Winter-buds small, obtuse, free, brownish; leaves folded
upward, lanceolate or oblong-lanceolate, pointed at both ends,
thin, membranaceous, margins closely and finely serrate with
minute teeth, tipped with glands; upper surface glabrous,
lustrous, bright green, lower surface glabrous or pubescent
in the axils of the veins, dull, two-thirds inch wide and
from one to two inches long; petioles one-half inch long,
slender, glabrous or tomentose, bright red with two red glands
near or on the base of the leaf; stipules one-half inch long,
narrow-lobed, serrate with gland-tipped teeth.
Flowers appearing with or before the leaves, small, less than
one-half inch across, very numerous; umbels sub-sessile, two to
four-flowered, from lateral spurs or buds; pedicels glabrous,
slender, one-half inch in length; calyx-tube campanulate,
glabrous; calyx-lobes obtuse, glabrous outside, margins
ciliate, inner surface pubescent, reflexed; petals creamy in
the bud, obovate, apex rounded, narrowing into a claw at the
base; filaments and pistils glabrous, the latter shorter than
the stamens.
Fruit ripening early; spherical or ovoid, three-quarters inch
in diameter, bright red, sometimes yellow, glossy, with little
or no bloom; dots numerous, very conspicuous; skin thin;
flesh tender, juicy, yellow, subacid; quality rather poor;
stone small, clinging, ovoid, turgid, slightly roughened,
cherry-like, edges rounded, the dorsal one grooved.
The original home of _Prunus angustifolia_ is not known. The inference is
left in most of the botanies that the species is not indigenous in the
region east of the Mississippi, but that it was brought by the aborigines
from the southwestern section of the Mississippi Valley or possibly the
southern Rocky Mountains or Mexico. The chief reason for the belief that
it does not belong where it now grows is the fact that it is usually
found near human habitations and on the margins of fields and as it was
known to have been cultivated by the Indians,[133] it is supposed to have
escaped from their semi-cultivated plantations. Bailey[134] dissents from
the current view, holding that the plant behaves like a true native in
regions where he has known it, Maryland in particular. It seems to the
writer that Bartram’s supposition, given in the foot-note below, has been
followed too closely. A careful study of recent botanical works indicates
that the species is indigenous to the southeastern United States.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account