25. WILTON PLACE. S.W.
June 9 /69
My dear Sir
Since I last wrote two boxes have come from you one (I believe per Somersetshire) some little time since and the other per Wellesley just arrived
I have finished the Verbenaceae and Myoporineae the latter have taken a long time because I had carefully to examine the ovaries — I have now packed up all your specimens and they go in a box they are sending from Kew with some other specimens for you I trust they will reach you safe.
In revising Verbenaceae I have thought the best course is to limit Chloanthes to the species with decurrent leaves which have a distinct habit with appreciable characters in the corolla and anthers and to reduce the Quoyas with the non decurrent western Chloanthes to Pityrodia which has in every respect all the Quoya characters.
There is no doubt you are right in transferring Sparthothamnus to Verbenaceae1 but I cannot agree in uniting Teucridium which has the 4-lobed ovary and 4-lobed fruit separating into dry nuts of Oxera and is in my opinion as distinct from Spartothamnus as any two genera of Verbenaceae.
Myoporineae must I presume be kept distinct from Verbenaceae as they differ in the aestivation of the corolla as well as in the inferior radicle2
As to the genera of Myoporineae they certainly do run much one into another. There appear to me to be four main types
Myoporum Stamens nearly equal. Ovary of 2, 3, 4 or more perfect cells with one ovule in each
Pholidia. Stamens didynamous. Ovary of 2 cells with 1 or 2 ovules in each. Endocarp 2- or 4 -celled with 1 seed in each
Eremophila Stamens didynamous. Ovary of 2 cells with 4 or 6 ovules in each in superposed pairs. Calyx lobes not overlapping at the base. Endocarp separating into 4 one-seeded nuts. Exocarp almost dry
Stenochilus Stamens and Ovary of Eremophila. Calyx much imbricate at the base. Endocarp very hard and four-celled. Exocarp succulent
But these run into each other especially the two last. Myoporum debile has a two-celled ovary with two ovules in each Two or three species of Stenochilus have only one pair of ovules in each cell and some species have rather ambiguous fruit. Browns Eremophila alternifolia goes better in Stenochilus and others are not quite certain[.]3 I therefore follow you in uniting Stenochilus and Eremodendron with Eremophila but I think Pholidia must be retained (including Pseudopholidia and Sentis) as being as distinct from Eremophila as from Myoporum without any positive limits from either — the latter of course including Disoon.
Your Eremophila myoporoides4 seems to me to be a true Myoporum only differing from M. deserti in the larger flowers. These two species differ from all other Australian Myopora in having constantly regular pentandrous flowers with the base of the corolla lobes perfectly glabrous whilst in all other Australian species I always find only four perfect stamens and only exceedingly rarely (indeed only once in the very numerous buds I have opened) a fifth imperfect one and always even where described as glabrous I find some hairs at the base of the corolla-lobes.
Browns Eremophila oppositifolia looks very different from E. Cunninghamii although you may be right in considering it as an extreme form. The leaves are almost terete as in E. alternifolia — but I shall compare them again.5
Ever yours sincerely
George Bentham
I go abroad next week till September6
Chloanthes
Disoon
Eremodendron
Eremophila alternifolia
Eremophila Cunninghamii
Eremophila myoporoides
Eremophila oppositifolia
Myoporineae
Myoporum debile
Myoporum deserti
Oxera
Pholidia
Pityrodia
Pseudopholidia
Quoya
Sentis
Sparthothamnus
Stenochilus
Verbenaceae
Please cite as “FVM-69-06-09a,” in Correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller, edited by R.W. Home, Thomas A. Darragh, A.M. Lucas, Sara Maroske, D.M. Sinkora†, J.H. Voigt† and Monika Wells accessed on 26 April 2024, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/vonmueller/letters/69-06-09a