Ulmus 'Turkestanica'

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Turkestanica' was first described by Regel as U. turkestanica in Dieck, Hauptcat. Baumschul. Zöschen (1883)[1] and in Gartenflora (1884).[2][3] Regel himself stressed that "U. turkestanica was only a preliminary name given by me; I regard this as a form of U. suberosa" [:U. minor ].[2] Litvinov (Schedae ad Herbarium Florae Rossicae, 1908) considered U. turkestanica Regel a variety of his U. densa (now considered in Russia a form of field elm[4][5]), adding that its fruits were "like those of U. foliacea Gilibert" [:U. minor].[6][7]

Ulmus 'Turkestanica'
GenusUlmus
Cultivar'Turkestanica'
OriginTurkestan

'Turkestanica' was distributed in Europe as U. turkestanica Regel by the Späth nursery of Berlin from c.1890,[8][9][10] in whose catalogues it was listed separately from U. pinnato-ramosa, now U. pumila 'Pinnato-ramosa', and from U. campestris umbraculifera,[11] with both of which it was later confused – the former by Elwes and Henry, the latter (as U. 'Turkestanica') by Green.[12]

Description

Späth in his catalogues described U. turkestanica Regel as "a densely growing, small-leaved tree".[10][11] Litvinov (1908) noted that it had branchlets like those of Ulmus pumila but typical field-elm fruit, up to 2 cm long by 1.2 cm wide.[6][7] Melville noted (1958) that the specimen of U. turkestanica at Kew had "frond-like leading shoots".[13]

Pests and diseases

Not known.

Cultivation

One tree was planted as U. turkestanica Regel, 'Turkestan Elm', in 1899 at the Dominion Arboretum, Ottawa, Canada, where it was distinguished from U. pinnato-ramosa.[14] A specimen of U. turkestanica Regel was present at Kew from the early 20th century to at least the 1950s, again distinguished from U. pinnato-ramosa.[15][13] Three U. turkestanica Regel (as well as three 'Pinnato-ramosa') were supplied in 1902 by Späth to the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh.[16][17] One was planted at the Benmore garden in Argyll in 1902, and survives (2020) as a sucker or cutting of the original. Following Green's confusion of 'Turkestanica' and 'Umbraculifera', the Benmore tree was believed for a time to be 'Umbraculifera'. 'Umbraculifera', however, though present in Späth's catalogues, does not appear in the RBGE 1902 accessions list from Späth. Being grafted, it does not sucker. In 2004 the tree was again misidentified by the Garden as U. pumila L. var. arborea Litv. (a synonym of 'Pinnato-ramosa'), though the leaves do not match those of the latter cultivar.[18][19] Its original name was restored in 2020.[17] An U. turkestanica stood till 1993 in RBGE itself, near the U. pinnato-ramosa. This was also a small tree; it produced suckers, and may itself have been sucker regrowth from tree C2697, one of the 1902 'Turkestanica' Regel from Späth.[13] A specimen of 'Turkestanica' Regel stood in the Arboretum national des Barres, Nogent-sur-Vernisson, France, in the 20th century, where it was distinguished from 'Pinnato-ramosa'. It was listed there under the queried synonym of Ulmus campestris turkestanica, suggesting that the Arboretum thought it possibly a field elm cultivar.[20]

A 'Turkestanica' obtained from Späth before 1914, and planted in 1916, stood in the Ryston Hall arboretum, Norfolk,[21] in the early 20th century. (The arboretum's list includes 'Umbraculifera' but not 'Pinnato-ramosa'.[22]) A 'Turkestanica' (listed separately from 'Umbraculifera'), "a compact grower with smallish leaves", appeared in early 20th-century catalogues of the Gembrook or Nobelius Nursery near Melbourne, Australia.[23] The description is the one used by Späth for U. turkestanica Regel.[10] 'Pinnato-ramosa' (not in the Nobelius catalogue) is, by contrast, a rather loosely-branched tree,[24] so the Nobelius introduction may have been Regel's tree.

By the 1930s, when 'Pinnato-ramosa' was being recommended as resistant to early-strain Dutch elm disease,[25] the "Turkestan elm" in nursery lists, as descriptions show, was usually the Siberian elm cultivar, not Regel's tree.[26] The Hesse Nursery of Weener, Germany, sold an "Ulmus turkestanica Reg." in the 1930s, but gave U. pumila arborea Litv., another name for 'Pinnato-ramosa', as a synonym.[27]

Putative specimens

A tall suckering field elm with leaves closely matching those of the Benmore specimen, and with the "frond-like leading shoots" described by Melville, stands in Carlton Terrace Gardens, Edinburgh, above Carlton Terrace Brae.

