AusBonsai

Can anyone id these two natives for me please? (Not the holly). And a second tree.

Hi Shane .The first one looks like a Cytisus and the second one is Garrya elliptica both are not native.

Thanks Sno, the second one is definitely a Snowtassel (Garrya elliptica). But, I'm not convinced about cytisus, as that's described in the information I subsequently looked up as a bush. Why do you think it is that?

Shane rub the foilage between your fingers see if there is a distinctive smell to it .
appears to have a smooth bark but need a closer pic of foilage
joann

Hi Shane . Back in the 80's I grew thousand of cytisus when I worked in nurseries . It looks like a Cytisus racemosus . It looks like it is just about to flower ,has yellow flowers. They can be a weed but its not all my fault .
Cheers Craig

Afraid I don't have the tree with me. It's the one that has (temporarily) got away. It's at a friend's parents' place; they're building and it's going. I only got it half out on Sunday.

*bump* Any other ideas on the first tree please? I plan to finish collecting it this Sat. Have had confirmed it is not a cystisus.

hi Shane,

I thought sno was bang on so I cant offer an alternative. What confirmed it wasnt a cytisus?

Squizz

Yeah it kinda is a Cytisus...

In passing, I was informed by a local with horticultural qualifications that it wasn't a cytisus. Last night I got the answer from this person that it was a genista. However, now have looked that up and seeing as genista is another broom, that looks so similar, it is entirely possible it's a cytisus. Guess I wait for the flowers.

Hi Shane.

Interesting how things like this teach us all something new. I can't help but wonder if cytisus is just the new name for genista though. Are they almost so similar that they are the same? What will you be looking for in difference with the flowers? Good post.

Squizz

There are Wikipedia pages for both and the flowers look visibly different. That's what I'll look for.

Hi Shane when I grew Cytisus back in the 80's we called it Genista. It took me years to actually think Cytisus when ever I saw Genista.They change botanical names all the time.Just ask an African about Acacia's.
Cheers Craig

*head desk*

Actually, whilst species have moved between the two genera, both Cytisus and Genista are accepted names. And there's actually another another genus more closely related to Cytisus and Genista; Chamaecytisus. To tell the difference you will need to wait till flowering occurs. Here is a key from http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/cgi-b ... =Faboideae

Keel petals curved along lower surface; style curved throughout its length. Move to 61
Keel petals oblong, straight along lower surface; style curved abruptly near the apex. = Genista

61 Flowers creamy white; calyx tubular, 9–10 mm long; stems ± terete, with obscure ridges. = Chamaecytisus
Flowers yellow; calyx campanulate, c. 6 mm long; stems prominently angular. = Cytisus

And these links show that all three genera are considered to be accepted.
Genista: http://www.theplantlist.org/browse/A/Le ... e/Genista/
Cytisus: http://www.theplantlist.org/browse/A/Le ... e/Cytisus/
Chamaecytisus: http://www.theplantlist.org/browse/A/Le ... aecytisus/

It also shows there are a number of species in each of those genera, and each of them will have different looking flowers. If you want an ID down to genus and species level in this case you will definitely need to provide photos of flowers. But for all intensive horticultural and bonsai purposes, treating it like a Cytisus will get you the results you want.

Joel