Ulmus glabra 'Latifolia'

Last updated

Ulmus glabra 'Latifolia'
Ulmus montana latifolia als Alleepflanzung.jpg
Ulmus montana latifolia, New Cemetery, Freiburg, 1901
Species Ulmus glabra
Cultivar 'Latifolia'
OriginMechelen, Belgium

The putative Wych Elm cultivar Ulmus glabra 'Latifolia' was identified in Audibert's Tonelle (1817) as U. campestrisLinn. [ = U. glabraHuds.] latifolia. [1] [2] The tree is reputed to have originated circa 1750 in or around Mechelen, and to have been widely planted throughout Belgium. A 1912 herbarium specimen from Oudenbosch, however, shows a hybrid leaf labelled Ulmus hollandica latifolia. [3]

Contents

'Latifolia' was considered "possibly the same as 'Belgica' (Belgian Elm)" by Green, [4] though the Späth nursery of Berlin marketed Ulmus montana latifolia and Ulmus montana belgica as distinct cultivars (see 'Cultivation'). The Hesse Nursery of Weener, Germany, marketed Ulmus montana latifolia in the 1930s, as well as an Ulmus latifolia, giving Ulmus Pitteursi and Ulmus hollandica as synonyms of the latter (and listing the latter with Ulmus latifolia Dumont). [5] Möller in Deutsche Gärtner-Zeitung (1901) gave U. scabraMill.latifolia as a synonym of the Ulmus montana latifolia marketed in Germany, confirming it as a wych elm cultivar. [6]

An Ulmus glabraMill. [:smooth-leaved] var. latifolia was described by Lindley in A Synopsis of British Flora, arranged according to the Natural Order (1829), from trees near West Hatch, Epping Forest, Essex. [7] A tree listed by that name grew in the Royal Victoria Park, Bath, in the mid-19th century. [8]

Description

Audibert described the tree as having broader leaves than the species, which expand very early in the spring. Möller in Deutsche Gärtner-Zeitung (1901) described Ulmus montana latifolia as a tree of lush growth that forms a broad crown with large foliage. [6] Hanham's Bath U. glabraMill. [:smooth-leaved] latifolia (1857) had leaves "oblong, acute, and very broad". [8]

Cultivation

No specimens are known to survive. 'Latifolia' was marketed in the late 19th century as U. montana latifolia by the Späth nursery of Berlin [9] and by the Ulrich nursery of Warsaw, [10] whence it was introduced to Eastern Europe. It was introduced to the Dominion Arboretum, Ottawa, Canada, probably from Späth, in 1899, as U. montana latifolia, being listed separately from U. montana belgica (planted 1896). [11] An U. campestris latifolia appears in some early 20th C English nursery lists. [12] An Ulmus latifolia, "compact and upright in habit" with "large leaves", appeared in the 1902 catalogue of the Bobbink and Atkins nursery, Rutherford, New Jersey. [13] It is not known to have been introduced to Australasia.

Putative specimens

An old elm cultivar matching one of the above descriptions of 'Latifolia' and one of the herbarium specimens [14] stands in North Merchiston Cemetery, Edinburgh (2018). The smooth leaf and shoot, asymmetrical leaf-base, 4 mm petiole, and elongated samara, suggest hybridity, despite a resemblance to wych elm.

Synonymy

Related Research Articles

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

The hybrid elm cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Belgica', one of a number of hybrids arising from the crossing of Wych Elm with a variety of Field Elm, was reputedly raised in the nurseries of the Abbey of the Dunes, Veurne, in 1694. Popular throughout Belgium and the Netherlands in the 19th century both as an ornamental and as a shelter-belt tree, it was the 'Hollandse iep' in these countries, as distinct from the tree known as 'Dutch Elm' in Great Britain and Ireland since the 17th century: Ulmus × hollandica 'Major'. In Francophone Belgium it was known as orme gras de Malines.

The hybrid elm cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Dauvessei', one of a number of cultivars arising from the crossing of the Wych Elm U. glabra with a variety of Field Elm U. minor, is a very rare cultivar said to have originated at the D. Dauvesse nursery in Orléans, France before 1877.

