Please I.D. this for me...

Discussion in 'Plants and Biodiversity Stumpers' started by yousatonmycactus, Apr 1, 2007.

  1. yousatonmycactus

    yousatonmycactus Active Member

    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Ventura, CA., USA
    This unmarked, furry, ground hugging vine is at the Getty Villa in Malibu. Can someone I.D. it for me please?
     

    Attached Files:

  2. alex66

    alex66 Rising Contributor Maple Society 10 Years

    Messages:
    2,013
    Likes Received:
    104
    Location:
    ROME Italy zone9/b
    Hi is a species of Salvia....
     
  3. Ron B

    Ron B Paragon of Plants 10 Years

    Messages:
    20,665
    Likes Received:
    547
    Location:
    WA USA (Z8)
    Leaf shape and lobing perhaps different but start by comparing with S. argentea.
     
  4. saltcedar

    saltcedar Rising Contributor 10 Years

    Messages:
    4,399
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Austin, Tx
    Wow! Nice Photo. I pinched it for my desktop.

    Regards
    Chris
     
  5. TonyR

    TonyR Active Member

    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    A great picture I agree, but would be just as great on screen if it was, say only 1100 pixels wide instead of 2500 and file size almost 2 Mb. I have a very fast connection but it's still irritating the time taken for pics like this to load - and there seem to be more and more of them lately.

    Most photo editing applications allow resizing and resaving. I attach an example below, a pic I took a week ago in my neighborhood. The original file size was 3.07 Mb, pixel size 3072 x 2048. It took me less than one minute in Photoshop Elements to resize it to 1100 x 733 pixels and resave with little compression to file size 350 Kb. I still have the original full-sized file intact.

    I hope this isn't too much of a sour note, but rather a helpful hint. And by the way, can anyone identify the tree in my picture?
     

    Attached Files:

  6. pedalada

    pedalada Member

    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Fukuoka, Japan
    As my answer, I attach a picture of a young tree taken in a wild forest of Japan.
    Young individuals of this species look a bit different from mature ones.
    I think the genus is right at least.
     

    Attached Files:

    • Xj.jpg
      Xj.jpg
      File size:
      99.5 KB
      Views:
      269
  7. TonyR

    TonyR Active Member

    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Pedalada, I suspect we have the same genus at least. I did not know the juvenile growths had spines like this, but one of my books confirms it.

    In recent classifications it has a connection with willows.
     
  8. pedalada

    pedalada Member

    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Fukuoka, Japan
  9. TonyR

    TonyR Active Member

    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Pedalada, you are on the right track!

    This shrub/tree was promoted as a hedge or screen plant around 30 years ago in Australia, as Xylosma senticosa. Walking past a large specimen in inner-suburban Sydney a few weeks ago, I saw flowers for the first time and couldn't wait to photograph them (hanging over the street). Chasing the name up with Google I got the impression that X. congesta is the name in use now, though could not find any good botanical study.

    Just to get super-pedantic, the name Xylosma is correctly treated as of feminine gender. As Stearn's Botanical Latin points out, while most Greek-derived names ending in -ma (-sperma, -stoma, -stigma, etc) are neuter, there are some exceptions such as -osma and -cnema that are feminine. So the epithets japonicum, congestum, racemosum, senticosum should all be corrected to japonica, congesta, racemosa, senticosa -- ignored by most references but supported at this website:
    http://www.bgbm.org/scripts/asp/IAPT/ncugentry.asp?name=Xylosma

    I loved your link to the original illustration in Siebold & Zuccarini. It's good the way more and more libraries and botanical institutions are making these classic references available online.
     

Share This Page