DOCSLIB.ORG

Cotoneaster Pruning Tips by Cass Turnbull

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cotoneaster Pruning Tips by Cass Turnbull PlantAmnesty Cotoneaster Pruning Tips by Cass Turnbull New gardeners are apt to make their first and most embarrassing phonetic faux pas when they mis-pronounce cotoneasters, as cotton-easters. Ka-tone- ee-ass-ters, is correct. New pruners also pronounce loppers, l-oh-purs (rhymes with dopers), instead of correctly as lop-pers which rhymes with toppers. Like most plant species, cotoneasters come in a variety of sizes, from the impressive C. frigidus `Cornubia', almost a tree at twenty feet, to the tiny- leafed C. microphyllus, bred for people who like cute buns. I'm partial to the ubiquitous, but highly underrated C. horizontalis commonly called fish-bone, herringbone or rock spray cotoneaster. I think it has great architectural qualities. Planted against a fence or chimney, it espaliers itself in a tower of fans. It reminds me of the ice feathers that form on your windshield this time of year, too. espalier - front view side view It's been so long since I took plant ID that I get my mid-sized cotoneasters mixed up. I think it's the C. lacteus that I prefer to C. franchetii. I find franchetii too spiky and stiff, though other people like the grayish cast of the leaves, which have even whiter undersides. I like the floppier, larger leafed C. lacteus, or is it parneyii? Latin names — I lose more of them every year. I'm surprised I can't actually see them falling out of my ears. And curse that secret society of heartless taxonomical dictators who change plant names. Did you know that common garden `mums' (chrysanthemums) are now really Dendranthema (will they be called common garden © PlantAmnesty Page 1 of 5 PlantAmnesty `ma's'?) There ought to be a law. What cotoneasters share in common is their nice display of red to orange berries and their arching branch pattern. They like dry soils and sun, but are generally tolerant of all kinds of abuse and neglect. They get around well on their own, spread by hungry birds who eat the berries in late winter when the finer fare is gone. One is apt to find a lone cotoneaster growing in the cracks of a sidewalk or sprouting out of the middle of a field of junipers. Such shrubs are called “volunteers”. Although I like cotoneasters, I admit that (on the great unspoken horticultural plant-status scale) they rate rather low. I know this because of what I said when I went on a consultation with another professional gardener. We went over her client's yard together where many plants had been mal-pruned, mostly sheared into balls. She asked what to do about the sheared cotoneaster and the sheared evergreen azalea. I told her that it wasn't worth the effort to rehab the cotoneaster (a difficult and lengthy process). “Just dig it out.” I moved on to show her how to un-shear the azalea (with relatively rapid, good results). THE MOST COMMON MISTAKE The most common pruning mistake people make is to shear cotoneasters (and everything else for that matter.) Actually, cotoneasters fit the criteria for plants that are good as formal hedges (small-leafed, evergreen and tough) and can be used as such, which is to say topiaried or sheared into continuous hedges. But most selective pruners express a more than average disgust when they see cotoneaster balls because such pruning subverts the best feature of these plants — their arching branch pattern. And also, because once cotoneasters are sheared, the future results are startlingly horrid. I know of no other plant that grows back from heading cuts with as many straight shoots. A picture of a re-grown, sheared cotoneaster at the PlantAmnesty educational booth is titled, WILD THING. THE MOST COMMON Heading cuts make it they will cause ugly MISTAKE: look tidier for now, regrowth, using non-selective but . making it twice as unkept heading cuts later. to make the plant smaller... © PlantAmnesty Page 2 of 5 PlantAmnesty Near my home in beautiful upper Ballard, I have examples of all three pruning techniques. One apartment complex sports a silly “row of soldiers”— all cotoneasters sheared into tight globes. Nearer my house is a condo with a steep rockery that a hardworking, yet wholly ignorant, grounds crew swarms over once a month to shear cotoneasters into rather pleasant looking smooth masses. It's reminiscent of some formal Japanese gardens I've seen. Between shearings, the shrubs resprout and don't look