Talk:Liriodendron

Size[edit]

Shouldn't some mention be made that the Tulip-tree is the tallest broadleaf tree through much of its range, particularly as far maximum height is concerned? Wilhelm Ritter 22:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling[edit]

Is there a best accepted name for this tree? The article has been shuffled around. Right now google shows 9510 hits for "tuliptree", 26500 for "tulip tree", and 16900 for "tulip poplar". WormRunner 01:38, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to go for either Tulip tree or Tulip-tree. Definitely not "Tulip poplar", as that suggests it is a poplar, which of course it isn't. - MPF 18:45, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Moved to Tulip tree, as this is the most widely used - MPF 12:23, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Moved back to tuliptree. THIS IS THE CORRECT USAGE. Consult Dir or Preston or any reputable reference. jaknouse 15:51, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, I disagree. Numerous references use Tulip tree. - MPF 15:57, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Just my opinion, Jaknouse, but I think "Tulip tree" has the most backing. And putting your opinion in all caps doesn't make it more right. -- WormRunner 06:20, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Jaknouse, I think you are outvoted. You're gonna have to be nice and accept the consensus, or convince us on the talk page. Pollinator 13:55, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Actually in the Appalachians, the most common terms are Tulip poplar or Yellow poplar, but I haven't argued for that because it is misleading. However, in either event the common usage is two words, not one. Pollinator 13:55, 29 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I certainly know about the "poplar" thing, and certainly should have mentioned it in the article. The reason that everyone (in the scientific community, anyway) is avoiding the name including "poplar" is that poplars are a clearly defined group of trees and are very distant cladistically from the magnolias, which is the group that tuliptree falls into, so using the word poplar for tuliptree is very misleading. That is the same reason that the scientific community uses tuliptree instead of tulip tree and cucumbertree instead of cucumber tree: to clearly indicate that those are vernacular names, and that the tuliptree has NOTHING to do with tulips, and similiarly for the cucumbertree. Now, I just dug out my Gleason & Cronquist. They are universally (among the science community) regarded as THE authorities on eastern North American plants. They actually do it a little differently from me -- and from you guys; they're actually closer to me. They use hyphens, like this: tulip-tree; cucumber-tree. This, again, is a device to clearly indicate that the names are vernacular, etc., etc. Similarly, the also capitalize the name ONLY when it is at the beginning of the sentence or entry. (that is, for tuliptree they say "Tulip-tree, yellow-poplar"). So, I just went and dug out my "Atlas of United States Trees", by Elbert W. Little, published by the USDA: they use "cucumbertree" (lower-case) and "yellow-poplar" (again, lower-case). So, I went and dug out the American Forestry Association's official guide. They use "cucumbertree" and "tuliptree" (both lower-case). In fact, of the dozens of tree books I have, ALL the scholarly and reference guides either use hyphens or compound names, and all lower-case -- not ONE uses "tulip tree" or "cucumber tree". Only the cheap popular guides use those arrangements or capitalize them. jaknouse 00:27, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Facts, not opinions: The OED says tulip-tree, tulip poplar, saddle-tree. And most of its quotes are "tulip-tree". A third option it seems. --Menchi 04:26, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've no objection to Tulip-tree and Cucumber-tree. If that makes a suitable compromise, I'd be very happy with that (and am happy to do the job of sorting all the links, if it is accepted). "Cucumbertree" at least looks like it should be pronounced "cucum - bert - ree", and so reads just plain silly. I'd disagree though that 'Tulip tree' or 'Cucumber tree' implies any relationship to tulips or cucumbers; 'Tree tulip' does, but 'Tulip tree' doesn't. I'd also disagree that Gleason & Cronquist are closer to your viewpoint than mine: search engines treat hyphens as the same as a space, not no space. If you google 'Tulip-tree', the hits are the same as for 'Tulip tree', but not 'Tuliptree'. - MPF 12:38, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Jaknouse has started a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life relevant to this topic. -- WormRunner 06:09, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've queried the lower case insistence there. - MPF 12:38, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Naming controversy[edit]

I don't think Wikipedia should endorse any particular name, if there is a controversy over which variant is "right" or "official". All three seem to have their supporters.

Tuliptree - one word, capitalised
Tulip-tree - hyphenated, capitalised
Tulip tree - two words, capitalised
tuliptree - one word, not capitalised
tulip-tree - hyphenated, not capitalised
tulip tree - two words, not capitalised

Location of article[edit]

Easy way out is to put the article under the genus name Liriodendron

I like this one. ;) WormRunner 17:04, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Otherwise, we should probably vote on one of the three forms listed above, and maintain redirects from the other 2 forms.

