Posted by Gus on 11/5/2008, 2:44 pm, in reply to "Another species of eucalyptus (3 photos)" Link: Eucalyptologics: Eucalyptus camaldulensis pics
83.45.72.114
So, the second shot allows to see some flower buds, and from that, counting their numbers and type of arrangement in the branchlets. Which already proves it is very likely no Corymbia 
So, it is an Eucalyptus.
3 out or 4 essential parts are there visible in Walt's pics, bark (well visible), flower buds (very small, enough to appreciate numbers, but not shapes, a photo of a tiny part of this tree collected by the observer would be ok), and leaves (adult leaves in this case, juvenile leaves are also a good hint sometimes). Seed pods are missing.
The fact that flower buds are arranged in groups of 7 already discards the most common eucalypt species in California, which would be E. globulus ssp. globulus. This one has mostly isolated fruits (x1), or very rarely in triplets (x3).
Another "usual suspect" as common in CA would be E. camaldulensis. In such a case, bark is similar, and flower buds are normally in groups of 7. Leaves are variable, but in some cases they are narrow and long when specimens are old enough. It could easily be. A close up of flower buds, and the missing seed pods could be of great help.
Also, any piece of wood from these trees would be clearly reddish (hence the common name Red River Gum). An example of it can be seen in the E. camaldulensis tree Dixie had to chop down in CA and kindly showed in this board some months ago.
If it was, it is an example of how this very variable species classicaly associated to Mediterranean climates, but with a wide distribution area in Australia (every state except Tasmania), can grow well in subtropical climates overseas too.
The trees were way larger, they were topped (Walt's first and especially second pic show that well).
Message Thread:
« Back to thread