Ulmus 'Densa'

Last updated
Ulmus 'Densa'
Ulmus densa.jpg
'Densa'
Genus Ulmus
Cultivar 'Densa'
OriginC. Asia

The elm cultivar UlmusDensa was described from specimens growing near Ashkabad as U. densaLitv. in Schedae ad Herbarium Florae Rossicae (1908). [1] Litvinov, reporting it growing wild in the mountains of Turkestan, Ferghana, and Aksu, as well as in cultivation, considered it a species, a view upheld by the Soviet publications Trees and Shrubs in the USSR (1951) [2] and Flora of Armenia (1962), [3] and by some current plant lists. [4] [5] [note 1] Other authorities take it to be a form of U minor, distinctive only in its dense crown and upright branching. [6] [7] [8] The Moscow State University herbarium gives (2020) Ulmus minor as the "accepted name" of U. densaLitv.. [9] [10]

Contents

Litvinov considered U. minor 'Umbraculifera', with its "denser crown and more rounded form", a cultivar of U. densa, [6] calling it U. densa var. bubyriana. Rehder (1949) and Green (1964), ignoring reports of the wild form, considered U. densa a synonym of 'Umbraculifera'. [11] [12] The U. densa photographed by Meyer in Aksu, Chinese Turkestan on his 1911-12 expedition does not appear to be the tidy grafted cultivar 'Umbraculifera' and was said to be named 'Seda'. [13] [14] Zielińksi in Flora Iranica (1979) considered 'Umbraculifera' an U. minor cultivar. [15]

In its natural range U. densa overlaps with U. pumila. The extent of hybridization between the two is not known.

Description

Litvinov noted that the tree "differed little from U. glabraMill." [:U. minor] except in its erect branches and dense oblong crown. [16] The leaves were "generally smaller" and the branches "smooth and lighter in colour". As with the hybrid U. × androssowii, its compact branch structure helps the tree conserve moisture. [17]

Pests and diseases

Not known.

Cultivation

Litvinov said that U. densa was "widely cultivated" in gardens in Turkestan. It is one of a number of elms known locally as 'karagach' or 'karagatch' [:'black tree' = elm]. [18] [19] [20] In western Europe U. densaLitv. was distributed by Hesse's Nurseries, Weener, Germany, in the 1930s. [21]

Notable trees

A large, well-grown specimen stands in Dushanbe Botanic Gardens, Tajikistan (2019). [22] [23]

Cultivars

These include one of the oldest of elm cultivars, 'Umbraculifera', and a number of elms introduced to the West by the Späth nursery of Berlin.

Meyer (1912) identified three cultivars of U. densa: 'Stamboul', 'Kitaisky' and 'Seda'. [24] [14]

Hybrid cultivars

The tree, or its cultivar form 'Umbraculifera', has hybridised with U. pumila to produce U. × androssowii.

Accessions

None known.

Notes

  1. Ulmus densa was one of two elm "species" determined by Litvinov; the second, his Ulmus celtidea, has not been accepted by other authorities (Journal of the Arnold Arboretum, vol.19, 1938; p.264).

Related Research Articles

<i>Ulmus minor <span style="font-style:normal;">subsp.</span> canescens</i> Subspecies of tree

Ulmus minorsubsp.canescens is a small deciduous tree occasionally known by the common names grey elm, grey-leafed elm, and hoary elm. Its natural range extends through the lands of the central and eastern Mediterranean, from southern Italy, the islands of Sicily, Malta, Crete, Rhodes and Cyprus, to Turkey, and as far south as Israel, where it is now considered rare and endangered in the wild. The tree is typically found amidst the comparatively humid coastal woodlands and scrublands.

<i>Ulmus</i> Crispa Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Crispa' [:'curled', the leaf margin], sometimes known as the Fernleaf Elm, arose before 1800 and was first listed by Willdenow as U. crispa (1809). Audibert listed an U. campestrisLinn. 'Crispa', orme à feuilles crépues [:'frizzy-leaved elm'], in 1817, and an Ulmus urticaefolia [:'nettle-leaved elm'] in 1832; the latter is usually taken to be a synonym. Loudon considered the tree a variety of U. montana (1838). In the 19th century, Ulmus × hollandica cultivars, as well as those of Wych Elm, were often grouped under Ulmus montana. Elwes and Henry (1913) listed 'Crispa' as a form of wych elm, but made no mention of the non-wych samara.