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Atropurpurea' [:dark purple] was raised from seed at the Späth nursery in Berlin, Germany, circa 1881, as Ulmus montana atropurpurea, and was marketed there till the 1930s, being later classed as a cultivar by Boom. Henry (1913) included it under Ulmus montana cultivars but noted that it was "very similar to and perhaps identical with" Ulmus purpureaHort. At Kew it was renamed U. glabraHuds. 'Atropurpurea', but Späth used U. montana both for wych elm and for some U. × hollandica hybrids, so his name does not necessarily imply a wych elm cultivar. The Hesse Nursery of Weener, Germany, however, which marketed 'Atropurpurea' in the 1950s, listed it in later years as a form of U. glabraHuds..

<i>Ulmus</i> Purpurea Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Purpurea', the purple-leaved elm, was listed and described as Ulmus Stricta Purpurea, the 'Upright Purpled-leaved Elm', by John Frederick Wood, F.H.S., in The Midland Florist and Suburban Horticulturist (1851), as Ulmus purpureaHort. by Wesmael (1863), and as Ulmus campestris var. purpurea, syn. Ulmus purpureaHort. by Petzold and Kirchner in Arboretum Muscaviense (1864). Koch's description followed (1872), the various descriptions appearing to tally. Henry (1913) noted that the Ulmus campestris var. purpureaPetz. & Kirchn. grown at Kew as U. montana var. purpurea was "probably of hybrid origin", Ulmus montana being used at the time both for wych elm cultivars and for some of the U. × hollandica group. His description of Kew's U. montana var. purpurea matches that of the commonly-planted 'Purpurea' of the 20th century. His discussion of it (1913) under U. campestris, however, his name for English Elm, may be the reason why 'Purpurea' is sometimes erroneously called U. procera 'Purpurea' (as in USA and Sweden.

<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.

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Monstrosa' [: "monstrous", "strange"], a shrub-elm with fasciated branching, is believed to have originated in France, where it was first listed by Lavallée in Arboretum Segrezianum (1877) as a form of Field Elm, Ulmus campestris var. monstrosa, but without description. Though its long slender 2 cm petiole is not a feature of wych elm U. glabraHuds., and is even less likely in a shrub form of this species, the wych-cultivar error arose early, perhaps because the Späth nursery of Berlin, using Ulmus montana both for some Ulmus × hollandica cultivars and for wych varieties, listed it c.1890 as Ulmus montana monstrosa. Hartwig in Illustrirtes Gehölzbuch (1892) followed with Ulmus scabra monstrosa, an error repeated by Krüssman (1962) and by Green (1964), with their U. glabraHuds. 'Monstrosa'.

<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.

The putative Wych Elm cultivar Ulmus glabra 'Dovaei', or Doué elm, was raised by the André Leroy nursery at Angers, France, as Ulmus dovaei, before 1868. The Baudriller nursery of Angers marketed it as Ulmus Dowei, "orme de Doué", suggesting a link with the royal nurseries at nearby Doué-la-Fontaine, which stocked elm. Green considered it a form of wych.

The putative Wych Elm cultivar Ulmus glabra 'Holgeri' originated in Sweden, where it was described by Holger Jensen of Ramlösa Plantskola, Helsingborg, in 1921. It was distributed by the Späth nursery of Berlin in the 1920s and '30s as Ulmus montana Holgeri. Späth used U. montana both for wych and for U. × hollandica hybrids like 'Dampieri', so the name does not necessarily imply a wych cultivar. In The Netherlands the tree was classified as an Ulmus × hollandica hybrid, a 1932 herbarium specimen from a tree in The Hague supplied by Späth being labelled Ulmus hollandica var. holgeri (Jensen).

