Possibly a species of Acacia, but hard to tell with the small pic size. Do you have a larger original of the photo?
You can try you luck with the local guys. They also have a forum there: http://flora.huji.ac.il/browse.asp?
Nice call! =) 100% with closeup to flowers: Senna nemophila var. coriacea <Desert Cassia> Photo vs Scientific name: Both have compound leaves and single flowers have the same structure. Here a link to compare with: http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showimage/179333/
I agree with David in LA, except for a point of nomenclature. Nowadays this group of "desert cassias" is understood to be a vast hybrid swarm across inland Australia, to the numerous forms of which it is difficult to apply taxonomic categories. The earliest applicable name is Senna artemisioides and one approach has been to treat the forms as nothosubspecies of that species. However, the Flora of Australia treatment used the informal category of "form taxon", basing it in most cases an earlier specific or infraspecific epithet. e.g. "Senna form taxon Zygophylla". This classification has not been widely accepted despite it reflecting the biological reality better than previous treatments - which goes to show that users of botanical names can be a conservative lot! By the way, the epithet nemophila has been the subject of debate in Australia. My recollection is that it was a mistranscription of eremophila in Allan Cunningham's manuscript description, and became the earliest published name, but was subsequently corrected back to eremophila in the 19th C. As to the meaning of 'nemophila', it makes no sense in relation to this Senna/Cassia. But the hardline prioritists insisted it must be retained. The debate has become less relevant with the new classifications.
