Oct. io, 1913 
Citrus Ichangensis 
II 
broader, distinctly veined leaves. Sterile specimens of both of these 
numbers in the herbarium at Dahlem belong undoubtedly to Citrus 
ichangensis and differ but slightly in shape and venation. 
In 1911 H. L£veill6 published a “Citrus Cavaleriei” in an article by 
Julien Cavalerie 1 without a recognizable description. A specimen collected 
by P£re Julien Cavalerie in the Province of Kweichow, China, preserved 
in the Museum d’Histoire Naturelle at Paris, is almost certainly Citrus 
ichangensis. In his account of the Aurantiacese of Kweichow, he says of 
this species: 
Citrus Cavaleriei , L6vl. I found in the forest, remote from any habitation in the 
vicinity of Ma-Jo and of Kai-Tch6ou [K’ai Chow] at about 1,700 meters [5,577 feet] 
altitude, a kind of spiny orange tree, in the undergrowth of the forested slopes. The 
tree is arched (voht6) and completely covered with moss. One tree had fruits of the 
size of an apricot and flowers at the same time. The fruit is hard and rounded in shape; 
the winged petiole is so much developed that it constitutes half of the leaf. I did not 
see this tree cultivated anywhere. It is the only wild species [of Citrus] in the high 
regions. 2 
There is nothing in this description to distinguish this plant from 
Citrus histrix DC., and upon applying to M. L6veill£ to see the type 
specimen he declared this name to be “a true nomen nudum ” that had 
been published by mistake, and a note to this effect was later published. 3 
A SUBSPECIES FROM THE KHASI HILLS 
Several good specimens of a Citrus from the Khasi Hills in Assam, 
collected by J. D. Hooker and T. Thomson in 1850 and preserved in the 
Kew Herbarium, were at first supposed by the writer to be identical 
with Citrus ichangensis , as they showed the same peculiar, very large 
and broadly oval or oblong winged petioles. After careful study, how¬ 
ever, the Khasi specimens were found to differ from the typical Chinese 
material in a number of points. 
In the first place, all of the Khasi specimens show leaves with less 
acuminate blades than those of the Chinese material; moreover, the 
leaves of the Indian specimens are distinctly more variable both in size 
and in shape. The immature fruits collected by Hooker and Thomson 
in this locality are all slightly oblate instead of slightly prolate like the 
Chinese fruits from Pingshan Pa (Wilson Nos. 4736, 4737 )* The fact 
that Hooker and Thomson call this plant a “wild orange” is additional 
evidence that the fruits did not have the lemonlike appearance of the 
Chinese form. Finally, the flowers in Clarke’s specimen preserved in the 
British Museum occur in three to six flowered axillary panicles instead of 
singly, as in all the Chinese material seen. The tree reaches a height of 
1 Cavalerie, Julien, 1911. Tes Aurantiac^es du Kouy-Tch&ni. Bui. de Gdogr. Bot., t. 21 (ann. 20, s. 4), 
no. 261, p. 2x1. 
2 Translation from Cavalerie, Julien, 1911, loc. dt. 
3 LJeveille], H., 1911. Tes Aurantiacees du Kouy-Tch£ou. Bui. de G6ogr. Bot., t. 21 (ann. 20, s. 4), 
no. 262, p. 236. 
