340 



NA TURE 



[August 13, 1891 



Zuccarini figured and described several that had been 

 collected by Siebold, Lindley, Andrew Murray, Maxi- 

 mowicz, Franchet, and others, contributed greatly to the 

 elucidation and delimitation of the several species. 

 Robert Fortune, John Gould Veitch, and Charles Maries 

 introduced many to our gardens. Horticulture has, in- 

 deed, rendered great service in this matter. The trees 

 in question are valuable for ornamental purposes, and 

 potentially as timber trees. The consequence of this is 

 that collectors have accumulated specimens in large 

 numbers and in different stages of growth. They have, 

 moreover, supplied our nurserymen with seed, so that 

 young plants are now numerous in our nurseries and 

 plantations. 



The study of the seedling plants, in their progress from 

 the seed-bed towards maturity, has afforded valuable 

 evidence concerning the morphology of the group and 

 its probable genealogy, its filiation and classification. 

 Cultivation has, for instance, shown that many of the 

 very curious forms known under the name of Retino- 

 spora are, in reality^ stages of growth of one, or at least 

 of a few, species of Thuya, of Cupressus, or of Juniperus, 

 so that the so-called genus is purely fictitious. In like 

 manner Abies bifida and Abies firma have been proved 

 to belong to one and the same species. 



To fill up the gaps in our knowledge, and to correct 

 errors arising from inadequate or imperfect material, it 

 was necessary that the trees should be studied by a 

 trained observer in the forests themselves. This was the 

 more necessary as, to a large extent, our knowledge has 

 been derived from plants cultivated by the Japanese and, 

 in some cases, not a little distorted in the process. The 

 earlier botanists had little or no opportunities of study- 

 ing the native flora for themselves. Even Fortune was 

 largely dependent on the Japanese nurserymen. John 

 Veitch collected for himself on Fusi-yama, and Maries 

 penetrated even to the forests of Yesso. Dr. Mayr, the 

 latest writer on these plants, has enjoyed opportunities 

 denied to his predecessors. After a distinguished career 

 in Munich, Dr. Mayr proceeded to the United States, 

 visiting the forests in all parts of the Union, and producing, 

 as a result, a work which the best judges speak of in 

 terms of high appreciation. Subsequently, our author 

 visited Japan to organize the Forest Department, and fill 

 the office of Professor of Forestry in the Imperial Uni- 

 versity of Tokio. In the execution of his duties Dr. 

 Mayr travelled through the various provinces, and derived 

 much information from the native foresters. One result 

 is before us in the shape of a volume, printed in German 

 at Tokio, and illustrated with seven coloured plates. 

 The group specially studied by Dr. Mayr is remarkable 

 for the relatively large number of endemic species. 

 Thus, Dr. Mayr enumerates six species of Abies, all of 

 which are peculiar to the Japanese islands. Five species 

 of Picea are nearly as much restricted in geographical 

 area. Tsuga, a genus represented in both the North- 

 eastern and the North-western States of America, as well 

 as in the Himalayas, has two species peculiar to Japan. 

 The genus Larix, which also has a wide distribution in 

 the northern hemisphere, has two species native to Japan, 

 and not extending far beyond its limits. Six species of 

 Pinus are enumerated by Dr. Mayr, and these also are 

 NO. ] 1.^7, VOL. 44] 



almost exclusively Japanese, though some are found on 

 the mainland adjoining. 



The Japanese islands, then, form a centre of distribu- 

 tion of a group of species of a distinct character, differing 

 markedly from a similar group of Chinese nativity, but 

 approximating to the Californian and to the East Ame- 

 rican coniferous floras, and having representatives in 

 other parts of Northern Asia and of Europe. The dis- 

 tinct character of the Japanese Coniferae and their re- 

 lationships are even more prominently brought into view 

 when the other tribes of Conifers are considered. Dr. 

 Mayr confines himself, however, to the Abietineae, and 

 we must here follow his example, in the hope that on 

 another occasion we may be able to accompany him also 

 through the other tribes. 



In speaking of the distribution of these plants. Dr. 

 Mayr alludes (i) to the tropical zone in which the genus 

 Podocarpus is represented, but which does not specially 

 concern us now ; (2) to a sub-tropical zone in which are 

 other two species of Podocarpus, as well as Pinus Thun- 

 bergii^ which extends round the coast of all the islands, 

 and less frequently Pinus densiflora; (3) a region of 

 deciduous trees, such as chestnuts in the south or at the 

 base of the mountains, or beeches and birches to the 

 northward or at higher altitudes. Here grow especially 

 the Cryptomeria, the various species of Chamsecyparis, 

 Thuyopsis, and Sciadopitys. (4) The fourth zone, that 

 of firs and spruces, occupies the high mountains in the 

 centre of the island. Here are found Abies Veitchii, 

 Picea bicolor, P. Hondoensis, and Larix leptolepis, which 

 are peculiar to the main island, together with A. Mariesi, 

 A.'sachalinensis, Picea ajanensis, -And P. Glehni, which 

 extend northward, some even as far as the Sachalin and 

 Kurile Islands. Tsuga diversifolia occurs from the 

 region of the beech upwards to the Alpine zone. (5) The 

 fifth, or Alpine region, also designated that of the Al- 

 pine pines, includes forms such as Pinus pumila, which 

 is allied to the Swiss /•■. Cembra. We can only indicate 

 these regions, as the dis:ussion of their climatal features 

 and plant population turns mainly upon plants different 

 from those which form the staple of Dr. Mayr's present 

 treatise. 



Passing into detail. Dr. Mayr proceeds to describe 

 each species separately, devoting much space to literary 

 references, Japanese as well as European, and giving a 

 description of the main peculiarities of the tree from an 

 economic as well as from a botanical aspect. 



A few new species are indicated, of the value of which 

 we can hardly form a trustworthy opinion in the absence 

 of authentic specimens. We venture, however, to doubt 

 whether Abies homolepis is, as, however, others besides 

 Dr. Mayr think, identical with A. brachyphylla. The leaf 

 structure of the two is certainly different, and cultivation 

 may yet reveal other differences. The names bicolor, 

 Alcockiana, ajanensis, jessoensis, japonica, niicrosperma, 

 as applied to one or more species of Picea, have been so 

 variously understood by botanists, owing partly to acci- 

 dental misplacement of labels, admixture of seeds, and to 

 imperfect information, that it is very important to have 

 an authoritative statement from such an observer as Dr. 

 Mayr. If allowances be made for a large amount of 

 variability within the conventional specific limitations, it 



