previous
next

Affinities.

1. “Near to E. patellaris F.v.M.” (Original description.)

For E. patellaris see Part XXXIX, p. 257, with figs. 7a–d, Plate 163. It is a species very little known, evidently also a Box. Only one authenticated specimen is known, a portion of which is figured. It differs from E. leptophleba in the more strongly marked venation of the leaves and in exsertion of the valves of the fruits. Mueller's statements as to the affinity of the two species, collected by him at nearly the same time, and described by him shortly afterwards, must be respected, and we can say no more until E. patellaris is rediscovered.

2. With E. crebra F.v.M.

Bentham (B. Fl., iii, 221) says that the fragmentary fruiting specimens “appear to me to differ but slightly from E. crebra in the leaves rather thicker and broader, and in the fruits much larger, attaining 4 lines diameter or rather more.” Bentham was referring to what he looked upon as a coarse form of E. crebra named E. drepanophylla, and that form and E. leptophleba have been thoroughly confused, as already indicated. E. crebra is, however, an Ironbark, and E. leptophleba a Box.

I confess I do not see its close affinity at the present time. It is one of the most coarse foliaged of all species of Eucalyptus, and it has very large flowers and fruits for a Box—one with a red timber. Indeed, it seems closer in superficial resemblance of herbarium material to some of the Ironbarks, which has caused the confusion with E. drepanophylla. E. pruinosa, a tropical “Box,” somewhat resembles it in the fruits.

previous
next