conical Q

[logman]

Always more answers than questions in this site, so i thought i'd throw one in.

Why are trees such as yew and juniper for instance, that dont have cones as such, are still refered to as conifers

[SteveD]

Botanically the Yew family is seen as a distinct evolutionary branch of the Conifer family, which seems to have reached its peak in the Tertiary and is today represented by 6 species found across the Northern Hemisphere....."Primitive Connifers". The Yew Family is thought to have split off from other Coniferous tree groups 'early in evolution' and distinguishes itself from other Conifers by producing its fruit as a fleshy red aril, rather than a woody cone.

The Juniper in particular desires and does almost the exact opposite of the general run of conifers: even of the rest of the Cypress family. ..... Where they have both male and female flowers on one tree she (again like the Yew) has either one or the other. They have woody cones, she has fleshy berries."

The above are from this site:

http://www.the-tree.org.uk/BritishTrees/yew.htm

Here:

http://www.dnr.state.oh.us/forestry/Education/ohiotrees/glossary.html

A conifer is described thus: A plant that has cones, rather than fruits, as its method of dispersing seeds. Most conifers are needle-foliaged (evergreens such as the Spruces and Pines, or deciduous versions such as Larch) that have relatively large cones that spread open at maturity. However, others have a miniature berry-like cone (such as the Junipers) or a ball-like cone (such as Bald Cypress, a deciduous conifer) instead.

So yews and junipers seem to be evolutionary exception to the general rule.

[logman]

Exellent answer !! But i dont think Yews and junipers are entirely uneque among conifers, when you look at Ginko, Californian nut meg. But may be i'am just splitting hairs, when you look at cone barers like alders that are obviously not conifers