so tidy. In point of fact, the condo association is paying a lot of money to have these plants look ultra-tidy half the time, and twice as unkempt the other half of the time. Next to it is a shorter rockery belonging to the church parking lot. It has unpruned cotoneasters spilling and arching gracefully, like a waterfall, down the rocks. Nobody ever prunes them and they look great all the time. Unfortunately grass and weeds are starting to invade, and when that happens, can the hedge- shearing motorheads be far behind? HOW TO SHORTEN As with most plants, I avoid trying to shorten or otherwise restrict the size of cotoneasters. If a branch actually interferes with people walking down a pathway, rubs on the house or sticks out too far into a neighboring plant, I look to see if it can be removed with a thinning cut, taking it off where it joins a larger stem or altogether, cutting it to the ground. If this is not possible, I will occasionally use a selective heading cut (see illustration). This is not necessarily the smallest cut possible along the branch. Follow the branch back from the tip trying to locate a largish side branch to cut back to. It's a difficult thing to grasp, but is the essential part of selective pruning that allows me to retain the natural grace of the branches and reduce the amount of water sprout/sucker regrowth. SELECTIVE HEADING is the right way to shorten a branch. This smaller cut may To make a better cut, make not be as good as a larger cut to a larger the next illustration lateral branch In my opinion, selectively heading these or any other shrubs for all-over size control is doomed to eventual failure. The size of a shrub is determined by its species and age. Pruning really won't work to keep them small, at least not for long. And you run the risk of ruining their good looks © PlantAmnesty Page 3 of 5 PlantAmnesty by trying. Most bad pruning comes from bad planning, itself as common as dirt (soil?). If you research the mature size of your plant in the plant encyclopedia, and there isn't enough room, by all means, TAKE IT OUT. (I rarely try transplanting cotoneasters. It's just not worth the effort since they die easily, are easy to replace, and are not considered particularly choice.) PlantAmnesty gives you permission. Correcting mistakes as soon as they are spotted is good garden policy. (But then, so is waiting to see how it goes.) DEADWOOD When pruning any plant, 80% of all the cuts made should be to remove deadwood — dead twigs, dead limbs and stubs. Cotoneasters, in particular, clean-up well with dead-wooding. The dead twigs are often so brittle that they can be simply brushed (crunched) out with a gloved hand. Take care to remove any stubs that might remain after the quick, brush through. What a difference! You will quickly discover that most deadwood occurs on the lower parts and inside of the shrub, where it has been shaded out. Two other plants which look particularly better after deadwooding are pines and pieris. Please make a note of it. BOTTOM UP, INSIDE OUT God bless George Schenk for his description in The Complete Shade Gardener of the pruning process that says, prune from the bottom up and the inside out. I remember when I started my business many years ago, my partner Betty would disappear inside shrubs, sometimes crawling into the base of them on hands and knees. I felt like asking her to stop fooling around and get to work. But as the minutes passed, and cut limbs and twigs were shoved outside the plant, the shrubs would start looking cleaner, better, and — well, more beautiful. This is the art of pruning. Most books say to remove crossing/rubbing branches and to open up the center to improve plant health, which it does. But the real reason it's done is to make your yard look better — that's the point of gardening anyway, unless you are gardening to provide wildlife habitat. In that case some tangles, brambles and deadwood are a good thing. And a heap of ugly concrete rubble is required if what you desire most is the company of a nice newt or garter snake. So, before I do any size reduction, I thin a bit, doing more at the base of the plant than elsewhere, to see if that will solve the real or perceived problem. REPAIRING MAL-PRUNED SHRUBS I can't actually recall spending the time and effort to restore a previously headed or sheared cotoneaster. It's too daunting, I guess. If you are a professional gardener who has taken on an over-sheared yard, it is often best to pick your battles. Refuse to re-top the dogwood or shear the pieris. A previously headed double-file viburnum may be worth three years of painstaking rehabilitative pruning. The cotoneaster, on the other hand, might just be the sacrificial shrub that someone is allowed to “sculpt” until it finally gets too big and unwieldy or develops a really bad case of web worm (they just love those tight clipped bushes, don't you know.) Then cut it © PlantAmnesty Page 4 of 5 PlantAmnesty to the ground.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • APPROVED PLANT LIST Midtown Alliance Tree Well Adoption Program
