FIG. 3. Fruit of the Tulip Tree (Liriodendron tulipifera); natural size, as it appears in the winter months. Various stages are presented, which will be appreciated through reading the descriptions in the text of the article.

summit into coarse and straggling branches." This may be the case in some tulip trees, but it by no means applies to all of them. For instance, it in no way applies to the tree I here present in Figure 1, which is a reproduction of one of my photographs of a superb Liriodendron tulipifera, growing on a hill south of Pierce's Mill, Washington, D. C. It is on the right hand side of the road before coming to the bridge close to the mill, and not far from the boundary of the National Zoological Park property. It will at once be observed that, although the trunk of this tree is fairly "straight," it is by no means "clear" of branches; neither does it exactly "divide rather abruptly at the summit." Personally, not only have I seen many a tulip tree like this one, but I have also seen specimens wherein the limbs, coming off from the trunk, were much larger, and sprang from the trunk much lower down. Moreover, the trunk of this tree is not always "straight," though it is so in the majority of trees of this species. (See picture on cover.) There is a very excellent description of this tree in the Century Dictionary (Knowlton?), but it likewise ignores the form of it. This definition, however, gives a very interesting fact when it states that "It is the sole remaining representative of a nearly extinct type which was formerly abundant, not less than 17 fossil species being known, the greater part occurring in the Cretaceous formation in New Jersey, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Greenland, and Bohemia, with a few in the Tertiary, chiefly in Europe."

Large tulip trees are very conspicuous in our forests where they occur, especially when they are in blossom, and their trunks are large, clear of branches a long distance up from the ground, markedly straight, and gradually tapering to their lowermost branches. These facts should not be ignored in scientific descriptions of Liriodendron tulipifera, much less should the exceptions to these general characters be omitted.

I find these loose descriptions and these omissions, in the case of many of our American trees, all the way through our standard botanies; and when the trees are entirely unknown to the student of such species, and the works give incorrect and only partial descriptions, the latter fail utterly to help him as they should, and science falls short of its purpose to just that extent. With respect to the general characters of Liriodendron tulipifera I may say, that the flowers show three reflexed sepals and that there are six petals (Fig. 2), these latter being arranged in two (2) rows, thus forming

a flatish, bell-shaped corolla, the flower being a fragrant one. Extrorse anthers and a sessile gynophore as in the Magnolia family generally (Magnoliacea), to which the Tulip Tree belongs. Carpels with two ovules and a fruit like samaras (Fig. 3). The narrow pistils flat and scale-form, forming an elongate and dry cone wherein they are imbricated and cohere. This falls away entire. It is indehiscent, and each carpel contains from one to two seeds at its base; anatropous.

Gray states for the Magnolia family in general "Trees or shrubs, with the leaf-buds covered by membraneous stipules, polypetalous, hypogynous, polyandrous, polygnous; alike, in three or more rows of three, and imbricated (rarely convolute) in the bud."

The feather-veined leaves are very smooth, untoothed, and alternate; marked with dots. Each typical leaf possesses two lateral lobes near the base and two others at the apex. They measure from two to five inches in length. Base cordate, and apex has the appearance of having been cut squarely across, leaving a long, shallow notch with sides of nearly equal length.

This description, taken in connection with what is set forth above and the four illustrations, will serve to present Liriodendron tilipifera in such a way that it may be recognized by both amateur and professional botanists in any part of the world.

TO OUR SUBSCRIBERS

Please note your expiration date and send in your renewals promptly.

Owing to the increased cost of paper and printing, also to the fact that The Nature-Study Review has not raised its subscription price, we will print only enough magazines each month to cover the subscription list and its normal increase.

A blue check on the wrapper indicates that your subscription expires with this number.

A great stimulus to tree study in fifth, sixth and seventh grades is the making of a portfolio of leaf prints of all the trees in the region. This portfolio may be the property of the school and each pupil contribute a print of special excellence, or what is far better, each pupil may make a portfolio of his own.

The outfit for making leaf prints is simple and inexpensive. It consists of a tube of printer's ink or a cup holding a portion of the ink which almost any newspaper office will contribute to the cause of education. We use an old paste jar for our ink and we bought enough ink to fill it for fifteen cents. Next we must have a flat, smooth surface on which to spread the ink; a slate, a piece of plate glass, or what we have found more practicable, a large square pie tin serves this purpose. Then we need a six-inch rubber roller such as photographers use for mounting prints and this at a photograph shop costs twenty-five cents; a bottle of kerosene to dilute

the ink and a bottle of alcohol or benzine or more kerosene to clean the outfit after using, and we have our outfit ready. Sheets of paper, 81⁄2 by 11, of almost any quality will do although a smoothsurfaced paper is preferable.

The method of operating is thus. With a stick dip out a little of the printer's ink about as large as two peas, upon the pan, add a few drops of kerosene to thin it. Then with the roller work it over until there is a thin film of the ink over the smooth surface. This is an important part of the work. The film should not be so liquid as to run but should be a smooth, firm, thin coat. Take a leaf by the petiole, lay it flat on the inked surface, hold it firm with one finger, and pass the inked roller over it several times until the veins are well inked. Lift the leaf by the petiole, lay it on a clean sheet of paper on a smooth table, place another sheet of paper over it, again place the finger firmly on the petiole so the leaf cannot stir and blur the print, and with the fingers of the other hand, press the paper firmly but gently over the leaf, working out the veins and margins carefully. Often a second or even third impression can be made without reinking the leaf and these will be better than the first.

Formerly we used a second clean roller for getting the print by placing the leaf between the sheets of paper, holding it fast by the petiole and rolling it once from base outward with the clean roller, putting plenty of strength into the action. Professor W. W. Gillette of Richmond, Va., who gave us our first lessons in making leaf prints and who taught boys of fourth and fifth grades to make leaf prints which are the best we have ever seen, used a letter press to make the prints, putting in several leaves at a time. Dried leaves may be soaked in water for a time and spread out and dried between blotters under pressure and be used to make leaf prints while they are still flexible. However, green leaves or autumn leaves as they fall are the best. The hickories and horsechestnuts and buckeyes, ash and locusts should be gathered first for these compound leaves soon fall apart.

TO MAKE A PORTFOLIO CASE

This is a very neat bit of manual training and if done well will add greatly to the enjoyment of the tree study. Pasteboard, or old book covers, about 9 by 12 may be used. These should have tape pasted on the inside with ends projecting for six inches,

then