Re: Help with Amorphophallus & Sauromatum
- Subject: Re: Help with Amorphophallus & Sauromatum
- From: Paul Tyerman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:06:34 -0600 (CST)
>into one. If a species is this difficult for someone with years of
>experience working with plants to get rid of in a garden bed, I am going
>err on the side of safety and call it an invasive. Once it gets somewhere
>where nobody annually removes the inflorescence and you add sexual
>reproduction and animal dispersal of seed to the equation, I will bet it
>is invasive by any definition, at least in Puget Sound area of Washington.
One thing immediately sprung to mind on reading your comments above.......
something that multiplies like crazy in a garden situation due to the
higher rates of fertiliser water and reduction in natural weeds does nto
necessarily multiply like that "in the wild". I'm not criticising in any
way, just mentioning that the conditions we grow plants in naturally
provide a better than average growing condition so the performance of any
plant in a garden situation does not necessarily mean that it will take
over in areas given different situations. I will only mention that as I
think that this has been said elsewhere (I lose track of which mailing list
particular emails come from.... this has been discussed on a number of
different ones) but I thought it was at least worth mentioning.
I would also note..... my above statement does not mean that it ISN'T going
to be invasive either, just that plentiful production in a garden situation
does not "necesarily" mean the same results in the wild, evne in the same
geographic area and climate.
Canberra, Australia. USDA equivalent - Zone 8/9
Growing.... Galanthus, Erythroniums, Fritillarias, Cyclamen, Crocus,
Cyrtanthus, Liliums, Hellebores, Aroids, Irises plus just about anything
else that doesn't move!!!!!