Do you recall the address? Or at least the approximate address?

Is the property on a named road?

sooby said:Maybe for hunting? Or trespassers? I keep looking at those leaves and thinking they look opposite no matter how multi-pinnate they are. According to Janet's information that would rule ot most Araliaceae.

Let's look at that quote again.

Leaves nearly always alternate (opposite only in Cheirodendron); spiral, or distichous (rarely), or four-ranked (rarely); commonly leathery; petiolate (usually), or subsessile; more or less sheathing (usually), or non-sheathing.

http://www.anbg.gov.au/angio/a...

These leaves are opposite. They may be "four-ranked" but I doubt this is Cheirodendron.

https://www.google.co.uk/searc...

If it's real then according to that information it can't be Araliaceae, but I don't know what else it could be (I've spent a long time on this).

CLAYBYRD said:

Not sure if you missed my post about this, but there are juveniles in the area that have the same growth patterns.

We would like to see these, can you take photos of the juveniles?

CLAYBYRD said:

That is a new growth. Like I said, they only come out of the same locations as fallen leaves.

It looks like a security light to me but that doesn't mean somebody hasn't attached one using battery power. some have a camera incorporated usually PIR operated.



The jury's out on the leaf joints, they look artificial but they could be real.

I've just realised something! Look at the cropped pic I just posted of the trunk. What doesn't fit?

I noticed the 'light' was knocked in below (actually above but there's a black spot above it) a leaf 'hole' or scar. What else????

If it was 4 vertical rows we would see more leaf scars around the trunk! Only one scar is visible on each plane, they are zig zagged up the trunk!

Green, it is not on a road, you have to walk through the woods from my neighbors back yard in the Palmetto point area.

JRBugs, I will be taking more pictures when i get off this evening as long as it isn't raining.

I was thinking they were opposite but each pair at right angles, if that makes any sense. In other words there would be two "leaves/branches" pointing east and west, the next pair up would be pointing north and south, then back to E-W and then N-S. So it looks zig-zag up one side of the trunk but is the same on the opposite side.

JRsbugs said:I've just realised something! Look at the cropped pic I just posted of the trunk. What doesn't fit?

I noticed the 'light' was knocked in below (actually above but there's a black spot above it) a leaf 'hole' or scar. What else????

If it was 4 vertical rows we would see more leaf scars around the trunk! Only one scar is visible on each plane, they are zig zagged up the trunk!

Your observation is correct. All the wholes are scars of fallen leaf branches and are offset in quarters but matching in halves. Hope you can follow my description, having a hard time thinking of a clear way to explain it.

sooby said:I was thinking they were opposite but each pair at right angles, if that makes any sense. In other words there would be two "leaves/branches" pointing east and west, the next pair up would be pointing north and south, then back to E-W and then N-S. So it looks zig-zag up one side of the trunk but is the same on the opposite side.

I can see it now! It looked like the leaves came off the trunk with 4 in the same radius. It's the upward angle which makes it difficult to tell.

CLAYBYRD said:

Your observation is correct. All the wholes are scars of fallen leaf branches and are offset in quarters but matching in halves. Hope you can follow my description, having a hard time thinking of a clear way to explain it.

Yep, I can follow it now. The leaves look so much closer towards the top but the height is giving a false impression.

The mystery continues.

So, are the leaves really opposite, while at the same time they are alternate?!

One of those anomalies I think due to the unusual and rare arrangement.

That probably puts it squarely back into Araliaceae.

I was wondering if it was a cellphone tower in disguise, but since there are juveniles probably not

It's like a mystery novel. The plot thickens.

JRsbugs said:So, are the leaves really opposite, while at the same time they are alternate?!

One of those anomalies I think due to the unusual and rare arrangement.

That probably puts it squarely back into Araliaceae.

Yes, I will be able to get pictures showing all this when I go back out there.

JRsbugs said:So, are the leaves really opposite, while at the same time they are alternate?!

I don't think it is unusual for opposite leaves to be at right angles alternating along the stem. The only thing that passes for leaves here after a looong winter is the Philadelphus by the house which is just bursting its buds but shows that the opposite arrangement alternates the same as the mystery tree:

I agree sooby. It's just the size and the fact that it keeps that conformity throughout that scale, that makes it more unusual for me.

It would be like taking your Philadelphus and have it grow straight up 20 feet as one branch with no other limbs.

I am finding this thread totally fascinating! Can't wait to read the next chapter...

Bad news about the rain. It may be tomorrow before I get more pictures.

That's ok. We'll all still be here waiting!

Well... I managed to get out between storms.

Like I said before: curiouser and curiouser. I would be digging up one of those young'ns

JamesAcclaims said:Like I said before: curiouser and curiouser. I would be digging up one of those young'ns

Ha, same here! I really hope we can get an ID on this. Are there any other sites that will ID from pics?