CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Ulmus macrocarpa

species of plant

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionDec 12, 2025
Entity authorityQ1037467 ↗
Source-derived summary

Ulmus macrocarpa Hance, the large-fruited elm, is a deciduous tree or large shrub endemic to the Far East excluding Japan. It is notable for its tolerance of drought and extreme cold and is the predominant vegetation on the dunes of the Khorchin sandy lands in the Jilin province of north-eastern China, making a small tree at the base of the dunes, and a shrub at the top [4].

Description

By the age of ten years, the tree bears a close resemblance to the American elm U. americana, but will never approach the latter's size. The tree can reach a height of 17 m, with a slender trunk rarely exceeding 0.4 m d.b.h; the bark is longitudinally fissured, and dark grey in colour. The twigs often develop corky wings that may persist for several years. The leaves are usually obovate < 9 cm long by 5 cm broad (significantly smaller on juvenile trees) and chiefly characterized by their thick, leathery texture and obtusely doubly or simply toothed margins. The perfect, wind-pollinated apetalous flowers appear from March until May. As implied by its name, U. macrocarpa is distinguished by its large, orbicular, wafer-like samarae < 50 mm in diameter, which ripen in May and June.

Pests and diseases

Possessed of a moderate resistance to Dutch elm disease and a low susceptibility to elm yellows, it has also proven very resistant to the elm leaf beetle Xanthogaleruca luteola in trials in Oklahoma [5] and Italy.

Cultivation

U. macrocarpa was introduced to the UK at Aldenham House in Hertfordshire in the late 19th century by Vicary Gibbs (1853–1932), almost certainly as part of the quincunx elm avenue leading to the front of the house.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Ulmus macrocarpa” as species of plant. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1853, 1932—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Ulmus, macrocarpa and species can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of plant. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Dec 12, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q1037467. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1853 and 1932.

Critical limits

Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Ulmus macrocarpa”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Ulmus macrocarpa primary sources, Ulmus macrocarpa archive and Ulmus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Ulmus macrocarpa”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Ulmus macrocarpa” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.