E. Purkinje 



Weisswasser in Bohemia, April 22, 1875 



Dear Sir: 



My best thanks for sending the letter which you wrote April 2nd, which arrived 

 here April 21st and was delivered to me this morning. That my letter should have been 

 on the way more than 20 days, is probably due to a writing error on my part. I wrote 

 Feb. 6 instead of March, an error which I make sometiraes at the beginning of the 

 month. I immediately took steps to soak all needles. I examined P. cembroides in 

 a specimen collected by Hartweg and P. edulis sent to me in a specimen by Boissier. 

 At the microscopic examination it Struck me at once as being identical with cembroides , 

 although I have no idea of branches, cones, etc. I am very curious about monophylla . 

 Some deformations (growing together or crooked) occur, I have examined an australis 

 which had two deformed needles, the third being free. I am also curious about 

 ayacahuite . In this group the microscopic differences are very insignificant so that 

 parvifolia , excelsa , Strobus, Lambertiana , monticola , show very few differences, 

 whereas those with two-needled are so extraordinarily different. Those with 3 

 needles also show considerable differences but by no means all so that Faeda , rigida , 

 Gef freyi nevertheless are similar. 



I must hasten so that this letter still leaves today. I repeat my sincerest 

 thanks and will soon write you what I found on the material. 



Respectfully, 

 Dr. E. Purkinje 



Cembroides as well as edulis moreover has the type of a 5 needle Scotch pine 

 from the group Cembra » not that of most 5 needle . Mexicans, just like the 3 needle 

 Bungeana or Gerandiana has the type of a 5 needle Cembra. 



