Here's the mutant.

you should NOT have cut it off ... if it were to be decided to be something rare and exciting.. it could have been grafted in winter ....

could it be a Picea glauca Conica reverting to P Glauca ...

that is to say a dwarf alberta spruce.. reverting to the mother plant .. the white spruce???? .. but that would not be a rare find ... and as such.. cutting it off was the right thing to do ....

what i think you are seeing.. is a difference in the GROWTH rate.. between the two examples .... yes????

ken

ps: it is a conifer... but you will get the answer you need here.. but if you find you are interested in that type of plant.. visit over there ....

Did you happen to mix up the photos?
The bottom one looks like a regular Picea pungens shoot.

The other looks like a more dense Picea pungens branch that is either a mutation, broom or was simply sheared which will cause that type of growth.

I too think a) the top one is the actual mutant, the Alberta part of the Picea glauca.
b) it is an Alberta spruce reversion, the bottom one showing what White Spruce look like in the wild.

Often happens, I would prune it out.

If you still wonder, post a pic of the tree, that would answer a lot of what ifs...

mtullius should post a picture of the whole plant, so that there aren't wild guesses at its identity based on little pieces.

I think ken has the answer embedded in his reply.

The plant(s) are Dwarf Alberta Spruce or Dwarf White Spruce (Picea glauca 'Conica'), which are extremely common ornamental plants. One plant is experiencing a reversion shoot which displays the character of the parent species White Spruce (Picea glauca).

This reversion is quite common with the dwarf form of this plant. I'm attaching an image of one here in KY which has not yet had its reversion attended to. If left alone, the reversion will eventually consume the plant's energy and starve the dwarf component.

Thanks for all the interesting replies. The 1st photo I posted IS what the rest of the tree and its mate look like. The 2nd tree has no unusual branches. It doesn't show well in this photo, but the weird branch is in the upper right.

I didn't cut off the whole branch, I just snipped a piece to bring inside to get a good close-up.

I wasn't sure if it was a conifer because it hasn't produced any cones. I'm not real clear on the reproductive habits of conifers.

I think the photo posted by viburnumvalley looks like mine. The main branches present a fairly smooth, dense surface, while the unusual branch has a more separate "branchy" look. The needles on the weird branch are longer, thicker and more bluish grey.

The consensus so far is that I should cut it out?

Thanks all!

That is exactly what was surmised previously - a dwarf Alberta spruce that has reverted. Unfortunately not an uncommon issue with this cultivar and only one of a number of problems to which it is prone.

Cutting out the reversion looks like it's going to leave a rather large hole in the side of the tree that will never fully fill in. And there is a very good possibility of further reversions, as well. I might be thinking about some replacement choices myself :-))

Yes I'm worried about a big hole too. And as I said it has a mate, its to the left, they frame the front of my house. I won't be happy without symmetry.Probably take them both out and replace with a flower bed, its one of the few places I get good sun.

Thanks for all your help and so quickly too. Really appreciate it.

Asking nature for symmetry rarely works, in my experience. I have had countless attempts with two plants that are the same cultivar, from the same stock, same size, same conditions, and after five years one is twice the size of the other or a different shape or the like. I think the minute that nature sees someone attempting symmetry she laughs and tries to mess it up as quickly as she can! I have recently planted two Picea glauca 'Pendula' flanking a double doorway....I never learn....

Sara