Current-Inventory092620.Pdf
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Vascular Plant Species of the Cayuga Region of New York State F
Vascular Plant Species of the Cayuga Region of New York State F. Robert Wesley, Sana Gardescu, and P. L. Marks © 2008 Cornell Plantations (first author); Dept. of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology (other authors), Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853. This species list is available online. Search for "Wesley" at: <http://ecommons.library.cornell.edu/browse-author> For more details and a summary of the patterns found in the data, see the Journal of the Torrey Botanical Society for an article based on this species list, published in 2008, entitled "The vascular plant diversity of the Finger Lakes region of central New York State: changes in the 1800s and 1900s," by P.L. Marks, F.R. Wesley, & S. Gardescu. For a link to the Journal's 2008 issues and abstracts, go to: <http://www.torreybotanical.org/journal.html> The following list of vascular plants includes native and non-native species that occur in a multi-county area in central New York State (see map below). We have called this the "Cayuga Region," as it includes the "Cayuga Quadrangle" of the flora of Clausen (1949) and the "Cayuga Lake Basin" of earlier floras (Dudley 1886, Wiegand & Eames 1926). A single set of modern species concepts was used, to correct for variations in nomenclature among the floras. Species found only under cultivation are not included. SPECIES NAMES are in alphabetical order, within major group. NATIVE/NOT is with respect to the Cayuga Region. For non-natives, WHEN HERE is the year by which the species had first established i the region, based on the floras of Dudley (1886), Wiegand & Eames (1926), Clausen (1949), and Wesley (2005; unpublished). -
Perennials for Winter Gardens Perennials for Winter Gardens
TheThe AmericanAmerican GARDENERGARDENER® TheThe MagazineMagazine ofof thethe AAmericanmerican HorticulturalHorticultural SocietySociety November / December 2010 Perennials for Winter Gardens Edible Landscaping for Small Spaces A New Perspective on Garden Cleanup Outstanding Conifers contents Volume 89, Number 6 . November / December 2010 FEATURES DEPARTMENTS 5 NOTES FROM RIVER FARM 6 MEMBERS’ FORUM 8 NEWS FROM THE AHS Boston’s garden contest grows to record size, 2011 AHS President’s Council trip planned for Houston, Gala highlights, rave reviews for Armitage webinar in October, author of article for The American Gardener receives garden-writing award, new butterfly-themed children’s garden installed at River Farm. 12 2010 AMERICA IN BLOOM AWARD WINNERS Twelve cities are recognized for their community beautification efforts. 42 ONE ON ONE WITH… David Karp: Fruit detective. page 26 44 HOMEGROWN HARVEST The pleasures of popcorn. EDIBLE LANDSCAPING FOR SMALL SPACES 46 GARDENER’S NOTEBOOK 14 Replacing pavement with plants in San BY ROSALIND CREASY Francisco, soil bacterium may boost cognitive With some know-how, you can grow all sorts of vegetables, fruits, function, study finds fewer plant species on and herbs in small spaces. earth now than before, a fungus-and-virus combination may cause honeybee colony collapse disorder, USDA funds school garden CAREFREE MOSS BY CAROLE OTTESEN 20 program, Park Seed sold, Rudbeckia Denver Looking for an attractive substitute for grass in a shady spot? Try Daisy™ wins grand prize in American moss; it’ll grow on you. Garden Award Contest. 50 GREEN GARAGE® OUTSTANDING CONIFERS BY RITA PELCZAR 26 A miscellany of useful garden helpers. This group of trees and shrubs is beautiful year round, but shines brightest in winter. -
2021 Wholesale Catalog Pinewood Perennial Gardens Table of Contents
