Ulmus aff. 'Plotii'

Last updated
Ulmus aff. 'Plotii'
Ulmus foliacea, young specimens from the meadow at Barlingbo marsh.jpg
Young Plot-like field elms, Barlingbo, Gotland, Sweden [1] [2]
Genus Ulmus
Cultivar Ulmus aff. 'Plotii'
OriginEurope

Ulmus aff. 'Plotii', or 'pseudo-Plotii', was the name first used by Melville in the 1940s for elms in England, of various genotypes, that resemble but do not completely match the 'type'-tree, U. minor 'Plotii'. [3] It was taken up again following Dr Max Coleman's findings about Plot Elm (2000) [4] and his paper on British elms (2002). [5]

Contents

Melville's brief description, at the end of a paragraph on Plot Elm in a 1948 paper, of "a second small-leaved elm, as yet unnamed, found in the lower Thames Valley and East Anglia", that "shares some of the curious features of the Plot Elm but lacks its graceful habit", [6] may be a reference to his aff. 'Plotii'.

Plot-like field elms have also been observed in U. minor fringe areas outside England. [2] [1]

Description

Elms of the aff. 'Plotii' group "are very close to Plot Elm and have a number of characteristics of the 'type', but their crowns are too broad and regular to match 'true Plot'." [7] They are characterised by some or all of the following diagnostic features: a mature crown of unilateral habit; short shoots that produce more than five leaves in a flush; subequal cordate leaf base; and red club-shaped glandular hairs on leaf surface.

Pests and diseases

The trees are susceptible to Dutch elm disease, but as they produce abundant root-suckers immature specimens probably survive in their areas of origin.

Cultivation

A few Plot-like field elms have entered cultivation (see Accessions below).

Two trees formerly labelled U. minor subsp. minor × U. minor var. lockii, and referred to in Coleman (2000) as 'pseudo-Plotii', [4] that stand (2016) in the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, have been re-classified on the RBGE database as U. minor 'Umbraculifera Gracilis'. [8] An elm cultivar of the same clone and similar age, also formerly known as U. aff. 'Plotii', [7] stands on Whitehouse Loan, Bruntsfield Links, Edinburgh. [9]

Hybrids

This group of elms is likely to hybridize in the wild both with wych elm and with U. minor.

Plot-like elms at Abbekinderen, Zeeland, the Netherlands, 1952, conjectured by Touw as U. minor x U. plotii (1958) Ulmus minor, Abbekinderen, Netherlands.jpg
Plot-like elms at Abbekinderen, Zeeland, the Netherlands, 1952, conjectured by Touw as U. minor × U. plotii (1958)

Accessions

Related Research Articles

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

The field elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Stricta', known as Cornish elm, was commonly found in South West England, Brittany, and south-west Ireland, until the arrival of Dutch elm disease in the late 1960s. The origin of Cornish elm in England remains a matter of contention. It is commonly assumed to have been introduced from Brittany. It is also considered possible that the tree may have survived the ice ages on lands to the south of Cornwall long since lost to the sea. Henry thought it "probably native in the south of Ireland". Dr Max Coleman of Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, arguing in his 2002 paper on British elms that there was no clear distinction between species and subspecies, suggested that known or suspected clones of Ulmus minor, once cultivated and named, should be treated as cultivars, preferred the designation U. minor 'Stricta' to Ulmus minor var. stricta. The DNA of 'Stricta' has been investigated and the cultivar is now known to be a clone.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Plotii Cultivar of the field elm

The field elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Plotii', commonly known as Lock elm or Lock's elm, Plot's elm or Plot elm, and first classified as Ulmus sativaMill. var. Lockii and later as Ulmus plotii by Druce in 1907-11, is endemic mainly to the East Midlands of England, notably around the River Witham in Lincolnshire, in the Trent Valley around Newark-on-Trent, and around the village of Laxton, Northamptonshire. Ronald Melville suggested that the tree's distribution may be related to river valley systems, in particular those of the Trent, Witham, Welland, and Nene. Two further populations existed in Gloucestershire. It has been described as Britain's rarest native elm, and recorded by The Wildlife Trust as a nationally scarce species.

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> × <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.

The Elm cultivar Ulmus 'Tiliaefolia' was first mentioned by Host in Flora Austriaca (1827), as Ulmus tiliaefolia [:linden-leaved]. The Späth nursery of Berlin distributed a 'Tiliaefolia' from the late 19th century to the 1930s as neither an U. montana hybrid nor a field elm cultivar, but simply as Ulmus tiliaefolia, suggesting uncertainty about its status. Herbarium specimens appear to show two clones, one smaller-leaved and classified as a field elm cultivar, the other larger-leaved.

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Cucullata', the Hooded elm, was listed by Loddiges of Hackney, London, in their catalogue of 1823 as Ulmus campestris cucullata, and later by Loudon in Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum (1838), as U. campestris var. cucullata.

<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.

