HARPER: VEGETATION OF THE PINUS TAEDA BELT 49 
have been calculated. As car-window notes cannot do justice to 
the abundance of some of the conifers, I have arbitrarily multiplied 
my figures for Pinus Taeda and P. palustris by 5 and for other 
conifers by 3 before calculating the percentages. The figures for 
Cornus florida, Salix nigra, Oxydendrum, Carpinus and Planera 
have been divided by 2 on account of the small size of those trees, 
for the object of this study is to analyze the vegetation volu- 
metrically. The figures for a few still smaller trees, or large shrubs 
(listed after the regular trees) have been divided by 10, those for 
ordinary shrubs and woody vines by 100, and those for herbs by 
500.* Species seen less than five times, which are presumed to 
make up a wholly insignificant part of the total vegetation, are 
omitted, as are all bryophytes and thallophytes, which are still 
smaller and less conspicuous, on the average, than vascular herbs. 
The fact that nearly all my walking in this region has been done 
in North Carolina tends to exaggerate the shrubs and herbs in the 
middle portion, but allowance is made for that in the generalizations 
which follow the list. 
These percentages of course cannot be guaranteed to be accu- 
rate within Io per cent., but they are reasonably consistent with 
pre-conceived notions and known facts. In C. S. Chapman’s 
report on Berkeley County, S. C., previously mentioned, there is 
a multitude of detailed statistics from which the percentages of 
the commoner trees in that particular area can be computed, and 
that serves as a check on my results. But his figures cannot be 
taken as representative of the whole Pinus Taeda belt, for several 
reasons. In the first place, his area is too small and too far from 
the center to be thoroughly typical, and being the property of a 
lumber company it probably contains more pine than the average. 
Second, some of the species are wrongly identified,t and some very 
common ones, such as Pinus serotina and Quercus marylandica, 
are omitted from the statistics though mentioned as occurring. 
The species are arranged in order of abundance in the region 
as a whole, but the percentages are given separately for each of 
the three states involved, in order to bring out certain interesting 
* This is a modification of a method described in the 6th Annual Report of the 
Florida Geological Survey, pp. 177-180. 
j See Bull. Torrey Club 34: 352. 1907. 
