REVISION OF THE GENUS PINUS. 371 
rarely 5 or 6 bracts of equal length ; anthers only } line te or — with a small, slightly denticulate crest. Only 
in J ine Sometimes cultivated under the name of the follow 
1. P. Massoniana, Lamb. Parlat., well distinguished ry the tree thus named by Siebold and Zuccarini [180] 
and “a Endlicher, which was named by Parlatore P. Thunbergii (see note 26). It is similar to the last, but has 
longer and more slender leaves and is a native of the warmer climate of Southern China, and is not hardy. where densi- 
flora and Thunbergit are. Ducts few or many, often with a few strengthening cells, these cells also in the corners, very 
few under the epidermis, rarely some with the vessels ; male flowers slender, cylindric, 6-8 lines long, in a spike, invo- 
lucrum of 6 or 7 bracts, the outer pair rather shorter than the inner ones. Griffith, No. 4992, from Afghanistan, in Herb. 
Kew., with two ducts on the upper side of the broader leaves, may belong here, which would extend the geographical 
area of this ra 
Merkusii, Jungh. & De Vriese, seems to be closely allied to the last and probably belongs here, or ought 
oil to i considered rather a two-leaved Indica. In the poor specimens at my disposal I could not discover any 
ducts ; the leaves are longer and more slender, the strengthening cells similarly disposed. The involucrum consists 
of 12 bracts, the outer pair not half as long as the inner ones. 
13. 4 Gerardiana, Wallich. Anther crests semi-orbicular, laciniate-dentate, seeds nearly 1 inch long. 
Halepensis, Mill. Cones with longer or te peduncles, lateral and often low Bown: on the axis, gener- 
ally ini with flat or sometimes somewhat tumid sca 
5. P. Pyrenaica, lapeyr., fide Parlatore, P. sete Ten., and with other synonyms, not to be confounded with 
that ee P. Pyrenaica, which is a form of P. Laricio. This species is so closely allied to the last that it is often con- 
sidered a variety of it. But the leaves are stouter, the more numerous ducts are surrounded by strengthening cells, 
ain are very scarce in the leaves of the other ; in both, these cells are found near the vessels ; the male flowers are 
twice as large ; the outer pair of involucral bracts is almost equal to the inner ones; the cones are nearly sessile and 
pointe generally several together, and often lateral and terminal on the same tree (see p. 171) ; the densely clustered 
cones in Tenore’s typical specimen in the Botanic Garden of Naples are the result of disease. 
16. P. leiophylla, Schiede & Deppe, has often 6 and even 7 leaves; the ducts are very small and often wanting ; 3 
the strengthening cells, usually well developed in bundles under the epidermis, are, as well as a ducts, absent in 
Gregg’s No. 821 from Zamora ; the sheaths are usually deciduous, but scarcely so in Hartweg’s N 
17. P. filifolia, Lindl. Ina specimen cultivated in Kew Gardens the ducts are sometimes internal. 
18. P. Montezume, Lamb., is, if I understand it correctly, a most variable species, the largest suit of different 
forms of which is preserved in the Berlin herbarium; some forms have longer, others shorter leaves, or stouter or more 
slender ones, 3, 4 or 5 in a bundle ; cones long cylindrical or oval or conical ; the scales in the typica 
are depressed and regularly rhomboidal, in other forms they become strongly umbonate. It is quite sien [181] 
therefore, to properly circumscribe the species ; for the present I feel obliged to unite with it even P. Har 
and a number of others already included by Parlatore. Only a closer study on the Mexican ee will decide 
whether or not several well characterized species may be hidden among them. All those that I could examine have 
numerous and strong bundles of strengthening cells under the eniderias and also near the vessels, but none around 
the ducts. 
19. P. Torreyana, Parry, has the same structure of the leaves. The name was published in the Botany of the 
Mexican Boundary, 1859, and is therefore older than P. lophosperma, Lindl. of 1860 
20. P. Arizonica, Engelm. in Bot. Wheeler, p. 260, has also this structure, ae is thus distinguished from P. 
ponderosa, besides ata five-leaved. 
. Enyelmanni, Carriére, Conif. p. 356, P. macrophylla, Engelm. in Wisliz. Mem. p. 103, note 25, is a tree 
only ines from Wislizenus’ single specimen gathered in 1846 on the mountains of Cosiquiriachi, west of Chihuahua, 
where it is said to be abundant. The name was changed by Carriére because it clashed with Lindley’s prior one ; — 
however, is considered by Parlatore to be a form of Montezwme, but which I have not been able to examine. 
plant differs from this species, by having its very stout leaves in threes and fours and very rarely in fives, in ties 
strongly developed strengthening cells under the epidermis and also around the ducts, and in the form of the cone. 
Parlatore does not mention it. 
onderosa, De iy a variable and wide-spread species of Western North America, several forms of which 
have been denied as dist e only one which may perhaps claim specific recognition is our var. Jeffreyi (P. 
Jeffreyi, Murr.), Gahsdak “6 its darker more finely cleft bark, a branchlets, paler foliage, and much larger 
cones, with rather slender sharp recurved prickles and larger seed ut it seems that intermediate forms unite it with 
the typical one. Another form which deserves notice is var. stems of the Rocky Mountains, with shorter and 
often binate leaves and smaller cones (see Engelm. in Flor. Calif. 2, p. 125) 