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>hollandica</i> Serpentina Elm cultivar

The putative hybrid cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Serpentina' is an elm of unknown provenance and doubtful status. Henry identified it as intermediate between U. glabra and U. minor, a view accepted by Bean and by Melville, who believed that the specimens at Kew bearing the name 'Serpentina' were U. glabra "introgressed by U. carpinifolia" [: U. minor] and were similar to but "distinct from 'Camperdownii'".

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Propendens Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Propendens', described by Schneider in 1904 as U. glabra (:minor) var. suberosa propendens, Weeping Cork-barked elm, was said by Krüssmann (1976) to be synonymous with the U. suberosa pendula listed by Lavallée without description in 1877. Earlier still, Loudon's Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum had included an illustration of a pendulous "cork-barked field elm", U. campestris suberosa. An U. campestris suberosa pendula was in nurseries by the 1870s.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Umbraculifera Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Umbraculifera' [:shade-giving] was originally cultivated in Iran, where it was widely planted as an ornamental and occasionally grew to a great size, being known there as 'Nalband' Persian: نعلبند‎ [:the tree of the farriers]. Litvinov considered it a cultivar of a wild elm with a dense crown that he called U. densa, from the mountains of Turkestan, Ferghana, and Aksu. Non-rounded forms of 'Umbraculifera' are also found in Isfahan Province, Iran. Zielińksi in Flora Iranica considered it an U. minor cultivar.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Rueppellii Elm cultivar

Ulmus minor 'Rueppellii' is a Field Elm cultivar said to have been introduced to Europe from Tashkent by the Späth nursery, Berlin. Noted in 1881 as a 'new elm', it was listed in Späth Catalogue 73, p. 124, 1888–89, and in subsequent catalogues, as Ulmus campestris Rueppelli, and later by Krüssmann as a cultivar.

<i>Ulmus</i> Koopmannii Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Koopmannii' was cloned from a specimen raised from seed sent from Margilan, Turkestan by Koopmann to the Botanischer Garten Berlin c. 1880. Noted in 1881 as a 'new elm', it was later listed by the Späth nursery, catalogue no. 62, p. 6. 101, 1885, as Ulmus Koopmannii, and later by Krüssmann in 1962 as a cultivar of U. minor. Margilan is beyond the main range of Ulmus minor. Augustine Henry, who saw the specimens in Berlin and Kew, believed Koopmann's Elm to be a form of Ulmus pumila, a view not shared by Rehder of the Arbold Arboretum. Ascherson & Graebner said the tree produced 'very numerous root shoots', which suggests it may be a cultivar of U. minor. Until DNA analysis can confirm its origin, the cultivar is now treated as Ulmus 'Koopmannii'.

Ulmus laevis var. celtideaRogow. is a putative variety of European White Elm first described by Rogowicz, who found the tree in 1856 along the river Dnjepr near Chernihiv in what is now northern Ukraine. The type specimen is held at the National Herbarium of Ukraine. The variety was first named as Ulmus pedunculata var. celtidea. Litvinov (1908) considered it a species, calling it Ulmus celtideaLitv., a view not upheld by other authorities.

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Globosa' was first described in the Späth nursery catalogue of 1892–93. Considered "probably Ulmus carpinifolia " by Green

<i>Ulmus pumila</i> Pendula Elm cultivar

The Siberian Elm cultivar Ulmus pumila 'Pendula' is from northern China, where it is known as Lung chao yü shu. It was classified by Frank Meyer in Fengtai in 1908, and introduced to the United States by him from the Peking Botanical Garden as Weeping Chinese Elm. The USDA plant inventory record (1916) noted that it was a "rare variety even in China". It was confirmed as an U. pumila cultivar by Krüssmann (1962).

