Acacia phasmoides
species of plant
Acacia phasmoides, the phantom wattle, is a shrub species that is endemic to south-eastern Australia.
Description
It grows to between 1 and 4 metres high and has phyllodes that are 5 to 12.5 cm long and 1 to 2 mm wide. The bright yellow globular flowerheads appear singly or in groups of two in the axils of the phyllodes from September to November, followed by curved seed pods which are 5 to 9 cm long and 2 to 4 mm wide.
Taxonomy
The species was formally described in 1967 by botanist Jim Willis based on plant material collected from Pine Mountain in north-eastern Victoria. It was reclassified as Racosperma phasmoides by Leslie Pedley in 2003 and then transferred back to genus Acacia in 2006.
Distribution
Its distribution is limited to a small area on the border between south-eastern New South Wales and north-eastern Victoria.
In New South Wales it is found along the southern edge of Woomargama National Park and has an estimated population of 2000 plants. In Victoria it is found in the Burrowa-Pine Mountain National Park from two stands east of the summit of Pine Mountain with nine plants in one stand and between 150 and 250 in the other. The Victorian populations are located approximately 35 km (22 mi) from the New South Wales populations.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Acacia phasmoides” as species of plant. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as species of plant. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 17, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q4670986. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1967, 2003, 2006 and 2000.
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.
- 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 phasmoides”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Acacia phasmoides primary sources, Acacia phasmoides 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 phasmoides”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Acacia phasmoides” 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.