(Part 3) Top products from r/whatsthisplant

I'm mostly into trees and shrubs, and I'm based out of Texas. I have a few books, including:

Trees by Allen Coombes, useful for identifying some of the most widely-planted/popular trees and their varieties around the world.

Trees, Shrubs, and Woody Vines of the Southwest by Robert Vines. A comprehensive resource for identifying native trees/shrubs/vines if you're in the area.

Manual of the Trees of North America by Charles Sprague Sargent, vols. 1 and 2. Slightly outdated in terms of pure taxonomy, but (again) extremely comprehensive, and includes nice identification keys and a glossary for the technical terms.

It helps to be crazypassionate enough about the subject that you'd actually crack open these books for pleasure browsing instead of just trying to find a species, but it's not required.

Google image search is your friend, especially if there is some characteristic about the plant that really stands out, you may just be able to search directly for it. If the OP has provided location information, a search like "oaks native to minnesota" (or whatever) can help narrow down a species.

Also it helps to walk through a few nurseries in your area, look at the labels, and figure out what is popular.

Some of it is just experience and really wanting to know what things are. You just get to know the trees/plants in your area, and if you see something out of place, figure out what it is and add it to your mental inventory, store its characteristics (foliage arrangement, fall color, leaf/bark variability, general shape/form, fruit, common diseases/issues, etc. etc.) Just do this for the stuff you care about. I've found that over time, as things become familiar, I have the mental space to care about things that would have escaped my attention before.

It's easier to distinguish some superficially similar trees (for instance, pecan vs. black walnut w/no fruit, or catalpa vs paulownia) after you've seen a few of them in person and know what to look for.

Sorry for the TL;DR, hope it helps!

It's definitely a challenge gardening in the desert and it's what I do for a living! Lots of trial and error still to this day and I've lived in the desert for 10 years now.

Here are some books that I have found very helpful:

Perennials for the Southwest

Native Plants for Southwest Landscapes

Arid Plants for Dry Regions

I used to work in a desert botanic garden nursery and these 3 books were our go to books for reference. Bear in mind that your area can get much colder than the low desert but all these books have plant temperature requirements.

But most importantly have fun getting to know the desert and after time you'll see what a magical place it is. If you have the time I recommend exploring the natural areas by hiking, camping or just doing a bit of road tripping. You'll get lots of inspiration and come to an understanding of how unique all the animals and plants are that have had to adapt to such harsh conditions. Winter is great time to explore. No bugs and all the snakes are sleeping! =)

I am voting with ABITCH and saying Carpinus caroliniana. Carpinus don't usually get so big, but in a city the competition is usually nonexistent and if it can survive the smog, a tree can thrive. The bark seems a little unusual for that species, but I think that's a result of the tree being bigger than an average specimen. It does look a bit like an elm or beech, but take a look at those 'little leaves' developing at the ends of the branches- those are definitely not beech nuts or elm seeds, and they sure look a lot like carpinus inflorescence. They are neat little trees and tend to look very muscular.

Also, I like your blog! I recommend getting this book, and/or others in the series: http://www.amazon.com/Tree-Finder-Manual-Identification-Eastern/dp/0912550015/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1310438269&sr=8-1

It will help you learn about the different distinguishing characteristics and walk you through ID's until you get the hang of it. Sometimes picture based guides are not ideal, because one specimen may look very different than it's relatives due to disease or an unideal habitat.

This is the book I like, but it does pre-suppose quite a bit of botany. Part of what I like is the introductory section where he explains the botanical terms. The simple line drawings are excellent, in my opinion, and since the family level is most important for getting your bearings with wild plants, it's a book I turn to pretty often. What I don't like about it is the quality of the binding is poor, and it's pretty dense with abbreviations and botanical terminology that I end up flipping to the glossary to look up all the time.

I agree with /u/whyen0t -- taking a class is really a great start! Beyond that, I would recommend getting a dichotomous key for the flora in your area and starting to familiarize yourself with different plants you see quite a bit. Often, there is a "Guide to the Families" section in the beginning of a floristic guide that can give you a really good sense of the big characteristics that define each family. Just googling a guide to the families brought me to this one: http://www.amazon.com/Guide-Flowering-Plant-Families-Zomlefer/dp/0807844705/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415690844&sr=8-1&keywords=guide+to+plant+families --I don't know anything about it personally, but it seems to have good reviews!