2021 Wholesale Catalog Pinewood Perennial Gardens Table of Contents In Our Catalog ........................................................................................................................................2 Quart Program ........................................................................................................................................3 Directions ..............................................................................................................................................3 New Plants for 2021 ...............................................................................................................................4 Native Plants Offered for Sale ..................................................................................................................4 L.I. Gold Medal Plant Program .................................................................................................................5 Characteristics Table ..........................................................................................................................6-10 Descriptions of Plants Achillea to Astilboides .........................................................................................................11-14 Baptisia to Crocosmia ..........................................................................................................14-16 Delosperma to Eupatorium ...................................................................................................16-18 Gaillardia to Helleborus -
The Ground Cover Demonstration Plots
ARNOLDIA A continuation of the BULLETIN OF POPULAR INFORMATION ’ of the Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University VOLUME 16 NOVEMBER 16, 1956 NUMBER 10 THE GROUND COVER DE11ION:~TRATION PLOTS (Brought up to date) Ground Cover Demonstration Plots on the Arnold Arboretum’s Case THF~Estates in Weston, Massachusetts, vcere first laid out in 1950. Then, only about fifty different kinds of plants were tried, but as time went on, there was so much interest shown in these plantings that they were increased considerably. New ones are being added every year, and unfortunately, there are always some which do not do well and die as a result of severe winters. It is impossible to publish a list that is complete for any length of time, since numerous changes are constantly being made. There are at least 1 50 different kinds of plants being grown in these plots now, and most of these are listed in this bulletin according to row number and position in the row. Row I is nearest to the high stone wall, and the plants are numbered from the Wellesley Street end, the first plant in each row being the closest to Wellesley Street. The plots are in an open former cow pasture, mostly in the full sun, although the first row along the taller stone wall does receive shade about half the time. Otherwise, these plants are all given approximately the same care, with only a few being covered in the winter with pine boughs. Late fall and winter are not the best times of the year to see these plots. -
State Botanical Garden of Georgia Spring Plant Sale 2019 Availability List
State Botanical Garden of Georgia Spring Plant Sale 2019 Availability List Annuals Native Botanical Name Common Name Lupinus 'Noble Maiden' Band of Noble Series Lupine (white) Lupinus 'Popsicle Mix' Popsicle Series Lupine Salvia splendens 'Saucy™ Red' PPAF Saucy™ Red Salvia Conifers Native Botanical Name Common Name Cephalotaxus harringtonia ‘Gold Dragon' ™ PPAF Plum Yew Chamaecyparis obtusa ‘Chirimen' Hinoki Cypress Cryptomeria japonica 'Rasen' Japanese Cedar Cupressus arizonica 'Limelight' Arizona Cypress Cupressus arizonica var. glabra 'Blue Ice' Arizona Cypress Cupressus arizonica var. glabra 'Blue Ice' Arizona Cypress Cupressus glabra 'Silver Smoke' Arizona Cypress Juniper conferta 'sPg‐3‐016' Golden Pacific™ Shore Juniper Native Juniperus virginiana 'Woodlanders Weeping' Weeping Eastern Red Cedar Native Juniperus virginiana var. silicicola 'Brodie' Red Cedar Metasequoia glyptostroboides Dawn Redwood Podocarpus macrophyllus ‘Pringles Dwarf' Dwarf Podocarpus Podocarpus macrophyllus var. maki Chinese Podocarpus Thuja 'Green Giant' Arborvitae Native Thuja occidentalis 'Sunkist' Eastern Arborvitae Native Thuja occidentalis 'Little Giant' Eastern Arborvitae Native Thuja occidentalis 'Concesarini' PP24013 Pancake™ Eastern Arborvitae Thuja orientalis 'Aurea Nana' Berckman's Golden Arborvitae Ferns Native Botanical Name Common Name Native Athyrium filix‐ femina var. asplenioides Southern Lady Fern Athyrium niponicum var. pictum Japanese Painted Fern Native Deparia acrostichoides Silvery Glade Fern Native Dryopteris celsa Log Fern Dryopteris -
Pollinator Adaptation and the Evolution of Floral Nectar Sugar
