Very interesting, almost contradictory to what I thought possible. Leaves are a dead ringer for ash, but it's a gymnosperm?!? Origins are very ancient according to the link.

... is it a gymnosperm?

The Wikipedia link shows 4 hypotheses in the classification, below is a screenshot of the first one, the Gnetifer hypothesis which says that it is a gymnosperm. However, 2 of the 4 hypotheses say that it is a gymnosperm, the other 2 say that it is not a gymnosperm

When I was digging, I was not looking at classifications/hypotheses though, I was looking at pics and yeah, who would have thought that an ash tree could bear cones!

I REALLY like this thread. I have been aware of many of the species in this group, but I've never studied the taxonomy very carefully. It's always just been something I saw in passing. Very interesting!