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>hollandica</i> Gaujardii Elm cultivar

The hybrid elm cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Gaujardii', one of a number of cultivars arising from the crossing of Wych Elm U. glabra with Field Elm U. minor, was raised by the Gaujard-Rome nursery of Châteauroux, France, in the 1890s as Ulmus Gaujardii and was described in the 1898 Kew Bulletin and Wiener illustrirte Garten-Zeitung. It won first prize in the International Horticultural Exhibition in Saint Petersburg, Russia, in 1899 and a silver medal in the Heemstede Exhibition, The Netherlands, in 1925. From the early 20th century it was distributed by the Späth nursery of Berlin as Ulmus montana Gaujardi, and in the interwar years by the Boccard nursery of Geneva as Ulmus campestris Gaujardi. It appeared in Unsere Freiland-Laubgehölze in 1913, but without description.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Umbraculifera Gracilis Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Umbraculifera Gracilis' was obtained as a sport of 'Umbraculifera' by the Späth nursery of Berlin c.1897. It was marketed by the Späth nursery in the early 20th century, and by the Hesse Nursery of Weener, Germany, in the 1930s.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Pendula Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Pendula' was said to have been raised in Belgium in 1863. It was listed as Ulmus sativa pendula by C. de Vos in 1887, and by Boom in 1959 as a cultivar.

<i>Ulmus</i> Androssowii Elm cultivar

The hybrid cultivar Ulmus 'Androssowii'R. Kam., an elm of Uzbekistan sometimes referred to in old travel books as 'Turkestan Elm' or as 'karagach' [:black tree, = elm], its local name, is probably an artificial hybrid. According to Lozina-Lozinskaia the tree is unknown in the wild in Uzbekistan, and apparently arose from a crossing of U. densa var. bubyrianaLitv., which it resembles, and the Siberian Elm Ulmus pumila.

<i>Ulmus pumila</i> Pinnato-ramosa Elm cultivar

The Siberian elm cultivar Ulmus pumila 'Pinnato-ramosa' was raised by Georg Dieck, as Ulmus pinnato-ramosa, at the National Arboretum, Zöschen, Germany, from seed collected for him circa 1890 in the Ili valley, Turkestan by the lawyer and amateur naturalist Vladislav E. Niedzwiecki while in exile there. Litvinov (1908) treated it as a variety of Siberian elm, U. pumilavar.arborea but this taxon was ultimately rejected by Green, who sank the tree as a cultivar: "in modern terms, it does not warrant recognition at this rank but is a variant of U. pumila maintained and known only in cultivation, and therefore best treated as a cultivar". Herbarium specimens confirm that trees in cultivation in the 20th century as U. pumilaL. var. arboreaLitv. were no different from 'Pinnato-ramosa'.

Ulmus boissieriGrudz.,, a disputed species of elm found in Iran, was identified by Grudzinskaya in 1977. She equated her "new species" with the U. campestris f. microphylla collected in 1859 in Kerman Province and described in his Flora Orientalis (1879) by Boissier, for whom she named it, treating Boissier's specimen as the "type". The tree is endemic the provinces of Kermanshah and Kerman., and also the Zagros forests, growing with Quercus brantii, Celtis australis, Platanus orientalis, Fraxinus sp., and Cerasus mehaleb.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Goodyeri Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Goodyeri', commonly known as 'Goodyer's Elm', was discovered by John Goodyer in 1624 at Pennington near the Hampshire coast between Lymington and Christchurch. No old specimens are known to survive, but the tree is perpetuated by numerous root suckers, notably in the lanes about the Alice Lisle public house in the New Forest hamlet of Rockford. The tree has suffered misidentification in the centuries since its discovery, firstly by Philip Miller in his 'Gardeners' Dictionary' of 1731, and later in the early 20th century by Augustine Henry and Marcus Woodward, who both confused the tree with Plot Elm, whose centre of distribution is in the East Midlands, some 200 miles away and of completely different appearance.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Suberosa Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Suberosa', commonly known as the Cork-barked elm, is a slow-growing or dwarf form of conspicuously suberose Field Elm. Of disputed status, it is considered a distinct variety by some botanists, among them Henry (1913), Krüssmann (1984), and Bean (1988), and is sometimes cloned and planted as a cultivar. Henry said the tree "appears to be a common variety in the forests of central Europe", Bean noting that it "occurs in dry habitats". By the proposed rule that known or suspected clones of U. minor, once cultivated and named, should be treated as cultivars, the tree would be designated U. minor 'Suberosa'. The Späth nursery of Berlin distributed an U. campestris suberosa alataKirchn. [:'corky-winged'] from the 1890s to the 1930s.

