PDA

View Full Version : Wood indigenous to both USA and Australia







Dusty Workshop
23rd September 2004, 02:11 PM
I am curious. Does anyone know of any species of wood that is indigenous to both the USA and Australia?

Regards,

DUSTY

hoopy
23rd September 2004, 02:34 PM
I've had a look in a couple of books and I don't know how accurate it is but apparantly Northern hemisphere Beech and Southern Hemisphere beech are closely related, both Nothofagus spp. Tasmanian Myrtle is a Nothofagus (can't find the species name) that seems to be as close as it gets.

hoopy
23rd September 2004, 02:37 PM
Tasmanian Myrtle is Nothofagus cunninghamii

jshaw
23rd September 2004, 02:50 PM
Dusty,

Not quite what you asked, but the best I can find is that some of the Araucaria species (monkey puzzle trees, southern hemisphere "pines") are native to South America (Chile, Brazil and Argentina). I suspect they are not the same ones that are native to Australia, but I'm not absolutely sure. This web page (http://www.botanik.uni-bonn.de/conifers/ar/ar/index.html) says that they were once common in the northern hemisphere too.

John

Rocker
23rd September 2004, 03:28 PM
Dusty,

European beech is Fagus sylvatica, and so belongs to a different genus from Tasmanian myrtle (Nothofagus). I suspect they are no more closely related than European Oak (Quercus robur) and Tasmanian oak (Eucalyptus regnans).

It is unlikely that there would be any plant species common to North America and Australia, because Australia, 200 million years ago, was part of the southern super-continent Gondwanaland, which broke up to form Antarctica, Australia, South America, Africa, and India, while North America was part of a northern super-continent consisting of North America, Europe, and Asia. Each of the the super-continents had its own distinct flora, which evolved separately.

Rocker

PAH1
23rd September 2004, 04:16 PM
Australia does have mostly uniqe flora. I think that if you were going to find something in common then you are going to go back to the mossess and liverworts to do it. I do not think we have any of the Prunus group here, definetly not Malus, we do have a couple of native citrus but these are nearly unrelated to the commercial citrus. We do have native cottons ie Gossypium sp and a couple of them form things close to tree height, but again nearly unrelated to the native cotton's of america which are biennial shrubs.

Would something that grows in both places do? If so I know that mesquite does quite happily here, and all the tall trees in Tucson AZ are Eucalypts of one sort or another. I think we have given Florida a weed in one of the Tea trees (Leptospermum). Cottonwood abounds here in Canberra.

Rocker when tas myrtle was orginaly described it was as a Fagus species. I still think they are fairly closely related. In scientific circles they are usually called "antarctic beech". I just checked and the last bit is a bit fuzzy as it refers to several species, at least it got it somewhat right and did not call it a myrtle.

Termite
23rd September 2004, 04:46 PM
What about MDF? :D Sorry couldnt help myself.

echnidna
23rd September 2004, 05:02 PM
Thats closely related to pinus chipboardus

Wood Borer
23rd September 2004, 05:06 PM
Thats closely related to pinus chipboardus

The Australian MDF is pinaus chipboardaus

Rocker
23rd September 2004, 05:58 PM
PAH1,

I think the Mesquite is regarded as a noxious weed, and, even if Cottonwood isn't, it should be - it is a mongrel of a tree with useless timber and branches that are liable to fall off and cause major damage if it grows anywhere near a building. Admittedly, Mesquite is quite good timber, but I wish we had American Cherry, Walnut, Maple, and Red Oak growing here instead.

Rocker

AlexS
23rd September 2004, 09:26 PM
I don't know how closely they are related - probably hardly at all, but apparently Huon pine and Bristlecone pine have many similar characteristics, including argument over which one is the longest-living.

Ben from Vic.
23rd September 2004, 09:57 PM
I don't know how closely they are related - probably hardly at all, but apparently Huon pine and Bristlecone pine have many similar characteristics, including argument over which one is the longest-living.

I bet ours smells better. ;)

Love the smell of Huon Pine. :)

PAH1
24th September 2004, 09:54 AM
I don't know how closely they are related - probably hardly at all, but apparently Huon pine and Bristlecone pine have many similar characteristics, including argument over which one is the longest-living.

