ACERACEAE. — ACER 85 



Though Gleditsch's species is based only on a single leaf without flowers or 

 fruits, the figure leaves no doubt that it is the same as A. laeturn C. A. Meyer, and 

 his name being about 45 years older must supersede that given by Meyer. Acer 

 cappadocicum is based on a leaf collected by Gundelsheimer, who traveled with 

 Tournefort in Asia Minor during the years 1700 to 1702. The same species is 

 mentioned by Tournefort {Coroll. 43) under the name Acer orierUalis Hederae folio, 

 but without any description or remark. 



Acer cappadocicum, var. sinicum Rehdcr, n. var. 



Acer laeturn var. cuUratum Pax in Engler, Pflanzenreich, Heft 8 (IV. 163), 48 

 (in part) (1902). — Rehder in Sargent, Trees and Shrubs, I. 178 (in part) 

 (1905). 



A typo differt foliis minoribus plerumque 6-9 cm. longLs quinque- 

 lobis basi subcordatis v. truncatis, fructibus minoribus alis loculo 

 incluso 2.5-3 cm. longis, floribus minoribus. 



Western Hupeh: Hsing-shan Hsien, woods, alt. 1500-2100 m., 

 May 11, 1907 (No. 1884); Chang-lo Hsien, woods, alt. 1500 m., May 

 1907 (No. 1925). Western Szech'uan: Ta-p'ao-shan, northeast 

 of Tachien-lu, woods, alt. 2300 m., July 5, 1908 (No. 1903); Wa-ssu 

 country, Wen-chuan Hsien, woods, alt. 2100-2600 m., October (No. 

 1009). 



To this variety I refer all Chinese specimens I have seen from Hupeh, Szech'uan, 

 and Yunnan. It differs from var. indicum in its smaller leaves with narrower and 

 longer lobes, purplish when unfolding and less densely bearded in the axils of the 

 primary veins beneath and in the smaller flowers and fruits. In the shape and size 

 of its leaves it much resembles A. pictum, var. parviflorum C. K. Schneider, but is 

 easily distinguished by the smooth greenish bark of the young branches. No. 1903 

 from Szech'uan differs from the typical form in its somewhat larger leaves, 7 to 

 11 cm. long, and Henry's No. 10877 from Yunnan in its shghtly hairy calyx and 

 ciliate sepals. 



Acer cappadocicum and particularly its variety sinicum is often confounded with 

 Acer pictum, as the relative length of wing and nutlet, usually given as the chief 

 distinguishing character, is very variable in both species. The best character by 

 which to distinguish these two species seems to lie in the bark of the younger 

 branches; this character has moreover the advantage that it is always recognizable 

 even in winter. In Acer pictum the epidermis of the young branches ceases growing 

 during the first summer, and the bark of the branches becomes corky and grayish 

 white, ashy gray or fight grayish brown and is marked with conspicuous lenticels and 

 in the second year with slight longitudinal fissures, while in A. cappadocicum the 

 branches remain covered by the growing epidermis for several years, and are there- 

 fore smooth, ranging from green or greenish to purple in color, marked with only 

 few and small lenticels or are without lenticels. Other distinguishing characters 

 are the generally truncate leaves, at least in the Chinese variety, in A. pictum they 

 are subcordate, the more convex and smaller nutlets in A. cappadocicum and the 

 wing contracted at the base, while in A. piclum the nutlets are much compressed, 

 almost flat, and the wings are of nearly the same width through their whole length. 

 The terminal winter-buds of A. pictum have 2 to 3 pairs of outer scales, those of 

 A. cappadocicum 3 to 4 pairs. 



