BETULACEAE. — BETULA 473 



Ajan, //. Tiling (type of var. lanata); Ochotsk Sea, J. Small (Herb. N. Pacif. 

 ExT)l. Exped. Wright Coll.). 



These northern forms seem to be well distinguished by the characters indicated 

 above. 



7. Betula Jacquemontii Spach in Ann. Sci. Nat. s6v. 2, XV. 189 (1841).— 



Jacquemont, Voy. VI. t. 158 (18-14). — Regel in De Candolle, Prodr. 



XVI. pt. 2, 178 (1868). — Bean, Trees & Shrubs Brit. Isl. I. 257 (1913). 

 Betida BhojpaUra, var. Jacquemontii Regel in Nouv. Mem. Soc. Nat. Mosc. 



XIII. pt. 2, 118, t. 6, fig. 19 {Monog. Betulac. GO) (pro parte) (1861); 



in Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. XXXVIII. pt. 2, 416 (1865); in De Candolle, 



Prodr., XVI. pt. 2, 177 {BhojpaUra) (1868). 

 ? Betula alba, var. glutinosa, lusus latifolia Regel in Nouv. Mem. Soc. N'nt. 



Mosc. XIII. 79 {Monog. Betulac. 21) (1861), quoad speciin. Indiae Orient. 

 ? Betula BhojpaUra, var. glandulifera Regel in Bull. Soc. Nat. Mosc. XXXVIII. 



pt. 2, 416 (1865); in De Candolle, Prodr. XVI. pt. 2, 177 {Bhojpattra) 



(1868). 

 Betula utilis, var. Jacquemontii Henry in Elwes & Henry, Trees Gr. Brit. & 



Irel. IV. 981, t. 270, fig. 15 (1909). 



INDIA. Kumaon: "Emodo," V. Jacquemont (type, ex Spach); Chumpua, 

 3400 m., Strachey & Winterbottom (No. 1; flowers). United Prov.: Dehra 

 Dun, Deota, alt. 2400 m., June 9, 1912, Sulakhan Singh (No. 98). Kashmir: 

 Zanskar, "14000 ped.," T. Thomson (young leaves); without locality, "9-11000 

 ped.," T. Thomson; Ahbad, alt. 3300 m., C. B. Clarke (No. 28928; young leaves); 

 Hazara distr., Kagan valley, alt. 2600 m.. May 1910; "Tibet, prov. Hasora, 

 Sangu Sar, on the right side of the Tsunger glacier," September 12, 1856, Schlagint- 

 weit (No. 6568); Rimkim, 3800 m., Strachey & Winterbotto7n (No. 2; fruits). 



AFGHANISTAN. Kurrum valley, 1879, J.E. T. Aitchison (No. 719). 



This species certainly needs further observation. 1 am not sure whether the 

 plants described by Henry and Bean are really the same as Spach's species, the 

 type of which I have not been able to examine. ^ Henry and Bean refer to trees in 

 Kew Gardens obtained from Petrograd. 



By the kindness of the Keeper of th^ Kew Herbarium I have been able to 

 compare a dried specimen of the plant cultivated in Kew. It certainty much re- 

 sembles B. Jac.quemo7itii, but the leaves are almost glabrous, a little more ovate 

 in shai)e and with relativelj' long petioles. The fruiting bracts show a deiiser and 

 shorter ciliation, and their lateral lobes are blunter and somewhat shorter com- 

 pared with the middle one. The pubescence of the l^ranchlets of even the second 

 year is very short and fine and the young branchlets are less glandular. Unfor- 

 tunately there is no record in Petrograd where the original seeds came from. 

 Young plants in the Arnold Arboretum raised from seeds sent by Mr. R. N. Parker 

 from the northeastern Himalaya look different. The plant in Kew, however, seems 

 more nearly related to B. Jacquemontii than to any other Birch I have seen from the 

 Himalayas or eastern Asia. Neither can I refer it to any North American species 

 so far as 1 know them, nor to any of the numerous hybrids in cultivation. I am 



1 At my request Dr. Gagnepain has kindly looked at the type-specimen in the 

 herbarium of the Museum d'Histoire Naturolle at Paris. According to his report 

 the tj^ie of B. Jacquemontii is certainly different from Wallich's types of B. 

 bhnjpiitra. Jacquemont's plant seems to represent a form v/ithout glands on the 

 leaves. In the shape of the fruiting bracts there is apparently no real difft-rence 

 between these two species. 



