24 JOURNAL OF THE ARNOLD ARBORETUM [vol. hi 



Primus dehiscens Koehne in Sargent PL Wilson, i. 271 (1921); in. 

 432 (1917). — Descriptioni adde: Flores praecoces, solitarii, subsessiles; 

 calycis tubus rubescens basi perulis glabris obtectus, late campanulatus, 

 4-5 mm. longus et circiter 5 mm. latus, extus glaber, intus sparse papil- 

 loso-pilosus pilis in seriebus irregularibus longitudinalibus dispositis; 

 sepala rubescentia, ovalia, 3.5-4 ram. longa et 3 mm. lata, apiee rotundata, 

 integra, glaberrima, demum reflexa, tubo paullo breviore; petala alba, 

 obovata, 11-12 mm. longa et 7-8 mm. lata, apice rotundata, basi lata 

 cuneata et vix unguiculata; staminia circiter 30 (30-33 visa), inaequalia, 

 3-6 mm. longa, petala dimidia aequantia, filamentis glabris, antheris 

 ovalibus 1.25 mm. longis flavis; ovarium dense breviter pilosum; stylus 

 cum ovario 9-11 mm. longus, papilloso-pilosus vel breviter pilosus triente 

 superiore glabro excepto, stamina aequans vel paullo superans. 



When this species was described by Koehne only fruiting specimens 

 collected by Wilson in western Szech'uan under No. 4029 were available. 

 From seed of this number plants have been raised at the Arnold Arbore- 

 tum which flowered in 1916 and 1917. The description given above is 

 based on specimens collected May 2, 1916, and April 28 and May 6, 

 1917. In this Arboretum P. dehiscens survives ordinary winters, but it 

 succumbed to the unusually cold winter of 1919-20; it is now represented 



here by young grafted plants. 



Prunus dehiscens is apparently most closely related to P. tangutica 

 Koehne. The flowers of the latter species scarcely differ from those of 

 P. dehiscens and the same must be said of the fruit, if mature fruits col- 

 lected by F. N. Meyer near Lan Tsai in southwestern Kansu belong to 

 P. tangutica; they are dehiscent like those of P. dehiscens and the stones 

 show no perceptible difference in size and sculpturing. The leaves, 

 however, of P. tangutica are described as much larger and the petioles as 

 often glandular; I, therefore, hesitate to form an opinion regarding the 

 identity of the two species until I have seen complete material of P. 

 tangutica. 



Prunus Persica f. duplex, comb. nov. — Amygdalus-Persica Persica 2. 

 Persica-duplex Weston, Bot. Univ. l. 7 (1770). — Amygdalus Persica 8 

 plena Aiton, Hort. Kew n. 161 (1789). — Amygdalus Persica flare pleno 

 Sweet, Hort. Brit. 133 (1827). — Persica duplex Poiteau & Turpin, 

 Traits Arb. Fruit. I. 276, t (1835). — Amygdalus Persica 0. multiplex 

 Bunge in M6m. Sav. Etr. Acad. Sci. St. P£tersb. n. 96 (1838). — Persica 

 vulgaris var. 4. flare pleno Hort. apud Loudon, Arb. Brit. n. 680 (1838). 

 Persica vulgaris var. flare plena roseo La valine, Arb. Segrez. 68 (1877), 

 nomen. — Prunus Persica var. flare plena Voss, Vilmorin's Blumengart. 

 i. 232 (1894). — Prunus Persica var. flare roseo-pleno Nicholson in Hand- 

 list Arb. Kew I. 131 (1894), nomen. — Amygdalus Persica rosea plena 

 Zabel in Beissner, Schelle & Zabel, Hand. Laubholz-Bcn. 234 (1903). 