doi: 10.1111/jeb.12991 Pollinator adaptation and the evolution of floral nectar sugar composition S. ABRAHAMCZYK*, M. KESSLER†,D.HANLEY‡,D.N.KARGER†,M.P.J.MULLER€ †, A. C. KNAUER†,F.KELLER§, M. SCHWERDTFEGER¶ &A.M.HUMPHREYS**†† *Nees Institute for Plant Biodiversity, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany †Institute of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland ‡Department of Biology, Long Island University - Post, Brookville, NY, USA §Institute of Plant Science, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland ¶Albrecht-v.-Haller Institute of Plant Science, University of Goettingen, Goettingen, Germany **Department of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, Berkshire, UK ††Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, University of Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden Keywords: Abstract asterids; A long-standing debate concerns whether nectar sugar composition evolves fructose; as an adaptation to pollinator dietary requirements or whether it is ‘phylo- glucose; genetically constrained’. Here, we use a modelling approach to evaluate the phylogenetic conservatism; hypothesis that nectar sucrose proportion (NSP) is an adaptation to pollina- phylogenetic constraint; tors. We analyse ~ 2100 species of asterids, spanning several plant families pollination syndrome; and pollinator groups (PGs), and show that the hypothesis of adaptation sucrose. cannot be rejected: NSP evolves towards two optimal values, high NSP for specialist-pollinated and low NSP for generalist-pollinated plants. However, the inferred adaptive process is weak, suggesting that adaptation to PG only provides a partial explanation for how nectar evolves. Additional factors are therefore needed to fully explain nectar evolution, and we suggest that future studies might incorporate floral shape and size and the abiotic envi- ronment into the analytical framework. -
Phylogeny of Lamiidae Reveals Increased Resolution and Support for Internal Relationships That Have Remained Elusive
American Journal of Botany 101(2): 287–299. 2014. P HYLOGENY OF LAMIIDAE 1 N ANCY F . R EFULIO-RODRIGUEZ 2 AND R ICHARD G. OLMSTEAD 2,3 2 Department of Biology, Box 355325, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 USA • Premise of the study: The Lamiidae, a clade composed of approximately 15% of all fl owering plants, consists of fi ve orders: Boraginales, Gentianales, Garryales, Lamiales, and Solanales; and four families unplaced in an order: Icacinaceae, Metteniusi- aceae, Oncothecaceae, and Vahliaceae. Our understanding of the phylogenetic relationships of Lamiidae has improved signifi - cantly in recent years, however, relationships among the orders and unplaced families of the clade remain partly unresolved. Here, we present a phylogenetic analysis of the Lamiidae based on an expanded sampling, including all families together, for the fi rst time, in a single phylogenetic analyses. • Methods: Phylogenetic analyses were conducted using maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. Analyses included nine plastid regions ( atpB , matK , ndhF , psbBTNH , rbcL , rps4 , rps16 , trnL - F , and trnV - atpE ) and the mitochondrial rps3 region, and 129 samples representing all orders and unplaced families of Lamiidae. • Key results: Maximum Likelihood (ML) and Bayesian trees provide good support for Boraginales sister to Lamiales, with successive outgroups (Solanales + Vahlia) and Gentianales, together comprising the core Lamiidae. Early branching patterns are less well supported, with Garryales only poorly supported as sister to the above ‘core’ and a weakly supported clade composed of Icacinaceae, Metteniusaceae, and Oncothecaceae sister to all other Lamiidae. • Conclusions: Our phylogeny of Lamiidae reveals increased resolution and support for internal relationships that have remained elusive. -
2021 Gulley Greenhouse Wholesale Catalog
