Is a holly tree deciduous or conifer?

Question

It does not lose its leaves, but it does not produce cones either.

Answer 1

The scientific name is --( Ilex aquifolium); now read the following ;

but remember it is evergreen tree with spiny leaf margin and red berries. It is Not a conifer ( Gymnosperm) so no Cones.

It is neither deciduous nor a conifer . It is an evergreen tree.

It belongs to the family Aquifoliaceae of the Angiosperms. For picture kindly click on the blue link below:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holly

IN northern regions evergreens are not numerous, and the short days of winter are better fitted for festivities round the warm hearth within doors than for industrial occupations in the chill open air. Thus, during the comparatively gloomy reign of winter, the old agricultural festival of the melancholy god Saturn was kept by the Romans with houses decked with boughs, and with free license of speech and jest even for the slave; whilst the ancient Teutonics seem to have propitiated those "good people," "the lubber fiend" and other woodland sprites, by offering them warm sheltering boughs around the ingle-nook, when their wonted haunts were bare of leaves. Among the Kelts the unbroken life of "Madre Natura" was symbolized by the evergreen branches of the weird mistletoe, that parasitically decked the boughs of the sacred monarch oak of the forest, and of the surrounding apple-groves of Arthur's Avalon when their leaves had fallen. Ancient canons of the Church forbade Christians to deck their houses with evergreens according to these Pagan customs, at least, not at the same times as the heathen; but it was the wise policy of men like Gregory and Augustine to Christianize these rites, although the mistletoe seems to have been too closely associated with the arcana of Druidism ever to receive the same full ecclesiastical sanction as the Holly and the Yew. The spinous leaves and blood-red berries of the former might well be taken by the Christian symbolist as a mystic foreshadowing of the Passion at the celebration of the Nativity, and the name of the tree, which originally referred mainly to its pointed leaves, may have suggested something holy.

Our poets naturally abound in allusions to the bright green of the leaves and the crimson of the berries of the Holly, associating it generally with ivy and yew.

Answer 2

Deciduous Holly

Answer 3

An interesting question I have never thought about. Conifer are usually CONE BEARING trees, like pine cones. Holly does not have a cone so I would think conifers are out. However, decidous trees tend to lose their leaves in the fall and Holly does NOT lose its leaves and go dormint like an Oak tree. Interestingly, the Scrub Oak (Quercus berberidifolia) of southern California has leaves very similar to Holly (Ilex opaca). In fact, Holm Oak is Quercus ilex . Wikipedia lists Holly as BOTH deciduous And evergreen. It does NOT list it as a conifer. I would therefor considerit deciduous.

Answer 4

It's an evergreen. Since most evergreens are conifers, the two terms are often used interchangeably as the two types (deciduous and conifer, or broadleaf and conifer, as those that lose their leaves and those that don't). But some conifers are deciduous (larch, tamarack, baldcypress, dawn redwood) and many evergreens are not conifers (holly, live oak, laurel, eucalyptus...).

Answer 5

Neither. It's a flowering plant (and dioecious, having male and female specimens), so it definitiely is not a conifer.

Holly trees can keep a single leaf for up to 8 years. Maybe their thick waxy cuticle and ability to curl enable them to overwinter more than other deciduous plants.

Answer 6

RE:
Is a holly tree deciduous or conifer?
It does not lose its leaves, but it does not produce cones either.

Answer 7

Animals evolved into two groups: vertebrates and invertebrates. Vertebrates evolved into two groups: those that lay land eggs and those that don't. Mammals evolved into two groups: egg-layers and non-egg layers. Non-egg layers evolved into two groups: marsupials and placentals. Monkeys evolved into two groups: new world monkeys and old-world monkeys. Other plants evolved into two groups: vascular plants and non-vascular plants. Vascular plants evolved into two groups: seed plants and those that don't have seeds. Seed plants evolved into two groups: naked seeds and covered seeds. Flowers evolved into two groups: monocots and dicots. Most anything can be divided into two groups, so your question has more to do with why people like to divide things into two groups. (Even when there is a range of intermediates.) Another way to look at it is, any time a new feature evolves, there will be those with it and those without it, so there are always two groups. So trees either lose their leaves or not, so (surprise) you have two groups. But not all trees would fit neatly into your two groups--what about larch and bald cypress, which are deciduous conifers? But deciduous and conifer are not what we call "natural" groups (grouped by evolutionary relationships). Some divisions into two groups have more significance than others, and we can easily classify things into any number of groups. One could argue that trees evolved into three main groups: Ginkgo, gymnosperms and angiosperms. So the short answer is, trees didn't evolve differently than anything else.

Answer 8

Yes it is referred as an evergreen.
More a bush than true tree it is neither coniferous (cone bearing) nor deciduous (drops leaves).
There are many plant species still that keep leaves thruout winter.

Answer 9

I have a holly tree. It does not shed it's leaves in winter. It does sometimes produce berries. I don't know what category this tree falls in.

Answer 10

You can just call it a broadleaf evergreen.