tiST OF CONIFERS ANt) TAXADS. 



181 



by Laguna and Don Pedro de Avila (1881). The latest enumera- 

 tion of European Conifers is that in Kichter's " Plantae Europeae," 

 vol. i. (1890), pp. 1-7. 



For the North American species, exclusive of those of Mexico 

 and Central America, Sargent's list of forest trees in the Tenth 

 Census Eeport (1884) is invaluable for its elaborate synonymy, 

 copious references to literature and to illustrations, extended 

 details of topographical distribution, together with indications of 

 economic uses, etc. 



Coulter's " Manual of the Botany of the Rocky Mountains " 



(1885) deals with the Conifers of that range, and the Californian 

 species were enumerated in the second volume of Watson's " Flora 

 of California " by the late Dr. Engelmann (1880). Lemmon's 

 second and third " Biennial Reports of the California State Board 

 of Forestry," for the years 1887-88 and 1889-90 respectively, are 

 very valuable as containing numerous and important observations 

 on the living trees and their distribution, together with photo- 

 graphs, &c. ; but, unfortunately, these Reports are not generally 

 accessible to gardeners. 



Macoun's " Catalogue of Canadian Plants," vol. i., part 8 



(1886) , contains a complete list of the Canadian species, Pacific as 

 well as Atlantic, with a full account of their distribution. 



A catalogue of Mexican and Guatemalan species is given by 

 Hemsley in the " Biologia Centrali Americana," vol. iii., p. 183 

 (1886). 



The few Maroccan species were enumerated by Ball in the 

 Spicilegium Florae Maroccan© " in 1878 (Journal of the 

 Linnean Society, vol. xvi., p. 669). 



Boissier's "Flora Orientalis," vol. v. (1884), contains a 

 descriptive enumeration of all the Mediterranean, Levantine, 

 Persian, and Caucasian species, as well as those of Afghanistan 

 and bordering countries. 



For Indian species, Sir Joseph Hooker's Flora of British 

 India," vol. v. (1888), summarising as it does the labours of 

 Wallich, Griffith, Wight, Brandis, and many other Indian 

 botanists, and giving references to their publications, has been 

 followed. 



For the species native to Japan I have consulted not only 

 the Flora of Siebold and Zuccarini (1842), but the later works 

 of Murray on the Pines and Firs of Japan (1868), Franchet and 



