Hello again Rhizo_1, I did far more reading today than I had planned (not a bad thing, lol). While none of the research that Ive come across was be any means complete or definitive, I did gain several insights to my own practices as well as those of the retail nursery industry as it pertains to "tried and true" methods regarding the transplanting of trees and shrubs. One article, regarding planting "myths and urban legends", detailed the myth that the pruning of woody plants stimulates their growth. Apparently, the overall re-growth of copiously pruned woody plants is less than that of non-pruned ones. That is, pruning doesnt "encourage" growth. It just cues dormant buds to begin growing. Getting back to the subject at hand... I found it interesting in the article regarding the California live oak, Quercus agrifolia, that they had decided not to include the higher initial mortality rate of non-pruned trees in the over-all 10 year study. With the removal of these initial deaths, the bias toward statistical data "for" survival of non-pruned trees was significantly higher than for that of the pruned trees. In this study, both the growth rates and gains for trunk growth and top growth were measured at regular intervals and it was found that the pruned trees, while recovering differently and at differing rates, did in fact show substantial recoveries using "old fashioned" methods. The full details and results cant truly be given at this time, as the "non-pruned" trees have only been in the ground for 5 years, whereas the pruned trees have come through the full 10 year trial period. Although, comparing the 5 year periods, the unpruned group has shown more growth in the girth of their trunks with negligible top growth gains, whereas the pruned group has shown negligible growth in their original girth, yet substantial growth rates of new branches to the point of being near recovery of their tops while also having become nearly established. When factoring in the initial numbers of trees, including the early "shock deaths", there is a higher percentage of survival amongst the "pruned" group of oaks. Reading between the lines is something that I have learned over the years as the most prudent way to weed through such a vast sea of snake oil remedies as well as urban mythologies. Even in the article you linked, there were several practices that were/are very difficult to swallow in any practical sense and give little reason to break from tradition. The "new" recommended practice of administering 1 to 1-1/2 gallon of water, per inch of trunk diameter, per day for the first two weeks after transplanting, every other day for the next three months and then once per week for the remainder of the establishment period is not only excessive, but a task that is quite impractical for most of us. From a purely financial aspect, it is nearly insurmountable... Aside from the watering bills it would incur, if we were to discuss a professionally planted landscape, residential or commercial, youre looking at maintenance fees for the full 3-5 year establishment period for #5 to #15 sized (container) landscape plants. I hope youre not taking this personally, Im just addressing the issues that I see with using a completely opposite planting strategy based on incomplete studies and inconclusive evidence. After all if you look at the over-all results between the two groups, the only thing gained "after initial transplant shock losses" in a ten year period is, as they say, a "push". The whole point of the old method "is" the higher success rate of a larger overall percentage of transplants, which includes surviving initial transplant shock. Thats something that the current evidence has not shown for "non-pruned" transplanting. I also have to add that fungicides had to be added as "part of the process" in order to overcome the fact that copious amounts of water were used to establish the "non-pruned" trees, as well as microrhizzae inoculations. The main point that was reinforced for me, was that the loss of too much root AND top was detrimental to the plants chances of survival, as both the roots and stems store carbohydrates, loosing to high a percentage of "both" was essentially like emptying the cupboards and starving the plant. I firmly believe that when it comes to plants, as well as any other living creature, balance is the answer. This balance was described very well in the article put out by the University of California, Davis, which was looking in to the viability of transplanting fully mature native (CA) live oaks to reestablish ecosystems in newly built urban communities. At the end of the study, both the higher costs as well as the substantial losses and high labor requirements were deemed to involved. In other side by side comparisons, the reactions of pruned vs unpruned transplants were exhibited as having differing rates of recovery "in differing areas at different times". Pruned plants recovered their "rate of growth" quicker, as the balance of root mass to top growth were reached sooner. The unpruned plants top growth was "suppressed" until their roots had regrown to match, which by the way, was measured over a similar amount of time comparatively. Again, this would be considered a "push", if it were not for the demonstrated over-all higher success rate of the plants that were pruned. One point that does seem apparent as being important in any context, is that over pruning can be detrimental in most cases, transplanted or established. I know that I recommended "thinning" to compensate, but I certainly did not mean to sound as though I was recommending butchering. I always start with broken, crossing and dead branches, then thin to a main scaffold system. My newly transplanted trees and shrubs are always kept to a foliated framework that, while reduced by percentage, is still that of the original plants structure, form and over-all size/shape. I certainly dont water at excessive levels, as the vast majority of the plants I plant on our 13 aces are sufficiently distanced from a water supply. So the question then becomes, why would anyone adopt a new system that advocates not pruning transplants and watering at much higher volumes and rates of frequency, when the old system of thinning and modest watering volumes at a lower frequency continues to produce high establishment rates and lower initial mortality rates? If it helps you to understand me, as well as my motivation, I cant recommend something to consumers that I cant back up in practice on my own place. Just out of curiosity I may just try out your proposed method starting tomorrow and see how four newly dug trees survive in a side by side test.Two groups of two, one group will have a pruned and an unpruned tree that will be watered at the recommended "higher rate and frequency", the other group of one pruned and one unpruned will be watered at the typically recommended rate as I normally use. Should be an interesting study. Lord knows there are plenty of trees that require relocation from my woods to my front yard. Gives me a good reason to check on the ginkgo I transplanted to the lower part of my property three weeks ago. ;) Regards & best wishes, Dan

WOW! FROM SEED you say!!! I can see I'll be waiting a few years to see if you can get one to bloom. But I'll be here if the island doesn't sink before then. I don't have a place for a continuous 85F temperature in the day, but if you do the flowering will be beautiful. I wonder what color you have. I see you have a 5 acre Playground. Take lots of pictures so you can look back as it changes over the years. If I was younger I'd be envious and I'd be living between home and the nurseries, always looking for ideas. Hope the kids enjoy it too.......and just maybe you can entice your hubby into your new love. Have fun!

Palmnut, surprised that your Crapes get attacked by animals. I live in 'deer central' and they ignore Crapes completely. My minors were the only in-ground palm that survived last winter. I lost some nice Trachycarpus palms. I even lost some newly planted Crapes, and loquat trees. However, these survived in addition to the Sabal minors... Podocarpus Aspidistra Camellias M. Grandifloras (no issues at all) Algerian ivy Figs Dwarf pomegranate Bay Tree I thought I would have to replace this Dynamite Crape, but it is fine and in full bloom. P.S., I think, our ridiculously deep snows (measured in feet) helped the plants with the ridiculous cold temperatures! This post was edited by njoasis on Fri, Jul 25, 14 at 14:21

Allentown is the northern edge of the growing region for the Indian named culivars of Lagerstromia, breeded for cooler regions, as well as better pest/disease resistance. I have a 'Tonto' that has grown well for me since acquiring it in '02. I do not believe it has been severely tested yet, in regard to winter hardiness, as the winters have been mild. The Indian series is rated for zones 7 to 9, but with the warming trend, you may ok, but a severe winter cannot be ruled out. I grow mine in my hot, FULL-sun south-facing back yard. The flowers do get consumed by Jap. beetles, so I'm forced to spray for that. 'Tonto' Here is a link that might be useful: Lagerstromia indica