Acer japonicum 'Taki-no-gawa' Here is an Acer japonicum that I have recently been producing. Nothing spectacular but it makes a good sized tree with nice medium size leaves of a good green color. It practically grafts itself.
A friend's 'Taki-no-gawa' Here is a picture of a friend's 'Taki-no-gawa'. Photo made yesterday,4-12-04.
Hi Elmore: The problem with "oldtimers" is that we tend to forget things we once knew like it was the back of our hand. I know the difference between the Japonicum and the Palmatum forms but I have to rethink which one is which as I knew them as being Takinogawa and Takinokawa. I believe the Takinokawa is the Palmatum that I once knew but I cannot be positive about that at the moment. Jim
A quick notation: I believe there is no mention of Takinokawa in our books but that is how I learned the Palmatum form as being named. The part that escaped me was the 'kawa' which means within bark, so I had to do some recollection and then realized the largest size plant I've seen of the Palmatum form was a 5 gallon. I cannot be sure if the Palmatum form had white striations in the bark or not. Perhaps someone can fill in that blank for me but the leaves of the Palmatum and the Japonicum are not the same as the Palmatum form leaves have 5-7 lobes and are much more deeply divided and the Japonicum has 7 lobes and is a more palmate shaped leaf (all from memory). Jim
Large Acer japonicum 'Taki-no-gawa Here is a large 'Taki-no-gawa', at least 15'-18' in height. It is the dormant tree in the center. Next time I visit I'll make a picture of it in leaf. Jim, grow Ginkgo trees for memory. lol
Maybe we can see the palmatum form here, sold to me as Acer japonicum 'Takinogawa'. The leaves are very thin, paper thin to say the least and it is a very upright compact tree. The plant I have came to me in a 2gal can by stands about 4ft tall and about 1-2 wide. The only marginal characteristic is the slight cupping or depression in the leaves at the petiole. The stock plant has resided in the collection of the grower for over 20 years. MJH
Hi Michael, I am not familar with this culitvar, but after looking at your photos the plant looks more like a pseudosieboldianum rather than a plamatum or japonicum! From what I have observed, japonicums are only slightly pubescent on their leaves and petioles. From your photos of Taki-no-gawa, it appears that there is a lot of pubescence on the stems and leaves. I have a hard time with A. j. ogurayama being aligned with the japonicums too. It also looks to me to be a pseudosieboldianum forma. robert
Hi Robert, This tree shares characteristics of leaf form and growth to both of the trees I am growing as Ogurayama, all three slightly different. All three have slight cupping and I have see the hairs on the petiole persist on two of the forms. One sold to me as shirasawanum and two as japonicum. The smallest of the tree forms in growth and leaf size I have always felt was sieboldianum or if we bring it into the mix, pseudosieboldianum, but I would not know how to use that form correctly to classify. What we can see here are some likely very old trees that are coming back to light and it seems we are not quite sure what to call them. It may even seem that the knowledge needed to sort it out is a bit fuzzy. Glad you noticed the hairs--so far we are in pretty close agreement. I used the idea that it might be palmatum to get the tree into this thread hoping that I could get some good feedback. I am going to lean japonicum (which variety exactly I am not sure) on this one for now, but there is definately likey to be a sieboldianum form of Ogurayama and maybe other japonicums being sold today. I love the form of the form of these trees and I think they would make great landscape trees, while not spectacular and flashy as some of the newer introductions, they are outstanding in their own way. Michael
There are several forms of japonicum that will have the pubescence on the petioles. There is a difference between hairs and pubescence on a petiole. Years ago I bought a 'Takinogawa' out of Oregon. The original Maple came in from Japan and then went to California where offspring was grafted and then was outlet in Oregon and later elsewhere. My plant will show characteristics of both 'Meigetsu' and 'O taki' in that the newer leaves look very much like a 'Meigetsu' and the leaves on older wood look very much like an 'O taki'. The difference of my Maple and the others is how the leaves are arranged in that the leaves of my plant are noticeably layered in whorls at the tips of the stems. There is also a difference in petiole color most of the year that separates this Maple from a 'Meigetsu' and an 'O taki' as the rich pink petiole of 'Takinogawa' will last longer in a growing season before the petiole turns an aocha - a yellow green in color. Number of lobes means little in that my plant can have as few as 7 lobes on the newest growth and as many as 11, sometimes 13 from leaves on the oldest wood. My plant does have a pubescence on the petioles of the newer leaves and the pubescence will stay for a couple of months until burned off by sunlight. I have two forms of aconitifolium that will have pubescence on the newest growth tips and twigs, yet have what I call hairs on the petioles. The relative, current thinking that hairs on the petioles as being exclusively a sieboldianum or even a pseudosieboldianum trait just flew out the window if we will pay enough attention to our current aconitifoliums. 'Ogurayama' will have the same thing as most of the aconitifolium forms will have in regards to the pubescence on the newer growth and the hairs on the petioles with the same color of the petioles as several forms of the japonicums will have. To say that 'Ogurayama' is now a sieboldianum due to the hairy pubescence on the petioles is complete nonsense as we see it in several forms of the better known japonicums as opposed to the not as well known forms of sieboldianums. The dilemma we have today is more so who told us what the Maple was that we bought. I would want to know who taught the person that told you the Maple was a 'Takinokawa' or 'Ogurayama' or a 'Sode no uchi' as it leads to credibility with me and certainly would have had a lot more relevance to the people that taught Maples to me. There are some people today that are considered quite knowledgeable in Maples that still do not know much of the basics of these plants. Without a strong background in the old school Japanese views, they just aren't going to know a whole lot in my mind, even though some of them can play a pretty good game. Sieboldianum in a warm climate will have noticeably thinner leaves than a japonicum will. The color of the undersides of the leaves was used at one time in Japan by botanists to separate out Siebold's Maple from japonicum forms. I've been confused for a long time with 'Lovett'. We got ours in the nursery as being a japonicum of which I see japonicum traits but I also see sieboldianum traits as well. The hairs on the petioles is common with both Maples so we have to look at the structure, color and shapes of the leaves to have a better idea as to which one this Maple is. When I read what some Europeans see in this Maple I tend to know why they feel that way for it being a sieboldianum but I also see japonicum traits, such as the trunk color, the coloring of the old and new bark and the formation of the branches, that are just not mentioned any more. I still feel that if we do not have conclusive evidence that this Maple is a sieboldianum that it has to default back to what the Maple was thought to originally be when it was first sold and that is as a japonicum. It has to remain a japonicum until we have better reasoning than what we have so far to call this one a sieboldianum and be definitive about it. Here is another problem that we have in Maples and that is the Maple shown here has been around for 20 years and it is not fully understood what the Maple is. I'd need to see it over time in a growing season but I can state that it is not 'Takinogawa', nor is this Maple the palmatum 'Takinokawa'. As of these photos with the shapes of the leaves, the petiole color and the thinness of the leaves, this Maple looks closer to being sieboldianum to me. Not a pseudosieboldinaum at all as the petiole color, the number of lobes and leaf color is all wrong for this one to be that Maple. Jim
New growth on my ‘Taki-no-gawa’ in September! It may experience dieback this winter, but in the meantime I’m enjoying the beautiful shrimp color.
Here is my mine. Pic take 8/9/22 Form reading the previous post in the thread makes me wonder about mine. I will continue to grow and post pics.
Mine got demolished by an ice avalanche from my roof this last winter. I really liked it, it had beautiful large leaves, interesting new leaf color and beautiful red/orange fall color. Thanks for sharing yours and I am glad yours is still OK.
