CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

Calothamnus quadrifidus

species of plant

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 6, 2026
Entity authorityQ670027
Source-derived summary

Calothamnus quadrifidus, commonly known as one-sided bottlebrush, is a plant in the myrtle family, Myrtaceae and is endemic to the south-west of Western Australia. The common name alludes to the arrangement of the flowers in the inflorescence which line up on one side of the stem. It is a shrub with grey-green, pine-like foliage covered with soft hairs and red, four-part flowers in spring. Widely cultivated because of its attractive foliage, colourful, unusual and prolific flowers, it grows in a variety of habitats and soils. In 2010, Alex George published a review of the species based on recent research and described a number of new subspecies. (In 2014 Craven, Edwards and Cowley proposed that the species be renamed Melaleuca quadrifida.)

Description

Calothamnus quadrifidus is a shrub which sometimes grows to a height of 5 metres (20 ft) although usually much less and it sometimes has a lignotuber. Its leaves are variable, depending on subspecies, but usually 10–50 millimetres (0.4–2 in) long and 0.8–10 millimetres (0.03–0.4 in) wide, sometimes circular in cross section but in some subspecies flat.

The flowers are usually red, although there are white and yellow forms, with the red flowered form most commonly seen in cultivation. The flowers are arranged in clusters, usually on one side of the stem amongst the older leaves. There are four petals, each 3.5–4 millimetres (0.1–0.2 in) long which fall off soon after the flower opens.

Editorial summary

“Calothamnus quadrifidus” enters the record as species of plant. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Calothamnus, quadrifidus and species can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA sound reference starting point where classification, measurement and the date of the underlying evidence remain visible. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2010, 2014—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Calothamnus, quadrifidus and species.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Calothamnus quadrifidus” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Calothamnus, quadrifidus and species provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Stable identifiers, scientific names and standards terminology offer the best bridge between this overview and specialist evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 6, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q670027. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2010 and 2014.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. 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.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Calothamnus quadrifidus”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Calothamnus quadrifidus primary sources, Calothamnus quadrifidus archive and Calothamnus research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Calothamnus quadrifidus”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Calothamnus quadrifidus” 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.