Acacia producta
species of plant
Acacia producta is a shrub of the genus Acacia and the subgenus Plurinerves that is endemic to northern central Australia.
Description
The resinous shrub typically grows to a height of about 2 m (6 ft 7 in) and has an erect or prostrate habit with smooth dark grey coloured bark and angular branchlets that have resin-crenulated ridges. Like most species of Acacia it has phyllodes rather than true leaves. The evergreen phyllodes have an elliptic to narrowly oblanceolate shape and are straight or slightly curved. The phyllodes have a length of 3 to 8 cm (1.2 to 3.1 in) and a width of 5 to 23 mm (0.20 to 0.91 in) and have three prominent longitudinal nerves.
Taxonomy
The species was first formally described by the botanist Mary Tindale in 1980 as a part of the work Notes on Australian taxa of Acacia as apublished in the journal Telopea. It was reclassified in 2003 by Leslie Pedley as Racosperma productum then returned to genus Acacia in 2006.
Distribution
It is native to the top end of the Northern Territory including Maria Island in the Gulf of Carpentaria where it is usually situated on rocky sandstone pavements on plateaux or alluvial flats where it is found growing in sandy or loamy or sandy-silty soils or over around laterite as a part of Eucalyptus woodland or in heathland communities.
The public source identifies “Acacia producta” as species of plant. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Acacia, producta and species.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Acacia producta”, the useful work is to connect “species of plant” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 10, 2021. The linked authority identifier is Q9568235. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1980, 2003 and 2006.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Acacia producta”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Acacia producta primary sources, Acacia producta archive and Acacia research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Acacia producta”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Acacia producta” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.