50° BOTANICAL GAZETTE [JANUARY 
the Schuylkill at some time previous to 1750. A rather complete 
history of the occurrence of other individuals which were included 
with this tree under the name of Q. heterophylla is given by Dr. 
ArtHur Hottick in Bull. Torr. Bot. Club (15:303. 1888) and need 
not be repeated here. 
After a consideration of various lots of material which appeared 
to differ widely, various botanists have regarded this tree as a hybrid 
between Q. Phellos and Q. tinctoria, Q. Phellos and Q. falcata, Q. 
Phellos and Q. coccinea, Q. Phellos and Q. palustris; while others 
have designated it as a variety of Q. Phellos, Q. coccinea, Q. aquatica, 
Q. nigra, and Q. imbricaria. It is notable that of the botanists who 
ascribed a hybrid origin to the plant all agreed that Q. Phellos must 
be one of the parents, a fact which will be easily explainable when 
an examination of its leaves is made. 
In October 1905 the author was accompanied to a locality on 
Staten Island by Dr. Hortick and Dr. Brirron, where several trees 
of the species had been under observation by them for many years. 
About 75 acorns were procured from a tree which bore leaves of 
a form approximating that of figs. 2 and 3, and were placed in the 
propagating houses of the New York Botanical Garden, with the 
result that 55 plantlets were available for study in December and 
January following. With the formation of the earliest leaves it 
became evident that a wide diversity of form of these organs and of 
other qualities prevailed, as shown by the photograph taken in April. 
In May 1906 all of the plantlets were transferred to the experi- 
mental grounds, and as development proceeded the diversity became 
still more marked. At the close of the season it could be seen that 
this group of plants included some which simulated Q. Phellos with 
its lanceolate entire leaves, while others were not separable from Q. 
rubra, the remainder being capable of arrangement in a series between 
these two poles. An examination of the literature disclosed the fact — 
that the combined observations of the several botanists who have 
written on the subject refer to plants bearing almost the entire range 
of leaves noted in the cultures here described. In most of these 
accounts the leaves are said to be much like those of Q. Phellos, while 
some observations include notices of others which were broad lobed 
and notched, although most of these writers were extremely chary of 
a 
