no previous
no next

01. Part I

  ― 1 ―

1. A Critical Revision of the Genus Eucalyptus.

A.—Variation in the Genus.

THE genus Eucalyptus is such a large one that a number of schemes have been submitted for dividing it into sections with a view of associating those closely allied, or for arriving at the name of a species with facility. These schemes will be referred to in the bibliography, and I now propose to review each character, from timber to another, to see if any satisfactory scheme can be evolved. In the Proc. Aust. Assoc. for Adv. of Science, Sydney Meeting, 1898, Professor Tatenote and Mr. Luehmannnote simultaneously gave prominence to the use of the fruit for purposes of classification. Both papers take cognizance of other characters as well. Both are the work of men who know the genus, and are valuable contributions to knowledge.

Habit.—Tate defines two habits of growth, viz:—Trees, and shrubby, stocky trees, to which he applies the vernacular names of gums and mallees, names well understood in Australia. He points out that in young plants of the genus there is a large inflation of the base of the stem, either at the surface or just below the surface of the soil. In gums (E. rostrata, leucoxylon, viminalis, &c.) this is eventually outgrown; but in the mallees (incrassata, uncinata, &c.) it persists and increases in size proportionately with the development of the branches which are emitted from it—in the mallee this rudely globose bole is partly subterranean. “The umbrella-like disposition of the foliage of the taller mallees may be largely incidental to overcrowding, though it would seem to be an inherited character, as it is fairly pronounced in them when they are distinctly separated from one another.” This classification is chiefly of practical use in Professor Tate's own State (South Australia) and in Western Australia.

It is, however, very difficult to group the species according to habit. Some are dwarf in their typical forms, but under different circumstances they take on a larger growth. Then, speaking generally, such species as are found in damp situations in good soil are umbrageous trees; such, for example, are stellulaat, aggregata, Macarthuri, but this character is largely a matter of environment. Then some species, e.g., viminalis, have a more or less drooping habit as a rule, but this species is often nearly erect in less congenial soil. And further, to show variation in habit, we have only to point to the Eucalyptus plantations of California and the South of France, where the species are cultivated almost out of recognition.

  ― 2 ―

Bark.—Mueller (Journ. Linn. Soc., iii, 99, 1858) arranged the genus in the following six groups in respect to their barks. With the additional information we have obtained since Mueller's paper was published, we are able to recast his list of examples. It will be found, however, that no two botanists agree as to the sections in which to place some of the species, and as further field-knowledge is available and we know more about the variation of the bark in the same species, the same authority modifies his own lists. See Woolls, “On the classification of the Eucalypts” (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W. (2), vi, 60).

“i. Leiophloiœ.—Cortex post delapsum strati supremi undique laevis. (Vulgo, flooded gum trees, white gum trees, blue gum trees partim, red gum trees partim, yarra trees.)”

Smooth barks (“gums” we call them).—Examples are—E. hœmastoma, tereticornis, rostrata, leucoxylon, viminalis, Gunnii, maculata, latifolia, aspera, stellulata, coriacea, saligna, Behriana, punctata, stricta, fasciculosa.

“ii. Hemiphloiœ.—Cortex in trunci parte inferiore persistens rugosus et rimosus, in parte superiore ramisque delapsu strati superioris laevigatus. (Vulgo, Moreton Bay ash, blackbutted gum tree, box trees partim.)”

Half barks, the barks of the lower part of the trunk persistent and the upper part smooth. Examples are—E. hemiphloia, pilularis, bicolor, longifolia, melliodora, amygdalina, dives. The Moreton Bay Ash (tesselaris) is better in section iii or vi.

“iii. Rhytiphloiœ.—Cortex ubique persistens rugosus et rimosus intus solidus. (Vulgo, bloodwood trees, box trees partim, peppermint trees partim.)”

With wrinkled persistent bark, rather solid. This is an unsatisfactory group, including heterogenous barks. Mueller intended it to include the bloodwoods (corymbosa, eximia, trachyphloia), also bicolor (which is better in ii) and E. microtheca, leptophleba, ferruginea. Odorata, robusta, botryoides may be added, and also Stuartiana, pulverulenta, microcorys, acmenioides, resinifera, polyanthema, populifolia, piperita.

Nos. ii and iii run into each other, and both of them into No. iv.

  ― 3 ―

“iv. Pachyphloiœ.—Cortex ubique persistens rugosus intus fibrosus. (Vulgo, stringybark trees.)”

“Stringybarks,” with persistent, fibrous barks. A good natural group, including eugenioides, capitellata, macrorrhyncha, obliqua, pilularis var. Muelleriana, tetrodonta.

“v. Schizophloiœ.—Cortex ubique persistens profunde sulcatus intus solidus. (Vulgo, ironbark trees.)”

“Ironbarks,” with hard, deeply-furrowed barks. Perhaps the best of all the groups. Examples—E. siderophloia, paniculata, crebra, sideroxylon, melanophloia.

“vi. Lepidophloiœ.—Cortex saltem in trunco persistens lamellaris friabilis. (Vulgo, melaleuca gum trees, mica trees.)”note

With persistent bark on the trunk only, and forming scaly separate pieces. Mueller's examples are miniata (aurantiaca), phœnicea, peltata (melissiodora), to which I would add tesselaris. The Rev. Dr. Woolls (Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.W., vi, 709) ignores section vi, and it certainly cannot be separately maintained as a section.

The cortical classification separates trees that are closely allied, e.g., hemiphloia and Baueriana, the first being a half bark, and the latter having rough bark to the branchlets. Similarly E. pilularis in its normal form has smooth branchlets, while its variety Muelleriana has rough branchlets. It places in juxtaposition those that are not closely related, as will be observed from the examples given under each section. Prominent examples are:—

  • (a) E. paniculata, Sm., and E. fasciculosa, F.v.M.; and
  • (b) E. sideroxylon, A. Cunn., and E. leucoxylon, F.v.M., respectively, nearly alike in leaves, flowers, and fruits, but utterly dissimilar in bark and wood.

Absolute anomalies as regards barks are those of ironbark for E. stellulata, Sieberiana, and viminalis;note a box-like bark for E. tereticornis, and observers will note many other anomalies within their own experience. At the same time, in careful hands, the bark is the most useful character the forester can employ.

Timber.—While the character of a timber is a matter of economic importance, its use in botanical diagnosis is very often overlooked. For many years I have insisted on the examination of the timber wherever possible, and recognition of this character has undoubtedly led to a better understanding of the genus.

  ― 4 ―

Timbers can be classified in different ways, e.g., according to—

  • (1.) Fissility.—Some are fissile, such as stringybarks (E. eugenioides), &c., Mountain ash (E. Sieberiana), Victorian blackbutt (E. regnans), &c. Others are short in the grain, such as many gums, snapping off like a carrot; while others are tough and interlocked, like boxes and ironbarks.
  • (2.) Colour.—In a lecture delivered in 1891 before the Sydney Architectural Association of New South Wales, I divided many of the Eucalyptus timbers into pale hardwoods, subdividing them into three groups—(a) Hard, interlocked; (b) Fissile; (c) Inferior, such as Gums; which is a useful practical classification. In my “Notes on the Commercial Timbers of New South Wales,” (1895), I submitted the classification—1. Ironbarks. 2. Pale hardwoods. 3. Red hardwoods.

1. Gums.—These timbers are short in the grain; dry to a brown or reddish colour; crack radially in drying; have many gum-veins; and, as a rule, lack durability. Their barks are smooth, and more or less ribbony. Examples—stellulata, coriacea, hœmastoma, viminalis, Gunnii. They connect with the “Boxes” (Bastard), and also with the smooth-barked members of the Jarrah group.

2. Mallees.—Examples—oleosa, Behriana, incrassata. This is a group based on geographical considerations. They are arid country species, and connect the “Gums” and “Red Boxes.”

3. Ironbarks.—These are fully described in my “Notes on the Commercial Timbers of New South Wales.” They consist of—

  • (a) True Ironbarks, viz., paniculata, siderophloia, crebra, sideroxylon.
  • (b) Bastard Ironbarks.—Timbers very similar to ironbarks, but the barks belonging to the “Box” group. They include Boormani and affinis. Melanophloia, and, perhaps, microtheca connect the two groups.

4. Boxes.—These are tough, interlocked timbers, usually with fibrous bark on the trunk, and may be subdivided into—

  • (a) Pale.—Examples—Hemiphloia, melliodora, Bosistoana, Baueriana, populifolia, quadrangulata, Cambagei, goniocalyx, tesselaris, leucoxylon, corynocalyx, globulus.
  • (b) Red.—Examples—bicolor, microtheca, polyanthema, odorata, fasciculosa.

These two groups include some smooth barks or “Gums,” but their timbers are provisionally classified with the “Boxes.”

  • (c) Bastard.—Examples—Stuartiana, pulverulenta, Macarthuri, aggretata. The timber of (c) is inferior, and closely resembles that of the “Gums.”

  ― 5 ―

5. Stringybark Group.—This includes a number of fissile timbers that pass into each other, and may be subdivided as follows:—

  • (a) True Stringybarks.—Examples—eugenioides, macrorrhyncha, capitellata, obliqua, Baileyana.
  • (b) Blackbutts.—Examples—pilularis (which absolutely connects with the Stringybarks through its variety Muelleriana), acmenioides. These are the most valuable timbers of the group.
  • (c) Peppermints.—Examples—amygdalina, regnans, dives, piperita. These timbers have gum-veins, and are altogether inferior in quality.

Allied to these is the—

6. Mountain Ash Group.—Fissile timbers usually pale in colour, and with bark not so fibrous as the preceding. Examples—Sieberiana, Planchoniana, virgata and its varieties, Risdoni, cordata.

7. Tallow-wood and Spotted Gum.—microcorys and maculata (two valuable pale-coloured timbers), sui-generis.

8. Bloodwoods.—These have gum-veins, and are coarse-grained; corymbosa, is red, and eximia and trachyphloia, which are pale, connect with maculata.

9. Jarrah Group.—Containing a number of heterogenous species, and which I name after the best-known member. Some have fibrous barks, others are smooth; but they are all deep-red, durable timbers. Examples—marginata, resinifera, diversicolor, propinqua, punctata, saligna, botryoides, robusta, tereticornis, rostrata, longifolia.

This group connects with the Red Boxes.

The timber of the same species varies a good deal according to the soil and situation, and our knowledge does not yet enable us to discriminate between some timbers not closely allied botanically. In other words, a man who professes to discriminate between all species of timber attempts the impossible.

Exudations.—In Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., 1890, I proposed examination of the kinos as an aid in the diagnosis of eucalypts, and I divided them into three groups according to their behaviour in water or alcohol (spirit).

1. Ruby Group.—Consisting of ruby-coloured kinos, soluble in water and alcohol in all proportions. Examples are—all Renantheræ except microcorys.

2. Gummy Group.—Soluble in water, but insoluble in alcohol owing to the gum they contain. Examples—the ironbarks.

3. Turbid Group.—These kinos are soluble in hot water or hot alcohol, but deposit sediments on cooling. Examples—most of the Parallelantheræ. This

  ― 6 ―
section, however, includes heterogeneous substances, and brings together species little allied. It is doubtless capable of further elaboration, but only serves to accentuate variation in the genus. Some kinos, e.g., E. maculata, are characteristic in appearance, having an olive-green colour; perhaps also that of E. corymbosa, of an intense, almost vermilion colour.

An exudation of less importance is that of Manna. A number of species exude saccharine substances from the leaves and, a very few, from the trunk. The list is being added to slowly, but in most cases the mannas are mere scientific curiosities, and of little value in a scheme of classification. They include viminalis, Gunnii, punctata, pulverulenta, Stuartiana.

Petiole.—D. McAlpine and J. R. Remfrey, in Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., 1890, published a paper entitled, “The transverse sections of petioles of Eucalypts as aids in the determination of species.” The method of classification on the comparatively few experiments made is ingenious, but of little practical value to us for diagnosis, thousands of sections being required in order to obtain data for generalisation. The paper is, however, of more than ordinary value, and is well worthy of perusal.

Leaf.—(a) Suckers. De Candolle (Prodromus, vol. iii, 1828), classified eucalypts according to the opposite or alternate character of the leaves, a character of special importance at that time, since species were often described from seedlings grown in pots. Field observations have, however, shown that all species have opposite leaves in at least an early stage. In seedlings this is best observed, but in many cases suckers show the character quite as well. In a few species, e.g., gamophylla, this opposite-leaved character persists through life. In many cases the young leaves are broad, and become alternate and narrower, with a lanceolate or falcate shape as maturity is reached. Often these young leaves are glaucous, becoming glabrous as growth proceeds. But there is a group in which the seedling and sucker leaves are narrow. Such species include amygdalina, pilularis, viminalis.

The list is, however, so incomplete that it is impossible at present to use them as a broad basis of classification. For diagnostic purposes, I personally use the shape of the young leaf wherever possible; it is an atavistic character, and data are accumulating by which we shall be in a better position to interpret it.

The difference between suckers and mature leaves has been studied in Europe for many years, although in Eucalyptus the systematic comparison of such forms is of comparatively recent data. It is of practical importance to the Australian forester, for the reason that the occurrence of these young or sucker leaves is so very frequent in the bush.

When a trunk is injured, new shoots make their appearance either from the “eyes” in the stem or from reserve buds of the branches and twigs, or by buds produced from the roots below the ground. The leaves of these shoots, or suckers, as they are called, differ very much from the stems or branches which have been broken, eaten, cut, or frozen off.

  ― 7 ―

Instances of differences are given, and it is added:—

Hundreds of trees and shrubs might be mentioned in which there is a distinct difference between the foliage of the suckers and of the normal branches of the crown. (Kerner and Oliver, ii, 515–6.)

Nor has the description of species and varieties from suckers or seedling leaves been confined to writers on Eucalyptus:—

Gardeners and descriptive botanists have frequently determined and described mutilated plants as other species, hybrids, or varieties. They are neither the one nor the other. The peculiar appearance of the altered members, resulting from mutilation, is exactly determined before hand in each species; it is due to the specific constitution of the species, and thus is part of its being. It is not produced by the external influences which lead to the formation of the varieties, but is brought about by inherent necessity quite independent of the influence of climate and soil. (Op. cit., ii, 518.)