    APPROVED PLANT LIST Midtown Alliance Tree Well Adoption Program Midtown Alliance launched the Tree Well Adoption program with the primary goal of enriching the experience of Midtown’s workers and residents while encouraging sustainability through the use of low-water, urban tolerant plant species. This list of plants was created to aid individuals and organizations in selecting plant material to plant in their adopted tree wells. This plant list is intended to encourage individual character in the tree wells, rather than restrict creativity in the selection of plants. The plants on the approved list were selected based on the following criteria: • Perennial. All plants listed are perennial, meaning they last for two or more growing seasons. Once established, these plants will require less water to maintain than annuals. • Heat tolerant. Plants in tree wells are exposed to high temperatures caused by vehicles and heat reflected from surrounding buildings, asphalt, and other urban surfaces. They must also be tolerant to high daytime temperatures, typical of Atlanta’s summer months, and cold hardy in the winter months. Atlanta is located in USDA Plant Hardiness Zone 7b/8a. • Water wise. Urban tree wells are surrounded by impervious surfaces and thus, are highly susceptible to periods of drought. Suitable plants must be able to survive periods of low rainfall. • Pollution tolerant. Vehicle exhaust may leave deposits and pollutants on plant foliage, which can kill sensitive plants. • Encourage wildlife. Flowering plants attract insects such as butterflies while others provide food sources for birds and other wildlife. • Grown locally. Many of the plants listed are native to the Atlanta area, and all can be found at local nurseries.
    [Show full text]
  • Shrub List for Brighton 2010
    Shrub List For Brighton 2010 Large Shrubs 10’ -20’ Tall by 6’ – 25’ wide Acer ginnala Amur Maple Acer tataricum Tatarian Maple (better than Amur Maple) Acer grandidentatum Bigtooth Maple Amelanchier alnifolia Saskatoon Serviceberry Amelanchier canadensis Shadblow Serviceberry Caragana arborescens Siberian Peashrub Cercocarpus ledifolius Mountain Mahogany Cotoneaster lucidus Peking Cotoneaster Cowania mexicana Quince Bush, Cliffrose Crataefus ambigua Russian Hawthorn Forestiera neomexicana New Mexican Privet Hippophae rhamnoides Sea Buckthorn Juniperus species Juniper Kolkwitzia amabilis Beauty Bush Pinus mugo Mugo Pine species Prunus americana American Plum Prunus virginiana ‘Shubert’ Canada Red Chokecherry Ptelea trifoliata Wafer Ash or Hop tree Quercus gambelii Gambel Oak Rhus typhina Staghorn Sumac Robinia neomexicana New Mexico Locust Sambucus species Elders Shepherdia argentea Buffaloberry Syringa vulgaris Common Lilac Viburnum lantana Wayfaring Tree, Viburnum Medium Size Shrubs >10’ high by >8’ wide Amorpha fruticosa False Indigo Atriplex canescens Fourwing Saltbush Buddleia davidii Butterfly Bush Cercocarpus montanus Mountain Mahogany Chamaebatiaria millefolium Fernbush Chrysothamnus nauseosus Rubber Rabbitbrush Cornus sericea Redtwig Dogwood Cotinus coggygria Smoke Tree Cotoneaster species Cotoneaster Cytisus scoparius ‘Moonlight’ Moonlight Broom Euonymus alatus Burning Bush Forsythia x intermedia Forsythia Hibiscus syriacus Rose-of-Sharon Juniperus species Juniper Ligustrum vulgare Privet Lonicera species Honeysuckle Mahonia aquifolium Oregon Grape Holly Philadelphus species Mockorange Pyracantha coccinea Firethorn Physocarpus opulifolius Common Ninebark Prunus besseyi Western Sand Cherry Pyracantha coccinea species Firethorn Rhamnus frangula Glossy Buckthorn Ribes species Currant Sambucus species Elder Spiraea x vanhouttei Vanhouttei Spirea Symphoricarpos albus Snowberry Syringa meyeri „Palibin‟ Dwarf Korean Lilac Syringa patula „Miss Kim‟ Dwarf Lilac Viburnum species (dozens of different types) Small Size Shrubs > 5’ tall by >6.
