67 



1, With E. melanophloia, F.v.M. 



The narrow-leaved form of this species often displays considerable resem- 

 blance to E. crebra. See B.Fl. iii, 222, where a number of specimens of E. 

 melanophloia are referred to JE. crebra by Bentham, and discussed by me at p. 71 

 of the present Part. Mueller refers to the subject iu Uncahjpiogrn ijhla, under 

 JE. crebra. 



2. With E. leptophleha, F.v.M. [E. drepanophylla, Bentb.). 



In the Eucalyptograpliia, under E. crebra, Mueller expresses some doubt as 

 to the specific value of the former species, and to its difference from E. crebra. lie 

 refers to the matter again in the same work under E. sklerophloia. See p. 33-1', 

 Part X, of the present work. 



Reference to my notes on E. leplophleba at p. 332, and the figares on Plate 

 4S, show it to be markedly different from E. crebra. Seeing my note (p. 333) to the 

 effect that the juvenile leaves of E. leptophleba were unknown, Dr. T. L. Bancroft, 

 of Stannary Hills, North Queensland, where the species is abundant, obligin"'ly 

 sent me juvenile leaves. They are huge, and as different from those of E. crebra as 

 it is possible for them to be. 



Tliey are elliptical or j^early oblong in sliape, very coriaceous, equally green 

 on both sides, and 4|^ inches in breadth by 7 inches in length are common dimen- 

 sions ! The veins are prominent, roughly parallel, and often nearly at right angles 

 to the midrib. The intramarginal vein is at a considerable distance from the ed^e. 



Mr. F. M. Bailey, in the Queensland Agric. Journ., xxiii, p. 259 (1G09), 

 has redescribed tliese specimens, which in my view are E. leptopMebu (E. 

 drepanophylla) as a new species, under the name of E. Stoneana. 



8. With E. hcBmastoma, Sm., var. micrantha, Benth. 



E. crebra is a small-flowered, often small-leaved species, and therefore it 

 becomes necessary sometimes to compare it with other small-flowered species. It 

 is sometimes very difiicult, with the incomplete specimens often found in herbaria, 

 to distinguish between the two plants. In the field their appearance is, of course, 

 quite different, E. hcemasloma being a White Gum and E. crebra an Ironbark. 



4. With E. microtheca, F.v.M. 



In flower this species (c)-«/;?y«), especially in the thicker-leaved specimens, is sometimes difficult to 

 distinguish from E. brachypoda (E. microtheca is meant in this instance ; see page 51 Part XI of this 

 work) ; the leaves are generally, but not always, thinner, with more oblique veins, and the flowers not so 

 glaucous, with the calyx less open ; the fruit is, however, very differently shaped. {B.FL iii, 222.) 



The above remarks were doubtless written partly in contemplation of those 

 specimens of E. crebra found in dry localities (see p. 08), and partly of those 

 lanceolar-leaved forms of E. melanophloia formerly considered (on herbarium 

 specimens only) to belong to E. crebra. See also my remarks at p. 53, Part XT, of 

 this work. 



