| 
BRIEPER ARTICLES. 
THE DISTRIBUTION AND HABITS OF SOME COMMON OAKS. 
WHEN doing some work in Wisconsin last year for the Arnold Arbore- 
tum, I found that Quercus ellipsoidalis E. J. Hill was well represented in 
the woods of the southeastern part of that state. It was originally described 
from trees growing in the vicinity of Chicago. It had been identified 
by those studying the flora near Milwaukee, and is quite abundant on the 
hills of the Kettle Range. It had also been recognized as distinct by those 
unfamiliar with botanical works, as disclosed by the common name “pin 
oaks.’”’ I had not before heard this name applied to any except Q. palustris 
Moench. The original description mentioned the usual but not universal 
drooping of the lower branches, as is quite common in the pin oaks. 
When finding it in some new locality I have sometimes been at a loss to 
decide which of the two species it was till the acorns were in hand, 
As the branches often come low down, they are apt to die as the trees 
grow older, and, breaking off a short distance above their base, leave stubs 
along the trunk, so characteristic of the pin oaks. This was freely the 
case in most of the trees seen in Wisconsin, and doubtless explains the 
local name. 
Quercus palustris was not seen in any of the localities visited, nor did I 
learn of its presence from those familiar with the flora. In 1846 Dr. Lap- 
HAM mentions its occurrence at Milwaukee in a book containing “A list of 
plants which have not before been noticed as indigenous to Wisconsin.””! 
It was mentioned again by him in a paper on the ‘Plants of Wisconsin.”’ 
Though no locality is specified, it is understood from a prefatory statement 
to have been “ within thirty miles of Milwaukee.” If rightly identified (and 
Dr. LapHam was a careful and competent observer), it would seem to have 
disappeared. Yet there is the possibility that the tree with drooping 
lower branches with stubs along the trunk, and finely divided leaves, going 
by the common name of pin oak, was the one he alluded to, since the 
common name is added to the botanical in both of the above citations. 
That botanists have been bothered by some form ascribed to Q. palustris 
or Q. coccinea is apparent from a statement of Dr. GrorGE Vasey in an 
* Wisconsin: its geography and topography, history, geology, mineralogy, etc. 
Milwaukee, 1846, p. 73. 
2 Proceedings of American Association for the Advancement of Science 1849:19. 
445] [Botanical Gazette, vol. 41 
a 