Practically all the researches on the anatomy of Eucalyptus leaves have been made on those of the readily available E. globulus, in which species both sucker and mature leaves are readily available. The most complete research is the masterly paper of G. Briosi.note See also a study by H. Pocklington.note

Then Henslownote says:—

The chief differences between the two forms of leaves I find to be as follows:—In the horizontal leaf the upper epidermis is composed of small cells, and there are no stomata. There is a palisade tissue of one layer of cells, with lax mesophyll below the lower epidermis. This latter has larger cells than the upper, and is provided with stomata. The pendulous leaf is a good deal thicker than the horizontal. Both epidermides are provided with a very dense cuticle, in which the stomata are deep-seated. There are four rows of palisade cells on both sides, with a chlorophyllous mesophyll between them. The petiole is flattened so that the leaf can swing much in the same way as that of the poplar.

A useful paper by Dr. Albert Schneidernote speaks of the sucker (“dorsiventral”) leaves with palisade cells on the upper side and stomata on the under side only. The mature leaves, “isolateral leaves or phyllodes,” take a vertical position with the convex edge directed upward. The epidermis is alike on both sides. It will be observed that his results do not agree with those of Henslow;—evidence of variation. The anatomical characters of the leaves of Eucalyptus offer, however, much room for research. See “Stomata,” p. 8.

(b) Cotyledon leaves.—The shape of the cotyledon leaves we know less about, and data are being collected. The work has been hindered because of the difficulty of obtaining seed from certain interesting forms. Mueller's Eucalyptographia and Lubbock's “A contribution to our knowledge of seedlings,” form the basis of our present available information on the subject.

Other characters of Eucalyptus leaves we require to know more about are their size, texture, and prominence of venation. They are minor characters, and some species present much variation in this respect.

  ― 8 ―

(c) Venation.—Messrs. Baker and Smith, in Proc. Roy. Soc. of N.S.W., 1901, have grouped certain Eucalyptus leaves into sections in regard to the disposition of their veins, pointing out that the oil-content of the leaves can in a measure be gauged from the venation. The suggestion is ingenious; but as the venation is, like other characters, variable within such large limits, the method will only be practically useful in the hands of experts.

(d) Young stems.—Some eucalypts have marked quadrangular stems, e.g., globulus, Maideni, goniocalyx, quadrangulata, tetragona, and many others; but, as a rule, this quadrangular appearance, often well marked at an early stage of growth, passes away as growth proceeds.

(e) Essential oil.—The perfume of Eucalyptus leaves is owing to the presence of an oil. It varies in different species in regard to both character and amount. In young it is commonly more abundant than in mature foliage, the high proportion of resinous matter in the former being, however, a drawback to distillation. In some cases the perfume is not easy to define, but the crushing of the fresh or even dried leaves in the warm hand has been used as a diagnostic character for many years. It affords a rough but ready test, which is always available and really valuable in skilled hands. Incidentally it may be mentioned that some few leaves, e.g., corymbosa, contain a substance allied to caoutchouc in their tissues, especially in their young state.

Some years ago, when Superintendent of Technical Education, I determined to ascertain whether this qualitative test of Eucalyptus odour was capable of leading up to further results. Accordingly I obtained samples of commercial Eucalyptus oils, and also watched their distillation in the country, but found, as a general rule, that the various kinds of leaves were not rigidly kept apart. I therefore resolved, with the advice of Dr. T. L. Bancroft, of Brisbane, and the active co-operation of Mr. Owen Blackett, C.E., of the Technical College, to erect a model still capable of holding large charges of leaves, and to distil only those leaves obtained by my own collector or through agencies which permitted their origin to be precisely checked from a botanical point of view. In this way, and in this way only, could Eucalyptus oils of many species, absolutely true to name, be obtained for research. My transfer to the Botanic Gardens removed me from this domain of botanical technology, and the work thus initiated has been continued and extended by my late assistants, Messrs. Baker and Smith.

(f) Stomata.—Mueller, in Eucalyptographia, under E. pachyphylla and E. phœnicea, has classified some of the eucalypts according to the number and distribution of the stomata. He styles the leaves—

  • 1. Hypogenous, according to the presence of stomata on the under surface only.
  • 2. Heterogenous, according to their presence on both surfaces, but less numerous above than below.

  •   ― 9 ―
  • 3. Isogenous, when they are present on both surfaces, but approximately equal in number above and below. “This almost equal distillation of the stomata coincides with the similarity of the colour of both sides of the leaves.”

This method cannot, however, be used for diagnostic purposes with any degree of certainty, because of the variation in the distribution of stomata even in the same tree.

Galls.—At one time I inclined to the opinion that the shapes of the leaf-galls in Eucalyptus would be a useful character for classification. Mr. W. W. Froggatt, who has of late years been giving special attention to Brachyscelidæ, finds that the same insect frequents so many species that no general grouping of the trees based on their galls can be made.

Inflorescence.—Professor Tate points out that the usual form of inflorescence is an umbel which, by lengthening of the axis, passes to the panicle or corymb. The transition from one to the other is so easy, he goes on to remark, and often exemplified in the same tree, that it is obvious the form of the inflorescence is not reliable as a specific character. Bentham had previously drawn attention to the unsatisfactory character of the arrangement of the inflorescence from the point of view of the systematist. Naudin's grouping (second memoir) of fifty-six species (or reputed species) known to him as growing in the gardens of Provence, is mainly based on the inflorescence, but also depends on the fruits and leaves. It doubtless was of local value, but it is based on characters which present so much variation as to preclude its general application.

Following is an abstract in Gardeners' Chronicle, 7th February, 1891:—

Section I.—Inflorescence in cymes or axillary umbels.

Capsules longer than the calyx tube.

Capsules shorter than the calyx tube.

  • (a) Cymes 3-flowered.
    • Leaves uniform, opposite.
    • Leaves uniform, alternate.
    • Leaves of two shapes.
  • (b) Cymes of 3 to 7 or more flowered. Cymes 7-flowered.
    • Leaves uniform opposite.
    • Leaves of two shapes, opposite at first.
    • Leaves uniform, always alternate.
  • (c) Cymes or umbels, axillary, more than 7-flowered.
    • Leaves uniform.
    • Leaves of two shapes.

Section II.—Flowers in terminal panicles or corymbs.

Flowers.—With reference to individual flowers, there is much variation in the number of flowers in an umbel, and, to a less extent, in the colour of their filaments. The colour in the vast majority of species is white or cream, but in a few species, e.g., leucoxylon, sideroxylon, viminalis, ficifolia, calophylla, pyriformis, it may be

  ― 10 ―
pink also. In some species, e.g., ficifolia, miniata, phœnicea, it may be red, even a vermilion or orange-red. In a few species, e.g., pilularis, the filaments of dried flowers turn red in course of time.

The pedicel is normally rounded, but owing to compression it is very often strap-shaped, as in botryoides, and extreme cases are afforded by obcordata (platypus) and occidentalis.

Flower-bud.—The shape of the operculum was first used as a classification character by Willdenow in his Species Plantarum, 1799. He divided the twelve species then known into two groups—“operculo conico” and “operculo hemisphaerico.” It is undoubtedly a useful character for the purpose, but variable, like everything else about Eucalyptus. E. tereticornis is usually looked upon as a species to be diagnosed by its operculum, but (Bull. Herb. Boissier, 1902, 579), I have shown that this character breaks down completely as between that species and E. rostrata. E. capitellata and E. macrorrhyncha were at one time separated by their opercula, but they pass into each other as regards those organs. As this work progresses it will be obvious how very variable the operculum is. At the same time, it will always remain, in the hands of a judicious observer, one of the most practically useful diagnostic characters we have.

Some species possess a double operculum, or membranous bract, enveloping the whole of the young inflorescence. It was first observed by Robert Brown (see his description of Eudesmia tetragona), but a few years ago it was only recorded from a very few species. In some it is very early deciduous and in others infrequent; but I have observed it in such a large number of species that I am inclined to the opinion that extended research will show that it occurs in all. Brown's and Jussieu's interesting observations on the single and double operculum will be found supplementary to the former's description of Eudesmia tetragona (Bot. App. to Flinders' Voyage).

Anther.—Bentham (Flora Australiensis) first grouped species according to the shape and mode of dehiscence of the anthers. He made five groups, but laid no stress on the importance of the dehiscence on the top on the anther. He, however, alludes (B.Fl. iii, 186) to “truncate” anthers, and at page 189 to the truncate anthers of E. leucoxylon. Mueller, finding that Bentham's five groups could not be separately maintained, reduced them to three, viz.:—

Renantherœ, the anthers large and the cells divergent at the base.

This section mostly includes the stringybarks, although it includes several white gums,—plants otherwise very different.

Porantherœ, the anthers small and opening in pores.

This section mostly includes boxes and some mallees, and includes the silver-leaved ironbark (melanophloia), while E. crebra, which is very closely allied to it, is placed in another section.

  ― 11 ―

Parallelantherœ, the cells parallel, and the longitudinal slits consequently parallel.

This section comprises the remainder of the eucalypts, and a most heterogeneous and extensive collection they are, variable in many ways.

As a matter of fact, the anthers refuse to be rigidly marshalled into sections. They sometimes display such variation of divergence of shape of cell, size, and mode of dehiscence, that classification on the anthers alone becomes a matter of difficulty.

In the old collections, the difficulty is enhanced through the partiality of insects for these organs; nevertheless, examination of the anthers is always carried out by me, and it is a most useful character.

Pollen-grains.—Mueller (Eucalyptographia, under E. erythrocorys) has shown that the size of pollen-grains varies in different species, but we require very many more measurements than are available, to be in a position to place any interpretation upon the results. The shape of the pollen-grains also varies, but we have few data on the subject.

Calyx.—The calyx, “cupula” of De Candolle and other botanists, the “hypanthium” of Schauer, is no longer used for classification purposes, having been proved to be so utterly variable. De Candolle (and his translator, G. Don) offered a classification of the eucalypts consisting of opposite or alternate leaves combined with a comparison of the size of operculum with cupula.

Fruit.—While many botanists have more or less used the fruit as a diagnostic character in Eucalyptus, and it is undoubtedly the best character we have, it is due to Professor Tate to say that (op. cit.) he was the first to submit a scheme for classification of the genus based on the fruits alone. He deals with (a) shape; (b) external sculpture and ornament; (c) capsular teeth; (d) capsule cells; (e) fertile seeds. But examination of Professor Tate's scheme shows (through no fault of his) how very imperfect and full of exceptions it is. Taking item by item we find the shape in each species to vary within wide limits. The truth of this will be observed in contemplation even of the single species, E. pilularis, dealt with in this part. Personally, I very largely use the fruit (unripe fruits may be very misleading) for diagnostic purposes; but in many cases it must be carefully used, for it displays an enormous amount of variation. This much is proved, and I go further and say that some fruits only appear to have an approximately constant shape because we have so much to learn in regard to the range of the species and consequent possibilities of variation. Of course, I at once admit the fact that some species are “stronger” than others.

To sum up, for herbarium work the anthers and fruits are the best characters to go by; for the scientific forester, the bark and the timber; but all characters display a puzzling amount of variation.

  ― 12 ―

B.—Doubtful Species.

THE following list includes doubtful species and perhaps some nomina nuda. Some of them are probably indeterminable, and I trust that further inquiry will be made into them. It is quite possible that some of these so-called species of Eucalyptus may prove to belong to other Myrtaceous genera.

1. E. alata, Hort. Ex G. Don in Loud. Hort. Brit., p. 198 (1830). New Holland, 1816.

I cannot trace a description.

2. E. albicans, F.v.M. The seedlings are described in Fragm., vii, 42, in the following words:—“Caulis laevis, fere teres; folia rigidula, sparsa, brevipetiolata, cordato-v. orbiculato-ovata, acutiuscula, 1½–2½? longa, 1?–2? lata.”

I cannot ascertain where the species itself was described.

3. E. albicaulis, Hort. Ex G. Don in Loud. Hort. Brit., p. 198 (1830). New Holland, 1810.

Does not appear to have been described.

4. E. alpina, Hort. “Native of Mt. Wellington, V.D.L.” (Tasmania). Loudon's “Trees and Shrubs of Britain,” p. 2567 (vol. iv.).

5. E. cotinifolia, Lodd. Ex G. Don in Loud. Hort. Brit., p. 198 (1830).

I cannot trace a description.

6. E. curvula, Sieb. “Operculo conico, pedunculis sub-3 floris incrassatis compressis divaricatis, foliis inaequaliter oblongo-lanceolatis acutis.” (Spreng. Syst., iv, Cur. Post. 195.) “The short diagnosis equally applicable to several species.” (Benth.)

7. E. deglupta, Blume. Following is the original description:—

“207. Eucalyptus deglupta, Bl., ramulis compresso-tetragonis marginatis; foliis sparsis (plerumque alternis) breviter petiolatis ovato-lanceolatis acuminatis basi acutiusculis coriaceis glabris penninerviis subtus tenuissime reticulatis.—Populus? deglubata, Herb. Rwdt.—Arbor excelsa, corticem resinosum aromaticum per magnas laminas delibrans; ramulis nonnihil flexuosis, siccis obscure rubiginosis, pruinosis, glanduloso-punctatis, glabris. Folia alterna v. passim opposita, patentia, petiolis 3-5 lin. longis instructa, 4½-7 poll. longa,

  ― 13 ―
1¾–2? poll. lata, longe acuminata, sicca supra obscure fusca, subtus flavofuscescentia et nervo medio venisque prominentibus ramulis concoloribus.—In sylvis montanis Celebes.” (Blume, Mus. Bat. Lugd. Bat., vol. i, p. 83, 1849.)

It was therefore, as Bentham states (Journ. Linn. Soc., x, 143), described from a Celebes specimen in leaf only, which Blume found in Reinwardt's collection under the doubtful name of Populus? deglubata.

