... my own reasoning to rach out for *S. mahagoni*: - flowers look relatively inconspicuous. - the inflorescence seems to be thus lax - the fresh leaves look bright green ... stupid reason - I have not seen how fresh leaves of *S. macrophylla* look like - the bole is relatively shorter - I have read somewhere that *S. macrophylla* tends have a cleaner bole - shorter bole, rounder canopy ... I do not know whether this makes sense.
Regards. On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Dinesh Valke <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello friends, > > I am almost sure that this tree is *Swietenia mahagoni*. > Yet, please validate ... not sure how I can rule out *S. macrophylla*. > > Attached 3 photos, just in case you would like some more views: > > http://www.flickr.com/search/?s=int&w=91314...@n00&q=Swieteniamahagoni&m=tags > > Regards. > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "indiantreepix" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.in/group/indiantreepix?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
