474 WILSON EXPEDITION TO CHINA 



deeply indebted to Dr. Stapf for much valuable information in this matter and take 

 the liberty to print in a note a part of one of his very interesting letters. ^ 



I suppose that typical B. Jacquemontii represents the most western form of all 

 these forms which 1 include under this species and under B. utilis D. Don and B. 

 albo-sinensis Burkill. Certainly they are all very similar, but it seems better to 

 keep these species separated according to their geographical distribution imtil 

 further observations on abundant material can show that the northwestern Hima- 

 layan forms are clearly connected by intermediate forms with those of eastern 

 India and central China. 



8. Betula utilis D. Don, Fl Nepal. 58 (1825). — Hooker f., Fl. Brit. Ind. V. 

 599 (1888). — Dippel, Handh. Laubholzk. II. 187 (pro parte) (1892). — ? Koehne, 

 Deutsche Dendr. 108 (1893). — Gamble, Man. Indian Timb. ed. 2, 668 (pro parte) 

 (1902). — Schneider, III. Handh. Laubholzk. I. 102, fig. 53 g (pro parte) (1904). — 

 Winkler in Engler, Pflanzenr. IV.-61, 61 (pro parte) (1904). — Brandis, Ind. Trees, 

 622, fig. 191 (pro parte) (1906). — Henry in Elwes & Henry, Trees Gr. Brit. & 

 Irel. IV. 980, t. 269, fig. 7 (excl. var.) (1909). — Bean, Trees & Shrubs Brit. Isl 

 I. 263 (1913). 



Betula Bhojpattra Wallich, Icon. PI. As. Rar. II. 7 (1831). — Brandis, For. 



Fl. Brit. Ind. 457 (pro parte) (1874). 

 f Betida Bhojpaltra Spach in Ann. Sci. Nat. ser. 2, XV. 189 (1841). 

 Betula Bhojpaltra, var. genuina Regel in Nouv. Mem. Soc. Nat. Mosc. XIII, 



pt. 2, 59, t. 13, fig. 7-12 {Monog. Betulac.) (pro parte) (1861). 

 Betula Bhojpattra, var. typica et var. latifolia Regel in Bull. Soc. Nat. Mcsc. 



^ Dr. Stapf writes: " B. utilis D. Don and B. bhojpattra, Wall, are absolutely 

 sjTQonymous as they have been based on the same specimens, that is, specimens 

 collected at Gossainthan in Nepal. B. xdilis is the earlier name and has, therefore, 

 priority over B. bhojpattra. The species extends into Kumaon and I have no 

 doubt that the specimen collected by Blinkworth {Wallich n. 2792 B.) is the same. 

 We further possess specimens collected by Strachey and Wintcrbottom at Champwa 

 in Kumaon, at 11500 feet. All our other specimens from Kumaon and westwards 

 to Kashmir and Hazara are with one exception evidently B. Jacquemontii. We do 

 not possess Jacquemont's type, but there can be no doubt about it. Spach's "in 

 emodo" simply means that Jacquemont collected it on the Himalayas (very prob- 

 ably in the Sutledj valley), "emodus" being a common Latin term for Himalaya. 

 We have the following specimens of B. Jacquemontii: Kumaon, "in excelsis," 

 Munro (n. 2958); Tihri Garhwal, near the Tibetan frontier, Rimkim, 13500', 

 Strachey & Winterbottom (n. 2); Upper Ganges valley, above Jangla, Duthie (366); 

 Northwest India (probably Garhwal) (Hb. Royle); Sirmor, Hattu, Thomson; Ku- 

 nawur (basin of the Sutledj ) near the top of the Werang Pass, Thomson ; Lahul, 

 Jaeschke (280); Chamba, Ellis; Kishtwar, 10000', Thomson; Zanskar, 14000', 

 Thomson; Kashmir, Gurais Pass, Winterbottom (184) and Clarke (29282); Burzil 

 valley, Winterbottom (184 J^); Zoji La, Thomson, Henderson; Banahal Pass, 

 Thomson; Afghan frontier, Shend Toi Hills, 11000', Aitchison (719; 10-11000', 

 not common); Aitchison (228)." 



"The one exception mentioned above is a sheet containing two specimens col- 

 lected by Edgeworth at Maduum (n. 247) and Junghury (n. 248). I have not suc- 

 ceeded in tracing these localities, but Junghury may be Janghary in the Upper 

 Sutledj valley, where Edgeworth was. We know he collected there and in Tihri 

 Gharwal and also around Simla. These specimens appear to be intermediate 

 between B. utilis and B. Jacquemontii, but rather nearer to the latter." 