2021 GULLEY GREENHOUSE WHOLESALE CATALOG TABLE OF CONTENTS (Click on each link or see tabs below) 2021 General Information General Information & Terms Ordering Information Delivery Information 2021 Perennial List 2021 Jeepers Creepers Groundcover List 2021 Annual List 2021 Fairy Flowers List 2021 Herbs, Fruits & Vegetable List 2021 Hanging Basket List 2021 Container List Gulley Greenhouse Inc. ‐ 970.223.4769 (GROW) ‐ www.gulleygreenhouse.com 6029 South Shields St. ‐ Ft. Collins, CO 80526 ‐ Fax: 970.226.2736 GULLEY GREENHOUSE 2021 GENERAL INFORMATION Gulley Greenhouse, Inc. ‐ 970.223.4769 (GROW) ‐ Fax: 970.226.2763 ‐ www.gulleygreenhouse.com GENERAL INFORMATION AND TERMS HOURS QUESTIONS? January 1 ‐ April 18: Monday‐Thursday 8:30am‐3:30pm Please call our main wholesale office toll‐free at 1‐800‐642‐8028 or Friday 8:30am‐12:00pm send us an e‐mail: April 19 ‐ June 5: Monday‐Thursday 8:00am‐5:00pm Celia Tannehill: [email protected] Friday 8:00am‐2:00pm Christy Patton: [email protected] Saturday 9:00am‐12:00pm Shannon Hackett: [email protected] June 6 ‐ December 31: Monday‐Thursday 8:30am‐3:30pm Friday 8:30am‐12:00pm RETURNS AND CLAIMS: Claims due to plant shortages or damages must be reported to OUR MISSION: Gulley Greenhouse within 24 hours of delivery or pickup. Claims due At Gulley Greenhouse, our goal is to produce high quality ‘Gulley to plant quality or wrong variety must be reported within 72 hours Grown’ plants that are ready to sell and plant. We feature a of delivery or pick‐up. Claims reported after the specified time selection of perennials that are best suited for our Colorado Front frames will not be honored. -
Influence of Plant Age, Soil Moisture, and Temperature Cylcing Date on Containter-Grown Herbaceous Perennials Sarah Kingsley-Richards University of Vermont
University of Vermont ScholarWorks @ UVM Graduate College Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 2011 Influence of Plant Age, Soil Moisture, and Temperature Cylcing Date on Containter-Grown Herbaceous Perennials Sarah Kingsley-Richards University of Vermont Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis Recommended Citation Kingsley-Richards, Sarah, "Influence of Plant Age, Soil Moisture, and Temperature Cylcing Date on Containter-Grown Herbaceous Perennials" (2011). Graduate College Dissertations and Theses. 122. https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/graddis/122 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Dissertations and Theses at ScholarWorks @ UVM. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate College Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ UVM. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFLUENCE OF PLANT AGE, SOIL MOISTURE, AND TEMPERATURE CYCLING DATE ON CONTAINER-GROWN HERBACEOUS PERENNIALS A Thesis Presented by Sarah L. Kingsley-Richards to The Faculty of the Graduate College of The University of Vermont In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Specializing in Plant and Soil Science May, 2011 Abstract Perennial growers overwintering plant stock require information to assist in deciding which containerized plants are most likely to successfully overwinter. Three studies on container-grown herbaceous perennials were conducted to examine the influence of plant age, soil moisture, and temperature cycling date on cold hardiness. In January, plants were exposed to controlled freezing temperatures of -2, -5, -8, -11, and -14C and then returned to a 3-5C greenhouse. In June, plants were assessed using a visual rating scale of 1-5 (1 = dead, 3-5 = increasing salable quality, varying by cultivar) and dry weights of new growth were determined. -
Resolving the Phylogenetic Position of <I>Ombrocharis</I> (Lamiaceae), with Reference to the Molecular Phylogeny Of
TAXON 65 (1) • February 2016: 123–136 Chen & al. • Systematic placement of Ombrocharis (Lamiaceae) Resolving the phylogenetic position of Ombrocharis (Lamiaceae), with reference to the molecular phylogeny of tribe Elsholtzieae Ya-Ping Chen,1,2 Bryan T. Drew,3 Bo Li,4 Douglas E. Soltis,5,6 Pamela S. Soltis6 & Chun-Lei Xiang1 1 Key Laboratory for Plant Diversity and Biogeography of East Asia, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650201, Yunnan, China 2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China 3 Department of Biology, University of Nebraska at Kearney, Kearney, Nebraska 68849, U.S.A. 4 Laboratory of Subtropical Biodiversity, College of Agriculture, Jiangxi Agricultural University, Nanchang 330045, Jiangxi, China 5 Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, U.S.A. 6 Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, U.S.A. Author for