I have seen those growing, interesting tree but would be a real mongrel to get any useable wood out of the ones I saw. The base was small 10-20cm and twisted as anything, multiple branches and very slow growing.

Rocker. I have seen pens made from cottonwood and they are interesting. Not saying that they make a great pen but they are rather nice. I think you will also find that in many parts of the US Mesquite is regarded as a noxious weed, it certainly was around Tucson.

Along these lines Mesquite is regarded as a good timber to finish turn from green because its longitudinal and radial shrinkage rate are the same, so a green turned item retains its shape. Does anybody know of australian timbers that have that same feature?

seriph1
24th September 2004, 10:03 AM
Eucalypts abound in California though were intro'd in 1905.

There are certainly timbers that grow on both continents, though can't think of any species existing indigeonously on both...... maybe Arukaria, but don't kknow if it was introduced or not ...... We have Elm (some of the last in the world apparently, due the disease) and Oak over here as well as Southern yellow Pine, though all were intro'd

AlexS
24th September 2004, 01:04 PM
I bet ours smells better. ;)

Love the smell of Huon Pine. :)

With you there Ben!

We had a Tasmanian student living with us for a while. Every so often she'd come to the workshop for her Huon pine hit.

glenn k
25th September 2004, 02:44 PM
Yes Dusty there is a tree that grows here and in North America. It is a true cosmopolitan tree I believe it is indigenous to every continent on earth (well the ones that still have trees).
It is Melia azedarach it is usually known here as White Cedar but elsewhere as Pride of India, Persian Lilac, Texas Umbrella Tree, Syrian Bead Tree, and Japanese Bead Tree.
There are localized varieties with distinct differences but are from the same origin.
How did it do it? My theory: when the planet was first colonised “they” planted them all over so they could be used for insect control after farming was started. For those that don’t know in other countries and here a little it is used to control head lice intestinal parasites insects on plants. Insects can’t build immunity and it is harmless to mammals. It is also naturally occurring thus not patentable therefore not as profitable as the nasties they feed us.

PAH1
27th September 2004, 09:32 AM
Melia I thought of being naturalised rather than a real native, like Tamarind. I guess it comes down to pedantics about accepting human intervention in colonisation or not.

IanW
27th September 2004, 10:27 AM
Melia is sort of a native, alright, in that it got here by its own steam. It got into the north along with a lot of other species from the Asian region, a long, long time before humans did the same thing. It's a marginal rainforest species but has been planted far and wide as a street tree in Australia - it does amazingly well considering its preferred habitat, but the specimens you see in Vic. are a bit smaller than the whoppers you can find around Cairns.
Glenn K - are you absolutely certain M. azedarach is also 'native' to the Americas? It's in the Meliaciae, the family that contains the true Mahoganies, and our 'red cedar', and has a very wide range throughout the Asian/Australian region, but I seriously doubt its natural range extended to the Americas.
Its fruit is also quite toxic to mammals, particularly pigs. I've not heard of its insecticidal properties before, but maybe that explains why the fruits last so well on the tree, providing a winter food source for some birds? Birds aren't bothered by the toxin(s), fortunately for them.
We've been separated from the northern hemisphere for a very long time, and while we have closely related plants in South Africa, South America and Australia (including the Auricarias) we don't have exactly the same species. The northern families that have colonised the north of Aust. are relatively recent arrivals, and mostly quite different from endemic families of plants.
Huon pine is NOT closely related to Bristlecone pine, but does belong to the same ancient group of non-flowering plants (Gymnosperms), and Tas Oak is a Eucalypt, in the Myrtle family, whereas the northern hemisphere oaks are in the family Fagaceae, the same as our Southern Beech and northern Beech - so the name 'Myrtle' for our beeches is a bit of a poor choice.
Common names can be mighty confusing if you really want to know how plants are related!