[I love this book](https://www.amazon.com/Midwest-Foraging-Flavorful-Edibles-Regional/dp/1604695315) and [this blog](https://honest-food.net/) is also great.

I assume you already have a copy of the Jepson Manual and / or are familiar with eFlora. Sort of the de facto gold standard for California. You can get a used older edition pretty cheap and other than moving a few species around it's still a very usable, if not very portable book.

I'd point out that California has one of the richest floras in the world. In some ways though, it's characterized by a large number of species and subspecies within many of the genera. So if you can learn to recognize for example a plant from the genus eriogonum or arctostaphylos at a glace, keying it out to the specific species will be much more simple. Learn to spot the major genera of the area because the exact species you will encounter might be different than you would see just a few miles away and you will never remember them all, the book is 1600 pages.

I don't know for sure, but I would guess those are going to be flowers, not leaves. I would bet the leaves are coming later.

Edit: I have and like this little guide to leafless trees; maybe it could help you with yours too! https://www.amazon.com/Winter-Tree-Finder-Identifying-Deciduous/dp/0912550031

If you want more information, this book is a great source. It taught me everything I needed to know: https://www.amazon.com/Orthos-All-About-Pruning-Gardening/dp/0897214293

http://www.amazon.com/Edible-Wild-Plants-Adventure-Series/dp/1423601505/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375922689&sr=8-1&keywords=edible+wild+plants

Great book

There's absolutely such a thing as red elderberries. They were all over our property in Olympia, WA, along with the red huckleberries in the 4th and 5th pictures. The red elderberries are supposed to be edible if they're cooked, but after I smelled them cooking I dumped them out.

Red huckleberries are extremely tart compared to the blue ones, more like a red currant, but they make good jam. They take forever to pick, though.

The first and second pictures are Saskatoon berry, also known as Pacific serviceberry.

The last picture is unripe cascara berry. I've never tried those, but in Plants of Coastal British Columbia it says they're "edible but not incredible."

this one is quite good and covers a lot of species: http://www.amazon.com/Ultimate-Garden-Book-North-America/dp/0847818705

By the way, I only said it because you had so many questions.

To give a short answer. Yes.

This is from a book about psychoactive plants i have. Because there are a lot of non factual answers here, I thought i post this. I had to write it all so there might be some spelling errors.

.
.
.

Plants of the gods, By Richard Evans Schultes, Albert Hofmann &Christian Rätsch.
>

The chemistry of Fly Agaric

> The active principle of Amanita muscaria was thought once, a century ago, to have been muscarine when Schiedeberg and kope isolated this substance. this belief has been proven erroneous. Recently Eugster in Switzerland and Takemo in Japan isolated ibotenic acid and the alkaloid muscimole as being responsible for the Fly Agaric's psychotropic effects. The mushroom is taken usually dried. The drying process induces the chemical transformation ibotenic acid to muscimole, the most active constituent.

...Amanita muscaria may be the oldest of the hallucinogens and perhaps was once the most used...

A little background summary from me:


It's been used by many different cultures in the past and has been associated with many different gods, There is evidence suggesting it's been used in India, Siberia and The America's, (From Mesoamerica to the north of Canada.


If you're interested in these kind of things, i suggest you try to find some literature about it. The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Plants: Ethnopharmacology and Its Applications, Plants of the Gods: Their Sacred, Healing, and Hallucinogenic Powers, Psychedelics Encyclopedia. It's amazon link's but you can find them anywhere.

First off, not a plant! Is fungus.

Heat is the key to converting the ibotenic acid into muscimol. The difference, allegedly, is a nausea/coma vs a religious experience. Not deadly, though is a bit of a risk. Legend has it the heat of your body's metabolism is enough to make that conversion, and has been theorized as the method by which Jesus Christ turned water into wine, as well as raised Lazarus from the dead (wasn't dead, just prepared his mushrooms wrong). "Magic Mushrooms in Religion and Alchemy" by Clark Heinrich is an interesting read, definitely recommended before attempting this mysterious fungi.

http://www.amazon.com/Peterson-Field-Guide-Ferns-Northeastern/dp/0618394060