From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Plants (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

In the September 2006 issue of Science [...][edit]

I would rather link the "(publishing in full here)" with the official JGI Poplar sequencing project, which also contain a link to the Science paper. The official link would be Or simply it could be mentionned that a P. trichocarpa was sequenced and linked to the Wiki on P. trichocarpa, this will do since this page contains all the references needed -- Fred 15:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, now I see what you mean! Excellent. Yes, I think changing that link would be ok. We can also link to Populus trichocarpa in that section. Good point. Next time you can be bold and make any change you want yourself! You don't always have to check on the talk pages first unless it's something terribly controversial, then it's a good idea to leave a note on a talk page. Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 06:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

edibility of poplar tree exudates?[edit]

Just a curiosity for anyone who knows about these trees! Its spring here in the North East of U. S. and my poplar tree is spewing out this "stuff" that looks like long tendril flowers. They are all over the place! May I ask, "Are they edible." Does it matter? Should I just put them in my compost heap?

                                       Curious at,

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by P831 (talkcontribs) 16:17, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

I just added a description of the flowers; long tendril seems to fit. (SEWilco 04:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

"Invasive" roots. Best choice?[edit]

"Invasive" is a word commonly used for roots that damage things. But is it the best word to describe the root systems of all Poplars in general. If a poplar is located alone in the middle of a 2 acre parcel, its roots would not be invading anything, but the article is worded to label the roots of a tree like that as "invasive" also. "Fast growing" might be a more universal word. M.D. Vaden of Oregon.Mdvaden 16:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi, another user here, wonder if this post marks an opportunity to include RHIZOMES in the article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:282:901:D40B:3847:D9D4:C0FB:701D (talk) 20:46, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

suggestion for Uses - Land management[edit]

The current text in the Uses - Land management section singles out P. nigra as the species used in field shelterbelts. As an employee of the branch of the Canadian federal government responsible for providing field shelterbelt trees to all of western Canada, I am aware that this is somewhat incorrect and misleading.

In western Canada, at least, we have a significant portion of old shelterbelts that are P. alba or hybrids such as P. x euramericana. Additionally, newly released hybrid clones (P.x Walker, P. x assinboine) are shipped out each year to farmers. I feel it is not appropriate to suggest that P. nigra is used exclusively or preferentially.

I have tried to find acceptable citations for the above claims, but there are probably more appropriate publications to be found. If a person wished to pursue this matter further they might have success searching for publications under the "Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA) - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada", or the "Poplar Council of Canada"/"Poplar Council of America".

PFRA-AAFC "Trees and Shrubs for Prairie Shelterbelts"

Poplar Council of Canada - "Poplar and Aspen breeding in Canada" — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)


This referenced addition[1]:

"*Baking trays from peeled poplar are biodegradable."

seems legitimate, but was reverted. is this correct? -- (talk) 14:56, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Not acceptable for wikipedia, per WP:NOTADVERTISING. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 15:27, 20 May 2016 (UTC)