49 



LARGE TREES 



Quercus Schneckii (?) 

 Quercus Michauxii 

 Liquidanibar Styraciflua 

 Tilia sp.* 



Fraxinus Americana 

 Acer Floridanum 

 Ulmus fulva 

 Ulnius alata 



Prunus scroti na 



Celtis sp. 



(Melia Azcdararh) 



Quercus Virginiana 



Hicoria sp. 



Pinus Taeda 



Magnolia grandiflora 



SMALL TREES 



Prunus Caroliniana 



Cercis Canadensis 

 Ilex opaca 



Persea Borbonia 



Morus rubra 



WOODY VINES 



Bignonia crucigera 



Parthenocissus quinquefolia 

 Smilax rotundifolia ? 



Grossularia echinella 

 Adelia ligustrina 

 Aesculus Pavia 



Tovara Virginiana 

 Calycocarpum Lyoni 

 Tillandsia usneoides 

 Arisaema Dracontium 

 Spigelia Marilandica 

 Tradescantia sp. 



SHRUBS 



HERBS 



Rhus radicans 

 Vitis rotundifolia 

 Smilax lanceolata 



Callicarpa Americana 

 Ptelea trifoHata 

 Asimina parviflora 



Polymnia Uvedalia 

 Opiismenus setarius 

 Eupatorium incarnatum 

 Polypodium polypodioides 

 Trillium Underwoodii 



The most remarkable thing about the vegetation (disregarding 

 the identity of the species) is the fact that the first evergreen 

 tree comes twelfth on the list, and there seem to be no evergreen 



* In the last few years, since the splitters have been at work on this genus, 

 it is practically impossible to identify the described forms in the field without 

 a manual, or in winter even with a manual (much as in Crataegus). They all 

 have much the same bark, wood, flowers and habitat, and the 15 alleged species 

 and several varieties described in the 1922 edition of Sargent's Manual of 

 North American trees are distinguished mainly by the pubescence and ser- 

 ration of the leaves. The 1 7 Tilia cuts in that work do not show any important 

 differences, and there is possibly no one who could identify them all if they 

 were separated from the accompanying text. Such forms cannot be distinct 

 species in the same sense as those of Pinus, Quercus, etc., now commonly 

 recognized. 



