AbstractSince the introduction of Siberian elm,Ulmus pumilaL., into cultivation, much confusion has existed in the trade between this species andUlmus parvifolia, the true Chinese elm. However, distinct vegetative, cultural, and aesthetic differences are apparent between these two Asiatic elms. Though Siberian elm has been used extensively in the past for urban planting, its future usefulness must be seriously questioned. Chinese elm has also shown tolerance to the urban environment but unlike the Siberian elm it does not experience the decline in vigor with increasing age. Common pathogens of both elms and the propagation of Chinese elm are also discussed.