365 
PARK AND CEMETERY, 
SUGGESTIONS for IDENTIFYING the CONIFERS 
Perhaps, to the ordinary oliserver 
there seems no group of plants in which 
there exists as much of a sameness or 
similarity of character as amoi^g the 
conifers. The nurseryman knows these 
plants as one knows the members of 
his family — from having been constantly 
in touch with them since their career 
began in the seed bed or in the cutting 
bench. He recognizes various species 
by certain characteristics, which he has 
never stopped to formulate into a lan- 
guage. “I know them, because I know 
them,” he says, but why, he cannot tell. 
But the landscape gardener or the lover 
of plants cannot grow up with them, 
and hence should have some scientific 
way to tell the species of the specimens 
which he has bought. Not only should 
he know the characteristics of the tree 
when it reaches maturity, but equally as 
important is the necessity of knowing it 
as it comes from the nursery row. 
Conifers possess as widely differing 
characters as most of our deciduous 
trees and shrubs. They are plants most 
of which do not fruit until after they 
have attained nearly to mature forms, 
and because of this fact, 1 have seen 
botanists waiting for specimens to ma- 
ture, before giving them a species name. 
During travels in both American and 
foreign nurseries I have made it a spe- 
cial point to investigate the system of 
nomenclature which is applied to this 
group of plants. It is very much con- 
fused, as the majority of grow'ers ad- 
mit. The nurseryman is not wholly at 
fault, because lx)tanical -authorities 
have varied from each other as years 
have passed, and hence a grower who 
bases his nomenclature upon one of 
the older standard works will find that 
it differs from the more modern works. 
A nurseryman should keep abreast of 
the more recent changes in nomencla- 
ture and should so name his catalog 
list that the more common synonyms 
appear, and furthermore he should avoid 
giving of the same generic name to 
species wdiich, because of their botani- 
cal character, belong in two widely dif- 
fering genera. 
This latter is seen in the evergreen 
groups especially. Here, the ordinary 
buyer who is not acquainted wutli gen- 
eric characteristics is wholly at the 
mercy of the ignorance of the nurser}^- 
man, and many times receives an en- 
tirely different species or even genera 
from that which he ordered. I know 
of one nurseryman who received from 
a foreign grower some thousands of 
seedlings which he had ordered for 
Blue Spruces, and they w'ere no more 
or less than the common Abies con- 
■S\ . - 
color. The names, Picea Canadensis ; 
Abies Canadensis, and Tsuga Cana- 
densis are used to a great extent in- 
terchangeably and synonymously by 
many growers. The generic names 
Abies 'and Picea are applied to the 
Spruce group and to the Fir group ir- 
respective of the characters which 
mark the plants as belonging distinctly 
in one or the other, and not in both. 
Now, as seen in the accompanying 
photograph, the one great difference be- 
tween these two distinct genera lies in 
the' fact that the leaves in Picea 
(Spruces) are deciduous above the base 
(Fig. 1), and those of Abies (Firs) are 
deciduous at the base (Fig. II.) ■ Thus 
in the first case we see these quad- 
rangular sterigmata projecting from the 
twigs after the leaves have fallen, while 
in the latter case there remains nothing 
but a smooth oval leaf scar which is 
either level with or a little below the 
surface of the bark of the twigs. The 
leaves of the spruce are all decurrent 
while those of the firs are said to be 
excurrent. This one simple character- 
istic, if carefully observed, will never 
lead anyone to a mingling of the Spruce 
group with the Fir group. Of course 
we have other characteristics which dis- 
tinctly mark these two genera ; the most 
prominent one being the upright char- 
acter of the cones in the Firs and the 
drooping character in the Spruces. This, 
however, as with other differences is 
not valuable to the nurseryman ; his 
specimens are sold, and thousands of 
others are growing in their places when 
the first come to a fruiting age. Thi.<^ 
one characteristic — in a secondary classi- 
fication of the twigs — which requires 
no skill to observe is the one great 
difference which will separate once and 
for always these two groups of plants. 
Many superficial botanists say that ' 
the leaves of the Spruces are quad- i 
rangular in cross section, while those ; 
of the firs are more flattened and dorsi- 
ventral ; this may apply to a few species 
in any one locality, but for the great 
groups of Spruces and Firs it is very j 
inadequate as a means of ■ separation. 
We will find species in either genera ' 
which overlap the other, and no sharp 
line can be drawn between them upon [ 
this basis. 
In the second photograph will be seen * 
a variation often quite common among t: 
the Thuyas (Arborvitae), the Juni- 
pe'rus (Cedars and Junipers), and the 
Retinospora (more properly called the , 
Chamrecyparis) (Japanese Cypress). ' 
These two forms are commonly known 
as the mature and the juvenile forms of 
foliage, and occur upon the same 
branches of a specimen at any age. 
Many have thought it to be a physio- 
logical process resulting from food sup- ) 
ply : but the accepted explanation is 
that this is simply a reverting back to 
the original type of the plant frofn 
which the species originated. The speci- 
men on the right is the mature form ; 
