« Previous Day: Lilium columbianum and Campanula rotundifolia |
Main
| Next Day: Eucalyptus rhodantha »
Nov 6, 2009: Cypripedium montanum
Nov 7, 2008:
Ranunculus aquatilis
Nov 7, 2007:
Quercus suber
Nov 7, 2006:
Pediomelum esculentum
Nov 7, 2005:
Verbascum eriophorum
February 1, 2007 : Acacia baileyana
Interested in subscribing? Visit the main Botany Photo of the Day page and fill out the form in the upper right corner!
Keywords: Fabaceae | Acacia baileyana F. Muell. | Australia
For the next four days, perhaps more, BPotD will feature plants from Australia. Today's photograph is courtesy of Katy S, taken somewhere in Australia.
Where in Australia isn't too important. As noted in the comments on last year's BPotD entry on Cootamundra wattle, this species has invasive potential. Though the comments discuss its spread in California, it is similarly invasive in parts of its native Australia, making it one of those infrequent “invasive natives”. It is a fine illustration of the ambiguity of the word native. It is accurate to say it is native to Australia, but far more precise to say it is only native to a narrow ecoregion – a small corridor perhaps 50km (30 miles) wide – in southern New South Wales. Elsewhere in Australia where it has been introduced, it has proven to be invasive (information sourced from World Wide Wattle's page on Cootamundra wattle).
Strictly speaking, some might disagree with my use of the terminology invasive native, as a definition (see native weed) of the term suggests a different interpretation. In that glossary, invasive native is defined as a species that historically occurs in a certain area, but for some reason has exploded in terms of its population. One example cited is white-tailed deer in parts of North America, with present populations far exceeding historic numbers due to human-created landscape changes. Personally, I think the two terms should not be equated, with invasive native being reserved for those imprecise (but often necessary) instances when nativity is not defined by ecoregional areas, but rather by political boundaries.
Posted by Daniel Mosquin at February 1, 2007 12:00 AM
Read recent comments on all BPotD Entries
Comments
Posted by: Stan Flouride at February 1, 2007 8:13 AM
Acacia baileyana - Z8 - RHS Index of Garden Plants, Griffiths
Acacia baileyana - Z10-11 - A-Z Encyclopedia of Garden Plants, Brickell, Cole, Zuk
Posted by: Beverley at February 1, 2007 9:17 AM
Please include a common name with each of your great pictures. I add many of them to a file I run as a slideshow for a screen saver, and I add a label right on the picture so I know what I'm looking at when it appears. I did find one for this plant, but it was not obvious at first.
Thanks.
Doug.
Posted by: Douglas Smith at February 1, 2007 12:41 PM
There are invasive natives, and native weeds. Invasive has to do with behavior, not with origin. Unfortunately the US government officially defined "invasive species" as harmful non-natives. "Weed" is similarly subjective. But wattle we do about it? (Blame Monty Python for that one.)
Posted by: Andrea at February 1, 2007 8:26 PM
I see some references to Acacia being in the Mimosaceae family rather than Fabaceae - can anyone explain?
Posted by: Eric in SF at February 4, 2007 6:09 PM
Eric, Wikipedia provides a good summary (Fabaceae), but I'll summarize, too. Legumes can be divided into the three subfamilies, the Caesalpinioideae, the Mimosoideae and the Papilionoideae. Some taxonomists choose to elevate these to the family level instead of using the broader Fabaceae, in which case Acacia would be in Mimosaceae. For a time, a few of us switched to using the 3-families-of-legumes approach here at UBC, until Quentin expressed doubts that the three family approach will stand the test of time (or, rather, the test of taxonomic science) – considering his expertise with the family, we've gone back to using the single family convention.
Posted by: Daniel Mosquin 
at February 5, 2007 11:47 AM
Thanks, Daniel!
Posted by: Eric in SF at February 5, 2007 10:32 PM
Please share your comments about the photograph(s) and accompanying write-up. Telling a story about the subject of the photograph(s) is also much appreciated! If you have a gardening question, the best place to ask is on the UBC Botanical Garden Forums. Thank you!
Post a comment
XML Feeds: Atom | RSS 2.0 | RSS 1.0 | What is RSS? | RSS Tools
Botany Photo of the Day and all associated images are licensed under a Creative Commons License except when otherwise specified in the accompanying written entry.
About Botany Photo of the Day | Submit Your Photos via Flickr | Submit Your Photos via UBCBG's Discussion Forums
Botany Photo of the Day is a project of the UBC Botanical Garden and Centre for Plant Research, located in Vancouver, British Columbia Canada. UBC BGCPR is a department of the Faculty of Land and Food Systems within The University of British Columbia.
There are 11 of these planted on my block in San Francisco and it is the only plant or substance that I am allergic to. The last week in February and the first two in March are hell. (and then I get to sweep up the much-less lovely flowers)
A generous benefactor from Australia who lived on the block donated them all to the city back in the 60s.