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of Geographic and Biological Variables in Predicting
    Horticulture Publications Horticulture 6-2013 The mpI ortance of Geographic and Biological Variables in Predicting the Naturalization of Non- Native Woody Plants in the Upper Midwest Mark P. Widrlechner Iowa State University, [email protected] Emily J. Kapler Iowa State University, [email protected] Philip M. Dixon Iowa State University, [email protected] Janette R. Thompson Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/hort_pubs Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Forest Management Commons, Horticulture Commons, and the Statistical Models Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ hort_pubs/33. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Horticulture at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Horticulture Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The mpI ortance of Geographic and Biological Variables in Predicting the Naturalization of Non-Native Woody Plants in the Upper Midwest Abstract The es lection, introduction, and cultivation of non-native woody plants beyond their native ranges can have great benefits, but also unintended consequences. Among these consequences is the tendency for some species to naturalize and become invasive pests in new environments to which they were introduced. In lieu of lengthy and costly field trials, risk-assessment models can be used to predict the likelihood of naturalization.
    [Show full text]
  • The Typification of Cotoneaster Symondsii (Rosaceae)
    Phytotaxa 164 (2): 149–153 ISSN 1179-3155 (print edition) www.mapress.com/phytotaxa/ Article PHYTOTAXA Copyright © 2014 Magnolia Press ISSN 1179-3163 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/phytotaxa.164.2.9 The typification of Cotoneaster symondsii (Rosaceae) JEANETTE FRYER1 & PETER F. ZIKA2,* 1 Cornhill Cottage, Honeycritch Lane, Froxfield, Petersfield, Hampshire, GU32 1BE, England. 2 WTU Herbarium, Box 355325, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-5325, USA. * Author for Correspondence, Email: [email protected] Abstract The binomial Cotoneaster symondsii was published eight years earlier than Cotoneaster simonsii. Some authors have argued that Cotoneaster simonsii should be synonymized under Cotoneaster symondsii, based on priority. Foliar characters provided in the protologue of Cotoneaster symondsii are not a good match for Cotoneaster simonsii. In the absence of original material, a neotype is chosen for Cotoneaster symondsii, in accordance with its protologue, which places it in synonymy with Cotoneaster marginatus. Key words: Cotoneaster subgenus Chaenopetalum, Himalaya, India, nomenclature The binomial Cotoneaster symondsii Moore (1861: 298) was validly published but the original material that formed the basis of the description remains unfound. We were unable to locate any herbarium specimens collected by or seen by Moore when describing C. symondsii. The British Museum received Moore's types and most of his collections that were not ferns (Stafleu & Cowan 1981). We have searched AK, B, BM, CAM, DBN, E, K, KIEV, HILL, OXF, P, WAG, and a number of additional herbaria, but unsuccessfully, and did not find any collections from circa 1860 labeled Cotoneaster symondsii. Moore's (1861) protologue reads: "from Mr. Standish, Bagshot.
    [Show full text]
  • Conserving Europe's Threatened Plants
    Conserving Europe’s threatened plants Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Conserving Europe’s threatened plants Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation By Suzanne Sharrock and Meirion Jones May 2009 Recommended citation: Sharrock, S. and Jones, M., 2009. Conserving Europe’s threatened plants: Progress towards Target 8 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Botanic Gardens Conservation International, Richmond, UK ISBN 978-1-905164-30-1 Published by Botanic Gardens Conservation International Descanso House, 199 Kew Road, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3BW, UK Design: John Morgan, [email protected] Acknowledgements The work of establishing a consolidated list of threatened Photo credits European plants was first initiated by Hugh Synge who developed the original database on which this report is based. All images are credited to BGCI with the exceptions of: We are most grateful to Hugh for providing this database to page 5, Nikos Krigas; page 8. Christophe Libert; page 10, BGCI and advising on further development of the list. The Pawel Kos; page 12 (upper), Nikos Krigas; page 14: James exacting task of inputting data from national Red Lists was Hitchmough; page 16 (lower), Jože Bavcon; page 17 (upper), carried out by Chris Cockel and without his dedicated work, the Nkos Krigas; page 20 (upper), Anca Sarbu; page 21, Nikos list would not have been completed. Thank you for your efforts Krigas; page 22 (upper) Simon Williams; page 22 (lower), RBG Chris. We are grateful to all the members of the European Kew; page 23 (upper), Jo Packet; page 23 (lower), Sandrine Botanic Gardens Consortium and other colleagues from Europe Godefroid; page 24 (upper) Jože Bavcon; page 24 (lower), Frank who provided essential advice, guidance and supplementary Scumacher; page 25 (upper) Michael Burkart; page 25, (lower) information on the species included in the database.