The hybrid cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Etrusca' was first mentioned by Nicholson in Kew Hand-List Trees & Shrubs 2: 139. 1896, as U. montana var. etrusca, but without description. The tree at Kew, judged by Henry to be "not distinct enough to deserve a special name", was later identified as of hybrid origin, U. glabra × U. minor 'Plotii', by Melville.

<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.

The hybrid elm cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Elegantissima' was the name given by A. R. Horwood in his Flora of Leicestershire and Rutland (1933) to an elm found in those counties and later identified by Melville as a natural hybrid between Wych Elm and Plot Elm. According to Melville, the hybrid occurs in the main areas of Plot Elm distribution, where it is more common than Plot Elm itself. The tree is sometimes known simply as the 'Midlands Elm'.

<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'.

<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 minor</i> Coritana Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Coritana' was originally claimed by Melville, while he was searching in the neighbourhood of Leicestershire in 1936 for U. elegantissima, as a new species, which he called U. coritana. He later recorded its distribution in the counties of Bedfordshire, Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertfordshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Norfolk, Oxfordshire, Suffolk and Warwickshire. Richens, however, dismissed U. coritana as 'an artificial aggregate' of local forms of Field Elm. Bean noted (1988) that Melville's U. coritana was not recognised in the Flora of the British Isles as a species distinct from U. carpinifolia [:U. minor].

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>diversifolia</i> Elm cultivar

Ulmus × diversifolia, also known as the diverse leaved elm, was originally described by Melville in 1939 as a new species, U. diversifolia, though he later believed it a natural hybrid of Coritanian elm, Plot elm and Wych elm. He recorded its distribution in Hertfordshire, between Hatfield, Hertford and Watton-at-Stone, and in Suffolk, where it was common along the coastal plain from Ipswich and Felixstowe to Lowestoft and Beccles, occurring inland as far as Diss and Debenham, and probably extending further north into Norfolk and south towards Colchester, Essex. He accordingly referred to it as "the East Anglian elm".

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Viminalis Stricta' (:'narrow'), formerly known as U. campestris var. viminalis stricta, is a fastigiate form of Ulmus minor 'Viminalis'. A herbarium specimen at Kew labelled U. campestris var. viminalis f. stricta was considered by Melville a form of his U. × viminalis.

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

The field elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Viminalis' (:'willow-like'), occasionally referred to as the twiggy field elm, was raised by Masters in 1817, and listed in 1831 as U. campestris viminalis, without description. Loudon added a general description in 1838, and the Cambridge University Herbarium acquired a leaf specimen of the tree in 1866. Moss, writing in 1912, said that the Ulmus campestris viminalis from Cambridge University Herbarium was the only elm he thought agreed with the original Plot's elm as illustrated by Dr. Plot in 1677 from specimens growing in an avenue and coppice at Hanwell near Banbury. Elwes and Henry (1913) also considered Loudon's Ulmus campestris viminalis to be Dr Plot's elm. Its 19th-century name, U. campestris var. viminalis, led the cultivar to be classified for a time as a variety of English Elm. On the Continent, 'Viminalis' was the Ulmus antarcticaHort., 'zierliche Ulme' [:'dainty elm'] of Kirchner's Arboretum Muscaviense (1864).

<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.

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].

<i>Ulmus</i> Glabra Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Glabra' was distributed by the Späth nursery, Berlin, in the 1890s and early 1900s as U. glabraMill.. Not to be confused with the species U. glabraHuds..

References

  1. 1 2 Johansson, K. (1924). "Om vära almar" [About our elms](PDF). Lustgården. 5: 62. Retrieved 13 February 2018.
  2. 1 2 Johansson, K. (1921). "Bidrag till kännedom om Gottlands Ulmus-former" [Contribution to knowledge of Gottland's Ulmus forms]. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift. 15 (1): 9. Retrieved 14 February 2018.
  3. "Herbarium specimen - L.4214727". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Specimen labelled Ulmus aff. plotii by Melville (Newport, Essex, 1949); "Herbarium specimen - L.4213929". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Specimen labelled Ulmus aff. plotii by Melville (Ware, Hertfordshire, 1949)
  4. 1 2 3 Coleman, M.; Hollingsworth, M. L. & Hollingsworth, P. M. (2000). "Application of RAPDs to the critical taxonomy of the English endemic elm Ulmus plotii Druce". Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. 133 (3): 241–262. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8339.2000.tb01545.x.
  5. Coleman, Max (2002). "British elms". British Wildlife. 13 (6): 390–395.
  6. Melville, Ronald, 'The British Elms', The New Naturalist, Collins, London, 1948, p.40
  7. 1 2 Coleman's description, in correspondence, 2013.
  8. "Former aff. 'Plotii', RBGE".
  9. "Former aff. 'Plotii', Bruntsfield Links, Edinburgh".
  10. bioportal.naturalis.nl, specimen L.3185175
  11. Detailed results from Living collection for ulmus plotii: ePIC - Detailed results from Living collection for ulmus plotii, accessdate: July 29, 2016