BY M. B. WELCH. 429 



with E. cinerea, which was then synonymised under the small slender bush E. 

 pulverulenta. J. H. Maiden (1921, p. 101) mentions the fact that "the inner 

 bark of E. acaciaeformis has a distinct odour of turpentine" and that "the bark 

 of old trees of E. aggregata contains essential oil." 



Frequent references have also been made by many botanical workers to the 

 fact . that both E. Bridgiesiama and E. Macarthuri possess a bark containing oil 

 but, apart from Moller, no record has so far been met with as to a similar oc- 

 currence in E. viminalis and E. Stuartiana. It was at fr-st thought that Moller 

 may have been working on material of E. Bridgesiana and E. Macarthuri, as 

 between these four species there has been a certain amount of confusion in the 

 past. For example, E. Stuartiana has had a particularly chequered career and 

 its botanical history is somewhat complex. Numerous attempts have been made 

 to prove that E. Bridgesiana R. T. Baker, a WooUybutt with a soft fibrous bark, 

 is synonymous with E. Stuartiana F.v.M., "Apple" of Victoria, a tree with a 

 reddish "Stringybark." There is, in fact, little in common between the barks 

 and timbers of the two species. Again Bentham (1866) places Woolls's specimens 

 labelled Camden WooUybutt, now E. Macarthuri, under E. viminalis, though the 

 barks of the two trees are also dissimilar. According to Deane and Maiden 

 (1899) in their original description of E. Macartlmri, the Camden WooUybutt of 

 Bentham is identical with their species. 



It was therefore thought probable that in view of the relationship, in nomen- 

 clature at any rate, of the present day E. Bridgesiana and E. Macarth-uri, with 

 the older E. viminalis and E. Stuartiana, that the former species were the oneS 

 which Moller had used, particularly since no subsequent Australian writer has 

 confirmed his work. An examination was therefore made of a number of 

 Eucalyptus barks and, not only are there definite oil-glands in the secondai-y 

 bast of certain species, but they occur also in the two species on which MoUer 

 worked. 



This investigation shows that oU-glands occur in the following species: — E. 

 acaciaeformis Deane & Maiden, E. aggregata Deane & Maiden, E. angophoroides 

 Baker, E. Bridgesiana Baker, E. cinerea F.v.M., E. elaeophora F.v.M., E. GuUicki 

 Baker, E. Macarthuri Deane & Maiden, E. maculosa Baker, E. nova-amglica 

 Deane ife Maiden, E. pulverulenta Sims., E. rubida Deane & Maiden, E. Smithii 

 Baker, E. Stuartiana F.v.M., and E. viminalis Labill. 



A large number of the species have been examined with negative results, 

 and it is evident that Eucalypts with bark oil-glands are the exception rather 

 than the rule. 



Bark specimens of the following Eucalyptus species showed no evidence of 

 oil-glands : — E. acnvemoides Sehau., E. albens Miq., E. Behriana F.v.M., E. bicolor 

 Cunn., E. Boormani Deane & Maiden, E. Bosistoana F.v.M., E. botryoides Sm., 

 E. calycogona Turcz., E. camphora Baker, E. Cannoni Baker, E. corymbosa Sm., 

 E. crebra F.v.M., E. Dawsoni Baker, E. dealbata Cunn., E. dives Sehau., E. fas- 

 ciculosa F.v.M., E. fastigata Deane & Maiden, E. Fletcheri Baker, E. fraxinoides 

 Deane & Maiden, E. globulus Labill., E. haemastoma Sm., E. haemastoma Sm.^ 

 var. micrantha Benth., E. hemilampra F.v.M., E. hemiphloia F.v.M., E. longifolia 

 Link et Otto, E. Maideni F.v.M., E. melliodora Cunn., E. microtheca F.v.M., 

 E. Nepeanensis Baker & Smith, E. oreades Baker, E. ovalifolia Baker, E. palu- 

 dosa Baker, E. paniculata Sm., E. patentinervis Baker, E. pilularis Sm., E. 

 piperita Sm., E. polyanthemos Sehau., E. populifolia Hook., E. punctata De C, 

 E. radiata Sieb., E. regnans F.v.M., E. resinifera Sm., E. Rossii Baker & Smith, 

 E. rostrata Schlecht., E. saligna Sm., E. Sieheriana F.v.M., E. squamosa Deane 

 & Maiden, E. tesselaris F.v.M., E. vitrea Baker, and E. Woollsiana Baker. 



