris lanceolatis, crenis 

 undulatis" in his Fl. Lap. 283, t. 8. fig. d (1737). From his description I 

 take the following characters: ". . ramuli recentes purpurascentes. 

 Folia lanceolata, glabra, distincte serrata, . . superne saturate viridia, 

 nitida . ." S. J. Enander, the foremost living salicologist (in his Stud. 

 Salices Linnes Herb. 17, no. 7a, and 83, no. 89 [1907]) has not only given an 

 exact description of the material of S. phylicifulia preserved in Linnaeus' 



