﻿

  Rydberg: 
  Notes 
  on 
  Rosaceae 
  ' 
  63 
  

  

  HYBRIDS 
  

  

  very 
  

  

  in 
  cultivation, 
  and 
  many 
  wild 
  hybrids 
  have 
  been 
  recorded 
  in 
  

   Europe. 
  No 
  attempt 
  has 
  been 
  made 
  in 
  this 
  country 
  until 
  

   recently 
  to 
  distinguish 
  hybrids 
  among 
  our 
  native 
  species. 
  The 
  

   first 
  and 
  only 
  record 
  in 
  print 
  that 
  I 
  know 
  of, 
  was 
  made 
  in 
  1900 
  

   and 
  by 
  a 
  European, 
  Crepin, 
  who 
  published 
  R. 
  Carolina 
  X 
  nitida 
  in 
  

   Rhodora. 
  This 
  hybrid 
  should 
  now 
  be 
  known 
  as 
  R. 
  nitida 
  X 
  

  

  palustris. 
  

  

  Outside 
  of 
  this 
  record, 
  I 
  did 
  not 
  know 
  of 
  anyone 
  besides 
  myself 
  

   and 
  Mr. 
  E. 
  P. 
  Bicknell, 
  who 
  had 
  undertaken 
  to 
  distinguish 
  hybrids 
  

   among 
  our 
  native 
  roses, 
  and 
  neither 
  of 
  us 
  had 
  put 
  our 
  observations 
  

   in 
  print. 
  Bicknell, 
  who 
  did 
  so 
  much 
  in 
  clearing 
  up 
  the 
  Ruhus 
  

   hybrids, 
  did 
  some 
  work 
  on 
  Rosa 
  at 
  the 
  same 
  time, 
  though 
  his 
  

   notes 
  have 
  remained 
  in 
  manuscript. 
  

  

  While 
  spending 
  some 
  time 
  last 
  fall 
  at 
  the 
  Gray 
  Herbarium, 
  

   I 
  found 
  there 
  a 
  collection 
  made 
  by 
  Dr. 
  Schuette 
  of 
  Green 
  Bay, 
  

   Wisconsin, 
  which 
  collection 
  I 
  worked 
  over 
  in 
  the 
  light 
  of 
  a 
  small 
  

   paper 
  published 
  by 
  him 
  in 
  1889.* 
  After 
  my 
  return 
  to 
  New 
  York, 
  

   I 
  found 
  that 
  the 
  New 
  York 
  Botanical 
  Garden 
  had 
  received 
  a 
  set 
  

   of 
  Dr. 
  Schuette's 
  duplicates 
  in 
  exchange 
  with 
  the 
  Field 
  Columbian 
  

   Museum 
  in 
  Chicago. 
  The 
  numerous 
  notes 
  accompanying 
  these 
  

   duplicates, 
  as 
  well 
  as 
  those 
  at 
  the 
  Gray 
  Herbarium, 
  show 
  that 
  

   Schuette 
  had 
  done 
  considerably 
  more 
  intelligent 
  work 
  than 
  his 
  

   published 
  paper 
  indicated. 
  In 
  his 
  article, 
  he 
  described 
  one 
  new 
  

   species, 
  R. 
  acicularioides, 
  and 
  several 
  varieties 
  of 
  R. 
  blanda 
  and 
  

   R. 
  Carolina 
  (i.e., 
  R. 
  palustris). 
  His 
  descriptions 
  are 
  meager, 
  

   mostly 
  one 
  or 
  two 
  lines 
  long, 
  and 
  apparently 
  of 
  little 
  value, 
  unless 
  

   studied 
  in 
  connection 
  with 
  his 
  specimens. 
  His 
  notes, 
  however, 
  

   show 
  that 
  most 
  of 
  his 
  varieties 
  he 
  regarded 
  as 
  hybrids 
  between 
  

   those 
  two 
  species 
  and 
  other 
  roses 
  found 
  in 
  the 
  region. 
  The 
  notes 
  

   if 
  published 
  would 
  make 
  a 
  long 
  paper 
  by 
  themselves. 
  It 
  would 
  

   not 
  be 
  advisable 
  to 
  do 
  so 
  now, 
  as 
  nobody 
  could 
  now 
  present 
  the 
  

   matter 
  with 
  Schuette's 
  final 
  views. 
  It 
  is 
  evident 
  that 
  even 
  at 
  

   the 
  time 
  when 
  he 
  published 
  his 
  paper, 
  he 
  was 
  inclined 
  to 
  regard 
  

   these 
  forms 
  as 
  hybrids. 
  It 
  is 
  unfortunate 
  that 
  he 
  did 
  not 
  dare 
  or 
  

   did 
  not 
  think 
  it 
  advisable 
  to 
  put 
  his 
  convictions 
  in 
  print 
  and 
  

  

  ■ 
  - 
  ----- 
  - 
  - 
  . 
  ■ 
  ' 
  ' 
  ^^^^^^^^^^■^^^■^■^^■^■***^^^^^^ 
  

  

  * 
  Froc. 
  Am. 
  Ass. 
  Adv. 
  Sci. 
  46: 
  278-279. 
  iSpS- 
  

  

  