i6o 
Journal of Agricultural Research 
Vol. I, No. i 
part of his farm. These two had been transplanted to his plum orchard 
and the others grubbed up. Though not perfectly identical, these trees— 
though small, they were perfect trees in form—are so similar as to make it 
superfluous to give separate descriptions. The more perfect of these 
was selected for description and named “Stuart” for the owner. (PI. X, 
figs, i and 2.) Its fruit is among the best produced by hybrids. Two 
points worthy of note about this variety are that the flowering followed 
the opening of the leaves and that there is a tendency to suckering or 
root-sprouting. 
A few days later, in a trip along the Hilderbrand Road in company 
with Mr. R. E. Blair, two more hybrid varieties were found in a field of 
the Whittaker Ranch. Both were small trees, evidently sprouted from 
an older growth broken down. The flowering season had passed and a 
small setting of half-grown fruits was noted. Later in the season Mr. 
Blair returned and found a few of these ripe, but a detailed description 
was not secured. It is a medium-sized, dull-red fruit of only fair quality. 
The variety near the fence on the pike road was designated as the Hilder¬ 
brand and the one in the field as the Whittaker. On a later trip Mr. Blair 
located another hybrid tree in the same neighborhood, a detailed 
description of which has not been secured. 
It will be noticed that in the descriptions of these hybrids no attempt 
has been made to name other parents than the wild peach {Prunus 
texana) y which dominates them all. There are characters which indicate 
that at least three other species as parents must be reckoned with. The 
northern portion of the range of this species is also the home of a number 
of species of typical American plums. 
Prof. Sargent has but recently described two new species from this 
territory, and it is probable that others are pending. No less than eight 
species of Prunus of the plum class have been credited to this territory, 
several of which are with difficulty distinguished from each other. The 
hopelessness of determining the other parents of these hybrids is immedi¬ 
ately apparent. We have no basis for more than a conjecture as to 
which direction the cross may have taken, whether Prunus texana 
furnished the pollen or was the pistillate parent. 
The only hint we can get in this direction is from the work of Mr. 
Ramsey, referred to later. He made use of pollen from the Wild Goose 
plum, without removing the stamens from the flowers of the wild peach 
and secured four hybrid trees out of a number of fruits set on the pro¬ 
tected branch. All of these four show Wild Goose characteristics in 
their flowers. 
The grouping of a number of closely similar varieties, as in the case of 
the two Gephart trees, the Stuart group, and those on the Hilderbrand 
Road, suggests that a bush of wild peach may have received visits of bees 
carrying wild-plum pollen and that a number of fruits of this pollination 
germinated under or near the parent bush. 
