So, even if we are just a good bunch of great eucalypt fans... if we keep applying scientific methods for ID as much as possible, then we will rarely fail, having seen the trees before or not. And if we are all puzzled, then it is time to bother an eucalypt botanist
Benoit did it very well! Not easy to have all the right photos available. He also posted the pictures in the right order, so each viewer can see the almost perfect sequence of ID parameters in the right order: Tree, bark at breast height, bark above, leaves and flower buds, leaves and seed pods, details of flower buds (and measurement), details of seed pods (and measurement). Only thing left, wood colour (red timbers are rare in eucalypts). But special trees should not be chainsawn or bored for a photograph without need Better doing forensics of alive trees
Phil and Tony did it very well too, and their hypotheses both made good sense except for small details.
This all means that the combined work of those making the old and new books, botanical keys and botanical plates we may use, is not just still valid to a great extent, but that if we sometime find glitches, we may help improve them There are very few eucalypt botany experts in the world, and the trees are complicated. The more people learning, the better
« Back to index