After this, I have them study the two large shade trees in front of the building. In the foreground we have Quercus rubra or northern red oak and in the background, Q. palustris, or pin oak. Whereas most people would simply catalog them both as 'trees', some would know they are oaks. A few would understand they are different species of oaks. Finally, fewer still would know they are different species when there are no leaves on the trees to aide them. But look closely, even in this photo, and it's clear the texture of the bark is different.
To me, red oaks are one of the easier trees to identify, sans leaves. The bark consists of smooth, shiny furrows and rough raised ridges. I describe it to students by saying it looks like someone has taken a butter knife or their thumbnail and gently carved the furrows in the bark. The smooth shiny quality can reflect the sun brilliantly, too.
The leaves are (I hope) universally recognized as oak leaves, but differ from the popular leaf of the white oak (Quercus alba) because the lobes of these leaves are pointed. The sinuses (the spaces between the lobes) are relatively shallow and the leaf itself is quite large, which means it can pose more of a litter problem than the aforementioned Q. palustris which has smaller leaves with deeper sinuses.
Hi Jen, great memories and as the leaves leave us, I've been thinking (fondly) again about Quecus bark. MJK
ReplyDelete