AusBonsai

Hello Everyone,

Can someone please assist with the I.D. on this Ficus please.
I originally thought MB as the regrowth is identically shaped and coloured.
However, the leaf size is approximately half of the MB's leaf.
It is a collected specimen, carefully plucked growing from an old sandstone retaining wall.
I would like to start a progression on this particular fig and also ask for some specific opinions.
But an I.D. would greatly assist me so i can correctly title my progression.

Thanking you all in advance,
Kevin

Trunk New Growth Foliage

Hello all,

Concerning the I.D. what continually throws my identification of this plant is it's speckled trunk and speckled branches and speckled aerial roots.
Whenever a specimen is shown with these characteristics, it's labelled a TIGER FIG.
But from what i have researched a Tiger Fig ranges from 'microcarpa', 'retusa', 'nitida', 'rubiginosa', a variation named 'hilii' also a plethora of other figs too.

Is the speckling just a variation of any Ficus spp.?

Thanks,
Kevin

The "speckles" are called lenticels and they are a pore that allows gas exchange between the air and the inner woody tissue. They are a common feature on many trees, can vary greatly between species and sometimes are a good indicator for identification.

The 2 most common figs that you would find growing around sydney would be Ficus rubiginosa and F. macropylla. It can be very difficult to positively identify them as they have a great deal of variation and there may even be interbreeding. The ONLY true way is through the fruits. However there are a couple of things that can determine which species. The only problem is the absence of them doesn't indicate the other species.

I believe yours is Ficus macrophylla. The reason is the leaves show an M shape at the attachment to the leaf stalk. See here for further details. I have found this appears on juvenile leaves and may disappear as leaves reach a mature. So if your tree doesn't have the attachment it doesn't mean it's a F. rubiginosa.

Similarly, new shoots on F. rubiginosa are covered in fine downy hairs, but only as the tree matures. I see it on mine that I leave to grow freely. Again the absence doesnt indicate that it is F. macrophylla.

Thanks for your reply Dan,

Any idea as to why some figs of the same genus have lenticels and some don't OR is the information i have been reading wrongly labelling certain figs?

Are Lenticels directly related to one species of Ficus?

In other genera i have observed the lenticels as you mentioned are an identifying feature like the Birch trees.

What about Ficus and Lenticels?

Thanks, hoping someone can help.

Also, is the regrowth, as in the new leaf spike, just prior to the leaf opening - the Leaf Sheath - Are these a distinguishing feature, previously researched and stuck in the back of my mind is the MB's Leaf Sheath being always red as opposed to the PJ's Leaf Sheath being green?

Is the above correct?

Kevin

Not just between species, but as mentioned before, there can be great variance in any species. In leaf shape, colour, bark, growth habit, etc... That's where different varieties or cultivars come from. Lenticels are another thing that can vary.

Most Figs have them and they vary in shape, size, and colour. Tiger bark Figs for instance have very distinct lenticels, where as others are barely visible. Ficus macrophylla and F. rubiginosa both have them and on mature trees may very well be indicative of species, particularly if that is all that is visible of the tree. However as bonsai, some distinguishing features are not apparent.

As for the leaf sheath, or stipule, again I don't think they can be used as a distinguishing feature. I have a discriotion by eminent Botanist of NSW rainforest A. G. Floyd that says F. macrophylla stipules are creamy brown!

I have many Figs, a lot I have not formally IDed that have red stipules, but I also have figs I believe to be F. macrophylla with green stipules. As I mentioned above, some things can be used to say it is such and such, but the absence doesn't make it the other. Many people will tell you a sure way to distinguish them, but the only true and sure way is fruit.

When it comes to true species identification of any species it is only about the flowers. All else is incidental. Some species have features that we recognise at a glance. Others can be a lot harder. And some need advanced techniques to be truly sure.

Thanks Dan

What is the species of ficus that you relate to as Tiger Bark Fig?

Thanks,
Kevin

Ficus retusa. It has brown bark with very distinct white horizontal lines. In the discriptions I just read from Floyd it actually described the branchlets as having lenticels and the bark of figs being marked by pustules. So I suppose they would be pustules, not lenticels that are distinct on the tiger bark.

Hello Dan,

Do you think this may be F. retusa from this photo?
Thanks,
Kevin

As Dan has said, some widespread species are very variable. F. rubiginosa grows from Vic border all the way to QLD so lots of slight differences have developed in different areas. Some forms have rusty leaves, others are plain green. Some have larger average leaves, some smaller. Some have red sheaths all the time, some have red sheaths in winter, others don't have any colour. They are all F. rubiginosa (until some botanist decides that the variation is too much for a single species and splits them into several new species ) but have adapted just slightly to the slightly different environments they have grown in for hundreds of thousands of years.

Because they are variable different people will give different characteristics that differentiate the species - usually because they are not aware of the full range of variables that the species exhibits. You can also be assured that many of the experts will also vehemently assure you that they alone are correct and all the other opinions are worthless.
I am assured that the only really defining feature is the flowers. Ficus flowers are inside the fruits so fruit becomes the defining feature which Dan has already told you. Anything else is just guesswork.

For the purposes of bonsai does it really matter whether you have one species or another?

Thanks Dan and Shibui,

To answer your question Shibui - to me, it does matter. BUT in the big picture it is just a Potensai.

I like Dan believed this to be MB and i do completely comprehend variances between species, especially within our native flora.

But, i have never seen a variance of such magnitude in MB's trunks, maybe i should get out a bit more.

Truly Thank-you for helping and educating,

Kevin