ID this eucalypt

Eric Frei

Looks similar to tereticornis but the leaves are duller and wider plus the tree has more upright form.

Since tereticornis was present on the same site I can say the trunk's browny/pinkish tinge is only for this guy. Older bark that hasn't shed in ribbons is identical to tereticornis.

Not grey gum either.

Sorry, no caps around.





And a close up of the bark and also why it's dying.

Attached Thumbnails

     

__________________

dguntertrees

Does smooth bark continue right to the ground?

Eric Frei

Sure does.

__________________

Sean Freeman

Euc saligna?

Eric Frei

But the leaves are a bit too wide I think. Also no sock on it.

__________________

Sean Freeman

Ok no stocking then prob Euc propinqua

Sean Freeman

Have you got this? Key_to_eucalypts_of_Greater_Brisbane.pdf

Eric Frei

Nah, not grey gum, barks not quite matt finished enough, this is more of a gloss, leaves are too wide also.

__________________

Eric Frei

Yeah I have Sean but no caps makes it hard to use that.

I can see a trip to Mt Cootha coming. LOL

__________________

Sean Freeman

Sorry Eric too hard from the pics for me, they are pretty much always caps around on the ground though eh?

Eric Frei

I think their lawn mower is made by Hoover or Electrolux. LOL

__________________

Bernard Keays

Ekka...Did you have any more photos. One where the trunk meets the ground. I think Sean's first guess is pretty good as it looks like E. saligna to me as well. Or could it be a E. grandis X tereticornis cross?

__________________
Bernie

Eric Frei

Bernard

All those 3 have socks.

I only have video of it and just viewed it, it's smooth all the way to the ground like Angophora.

__________________

Tilia

it ticks alot of the boxes to be a E. tereticornis. might be a hybrid with something else in the series, which might explain the no sexual bits. ????????

Quantum Leaf

The leaf is too wide to be E. tereticornis or E. propinqua, E.propinqua also has a strongly discolourous leaf and one of the typical characteristics of E. saligna (like any within the Mahogany Group) is the existance of leaf lerp, and generally profuse number of capsules.
Unfortunately without a capsule, bud or flower, identification is rarely certain. If it is a remnant species then you can narrow down the search, the suggestion of an intergrade (natural hybrid) is likely. It is common for some Eucs to skip a year or 2 from flowering. I generally find in the search for capsules and buds that if the area below the tree is maintained, then their is a chance of finding a capsule, bud stuck in a crotch, or close to the root flare where the mower dosn't reach. Otherwise the lack of these can also suggest that it is a very small capsule (like E.nicholii)that decays quickly, or is just difficult to find.
Their is an identification program called 'Euclid', which has an impresive key that can work without the bud or capsule.
Allowing for the number of species (approx. 850) as well as the intergrades, and variation within this genus, it would have to rate as one of the most difficult plant species in the world to identify.

dguntertrees

I would go with Tereticornis hybrid too. But then I'm a Pom who's been here about 5 minutes....

Eric Frei

Got some caps today and compared them to other tereticornis caps on site ... definitely tereticornis. The leaves, dunno, just an anomaly.

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________

Robert STAVROU

Morning, the capsules appear to be E. teretecornis; my friend John tells me that the calypta (opperculum) would be definitive.

__________________
STAV

bill24

My moneys on E. Camaldulensis, common 'River Red Gum'.

Any takers?

bill24

Shut up Bill, silly bugger,

Lucky no takers!

Forest Red Gum, Teret---(wotzit.....subdoover.)...Myrtaceae.

Perhaps the large leaves at the bottom are immatures, bought on by the strangling chain, and the higher older leaves are better specimens?

Other than that, well out of my depth.

regards to all,

Bill 24.

Eric Frei

So, need to show the differences between camaldulensis and tereticornis

Now isn't this interesting.

From: http://www.florabank.org.au/files/do...0070824-04.pdf

That just adds to the confusion.

They are similar however camaldulensis is usually a lot thicker in DBH for ht and sprawls a lot more. Also more likely to have a sock.

__________________

TrevMcRev

Form looks too tall, thin and upright for a cameldulensis.... down here anyway!

simo77

Eucalyptus punctata(grey gum)

Eric Frei

Nah, not grey gum.

PlantNET - FloraOnline

These caps seldom over 5mm dia or length let alone 10mm, they're tiny.

