This has become very difficult for me. I even suspect that the two are
not really different species.

Does anyone have a easy test for whether a young ash tree is green ash
or white ash?

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Sure Archie,

Green Ash has narrowly winged leafstalks, White Ash doesn't.

Don't you ever bother to read regional floras with keys or do you usually
wait for divine enlightenment?


"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
This has become very difficult for me. I even suspect that the two are
not really different species.

Does anyone have a easy test for whether a young ash tree is green ash
or white ash?

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Look at a leaf scar--where a leaf has fallen. If you can't find one,
snap off a leaf at the base. White Ash, Fraxinus americana will have
leaf scars shaped like a U--rounded on the bottom and quite concave on
the top. Green Ash, F. pennsylvanica, has leaf scars round on the
bottom and nearly straight across the top, like a sideways D. This
usually works. Fruit characters are helpful too, but fruit aren't
always handy.

M. Reed

Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

This has become very difficult for me. I even suspect that the two are
not really different species.

Does anyone have a easy test for whether a young ash tree is green ash
or white ash?

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

--
ÿWPC5

Mon, 03 May 2004 11:47:24 -0500 Monique Reed wrote:

Look at a leaf scar--where a leaf has fallen. If you can't find one,
snap off a leaf at the base. White Ash, Fraxinus americana will have
leaf scars shaped like a U--rounded on the bottom and quite concave on
the top. Green Ash, F. pennsylvanica, has leaf scars round on the
bottom and nearly straight across the top, like a sideways D. This
usually works. Fruit characters are helpful too, but fruit aren't
always handy.

M. Reed


I wonder if the difference of a species of trees can come so close as to be
a small visual difference of between whether a leaf has convex shape or
concave shape.

Can someone tell me what the smallest difference is between 2 different
species of trees? Perhaps the ashes possess the smallest of differences.

In the other extreme of huge differences we can cite the dog species in
that they come in all sizes and shapes and colors yet they are the same
species. Anyone know what species has the hugest range of differences for
trees of the same species? Likewise, (repeating my question) what tree
species has the narrowest range of difference and yet still 2 distinct
species.

Several nights ago I was watching PBS of a program of ancient DNA on King
Tut of ancient Egypt where the DNA could tell that the family dynasty had
fresh blood mixed in and not collapsed into inbreeding. What I am getting
at is whether scientists have yet quantified as to how much at minimum must
the A,C,T,G vary in order for there to be 2 different species. And
likewise, how much of the A,C,T,G varies in dogs even though they are one
species yet so diverse in shape and size and other characteristics.

If Ash trees were intelligent life and went around inspecting humans, it
would be puzzling that ash of pennsyl and americ are different species yet
virtually identical in shape form and physical attributes, yet humans come
in a huge range of physical attributes yet all one species.

There needs to be some questions and answers as to why plants can be so
similar physically yet be multiple species, whereas in animals they can be
so diverse range of physical characteristics yet all one species. I believe
some answer to this may help with the concept of quantum duality between
plant and animal kingdoms. That the genetics of plants allows for different
species who have nearly identical physical attributes, whereas in animals
there rarely exists 2 different species with nearly identical physical
attributes.

Instead of leaf scars, I wonder if green ash and white ash can be discerned
from the leaf tip itself. Where Monique describes a concave for white ash.
Instead of scars I wonder if the tip of the leaf can decide. I notice on my
green ash that the leaf tip has a very pointed tip resulting from J and
reverse J whereas the tip of white ash is a blunt tip resulting from a D
and reverse D. One is concave inward and the other concave outward.

I wonder if that tip inspection is a true rule to follow. I would have to
inspect alot of mature green and white ash but I encounter mostly only
green ash in the wild.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium

Mon, 03 May 2004 11:47:24 -0500 Monique Reed wrote:
Look at a leaf scar--where a leaf has fallen. If you can't find one,
snap off a leaf at the base. White Ash, Fraxinus americana will have
leaf scars shaped like a U--rounded on the bottom and quite concave on
the top. Green Ash, F. pennsylvanica, has leaf scars round on the
bottom and nearly straight across the top, like a sideways D. This
usually works. Fruit characters are helpful too, but fruit aren't
always handy.

M. Reed

Archimedes Plutonium schreef
I wonder if the difference of a species of trees can come so close as to
be a small visual difference of between whether a leaf has convex shape or
concave shape.

+ + +
You are confusing identification with species delimitation.
+ + +

What I am getting at is whether scientists have yet quantified as to how
much at minimum must the A,C,T,G vary in order for there to be 2 different
species.

+ + +
Easy: 1. Theoretically a single base pair should do it.
On the other hand hundreds of base pairs could vary without any effect
+ + +

If Ash trees were intelligent life and went around inspecting humans, it
would be puzzling that ash of pennsyl and americ are different species yet
virtually identical in shape form and physical attributes, yet humans come
in a huge range of physical attributes yet all one species.

+ + +
Probably the other way about. Any species is most alive to their own
species. If Ash trees were intelligent, they would wonder why humans are all
so alike (driving cars, cutting down trees, etc) and that Ash trees are so
wonderfully recognisable. Intelligence is relative, anyway.
+ + +

Instead of leaf scars, I wonder if green ash and white ash can be
discerned from the leaf tip itself.

+ + +
For starters leaf scars can be observed year round, while leafs are
available only part of the year. Also there are lots of species known for a
wide variety of leaf shape, sometimes within a single tree.
+ + +

I wonder if that tip inspection is a true rule to follow.

