I am very interested in doing a trade with you. I do have quite a few heucheras , but have never traded them before so am unsure of how you divide them to do so.

Yeah, I had a suspicion it was a scam so made a post just in case. Thanks for confirming everyone. Not a very smart person to have provided us with the apartment shipping address just to get some freebies. To stoop so low is a pitty. I would have gladly given them for free if asked nicely. The person will create new accounts, but that name, address, and city is on my do not associate list...hehehe. Sad to see these sort of things happen here but it's just one insignificant bad apple. In the future I will check the age, posts, and contributions of the person before trading with him/her. Now back to the business of trading and growing great plants or experimenting with new ones. Cheers!

Lacebark, Inc., P.O. Box 2383. Stillwater, OK 74076 Much has been written in recent years about the need to plant only "native" species. But the key questions are often overlooked. Is a plant best adapted to where it is "native"? Once urban soils have become homogenized and modified with all sorts of construction debris, is any plant "native" to that site? Are all introduced species "bad"? Shouldnt adaptation of a plant to a site or region be considered instead of just "native" vs. exotic? Just because a plant is "native" to an area, does that mean that the location/conditions are where is grows best? All these are questions that need to be considered. Our focus should be on plants adapted to a site and with acceptable "manners" relative to the desired purpose. The plant that grows best on a site may or may not be the most desirable and it may be a native or it may be an exotic. In many instances I feel requirement is often confused with tolerance. For example, my research that created the micronutrient fertilizer, Micromax, was done with tomato and pyracantha only. That was in 1978. Micromax has been the number 1 selling micronutrient fertilizer in the world for years. How can it be that research data from one vegetable and one woody shrub relates to thousands of species worldwide? I believe it is because all or nearly all plants have the same requirement for optimum micronutrient nutrition. To study this question I have grown an array of species of plants with a wide array of micronutrient levels. Azaleas were dark green and thrived in a narrow band of micronutrient levels. The same was true for African violet and blueberry. On the other hand, juniper, arborvitae, marigold, and crabgrass were green and attractive over a huge range of micronutrient levels, hundreds of times wider than for the azalea. BUT all of the test species grew best with the same level and combination. These data support the view that plants have vastly different degrees of tolerance, yet for optimum growth, about the same requirement. Now consider the initial questions raised: Is a plant best adapted to where it is native? If a plant grows faster, produces more flowers and seeds which germinate readily and establish new plants more rapidly in a new location vs. where it is native to which site is it best adapted? The new location of course! This is exactly the situation with the Melaluca leucadendron or punk tree in south Florida vs. its native habitat of Australia. In its native range in Australia, it is not an aggressive, invasive tree. A striking reverse situation exists with Pinus radiata, Monterey pine, native to the California coast where it grows at a moderate pace and is not especially vigorous. Yet in New Zealand and South Australia, Monterey pine grows vigorously and creates magnificent timber. A study of fossils reveals that many plants were "native" to locations far removed from were they are currently "native". Conditions change and with the change plant species shift or adapt. Just because a plant is "native" to a site does not necessarily mean that site and conditions are optimum for its growth. Once urban soils have become homogenized and modified with construction debris is any plant "native" to that site? No, other than crabgrass and then only because it has, perhaps, the widest tolerance of all species. On the other hand, many species have such a wide tolerance that they can grow reasonably well under such adversity. For example, southern wax myrtle, Myrica cerifera, is native over a wide range of conditions throughout the southeast USA. It is native to the almost pure sand soils of the Ocala National Forest in north central Florida, to stream banks where flooding frequently occurs, to alkaline soils along limestone outcroppings and acid soils along the swamps of southern Georgia. This is a species with a huge tolerance for growing conditions, and it does well in nearly all urban conditions. In order to have successful plantings on highly disturbed urban sites, we must look to plants with a wide range of tolerance. Along with wax myrtle, one of the most tolerant and adaptable shrub species that works well is Nandina domestica, native to China. Nandina would be at the very top of my list of broadleaf evergreen shrubs with many attractive qualities and good mannersÂnative or non-native. Nandina has attractive foliage, flowers, and fruits, is nearly disease- and insect-free, produces few invasive seedlings or rhizomes, is easy to maintain, and grows well in a huge range of conditions. Are all introduced species "bad"? Absolutely not. Nandina, lacebark elm, Chinese pistache, Pittosporum tobira, and on and on are introduced species that are well adapted to much of North America that have good manners and make good "citizens". On the other hand, melaluca, tree of heaven, Japanese honeysuckle, kudzu vine, and many other species are too well adapted: grow too vigorously and reproduce too freely so as to be undesirable in the view of current day society. The bottom line is that just because a plant is growing "native" under certain conditions, does not mean that it is at its peak or optimum. It simply means that it is able to tolerate the current conditions and survive. Further, relative to the evolution of the species and the changing local site conditions or site conditions of a much larger region, the species may be relatively "new" and will become more vigorous and aggressive in the future as conditions become more favorable or it may be on its way out because it has reached its limits of tolerance and will eventually become extinct. At this point in time no one knows. However, we get a "feel" for the answer from various experiences. Because of the positive plant response and adaptation to such an array of conditions, southern wax myrtle appears to be still expanding its "native" environment. On the other hand, black cherry, Prunus serrotina, appears to be less and less tolerant to environmental conditions and may become extinct in another century or two. In my view, it would be simplistic and foolish to plant only natives. Likewise, it would be foolish to plant only introduced species. Our focus should be on species adapted to the site and with acceptable manners regardless of where they happen to be "native at a particular time in the glob al picture. ------------ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl Whitcomb is author of ÂKnow It and Grow It: a guide to the identification and use of landscape plantsÂ, 820 pages, 8.5 by 11 format, hard cover, over 2000 black and white photos of most of the woody plants, native and exotic, that can be grown east of the Rocky Mtns. $60.00 + shipping. Also, ÂEstablishment and Maintenance of Landscape PlantsÂ, 630 pages, 6 by 9 format, hard cover and many photos. $35.00 + shipping. Phone 405-377-3539 or Fax 405-377-0131.