__________________

hoot gibson

i dont know much about trees , but i can see that there is a problem with your tape measure. hoot

Gus

Interesting thread this one

I checked some of the old books and I found reference to this:

Eucalyptus tereticornis var. latifolia

which literally means "[tree with] well covered flowers [by] straight horned [opercula] and wide leaves"

It was a quite old name given by Bentham some 150 years ago to a botanical sample collected 200 years ago somewhere in QLD, and we cannot be very sure about what happened. Maybe just the juvenile leaves or intermediate leaves (not yet typically sickle shaped) of a normal E. tereticornis arrived to the old George.

Some years later, that "var. latifolia" was also tentatively identified as an hybrid of E. tereticornis:

E. alba ssp. platyphilla x E. tereticornis

Which, in some more years (the story of E. alba is a long one!), became

E. platyphylla × E. tereticornis ssp. tereticornis

So, I am not saying this is it. Just leaving another potential hybrid explanation, just with the funny detail of it being wide leaved. There could be others for sure. And it is already a confusing one, depending on what you interpret as E. platyphylla

Ekka, absolutely no sign of lanceolate shaped leaves anywhere on that tree? And, is there any chance to estimate the age of that specimen?

__________________
EUCALYPTOLOGICS, Information resources on Eucalyptus cultivation here and there

Eric Frei

No lanceolate shaped leaves at all, very consistent throughout the canopy from juvenile to dead old leaves.

This tree was in Durack, SW of Brisbane GPO maybe 10kms.

It was the only one like that in the group, now deceased though.

I estimate it's age around 60 years, no more than 100 years.

It's unusual around Brisbane's metro areas to find really old eucs.

I mean there's some large ones but they are not 250 years old etc from Captain Cooks days. I don't know if they all got cleared, burnt, died of natural causes and we are looking at re-sprouts or seeded.

From various old timers around the place much of Brisbane was cleared for agriculture, very likely this place was and when the transition from rural to residential occurred the tree was allowed to grow or was planted.

How do you know so much about eucs? I mean you knew about this "var"

__________________

Gus

It makes sense Ekka. The source tree for that botanical plate ("var. latifolia") I mentioned is possibly never to be found again, and there is no guarantee those traits passed to progeny or further generations of trees near the collection point (which is not too close to Brisbane), so I guess it all is largely speculative.

More speculation, this time about the Durack tree, but at once a bit of a logical bet, makes me think of at least four possible hypothesys:

1) It was an hybrid, developed naturally, one parent E. tereticornis, common in the area, the other parent a compatible species with broad leaves growing nearby, possibly section Exsertaria too, several candidate species.

2) It was a distinct form of E. tereticornis or of some other species within series Tereticornes. Many of these have quite a bit of variability. Several species to discard could be E. blakelyi, E. amplifolia, E. glaucina, E. exserta, and E. camaldulensis. Several of these have different forms to what could be considered "type" (for example, the classical E. camaldulensis along the Murray).

3) It was an hybrid, or at least something strange, developed elsewhere, one parent E. tereticornis, the other unknown, and it was planted there around 1950.

4) It was something else we cannot grasp now I think John was right and flower buds or at least the calyptra (opercula) could have given complementary hints. I have this small summary on what to look at to try to ID Eucalyptus with a high degree of certainty, just in case it is useful to someone. Plus some other blabla on eucalypt identification at the Eucalyptologics archives.

To finish making things complicated, there is this other species I already mentioned, whose name literally means "wide leaved": E. amplifolia. Seed pods are somewhat similar to E. tereticornis, so a potential hybrid would tend to retain that shape for the fruits. But this would be a quite speculative explanation.

I do not know so much, I just know a little about some eucalypts. There are way too many to know about them all But it happens because I live in an area of the world with some 50 species and 1.2 billion specimens of them, and I am a forester with a quite nice library on these trees

Curiously, one of my mystery trees around here involves as possible related things many of the species the folks participating in this thread have mentioned: E. longifolia, E. punctata, E. tereticornis, E. robusta! That's why I found this thread interesting Unfortunately, they do not look like the one at Durack.

Final question, if this tree was removed, does the stump still remain in place? Are there chances to see if it coppices?

__________________
EUCALYPTOLOGICS, Information resources on Eucalyptus cultivation here and there

Eric Frei

It's likely going to be dozed for units.

That link you gave to here, ID your eucalypt. Taking samples of key organs.

No images coming up for me, something not right?

__________________

Gus

I do not know, I can see it all okay at the moment, it might have been my server being temporarily down? Just in case... (sorry for graphic quality!)

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
EUCALYPTOLOGICS, Information resources on Eucalyptus cultivation here and there