There - have now exhausted what I remember of my first-year botany.............
Cheers,

glenn k
29th September 2004, 12:19 AM
I saw a map of where Melia was growing in the US they said it was naturalised. Another site said it was native but how can you tell I'm sure noone has studied fossile records to find the spread of Melia. I have never heard of the berries being toxic to pigs. Probably a quanity thing most things will kill you in excess.
A friend of mine worked in the mountains in Vietnam and said the locals were soaking the Melia fruit in water and pooring it on their crops. I did a bit of research and decided 25g of fruit to the litre was the go so I mixed it up with crushed fruit and sprayed my pear tree. No more cherry slugs for the rest of the year, that does not happen with insecticide or white oil. The oil is sold as Neem Oil some say the Indian tree they use is a different species others a different genus other same species.
I read about it being poured on the ground to stop termites but it only lasted a year or so. The leaves work as well as the fruit.

IanW
29th September 2004, 08:57 AM
Glenn,

I saw a map of where Melia was growing in the US they said it was naturalised. Another site said it was native but how can you tell I'm sure noone has studied fossile records to find the spread of Melia.

The Yanks are always claiming things that don't belong to them as their own. :rolleyes: Macdamias are sold in Hawaii as "The Royal Hawaian Nut". It's most definitely NOT native to Hawaii, but is a native of Qld.
It's possible, but unlikely, that Melia is 'native' to the Americas, but it would go against the botanical trend.


I I have never heard of the berries being toxic to pigs. Probably a quanity thing most things will kill you in excess.

I assure you it is, and to most other mammals - look up any standard veterinary toxicology text. And your comment is right on - most "-cides', man-made or 'natural' are differential toxins of one kind or another - i.e. they are simply more toxic to target species than the ones you are trying to 'protect'.

I'd never heard of Melia fruits being used as insecticides, before, and being well aware of the extent of my ignorance, did a bit of quick research.
First, I should emphasize, M. azedarach is NOT the Neem tree, or at least not the one of fame, which is Azadirachta indica, but the two are often confused, it seems (saw one reference to Melia as the 'false' Neem). There is another Neem (A. excelsea) that grows in Vietnam, and it's possible your friend mis-identified the tree they were using, (they are superficially very similar) in which case, you may have made a serendipitous discovery of the insecticidal properties of Melia!
On the other hand, M. azerach is a common tree in Vietnam - I've seen plenty of them planted as street trees, and lots of it being sawn up for lumber in villages up and down the country - so it may well be that the locals are well aware of its other properties, and have been for a very long time.
It's an endlessly-interesting world, ain't it??
Avagooday,

PAH1
29th September 2004, 09:26 AM
A friend of mine worked in the mountains in Vietnam and said the locals were soaking the Melia fruit in water and pooring it on their crops. I did a bit of research and decided 25g of fruit to the litre was the go so I mixed it up with crushed fruit and sprayed my pear tree. No more cherry slugs for the rest of the year, that does not happen with insecticide or white oil. The oil is sold as Neem Oil some say the Indian tree they use is a different species others a different genus other same species.
I read about it being poured on the ground to stop termites but it only lasted a year or so. The leaves work as well as the fruit.

Interesting bit about the insecticide. I had come up with another solution to cherry slug, a relatively strong solution of Teepol (normally used here for controlling aphids) at about 1%W/V mixed with a small quantity of eucalyptus oil. Teepol by itself is no good, they stay under the slime coat, however with the euc oil added they try and wriggle out of it dessicate and die.

I did my PhD on toxins in wheat flour, if they are injected there is enough of this stuff in a Kg of wheat flour to kill about 250000 people. However our digestive systems handle it no problems at all.

PAH1
7th October 2004, 03:12 PM
Sorry to go back to an old thread but some stuff came accross my desk yesterday that is interesting and relevent.

The genus Acacia with some 1350 members is going to be split up. As roughly 1000 of these are from australia this is of interest to us. Thanks to some guys at the Herbarium here at CSIRO they have managed to convince the council that decides on plant names that we should keep the acacia name, though strict enforcement of the rules would mean that it went to a south african plant and we got some other strange name.

