Aside from the above points re: maturity of plants, extraction method .. I think that maybe we are looking at a bit of a 'maidenii' scenario with Floribunda. It seems pretty clear now that this is a species in dire need of botanical revision.. it is just so variable area to area.
As an example (or many) there are forms with more stiff glabrous and leathery phyllodes, papery phyllodes with appressed hairs, narrow phyllodes, broad phyllodes.. short and bushy/prostrate growth.. long loose flower rods.. tighter and shorter flower rods.. shiny grey trunk.. brown to orangy trunk. Small seed.. longer oblong seed.. an impressively long list of variablility to be all be lumped as one species without any recognition of sub species within. Just as trees like Acuminata have recognised sub species I think Floribunda probably should too... !
And its anecdotally evident from many tests that certain forms seem to be inactive while other forms are highly active. Whether that is due to environmental factors or whether it is to do with genetics I don't think anyone is 100% sure .. and many give up on Floribunda because it doesn't come across as reliable as other species.. but I'm now leaning pretty strongly towards it being probably genetic If that is the case I think people should try to source seed from confirmed active varieties.. this is more difficult for people to do internationally I understand (although I would be happy to share small amounts of seed from confirmed varieties with anybody on here who would like a bit to experiment with)
Lastly with all that said.. at a young age it is really difficult to know what variety of Floribunda you have.. and as it is not yet split into differen't recognised forms.. all seed is simply sold as Floribunda. It tends to all look pretty generically the same at a young age too before it starts exhibiting the traits of its 'type' with maturity..
Floribunda rant over .. very cool experiment here Jagube
