Can you help identify the tree in my yard that appears to be a gum tree (as it has the large distinctive star-shaped leaves) but does not have the fruit that seems to be associated with this tree. In fact, I have never seen any fruit or seed pods on this tree and I've lived here for seven years. I'm not complaining (since from what I've read gum trees are a messy bunch), just wondering if what I have is really a gum tree or not. Does this type of tree sound familiar to anyone? I can attach pictures but before doing so thought I'd just start with a basic description. It is a deciduous tree...quite shapely. The bark is rough or furrowed and grey colored. The large star-shaped leaves (5 star-shaped tips) have serrated edges with the larger leaves almost 23 cm. (9") long tip to tip and 18 cm. (7") from base of leaf to tip. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.
liquidambar styraciflua is aka the gum tree or american sweet gum. it has a leaf that somewhat resembles maple in tht it is palmate, the major factor to distinguish the two is the fact that Liquidambar has alternate leaf attachments and Maple has paired opposite. try here for picture (or just go to google images): http://cricket.biol.sc.edu/acmoore/527/plants/Liquidambar.jpg http://www.cuyamaca.net/oh170/Plant_TNails/Liquidambar_styraciflua_9-1-30_5.jpg http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/biology/trees/images/Liquidambar_styraciflua_leaves.jpg
Thanks, but the sweetgum (from everything I've read) always has those round "fruit pods" that I referred to. Mine does not. The question I'm asking is has anyone ever heard of a gum that does not have that fruit?
sounds like a juvenile Liquidambar or more than likely a coppiced mature specimen. A pictures worth a thousand brain cells
Fruitless individuals have been named and introduced to the trade for being fruitless. If it looks just like a sweetgum, not having fruits (now or later) doesn't make it not a sweetgum.
Hi I need some advise. I have same tree without the fruit. I heard that sweet gum has a BIG root system. My problem is I have two of them about 6 feets away from my foundation. It about 30 tall but it doesn't show any sign of damage yet...but should I remove it soon...I don't want any root problem in the future. Please advise. Thanks, -Tim
These are fast growing, short-lived tall trees anyway. Unless your rooms would suddenly roast in the sun without them, maybe you should have them taken out.
Sweet gums seem pretty well behaved in the urban environment when outside their native range. In the southeast US, they grow fast and big, and are rather weak, so you have the risk of branches falling on the house. Your tree does seem a sweetgum rather than a maple.
It doesn't produce gumballs here - our summers are too cold for it. Actually, it barely even grows at all.
See fruiting here and there on trees in this area. Others have a problem with retaining leaves into winter, without turning to red and purple, and being caught in occasional early snows which then break their still-foliated branches. Maybe by "here" Michael means his part of UK, the tree is certainly being grown elsewhere there. 'Lane Roberts' and 'Worplesdon' have even been given the RHS Award of Garden Merit. http://www.rhs.org.uk/RHSPlantFinder/Plantfinder2.asp?crit=liquidambar&page=1&genus=Liquidambar
Yep, I do mean my part of Britain, northeast England, a fair bit cooler in summer than e.g. the London area (where Sweetgum does produce gumballs).
