― 135 ―


  • 1. E. pauciflora, Sieb.
  • 2. E. piperita, Sm.; var. pauciflora, DC.
  • 3. E. submultiplinervis, Miq.;

Do forma minor, Miq.

  • 4. E. sylvicultrix, F.v.M.
  • 5. E. phlebophylla, F.v.M.

There is a variety, alpina, Benth.—(B.Fl. iii, 201).

Notes on the Synonyms.

1. E. pauciflora, Sieb. The original description is—

pauciflora, Sieb. 26. E. operculo conico, pedunculis abbreviatis sub—6 floris, foliis oblongolanceolatis falcatis nervosa-venosis elongatis.—(Spreng. Syst. IV. Cur. Post., 195.)

A specimen of the type in Herb. Barbey-Boissier bears the following label:—

Sieber's No. 470. Eucalyptus pauciflora, Sbr. De la nouvelle Hollande, M. Sieber, 1825, with the addition later on, “Eucalyptus piperita, Sm.; E. pauciflora, DC.”

It is figured on Plate 26, and there can be no doubt that it is correctly referred to E. coriacea, A. Cunn. I have seen a further specimen, stated to be Sieber's No. 475, and labelled Eucalyptus pauciflora, Sieber, from Herb. Berol. It consists of a leaf and a cluster of buds. The leaf is narrow, and has rather straight veins, which one reasonably associates with E. coriacea, A. Cunn. But the buds do not belong to that species, and careful examination of the specimens shows that they probably belong to one of the New South Wales “Messmates.”

E. amygdalina and E. regnans are so closely allied that it is not possible to say absolutely from the material available which species it is, since it matches E. radiata from the Blue Mountains, which we know Sieber visited, and E. regnans from southern and western localities. The texture of the leaf is amygdalina, or regnans, and not coriacea. Nothing further need be said, as there is apparently a misplacement of a label.

  ― 136 ―

2. E. piperita, Sm.; var. pauciflora.

This is the name as given in DC. Prod. iii, 219,

3. E. submultiplinervis, Miq.

34. Eucalyptus submultiplinervis, Miq., n. sp., ramulis gracilibus teretiusculus vel hic illic angulatis, foliis e basi attenuatâ lanceolatis breviter acutis, herbaceo-coriaceis, venis plerisque adscendentibus versus basin adproximatis utrinque distinctis submultiplinervis, marginibus subincrassatis subfuscescentibus, pedunculis rugosis 5–10 floris, floribus subsessilibus, calycis tubo obpyramidato-turbinato striato-sulcato glanduloso, operculo brevi-hemisphaerico subumbilicato quam tubus breviore, antheris albidis didymis. Van Diemansland (Stuart n. 10, 13, 14, 15)—Petioli circiter semipollicares antice canaliculati, angulosi. Pedunculi 3–4 lin. longi. Flores 2½ lin. æquantes. Forma præsertim quod a flores minor: E. sylvicultrix, Müll. Herb.—(Nederl. Kruidk. Arch., iv, 138, 1856.)

4. E. sylvicultrix, F.v.M., is briefly referred to in the preceding paragraph.

Bentham also noticed it:—

E. submultiplinervis, Miq. in Ned. Kruidk. Arch., iv, 138, or E. sylvicultrix, F. Muell. in Herb. Sond., is a narrow straight-leaved variety, with the flowers of the ordinary size.—(B.Fl. iii, 201.)

Following are the specimens on which the names submultiplinervis and sylvicultrix were founded:—

  • (a) Specn. No. 34 (species number in Ned. Kruidk. Arch. iv). “Eucalyptus sylvicultrix, Ferd. Mueller, Tasmania, in Mueller's handwriting, and E. submultiplinervis, forma minor,” in that of Miquel, have buds, and are undoubtedly coriacea as so marked by Bentham on the specimen. I fail to see that Miquel's forma minor is really smaller than other specimens.
  • (b) “E. sylvicultrix, F.v.M. Syn. E. coriacea, A. Cunn., var. sylvicultrix, F.v.M. (Herb. Melb.). Syn. E. multiplinervis, Miq. (Herb. Melb.) (a slip of the pen for submultiplinervis). No. 765, near Woodhall, Tasmania, March. Charles Stuart.”

