Classification of trees

[Joseph Zorzin]

Bob Weber wrote:
> 
> I am an amatuer naturalist with more than an average knowledge of
> plants.  Someone recently asked me how trees should properly be
> classified.  My answer was by leaf types or possibly as gymnosperms or
> angiosperms. This person thought that trees should be classified as
> either deciduous or evergreen.  However, I wasn't comfortable with that
> description.  Can anyone help me?

Your answer is the correct one; based on evolutionary principals.
Because some gymnosperms are deciduous and some angiosperms are
evergree; your friends method doesn't reflect biological origins which
governs how they should be "properly classified". Unless you are a
creationist; then anything goes. <G>

-- 
http://forestmeister.com
"The ONLY forester's web page in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and
most likely the only one that ever will be".