Following is Reinwardt's amplified account of the supposed species:—

“103. E.? deglupta, Bl. Ramulis compresso-tetragonis foliis ovato-oblongis, acuminatis, integerrimis, glaberrimis, coriaceis, petiolo et nervis primariis flavis, graveolentibus, pellucido-punctatis.” Insula Celebes sec. Reinwardtii sched. mss. E. deglupta, Bl., Mus. Bot., i, p. 83. Miq. flor. ind., p. 398.

An revera Eucalyptus? Affirmare certo non audeo. Reinwardtii schedulae herbarii haec habent adscripta:—

“1516. Populus deglubata (dein); Eucalyptus deglubata, Bl. Sylvae Celebicae prope Pogowat., m., Sept., 1821.”

“1516. Habitat in sylvis insulæ Celebes, prope flumina Pogowat., Taludujunam, etc. Tambuli-lato incolis Celebicis dicitur. Arbor Populi instar balsamea.”

In relatione itineris Reinwardtii in insula Celebe haec de hac arbore adnotata lego. “Die veneris, qui erat duode-trigesimus, m., Sept., 1821., Pogowattam reliqui, iter facturus in loca ubi aurum colligitur, nempe versus Taludujunam. Inter alias arbores, quas vidi, una erat species trunco excelso, crasso instructa atque ad basin expansionibus laminaribus undique se expandens, vulgo epidermide destituta, glaberrima et versicolor quod superficiem attinet. Horum truncorum unum securi percutere jussi et visa mihi est haec arbor esse populi species, cujus magna est cum Populo balsamea analogia, tum quod attinet folia, tum vero luxuriem incrementi ramorum, flavicantem colorem petiolorum, ruborem ramorum et foliorum novellorum, sed maxime etiam propter odorem balsamicum quem folia juniora, ubi fricantur, spargunt.”

Haec in sylvis Celebicis notavit jam beatus Reinwardtius. Quodsi in museo suo Lugduno-Batavo stirpem Celebicam examinavisset et si lentis augmenti ope eam conspexisset, nullus dubito quin folia pellucido-punctata botanico praestantissimo istiusmodi determinationem protinus dissuasissent.

Cel. Reinwardt de planta illa haec adnovit. “1516. Eucalyptus? deglupta, Bl., Mus. 1, p. 82. Diospyros? P. foliis ovato-oblongis, acuminatis, integerrimis, glaberrimis. Arbor egregia, excelsa, protinus e longinquo dignoscitur trunco erecto, altissimo, deglubato, id est, epidermide plerumque exuto, variegato, flavo-virente, nudo. Cortex ipse tenuis est, intus (quod lignum) alba. Rami habent folia alterna; ramuli ultimi alato-tetragoni sunt. Folia breviter sunt petiolata, crassa, coriacea, petiolis et nervo primario flavis. Foliorum et ramulorum contritorum odor est fortis, balsamicus,—Populi balsamiferae. Hanc ob causam, tum vero etiam propter habitum, ramosque juniores quadrangulares, turiones rubentes resinosos cet., praeterea etiam ob celere incrementum, Populum esse suspicor. Lignum est molle, inutile, populorum ligne simile. Folia optime descripsit Cl. Blume, 1 c., p. 83.” (Reinwardt in de Vriese Pl. Ind. Bat. Or., p. 65.)

  ― 14 ―

8. E. flexilis, Regel.

“Eucalyptus flexilis, Rgl., Ramossima; ramis ramulisque flexuosis, teretibus, verruculosis; foliis alternis, anguste lineari-lanceolatis, plus minus falcatis, integerrimus apice acuminatis v. subuncinatis; umbellis lateralibus, 5-8-floris; operculo conico, capsula tenuiore et eadem circiter duplo longiore.

“Ein neuer Eucalyptus aus Neu-holland. Stark verästelt. Aeste und Aestchen hin und her gebogen, stielrund, mit Wärzchen besetzt. Blätter abwechselnd, schmal linien-lanzettlich, mehr oder weniger sichelförmig, ganzrandig, an der Spitze zugespitzt und zuweilen hakenförmig, 2½-3 Zoll lang, 1/10-? Zoll breit, am Grund in den Blattstiel verschmälert, lederartig, punktirt, einnervig oder ausser dem Mittelnerven mit 2 undeutlichen Seitennerven. Blüthendolden seitenständig, zerstreut oder mehrere zusammengedrängt, 5-8 blumig. Blüthenstiel ¼ Zoll lang, aufrecht, wie die Blüthenstielchen unmerklich zusammengedrückt und mit kleinen Wärzchen besetzt. Blüthenstielchen ungefähr ? Zoll lang; so lang als die Kelchröhre. Der Deckel des Kelches kegelförmig, röthlich, glatt, zweimal so lang als die Kelchröhre und schmäler als dieselbe, Blumen mittelgross, weiss.

“Schöner Kalthausstrauch aus Neu-holland, der, gleich den andern Eucalyptus-Arten, in eine mit Lehm versetzte Heideerde gepflanzt wird.

“Steht dem E. linearis, Dehnh. und E. faloata, Turcz. zunächst. Der erstere derselben unterscheidet sich durch drüsigen Deckel, glatte Aeste und schwach gezähnte Bïtter; der andere durch herabgebogene Blüthenstiele, die viel länger als die Blattstiele, und einen spitzen Deckel, der 4 mal länger als die Kelchröhre. (E.R.)” Regel in Gartenflora, vii, 284 (1858).

Following is a translation:—“A new Eucalyptus from New Holland. Much branched. Branches and branchlets flexuous, terete, covered with warts. Leaves alternate, narrow linear-lanceolate, more or less falcate, the margins entire, the point acuminate and occasionally hooked, 2½ to 3 inches long, -1/10 to ? of an inch broad, the base narrowed into a petiole, of leathery texture, punctate, one-nerved or with two indistinct side-nerves beside the mid-rib. Umbels of flowers lateral, scattered or several crowded together, with 5 to 8 flowers. Peduncle ¼ of an inch long, erect, slightly compressed as well as the pedicels, and covered with small warts. Pedicels about ? of an inch long, as long as the calyx-tube. Operculum conical, reddish, smooth, twice as long as the calyx-tube and narrower. Flowers of middle-size, white.

“A beautiful green-house shrub from New Holland, which, like the other species of Eucalyptus, should be planted in a loamy, heathy soil.

“It is nearest allied to E. linearis, Dehnh., and E. falcata, Turcz. The former is distinguished by its warty operculum, smooth branches, and slightly dentate

  ― 15 ―
leaves; the latter by the peduncles being bent down and much longer than the petioles, and by the pointed operculum, which is 4 times as long as the calyx-tube.”

The juxtaposition of E. linearis and E. falcata shows that the description has probably been based on horticultural considerations.

9. E. glauca, Hoffmg.

“(164.) Eucalyptus glauca. Synonymon absolute nullum reperio. Simillimus est E. piperitae, ut eundem diceres; at vere differre videtur diutius observata foliorum acumine parumper magis producto, substantiâ multo magis rigidâ et coriaceâ (fere ut fol. Lauri nobilis, vel Citri medicae), quod in E.p. non ita.” (Hoffmannsegg, Verz. Pfl. Nachtr., p. 215.)

The name glauca was a favourite both with botanists and horticulturists during the first half of the 19th century, and before it was realised that so many species are glaucous at one period or another of their growth. Following is an instance of its use by Allan Cunningham in his Journal, dated 17th August, 1817, when near Bathurst from the west.

“A species of Eucalyptus (glauca), with conical blunt deciduous operculum and angular umbel of flowers, forming a tree 30 or 40 feet high is frequent, and being now in flower induced me to gather specimens.”

10. E. moluccana, Roxb.

“Lid conical, shorter than the calyx. Panicles lateral, compressed of peduncled heads, of 6 or 7 flowers. Leaves alternate, petioled, lanceolate, entire, firm and polished.

“A native of the Molucca Islands, differing from all the species described by Dr. Smith in the 3rd Vol. of the Transactions of the Linnean Society, in having lateral panicles, composed of heads of 6 or 7 sessile flowers.” (Fl. Ind. ii, 498; Hort. Beng., 92.)

E. moluccana, Roxb., described from a tree in the Calcutta Garden, said to be a native of the Moluccas, but without any record as to when or by whom introduced, and I cannot find that any drawing or specimen has been preserved. Miquel refers it to E. alba, but that is mere guess work, and Roxburgh's short description is quite at variance with that species.” (Benth. Journ. Linn. Soc., x, 142.)

11. E. myrtifolia, Link.

“224. E. myrtifolia. Fol. pet. 3-4? longo, lamina cum pet. 2' longa, 1' lata acuta reticulata, nervis in margine connexis, punctata. Hab. in Australia. Non floruit.” (Link's Enum. Hort. Berol., ii, 30; DC. Prod. iii, 222.)

“Very doubtful.” (Bentham.)

  ― 16 ―

12. E. nervosa, Hoffmg.

“(165.) Eucalyptus nervosa. Foliis oppositis alternatisque petiolatis ovato-oblongisacuminatis uninerviis costato-venosis marginatis subrepandiusculis glabris (4–5' lg., 2–2½' lt.). (Hoffmg. Verz. Pfl. Nachtr., p. 215.)

E. nervosa, F.v.M., is E. obliqua, L'Herit.

13. E. oppositifolia, Desf., “à feuill opposées N. Holl. or.” (Desf. Tabl. Ecol. Bot. Ed. 1, 1804, p. 222.) I cannot trace any ampler description.

14. E. orbicularis, Lodd.

15. E. phillyreoides, Lodd. Both ex G. Don in Loud. Hort. Brit., p. 198 (1830). I cannot trace any description.

16. E. reticulata, Link.

“215. E. reticulata, Fol. lanceolata subfalcata acuminata basi subovata obliqua 6–7' lga., 2' et ultra lata, subtus reticulatim venosa. Hab. in Australia. Nondum floruit. Nervi foliorum subtus non paralleli ut in pr.” (Link's Enum. Hort. Berol., ii, 29; DC. Prod. iii, 222.)

“Very doubtful.” (Bentham.)

17. E. robusta, Hoffmg.

“(433.) Eucalyptus robusta. In Syn. ap. Willd. Sp. Pl. pedunculi compressi quidem dicuntur, et in mea (versus apicem) depressi sunt; at cogitans, plerosque scriptores hediernos terminorum veram acceptionem parum curare, puto, quod et hic compressus pro depresso sumtum sit, et hoc scrupulo (licet per se gravissimo) non morabor. Necesse est se temporibus accommodare. (!) Caeterum et aliae spp. tales habent petiolos. Certitudinem vero definitionis ullius EE. Sp. nemo acquiret, nisi qui opercula viderit, quum pleraeque aliae partes, quibus plantae vulgo distingui solent, vix memoratae sint; quod igitur in plurimis manet ‘seros nepotes.’

“Caulis teres, asper, cum petiolo < 6? lg., nervoque primario supra, purpurascens. Folia coriacea, asperula, ad lentem punctis numerosissimis minutis, secus lucem albidis, contra eam pellucidis, tuberculisque rarioribus majoribus depressi subglabratis.” (Hoffmg. Verz. Pfl. Nachtr., ii, p. 115.)

18. E. Sarassa, Blume.

“209. Eucalyptus Sarassa, Bl. Kaju Sarassa Rumph. Herb. Amb. iii, p. 122. In montanis Moluccarum.” (Mus. Bot. Lugd. Bat., i, 84, 1849.)

“ ‘Founded on Rumphius’ incidental mention of the Sarassa tree in the same article (see E. versicolor), all three species, this,—versicolor and deglupta, conjecturally referred by Blume to Eucalyptus on account of their resinous bark, described as detaching itself in particles.” (Benth., Journ. Linn. Soc., x, 143.)

  ― 17 ―

19. E. stenophylla, Link.

“226. E. stenophylla. Fol. linearia basi attenuata obtusiuscula venosa punctata nervis ante marginem connexis. Hab. in Australia. Fol. pet. 4? lgo., lamina 3' lga, 4? lata.” (Link's Enum. Hort. Berol., ii, 30; DC. Prod. iii, 222.)

“Very doubtful.” (Bentham.)

20. E. tuberculata, Parm.

“Parm. h. engh. ex Otto hort. Berol. foliis oppositis sessilibus, amplexicaulibus oblongo-linearibus acutis membranaceis glabris, ramis filiformibus tuberculatis. In Nova-Hollandia v.s. sine fl.” (DC. Prod. iii, 221.)

“Very doubtful.” (Bentham.)

21. E. turbinata, Page.

By name only in Page's Prodromus, 1818. I cannot trace where, if at all, it was described.

22. E. undulata, Hort.

23. E. verrucosa, Hort. Both ex. G. Don in Loud. Hort. Brit. p. 198 (1830).

New Holland, 1820. I cannot trace the description, if any.

24. E. versicolor, Blume.

“(208.) Eucalyptus versicolor, Bl., foliis sparsis v. sub-oppositis breviter petiolatis ovato-lanceolatis acuminatis basi acutiusculis coriaceis glabris penninerviis. Arbor versicolor Rumph. Herb. Amb., iii, p. 122, tab. 53. Ay-alla Amboinensium. Truncus strictus, altissimus; cortice tenui, laevigato, albido, in lamellas secedente excellentem gerens colorem ex rubro luteo et viridi variegatum, qui e longinquo iridis colorem refert. Folia 5 poll. longa, 2 poll. lata, laurina, nervo medio subtus argute prominente, sicca supra nigricantia. In Moluccis.” (Blume, Mus. Bot. Ludg. Bat., vol. i, 1849, p. 84.)

From the Moluccas, taken up from Rumphius' description and rude figure of Arbor versicolor Ay-alla (Herb. Amb., iii, p. 122, t. 80, not t. 53, which is an Eugenia) without flowers or fruit.” (Bentham, Journ. Linn. Soc., x, 143.)