The material of (b) is in twigs bearing leaves, very young buds, and flowers. The specimens, as far as they go, in the venation of the leaves and their hooked apices, their length and breadth, in the very young buds, in the calyces and flowers, resemble many from New South Wales.

5. E. phlebophylla, F.v.M.

40. Eucalyptus phlebophylla, Ferd. Müll., Herb. ramulis teretibus fuscescentibus, foliis longiuscule petiolatis lanceolatis vel oblongo-lanceolatis in apiculum tenuem fuscum curvulum exeuntibus, basi attenuatâ inæquilateris, vulgo totis falcato-curvatis, rigide coriaceis, punctatis, venis plurimis e basi ortis submultiplinervis, umbellis axillaribus et terminalibus confertis, 3–5 floris, pedunculis pruinosis, floribus sessilibus, calyce obovato-turbinato. Crescit in montibus Buffalo Range (F. Müller). Van Diemansland (Stuart).

Petioli ½–¾poll. longi rugosuli, in siccis pallidi vel fusculi; folia 3–7 poll. longa, 1½ lata; pedunculi 2–3 lin.; calycis tubus in fructu 2 lin. æquans.—(Ex. Miq. in Nederl. Kruidk. Arch. iv, 140, 1856.)

  ― 137 ―

I have seen the type from Mount Aberdeen, which is a very markedly veined, large, young leaf; also specimens marked “Gippsland, Mueller,” in flower.—(Herb. Calcutta.) I have examined a specimen (Van Dieman's Land, C. Stuart) bearing, in Miquel's handwriting, the words “E. phlebophylla, M.,” with the words “E. submultiplinervis affinis” cancelled.—(Herb. Melb.)

Some of Gunn's specimens in European herbaria labelled “Eucalyptus radiata,” with glaucous buds, really belong to E. coriacea. Some of them are labelled “very common about Hobart Town,” and “Weeping Gum of Norfolk Plains.” The true E. radiata, Sieb., is much less likely to be confused with E. coriacea, A. Cunn., than the forms (E. radiata, Hook., f. non Sieb.) that Hooker took to be E. radiata.

Var. alpina, F.v.M. (B.Fl. iii, 201).

Leaves short and nearly straight. Flowers rather smaller and peduncles shorter.

Mountains on Macalister River, Vic. (B.Fl.). Specimens of this variety from Mount Kosciusko, in our own State, are very glaucous. Leaves 2 inches long, or a little more.

Following is an account of the Mount Kosciusko trees:—The Snow Gum is a small-leaved form of E. coriacea, resembling E. stellulata a good deal in leaf outline, and might be mistaken for it. At low elevations it is a large tree; as the mountain is ascended it becomes smaller and smaller, till at length it becomes a dense whipstick scrub, and finally (at 6,000 feet, about) disappears altogether. It forms the limit of tree vegetation. It is usually as glaucous as if it had been sprinkled with flour, but not invariably so, and at the Jindabyne level it is frequently scarcely glaucous.note

“Forming the ‘Tree line.’—The trees of this species at the highest elevations are remarkable for their bare stems, surmounted with a dome or flattish top of leaves. The bare stems are, doubtless, the consequence of winds, the leaves being concentrated on the top as a thin ‘layer,’ and offering minimum resistance to the wind. These dwarf trees are in masses of a fairly uniform height; a different arrangement would result in the crown of leaves of the smaller plants being beaten against the bare stems of their taller brethren, and denuded of their foliage. The grotesque leaning forms of the stems, like guys or supports to resist wind-pressure, are shown in one of the illustrations. In many cases the butt of the tree forms a huge protuberance at the ground level, taking on a peculiar plastic appearance often seen in the coast districts in E. maculata (Spotted Gum) and Angophora lanceolata (Smooth-barked Apple). In E. coriacea, from this protuberance there spring out as many as four (and even more) stems of equal diameter, such stems being equidistant from each other, or nearly so.”note