Thread: Leopard tree

Originally Posted by artme

Just a few points to clear things up, and I expect Runge will be right on top of this.

I skimmed the article you referenced Runge and note that it was written in 2004 and assented to in 2005.

I see on the page with the sample photos that Caeselpinia ferrea is referred to as pau ferro - ironwood.

Now contributors here are talking of Libidibia sclerocarpa being pau ferro or ironwood.

Are we talking about the same tree?? For me Pete's photos definitely show what I know as a leopard tree and therefore ceaselpinia ferrea, pau ferro or irnwood.

Has the nomenclature been changed since 2005???

The photos shown of Libidibia sclerocarpa show it with a similar mottled bark to the Leopard tree shown by Pete except that the bark is distinctly green in colour.
I have never seen this on a leopard tree, but that doesn't mean it can't be or isn't so.

I also note the photos in the article Of pau rainha - kingwood, pau cobra - snakewood and pau brasil - Brasilwood'.

In Portuguese Pau is wood so a woodpecker is a picca pau.

Pau brasil is gorgeous stuff!! It was originally cut for the red dye that was produced from it, and was nearly cut to exrinction. It is now a protected species with savage
penalties for any person caught trading it without proper authority.

A while back, the genus Caesalpinia was broken up. Here is part of the Introduction from Gasson et al. (2009) (<- Click on link)

Caesalpinia s.l. traditionally comprised c. 140 species in the New and Old World tropics,
and contained 25 generic synonyms (Lewis 2005). The genus in its broadest sense
has been shown to be polyphyletic in morphological and molecular studies (Lewis &
Schrire 1995; Simpson & Miao 1997; Lewis 1998; Simpson 1998, 1999; Simpson &
Lewis 2003, Simpson et al. 2003), and most species have now been assigned to reinstated
segregate genera, whose names and/or status differ from the group names used
in Lewis (1998) as follows: Caesalpinia s.s. (c. 25 spp.), Coulteria (10 spp., Brasilettia
group in Lewis (1998)), Erythrostemon (13 spp., part of Erythrostemon/Poincianella
group in Lewis (1998)), Guilandina (c. 7 spp., subgenus Guilandina), Libidibia (8 spp.,
Libidibia group), Mezoneuron (c. 26 spp, subgenus Mezoneuron), Poincianella (c. 35
spp., part of Erythrostemon/Poincianella group), Tara (3 spp., Russellodendron group
in Lewis (1998)). About 15 Asian taxa remain unassigned pending further analysis,
especially of molecular data. Pomaria was once largely included in Hoffmannseggia but
is now considered more closely related to Caesalpinia s.l. based on molecular studies
by Simpson et al. (2003). Some species of Caesalpinia s.l. (e.g. Poincianella pannosa
and P. exostemma) have considerable morphological variation in their foliage, leaflet
size, shape and indumentum, which has led to a proliferation of species names now
included in synonymy. In this paper we describe the wood anatomy of the genus in its
broadest sense, and outline the features (if any) that consistently define each segregate
genus. Our major aim was to ascertain how closely the wood anatomy reflects the
reclassification of Caesalpinia s.l. into putatively monophyletic segregate genera.

In the section entitled "Libidibia,"

Neotropical trees or shrubs in seasonally dry forest and scrub, thorn forest (including
caatinga) and savanna woodland. We examined seven species of
Libidibia: L. coriaria (Jacq.) Schltdl., Caesalpinia
(Libidibia) ferrea Mart. (Fig. 29 & 30), Caesalpinia (Libidibia) glabrata Kunth (synonym
Caesalpinia paipai Ruiz & Pavon) (Fig. 26–28), Libidibia granadillo (Pittier)
Pittier (probably = Libidibia punctata (Willd.) Britton), Libidibia paraguariensis
(D. Parodi) G.P. Lewis (Fig. 23–25), Libidibia punctata (as Caesalpinia (Libidibia)
paucijuga Benth. ex Hook.) and Libidibia sclerocarpa Britton & Rose (as Caesalpinia
sclerocarpa Standl.). The wood of the eighth species, L. corymbosa (Benth.) Britton &
Killip (probably = Caesalpinia (L.) glabrata Kunth), was described by Latorre (1983).
The wood of Libidibia has several uses (Lewis 2005): it is prized in turnery and for
parts of guitars and violins; Caesalpinia (Libidibia) glabrata and Libidibia paraguariensis
(both known as partridge wood) are used in decorative inlay and cabinet
work, some species are used in heavy construction (railway sleepers, beams, bridge supports),
for tool handles and firewood. Some Libidibia species are also planted as ornamentals.
There are wood descriptions and/or photomicrographs of the wood of Libidibia,
usually as Caesalpinia species, in Schmid (1915), Record and Mell (1924), Williams
(1939), Cozzo and Cristiani (1950), Cozzo (1951), Tortorelli (1956), Kribs (1959),
Paula (1980, 1981), Mainieri et al. (1983), Luo (1989), Ilic (1991), Angyalossy et al.
(2005), Espinoza de Pernía and Melandri (2006), and InsideWood (2004–onwards).
Libidibia is well defined on the basis of wood anatomy. All species have short storied
rays, storied axial parenchyma, and homocellular rays. Prismatic crystals were not found
in any ray cells. Most species lack growth rings apart from Caesalpinia (Libidibia)
ferrea (Fig. 29), which has indistinct growth rings and Libidibia paraguariensis, which
has marginal lines of parenchyma. The sample labelled Libidibia granadillo (probably
= L. punctata) was the only species of Caesalpinia s.l. examined with sclerified
axial parenchyma.

http://www.kew.org/science-conservat...enus/libidibia


The names "pau ferro" and "ironwood" are used for countless timbers. Common names are a recipe to confusion.

Libidibia sclerocarpa => Ebano, Ebano prieto, Ebano de Mexico, Palo freno, tubchi
Libidibia punctata => Granadillo, Ebano, Bridalveil Tree, brown ebony, partridgewood
Libidibia glabrata => Charán, Charán verde
Libdibia ferrea

The recurrent tree shown on this forum called Brazilian Ironwood is Libidibia ferrea. The bark is quite distinctive. Pau-Brazil is Caesalpinia echinata. From Juchum et al. (2008):

Caesalpinia echinata (brazilwood or Pernambuco
wood) comprises a complex of three morphological
leaf variants, characterized by differences in the number
and size of the pinnae and leaflets, and occurring in
allopatric and sympatric populations. The present study
evaluates the utility of the Chloroplast DNA trnL intron in a
phylogenetic analysis of the three leaf variants along with
other species of Caesalpinia and generic relatives. Our
study supports the hypothesis that the name C. echinata
designates a species complex and provides evidence that
one of the forms, the highly divergent C. echinata largeleafleted
variant, represents a distinct taxon.

Phylogenetically, Caesalpinia echinata is relatively close to the genus Libidibia. Otherwise, the subfamily Caesalpinioideae is not fully sorted out. Expect more name changes in Leguminosae/Fabaceae in the future.