444 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [MAY 
thin, with only slightly revolute margins and reticulate veins incon- 
spicuous on the lower surface, which is covered with very short close 
pale pubescence. On the other form the leaves are much thicker, 
with conspicuously revolute margins and reticulate veins prominent 
on the lower surface which is covered with thick pale tomentum. 
The habit of the mature trees of the two forms is the same, and they 
both have the same dark gray furrowed bark and the same fruit. 
At Biloxi, Mississippi, where these two forms are very abundant 
and grow together near the sandy shore of the Sound, on April 2, 
1917, the leaves of the previous year had practically all disappeared 
from the first variety, the new leaves were nearly fully grown, and 
the staminate flowers had fallen, while the trees of the second variety 
still retained all the leaves of the previous season and showed no 
signs of vegetative activity. The leaves of the thin-leaved form 
usually show a tendency to undulate on the margins and are often 
lobed, especially on trees in western Texas, but on the thick-leaved 
form I have seen few lobed leaves. Occasionally trees of the thin- 
leaved form occur on which the leaves are thicker than usual, with 
thicker and more revolute margins, showing a tendency to inter- 
grade with the other form, although usually the two forms appear 
very distinct. The thin-leaved form is the more widely dis- 
tributed, and, except in the interior of the Florida peninsula, the 
more common tree. It is possibly a larger tree than the other; at 
least all the very large live oaks I have seen are of this variety. Of 
the thick-leaved form I have seen specimens outside of Florida 
only from Wrightsville and Southport, North Carolina, Bluffton, 
St. Helena Island, and Beaufort, South Carolina, Colonel’s Island, 
Coffin County, Georgia, Fish River, Baldwin County, Alabama, 
and Biloxi, Mississippi. Although very common along the coast of 
Mississippi it does not, so far as I have observed, cross the Pearl 
River into Louisiana, and the great live oaks for which that state 
is famous are all of the other form. 
It is not possible to determine precisely which of these two forms 
is the type of Q. virginiana Miller. The first description of this tree, 
published in 1696, was that of PLUKENET, Quercus virginiana sem- 
pervirens, foliis oblongis sinuatis and non sinuatis (Alm. Bot. 310)- 
This description might apply to either form and equally well to 
