Abstract: Schlarbaum et al.^{[12, 13]}declared that evidence from their karyotype analysis favoured the interpretation that Sequoia sempervirens was a segmen-tal allopolyploid (A₁A₁A₁A₁A₂A₂) and it could have been possible for a species of Cunninghamia to contribute a genome to Sequcia's hexaploid comple-ment. Tbe present paper did not agree with the opinions. According tothe karyotype comparison (Table 1)or morphological characters, the authorrecognized that the genomic constitution of S. sempervirens must have beenAAAABB but not A₁A₁A₁A₁A₂A₂. The species of Cunninghamia could not be the parients of Sequoia and they might be "Metasequoia" and "Sequoiadendron".