“44. Eucalyptus, nov. sp. ramulis rubellis, etc., e specimine incompleto non describenda. Van Diemen's Land (Stuart n. 19).” Miq. in Ned. Kruidk. Arch., iv, 141 (1856).

I have not been able to see a specimen of Stuart's No. 19 from Tasmania, so that I cannot say if it would be possible to express an opinion as to the species to which it belongs.

  ― 18 ―

C.—Non-Eucalypts described as Eucalypts.

THE following non-Eucalypts have been described or referred to as Eucalyptus.

The following three specimens are from Herb. Vindob:—

1. E. saligna, Hort. Berlin (labelled E. saligna, Sm.).

2. Metrosideros saligna (in 18th century handwriting).

3. Eucalyptus resinifera, Hort. Argentorat et Nessler (sic.) ded. Sept., 1828.

These are all Agonis flexuosa, DC.

The prominent wing on the young branchlets of the var. latifolia is often very faint on the common narrow-leaved form, but always discernible. Bentham omits this character in Fl. Aust.

4. E. microphylla, Willd.

E. microphylla, W.E., 515. Fol. pet, 4? longo, lamina 1' 4? lga. 4? lata, apice falcata, in ramulis conferta parva.” (Link's Enum. Hort. Berol., 225.)

Bentham says this is probably not a Eucalyptus at all. I have seen a specimen (in leaf only) in Herb. Vindob. doubtfully referred to this species, and I agree with him.

5. Sieber's No. 471.

E. hispida, Sm. De la Nouvelle Hollande. No. 471, M. Sieber, 1825,” in Herb. Barbey-Boissier is Angophora cordifolia, Cav.

6. E. hirsuta, Link.

“229. E. hirsuta. Foliis subpetiolatis cordatis obtusis, subtus nervis pubescentibus ramis pedunculisque strigosis. Hab. in Australia. Rami strigis longis densis rubescentibus patentibus. Fol. petiolo brevissimo, lamina 3' lga., 1' 6? lata, juniora pubescentia rubescentia, adultiora subtus tantum in nervis pubescentia discolora. Pedunculi 1' longi triflori, pedicelli 8? longi. Operculum hemisphaericum.” (Link's Enumeratio Hort. Berol., ii, 31.) This is Angophora cordifolia Cav.

  ― 19 ―

7. E. media, Link.

“219. E. media. Fol. pet. 6? longo, lamina lanceolata longe acuminata basi subovata obliqua, lata angustieraque 6-7? lga, 1' 2? ad 2' lata, subtus nervis parallelis. Hab. in Australia, non floruit.” (Enum. Hort. Berol., ii, 30; DC. Prod. iii, 222.)

Specimens in Herb. Vindob. in flower, labelled “Eucalyptus media, Link., Ferd. Bauer, Hb. Bauer” are Angophora lanceolata, Cav.

8. “1846, No. 397. ‘Apple-tree Eucalyptus,’ sub-tropical New Holland. Lieut.-Col. Sir T. L. Mitchell,” Herb. Cant. ex Herb. Lindl. is Angophora intermedia, DC., with lanceolate leaves, also with broad cordate leaves (suckers).

9. E. rubricaulis. “Ramis asperis; ramulis filiformibus; foliis alternis, angustolanceolatis acutis petiolatis. Folia uncias 2-3 longa, lineas 3 lata.” (Desf. Cat. Pl. Hort. Par., ed. 3, 1829, p. 408; also, Dehnh. Cat. Pl. Hort. Camald., ed. 2, p. 20.)

A specimen in leaf only. “Eucalyptus rubricaulis, Desf. ex hort Celsiano, Paris, 1819,” Herb. Vindob. (Herb. Boos.) appears to me not to be a Eucalyptus at all, but probably a Proteacea. Underside of leaves reddish.

  ― 20 ―

D.—Works consulted.

EUCALYPTUS being naturally such a well-defined genus, it has very few generic synonyms. Those that are accounted synonyms are not synonyms of the whole genus, and comprise two only, viz.:—

  • (a) Eudesmia, R.Br., which was the name given to one species (tetragona) looked upon by Brown as connecting Eucalyptus with Angophora.
  • (b) Symphyomyrtus, Schauer., which consists of a form of E. cornuta, Labill., with the walls of the fruits fused together.

Aromadendrum, Anderson (Dr. W. Anderson, the surgeon of Cook's second and third voyages), is a nomen nudum. A second Aromadendrum (Blume) is a genus of Magnoliaceæ.

The vast majority of species are Australian. The known exceptions are two species extending to Timor, and two or three or perhaps one single somewhat doubtful species from the Indian Archipelago; one from New Britain. Species have been described by Naudin from cultivated specimens in the south of France and by Kinney from California, but, in my opinion, they are referable to Australian species.

The botanical literature of Eucalyptus is very scattered. Most of the original descriptions of Robert Brown remain in manuscript, while later work has rendered some of them of only historical value. I do not hesitate to say that the suppression of these descriptions has been a heavy blow to British botanical science, whether this suppression eventually met with the acquiescence of Robert Brown himself or whether he was controlled, in this respect, by superior authority.

The first published attempt to get the increasing number of species of Eucalyptus into order was by Augustin Pyramus de Candolle in his Prodromus, vol. iii, 216 et seq. (1828). The Eucalyptus portion of Don's “General History of Dichlamydeous Plants,” vol. ii, 818 et seq. (1832), is mainly a translation of the preceding.

Then follows the important work of W. P. Walpers, “Repertorium botanices systematicae.” (Leipzig.) Vols. ii and v contain an important series of descriptions of species. This work was continued as “Annales botanices Systematicae,” and vols. i and ii also contain descriptions of Eucalyptus.

  ― 21 ―

In 1866 appeared the third volume of Bentham's Flora Australiensis, which will always remain a classic as far as the genus Eucalyptus is concerned.

From 1879 to 1884 there was published Mueller's Monograph of One Hundred Species of Eucalyptus, which is of the highest value.

There can be no doubt that the time has arrived when a process akin to the consolidation of legal statutes is desirable as regards the National Genus of Australian Plants. The literature is very scattered, and so are the types; a few I have not been able to see, and do not even know where they are. Perhaps European botanists will kindly assist me with specimens or drawings, for which I will make the amplest recompense I can.

Following is a list of herbaria of Eucalyptus examined by me. In a number of cases the collections have very kindly been remitted to me in Sydney:—

Berkeley, University of California, U.S.A.

Berlin, Royal Botanic Garden.

Calcutta, Royal Botanic Garden.

Cambridge, University.

Edinburgh, Royal Botanic Garden.

Geneva, Herbier Barbey-Boissier.

Geneva, Herbier De Candolle.

Glasgow, University.

Kew, Royal Gardens.

Melbourne, National Herbarium.

Natal (Durban), Colonial Herbarium.

Oxford, University.

Vienna, Imperial and Royal Natural History Museum.

Washington, U.S., United States National Herbarium (Smithsonian Institution).

Following are the works consulted by me up to date. Others will be referred to under separate species.


Sertum Anglicum, seu plantae rariores, quae in hortis juxta Londinum imprimis in horto regio Kewensi excoluntur.note

This work contains the first description of Eucalyptus, the first species described being E. obliqua.

  ― 22 ―

Gaertner, J.

De Fructibus et Seminibus Plantarum. 3 vols. 4to., 1788–1807.

Cavanilles, Antonio José.

Icones et descriptions plantarum, &c. 6 vols. Folio, 1791–1801.

Smith, J. E.

  • (a) A specimen of the Botany of New Holland. Vol. i. London, 1793.
  • (b) Transactions of the Linnean Society.

Lalillardiere, J. J.

  • (a) Novæ Hollandiæ plantarum specimen. 2 vols. Paris, 1804–6.
  • (b) Voyage in search of La Pérouse (translated from the French and published by J. Stockdale, London, 1800).

Bonpland, Aimé.

Description des plantes rares cultivées à Malmaison et à Navarre. A Paris de l'Imprimerie de P. Didot L'Ainé, 1813. Folio.

Contains a description and plate of Bonpland's E. diversifolia.

Loddiges, Conrad, and Sons.

Botanical Cabinet. (1817, &c.)

Link, H. F.

Enumeratio Plantarum Horti Regii Botanici Berolinensis Altera. Pars 1, Berlin, 1821. Pars 2, Berlin, 1822.

Link et Otto.

Icones Plantarum Selectarum. 4to. Berlin, 1820–8.

Sprengel, C.

Systema Vegetabilium. (Vol. iv, Pars 2, Curæ Posteriores), 1827.

Candolle, Aug. Pyr. de

Prodromus Systematis. Naturalis Regni Vegetabilis. Vol. iii (1828).

Mémoire sur la Famille des Myrtacées. (Posthumous work). Genève, Cherbuliez, 1842; Mém. de la Soc. de Phys. et d”hist. nat. de Genève. Vol. ix.

Don, G.

General System of Dichlamydeous Plants. Vol. ii (1832).

  ― 23 ―

Hooker, W. J., and Hooker, J. D.

  • (a) London Journal of Botany.
  • (b) Icones Plantarum.
  • (c) Botanical Magazine.

Hooker, J. D.

The Botany of the Antarctic Voyage. Part 3. Flora Tasmaniæ. 1860.

Lindley, J.

Edwards” Botanical Register. 1838, &c.

Walpers, W. P.

  • (a) Repertorium botanices systematicæ. ii, 163, 924; v, 743 (1843, &c.).
  • (b) Annales botanices systematicæ. i, 309; ii, 619.

Mitchell, T. L.

  • (a) Three Expeditions into the Interior of Eastern Australia. London, 1838 (2nd ed., 1849).
  • (b) Journal of an Expedition into the Interior of Tropical Australia. London, 1848.


Bull. Phys-Math. Acad. Pétersb. 10. 1852.

Miquel, F. A. G.

Stirpes nova Hollandas a Ferd. Mullero Collectas, Determinavit F. A. G. Miquel.note

Nederlandsch Kruidkundig Archief. Vol. iv, Part 2 (Vierde deel, tweede stuk), pp. 97–150. Leyden, 1856.

The date of this part is 1856 and not 1859 as quoted in B.Fl., iii.

Mueller, F.

  • (a) Proceedings, Linnean Society. Vol. iii (1858).
  • (b) Fragmenta phytographiæ Australiæ.
  • (c) Eucalyptographia.
  • (d) Western Australia. “General information respecting the present condition of forests and timber trade of the southern part of the Colony, together with a report on the forest resources of the Colony by Baron von Mueller.” Perth, 1882. The report was previously published by L. Reeve & Co., London, in 1879.

  ― 24 ―

Bentham, G.

Flora Australiensis. Vol. iii (1866.)

Woolls, W.

  • (a) A contribution to the Flora of Australia. Sydney, 1867.
  • (b) Lectures on the Vegetable Kingdom with special reference to the Flora of Australia. Sydney, 1879.

Howitt, W. A.

The Eucalypts of Gippsland. Trans. R.S. Vict. Vol. ii, Pt. 1, 81.

Deane, H. and Maiden, J. H.

Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W. 1895 to 1901.

Maiden, J. H.

Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W.; of Roy. Soc., S.A.; of Roy. Soc., Tas.; Victorian Naturalist; Agric. Gazette, N.S.W.; Bulletin, Herbier Boissier, &c. [See also Deane and Maiden.]

Baker, R. T.

Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W. 1899 onwards.

2. 1. Eucalyptus Pilularis (Smith).

  ― 26 ―


FOLLOWING is the brief original description of the species:—

Operculo conico medio constricto longitudine calycis, umbellis lateralibus, fructu globoso foliis lineari-lanceolatis.

The leaves are much narrower than in the preceding,note and the flowers not half so large; neither is the cover, as in that, more in diameter than the calyx. The fruit is globose. I suspect that of E. robusta to be turbinate with a reflexed margin, but I have seen it only half ripe.—Smith, in Trans. Linn. Soc., iii, 284, 1797.

It has been more amply defined in Bentham's Flora Australiensis (iii, 208), and in Mueller's Eucalyptographia.

Vernacular Names.—It is the tree which most usually goes under the name of “Blackbutt,” and sometimes by way of distinction, for it attains enormous size, as will be seen presently, the “Great Blackbutt.” It is a stately, shapely tree, and perhaps the best known of all the genus to Sydney residents, as it is so abundant. It belongs to the group of cucalypts called “half-barked,” because its rough outer bark is confined to the trunk of the tree, the branches being smooth and white. From the latter circumstance it shares with some other species the designation of “White-top.” The outer bark of this tree is fibrous and closely matted, forming, if I may make the comparison, a sort of middle link between such fibrous-barked trees as the Stringybarks, and such smooth ones as our White gum. I do not know that the term “black,” as applied to the butt, is particularly appropriate; the word “grey” would be better, though exception could be taken to this adjective also.

Before the term “Gum” was restricted to those eucalypts which have smooth or nearly smooth bark it was termed “Blackbutted Gum.”

“Flintwood” is an old name for this species, in allusion to the hardness of the dry wood.

It shades off imperceptibly into the Stringybarks, and forms of it are known as Yellow Stringybark (from the yellow cast of the inner bark, at some seasons), Messmate, and Stringybark. Other adjectives applied to Stringybark will be noted under the forms described.

  ― 27 ―

Aboriginal Names.—“Yarr-warrah” of the Illawarra blacks, according to the late Sir William Macarthur. Another New South Wales aboriginal name was “Benaroon.” By the aborigines of South Queensland it was known as “Tcheergun” and “Toi.”

In a collection of specimens made by George Caley are three twigs which belong to this species and which are labelled as follows by him, Tarundea being the aboriginal name:—(a) “Pilularis? Smaller Blackbutted Gum. Tarundea. Feb. 15, 1805.” (b) “Great Blackbutted Gum with large capsules. Tarundea. Jan., 1808.” (c) “This is neither Deraboynnote nor Tarundea. I only know a single tree of it, nor do the natives know any other.”

