cristop

Maybe Acacia oshanesii

Probably Drosera glanduligera. If so, when it flowers you'll get a 1-4 many flowered scapes from each plant. Orange flowers.

If you tease open those buds you will see anthers & maybe pollen. So male. BTW: Plants don't have genders, they have sexes. 'Gender' is a term used in the humanities to avoid recognizing biological differences between men and women. We are still permitted to think of other organisms as having different sexes.

I make it A. leiocalyx too. The coiled pods help eliminate other similar species. The wider phyllodes would make it subsp. leiocalyx as opposed to subsp. herveyensis.

When the flowers have developed look for anthers or else styles

Plumosus nanus AKA Asparagus plumosus looks close

Some sort of Mentha. Maybe M. pulegium or M. aquatica. Neither of these is a perfect match though. Your specimen is set apart as its flowers have distinct pedicels.

Can't find any record of P. brachystachis in Australia. Try. Phalaris. minor, P. paradoxa & P. canariensis

The description of Lactuca serriola in Flora of the Perth Region describes it as "glabrous or basally setose" - i.e. bristly. To date L. virosa has only been recorded from MIldura, whereas L. serriola is found right across the continent. http://avh.ala.org.au/occurrences/search?taxa=Lactuca+virosa#tab_recordsView

Lactuca serriola.

All of the following is based on the assumption that it is Celastraceae. If you want to try your hand at a dichotomous key use this link: http://plantnet.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/NSWfl.pl?page=nswfl&lvl=fm&name=CELASTRACEAE#3 In this key it looks like Maytenus is included under Denhamia. You'll need some good material to work with including some with fruits. You may also need a lens/microscope and ruler to measure the lengths of the styles, pedicels, petioles etc. There are only seven species of Denhamia in the key and you can knock out a few based on pedicel length (yours are several mms), leaf margins (yours are toothed), petioles (yours are a few mms) etc. Alternatively you could search through the records online here: http://avh.ala.org.au/occurrences/search?taxa=Celastraceae&q=+(state%3A"New+South+Wales"+OR+cl2117%3A"New+South+Wales") In this case I've just done a search for Celastraceae across all of NSW, assuming "temperate tablelands" is in NSW. You can reduce your search to a particular local government area or bioregion using the 'advance search' options. Note that Celastraceae or Denhamia goes in the box "taxon name" (not "text"). You'll have to wade through pages of specimens to come up with a short list of Celastraceae species. For some species the AVH has images in their database, but in most cases you'll need to find your images elsewhere online. If you can't find good matches between your specimens and images online or in the key then maybe it's not Celastraceae after all.

I tried the page Anodyne linked to but could not get to Acacia longifolia subsp. sophorae for some reason. Nevertheless if your Acacias conform with those two features I mentioned before, they have to be sophorae (or just possibly subsp. longifolia). Here are some images of some confirmed specimens - you can zoom right in on them. They look very much like the ones you photographed: http://avh.ala.org.au/occurrences/search?taxa=acacia+sophorae#tab_recordImages

Looks like Acacia longifolia subsp. sophorae though it's unusual for that to have phyllodes over 12cm long. Have a close look at the minor veins - they should be joining up quite a lot (anastomosing). Phyllode margins should not be resinous.

Then I can only speculate. Maybe A. implexa was planted there or maybe the third tree is a sport of A. melanoxylon. A. implexa doesn't usually flower this time of the year, but it can. If you are determined to get to the bottom of it you can collect flowers, phyllodes and pods from both types and take them to the Tasmanian Herbarium to compare with verified specimens housed there. If it's anything like WA there will be microscopes available for public use.

Given they're growing together they may both be A. melanoxylon, in which case there will be a bit of overlap between the features of either tree. Compare old phyllodes with old phyllodes, new with new etc. Are there some features that are consistently different between the two trees, e.g. no thinner acute phyllodes on the first specimen, no broad blunt ones on the second etc? If they are definitely different the second could be A. implexa, though this has not been collected from Hobart before.

There's not much to choose between A. floribunda, A. longifolia ssp longifolia and A. obtusifolia

Maybe Acacia longifolia subsp. sophorae. Have a close look at the minor veins on the phyllodes (not the 2 or 3 prominent veins). If it is Acacia longifolia they should be be commonly anastomosing (i.e.joined by cross veins) as opposed to just running parallel without many connections. If anastomosis is rare it is something else, probably introduced. The pods in the litter beneath the tree should be 5-15 cm and slightly curved or coiled, with the seeds lined up longitudinally in th pods, i.e. not diagonally.

If not Acacia concurrens - A. aulacocarpa and A. leiocalyx subsp. leiocalyx also fit the bill.

Assuming it's native to the area it could be Acacia implexa. Pods and flowers together with measurements are very useful for identifications. If you look in the litter beneath large plants like this you'll often find pods from the previous season. Photos of pods & phyllodes next to a ruler or pencil are helpful.

Specimens 1 & 2 look the same to me, but if the plants appear different in the field it could be due to differences in soils or age. For example one population may be on shallow or saline soils. Or maybe one population is mature while the other germinated together after a fire and has yet to reach full maturity. There could also be genetic differences, but without looking at them in situ I'm just speculating. Phyllodes are narrower in the low rainfall parts of its range. The reason the narrow phyllode variant is no longer deemed a separate taxon would be because phyllodes width varies along a continuum, and other characters don't reliably vary along with it. So there's no clear dividing line. I wouldn't know about the alkaloid contents. I'd like to think you're not killing too many trees for their bark, particularly if they're on a reserve.

The first two are A. acuminata. The narrow phyllode variant of that is no longer considered a separate taxon. Specimen 3 is something different. It might be A. jibberdingensis. York is west of the main distribution of this species but it has been collected from "the west end of Tammin Reserve". It would require examination under a microscope and/or a look at its pods to be certain.

Acacia obtusifolia I think

Not much to go on. Capsicum or chilli maybe?

It's hard without pods or flowers. These measures might help: a. look in the leaf litter for any old pods or flowering stems then photograph them against your tape b. With the tape against the phyllode get a clear macro pic of the first few centimetres of the upper margin of the phyllode. The distance between the pulvinus (where it joins the stem) and the gland can help identification. c. Get some pics of typical undamaged mature phyllode tips d. get some good pics of the veins at the base of the phyllodes so I can see how they converge

It certainly looks like Nicotiana tabacum.