Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Maples' started by conifers, Sep 11, 2010.
This one is also a Field Maple
yes i agree! x coriaceum is one hybrid between acer monspessulanum and opalus ...
I don't own any books about Maples... any thoughts on
naming(?) and then obviously... I'll have this thread, closed.
Maybe the hybrid was grafted onto A. campestre and the scion failed, to be replaced by rootstock sprouts.
Chiming in with general agreement, it appears to be A. campestre.
Interesting I looked for a picture also in le Hardy de Beaulieu, he lists the hybrid as pseudoplatanus x mospessulanum, which is inter-series. I wonder if there are distinct forms of x coriaceum. (Not to suggest this is any form).
"The Acer Ã—coriaceum was identified in person by James "Acer" Harris, who wrote the British book on maples. The label must have been mistyped because it's correct in the database. Sure it has field maple traits, because that's one of the parents. Rez oughta know that, and he probably knows Harris too. It came by seed from an isolated (selfed) cultivated tree that was removed the following year. We have several and they are identical."
pag 245 of the book "Maples of the World ":x coriaceum=acer monspessulanum x acer opalus ssp.obtusatum is possible propagate by seed or by graft on acer monspessulanum..hybrid origin Dalmatian coast and Croatia...
First, by any account A. campestre is not a parent of x coriaceum, as Alex points out. Mr. Harris of course knows this, in spite of the fact that he makes no mention of coriaceum in "The Gardener's Guide to Growing Maples" (Timber Press). Mr Harris is an eminent plantsman and officer in the Society, so is known to many people. That doesn't change the fact that there is no parent here who is a field maple! :)
MOW in Alex's reference clears up the issue of parentage confusion in the "Illustrated Guide." It further states "Bark gray and smooth, like that of A. opalus." That's clearly not the case in the picture where the bark is corky, like campestre can be in hotter climates.
The leaves are pictured clearly in the "Illustrated Guide" and appear much more like monspessulanum than campestre as we have here.
Honestly it's very difficult to make a positive ID from a picture, but there's nothing to suggest this is really x coriaceum and not campestre.
P.S. Thanks very much for posting it though, and helping build the forum of species. It's much appreciated in any event.
You bet guys... thanks.
Acer Ã— coriaceum wouldn't be graftable on A. campestre; they're not close relatives. So it couldn't be rootstock sprouts.
Maples of the World states:
I'm sort of becoming a bit confused as to what threads I [created(2)] [(1)with photos only added to a previous poster] should be deleted or not.
Please say yes/no to:
Acer x coriacium
Sorry, I'm not at all in the know
and I'm having difficulty if these
are correct photos. I'm quite
sure this one needs to be deleted.
Just make life easy for me will ya, many thanks...
monspessulanum: the pics are fine, no issue, don't delete.
x coriaceum: wrong maple, do delete
miyabei: can be confused with campestre. In spite of strong opinions, individual morphological variation can make ID difficult from these photos. I'd leave it, but with a question mark.
HTH and thanks for trying to clear it up. ;)
That sounds reasonable. Might be a good idea to leave this thread a day or two before deleting so that all who contributed can see the conclusion.
Thanks to Dax for sharing in the first place.
The photos reminded me of a field maple (?) I have in my garden : same corky bark of some 2-3 yr-old shoots in particular. I mentioned it in this thread :
The leaves now are a bit different from the ones I posted in May, but still, they don't really look like most of the field maples I can see around here. I'll post new photos later today...
This page from Tela Botanica :
states it is a hybrid from Acer monspessulanum L. and Acer pseudoplatanus L., as Emrey mentioned above...
Alain, MOW states that the other parent is A. opalus, not pseudoplatanus "as cited mistakenly in some literature" (not a real quote, I don't have MOW handy this minute, but that's the gist of it.)
I think we can pick MOW as the authority...
correct is: opalus subsp.obtusatum ;)
Thank you Gentlemen. I'm both on track and have notified
the owner of these trees of each individual situation - and
he agrees with you guys.
I'll ask this thread be deleted and treat the others as suggested.
Hey thanks again, and you guys know I'm always adding to galleries on the web... this one happens to have Maple Society members and people all over the world, participating.
I'll be back! ;)
You're right: I found the reference after repying to your previous message and indeed, it seems a more convincing presentation. Thanks for putting things straight.