"Iris Cohen" wrote in message
...

I see A. farnesiana is still an Acacia.

As so it will probably stay [being traditionally a member of Acacia
subgenus Acacia, it's thus part of a group that will remain "true
Acacias" by definition, i.e., the group containing the type species of
the genus]. If anything is to stay a member of the genus Acacia, it
will be they.

I never heard of it having phyllodes,

Nor should it have them. Phyllodes are characteristic of just one
particular major group of "no-longer-Acacias". Interestingly, DNA
phylogenies reportedly show that some Australian species with only
bipinnate leaves, not phyllodes, do belong within the phyllode-bearing
group. Of course, the phyllode-bearing species also still have
bipinnate leaves as seedlings and juveniles, so this apparent reversal
to the ancestral condition may be less surprising than it might seem
at first.

so where is it going to live? It comes from Florida, Texas, Mexico, and I
think
the Caribbean.

And it reportedly has its closest relative in A. nilotica of Africa.

cheers