1. Proc. Am. Acad. Arts & Sci. 50:228. 1915.
2. P. sinensis Hemsley Jour. Linn. Soc. 23:257. 1887, in part. Not Poiret nor Lindley.
3. Schneider Ill. Handb. Laubholzk. 1:663. 1906. fig. 364 c-d.
4. P. simonii Hort. Not Carrière.
Rehder, who established this species, says of it: “This species seems to be most closely related to P. ussuriensis Maximowicz which differs chiefly in the broader orbicular-ovate or ovate leaves, in the lighter colored branches, and in the short-stalked subglobose fruit with the persistent sepals spreading. The shape of the fruit of P. ovoidea is very unusual and quite distinct from any pear I know; the fruit is exactly ovate, broad and rounded at the base and tapering from the middle toward the truncate apex, as figured by Schneider (fig. 364 d). This may, however, not be a specific character and the shape of the fruit may vary in other specimens referable to this species. The Chinese material which I have seen and which might belong here is very meagre. The Fokien specimen is in young fruit which suggests a more pyriform shape, though tapering toward the apex and showing the same kind of persistent calyx; the serration of the leaves is more minute and more accumbent. The Yunnan specimen is in flower and differs somewhat in the more copious tomentum of the leaves and of the inflorescence and in the shorter, nearly entire calyx-lobes.
“It is not known when and whence this species was introduced. Possibly it was sent in the early sixties from northern China by G. E. Simon, or by A. David a little later from the same region or from Mongolia to the Museum in Paris and was afterwards distributed by Decaisne.”
This species is of importance to pear-growers as a stock. Discussing it as a stock, Reimer[21] says: “This species ranks second only to Pyrus ussuriensis in blight resistance. During 1915 we were unable to get the disease to develop more than four inches even in vigorous growing shoots of this species. During the very favorable season of 1916 vigorous shoots would blight down as much as fifteen inches. As soon as it reached the hard wood of the previous season it would stop. All the inoculations into one and two-year-old trunks have failed to develop the disease.
“The trees are vigorous growers, and produce medium sized fruit, which is egg-shaped, and has a persistent calyx. This species is a native of northern China, and was formerly known as Pyrus simonii.”
10. PYRUS VARIOLOSA Wallich
1. Cat. No. 680. 1828.
Reimer,[21] now a leading authority on blight-resistant stocks, writes of P. variolosa: “This species is one of the most promising types in our collection. The tree is a beautiful, vigorous, upright grower. It makes a good union with cultivated varieties, and should prove valuable as a stock for top-working.
“This species, while not immune to blight, is very resistant. During the summer of 1915 a large number of innoculations were made into the tips of young branches, and these usually would blight back for a distance of three to five inches. During 1916, a very favorable season for pear blight, the disease would extend down young branches as much as from twelve to eighteen inches, and in one case as much as two feet. Seventy-seven inoculations were made into the trunks of two-year-old trees. All but seven of them failed to develop the disease. In the successful infections, only small superficial cankers were produced. In these cankers a new cambium would readily form, and the entire wound would heal over perfectly in a short time.
“The origin of this species, or type, is still a matter of dispute. It has been confused with Pyrus pashia of northern India, from which species it is very distinct. Pyrus variolosa produces medium sized, pear-shaped fruits, which have a persistent calyx. It is possible that this is not a distinct species, but a hybrid. If this should prove to be the case, it probably will not come true to type from seeds. This matter will be determined by a study of the seedlings of this type. If this does not come true to type from seeds, the seedlings may be of little value for root stocks. If this should prove to be the case, it will, nevertheless, be of value as a stock for top-working, when propagated by budding or grafting on some other root system.”