The putative Wych Elm cultivar Ulmus glabra 'Latifolia Nigricans' was first described, as Ulmus campestris latifolia nigricans, by Pynaert in 1879. Pynaert, however, did not specify what species he meant by U. campestris. The tree was supplied by the Späth nursery of Berlin in the late 19th century and early 20th as Ulmus montana latifolia nigricans. Späth, like many of his contemporaries, used U. montana both for Wych Elm cultivars and for those of the U. × hollandica group.

<i>Ulmus glabra</i> Macrophylla Elm cultivar

The putative Wych Elm cultivar Ulmus glabra 'Macrophylla' [literally 'long-leaved', though also 'large-leaved'] was first mentioned by Lavallée in 1877 as U. montana var. macrophylla (fastigiata). The Späth nursery of Berlin marketed an U. montana macrophylla in the late 19th and early 20th century; both Späth and the Hesse Nursery of Weener, Germany, supplied it in the 1930s. At that time, Ulmus montana was used both for wych elm cultivars and for hybrid cultivars of the Ulmus × hollandica group.

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Rugosa' [:'wrinkled', the leaves], was first listed in Audibert's Tonelle (1817), as "U. campestris Linn. 'Rugosa' = orme d'Avignon [Avignon elm] ", but without description. A description followed in the Revue horticole, 1829. Green (1964) identified this cultivar with one listed by Hartwig and Rümpler in Illustrirtes Gehölzbuch (1875) as Ulmus montana var. rugosaHort.. A cultivar of the same name appeared in Loddiges' catalogue of 1836 and was identified by Loudon in Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum (1838) as Ulmus montana var. rugosaMasters, Masters naming the tree maple-bark elm. Ulmus montana was used at the time both for wych cultivars and for some cultivars of the Ulmus × hollandica group.

Ulmus × hollandica 'Pitteurs' or 'Pitteursii', one of a number of hybrid cultivars arising from the crossing of the Wych Elm Ulmus glabra with a variety of Field Elm Ulmus minor, was first identified by Morren as l'orme Pitteurs (1848). Elwes and Henry (1913) and Krüssmann (1976) listed it as an Ulmus × hollandica cultivar. It was named after the landowner Henri Bonaventure Trudon de Pitteurs of Saint-Trond, near Liège, Belgium, who discovered and first propagated the tree on his estate.

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

The hybrid elm cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Superba' is one of a number of intermediate forms arising from the crossing of the Wych Elm U. glabra with a variety of Field Elm U. minor. Boulger tentatively (1881) and Green more confidently (1964) equated it with a hybrid elm cultivated in the UK by Masters at Canterbury in the early 19th century, known as "Masters' Canterbury Seedling" or simply the Canterbury Elm. Loudon examined a specimen sent by Masters and considered it a hybrid, calling it U. montana glabra major.

<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> 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> Scampstoniensis Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Scampstoniensis', the Scampston Elm or Scampston Weeping Elm, is said to have come from Scampston Hall, Yorkshire, England, before 1810. Loudon opined that a tree of the same name at the Royal Horticultural Society's Garden in 1834, 18 feet (5.5 m) high at 8 years old "differed little from the species". Henry described the tree, from a specimen growing in Victoria Park, Bath, as "a weeping form of U. nitens" [:Ulmus minor ]; however Green considered it "probably a form of Ulmus × hollandica". Writing in 1831, Loudon said that the tree was supposed to have originated in America. U. minor is not, however, an American species, so if the tree was brought from America, it must originally have been taken there from Europe. There was an 'American Plantation' at Scampston, which may be related to this supposition. A number of old specimens of 'Scampstoniensis' in this plantation were blown down in a great gale of October 1881; younger specimens were still present at Scampston in 1911.

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>hollandica</i> Wentworthii Pendula Elm cultivar

Ulmus × hollandica 'Wentworthii Pendula', commonly known as the Wentworth Elm or Wentworth Weeping Elm, is a cultivar with a distinctive weeping habit that appears to have been introduced to cultivation towards the end of the 19th century. The tree is not mentioned in either Elwes and Henry's or Bean's classic works on British trees. The earliest known references are Dutch and German, the first by de Vos in Handboek tot de praktische kennis der voornaamste boomen (1890). At about the same time, the tree was offered for sale by the Späth nursery of Berlin as Ulmus Wentworthi pendulaHort.. The 'Hort.' in Späth's 1890 catalogue, without his customary label "new", confirms that the tree was by then in nurseries as a horticultural elm. De Vos, writing in 1889, states that the Supplement to Volume 1 includes entries announced since the main volume in 1887, putting the date of introduction between 1887 and 1889.