correspondence: Chun-Lei Xiang, [email protected] ORCID CLX, http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8775-6967 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.12705/651.8 Abstract Ombrocharis is the only incertae sedis genus within Lamiaceae that has not been included in a published molecular phylogenetic study. Here, we adopt a two-step approach to resolve the phylogenetic placement of the genus. Initially, the subfamilial affiliation of Ombrocharis was determined based on a combined ndhF and rbcL dataset covering all seven sub- families of Lamiaceae. Results show that Ombrocharis is a member of Nepetoideae, a placement that is also supported by its hexacolpate pollen grains. In the second set of analyses, two nrDNA (ITS, ETS) and four cpDNA (ycf1, rps15-ycf1, trnL-F, rpl32-trnL) markers were used to explore the position of Ombrocharis within Nepetoideae. -
Floristic Quality Assessment with Wetland Categories and Examples of Computer Applications for the State of Michigan
FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT WITH WETLAND CATEGORIES AND EXAMPLES OF COMPUTER APPLICATIONS FOR THE STATE OF MICHIGAN REVISED, 2ND EDITION – OCTOBER 2001 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Division Natural Heritage Program In Partnership With U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Great Lakes National Program Office Chicago, IL U. S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Rose Lake Plant Materials Center, MI Printed by Authority of: PA 451 of 1994 Copies Printed: 1400 Cost Per Copy: $3.79 Total Cost : $5,300 Michigan Department of Natural Resources FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT WITH WETLAND CATEGORIES AND EXAMPLES OF COMPUTER APPLICATIONS FOR THE STATE OF MICHIGAN October 2001 Kim D. Herman Wildlife Division Michigan Department of Natural Resources 6833 Hwys US-2, 41 & M-35 Gladstone, Michigan 49837 Linda A. Masters Conservation Research Institute 375 W. First St. Elmhurst, Illinois 60126 Michael R. Penskar Michigan Natural Features Inventory P.O. Box 30444 Lansing, Michigan 48909-7944 Anton A. Reznicek University of Michigan Herbarium North University Building Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1057 Gerould S. Wilhelm Conservation Research Institute 375 W. First St. Elmhurst, Illinois 60126 William W. Brodovich King & MacGregor Environmental, Inc. 5860 N. Canton Center Road, Suite 387 Canton, Michigan 48187 Kevin P. Gardiner Natural Heritage Program, Wildlife Division Michigan Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 30444 Lansing, Michigan 48909-7944 FLORISTIC QUALITY ASSESSMENT WITH WETLAND CATEGORIES AND -
Water Efficient Landscaping Standards A-1
APPENDIX A – WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET This worksheet is completed by the project applicant and is a required element of the Landscape and Irrigation Documentation Package. SECTION A. GALLONS OF WATER NEEDED BY PLANT CATEGORY AND IRRIGATION TYPE The specific irrigation water needs of each hydrozone in the design should be determined using the following formula and factors: Irrigation Water Budget = [(ETo × Plant Factor) – Re] × Irrigated Area ÷ Irrigation Efficiency × 0.623 Where: ETo = Reference Evapotranspiration = 27.4 inches/season (May through September) Re = Effective Precipitation = 6.8 inches/season (May through September) Irrigated Area = hydrozone area in square feet Water Use Plant Factor Irrigation Default Category Method Efficiency Cool-Season Turf 0.90 Overhead 75% High 0.80 Drip 90% Medium 0.65 Water Feature 75% Low 0.40 Very Low 0.25 Water Feature 0.90 Special Features to Incentivize Maximum Applied Healthy Landscapes* Water Budget (% of Irrigated Area) (gal/sf/season) At least 10% 8.5 At least 5% 8.0 Less than 5% 7.5 *See Section 4.3.1.b.i. Maximum of 10% of the total irrigated area can be applied for to increase water budget up to 8.5 gal/sf/season with any combination of applicable special features. Reduction in Calculated Number of 55-Gallon Irrigation Water Need Rain Barrels** (gallons) 2 250 1 125 **See Section 4.3.1.b.ii. Water from rain barrels must be applied to irrigated plantings with Low or Very Low water use categories with drip irrigation. City of Aspen Water Efficient Landscaping Standards A-1 SECTION B.