426 WILSON EXPEDITION TO CHINA 



Carpimis Fargesii Franchet in Jour, de Bot. XIII. 202 (1899). — Schneider, 

 III. Handb. Lauhholzk. II. 894, fig. 558 d, 559 q (1912). 



Carpimis laxijlora, var. Fargesii Bnrkill in Jour. Linn. Soc. XXVI. 501 

 (1899). — Diels in Bot. Jahrb. XXIX. 280 (1900). — Winkler in Engler, 

 Pfianzenr. IV.-Gl, 33 (1904); in Bot. Jahrb. L. 496 (1914). 



Carptnus laxijlora Henry in Elwes & Plenry, Trees Gr. Brit. & Irel. HI. 530 

 (1908), quoad plantam chinensem. 



Western Hupeh: mountains north and south of Ichang, woods, 

 alt. 1200-1800 m., May 1907 (No. 2217; tree 7-18 m. tall; flowers); 

 mountains south of Ichang, April 1900 (Veitch Exped. Nos. 40, 295; 

 tree 7-8 m. tall; flowers and young leaves); same locality, June 1900 

 (Veitch Exped. No. 948, in part; tree 7-13 m. tall; young fruits); 

 same locality, August 1900 (Veitch Exped. No. 948 in part; ripe 

 fruits); Patung Hsien, alt. 1600 m., April 25, 1900 (Veitch Exped. No. 

 477; tree 12 m. tall; flowers); same locahty, A. He7iry (No. 7013, type 

 of var. macrostachya; fruiting branchlets); Hsing-shan Hsien, Ma- 

 huang-po, alt. 500 m., 1900 (Veitch Exped. Seed Nos. 737, 737%- tree 

 8 m. tall). Eastern Szech'uan: near Tchen-keou-tin, P. Farges 

 (No. 699, type of C. Fargesii, ex Franchet). Western Szech'uan: 

 Mt. Omei, 1904 (Veitch Exped. Seed No. 1750; tree 10 m. tall, leaves 

 very small). 



This variety doubtless is nearly related to the Japanese type, but the leaves are 

 always distinctly ovate or oblong-ovate with a more gradually tajiering apex, while 

 in the typical forms the shape of the leaves is more obovate-oblong, being very 

 often broadest at or above the middle, with a more abruptly pointed apex. The 

 bracts of the male flowers seem to be a little longer, more ovate-oblong, not orbicular- 

 ovate as in the typical forms. I have not seen the type specimen of var. Fargesii, 

 but the No. 948 of Wilson which 1 in 1912 partly referred to this variety and partly 

 to var. macrostachya certainly does not belong to two different varieties. I can 

 hardly believe that C. Fargesii Franchet even represents a distinct variety. 



Carpinus laxiflora, var. Davidii Franchet in Jour, de BoL XIII. 203 

 (1899). — Eurkill in Jour. Linn. Soc. XXVI. 501 (1899). — Winkler 

 in Engler, Pfianzenr. IV.-61, 33 (1904); in Bot. Jahrb. L. 496 (1914). 



Carpinus laxiflora Franchet in Nouv. Arch. Mus. Paris, s6r. 2, VII. 89, t. 11, 



fig. A 1 {PI. David. 1. 279) (non Blume) (1884). 

 Carpinus Davidii Schneider, III. Handb. Laubholzk. II. 893, fig. 558 1, 559 e 



(1912). 



Kiangsi: Kuling, side of streams, alt. 1200 m., July 31, 1907 

 (No. 1534; bush 7 m. tall; ripe fruits); " montagne de Ly-chan pres 

 de Kiukiang," September, A. David (No. 750, type, ex Franchet). 



According to Franchet's plate this variety looks so distinct that I formerly con- 

 sidered it a species. But Winkler (1914), who saw the type, says the drav/ing is very 

 inexact. Certainly Wilson's jjlant from the same region looks very different from 



