Hi All,

Can you please help me identify this tree?

Thanks,

Andy

Sorry you pic is not clear enough.
To ensure accurate answers, it would really help to see clear close ups of the leaves/plus any flowers, berries or seed pods. in addition to a general pic.
Presume tree is growing in Sydney, Australia?

Appears to be a locust. Either a black locust or a honey locust and sometimes they have thorns. Does yours have thorns or flowers/bloom? It is considered a trash tree, invasive. There are two more at least in this photo. By the form of the branching and the shape of the leaves this is the closed thing I can conclude without closer photos.

Maybe a Silk Oak - Grevillea robusta. Does it have orange flowers?

Frillylily said:Appears to be a locust. Either a black locust or a honey locust and sometimes they have thorns. Does yours have thorns or flowers/bloom? It is considered a trash tree, invasive. There are two more at least in this photo. By the form of the branching and the shape of the leaves this is the closed thing I can conclude without closer photos.

A trash tree in one country does not mean it is a problem in another country.

I'm with Daisy

So much easier with clear pics.

Silversurfer said:

A trash tree in one country does not mean it is a problem in another country.

whatever this tree is, it is an invasive there, it is all over in the photo-sprouts.

https://aussietreecare.com.au/... if it is this tree, it appears to give some people a rash, so you should be careful when pruning it or handling the leaves, just in case.

I've never gotten a rash. I wonder how often rashes happen.

*************As a worthy precautionary tip, growers and experimenting arborists shouldn't overlook the danger the plant's foliage presents.
These narrow and longish leaves contain fatal amounts of hydrogen cyanide. Also, be keen not to overlook the dire warning that the enigmatic species also features doubly harmful tridecylresorcinol percentages – universally blamed for numerous epidermal complications such as contact dermatitis.************


This is what it says in the article, so not sure how often that happens, but doesn't sound like anything I'd want to mess with

A lot of edible plants contain hydogen cyanide. I don't think anyone is going to try to eat a Silk Oak. I think you are having a 'much ado about nothing' moment.

I never said anyone was going to eat it. In fact *I* did not have any opinion regardless, I merely quoted information in the article. The article says that when you mess with the leaves as in trimming/pruning ect that it can give you a skin rash. I never said that other plants did not have cyanide. Many plants contain it in small amounts, according to THIS article THIS plant contains it in amounts that can be fatal. It is worth noting if you have pets or small children, who sometimes DO eat plants.

Don't you have something better to do with your time than following me around on NGA and crapping on all of my comments? It's getting a little stale.

Not following you around, I was in this post first. I also think comments like your last sentence should either be left unsaid or said in private.

Have a good day.

DaisyI said:A lot of edible plants contain hydogen cyanide. I don't think anyone is going to try to eat a Silk Oak. I think you are having a 'much ado about nothing' moment.

It seems to personally bother you, that I pointed out the plant is poison. Children and pets end up hospitalized for eating poison plants. It doesn't really matter that *you* don't think anyone will eat it. Your personal opinion of other people's behaviors does not negate the fact that it is poison. The fact that you think I am having a 'much ado about nothing' moment' does not mean you had to say it. Maybe you should have sent a private message saying you think me pointing out that the plant is poison is not noteworthy.

I think it is interesting to learn various facts and trivia about plants whether they are particularly relevant or not.

Frillylily said:

It seems to personally bother you, that I pointed out the plant is poison. Children and pets end up hospitalized for eating poison plants. It doesn't really matter that *you* don't think anyone will eat it. Your personal opinion of other people's behaviors does not negate the fact that it is poison. The fact that you think I am having a 'much ado about nothing' moment' does not mean you had to say it. Maybe you should have sent a private message saying you think me pointing out that the plant is poison is not noteworthy.

I have a library of the best books on toxic plants; all of the citations on this species relate to contact dermatitis in a small number of human interactions. It should not be extrapolated to state that the plant is toxic.
Contact dematitis is personal; not universal.
I for instance, am not susceptible to poison oak; that does not mean it it is not toxic, but that it it is not universally toxic.

I did not extrapolate anything, I merely quoted the information in the article. If the original poster is interesting in investigating that further, it is his or her prerogative to do that. There are many things that are not universally toxic, but that do make most people sick. I wouldn't allow a plant like that to grow in my yard if I knew I had small children or pets that may eat them, just to see if *they* may be susceptible. I grew castor beans by my front door this year, I have no worries.

That's a lovely flower bed you've got there Frillylily. Thanks for sharing ( Castor beans look great )

Thanks Daisy - I think you are correct - it does have orange flowers.

Appreciate your help all!