<i>Ulmus</i> Fastigiata Glabra Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Fastigiata Glabra' was distributed by the Späth nursery, Berlin, in the 1890s and early 1900s as U. montana fastigiata glabra. Späth used U. montana both for cultivars of wych elm and for those of some U. × hollandica hybrids like 'Dampieri'. A specimen of U. montana fastigiata glabra in the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh was determined by Melville in 1958 as a hybrid of the U. × hollandica group.

<i>Ulmus glabra</i> Superba Elm cultivar

The wych elm cultivar Ulmus glabraHuds. 'Superba', Blandford Elm, with unusually large leaves, was raised by Gill's of Blandford Forum, Dorset, in the early 1840s as Ulmus montana superba and was quickly distributed to other UK nurseries. It was confirmed as a form of wych, and first described by Lindley in The Gardeners' Chronicle, 1845, later descriptions being added by Gill (1845) and Morren (1848), who called it U. montana var. superba. Morren had adopted the name 'Superba' from the Fulham nurseryman Osborne in 1844, who supplied him with the tree – presumably one of the nurseries supplied by Gill. Morren states that 'Superba', already in cultivation in England, was introduced to Belgium by Denis Henrard of Saint Walburge, Liège, that in 1848 it had been present in Belgium for only three years, and that this variety was the one described as 'Superba' by Osborne, whom Henrard had visited at his nursery in Fulham in September 1844. 'Blandford Elm', with leaves of the same dimensions, was soon for sale in the USA.

References

  1. Audibert, U., Catalogue des végétaux de tous genres cultivés dans les jardins et pépinières à Tonelle (Tarascon, France, 1817) p. 23 catalogue of 1817
  2. kiki.huh.harvard.edu
  3. "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1847087". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet labelled Ulmus x hollandica latifolia, Oudenbosch, 1912; "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1847086". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Long shoot. Sheet labelled Ulmus x hollandica latifolia, Oudenbosch, 1912; "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1846600". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet labelled Ulmus x hollandica latifolia
  4. Green, Peter Shaw (1964). "Registration of cultivar names in Ulmus". Arnoldia. Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University. 24 (6–8): 41–80. Retrieved 16 February 2017.
  5. Hesse, Hermann Albert (1932). Preis- und Sortenliste. pp. 96–97. Retrieved 18 January 2018.
  6. 1 2 3 Möller, Deutsche Gärtner-Zeitung, Vol.16 (1901), p.324–325
  7. Lindley, John (1829). A synopsis of the British Flora; arranged according to the Natural Orders. London. pp. 226–227. Retrieved 14 December 2017.
  8. 1 2 Hanham, F. (1857). A Manual for the Park (Royal Victoria Park, Bath). Longman, London.
  9. Katalog (PDF). Vol. 108. Berlin, Germany: L. Späth Baumschulenweg. 1902–1903. pp. 132–133.
  10. Ulrich, C. (1894), Katalog Drzew i Krezewow, C. Ulrich, Rok 1893-94, Warszawa
  11. Saunders, William; Macoun, William Tyrrell (1899). Catalogue of the trees and shrubs in the arboretum and botanic gardens at the central experimental farm (2 ed.). pp. 74–75.
  12. Clibrans Ltd. (1921). Ornamental Trees Shribs & Climbers. Vol. Season: 1921-22. Altrincham, Cheshire, UK: Clibrans. p. 15.
  13. Bobbink and Atkins, Rutherford. N.J. 1902. p. 51.
  14. bioportal.naturalis.nl, specimen WAG.1846600 Ulmus × hollandica 'Latifolia'
  15. huh.harvard.edu