    [Show full text]
  • Cotoneaster Apiculatus
    Cotoneaster apiculatus - Cranberry Cotoneaster (Rosaceae) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cotoneaster apiculatus is a low arching to mounding Fruits shrub, with glossy small leaves and prominent -red, maturing in late Aug. and a very effective globular red fruits. Cranberry Cotoneaster is often contrast in late summer and early autumn while the utilized as an edging or facer shrub or as a tall foliage is still a glossy dark green groundcover. -0.25" diameter and persistent into early winter -effective display when in mass plantings FEATURES Twigs Form -red-purple with persistent pubescence -low sprawling -older stems olive-brown and lenticeled deciduous shrub or -branches continuously arching with numerous side moderately tall branchlets woody groundcover -buds very small -maturing at 1.5' tall Trunk x 5' wide -not applicable -arching mound and spreading mound USAGE growth habit, with Function branches sometimes -shrub or groundcover effective as an edging, facer, rooting as they touch the ground embankment, mass planting, low barrier, foundation, wall, or -slow growth rate raised planter (short cascading effect) woody plant Culture Texture -full sun to partial shade -fine texture in foliage but medium when bare -prefers moist, well-drained soils but is very urban -open density in foliage and when bare stress tolerant, including poor soils, soil pHs, drought, Assets pruning, salt spray, and some soil compaction -lustrous dark green foliage -propagated by rooted cuttings
    [Show full text]
  • Ultra Competitive Plants
    Ultra Competitive Plants Data Sheet No 2: Cotoneaster species Cotoneaster species are widely used by landscape architects as both trees and shrubs. Whilst most of these species are useful and attractive plants, there are however, five species that pose significant problems for designed and ‘natural’ environments throughout the UK. The chief problem is that they have the potential to spread widely and outcompete native flora in areas such as heaths, exposed hillsides and dune systems. As such their use should be carefully considered and actions prescribed in management plans to ensure that they do not escape the designed environment. Relevant legislation All five invasive species of Cotoneaster are listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act in England and Wales and it is therefore an offence to plant or otherwise cause to grow these species in the wild. However, some Schedule 9 plants are widely available in nurseries but are rarely advertised as such and landscape architects should ensure that they are aware of the implications of using these plants inappropriately or without understanding the risks. In addition, many Cotoneaster species in addition to the five species identified here are monitored by the Non Native Species Secretariat, whilst many species meet the criteria for being listed as an Article 4 species in the EU Invasive Alien Species Regulation and as such, may soon be subject to these conditions. In any case, as a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the UK has a duty to manage pathways to prevent the introduction and establishment of alien invasive species under Article 9 of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.
    [Show full text]
  • Italian Botanist 10 Supplementary Data to Notulae to the Italian Alien Vascular Flora: 10 Edited by G
    Italian Botanist 10 Supplementary data to Notulae to the Italian alien vascular flora: 10 Edited by G. Galasso, F. Bartolucci Categories concerning the occurrence status of taxa follow Galasso et al. (2018). 1. Nomenclatural updates Family Nomenclature according to Revised nomenclature References/Note Galasso et al. (2018) Fabaceae Acacia dealbata Link subsp. Acacia dealbata Link Hirsch et al. (2017, 2018, 2020) dealbata Pinaceae Abies nordmanniana (Steven) Abies nordmanniana (Steven) Another subspecies exists Spach Spach subsp. nordmanniana Asteraceae Centaurea iberica Spreng. subsp. Centaurea iberica Trevir. ex iberica Spreng. subsp. iberica Poaceae Digitaria ischaemum (Schreb. ex Digitaria ischaemum (Schreb.) Synonym of Digitaria violascens Schweigg.) Muhlenb. var. Muhl. var. violascens (Link) Link violascens (Link) Radford Radford Poaceae Gigachilon polonicum Seidl ex Gigachilon polonicum (L.) Seidl Synonym of Triticum turgidum Á.Löve subsp. dicoccon ex Á.Löve subsp. dicoccon L. subsp. dicoccon (Schrank ex (Schrank) Á.Löve (Schrank) Á.Löve, comb. inval. Schübl.) Thell. Poaceae Gigachilon polonicum Seidl ex Gigachilon polonicum (L.) Seidl Synonym of Triticum turgidum Á.Löve subsp. durum (Desf.) ex Á.Löve subsp. durum (Desf.) L. subsp. durum (Desf.) Husn. Á.Löve Á.Löve Poaceae Gigachilon polonicum Seidl ex Gigachilon polonicum (L.) Seidl Synonym of Triticum turgidum Á.Löve subsp. turanicum ex Á.Löve subsp. turanicum L. subsp. turanicum (Jakubz.) (Jakubz.) Á.Löve (Jakubz.) Á.Löve Á.Löve & D.Löve Poaceae Gigachilon polonicum Seidl ex Gigachilon polonicum (L.) Seidl Synonym of Triticum turgidum Á.Löve subsp. turgidum (L.) ex Á.Löve subsp. turgidum (L.) L. subsp. turgidum Á.Löve Á.Löve Balsaminaceae Impatiens cristata auct., non Impatiens tricornis Lindl. Akiyama and Ohba (2016); it is Wall.