Seedling Leaves.—The seedling leaves are narrow (those of two forms are depicted on Plates 1 and 2), thus affording a ready difference from E. capitellata, Sm., and Stringybarks in general. Those of the type form are toothed and hirsute (“in the earlier stages those of E. Muelleriana are frequently more less beset with tufts of hairs.”—Howitt). Those of variety Muelleriana that I have seen have the leaves a little broader; but Howitt speaks of them as “narrow lanceolar,” and the two forms run into each other. The width of some of those of E. pilularis are broader still, approximating to those of the true stringybarks.

Mature Leaves.—They are often hooked at the tips, and sometimes are glossy, particularly in var. Muelleriana. Usually there is no marked difference in the glossiness of the two sides. There are, however, more stomata on the lower side. As regards the type form, the venation is more prominent on the under surface of the leaf. This character, which appears to be almost confined to coast species, is shared by E. acmenioides and E. microcorys, of the Renantherœ, and E. saligna, E. resinifera, and several others of the Parallelantherœ. The petiole is broadish and flattened. Mueller (Eucalyptographia) lays emphasis on the flatness of the flower-stalks, but this character belongs to many other species, to some to a greater extent than to E. pilularis. In the variety Muelleriana it is sometimes much less marked.

I am not aware that an account of the oil yielded by the leaves of typical blackbutt has yet been published, but Gildemeister and Hoffmannnote have published the following account of the oils of two trees which, as will be presently shown, are forms of this species.

The oil of Eucalyptus dextropinea, Baker, has been prepared by Baker and Smithnote, as has also the oil of E. lœvopinea, Baker, from the fresh leaves of these trees. Both are indigenous to New South Wales. The yield was in one case 0·825, in another 0·850 per cent. The deep, red-coloured, and strongly-dextrogyrate oil has the sp. gr. 0·8743–0·8763 at 17°. By distillation the following fractions were obtained:—156–162°, 62 per cent.; 162–172°, 25 per cent.

  ― 28 ―

The oil consists almost entirely of d-pinene. The main fraction, finally boiling at 156–157°, had the sp. gr. 18°/16° 0·8629; [a] D = + 41·2° at 18.

For the identification of the pinene, the following derivatives were prepared:—Pinene nitrosochloride (m.p. 103°), and from the nitrosopinene (m.p. 128–129°) further terpin hydrate, as well as pinene monohydrochloride (m.p. 121–124°).

Besides pinene, the oil contains small amounts of cineol, which was recognised by the behaviour of the higher boiling fractions toward iodol and bromine.

From the fresh leaves of Eucalyptus lœvopinea they obtained 0·66 per cent. of a reddish oil, having the sp. gr. 0·8732. The following fractions were collected:—157–164°, 60 per cent.; 164–72°, 28 per cent. Just as the foregoing oil consists almost entirely of d-pinene, this oil consists almost entirely of l-pinene. The fraction boiling at 157–158°, which can probably be considered as fairly pure pinene, had the sp. gr. 0·8626 at 19°/16° and [a] D = - 48·63°. The same derivatives of the pinene were prepared as with the foregoing oil. This oil likewise only contains small amounts of cineol.

Operculum.—In the type form the pointed, even acuminate, operculum is associated with a globular narrow-rimmed fruit. In northern specimens (e.g., E. semicorticata, F.v.M.), the pointed operculum is associated with a broad-rimmed fruit. In the variety Muelleriana the rounded (sometimes nearly hemispherical) operculum is associated with a broad, sometimes very broad, -rimmed fruit, and there is a very considerable amount of variation.

Stamens.—The filaments often turn red. The dark colour of the stamens has already been referred to in B.Fl. iii, 208. They are, however, not noticed in fresh specimens, but the colour deepens with age.

Fruits.—Smith's original description refers simply to “fructu globoso,” an expression which is not appropriate to the broad-rimmed forms. Smith's specimens were in all probability collected in the vicinity of Port Jackson, and are our Form 2, Plate 4, to which the term globular or pilular, as applied to the fruits, is especially appropriate.

Bentham (B.Fl. iii, 208) speaks of the fruit as “semi-globose or sub-globose, truncate … the rim rather broad,” &c. At page 190 he says, “Fruit rim usually broad and flat.” Mueller speaks of the fruit as “semi-ovate or almost truncate-ovate,” and figures (Eucalyptographia) a broad-rimmed form. He adds, “the systematic name for this species is not happily chosen.” Again (loc. cit.), “Whereas the globular fruit of E. pilularis, as aptly described in the Linnean Transactions of 1797, would not apply to that species as now understood, but to E. piperita of the present day.”

Mueller was not familiar with the typical pilularis, and his mistaken reference to E. piperita will be dealt with when that species is under review.

The fact is that E. pilularis displays very considerable variation in regard to the rim. It may be thin (narrow) or broad, and the absolutely imperceptible way in which the various forms run into each other is brought out in the drawings

  ― 29 ―
(Plate 4). The variety Muelleriana is a broad-rimmed form, but fruits are figured that have broader rims than any hitherto attributed to variety Muelleriana. Not only is the rim broad, but it may be domed, imperceptibly shading off into both E. capitellata and E. macrorrhyncha in this respect.

The fruits vary in size from ? to ½ inch in diameter, and also in the size of the opening. In some trees the fruits are large, 7/16 inch in diameter, and nearly spherical, but with a small opening. In others, the opening is very wide.

Many of our eucalypts have large fruited forms. E. resinifera, E. punctata, E. virgata will occur to many in this connection. E. pilularis has one also belonging to the broad-rimmed section. I figure such a form collected by Mr. F. Williams at Dapto. (Fig. 18, Pl. 4.)

The valves are quite sunk in the typical form. Variety Muelleriana shows exserted valves, and they are even evident in the form (Fig. 3, Pl. 4), which otherwise would be typical. The specimens of “Mountain Gum” (Fig. 16, Pl. 4) show an extreme broad-rimmed form, with the valves exceptionally exserted, so that the size and shape of the fruits, the shape of the rim, and the valves all display considerable variation in this species, as will be at once observed if Plate 4 be studied.

Bark.—Has fibrous bark on the butt, while the branches are smooth, like those of a gum. The variety Muelleriana, however, frequently shows more rough bark on the branches than does the normal species.

Timber.Characteristics.—Pale-coloured, more or less fissile, though sometimes quite interlocked in grain. It is a strong, durable, thoroughly safe, and well-tried timber. It is usually readily diagnosed by the presence of narrow, concentric gum-veins, but sometimes these gum-veins are nearly or wholly absent. As a rule, they are too narrow to cause deterioration. Sometimes, particularly on the Northern Rivers, it is free from gum-veins, and then presents considerable similarity to tallow-wood (E. microcorys), for which it is occasionally substituted. It occasionally, though rarely, shows pin-holes.

In the Bateman's Bay and Moruya districts, where it occurs plentifully, it is said that although white ants are found in the heart of the living tree, they never attack the timber when it is dry.

Principal Uses.—It is one of the best hardwoods we have for house and ship building. It is useful for bridge-planking, though inferior to tallow-wood for that purpose. It has been tested for many years for blocks for wood-paving, with most satisfactory results; in fact, it is one of the best timbers we have for the purpose, both as regards wear and durability. It takes tar well. After ironbark, I would place this timber second only to tallow-wood, amongst our hardwoods, for

  ― 30 ―
general purposes. Of late years it has been used for railway sleepers, and it has been exported to Europe for sides and head-stocks for railway waggons as an experiment.

That variety known as Yellow Stringybark in Gippsland is not so well known as the Blackbutt, and, therefore, at page 35, I have given an ample account of it. It may be stated generally that all forms of E. pilularis yield valuable timber.

Size.—It is one of the largest of our eucalypts, and giant trees have been recorded over the greater portion of the area in which it abounds.

A tree at Bulli was measured by me in 1891 with the following results:—Girth at ground, measuring from buttress to buttress, 57 ft. 6 in.; the girth at 3 feet from the ground was 45 feet, and at 6 feet above the ground, 40 feet. The taper was then very gradual for about 90 feet (estimated), where the head is broken off. There are ten principal buttresses of an average diameter of over 2 feet, but they practically cease to flute the trunk at a height of 10 to 15 feet. This is, probably, the identical tree measured by the late Sir William Macarthur in 1861 at “Bullai, Illawarra, still in full vigour, and with no external symptoms of decay, 41 feet in circumference, with the bole of immense height.” Mr. A. G. Hamilton speaks of “Bulli Blackbutt, 22 yards in circumference at ground, and at stump height would be not much less, as it does not taper much.” One at Gosford was measured 156 feet high, and 23 feet in circumference at a height of 6 feet.

Propagation.—It is well known that the blackbutt reproduces itself more freely and more rapidly than most other hardwoods, so much so that when a large one is felled, a dense growth of seedlings, growing into straight saplings, is the usual consequence. It, however, reproduces itself most abundantly upon rich, moist flats, which is the description of land in greatest demand for agricultural pursuits, so that it will, no doubt, be necessary in future to revoke portions of the most easily accessible and richest land in the blackbutt forests in the interests of selectors and for encouragement of agriculture. Wherever practicable, I would recommend the retention of blackbutt forest reserves, even although the mature timber may have been removed therefrom, and also the proclamation of additional blackbutt reserves in suitable localities not likely to be required for settlement, and, at the same time, the preservation and conservation of other useful species of hardwoods, which are not so abundant as blackbutt.

A self-sown seedling was measured at Gosford in 1889 on the land which was cleared for a nursery site. In eighteen months it had attained a height of 25 feet and a circumference of 18 inches.

  ― 31 ―


  • 1. E. discolor, Desf. (probably).
  • 2. E. persicifolia, Lodd.
  • 3. E. persicifolia, DC.
  • 4. E. incrassata, Sieb.
  • 5. E. semicorticata, F.v.M.
  • 6. E. fibrosa, F.v.M.

Var. Muelleriana, var. nov.:—

  • 7. E. Muelleriana, Howitt.
  • 8. E. dextropinea, R. T. Baker.
  • 9. E. lœvopinea, R. T. Baker.

Notes on the Synonyms.

1. E. discolor, Desf.

Following is the original description:—

Eucalyptus discolor. Ramulis teretibus, purpureis; foliis oppositis, sessilibus, connatis, latolanceolatis, acuminatis, subtus glaucis.” (Desf., Cat. Pl. Hort., Ed. 3, 1829, p. 408.) Tabl. Ed., ii, 198 (name only).

I have recently seen a specimen belonging to the Vienna Herbarium. Following is the label:—

“Eucalyptus discolor, Desf. In Spreng. syst. deest. ex horto Paris, 1820.” In leaf only. I agree with Bentham that it is doubtful; but it resembles E. pilularis, Sm., a good deal, and I think it is that species. (See Fig. 1, Pl. 3.)

2. E. persicifolia, Lodd.

Bentham (B.Fl., iii, 240) states that E. persicifolia, Lodd. Bot. Cab. t. 501, “from the figure,” is E. viminalis. If his surmise is correct, he refers to var. pedicellaris, F.v.M., which is multi-flowered.

But De Candolle (who doubtless saw Loddiges' specimens) referred them to Sieber's Nos. 593 and 477, which I have dealt with below, p. 32.

E. persicifolia, Miq., is E. Gunnii, Hook. f. var. acervula, Deane and Maiden.

  ― 32 ―

3. E. persicifolia, DC.

Following is a copy of the original description:—

(Lodd. Bot. Cab., t. 501). Operculo conico cupulâ paulo breviore, pedunculis axillaribus et latioribus ancipitibus petioli longitudine, pedicellis brevibus compressis, foliis oblongis basi attenuatis apice acuminatis nervulo margine, subparallelo tenuissimo notatis. Novâ Hollandia. Folii petiolus 4·5 lin. longus, lamina 3 poll. longa, 6 lin. lata. Umbellæ 8-10-floræ. 3 foliis paulo latioribus, pedunculis brevioribus Eucalyptus. Sieb., plant. exs. Nov. Holl. n. 593 (v.s.). v. foliis paulo longioribus pedunculis petiolum paululum excedentibus. E. incrassata, Sieb., plant exs. Nova Holl. n. 477 E. multiflora, Poir. suppl. 2, p. 594? (v.s.). (Prod. iii, 217.)

De Candolle, therefore, states that the umbels are 8-10 flowered. He quotes two varieties:—

  • (a) With broader leaves and shorter peduncles. Sieber's No. 593.
  • (b) With longer leaves, and the peduncles slightly exceeding the petioles. This is Sieber's No. 477, and is stated to be E. multiflora, Poir.

A specimen in Herb. Barbey-Boissier in bud and leaf only bears the label, “Eucalyptus persicifolia, Lodd., DC. De la Nouvelle Hollande, M. Sieber, 1825, No. 593.” The leaves are broader than specimens of No. 477 in the same herbarium, but I can see no other difference.

Specimens of Nos. 477 and 593 in the Berlin Herbarium are so similar that I cannot detect any difference between them, and they also are referable, in my opinion, to E. pilularis.

These specimens are all in bud only, and there is no doubt that the resemblance to specimens of E. siderophloia in bud is considerable, and deceived Mueller; Bentham followed him.

Mr. Backhouse, the Quaker botanical traveller, collected E. pilularis at Elizabeth Bay, Sydney, in February, 1836, and labelled it “E. persicifolia.” The specimens are at Kew. The late Rev. Dr. Woolls and other botanists, who worked prior to the publication of Vol. III of the Flora Australiensis, used to style the blackbutt E. persicifolia.

4. E. incrassata, Sieb.

Following is De Candolle's description of this species:—

“Foliis paulo longioribus (than E. persicifolia, Lodd.), pedunculis petiolum paululum excedentibus. E. incrassata, Sieb., plant. exs. nov. Holl., n. 477. E. multiflora, Poir., suppl. 2, p. 594 (?)” (Prod. iii, 217). It is identical, of course, with E. persicifolia, DC.

An original specimen of Sieber's No. 477 in Herb. Barbey-Boissier bears the following additional label:—“Eucalyptus incrassata, Sieb. De la Nouvelle Hollande, Sieber, 1825.” On the same label was added a little later, “Eucalyptus persicifolia, Lodd., v.y., DC.”

