Need help with a Japanese Maple ID

[Jetson1950]

I got this maple from a friend. I’ve had it for about 2.5 years and I think it’s about 4 years old. It doesn’t appear to be grafted, so I assume cutting or seed. The leaves are quite small, so I’m putting it in training next year. I’m also air layering the top off. It’s got a pretty nasty trunk knob about half way up I need to remove. The four pictures show mature leaf, non hardened mature leaf, new leafs and trunk. The new leafs have a pinkish red-orange color. I’m sort of thinking Arakawa because the trunk is starting to look that way as it ages.

 

[SeanS]

Looks like acer palmatum

 

[Contact]

Effectively looking at the trunk It seems to be an Arakawa or anyway a Cork bark maple

 

[Paradox]

Without having a specific label from the grower, there is no definite way to tell what variety as there are 1000s of cultivars. So Acer palmatum it is

 

[Orion_metalhead]

Perhaps with a little more age and some older mature trunk bark we could call it arakawa but for now, regular ole acer palmatum.

 

[Mikecheck123]

Careful. There are purists here who believe that its ontological identity as a cultivar becomes unknowable if the tag blows away in the wind.

 

[Paradox]

Careful. There are purists here who believe that its ontological identity as a cultivar becomes unknowable if the tag blows away in the wind.

It's not being "purist". It's a well known fact that there are 1000+ cultivars and many of those are similar enough that just looking at leaf color and shape will not lead to a definite ID on cultivar.

 

[Contact]

I agree that without label every palmatum is only a palmatum, but these characteristics of the bark let me think to Arakawa or anyway another Cork bark JM

 

[SeanS]

I agree that without label every palmatum is only a palmatum, but these characteristics of the bark let me think to Arakawa or anyway another Cork bark JM

Yes but the OP mentions “cutting or seed”. Even a seedling from an arakawa parent tree could possibly produce rough/corky bark, but it wouldn’t be an arakawa.

 

[Jetson1950]

Thanks everyone. I agree with all that I really couldn’t call it an Arakawa, but I think that is what it came from. I think in a couple of years, I’ll at least be able to say it’s a cork bark tree for sure.

Last week I was up in Chadds Ford Pa with my daughter visiting her in-laws. They have a nice place out in the country. I collected about 60 Japanese maple seedlings from the trees in their yard. The trees look like a bloodgood or some other fairly red cultivar, but the seedlings all have many unique characteristics that look nothing like the parent tree. Some look similar, some are bright green, some a veraegted and some are very bright red. Leaf structures are all over the place as well. Will be interesting to watch them mature to see what they look like. Going to try lots of different things with them. Maybe I’ll get lucky and end up with a one of a kind unique JM. The seedlings were under two similar trees. That’s the little green tags in some pots to mark which one.

 

[Shibui]

Maybe I’ll get lucky and end up with a one of a kind unique JM

Each and every seedling one of a kind and unique, even if it appears similar to any others, just as you are one of a kind, unique and different from parents, siblings and your own children, even if you look similar or share certain traits.

What we all aspire to is a seedling that shows more attractive, different or desirable characteristics to any other Japanese maples but I guess that's what you inferred by using one of a kind and unique. Just my penchant for pedantry asserting itself

 

[Bonsai Nut]

Careful. There are purists here who believe that its ontological identity as a cultivar becomes unknowable if the tag blows away in the wind.

If you have no idea whether a tree is a cultivar or a seedling, and you are looking at photos of two green maple leaves... no, you cannot tell.

If, on the other hand, you bought two cultivars from a nursery, put them in landscape, and five years later can't remember which one you put where, your chances of telling the difference are pretty good - depending on the cultivars.

On this site we have recently had a number of examples of people who ended up getting a JM cultivar that may not be what it is supposed to be, because the "tags" got lost somewhere along the way. Even so, it is just as difficult to "disprove" a cultivar as it is to "prove" it - because trees can look very different depending on age, time of year, environment and care. I have 10 beni chidori cutting clones from the exact same source, and they all look a little different. If they were all out in a field mixed with 100 green JM maple seedlings, would even the most experienced JM nurseryman be able to walk out and pick out all ten? I doubt it. This is why we "purists" argue that provenance is critical - you have to trust your source, and know that they trust their source.

 

[Orion_metalhead]

Chances are that if the person gave you a cutting from something, it would be from something worth propogating... so a named variety. I agree that the bark looks like the young stages of arakawa but id be hesitant to call it such definitively if there is a gap in lineage. Theres no harm in saying you "think it is arakawa but arent certain or dont have any documentation of proof".

Heres the bark on my young arakawa.. similar for sure. Thats why id let it grow a bit and thicken and then reassess. I also just took 30 or so cuttings from my tree which I will then know the lineage of.

 

[Jetson1950]

This is a picture of one of the mother trees.