Talk:Brachychiton rupestris

Flower anatomy

Melburnian - there's not much in the brachy book - relies a bit on guymer anyway. I think not far off a GAN...but I hate trying to write out flower anatomy. Do you wanna have a go or shall I haul in one of the other plant people......I'll ask anyway to get it best we can after. ...sleep now......Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:57, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I went to the RBG this morning and took some photos of the flowers, I could only spot a few small flowers on one of their many trees. in stark contrast to the Illawarra flame trees flaming away. I'll have a go at the flower anatomy, though getting the balance of accuracy and completeness versus accessibility is always tricky, particularly while trying to deal with the silly season. Getting additional imput from WP:Plants is a good idea.--Melburnian (talk) 01:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Have requested over there. Will go to sleep now and see what happens in the AM......zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:53, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

What do you want to know? The plants are monoecious; the flowers apetalous; the inflorescences (looking at a photograph) synoecious; and the fruits apocarpous. Lavateraguy (talk) 09:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Of those characteristics, do you know which are common to (respectively) Malvaceae, Brachychiton and B. rupestris?.--Melburnian (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

To a first approximation these are traits of tribe Sterculiaae

To quote myself "Malvaceous plants are generally synoecious, and this is presumably the plesiomorphic condition in Malvaceae, as in Magnoliophyta as a whole.

The largest subgroup departing from this condition is subfamily Sterculioideae (12 genera, 400 species) in which the flowers are usually functionally unisexual, or polygamous. Sterculia may be monoecious or dioecious; Cola is usually dioecious. Pterygota and Hildegardia are dioecious."

Malvaceae are usually synoecious/hermaphrodite; Sterculieae is the largest exception (see here). Malvaceae usually have perfect flowers (Sterculieae is again the biggest exception - see here. The typical fruit of Malvaceae is a capsule, but there are numerous exceptions, such as the schizocarps of tribe Malveae or the berries of Theobroma; IIRC, Sterculieae is the only group with apocarpous fruits (i.e. the basal condition is syncarpous). I don't know anything about the variation of the distribution of sexes between inflorescences in Sterculieae and/or Brachychiton, but given the variation in the sexual system there may well be variation in this as well.

I would have expected Guymer to have covered this, but I don't have access to the paper.Lavateraguy (talk) 10:04, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that gives us some context. Time for me to do a lot of reading and note taking. If you or anyone contributing here would you like us to send a copy of the Guymer paper, let Cas or I know here or use the email link on one of our user pages.--Melburnian (talk) 11:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Lavateraguy thanks for the above - it is always tricky to figure out how much more general information should be on this page as well as Brachychiton or even Sterculioideae really. Have added a bit on classification. Guymer does cover some of this - will have another look. A smidgen more added - I think it is within striking distance of GA and have nommed it - think we're pretty much there with comprehensiveness. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Ambiguity

Is the period given that of the absence of leaves, or of the onset of leaf loss? "Brachychiton rupestris is deciduous. The period of leaflessness ..."? Lavateraguy (talk) 10:13, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks.--Melburnian (talk) 11:48, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Style

The description seems to be in the style beloved of floras. Some people might think that this is non-encylopaediac. Lavateraguy (talk) 10:14, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

I always find the description section to be the hardest to hammer into flowing prose. The measurement ranges and conversions are enough on their own to put any reader to sleep. Any pointers to improve it?--Melburnian (talk) 12:14, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Foliage

Alternate foliage is the normal condition in Malvaceae. Some species of Lasiopetalum have pseudoverticillate or even opposite foliage, and Guichenotia has leaves "ternately pseudoverticillate" (fide Hutchinson). Lavateraguy (talk) 14:43, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Ambiguity

Does juvenile foliage mean the leaves of young plants, or the leaves of new wood? Lavateraguy (talk) 17:46, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Generally speaking it means young plants. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:20, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

It would be good to have an article explaining juvenile leaves vs adult leaves in this sense. Any ideas what such an article should be named?--Melburnian (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

The term would appear to be heteroblasty - probably worth a stub. See papers such as this this and this. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:33, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Looking into it further, I see the word is used in different ways in different fields. I think I will make a stub at heteroblasty (botany).--Melburnian (talk) 04:08, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

A few questions

I have just read and copy-edited the article Brachychiton rupestris. I have a few questions:

1) The second-to-last sentence of the first paragraph in the lede is:

• The cream flowers appear from September to November, and are followed by the woody boat-shaped follicles, which are ripe from November to May.