Like other specimens of No. 477, it is in leaf and bud only, and is E. pilularis.

  ― 33 ―

5. E. semicorticata, F.v.M.

Arborea, ramulis angulatis, foliis alternis lanceolatis subfalcatis modice petiolatis sensim acuminatis opacis subtilissime venosis imperforatis, vena peripherica a margine remota, umbellis axillaribus et lateralibus solitariis 5-8 floris, pedicellis angulatis pedunculo compresso bis terve brevioribus calycis tubo vix longioribus, operculo acuminato calycis tubum semiovatum ecostatum aequante, fructibus hemisphaericis 3–4 loculatis vertice planis, valvis brevissime exsertis, seminibus apteris. Hab.—In nemoribus montium fertiliorum ad flumen Brisbane (Illawarra, Macarthur, Sydney Woods, in Paris Exhib., No. 88, hb. Hook.). Anth. aestate.

Arbor procera, “Blackbutt” colonorum. Cortice trunci extus nigrocinereo intus fusco fibroso, ramis denudatis albidis laevibus. Folia 2¼–4? longa, 7–10'? lata. Pedunculi 6–10'? longi. Operculum 2'? longum semiovatum subrostratum. Fructus 3–4'? longi. Semina fusca 1'? longa, angulata subtilissme punctulatorugulosa.

E. persicifolia Lodd., non Schl., huc forsan pertinet ex nomine vernaculari “Blackbutt” ad hanc a Cunninghamino citato.

(Journ. Linn. Soc., iii, 86, 1859.)

I have seen the specimen, Paris Exh., No. 88, Herb. Hook. (Herb. Kew). Bentham endorsed the label “Blackbutt of Brisbane River; long pedicels and a rim. (E. pilularis.)”

I have a specimen of the type, and the figure of the fruits (Fig. 6, Pl. 3) of E. semicorticata showing that while undoubtedly conspecific with E. pilularis, it is intermediate in character between it and var. Muelleriana, possessing the foliage and buds of the former and the fruits of the latter.

E. persicifolia, Lodd. Bot. Cab. t. 501, Syn. E. semicorticata, F.v.M. (Proc. Linn. Soc., iii, 86).”

Mueller, Fragm., ii, 61, gives the above synonymy, and gives the range from Moreton Bay to the Goulburn and Macalister Rivers, Victoria. He states that it is sometimes called “Blackbutt and Ironbark.” The calyx-tube is 1½ to 2½ lines in length, and the operculum 2½ to 3½ lines, “acute et longuiscule rarius obtuse v. ancipiter rostratum.” Peduncles ? to 1 inch, pedicels 2–3 lines; umbels 4–14 flowered.”

The fact that Mueller speaks of the species as “sometimes called Blackbutt and Ironbark” points to obvious confusion between two species.

Bentham (B.Fl., iii, 208) gives E. ornata, Sieb., as a synonym of E. pilularis, Sm.; but it is really a synonym of E. siderophloia, Benth, and affords another instance of the confusion of E. pilularis with E. siderophloia. In fact, E. siderophloia's identity as a distinct species was not recognised until Bentham described it in 1866.

6. E. fibrosa, F.v.M.

Arborea, ramulis compresso-tetragonis, foliis alternis modice petiolatis lanceolato-falcatis acuminatis indistincte vel subtile venosis opacis imperforatis, vena peripherica a margine remota, umbellis axillaribus solitariis geminisque vel terminalibus paniculatis 5–6 floris, pedunculo anguloso petiolum vix aequante, pedicellis calycis tubo semiovato aequilongis, operculo tenui-conico obtusiusculo quam tubus angustiore et duplo longiore, fructibus hemiphaericis 3–4 loculatis ecostatis, valvis infra marginem affixis breviter exsertis, seminibus apertis. Hab.—In montibus nemorosis ad flumen Brisbane. Anth. aestate. Arbor

  ― 34 ―
magna, suo tractu “Stringybark tree” colonis vocata, trunco recto cum ramis corticem extus rugosum nigrescenti cinereum intus fibrosum gerente. Folia 3–5? longa, ½–1? lata. Calyx in pedicellum angulatum desinens. Operculum 3'? longum; fructus lignosi, 3–4'? longi.

(Journ. Linn. Soc., iii, 87, 1859.)

E. fibrosa, F.v.M., seems to be a variety of E. siderophloia with a longer lid—‘Stringybark tree of Brisbane River,’ (Eucalyptographia, under E. siderophloia).”

Bentham himself says:—“E. fibrosa, F.v.M., from the Brisbane, is only known from specimens in young bud, in which state I am unable to distinguish them from var. rostrata of E. siderophloia. F. Mueller, however, designates it as a Stringybark. It may, therefore, prove to be distinct.” (See B.Fl., iii, 220.) If the note in regard to the texture of the bark be correct (and there is no reason to doubt it), the plant would come under E. pilularis, besides which I have specimens of that species from South Queensland, which have a rather long operculum. The balance of evidence is therefore, in my opinion, in favour of it being a synonym of E. pilularis.

Euc. galbulus, aff. hort. Neapol. Tenore” Herb. Monac., is E. pilularis, Sm.

Var. Muelleriana, var. nov.

We now come to the forms which, in my opinion, constitute a new variety of E. pilularis, viz., Muelleriana. E. Muelleriana, Howitt, is the type of the variety, and the E. dextropinea and E. lœvopinea of Mr. R. T. Baker are identical with it.

7. E. Muelleriana, Howitt.

Following is the original description of the species:—

The bole is straight and rather massive, with moderately-spreading branches, and a fibrous and dark-grey bark, which is more deeply and coarsely fissured than that of E. piperita—in fact, resembling the bark of E. capitellata where that species grows to a good size in favourable localities. The bark is persistent up to the small boughs, which are more or less smooth. The leaves of the aged trees are lanceolar, falcate, and more or less unequal-sided, rather dark green in colour, equally shining on both sides, and usually three to five times as long as broad, with a sharp apex.

The seedlings have narrow lanceolar opposed leaves of a dark green, shining, but paler on the underside. In the earlier stages they are frequently more or less beset with small tufts of hairs. I have noticed that the leaves are still opposed in young plants 2 feet to 3 feet in height. In young saplings, and those some feet in height, the leaves are rather broad, lanceolar, or ovate lanceolar in shape, less shiny on the lower face, much dotted with transparent pores, and rather thin in substance. A marked feature in the saplings of this eucalypt, and one by which it can be distinguished almost at a glance from those of other stringybarks, is that the broadly lanceolar and pointed leaves have a tendency to assume a horizontal position rather than a vertical one, and this gives the saplings a shining appearance. The stems of these saplings and young trees are somewhat smoother than those of E. piperita, E. capitellata, or E. macrorrhyncha. The umbels are usually solitary, and there is a marked tendency in the eucalypt for them to become strongly paniculated. The buds are from 3–12 in most of the umbels. The stalk is frequently slightly flattened, and not much longer than the buds, and the stalklet nearly as long as the calyx-tube, the lid semiovate to hemispheric, smooth, and occasionally slightly pointed, the stamens (rather sparse) are large and reniform like those of E. capitellata. Fruit almost hemispherical to approaching semiovate; the rim flat or even slightly inverted, not wide, valves deltoid, small, and inserted or, rarely, more slightly prominent; 4-valved, less frequently 3 to 5-valved.—(Howitt, Trans. R. S. Vict., 1890).

  ― 35 ―

Timber.—The timber of this tree is usually darker in tint than E. piperita. It is fissile, free from gum veins or shakes, clear in the grain, and enjoying a great reputation for durability. It is used for fencing and sawing, and, according to Mr. Macalpine, of Yarraville, who has lived for forty years in South Gippsland, fences are still standing with posts split from this eucalypt, which have been from thirty to forty years in the ground. I have myself observed posts of this timber standing in fences at Woodside since 1859. The local name of this tree is “Yellow Stringybark.”—(Howitt, Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., 1890).

The late Mr. Clement Hodgkinson, a Commissioner of the Melbourne Harbour Trust, interested himself in ascertaining the value of the timber of the Yellow Stringybark, and there is no doubt that it is one of the best Victorian timbers. Following are extracts from Mr. Hodgkinson's report to the Harbour Trust, of the 17th January, 1891:—

The Inspector-General of Public Works having (on the 6th December last, in reply to a letter from me to him on the 23rd November) informed me that the piles of the Welshpool Jetty were driven during 1859 and that, after the recent burning of that jetty it was repaired, “the stumps of the piles were found to be in such excellent preservation that they were not withdrawn, but short pieces were spliced on,” my colleagues and myself were able to obtain specific and reliable evidence to the effect that these piles were Yellow Stringybark cut during August, 1859, and driven during that year. We carefully scrutinised these old piles when the tide was low and found them to be perfectly sound, uninjured by sea-worms, and having the appearance of clean, well-seasoned timber, in excellent condition, notwithstanding that these piles had been in sea water more than thirty-one years.

With reference to the wharf at Port Albert, the Inspector-General of Public Works, in his letter to me, already alluded to, stated that “Yellow Stringybark and Gum are in use in the wharf and approaches to Port Albert. It is reported that, whereas the gum is fast decaying, the stringybark remains sound.” My colleagues and self, after examination of the Port Albert wharf, now corroborate this statement; the Yellow Stringybark used in the construction of this wharf is quite sound.

We also inspected many old posts and rails, beams, planks, weatherboards, &c., of this kind of Eucalyptus and we all noticed that it seemed less liable to warp than any other kinds of Eucalyptus, a fact mentioned in one of my previous reports on Yellow Stringybark. As, in addition to the specially important quality of great durability in the sea water, Yellow Stringybark has a specific strength very much greater than that of Red Gum and than that of Jarrah (as shown in the tabulated results of my tests of Yellow Stringybark inserted in my report of 5th July, 1890), my colleagues and myself have arrived at the conclusion that this species of Eucalyptus may be used for piles and other purposes in the Melbourne Harbour Works.

Determination by Commissioner Hodgkinson of the specific strength and specific gravity of five seasoned samples of Yellow Stringybark Timber, each being 6 feet 11? inches long, 1? inch square, and weighinglb., the distance between the bearers being 6 feet:—

Number of Sample.  Breaking Weight.  Deflection.  Specific Strength.  Specific Gravity. 
lb.  in. 
952  2599  0.898 
800  3½  2185  0.898 
866  3?  2368  0.898 
905  3?  2472  0.898 
1,016  4½  2775  0.898 
Average …  908  3?  2479  0.898 

Reported to Harbour Trust, 5th July, 1890.

  ― 36 ―

8. Eucalyptus dextropinea, R. T. Baker. “Messmate or Stringybark.”

“A tree attaining a height from 60 to 100 feet or higher, and a diameter up to 5 feet. Bark dark or black on the outside, fibrous, and longer in fibre than that of the other species. Branches smooth for a considerable distance down, but this feature varies. Leaves almost identical with those of E. lœvopinea of this paper, and resembling also those of E. obliqua, L'Hér., and E. Muelleriana, A. E. H. Young leaves broad, rounded at the base, and very acuminate, opposite or nearly so, on a short petiole, the venation well defined, the intramarginal vein being much removed from the edge. Mature leaves lanceolate, falcate, acuminate often very oblique, shining on both sides, rather thick, the intramarginal vein removed from the edge. Umbels axillary with about 8 flowers, peduncle flattened, operculum hemispherical, shortly acuminate. Calyx-tube obconical, stalklet 4–6 lines long. Buds longer and larger than those of E. lœvopinea. Anthers reniform, connected above by a prominent connective, valves opening in longitudinal slits. Ovary flat-roofed. Fruits 4–6 lines in diameter, hemispherical, truncate to rounded, occasionally domed, rarely countersunk, valves slightly exserted.

“Hab.—Monga, on granite formation, but in soil that is fairly rich (W. Bauerlen); Barber's Creek, mostly in the gullies (H. Rumsey).

“It is allied in some of its characters to E. obliqua, L'Hér., viz., the shape of the mature leaves, venation, buds, and in one particular form of fruit which has a contracted orifice and countersunk rim, but their sucker leaves are quite distinct, and the fruits are mostly hemispherical and usually with a thickened convex rim. The individual fruit figured by Baron von Mueller in his plate of E. obliqua in the Eucalyptographia, much resembles the fruit of this species. The timber, bark, and constituents of the oils of the two species are quite distinct, but herbarium specimens of them might easily be considered as belonging to one species. The form of the fruit referred to above is common also to E. pilularis, E. stricta, E. Muelleriana, E. piperita, but its other specific characters are too marked for it to be ranked with any of these. It differs from E. capitellata and E. macrorrhyncha in the nature of its timber, its fruits, buds, bark, and oil. The leaves do not contain any myrticolorin. It bears in some respects alliance to E. lœvopinea, but the bark is more fibrous and persistent, the timber is inferior, the fruits never so distinctly domed in the rim, and the valves much less prominent. E. Muelleriana has a much superior timber and a very different bark to E. dextropinea. The leaves of the former are shining only on one side; the fruits and buds are distinctly different. It differs from E. lœvopinea in the shape of its fruits, its inferior timber and nature of its bark, and the chemical composition of its oil. The buds and leaves are very similar; in fact, are identical with several other species, and like the venation, no specific difference can be based on these parts of the eucalypt. As the investigations of cognate species are not yet complete its exact systematic position cannot be given at present, but provisionally it might precede E. obliqua.

“Timber.—A dark brown-coloured timber. Seasons very badly, and is evidently worthless.

“Kino.—See remarks under E. lœvopinea.” (Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., xxiii, 417.)

For an account of the oil, supra, p. 27.

