• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

tree ID (1 Viewer)

Surreybirder

Ken Noble
There's a small tree near us which is about 15 feet high and with a spread of perhaps 18 feet. The trunk divides almost at ground level. Can anyone ID it from the attached pics? The underside of the leaves is paler than the upperside but not whitish.
(I am trying to ID a moth which had mined some of the leaves so the first step is to ID the tree.)
Thanks,
Ken
 

Attachments

  • tree1a.jpg
    tree1a.jpg
    181.4 KB · Views: 123
  • tree1b.jpg
    tree1b.jpg
    104 KB · Views: 136
  • tree1c.jpg
    tree1c.jpg
    111.6 KB · Views: 139
  • tree1d.jpg
    tree1d.jpg
    71.8 KB · Views: 118
  • tree1e.jpg
    tree1e.jpg
    78.4 KB · Views: 113
Hello there surreybirder,youve got me puzzled on this one.My first thought was Almond,Prunus dulcis but the almost ground level branching suggests not.Next possibility is the Snowbell tree,Styrax japonica ,hard to tell from the images though.Can you recall any bark characteristics?

Magnified the full tree image and i think neither of the above are correct,im getting my books out!

The bark looks reddish at the base,this suggests a cherry var' but leaves seem more Spindle,Euonymus .Hopefully someone with more knowledge will happen along and put us both out of our misery!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for trying, Tinca.
The bark appears pretty smoth in the pic. I thought that cherry tended to have quite a noticeable texture?
I've tried to blow up the bit showing the trunk in case it helps.
Ken
 

Attachments

  • tree1f.jpg
    tree1f.jpg
    41.8 KB · Views: 123
Surreybirder said:
Thanks for trying, Tinca.
The bark appears pretty smoth in the pic. I thought that cherry tended to have quite a noticeable texture?
I've tried to blow up the bit showing the trunk in case it helps.
Ken

Possibly Grey Willow (Salix cinerea)?

Yaffle
 
Yaffle said:
Possibly Grey Willow (Salix cinerea)?

Yaffle

Thx yaffle,i think you are spot on.It was nagging me all night!Knew i'd seen this or similar leaved shrubby tree,DOH! just about expresses how i feel. :brains:

Could this pin down your moth surreybirder?The ancient entomologist's posts have had me fascinated lately and i profess an awakening interest in the wee things that crawl and fly.
 
Last edited:
Definitely a Willow, Genus Salix... But that could become tough there, as there are lots of hybrids and the species in themselves are quite variable...

Jörn
 
Joern Lehmhus said:
Definitely a Willow, Genus Salix... But that could become tough there, as there are lots of hybrids and the species in themselves are quite variable...

Jörn


This is definitely Grey Willow or Common Sallow (whichever name you prefer), Salix cinerea subsp. oleifolia.
Also formerly called Salix atrocinerea.

Ken, your photograph even shows the rusty hairs on the underside of the leaf, which help confirm the subspecies as well as the species.

As Joern says, there is much hybridisation in Salix and S. cinerea plays its full part. In some parts of the country, Salix aurita x cinerea is more common than either of its parents. However, Ken's photographs of the leaves suggest that this is good, pure S. cinerea.

A true native, of course, which is more than is certain for a number of willows.

Alan
 
Silver said:
It's good to see a set of photographs showing all the right features!

I hope you get the moth ID now.

Alan

Nothing is ever straight forward. I sent the leaf-mine to my county recorder. I need him to confirm that it is from the same tree (I think it is). The genus of moth in question is not supposed to occur on willow sp. Where will it end?
At least I should be able to recognise a sallow in future ;)
Ken
 
Warning! This thread is more than 19 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top