42 



Before it is admitted into the Queensland Flora, specimens should be quoted. 

 It is very probable that Laichhardt observed it on Queensland territory on his 

 journey to Port Essington. It is, as Mueller points out, intermixed in the forest with 

 that species, which it resembles a good deal, and some of his " Melaleuca Gum," 

 referred to under E. miniate/, may well include E. phecnicea, but this should be 

 proved. 



AFFINITIES. 



1. With E. miniata A. Cunn. 



In habit E. miniata approaches nearest to E. plianicea, whose companion it is in Arnhem's Land 

 and around the Gulf of Carpentaria, agreeing with it much in its laminated, friable, easily separable 

 bark, which is, however, not persistent on the main branches, also more grey and less brown-yellowish 

 outside ; it accords furthermore with E. pJicenicea in the brilliancy of its flowers, thus forming quite an 

 ornament in the landscape, the name of the species being derived from the colour of the filaments like 

 that of red lead. The bark- contains more woody ramifications than that of E. pha'iiicca, but likewise 

 reminds in external appearance and in fracture much of mica-schist, thus indicating for both these trees 

 in the cortical S3^stem a peculiar section, that of the Lepidophloia^, to which also E. pdtata belongs. 

 E. miniata differs from E. p'twnicea in taller stature, in its branchlets, flower stalks, and calyces 

 being tinged with a whitish bloom, in generally broader leaves with less stomata above than below, in 

 umbels with less flowers, in the absence of distinct stalklets, in very angular and broader calyces, 

 proportionately longer lid, in more saturated orange-coloured filaments, longer anthers, larger, very woody 

 fruits, which latter are liued with prominent ridges and open with three or four valves; the fertile seeds 

 are also larger. (" Eucalyptographia " under E. miniata.) 



. . . . To which (E. miniata) it is also closely allied in its cortical characters, E. pJicenicea and 

 E. miniata standing in this respect quite apart from any other Eucalypt (unless E. melissiodora), constituting 

 in the cortical system of the genus a peculiar section, that of Lejndophloice. The bark of both is very 

 lamellar and friable, outside of a yellowish or greyish-brown, on fracture partly glittering and somewhat 

 resembling mica-schist. In E. phcenicea the bark covers the lower branches, as well as the stem, 

 persistently, but it is easily pulled off, and is less interwoven with fibres than in E. miniata, wdiereas 

 also in the latter the bark persists on the stem only. (" Eucalyptographia" under E. phamicea.) 



There is no doubt that these two species have the closest affinity to each 

 other. In the bush they require to be carefully compared, so that we may receive 

 notes, made on the spot, by a competent observer, in regard to the habit, size of 

 tree, bark, and timber, of both species. 



Tlie foliage of the two species is much alike; perhaps that of E. phcenicea is 

 smaller and less coarse. 



The buds of E. miniata are coarser, more sessile, fewer in the head, and on a 

 strap-shaped peduncle. The branchlets and inflorescence are more glaucous in the 

 specimens seen, but it should be locally observed whether glaucousness is a differen- 

 tiating character. 



The colour of the filaments of E. miniata is perhaps more scarlet ; they are 

 coarser. The anthers resemble each other a good deal. The fruits of E. miniata 

 are larger and coarser. 



2. With E. corymbosa Sm. 



The urceolate fruits suggest an affinity, while the barks of both E. phcenicea 

 and E. miniata undoubtedly display affinities to that of E. corymbosa and other 

 members of the Bloodwood group. 



