The correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller: ¶ Could what I have sent as Taxotrophis rectinervis possibly be a ¶ Celtis ¶ ? ¶ I have no note whether it is lactescent or not. If a new Celtis the specific name might still be retained ¶ ¶ Some ...

Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew Correspondence, Australia, Mueller,1858-1870, f. 32. 68.06.00a

Plant names

Celtis
Search for Celtis in
Cycadeae
Search for Cycadeae in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Pittosporum melanospermum
Search for Pittosporum melanospermum in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index
Taxotrophis rectinervis
Search for Taxotrophis rectinervis in
- This website
- Australian Plant Name Index

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to [George Bentham], 1868-06 [68.06.00a]. R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora, J.H. Voigt and Monika Wells (eds), Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, <https://vmcp.rbg.vic.gov.au/id//letters/1860-9/1868/68-06-00a-final.odt>, accessed June 9, 2026

The addressee is uncertain, but is most likely to have been Bentham as such comments were routinely addressed to him during the preparation of Flora Australiensis. There is a pencil annotation 'vol. vi', presumably added by an archivist when the manuscripits were sorted for binding; is treated in Bentham (1863-78), vol. 6.

June 1868 is the earliest date consistent with M having had second thoughts about (B68.06.03, p. 192), specimens of which were probably included in the main collection of Urticeae sent to Bentham in May 1868 (RB MSS M44, Notebook recording despatch of plants for Bentham for Flora australiensis, Library, Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne). M published a species of Pittosporum at the same time as Taxotrophis (p. 186) and apparently looked at the treatment in Flora Australiensis (Bentham (1863-78), vol. 1, p. 111); he may also have looked at the Pittosporum entry in Bentham & Hooker (1862-83), vol. 1, part 3, p. 131, published in September 1867.

Could what I have sent as possibly be a ?

Bentham (1863-78), vol. 6, p. 160 treated as a synonym of Aphananthe phillippinensis.

I have no note whether it is lactescent or not. If a new the specific name might still be retained

Some years ago the excellent Mr Bennett

Dr. George Bennett, d. 1893.

pointed out to me when I enquired, that Hunters River given as a locality for some of A Cunninghams N.W. Austr plants, was intended for Hunters Inlet on the N.W. coast.

See Bentham (1863-78), vol. 1, p. 111, under Pittosporum melanospermum, where he mentions 'There is one specimen, in the Hookerian herbarium from A. Cunningham, marked Hunter's River; but it is not in any other of the numerous collections we have from that locality, nor from any other station in N. S. Wales.' It is not clear which Kew specimen Bentham was citing.

In September 1820 Cunningham collected in the area of the Hunter's River that enters Prince Frederick's Harbour, off York Sound, WA at approx. 125° 30' E, 15°S (see A. Cunningham to W. T. Aiton, 1 February 1821, in A. Orchard & T. Orchard (2015), p. 130); K 591702 is from that location and is presumably the one that Bentham mentioned from 'York Sound', N. Australia.

The young fruit of is completely bilocular.

See Bentham (1863-78),vol. 1, p. 111, and the treatment of Pittosporum in Bentham & Hooker (1862–83), vol. 1, part 3, p. 131.

I have not been able to identify Mr Hills supposed new genus of , of which [an] account appeared in the Gardeners Chronicle

Catakidozamia hopei , W. Hill (1865). The description was reported in the Brisbane Courier , 21 March 1866, p. 4, col. c.

The text ends at the bottom of the page, without valediction.