+ + +
This would only be relevant if you want to start a church.
Do you know the Church of the Living Tree? [www.tree.org]
or this church http://www.therowantreechurch.org/
+ + +

I would have to
inspect alot of mature green and white ash but I encounter mostly only
green ash in the wild.

+ + +
Perhaps you should start with the difference between green and red ash?
PvR

Tue, 4 May 2004 09:56:13 +0200 P van Rijckevorsel wrote:


Archimedes Plutonium schreef
I wonder if the difference of a species of trees can come so close as to
be a small visual difference of between whether a leaf has convex shape or
concave shape.

+ + +
You are confusing identification with species delimitation.
+ + +


Not really. I was leading into the concept of linking A,C,T,G with form and
function and body morphology.


What I am getting at is whether scientists have yet quantified as to how
much at minimum must the A,C,T,G vary in order for there to be 2 different
species.

+ + +
Easy: 1. Theoretically a single base pair should do it.
On the other hand hundreds of base pairs could vary without any effect
+ + +

That is false. False as per the recent Neanderthal DNA comparison to humans.
Under that rigor it took at least 3 base pair differences to demarkate species.

This ties in nicely with my theory that Stonethrowing created humans out of
apelike creatures. The first apes to throw rocks and stones some 10 million
years ago would have been able to breed with non-stonethrowers. But as
selection for stonethrowers increase to the point where the DNA of A,C,T,G
changed in at least 3 base pairs (Neanderthal example) that would create a
better Rotator Cuff so that the individual could throw better. That this
morphology change would eventually lead to a different species.

I have another theory about the Quantum Duality of the plant kingdom to the
animal kingdom. If that theory has a band of truth to it, then the species
separation for plants should be different than for animals. In other words,
like the Neanderthal case where it takes at least 3 base pair differences for
animals. Then perhaps for plants it may take only 1 base pair difference.

And perhaps a hidden surprize in that no animal species exists that can have
less than 3 base pair differences but that plants can have 1 or 2 or 3 or more
base pair differences and be different species.

So the whole question of Speciation is a quantum question. And that Plants can
be quantified at 1 base pair difference but that animals require at least 3
base pair differences.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium






If Ash trees were intelligent life and went around inspecting humans, it
would be puzzling that ash of pennsyl and americ are different species yet
virtually identical in shape form and physical attributes, yet humans come
in a huge range of physical attributes yet all one species.

+ + +
Probably the other way about. Any species is most alive to their own
species. If Ash trees were intelligent, they would wonder why humans are all
so alike (driving cars, cutting down trees, etc) and that Ash trees are so
wonderfully recognisable. Intelligence is relative, anyway.
+ + +

Instead of leaf scars, I wonder if green ash and white ash can be
discerned from the leaf tip itself.

+ + +
For starters leaf scars can be observed year round, while leafs are
available only part of the year. Also there are lots of species known for a
wide variety of leaf shape, sometimes within a single tree.
+ + +

I wonder if that tip inspection is a true rule to follow.

+ + +
This would only be relevant if you want to start a church.
Do you know the Church of the Living Tree? [www.tree.org]
or this church http://www.therowantreechurch.org/
+ + +

I would have to
inspect alot of mature green and white ash but I encounter mostly only
green ash in the wild.

+ + +
Perhaps you should start with the difference between green and red ash?
PvR

Archimedes Plutonium schreef
I wonder if the difference of a species of trees can come so close as
to be a small visual difference of between whether a leaf has convex shape
or concave shape.

Tue, 4 May 2004 09:56:13 +0200 P van Rijckevorsel wrote:
You are confusing identification with species delimitation.
+ + +

Archimedes Plutonium schreef
Not really. I was leading into the concept of linking A,C,T,G with form
and function and body morphology.

+ + +
In that case you were confusing a genuine question with a retorical device.
+ + +

What I am getting at is whether scientists have yet quantified as to
how much at minimum must the A,C,T,G vary in order for there to be 2
different species.

+ + +
Easy: 1. Theoretically a single base pair should do it.
On the other hand hundreds of base pairs could vary without any effect
+ + +

That is false. False as per the recent Neanderthal DNA comparison to
humans. Under that rigor it took at least 3 base pair differences to
demarkate species.

+ + +
Probably a few hundred more?
+ + +

This ties in nicely with my theory that Stonethrowing created humans out
of apelike creatures. The first apes to throw rocks and stones some 10
million years ago would have been able to breed with non-stonethrowers. But
as selection for stonethrowers increase to the point where the DNA of
A,C,T,G changed in at least 3 base pairs (Neanderthal example) that would
create a better Rotator Cuff so that the individual could throw better. That
this morphology change would eventually lead to a different species.

I have another theory about the Quantum Duality of the plant kingdom to
the animal kingdom. If that theory has a band of truth to it, then the
species separation for plants should be different than for animals. In other
words, like the Neanderthal case where it takes at least 3 base pair
differences for animals. Then perhaps for plants it may take only 1 base
pair difference.

+ + +
So now it is no longer false?
+ + +

And perhaps a hidden surprize in that no animal species exists that can
have less than 3 base pair differences but that plants can have 1 or 2 or 3
or more base pair differences and be different species.

So the whole question of Speciation is a quantum question. And that Plants
can be quantified at 1 base pair difference but that animals require at
least 3 base pair differences.

+ + +
Actually you have not quantified anything, you just speculated about
theoretical minima.
PvR