    [Show full text]
  • Alien Flora of Europe: Species Diversity, Temporal Trends, Geographical Patterns and Research Needs
    Preslia 80: 101–149, 2008 101 Alien flora of Europe: species diversity, temporal trends, geographical patterns and research needs Zavlečená flóra Evropy: druhová diverzita, časové trendy, zákonitosti geografického rozšíření a oblasti budoucího výzkumu Philip W. L a m b d o n1,2#, Petr P y š e k3,4*, Corina B a s n o u5, Martin H e j d a3,4, Margari- taArianoutsou6, Franz E s s l7, Vojtěch J a r o š í k4,3, Jan P e r g l3, Marten W i n t e r8, Paulina A n a s t a s i u9, Pavlos A n d r i opoulos6, Ioannis B a z o s6, Giuseppe Brundu10, Laura C e l e s t i - G r a p o w11, Philippe C h a s s o t12, Pinelopi D e l i p e t - rou13, Melanie J o s e f s s o n14, Salit K a r k15, Stefan K l o t z8, Yannis K o k k o r i s6, Ingolf K ü h n8, Hélia M a r c h a n t e16, Irena P e r g l o v á3, Joan P i n o5, Montserrat Vilà17, Andreas Z i k o s6, David R o y1 & Philip E. H u l m e18 1Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, Aberdeenshire AB31 4BW, Scotland, e-mail; [email protected], [email protected]; 2Kew Herbarium, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AB, United Kingdom; 3Institute of Bot- any, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, CZ-252 43 Průhonice, Czech Republic, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]; 4Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Viničná 7, CZ-128 01 Praha 2, Czech Republic; e-mail: [email protected]; 5Center for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]; 6University of Athens, Faculty of Biology, Department of Ecology & Systematics, 15784 Athens, Greece, e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]; 7Federal Environment Agency, Department of Nature Conservation, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria, e-mail: [email protected]; 8Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Department of Community Ecology, Theodor-Lieser- Str.
    [Show full text]
  • 15. PHOTINIA Lindley, Trans. Linn. Soc. London 13: 96, 103. 1821.1 石楠属 Shi Nan Shu Lu Lingdi (陆玲娣 Lu Ling-Ti); Stephen A
    Flora of China 9: 121–137. 2003. 15. PHOTINIA Lindley, Trans. Linn. Soc. London 13: 96, 103. 1821.1 石楠属 shi nan shu Lu Lingdi (陆玲娣 Lu Ling-ti); Stephen A. Spongberg Pourthiaea Decaisne. Trees or shrubs, deciduous or evergreen. Winter buds small; scales imbricate, few. Leaves alternate, simple, papery or leathery, venation camptodromous, margin serrate, rarely entire, shortly petiolate; stipules present, usually subulate. Inflorescences terminal, umbellate or corymbose, rarely shortly paniculate, many flowered, sometimes flowers 2- or 3-clustered or solitary. Hypanthium cupular or campanulate to cylindric, adnate to ovary or free near apex. Sepals 5, persistent, short. Petals 5, contorted or imbricate in bud, base clawed. Stamens usually ca. 20. Carpels 2–5, rarely 1; ovary semi-inferior, (1 or)2–5-loculed, in fruit free apically or to 1/3 length; styles (1 or)2–5, free or ± connate, short, dilated apically; stigmas truncate; ovules 2 per locule, erect. Fruit a pome, globose, ovoid, or ellipsoid, somewhat fleshy, (1- or)2–5-loculed, free from calyx only near apex or to 1/3 length, with persistent, incurved sepals; carpel crustaceous or membranous, each locule 1- or 2-seeded; seeds erect, testa leathery; cotyledons plano-convex. About 60 species: E, S, and SE Asia, also in Mexico; 43 species (32 endemic) in China. Wu Zhengyi (editor’s note) believes that Pourthiaea is morphologically distinct from Photinia and should be treated as a separate genus. Many species of Photinia are ornamental trees and shrubs with large lustrous leaves and attractive white flowers in the spring followed by red fruits in the autumn.