Referring to the plant[edit]

The article should mention that some folks (like The National Arbor Day Foundation spell it tuliptree and remark on how unusual that is.

Another problem with name[edit]

There is also the problem that lumber from this tree is sometimes sold as "tulipwood" but that is the name of at least four other species: Harpullia pendula also called tulipwood or black tulip wood, Dalbergia variabilis -pau rosa or tulipwood, Drypetes australasica also called Yellow Tulip Wood, and Rapanea howittiana. Rmhermen 17:00, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

Page Move[edit]

I moved the page to Liriodendron, but I'm willing to move it back to tulip tree if that's what you guys all want.

However, I'm only going to make one more move. So please come to an agreement you can all live with. --Uncle Ed 14:55, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think Liriodendron is a good place for it. In fact, I think this is a good solution for a great many plant names. WormRunner 16:58, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Fine with me. Starting to edit all the links that still point at Tulip tree, Tuliptree, etc. - MPF 17:28, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I agree with Uncle Ed. --User:Michael Simpson

Ecotypes, Varieties, and a possible separate Species[edit]

L. tulipifera has considerable individual variation. Some specimens are more brittle than others; some consistently produce narrow or wide-waisted leaves; some have little orange pigment (beta-carotene, BTW) in their flowers and others produce so much it's eye-catching. Florida trees (including the east-central ecotype) tend to have wide orange bands; this orange may 'finger' to the upper part of the tepal.

A coastal plain swamp ecotype was first identified in South Carolina in 1967. It grows around bayheads and pocosins, and along streams in the company of other moisture-loving trees such as bald cypress, pond pine, red maple, and tupelo. It is more flood-tolerant than the northern upland type which forms the vast majority of tulip tree populations, but prefers sites where the water is relatively mobile. Its leaves have rounded lobes and often have a reddish or coppery blush.[1] It is drought-sensitive by comparison with upland trees.[2]

Since 2000, author William Moriaty has cultivated tulip trees from the southernmost populations near Orlando, and has found enough distinguishing features to classify them in an East Central Florida (ECF) ecotype. Their foliage resembles the coastal plain swamp lovers of the Carolinas, with rounded lobes. The lobe structure tends to become less pronounced as one travels from near Jacksonville to near Orlando. Stock from the Orlando area has a similar habitat preference to the coastal plain strain of the Carolinas, but is far more drought-tolerant and performs better all across central Florida than stock from the northwestern part of that state. These southernmost populations have very long growing periods below and above ground, can be semi-evergreen, and flower well before specimens from other provenances. They seem to have the best adaptability of all tulip trees to extremes of soil moisture.[3] There also is evidence that they adapt to differing soil conditions. Sands and peats seem to be their usual rooting medium in Florida, but a specimen is growing well on somewhat alkaline "flintstone" clay near Austin, Texas. They are so distinctive that separate species status for them seems justified.

Progress is being made in propagating the ECF ecotype, but there are a few catches: Its performance potential in colder climates remains unknown, and its foliage is so similar to the drought-intolerant Carolina coastal plain strain that trouble could develop if stock from the two sources becomes mixed. Tony 05:21, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subdividing Liriodendron[edit]

Concerns that the Liriodendron article is too long have led me to create separate pages for Liriodendron chinense and Liriodendron tulipifera. The Liriodendron page now has a short overview of the genus. Tony 09:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy[edit]

Liriodendron is not part of the clade eudicots. As a modern phylogenetic system is not availble above the rank of order, (APG only gives formal names under that rank), it is better not to focus the fact that Liriodendron is a dicotyledon, because its taxonomical position should be changed in newer systems to come.

European experiment[edit]

We live in Poland and, given that this tree was at one time native to Europe, we have planted one in our meadow and hope it will survive through the Polish winter, which can be extremely cold. To give it some protection, we will cover it with 'wloknina' (a light cloth material) through the winter months. As it likes slightly acidic soil, I am considering adding some leaf compost to the base to help acidify the soil. The flowers look spectacular. I would be interested to know in what areas this tree is an indigenous species - North America and Central Asia? Ivankinsman (talk) 17:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liriodendron. 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/20060417083017/http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/plants/trees/tuliptree.html to http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/plants/trees/tuliptree.html

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 17:37, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liriodendron. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 01:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]