Since no flowers have yet been mentioned, I wonder about the use of the definite article "the" in the phrase "the cream flowers", and since no follicles have yet been mentioned, I wonder about the use of "the" in the phrase "the woody boat-shaped follicles". I think both instances of "the" should be removed. It would then read:

• Cream flowers appear from September to November, and are followed by woody boat-shaped follicles, which are ripe from November to May.

Ok, done. As I am reading it, my initial inclination was that as I know it is an angiosperm I know it must have flowers, hence I'd be happy with a "the" there before "flowers"...but concede this would not be obvious for laypeople so removed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:35, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Unless this is standard botanists' terminology...

2) The first two sentences of the second paragraph in Brachychiton rupestris#Description are the following:

• Brachychiton rupestris is deciduous. Trees in their native habitat are typically leafless between September and December; however the timing, duration and extent of leaf drop may be affected by extremes of rainfall or drought.

As a North American, I know that the leaves of deciduous trees lose their leaves in the autumn, or fall, which is September to December. Every North American schoolkid learns that the autumn, or fall, in the southern hemisphere is at the time of the North American spring, about March to June. So, I was really puzzled when I read that this tree is leafless from September to December. I even thought it might be a typo. Then I read in another article linked from this article that deciduous trees can lose their leaves in the dry season. If that is what occurs for Brachychiton rupestris, I'm wondering if a phrase could be added to this sentence to make it clear that the tree loses its leaves in the dry season. It would prevent an immense confusion for a North American reader. If that's not the dry season in Australia, why is a deciduous tree losing its leaves in the Australian spring?

3) In the third paragraph in the section Brachychiton rupestris#Taxonomy and naming is the following sentence:

• Unique to section Delabechea, all three species all have bulbous trunks and can have large cavities in the vertical wood parenchyma.

You'll notice you have "all" twice in this sentence. It would be best to avoid that. I think only one is needed here, but I don't know which one you want to leave out.

(a) Unique to section Delabechea, all three species have bulbous trunks...

(b) Unique to section Delabechea, the three species all have bulbous trunks...

Also, wouldn't this sound better if it read, "Unique to the section, ..."? You've already mentioned the section's name, and you haven't mentioned any other section. Do you really need to repeat "Delabechea"?

good points and done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:35, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

4) In the fourth paragraph of the section Brachychiton rupestris#Taxonomy and naming is the following sentence:

• The generic name was for many years misconstrued as being of neuter gender—first by the genus describers Heinrich Wilhelm Schott and Stephan Endlicher and later by von Mueller and others—with the specific names then incorrectly amended.

The non-botanist might wonder what "the generic name" is. I assume it is "rupestris", but that's a guess. If it is, perhaps it could be added after "generic name" just to make it clear for the non-expert reader. I realize that there was a problem with the form of this word, so perhaps it would be too confusing to mention it here. If so, maybe you could add "the second part of the tree's name", or something like that.

Aaah, Brachychiton is the genus name. Its gender is actually masculine, but the -on confused some scientists who thought it was neuter. The species name is an adjective that has to agree in gender with the genus gender. Hence this was often written Brachychiton rupestre (neuter gender) in older books. I'll see what I can do to make it clearer. Ok does this help? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:48, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

5) In the section Brachychiton rupestris#Distribution and habitat is the following sentence:

• It is an emergent or dominant tree in forests dominated by brigalow (Acacia harpophylla), hoop pine (Araucaria cunninghamii), or ooline (Cadellia pentastylis).

You'll notice that you have "dominant" and "dominated" in close proximity in this sentence. It would be best to avoid that. Perhaps you could think of another word to substitute for "dominant", or leave it out altogether.

"dominant" is actually redundant and has been removed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:35, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

6) Regarding the section Brachychiton rupestris#Uses, I'm wondering if the order of the sentences could be improved. The first two sentences, describing how Aborigines used the tree for food and for fibre for nets, are fine. After that, the sentences seem a bit out of order. Corinne (talk) 04:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

yes agreed now that I read it again, switched a bit Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brachychiton rupestris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140813052953/http://nprsr.qld.gov.au/parks/pdf/south-west-qld-vg.pdf to http://www.nprsr.qld.gov.au/parks/pdf/south-west-qld-vg.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/58041/Cun5Dow685.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:33, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Seeds

Wondering whether the seeds of this Brachychiton are used as food, after roasting, as are some others of the genus? Or are they perhaps poisonous, as I've seen claimed for some species, due to cyanide leachate in damp soil. yoyo (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)