Talk:Leucaena leucocephala

Untitled
I've removed a claim that Leucaena produces a commercial antibiotic until someone provides a refernce to that fact. Considering the person contributing placed the comment in the references section and used the non-existent word "virii" and suggested that antiobitiotics work on viruses it wans;t exacvtly trustworthy.

Various edits
I reorganized a bit and added some information and references. This is still a sparse stub and could use some rewriting as well as much additional info, but now touches on some more aspects of the topic.--A12n 00:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Are Leucaena leucocephala and Ipil (tree) the same?
It seems this plant is the same as the ipil-ipil in the Philippines, but there is a separate entry for "Ipil (tree)". Anyone care to comment? Alternativity (talk) 10:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * They are different, the Tagalog English Dictionary of James English has two separate entries for ipil and ipil-ipil. - AnakngAraw (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Intsia bijuga or the ipil (with one ipil word) is also known as taal according to the J. English dictionary. - AnakngAraw (talk) 21:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * While the ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala; with two ipil words) is also called santa-elena and santaelena. - AnakngAraw (talk) 21:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

"Names in other languages"
The names in other languages section mentions "India" --India is not a language (neither is "Indian", for that matter.)  There are over 25 official languages in India and 600 spoken languages. Can we be more specific? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.88.170.32 (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion for a revised Leucaena leucocephala article
I added some information and tried to restructure:

Leucaena leucocephala, also known as Leucaena glauca is a highly branched small tree or shrub, which belongs to the family Mimosaceae. Leucaena is an evergreen, deep rooted plant, which may grow to heights of 3–15 (max. 20) m with a bole diameter of 10–50 cm and a bole hight to 5 m. L. leucocephala has an upright angular branching, which forms a narrow open crown. The leaves are bipinnate with 6-9 pairs. The leaflets are 9-16 mm long and 2-4.5 mm wide. The self-fertile flowers are white or cream-white. 100–180 flowers per head are forming a globular shape. The pods are 13-18 mm long, flat and brown containing a number of seeds. L. leucocephala is used for a variety of purposes, such as firewood, fiber and livestock fodder.

Origin and regions of cultivation
L. leucocephala is probably native to southern Mexico and northern Central America. It is naturalized throughout the West Indies from Bahamas and Cuba to Trinidad and Tobago, and from Texas and Florida to Brazil and Chile. It is also established in Hawaii, Pacific Islands and the Old World tropics.

Yield
Leucaena can produce 50–80 t/ha/year green matter and about 2–20 t/ha/year dry matter. Pods yield can vary between 4.5–7 kg per tree. The tree produces wood yield of about 30-40 m3/ha/year. It is estimated, that an area of 2-5 million ha is cultivated.

Product and use
Leaf tips can be used as a vegetable, pods and seeds can be used as food. It is possible to use the seeds as a coffee substitute. The leaves provide a protein rich fodder, which can be consumed browsed or harvested. Leucaena is as well a good cover and green manure crop and is also of value in land reclamation, erosion control, water conservation, reforestation and soil improvement. The wood is also used in the paper production (fibre) and is a good timber. L. leucocephala is able to produce a gum, which is similar to gum Arabic. The tree produces the gum when stressed by insects or disease. Leucaena is also widely used as fuel or charcoal, because of its very hard and heavy wood. Leucaena wood has 39% the calorific value of fuel oil, charcoal has 72.5%.

Nutritive value
Leucaena is a fodder tree with a high quality. The nutritive value of the leaves is very high and comparable with the fodder crop alfalfa. Leaves can have 55-70% digestability and 20-25% crude protein.

Toxicity: Leucaena leaves and pods contain the toxic amino acid mimosine. The content in edible forage is 4-5%, but the seeds and the youngest leaves can contain about 10%. In non-ruminent animals a high intake of the toxic amino acid can cause loss of hair. In ruminats the mimosine is broken down in the rumen to dihidroxypyridine. A content of more than 40% Leucaena in the diet can also cause symptoms of intoxication in ruminents.

Soil and climate requirements
L. leucocephala is a tropical plant with no frost tolerance but with a high drought tolerance although the yields are lower in dry environments. Waterlogging can reduce the production or can damage young seedlings, but established plants easily survive a short excess of water. The crop requires temperatures about 25-30°C (day) for optimum growth. It grows well at altitudes from 0-1500 m and needs mean annual rainfalls from 650-3000 mm.

Because of its deep root system the tree grows well on different soil types. Leucaena thrives best on deep, well drained, neutral to alkaline clay soils and is not tolerant of soils with low pH and high salinity. For an optimal growth performance Leucaena requires adequate amounts of phosphorus and calcium and does not like high alluminium saturation.

Cultivation
Planting: For planting seed or ‘bar stem’ seedlings are used. The recommended seeding rates are 1-2 kg/ha. The seeds are best sown early in the growing season 2-3 cm deep in rows of 3-10 m. Rainfall should be reliable. The Leucaena seedlings do not cope well with weed competition therefore weed control is needed.