9. Eucalyptus lœvopinea, R. T. Baker. “Silver-Top Stringybark.”

“A very tall tree in favourable situations. Bark fibrous but brittle, a feature that distinguishes it from that of “Red Stringybark,” E. macrorrhyncha, F.v.M., and “White Stringybark,” E. eugenioides, Sieb.; ultimate branches smooth. Young leaves alternate or scarcely opposite, broad at the base but not cordate, acuminate, about 3 inches long, the intramarginal vein removed from the edge, the lateral ones very distinct on the under side, scarcely showing on the upper surface. Mature leaves varying in size and shape, mostly very oblique, of a dark green colour, and shining on both sides, lanceolate, falcate, acuminate, the intramarginal vein removed from the edge, lateral veins fairly distinct. Petiole varying from ½ to 1 inch. Umbels axillary bearing about 5 to 7 flowers; stalk flattened, under an inch long, stalklet varying from 3 to 8 inches long, lid hemispherical, shortly acuminate, calyx not angular. Stamens all fertile, inflexed in the bud. Anthers divergent from the connective which surmounts them and is very prominent, opening by longitudinal slits. Roof of ovary flat and free from the placenta. Fruits hemispherical, petiolate; the rim very variable, at first thick and flat, or truncate, and then, as it matures gradually becoming exserted, and eventually quite domed, when it is not easy to distinguish it from E. macrorrhyncha, F.v.M.

  ― 37 ―

“Timber.—A very hard, close-grained, interlocked, pale brown coloured timber, difficult to distinguish from E. pilularis (Blackbutt), and no doubt of equal excellence. It is durable in the ground, and free from gum-veins as a rule. Suitable for bridge-decking, wood-blocking, posts, rails, and general building purposes requiring a hard, durable timber. In the case of “Red” and “White” Stringybark, the bark soon becomes detached after the timber is felled, but in this species the bark remains attached until the timber decays.

“Kino.—The exudation belongs to the ruby group, consisting principally of a tannic acid and water. Contains neither gum, like the kinos of the “Ironbarks,” nor eudesmin or aromadendrin, like the “Boxes.” In constitution it is practically identical with that of E. dextropinea, described below.

“Oil.—A deep reddish colour, and it could not be distinguished from that of E. dextropinea, except by chemical analysis. The leaves gave a yield of 0·66 per cent., and it consists very largely of lævo-rotatory pinene, chemically identical with the lævo-rotatory pinene obtained from trees of the Natural Order Coniferæ.

“For the chemistry of this pinene, see paper by my colleague, Mr. H. G. Smith, Proc. Roy. Soc., N.S.W., Oct., 1898.

“Hab.—Nullo Mountain, Rylstone (J. Dawson), Never Never Mountain, Rylstone (R.T.B.), Gulf Road, Rylstone (R.T.B.).

“This tree has always been regarded by local residents of the Rylstone district as quite distinct from any of the other “Stringybark” trees in the locality, owing to its peculiar bark and tough wood, and the glinting of the leaves in the sun, making them appear glaucous, and hence its vernacular name of “Silver-Top Stringybark.” When seen growing in its native habitat it somewhat resembles E. macrorrhyncha, F.v.M., and the mature fruits, with the domed rim and well-exserted valves, might easily lead one to diagnose it as that species; but it differs therefrom in its hard, durable timber, and also from it and cognate species by its characteristic bark, as well as in its hemispherical operculum, terete calyx-tube, in its oblique leaves, and the physical constituents of its leaves and oil. Except for its domed fruits, there is little to connect it botanically with E. macrorrhyncha, F.v.M., from the leaves of which is extracted (1) the dye myrticolorin; (2) an oil, very rich in the new solid camphor or stearoptene eudesmol, and also cineol. These bodies are entirely absent from the leaves of this particular eucalypt, and the oil is almost entirely composed of lævo-rotatory pinene.

“The presence of pinene of course allies it with the other species described in this paper, whilst the optical characters remove it from that species. It differs from E. capitellata and E. eugenioides in the shape of its fruits, its bark, buds, and leaves, and the chemical constituents of its oil, but yet it is a “Stringybark,” and the timber shows affinities with that group of eucalypts, while the hemispherical base and size of the fruits are not unlike those of E. capitellata. In botanical sequence it may be placed after E. capitellata.

“It is distinguishable from E. obliqua by its fruits and timber as well as its oil, but resembles that species somewhat in the shape of its leaves and buds. It differs from E. dextropinea of this paper in its fruits never having a countersunk rim, the superior quality of its timber, and the presence of a dextro-rotatory pinene in its essential oil. The leaves and buds of the two are identical. The oblique leaves and immature fruits led me at one time to consider this species as E. obliqua, L'Hér., and I so recorded it.” (Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., xxiii, 414.)

  ― 38 ―


Typical Form.

EXTENDING into Queensland on the north and to Twofold Bay on the south, from the coast up the slopes and spurs of the Dividing Range to the Table-land, but apparently not found more than 100 miles from the coast, and scarcely crossing on to the western slope in any place.

This species attains its greatest development in New South Wales. The type came from Port Jackson and is the coastal form of the species as a rule. The variety Muelleriana is, in New South Wales, found further from the sea, extending to the ranges and table-lands as a rule.

As a matter of geographical convenience let us deal with Victoria first.


In the forest near Mount Macedon (C. Walter), with coriaceous broadish leaves like var. Muelleriana, but with globose fruits with thin sunk rims like the type.

Mueller (Census) records E. pilularis from Victoria, but the preponderating form in that State is, undoubtedly, var. Muelleriana.


Following are some Port Jackson specimens:—

Sieber's No. 593 (E. persicifolia, DC.)

Sieber's No. 477 (E. persicifolia, DC.)

both labelled “Nov. Holland,” and probably collected around Sydney.

Eucalyptus, near E. oblonga, DC., black-butted gum, Colonies, 80 feet high, Port Jackson,” is a label in Allan Cunningham's handwriting on a specimen collected by him in 1836 (xvi).

E. pilularis is very common in the Sydney district, and even as regards specimens that are closer to the type than to variety Muelleriana, there is a certain amount of variation. For example, specimens from Gladesville (J. L. Boorman) have fruits smaller than those of the type; specimens from the National Park (J. H. Camfield) have ovoid fruits; and specimens from Kogarah Bay (J. L. Bruce) have the valves slightly exserted.

  ― 39 ―

Following are some southern localities:—Twofold Bay (Oldfield); Mogo, near Moruya (W. Bäuerlen); Currawang and Nelligen (W. Bäuerlen); Conjola (W. Heron); Jervis Bay (J.H.M.); Otford (J.H.M.).

Following are New South Wales localities north of Sydney:—“Stringybark,” St. Albans (A. Murphy), very small fruits; and near Booral (A. Rudder); Mount Seaview (J.H.M.); Macleay River, near coast (W. Macdonald).

A “Stringybark,” Attunga, near Tamworth, growing on a hill of Serpentine formation (R. H. Cambage), has domed fruits and resembles both E. macrorrhyncha and E. eugenioides.

Moonambah (W. Bäuerlen).

The northern New South Wales and Queensland forms are, as indicated at page 41, intermediate in character between typical E. pilularis and its variety Muelleriana.


“Benarora (?) Blackbutt, at the sandstone ranges towards Beroa.”

“Turru Turru, a kind of stringybark, but not yellow.”

The above are copies of labels in Leichhardt's handwriting. The specimens are in leaf only, but referable, I believe, to E. pilularis.

E. semicorticata, F. Mueller, Brisbane River (collector ?); specimen examined by Bentham.

Stradbroke Island, North Coast line; also Glass House Mountains and Highfield (F. M. Bailey).

Variety Muelleriana.


Following is Howitt's original account of the range of his E. Muelleriana:

This eucalypt has an extensive range in the western half of Gippsland. It is a littoral species, and is principally found between the Hoddle Ranges and the sea coast. There it forms the bulk of the forest, growing upon sands and sandy clays, from the Monkey Creek, 20 miles from Sale, to Shady Creek, west of Alberton in an east and west direction, and from Currajung southwards to the coast. The area thus covered by this tree is about 300 square miles. It also occurs in lesser colonies on the ridges extending from Tertiary tracts up to the high ranges forming the spurs of the mountains. I have not observed it west of Toongabbie, where it ascends the hills of Upper Silurian sediment for about 6 miles northwards to a 1,000 feet in elevation. I have also seen it growing extensively on the hills across which the road-known as the Insolvent Track, runs from the Stockyard to Cobannah Creek. The formations here are Upper Devonian, resting on sediments which may be either Devonian or Upper Silurian. Its range north and south in this locality is at least 25 miles, and its highest elevation probably over 1,200 feet. I have noted a third locality where this tree occurs under precisely similar conditions, extending northwards on the spurs of the mountains skirted by the Tambo Valley Road. There it grows for several miles on the Silurian sediments, northwards from the edge of the Tertiary Marine beds, and reaches an elevation of at least 1,000 feet. I have little doubt that it will be found in the intervening localities, and perhaps further to the eastward, but of this I have no direct evidence.—(Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., 1890).

On another occasion he said:—

It appears to grow to the largest size on the sands and sandy clays of South Gippsland, where it forms most valuable forests.

  ― 40 ―

And again:—

It grows principally in the tract of country lying between Sale and Yarraville, commencing at a point about 20 miles from the former place, where the “White Stringybark” (E. piperita) abruptly ceases to grow. Northwards it extends towards Tom's Cap. A second area is at the Nine-mile Creek, between Alberton and Toora.

These areas are in themselves not large, and have lessened so far as the supply of this tree is affected by alienation of the land. A small timber reserve, however, is reserved at Wonwron.

Small colonies of this tree occur about 3 miles out of Toongabbie on the Walhalla Road, between Bairnsdale and Mount Taylor, along the “Insolvent Track,” and at one place on the Tambo Valley Road, but none of these areas are of sufficient size to be of much economic value. Its maximum height is 170 feet or thereabouts, but more frequently from 100 to 150 feet.—(Howitt.)

The following Gippsland specimens were labelled E. Muelleriana by Howitt himself:—Agnes Creek Bridge; Four-mile Creek, Port Road; Lily's Leaf; Mount Morinch; Insolvent Track, 4 miles; Muddy Creek, Stockyard Creek Road; Toongabbie; Long Cutting, Tambo Road; Woodside, German's Creek, Port Albert Road; Bircham Road; Drouin West.

Following are other Victorian specimens examined by me:—Grampians (C. Walter)—the young buds angular, showing transit to capitellata (Fig. 21, Pl. 4); the Wimmera (F. Reader)—From the Wimmera is no great distance to South Australia, the climatic conditions of which it much resembles.


Mount Lofty (March, R. H. Cambage; November, W. Gill). (Fig. 20, Pl. 4) Mr. Gill observes that the inner bark of this tree has not a bright yellow colour. This is not an infallible guide, as it varies according to the season of the year and with the district. Mr. Cambage labelled it “Pale Stringybark.”

E. fabrorum, Schlecht. In montibus sterilioribus elatis. November, 1848, Dr. M.” This specimen was collected by Mueller, and labelled capitellata by Bentham. There is no doubt that the South Australian specimens show affinity to E. capitellata, Sm. (Most South Australian specimens labelled E. fabrorum, Schlecht., are E. obliqua.)


“Messmate,” south of Eden (J. S. Allan); Twofold Bay (Oldfield), in Herb. Barbey-Boissier; also Herb. Cant. These are identical with the Barber's Creek specimens. There is typical E. pilularis by the same collector, from the same locality, in the same herbarium.

Currawang Creek, near Nelligen (W. Bäuerlen). Typical for E. dextropinea, R. T. Baker. (Fig. 6, Pl. 4.)

In the Goulburn district (e.g., Box Point to Barber's Creek, Wingello, &c.) it is known as “White Mahogany”; but it is not to be confused with E. acmenioides. Its branches are rough to the top, forming a ready local distinction between it and the typical form. The bark is very yellow when freshly cut, also the timber, hence its Gippsland name of “Yellow Stringybark.” The timber is valued for building purposes, being used for flooring and weatherboards, &c. It occurs in many places in the coast mountain ranges, both north and south. It is a very clean timber, and grows large. Mr. Crawford, of Wingello, who was born in the district, and who has been a worker among timber all his life, writes to me: “While I call it ‘White Mahogany,’ and sometimes ‘Yellow Stringybark,’ the coast people call it ‘Blackbutt.’ ”

  ― 41 ―

“Towards and under Table Mountain, Milton;” also Mount Kembla (R. H. Cambage).

Western New South Wales localities are:—

“Stringybark,” Kanimbla Valley. A small-fruited form. Botanists may look upon as a large-fruited form of E. eugenioides, Sieb. (Fig. 7, Pl. 4.) The seedlings would settle the relative closeness to E. pilularis or E. eugenioides.

Nullo Mountain, Rylstone, and Gulf Road, Rylstone (R. T. Baker); and typical of his E. lœvopinea.

“Mountain Stringybark” (A. Rudder).note Identical with the Gulf Road specimen. The valves well exserted, and the rim exceptionally broad. (Fig. 16, Pl. 4.)

Moonan Flat (J.H.M. and J.L. Boorman). Large fruits. (Fig. 22, Pl. 4).

Murrurundi (J.H.M. and J.L. Boorman).

“Stringybark,” Warrah Creek (Jesse Gregson). (Fig. 17, Pl. 4.)

Tenterfield, via Cottesbrooke, to Sandy Flat, just west of Dividing Range (J.H.M). (Fig. 25, Pl. 4.)

Mr. Henry Deane (No. 302) collected a very interesting Stringybark or “Blackbutt” from the Glen Innes District (Hartley's Mill). (Fig. 19, Pl. 4). The fruits are larger than those of E. eugenioides usually are, and have a well-defined prominent rim, grooved on the outer edge, and show a tendency to exsertion of the valves. The specimens undoubtedly present affinity to E. eugenioides; but I think they come nearer to E. pilularis, var. Muelleriana, the fruits being a little more pear-shaped than usual. They are identical with the small fruit from Warrah. (Fig. 17, Pl. 4.)


The Tenterfield specimens were collected a few miles from the Queensland border, and I do not doubt that a precisely similar form extends into that State. The Southern Queensland forms (E. semicorticata, &c.), already alluded to, would by many botanists be placed under var. Muelleriana. In fact, they help to prove that it is quite impossible to maintain E. pilularis and E. Muelleriana as separate species.

  ― 42 ―


THIS species is an excellent one with which to study the variation so pronounced in the genus.