    [Show full text]
  • Wa Shan – Emei Shan, a Further Comparison
    photograph © Zhang Lin A rare view of Wa Shan almost minus its shroud of mist, viewed from the Abies fabri forested slopes of Emei Shan. At its far left the mist-filled Dadu River gorge drops to 500-600m. To its right the 3048m high peak of Mao Kou Shan climbed by Ernest Wilson on 3 July 1903. “As seen from the top of Mount Omei, it resembles a huge Noah’s Ark, broadside on, perched high up amongst the clouds” (Wilson 1913, describing Wa Shan floating in the proverbial ‘sea of clouds’). Wa Shan – Emei Shan, a further comparison CHRIS CALLAGHAN of the Australian Bicentennial Arboretum 72 updates his woody plants comparison of Wa Shan and its sister mountain, World Heritage-listed Emei Shan, finding Wa Shan to be deserving of recognition as one of the planet’s top hotspots for biological diversity. The founding fathers of modern day botany in China all trained at western institutions in Europe and America during the early decades of last century. In particular, a number of these eminent Chinese botanists, Qian Songshu (Prof. S. S. Chien), Hu Xiansu (Dr H. H. Hu of Metasequoia fame), Chen Huanyong (Prof. W. Y. Chun, lead author of Cathaya argyrophylla), Zhong Xinxuan (Prof. H. H. Chung) and Prof. Yung Chen, undertook their training at various institutions at Harvard University between 1916 and 1926 before returning home to estab- lish the initial Chinese botanical research institutions, initiate botanical exploration and create the earliest botanical gardens of China (Li 1944). It is not too much to expect that at least some of them would have had personal encounters with Ernest ‘Chinese’ Wilson who was stationed at the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard between 1910 and 1930 for the final 20 years of his life.
    [Show full text]
  • Relative Ranking of Ornamental Flower Plants to Foraging Honey Bees (With Notes on Favorability to Bumble Bees)
    Relative Ranking of Ornamental Flower Plants to Foraging Honey Bees (With Notes on Favorability to Bumble Bees) Whitney Cranshaw Colorado State University Observations were made during the 2007-2009 growing seasons on the relative attractiveness of various flowering ornamental plants to honey bees (Apis mellifera). This information was collected so that honey bee favorability - or lack of favorability - may be considered in plant selection. The study was conducted by repeated visits to public garden plantings in Larimer, Denver, Adams, and Cheyenne counties. Gardens were chosen that had large mass plantings of numerous flowering plants so that comparisons could be made and included the Denver Botanic Garden, gardens at Colorado State University (PERC, Flower Demonstration Planting), Welby Gardens, and Cheyenne Botanic Garden. These sites also were chosen because plantings had identification labeling. Plantings were visited between 2 and 12 times between mid-June and mid-September. Evaluations were made by examining plants that were in flower for the presence of honey bees. A planting was then given a relative ranking based on honey bee numbers. A 0-3 scale was used: 3 - Heavily visited by foraging honey bees 2 - Moderately visited by honey bees and foraged 1 - Honey bees seen occasionally visiting flowers 0 - Honey bees do not forage at these flowers Data were collected from a total of 319 different plant entries durig this study. Variation in rankings between dates did occur; where this occurred from multiple ratings the final ranking was rounded up to a whole number. Numerous other bees and other insects were commonly seen on many plants.
    [Show full text]