  • Possible 'Turkestanica', Edinburgh (2016)
  • Bole and suckers
  • Pressed autumn leaves
  • Spring silhouette
  • Samara
  • Young trees grown from suckers, showing frond-like leading shoots

Synonymy
  • Ulmus suberosa var. turkestanica[2]
  • Ulmus campestris turkestanica (?)[20]
  • Ulmus campestris var. laevis Regel (1879)[28] (Litvinov, 1908)[7]

Accessions

Europe
  • Royal Botanic Garden Benmore, UK, as U. turkestanica Regel, Acc. no. 19021007 [17]

North America
gollark: Due to the SQLite API apifying beeoids, it is.
gollark: Does it ever actually rollback the database transaction?
gollark: In the traceback bit.
gollark: That is actually quite good except that it doesn't indicate the error except by not being successful.
gollark: RSAPI works much better than this.

References
  1. Haupt-catalog der obst- und gehölzbaumschulen des ritterguts ts Zöschen bei Merseburg, 1883, p.36
  2. "Literatur". Gartenflora. 33: 28. 1884.
  3. Elwes, Henry John; Henry, Augustine (1913). The Trees of Great Britain & Ireland. 7. pp. 1926–1927.
  4. Moscow State University herbarium, Specimen MW0591858, plant.depo.msu.ru
  5. Moscow State University herbarium, Specimen MW0591857, plant.depo.msu.ru
  6. Schedae ad Herbarium Florae Rossicae, 1908; 6: 164
  7. Sargent, Charles Sprague, ed., Plantae Wilsonianae: an enumeration of the woody plants collected in western China for the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University during the years 1907, 1908, and 1910 by E. H. Wilson (Cambridge, Mass., 1917), vol.3, p.262
  8. Späth, L., Catalogue 79 (1890-91; Berlin), p.114
  9. Späth, L., Catalogue 89 (1892-93; Berlin), p.116
  10. Späth, L., Catalogue 104 (1899–1900; Berlin), p.134
  11. Katalog (PDF). 108. Berlin, Germany: L. Späth Baumschulenweg. 1902–1903. pp. 132–133.
  12. Green, Peter Shaw (1964). "Registration of cultivar names in Ulmus". Arnoldia. Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University. 24 (6–8): 41–80. Retrieved 16 February 2017.
  13. Melville's annotation, Oct. 1958, in the RBGE Cultivated Herbarium Accessions Book, alongside entry C2697, area G2, the RBGE U. turkestanica
  14. Catalogue of the trees and shrubs in the arboretum and botanic gardens at the central experimental farm (2 ed.). 1899. p. 76.
  15. Hand-list of trees and shrubs grown in the Arboretum, Kew Gardens (London, 1902), p.623
  16. Accessions book. Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh. 1902. pp. 45, 47.
  17. RBGE Living Collection, data.rbge.org.uk
  18. Tree mislabelled U. pumila L. var. arborea, originally 'Ulmus turkestanica' Regel, RBGE (Benmore), herbarium specimen E00212438, Acc. no. 19021007B (1902, n.1007, Benmore) from Späth, data.rbge.org.uk
  19. RBGE herbarium specimen of 'Turkestanica' Regel, E00824837, data.rbge.org.uk
  20. Léon, Pardé (1906). Arboretum national des Barres. Énumération des végétaux ligneux indigènes et exotiques qui y sont cultivées. Paris. p. 250. Retrieved 23 August 2018.
  21. rystonhall.co.uk/
  22. Ryston Hall Arboretum catalogue. c. 1920. pp. 13–14.
  23. Gembrook or Nobelius Nursery, Melbourne, 1916 catalogue
  24. Clouston, B., & Stansfield, K., eds., After the Elm (London 1979), p.39
  25. Clinton, G. P., McCormick, Florence A., Dutch elm disease, Graphium ulmi (New Haven, 1936), p.737, p.710
  26. Catalogue générale, automne 1936 – printemps 1937, Pépinières Boccard Frères, Geneva, 1936, p.30
  27. Hesse, Hermann Albert (1933). Preis- und Sortenliste. pp. 91–92. Retrieved 27 February 2018.
  28. Act. Hort. Petrop., 6:477 (1879)
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.