Curious little tree in my garden

[Mike4]

I have this curious little tree in my garden, and I'm wondering if anyone here recognises what it is so I can look up and learn more about it.

It's about 3 ft tall, seems many years old (I've only been here six months) and the trunk seems to be very different from the top part i.e. the branches. The trunk is dead straight and had some side shoots which I've snipped off. The side shoots had completely different leaves from the leaves on the branches. The side shoots look like willow to me, while the branch leaves look like cotoneaster I'm told. It's hard to photograph as its surrounded by other greenery which interferes with the clarity.

Some photos anyway:



The tree




The leaves on the branches




One of the side shoots I cut off from the trunk.

The difference in the leaves is making me wonder if the top of the tree is grafted onto a different trunk, in the way roses are grafted onto rootstock. Any advice much appreciated, I know very little about gardening but having acquired a nice garden, I'm needing to learn fast!

[GrahamPlatt]

There are some good apps for identifying plants, insects & the like. iNaturalist & Seek being two of the best.

[staffordian]

I'm not certain, but the trunk and the way the branches curve over to form an umbrella shape remind me of a Kilmarnock Willow we had a few years ago.

I can't recall the form of the leaves on that, which is what makes me slightly hesitant.

[Dod101]

I have several Kilmarnock Willows and I think staffordian may be right or at least it is a form of willow. The leaves are the right shape but from the photo they look highly 'polished' a bit like a laurel leaf is. My leaves are a soft matt green and the trees themselves have a much more distinct umbrella shape whereas in the photo they look rather gnarled and twisted. Even neglected my trees do not form that gnarled look.

No doubt someone will come up with the right ID though.

Dod

[Mike4]

I have several Kilmarnock Willows and I think staffordian may be right or at least it is a form of willow. The leaves are the right shape but from the photo they look highly 'polished' a bit like a laurel leaf is. My leaves are a soft matt green and the trees themselves have a much more distinct umbrella shape whereas in the photo they look rather gnarled and twisted. Even neglected my trees do not form that gnarled look.

No doubt someone will come up with the right ID though.

Dod

Thanks for that. I think you're on the right track, it definitely has an umbrella shape. I don't remember it having any of the fluffy white pompoms mentioned on the sites discussing Kilmarnock willows, and the leaves are much smaller, darker green and glossier than willow, varying from about half an inch to one inch long. My second photo doesn't convey a sense of scale. These leaves are WAY tinier than the leaves on the two willow-like stems I snipped off the trunk.

Previous gardeners have obviously snipped unwanted stems from the trunk too. I think this tree was much loved a long time ago but has been ignored/left untouched for the last few years by the people who had the house before.

[Dod101]

Catkins as we a call them are the giveaway for willows in the spring. My matt leaves are uniformly about 3 inches long and the trees themselves need careful pruning over the autumn/winter months otherwise they branch out all over the place, always with a basic umbrella shape.

Actually the leaves look more like a form of laurel although much smaller than my laurel leaves.

Dod

[bungeejumper]

It's a willow. Some types are well suited to being topped off and grown in an umbrella style - we have one ourselves. although I'd need to ask SWMBO for the exact variety. (Probably a Kilmarnock, though.) From the pictures I'd say that yours is pretty old, but it's got a bit straggly, and it would be no bad thing to rein it in a bit and shape it, so as to restore the umbrella effect.

Tough as old boots, as long as it's got enough water below the surface. Nice plant.

BJ

[staffordian]

Ours fell over in a gale, so I'm not sure how deeply rooted they are. Having said that, our "soil" once you got lower than a few inches was heavy clay, more akin to concrete than soil, so maybe in most soils it would be fine. It was a tough little beggar though; a quick push upright and a couple of stakes and it carried on as though nothing had happened.

It was a pain to keep looking good though. As new branches grew, the ones inside tended to die but remain in place and it was quite a scramble to get inside it to cut them out.

[Dod101]

staffordian's comments pretty much echo my own. I find that they need to be well staked and I am on good deep loam.. In fact I removed one over the winter because it was no longer doing what it was supposed to do and had become unbalanced and too big for where it was.

The variety in the pictures is not the same as mine, willow though it may be.

Dod