147 



AFFINITIES. 



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



Affinity undoubtedly exists, although typical forms seem different enough. 

 Mueller named a narrow-leaved form of iincinata, oleosa var. Jeptophylla, and he 

 confused the species on other occasions, pardonably enough — indeed his original 

 description of E. oleosa had to be amended to exclude some E. uncinata. The buds 

 of the two species are often a good deal alike. 



The valves of ^. ?<«<?/«« ^rt are so exserted, fairly frequently, as to strongly 

 resemble a small-fruited form of E. oleosa. E. oleosa has a fruit whicli tends to 

 beurceolate; this I have not noticed in jG*. ?<rtci«a^rt. The juvenile leaves of the 

 former species are larger and broader. The timber of E. uucinata is brown, less 

 rarely of a reddish cast ; the timber of E. oleosa is redder, often very red. The 

 twigs and branches of E. uncinala are often markedly rod, and hence it is sometimes 

 called " lied Malice " for that reason, and not because of the colour of the timber. 



Diels and Pritzel, in "Englcr's Jahrb.," xxxv, 438 (1903), remark : " Formoe 

 quaedam ad E. oleosam transitum efficiunt, an hybridit (?)." 



2. With E. decurva, T.v.M. 



This affinity is mentioned by Mueller ("Eucalyptographia," under ^. uncinata), 

 b:?cause of the kink in the filament in E. uncinala (also occurring in E.falcata, and 

 not in E. decurva, as stated by Bentham) . The shrubs are, however, as unlike as 

 they can well be ; and inasmuch as there has been a good deal of confusion as to 

 what E. decurva is, I defer my remarks until Part XVI of this work is reached, 

 when it will be found I have figured E. decurva on Plate 70. 



3. With E. micranthera, F.v.M. 



As suggested by Bentliam in B.Pl. iii, 21S, who says, "possibly a form of 

 E. uncinata." Under E. uncinata (" Eucalyptographia ") Mueller refers to the 

 affinities of E. uncinata and E. micranthera. 



In Proc. Aust. Adv. Science, vii, 533 (1898), Luchmann goes further, and says 

 that E. micranthera is a variety of E. uncinata. 



I dissent from this view. E. micranthera is an imperf(!ctly known species, 

 but I have a figure of the unique specimen in the Melbourne Herbarium, and will 

 discuss E. micranthera in relation to E. uncinata when I am in a position to reproduce 

 my drawing in this work. 



9664— C 



