5. With E. Boormani, Deane and Maiden. 



The species has undoubted affinity with E. Bosistoana. (See Proc. Linn. 

 Soc, N.S. W., xxv, 112.) They can, however, be readily distinguished by the rough 

 branches of E. Boormani, while those of E. Bosistoana are smooth, like the Boxes 

 (E. hemiphloia, &c). At the same time it must be noted that the rough bark on the 

 butt of E. Bosistoana often displays considerable similarity to that of E. Boormani. 

 The timber of E. Bosistoana is of a paler colour, and is less tough and hard. 



6. With E. leptophleba, P.v.M. {drepanophylla, Benth.). 



I mention this because Mueller does. It may be, as hinted by Deane and 

 Maiden, in giving the description of E. Boormani:, that that sj>ecies is identical with 

 E. leptophleba, but the latter is an imperfectly known species, and does not come as 

 far south as E. Bosistoana so far as is known at present. 



7. With E. siderophloia, Benth. 



This is mentioned also because of Mueller's reference. The two species, E. 

 Bosistoana and E. siderophloia have, however, no close affinity. The former is a 

 Box with pale-coloured timber, and the latter an Ironbark with dark-red timber ; 

 the buds of E. siderophloia are " egg-in-egg-cup " when young, and the operculum 

 more pointed than those of E. Bosistoana, while the fruits of E. siderophloia have 

 exserted valves. 