Why is this relevent, as it turns out some acacia's are found in south eastern USA as endemic species. So we have one conclusive genus that extends through to the USA that is part of the true flowering plants.
For more info see

Acacia info (http://www.anbg.gov.au/cpbr/taxonomy/acacia-conserved-2004.html)

glenn k
12th October 2004, 12:46 AM
Glenn,


is another Neem (A. excelsea) that grows in Vietnam, and it's possible your friend mis-identified the tree they were using, (they are superficially very similar) in which case, you may have made a serendipitous discovery of the insecticidal properties of Melia!
On the other hand, M. azerach is a common tree in Vietnam - I've seen plenty of them planted as street trees, and lots of it being sawn up for lumber in villages up and down the country - so it may well be that the locals are well aware of its other properties, and have been for a very long time.
It's an endlessly-interesting world, ain't it??
Avagooday,

I'm sure she would not have mis-identified the tree they were using as she has a Botany Degree and studied Horticulture and Arboriculture with me. The locals maybe.

jrwilliams01
12th October 2004, 01:39 PM
There is a guy here in Texas that builds rocking chairs out of Mesquite. He sells them for $5000 (thats U.S. dollars) apeice

reeves
2nd December 2004, 12:43 PM
In answer to the original question, as afr as I am aware, no.

NOth America broke off from Pangea ( original supercontinient) and australia was of Gonwana, broken section of supercontintiint, aroun dthe time most trees were developing, 50 -150 millions years ago.

Tho as in ALL species there are some distinct similarities, and some would be pretty much identical but as trees develop acoridng to local conditions, truly indetical trees in an indigenous form are unlikely.

AS previous post have outline, there are many transplanted species that are growing 'wild' eithe rin australia or the US, but not indigenous.

cheeers

scooter
2nd December 2004, 11:45 PM
...I read about it being poured on the ground to stop termites ...

Quick Glenn, what was the mix again... :D :D :D


Sean

glenn k
29th January 2009, 12:40 PM
Glenn,


The Yanks are always claiming things that don't belong to them as their own. :rolleyes: Macdamias are sold in Hawaii as "The Royal Hawaian Nut". It's most definitely NOT native to Hawaii, but is a native of Qld.
It's possible, but unlikely, that Melia is 'native' to the Americas, but it would go against the botanical trend.



I assure you it is, and to most other mammals - look up any standard veterinary toxicology text. And your comment is right on - most "-cides', man-made or 'natural' are differential toxins of one kind or another - i.e. they are simply more toxic to target species than the ones you are trying to 'protect'.

I'd never heard of Melia fruits being used as insecticides, before, and being well aware of the extent of my ignorance, did a bit of quick research.
First, I should emphasize, M. azedarach is NOT the Neem tree, or at least not the one of fame, which is Azadirachta indica, but the two are often confused, it seems (saw one reference to Melia as the 'false' Neem). There is another Neem (A. excelsea) that grows in Vietnam, and it's possible your friend mis-identified the tree they were using, (they are superficially very similar) in which case, you may have made a serendipitous discovery of the insecticidal properties of Melia!
On the other hand, M. azerach is a common tree in Vietnam - I've seen plenty of them planted as street trees, and lots of it being sawn up for lumber in villages up and down the country - so it may well be that the locals are well aware of its other properties, and have been for a very long time.
It's an endlessly-interesting world, ain't it??
Avagooday,
Sorry for regurgitating an old thread but was just rereading and the comment "lI assure you it is, and to most other mammals - look up any standard veterinary toxicology text" If you look up Sugar Gum you will find it is toxic aswell which is crap. I used to feed it to my goats and cows never leave leavs they can reach. I heard this furthy came from western Victoria where during a drought a farmer dropped a row of sugar gums and his starving stock stuffed them selves on it and died therefore toxic. If he had dumped a truck load of lucern all his cattle would have blown up and died a lot faster so is lucern toxic? The white cedar fruit and pigs probably started much the same. There has been huge amounts of research done on the active ingredient in Neem and Melia and it affects a stage of development in insects that manals don't have and mammalian toxicity tests aswell of course. If this substance was patentable it would be sold everywhere. Perhaps if we had patents at the begining of the industrial revolution we would not have had one.