I have shown, with evidence that appears to me quite incontrovertible, that E. pilularis and E. Muelleriana are not specifically distinct. The following extract (Trans. Roy. Soc. Vict., 1890) shows Howitt's views in regard to the relations of his E. Muelleriana with E. eugenioides and E. capitellata.

This eucalypt, therefore, is to be placed between E. eugenioides and E. capitellata. It resembles both, but the dissimilarities are more marked than the resemblances. The characteristic distinctions are quite as constant as those which distinguish those two species, and the occurrence of these species over so large an area, as well as in independent lesser colonies, negatives the probability of it being a mere hybrid.

The affinity of E. pilularis and its forms with a number of species will now be dealt with seriatim.

1. E. eugenioides, Sieb.—The affinity of E. pilularis, var. Muelleriana, and E. eugenioides is closest than between any other species. These species are, indeed, frequently confused through omission to keep the typical forms in mind. The matter will be further dealt with when the type specimens of E. eugenioides are figured.

Like many other species and varieties of Eucalyptus, there is more or less variation in the size and shape of the fruit of var. Muelleriana and E. eugenioides, not to mention leaves and other characters. Thus some small-fruited specimens of var. Muelleriana are, in my opinion, inseparable from some large-fruited specimens of E. eugenioides. There will always be hesitancy in regard to placing these forms; the same botanist may justifiably place them in both species at different times. In such cases a specimen should be labelled, I think, E. pilularis, var. Muelleriana, transit to E. eugenioides, or vice versa.

These transit forms are very common in Victoria and also in New South Wales, south, west, and north. Often they are termed Yellow Stringybark (owing to the bright yellow inner bark at certain seasons), which is a common name for var. Muelleriana. In fact, almost typical eugenioides is sometimes known as “Yellow Stringybark.”

Bentham has cursorily referred to the affinity of E. pilularis and E. eugenioides (under E. piperita, B.Fl. p. 208), and with additional knowledge gained by so much field work, we are now able to amplify his remarks.

  ― 43 ―

Mr. R. T. Baker's E. Wilkinsoniana, E. nigra, and E. lœvopinea, var. minor, are transit forms, but as, in my opinion, they are nearer to typical eugenioides than to the present species, I shall defer consideration of them.

It will be found that not only have we connecting links between E. pilularis and E. eugenioides, but E. pilularis also connects them with other stringybarks, E. capitellata and E. macrorrhyncha.

2. E. piperita, Sm.—This species and E. eugenioides are so closely related that any species possessing affinity to the one may be looked upon as possessing affinity to the other. The proper way to study the matter is to examine the series connecting E. eugenioides and E. piperita, such specimens being largely developed in Victoria and southern New South Wales.

I have specimens from the National Park, 20 miles south of Sydney, collected by Mr. Julius Camfield, with the inflorescence in a dense raceme and the fruits large and ovoid, showing, in the latter respect, an approximation to E. piperita. (Fig. 1, Pl. 4.) The operculum is not as long as that of E. pilularis usually is, and the filaments are white although they have been collected for a considerable period.

Bentham alludes to the affinity of E. pilularis to E. piperita in the following words. While the former is not related to the latter so closely as to some other species, the affinity is there and must not be neglected:—

E. piperita is sometimes difficult to distinguish in the dried state from some forms of E. obliqua, and on the other hand it approaches E. pilularis, differing from both of them generally but not strictly, as well in the foliage as in the bud and operculum, but more readily in the fruit. The variety eugenioides (E. eugenioides, Sieb.) is, however, in some respects almost intermediate between E. piperita and E. pilularis, var. acmenioides (E. acmenioides, Schauer).—(B.Fl., iii, 208.)

3. E. capitellata, Sm.—Both in Victoria and South Australia plants have been named E. capitellata by excellent botanists which have proved to be E. pilularis, var. Muelleriana; for example, specimens from the Grampians and Wimmera in the former State and Mount Lofty Range in the latter. In our own State, specimens from Mount Wilson and other localities are nearer to var. Muelleriana than to E. capitellata. Of course, true E. capitellata occurs in all three States. The most obvious characters of the latter species are its sessile, compressed fruits and angular buds, the former a consequence of the latter.

4. E. macrorrhyncha, F.v.M.—The affinity of E. pilularis to this speciess so close that I must frankly say that I have a number of specimens which I hesitate to place under one species rather than under another. A connecting link is Bentham's var. brachycorys of E. macrorrhyncha of which I give some particulars under E. pilularis as a matter of convenience.

E. macrorrhyncha, F.v.M., var. brachycorys, Benth. New England, C. Stuart. A mountain species. Bark separating in fibres like the V.D. Land E. gigantea (C. Stuart).

  ― 44 ―

In other words, a Stringybark like E. obliqua. The above is a copy of Stuart's label with Bentham's determination thereon.

The following specimens are very near typical var. brachycorys:

  • 1.“Stringybark,” Emmaville (J. L. Boorman).
  • 2.“Stringybark,” Bluff River, near Tenterfield.

Specimens collected by Mr. H. Deane and myself in this locality at different times show angular and rounded buds on the same twigs.

  • 3.“Red Stringybark,” Moona Plains, Walcha (A. R. Crawford), shows rounded buds also.
  • 4.Stanthorpe, Queensland (F. M. Bailey).

The angularity of the buds so usual in E. macrorrhyncha is not a constant character and breaks down in var. brachycorys, some of the leaves and buds being quite indistinguishable by me from the var. Muelleriana of E. pilularis. As a rule, the buds of var. brachycorys get more rounded as they get older. The rim of var. brachycorys is sometimes very broad and hardly angular, showing transit to the northern forms of pilularis, var. Muelleriana, as regards the shape of the fruits.

The colour of the timber, texture of the bark, &c., of E. pilularis and of E. macrorrhyncha and the other stringybarks varies just as do other characters of the eucalypts. E. pilularis and E. macrorrhyncha both include trees whose filaments become red on drying. I propose to again refer to the affinity between E. pilularis and E. macrorrhyncha when dealing with the latter species.

5. E. obliqua, L'Herit.—The “E. fabrorum, Schlecht., Lofty Ranges, S.A. Ferd. Mueller, Pharm. Cand.” (collected in 1847 or 1848) is E. obliqua, but undoubtedly very close to E. pilularis, var. Muelleriana.

The affinity of E. pilularis (through its variety Muelleriana) is too close to be neglected. The buds and leaves are frequently obviously a good deal similar, and there are other resemblances. The seedlings of E. obliqua are much broader.

6. E. acmenioides, Schauer.—Bentham (B.Fl., iii, 208) says, “I have much doubt whether this might not be adopted as a distinct species, although it seems sometimes to pass into typical E. pilularis.” In the Eucalyptographia, Mueller recognised Schauer's species, and, I think, rightly so. But of the affinity of E. pilularis to E. acmenioides there is no doubt, the transit being through the small-fruited forms of the var. Muelleriana of the former. E. umbra, R. T. Baker, is another form referred by most botanists to E. acmenioides (and rightly, I think), but which has obviously a dash of the E. pilularis strain in it.

  ― 45 ―

7. E. santalifolia, F.v.M.—The affinity of E. pilularis to this species is not close, but the shape of the fruits and the venation, &c., of the leaves show undoubted affinity to the variety Muelleriana of the latter species which occurs in the State (South Australia) in which E. santalifolia is found.

8. E. siderophloia, Benth.—Herbarium specimens (in leaf, bud, and flower) of these two species are sometimes a good deal alike (unless the anthers be examined), and the species have hence been confused by the older botanists, who often described eucalypts on what we deem to be imperfect material for such a purpose; moreover, E. siderophloia was not defined until 1866. I have dealt with the matter under E. persicifolia, Lodd. and DC., while E. fibrosa, F.v.M., is really a form of E. pilularis, and not of E. siderophloia. See page 34.

Finally, viâ var. Muelleriana, E. pilularis shades off into the infinity of gum-topped stringybarks.

Explanation of Plates.

Plate 1.

Plate 1: EUCALYPTUS PILULARIS, Sm. (Typical form from Port Jackson.) Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

  • 1.Young shoot, portion of a seedling. Note the dentate margin and tufts of hairs.
  • 2.Buds with pointed opercula.
  • 3.The fruits are nearly globular (pilular).

Plate 2.

Plate 2: EUCALYPTUS PILULARIS, Sm., var. MUELLERIANA, Maiden. Typical for EUCALYPTUS MUELLARIANA, Howitt. Drawn from Gippsland (Victoria), specimens collected and named by Mr. Howitt. Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

  • 1. Young shoot (sucker foliage). The young foliage has tufts of hairs. See Howitt, page 34. This shoot is not so young as the corresponding specimen of E. pilularis.
  • 2. Buds more clavate than in typical pilularis.
  • 3. The fruits are nearly globular, with rims of medium thickness, and with non-exserted valves.

  ― 46 ―

Plate 3.


  • 1. Eucalyptus discolor, Desf. (ex horto Paris, 1820). Foliage only.
  • 2. Mature leaves and buds of Sieber's No. 477 (E. persicifolia, DC., E. incrassata, Sieb.). Typical E. pilularis
  • 3. Mature leaves and buds of Sieber's No. 593 (E. persicifolia, DC.). Typical E. pilularis. The leaf broader than (2). The opercula are pointed.
  • 4. 4a. Two heads of fruits from typical E. pilularis, from Hurstville, near Sydney. They are from the same tree; in 4a the rim is thin and sunk; in 4 the rim is broad and the valves almost protruding.
  • 5. 5a. 5b. The fruits and buds are taken from the same tree of typical E. dextropinea (R. T. Baker), near Barber's Creek, Goulburn District, N.S.W. 5 closely resembles typical pilularis; 5a shows the broad rim and slightly exserted valves so common in the species. The buds are nearly clavate, but some are more pointed than shown.
  • 6. 6a. The fruits and buds of typical E. semicorticata, F.v.M., Brisbane River, Queensland. The broad rims of the fruit are commonest seen in var. Muelleriana, while the pointed opercula are typical for pilularis.

Plate 4.

Plate 4: EUCALYPTUS PILULARIS, Sm. Fruits illustrating variation in the species. Lithograph by Margaret Flockton.

A. Some forms of Fruits from the Sydney District to Jervis Bay.

  • 1. Ovoid form, National Park, Sydney, showing transition to E. piperita.
  • 2. Large pilular fruits, common in the Sydney District; rims thin and sunk.
  • 3. Kogarah Bay, Sydney; narrow rim and exserted valves.
  • 4. Fruits of intermediate size, Hawkesbury River.
  • 5. Jervis Bay, N.S.W. All the above, with thin rims and more or less globular fruits.

B. Some Miscellaneous Forms.

  • 6. Currawang Creek, near Bateman's Bay, N.S.W. Typical for E. dextropinea, R.T.B. Fruits nearly globular, and rim thicker than the preceding.
  • 7. Stringybark from Lowther Road, Kanimbla Valley, Blue Mountains, N.S.W. Thicker rim, but otherwise close to No. 3. Partakes of the characters of both E. pilularis and E. eugenioides.
  • 8. Port Macquarie, N.S.W. Small fruits, hardly ripe.
  • 9. Mount Seaview, Upper Hastings River. Thick rim.
  • 10. Kempsey, N.S.W.
  • 11. Fruits. 11a. Buds (both from same tree). W. MacDonald, Macleay River, N.S.W., near the coast The rim much sunk.
  • 12. Bolivia, near Tenterfield, N.S.W. Small fruits, with broad rims.

C. Fruits with Flat Tops and Broad Rims.

  • 13. Gladesville, Sydney.
  • 14. Fruits. 14a. Buds (from same tree). “Stringybark,” St. Albans, Hawkesbury District, N.S.W. Note the pointed opercula associated with the broad rims of the fruits.
  • 15. Tenterfield, N.S.W. Very broad rims, and slightly angled fruits; valves prominent.
  • 16. Fruits. 16a. Buds (from same tree). “Mountain Stringybark” (A. Rudder). Figured as “E. sp.” Figs. 11–12, plate LX. Proc. Linn. Soc., N.S.W., 1896. A very broad-rimmed form often seen in var. Muelleriana.

  •   ― 47 ―
  • 17. Small fruit, with tendency to doming. 17a. Fruit larger, with flat top with tendency to doming. 17b. Buds all from same tree, Warrah Creek, Liverpool Plains, N.S.W.
  • 18. Very large-fruited, broad-rimmed form, Dapto, N.S.W.
  • 19. “Blackbutt,” Hartley Mill, Glen Innes, N.S.W. Small fruit, more pear-shaped than usual, and inserted at this place to show the resemblance to 17, and also to macrorrhyncha forms, e.g., 23, 24, 27.

D. Domed Fruits tending to E. macrorrhyncha and capitellata, with and without Angled Buds.

  • 20. “Stringybark,” Mt. Lofty, near Adelaide, S.A. (often referred to as E. capitellata).
  • 21. Fruits. 21a. Angled buds (from same tree). Grampians, Victoria. The valves more exserted than 20; the buds resembling those of capitellata.
  • 22. Moonan Flat, Upper Hunter River, N.S W. Large fruits, broad rims.
  • 23. “Red Stringybark,” Moona Plains, Walcha, New England, N.S.W. Transit to macrorrhyncha (close to var. brachycorys). 23a. Mount Seaview, Upper Hastings River. Practically identical with 23.
  • 24. Fruits. 24a. Larger fruits. 24b. Angled buds (all from same tree), with very broad rims, and the valves less prominent than macrorrhyncha; near to capitellata. The angled buds nearer to capitellata. Bluff River, near Tenterfield.
  • 25. Flat-topped fruits. 25a. Angled buds. 25b. Pointed buds (all from same tree). On the whole tending to capitellata. Bluff River, near Tenterfield.
  • 26. Rounded buds. From same locality as No. 25 and from similar trees. The same tree often displays much variation as regards the buds.

Stanthorpe, Queensland. Fruits of macrorrhyncha, var. brachycorys, Bentham. It will be observed that the transit from typical pilularis to this form is quite gradual.

no previous
no next