Fertilisation: On infertile tropical soils fertilisation at planting, especially with phosphorus and calcium will be required. To extend the performance of the roots Leucaena needs the vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae mainly to access the immobile phosphorus. If phosphorus is low up to 100 kg/ha could be applied. Liming will be required in acid soils (pH < 5.0). A lack of calcium in the soil will lower the nodulation.

Harvest
Leucaena can be harvested for fodder at any stage. The yields of the green forage are at peak on 10-12 week cycles. The tree can be cut or grazed by animals. The crop is highly productive and recovers quickly from defoliation and tolerates several decades of cutting and grazing.

Interactions: Pests, diseases, symbionts
Nitrogen fixation: L. leucocephala is a legume and in the symbiosis with Rhizobia bacteria the tree is able to fix about 500 kg nitrogen per ha annually. The nitrogen fixing nodules are found on the small lateral roots near the soil surface.

Pest and diseases: "L. leucocephala is susceptible to the psyllid Heteropsylla cubana, which has caused serious defoliation and mortality in eastern Africa. A Caribbean parasitoid, Psyllaephagus, shows specificity and excellent appetite for H.cubana and hence offers possibilities for biological control. Some varieties are susceptible to gummosis, most likely caused by Fusarium semitectum. Ganoderma lucidum causes root rot in arid and semi-arid regions. Leaf-spot fungus also can cause defoliation under wet conditions. Wild animals avidly consume seedlings."

Re Thonc's edits
Please try to add the new information to the existing article instead of replacing the article with a new one. Your edit removed a lot of information without any explanation why it was being removed. Oops daisy (talk) 08:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect etymology
Etymological information provided by a dead link is added again and again. I have possibly found the correct link, that is actually at odds with the current etymological explanation.
 * Wiki: ''The specific name is derived from the Greek words λευκό, meaning "white", and κέφαλος, meaning "head," referring to its flowers

''
 * Original source: The specific name ‘leucocephala’ comes from ‘leu’, meaning white, and ‘cephala’, meaning head, referring to the flowers.

It seems that (Kevmin and Mark Marathon are actually defending the etymology that leucocephala is derived from λευκό and κέφαλος, while the original source mentions leu and cephala. @Kevmin and @Mark Marathon: did you actually checked the link? Do you think that the Wiki-page truthfully rendered the etymological derivation as presented by World Agroforestry Centre? Which etymological explanation is correct, the one on Wiki or the one presented by World Agroforestry Centre? Wimpus (talk) 08:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter which is correct. The policy is verifiablity, not correctness. If a reliable source says something, it doesn't matter one jot whether it is correct. If you have reason to believe that a RS does not say what is attributed to it, state that as the reason for your edit and we can discuss that. "I know this is not correct" is not a valid reason for making changes to stable articles, or indeed any articles. It is certainly not a valid reason for edit warring, as has been explained to you at length on your talk page. Mark Marathon (talk)
 * Do you belief that the current source is really a reliable source for etymological information, despite all the lapsus on the site? And do you think that you are able to correctly identify reliable sources, because here you state: Stop removing reliable sources while adding a Wiki-mirror as source? Wimpus (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I doesn't matterus what I thinkus. What matterus is that your editus has been challenged and it is up to yous to justify it, not simply keep reinstating it against policyus. And yes, I dous think that I can identifyus reliable sources. Suggest you readus WP:IRS Mark Marathon (talk) 08:50, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * How can you explain your reference to a Wiki-mirror? In case, a source is stating something that can not be true, I will check the source. An editor with some basic knowledge of Latin and Greek would have spot this. But as you are not able to judge this in these cases, you are actually a threat to Wikipedia. Wimpus (talk) 09:02, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You aren't gettin it. It doesn't matter whether it is correct, it remains a RS until you  can establish otherwise. The policy is verifiablity, not correctness. If a reliable source says something, it doesn't matter one jot whether it is correct. If you have reason to believe that a source is not reliable, state that as the reason for your edit and we can discuss that. "I the source is not reliable because I know Latin and Greek" is not a valid reason for making changes to stable articles, or indeed any articles. It is certainly not a valid reason for edit warring, as has been explained to you at length on your talk page. Mark Marathon (talk) 09:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Read my talk page. I have amply demonstrated there, that a site as WorldAgroForestryCentre is unreliable. To someone with only a little knowledge of Latin and Greek this would be obvious, but currently I have to discuss these issues with someone who knows nothing about Latin and Greek, and clearly misinterprets sources as Brown. I wonder, why you would even add etymological information, if you actually do not know what is written in the source. Wimpus (talk) 09:12, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * And once you have demonstrated that and discussed your reasons on this talk page and gained consensus from other editors you are free to make your changes. What you are not free to do is delete reliable sources based on "I know Greek and I know this is wrong" and then engage in edit warring. Mark Marathon (talk) 09:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)