Yes, I've also seen what I believe are silver / red hybrids around here. The natural hybrid thing goes a long way towards explaining why tree ID using only the bark and the appearance of the wood can be tricky business. Seeing as how much bark changes as trees age, combined with the natural hybrid thing, there is simply a lot of variation in terms of bark and wood color / texture, especially with maples. Most people know that young tree bark is usually different than mature bark, but the bark often changes again when trees get very old. A 50 year old red oak around here has fairly flat bark, but a 100 year old red oak usually has deep ridges and furrows. And I've seen 150+ year old red oaks with bark that looks almost like cottonwood, except darker in color. I love trees...
These would be roughly 50 year old, 100 year old, and 150-200 year old red oaks (forest tree size) around here. It makes sense when you see the progression, but if you compare just the youngest and the oldest, they don't exactly look like the same species. I like big buttress roots and I cannot lie.
