Document information

Physical location:

RBG Kew, Kew correspondence, Australia, Mueller, 1882-90, f. 140. 85.04.05a

Plant names

Preferred Citation:

Ferdinand von Mueller to Joseph Hooker, 1885-04-05 [85.04.05a]. 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/1880-9/1885/85-04-05a-final.odt>, accessed June 17, 2026

5/4/85
Would you kindly cause, dear Sir Joseph,
1
MS annotation: '23[H]'.
to be reexamined, to see whether it has subulate or truncate stigmata. In the former case I should think it identical with .
2
I should … Phacellothrix is marked with a line in the margin. MS annotations by D. Oliver: noted on sheet and Our single specimen is a very bad one. I find the style-branch [uninjured] — papillose & subulate, certainly not truncate. Phacellothrix we have not, at least not laid in D.O. and by W. Thiselton-Dyer And 22/5/85. Letter not found.
Undoubtedly you figured the true ;
3
Botanical magazine, 1885, 111: t. 6798.
a full account of flowers , fruits and even the tall palmlike stem is given in the fragm. II, 106, VII, 96.
4
B60.11.03; B70.04.01.
— Like the two s it is not likely belonging to any other region than that of eastern littoral Australia.
Regardfully your
Ferd. von Mueller.