<i>Ulmus</i> Karagatch Elm cultivar

Ulmus 'Karagatch' is a hybrid cultivar from Turkestan, selected in the early 20th century and considered either a backcrossing of U. × androssowii and U. pumila, or simply a cultivar of × androssowii. It was grown from seeds, introduced from Bairam Ali in Russian Turkestan by Arthur P. Davis in the 1930s, as U. 'Karagatch', under which name it was planted at Kew.

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Turkestanica' was first described by Regel as U. turkestanica in Dieck, Hauptcat. Baumschul. Zöschen (1883) and in Gartenflora (1884). 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 ]. Litvinov considered U. turkestanicaRegel a variety of his U. densa, adding that its fruits were "like those of U. foliaceaGilibert" [:U. minor].

References

  1. Schedae ad Herbarium Florae Rossicae , VI. 163-165 (1908)
  2. Sokolov, S. Ya (1951). Деревья и кустарники СССР [Trees & Shrubs in the USSR] (in Russian). 2. Moscow. pp. 504–505.
  3. Takhtajan, Armen Leonovich (1962). Флора Армении[Flora of Armenia] (in Russian). 4. Yerevan. pp. 341–342.
  4. The Plant List: Ulmus densa Litv., accessdate: December 14, 2016
  5. Tropicos: Name - Ulmus densa Litv., accessdate: December 14, 2016
  6. 1 2 Elwes, Henry John; Henry, Augustine (1913). The Trees of Great Britain & Ireland. 7. p. 1893.
  7. De Langhe, Jan (7 April 2016). Vegetative key to species European cultivation (Ulmaceae) (PDF). Ghent: Ghent University Botanical Garden. p. 5. Retrieved 18 December 2016.
  8. Plantarium: Ulmus densa - Галерея субтаксонов - Плантариум (in Russian), accessdate: December 18, 2016
  9. Moscow State University herbarium, Specimen MW0591858, plant.depo.msu.ru
  10. Moscow State University herbarium, Specimen MW0591857, plant.depo.msu.ru
  11. Alfred Rehder (1949). "Bibliography of cultivated trees and shrubs hardy in the cooler temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere". Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University. p. 142.
  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. Meyer's photograph (5675) of Ulmus densa Turkestan. Aksu, Turkestan. February 1911
  14. 1 2 Meyer's photograph (5676) of Ulmus densa Turkestan. Aksu, Turkestan. February 1911
  15. J. Zielińksi, 'Ulmaceae', Flora Iranica, ed. K. H. Rechinger (Graz, 1979)
  16. Photograph captioned U. densa, uses.plantnet-project.org
  17. World Digital Library: Elm Trees. Samarkand, accessdate: December 18, 2016
  18. Rickmers, W. Rickmer, The Duab of Turkestan, a physiographic sketch and account of some travels (Cambridge, 1913), p.172
  19. Lansdell, Henry, Through Central Asia (London, 1887), p.464
  20. Voeikov, Aleksandr Ivanovich, Le Turkestan Russe (Paris, 1914), p.68
  21. Hesse, Hermann Albert (1932). Preis- und Sortenliste. pp. 96–97. Retrieved 18 January 2018.
  22. U. minor / Ulmus densaLitv. www.plantarium.ru
  23. Google Maps: Dushanbe Botanic Gardens - Google Maps (May 2019), accessdate: August 21, 2019
  24. Meyer, F. N. (1912). Seeds and plants imported during the period from January 1 to March 31, 1912: Inventory No.30, Nos 3282932831. Bureau of Plant Industry - Bulletin No. 282. Washington, Government Printing Office, 1913.