Cook's Pine, New Caledonian Pine (Araucaria columnaris)

Cook's Pine, New Caledonian Pine
Araucaria columnaris

Norfolk Island Pine, Star Pine (Araucaria heterophylla) as observed at the Kula Botanical Garden in Maui

this is actually A columnaris

Gosh, did the botanical garden misname this one? I'll check.

they did, and it is a very common thing for them to do (many botanical gardens mislabel this species).

What distinguishes them from each other? Thanks

As seedlings and young plants up to about 5' tall, nothing. But as they start to grow into young trees A columnaris typically grows at an angle (not all do this), but A heterophylla never does-it is always straight up and down. A heterophylla foliage points upright while A columnaris foliage points upright, laterally and sometimes some of it even hangs down (in other words it is not as neat looking). A heterophylla is a larger, faster growing species with branches extremely regularly placed apart- these trees almost look fake they are so symmetrical. A columnaris trees are fairly symmetrical too, but not to a fault and branches are much closer together. A heterophyllas make a perfect triangle in silohuette while A columnaris tend to be a bit more elongated and columnar (particularly older trees), though in the tropics they both are somewhat triagular. Older A columnaris become more and more columnar as the lowest branches tend to lose the outermost foliage while A heterophyllas do this only to a slight degree or not at all (keeping their perfect triangular silohuette). There a bark differences, too, but they are more subtle. Cones differ a bit, too, but I cannot recall what those differences are.

Thanks for the explanation, palmbob. I thought that it looked different than most Norfolk pines I have observed.:o) I will have the photo moved.

This message was edited Jun 23, 2010 10:46 PM

Thanks. I had no clue there was a lookalike. A few months back I was on a mission taking pics of NIP around here. I will have to look and see if I captured any A heterophylla instead. Some were huge.

These two look like the real thing

http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showimage/271735/

but this one is questionable... very likely a hybrid (which sadly there are tons of now, further clouding the picture, so to speak)
http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showimage/267953/

these two trees are definitely MOSTLY columnaris, though
http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showimage/67687/

My image now is in the correct entry and my comments have been corrected.

PalmBob which one is this one? I had to go take the photo! LOL
Thanks

you can tell immediately from the silohuette that it is not a Norfolk Pine as it is leaning, and the branches are too close together... but additionally, you can see the lower branches have a lot of foliage that is horizontal or even somewhat pendulous. Norfolk Island Pines are straight up and down, have generally more spaces between branches (especially if watered well and it's a warm climate) and all foliage points up to the sky.

Intereting that you say these look like NIP when young. In 2006 I posted close ups of this same tree for ID for I didn't think it was a NIP at the time. I was told it was. I wrote at the time:
"It is funny you say Norfolk Island Pine. When this tree was growing up I would pass it in my car and I always thought it was a Norfolk. Then when I was out with my husband walking I stopped and looked at it and it doesn't look like what I thought one looks like. There are no spaces between layers of branches and the branches all curl upward giving the tree a different look. I even said to my husband look this isn't a Norfolk. Actually it is much prettier than any I have seen.

We have another Norfolk Island Pine in the neighborhood. I will have to alter our route and walk by it so I can get a close look.

Perhaps I have never seen a mature one or are there different varieties?"

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=2970786

Thanks for all the information PalmBob.

If you had asked me 6 months ago, I would have given you a different answer, but there has been a lot of discussion about these trees over the last few months, and that is when I learned the real differences... trying to keep up all the time with these things and it isn't easy. I am sure there are things I say with 100% assurance today that I will find out are totally wrong tomorrow.

The old post was of more interest to me not for the incorrect ID but for my perception of the tree at the time. I was onto the differences!
Thanks PalmBob!