Ficus elastica-- green-leafed "wild-type"

[fastfeat]

Here's what Ficus elastica looks like in the wild (or looked like-- supposedly extinct in its native India, per Margaret Barwick). Large, round-headed single-trunked tree with leaves not much larger than some F. rubiginosa forms.

These trees are almost completely gone in SoCal now as well. I remember as a kid when they used to line Los Alamitos Blvd (both small, green-leafed ones and larger-leafed 'Decora' that most people think of as "the" rubber tree.

They were also popular on school playgrounds; probably lots of kids my age learned to climb this tree. Sadly, these are now replaced with crap myrtles and shredded rubber chips so the little darlings don't fall out trees and sue the schools...

[MattyB]

What do you use for scale when you find a tabacco tree? A ficus leaf?

[The Silent Seed]

That is gorgeous! Get me some seeds to grow

[Kumar]

I thought F. elastica has aerial roots, like banyan. Plus they don't usually get so large crowned.

[fastfeat]

I thought F. elastica has aerial roots, like banyan. Plus they don't usually get so large crowned.

In Florida, F. elastica does form aerial roots, but in drier Southern California, aerial roots are rare.

[Kumar]

Thanks but it does seem to me that this is a seperate species from what I know as F. elastica or Indian rubber. Lack of aerial roots is a big difference according to me as these are also for support for the heavy branches. That aside, the bark colour of your specimen is much lighter - almost like F. religiosa. The leaves are longer and also lighter; and the new leaf is protected by a green sheath whereas all the ones I see here have a bright red sheath which is very conspicuous. More important difference is the morphology of the crown - F elastica here has a top heavy crown, quite unsightly actually and the stem is usually very thin in relation - the one pictured above has very aesthetic dimensions.

[fastfeat]

Thanks but it does seem to me that this is a seperate species from what I know as F. elastica or Indian rubber. Lack of aerial roots is a big difference according to me as these are also for support for the heavy branches. That aside, the bark colour of your specimen is much lighter - almost like F. religiosa. The leaves are longer and also lighter; and the new leaf is protected by a green sheath whereas all the ones I see here have a bright red sheath which is very conspicuous. More important difference is the morphology of the crown - F elastica here has a top heavy crown, quite unsightly actually and the stem is usually very thin in relation - the one pictured above has very aesthetic dimensions.

Kumar--

Interesting points, esp. about the bark and candle colors. Indeed, most F. elastica cvs. (usually F. elastica 'Decora' here) have a brownish bark. And likewise on the red sheathes, though it's been so long since I've seen (other) green-leafed F. elastica here, I can't say I've observed them regularly. Will have to look for others here and compare.

Do you have pictures of locally-grown (wild?) specimens for comparison?

[Kumar]

Thanks but it does seem to me that this is a seperate species from what I know as F. elastica or Indian rubber. Lack of aerial roots is a big difference according to me as these are also for support for the heavy branches. That aside, the bark colour of your specimen is much lighter - almost like F. religiosa. The leaves are longer and also lighter; and the new leaf is protected by a green sheath whereas all the ones I see here have a bright red sheath which is very conspicuous. More important difference is the morphology of the crown - F elastica here has a top heavy crown, quite unsightly actually and the stem is usually very thin in relation - the one pictured above has very aesthetic dimensions.

Kumar--

Interesting points, esp. about the bark and candle colors. Indeed, most F. elastica cvs. (usually F. elastica 'Decora' here) have a brownish bark. And likewise on the red sheathes, though it's been so long since I've seen (other) green-leafed F. elastica here, I can't say I've observed them regularly. Will have to look for others here and compare.

Do you have pictures of locally-grown (wild?) specimens for comparison?

regrettably, these are not too popular in cultivation due to their spreading habit, destructive roots, aerial roots, latex and littering habit. The few that I have seen are invariably potted, that makes them look even worse. I remember having seen a large one sometime back and will search my photos.

[Bennz]

regrettably, these are not too popular in cultivation due to their spreading habit, destructive roots, aerial roots, latex and littering habit.

Ironic that the first three of these points are exactly what makes Ficus so appealing to some of us temperate growers!

I much prefer the green foliage over coloured forms, but they are also fairly uncommon in this country.

Kumar, how much area do F. elastica cover? Are they as big as F. benghalensis?

I've noticed that F. elastica grown in NZ shows up soil trace elements deficiencies very well, almost as good as Citrus for this. Perhaps the leaf colour diff on the pictures CA. tree is influenced by a soil factor? I would be interested to see how it responds to a small amount of N, Mg and S.

[Palms1984]

Here's what Ficus elastica looks like in the wild (or looked like-- supposedly extinct in its native India, per Margaret Barwick). Large, round-headed single-trunked tree with leaves not much larger than some F. rubiginosa forms.

These trees are almost completely gone in SoCal now as well. I remember as a kid when they used to line Los Alamitos Blvd (both small, green-leafed ones and larger-leafed 'Decora' that most people think of as "the" rubber tree.

They were also popular on school playgrounds; probably lots of kids my age learned to climb this tree. Sadly, these are now replaced with crap myrtles and shredded rubber chips so the little darlings don't fall out trees and sue the schools...

There's still many of these trees in the old neighborhoods in San Diego, CA. However, I've never seen the true Ficus elastica for sale here, unfortunately.

[Kumar]

Since my initial search for a photo of a large sized specimen was unsuccessful, I have reproduced one from www.flowersofindia.net - a nice website in its own right.

The photo shows the classic form of F. elastica as commonly encountered here - medium laterally spreading crown with slightly 'weak' droopy branches and a relatively thin trunk (which admittedly is not visible). The aerial roots are usually amputated early on and that reduces the aesthetic appeal. This one must be a 15-25 year old specimen (and is likely on the verge of becoming a headache for the houseowner already) but very few are seen growing to this size. Over time they can and do get enormous, though nothinbg approaching F. benghalensis.

Ironic that the first three of these points are exactly what makes Ficus so appealing to some of us temperate growers!

I much prefer the green foliage over coloured forms, but they are also fairly uncommon in this country.

Kumar, how much area do F. elastica cover? Are they as big as F. benghalensis?

I've noticed that F. elastica grown in NZ shows up soil trace elements deficiencies very well, almost as good as Citrus for this. Perhaps the leaf colour diff on the pictures CA. tree is influenced by a soil factor? I would be interested to see how it responds to a small amount of N, Mg and S.

Most ficus trees here in urban areas are found as footpath trees - in such settings where space is a contraint, their destructive habit and aerial roots create a problem. I don't think th light colour is a reflection of the soil type as the dark colouration of our F. elasticas are uniform across the country.

Edited April 21, 2011 by Kumar

[Luisd]

Hi,I know some of these trees here and for me it is also wild elastica.The leaves are some variable in size: