This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: 'native' plants vs.. 'other' plants

On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, Sean A. O'Hara wrote:

> The recent discussion about the 'ease' of growing native (or not!)
> has inspired me to taken my e-pen in hand . . . (bare with me) ;-)
> 
> All plants are 'native' - to some part of the world. 

This is true, up to a point.  Disregarding hybrids which never occur in
nature for many reasons, there is also the issue of changes in a plant
when it is grown from seed in cultivation far from its habitat.

A thread in the Carnivorous Plants group illustrated this.  Insect-eating
plants are a group that are threatened in many areas of the world
including the U.S., because their habitats (bogs) tend to be looked upon
as 'waste' land and are drained, destroying the habitat.  What is in
cultivation represents only a very small part of the gene pool to begin
with, the population coming from those is limited genetically.

In addition if I take seed from some of these plants and grow them in,
say, Seattle for instance, :) it's likely that I like any other
horticulurist, will select the plants that are the most robust.  There are
going to plenty of plants that don't do well here, and they are not
necessarily the ones that would have done well in a bog in Alabama.  After
3 or four generations, you can be almost sure that it's not the same
plant.  This is not a statement against keeping threatened plants in
existence in cultivation; it's just a statement that the plants, unless
they are clones of the original, are *not* the plants from the area any
more, and have very likely been selected for traits that would not let
them prosper as well in their home habitats.

When plant collectors are looking for new garden-worthy plants in the
wild, a very important consideration is provenance - what part of their
range one collects plants from.  Plants from lower down a mountain might
not be as hardy in another country as those collected higher up where
winters are colder.  The cold hardiness might actually be the only feature
worth noting among plants that otherwise look the same.

In Turkey last year, I collcted lots of a variety of Malva sylvestris from
high up on Baba Dag mountain in the southwest.  It was a low
ground-hugging form that made big mats.  (Lots of alpine forms of things
have smaller leaves and small stature - you should have seen the chamomile
up there! Actually, you can in my home page).  I brought the seed back and
sure enough, it still has the low mat form and tiny leaves but it's not
very happy at low elevations and not-so-intense light of Seattle.  The
lower-elevation forms of the same species have absolutely no trouble here;
they can be weedy actually.  

So the point is, if you are going to try natives, provenance is another
important thing to keep in mind; unless there is something outstanding
about a particular form, try to collect seed from plants in the part of
their range that most nearly resembles your own; that way they will have
less adapting to do.

Bob
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index