I've taken an interest in learning about Florida gardening because I plan to move down there eventually. What I've read again and again about discouraging nematodes is to maintain a heavy layer of organic mulch. This will eventually break down and improve your soil. Some people mix in cheap clay kitty litter to make their soil heavier. Another possibility is to heavily underplant roses with Marigolds. There is one seed strain of French Marigolds in particular which tested as being very effective at deterring root-knot nematodes -- Tagetes patula 'Ground Control' (aka 'Single Gold'). The one caveat is that the effects won't be seen until the following year, and to maintain the effect, you'll want to replant them every year. As far as planting too deep -- I think many here would say I am guilty of this, but there hasn't been any negative effect which I can see. When I was putting this garden together, I planted my roses (own-root bands that were grown-on in pots for a few months) directly into the native soil in late Summer 2013. Prior to planting them, I had laid down sheets of cardboard to smother weeds and grass, and covered that with trimmings from a tree I was cutting back. This accumulated to about three inches, but it was a very "airy" three inches. Over all that, I put down an additional 6-8" of "proper" mulch (partially composted shredded wood chips). At first, I made concave "dishes" around each rose to allow water to be directed towards their roots and keep mulch away from the canes as I kept reading I was supposed to do, but after the first Winter, the beds were pretty much leveled out. In Spring, I worked an additional 2" of composted manure into that layer of mulch. This meant that what was once the border between canes and roots was now about 8-10" below the surface. Why did I do this? I wanted to give the roses an "early start" on having deep roots for getting water, and anticipated that canes buried beneath the mulch line would eventually root further up, allowing for easier access to fertilizer applied at the surface. Companion perennials were planted directly into this "mulch/compost" layer in Spring 2014, and they grew like gangbusters in their first year. Last Autumn, I wanted to continue adding organic matter to the beds, so I "harvested" fallen tree leaves and spread them to a "fluffy" three inches thick. I also started collecting used coffee grounds from Starbucks -- one 13gal kitchen garbage can-full per day -- and spread this about 2-3" over the leaves. It took about three months to complete. Winter snow has packed this down a bit, and the previous year's additions have started breaking down, so where I'm at now is about where I was after the first layer of mulch -- about 6-8" above the original soil line. This week, I started some early pruning. While there is some snow still remaining in half of the garden, where it is gone there was already life in the top layer of coffee grounds and leaves -- various soil critters are waking up and finding lots of food waiting for them. I've noticed some freeze damage (naturally) on some rose canes, but nothing soft and mushy which would indicate "cane rot". True, this could emerge later in the season, but I also never saw it last Spring when the roses' canes were also buried to about the same level. Why is this not harming my roses? Perhaps because what's covering the canes is actively being broken down by the various organisms in the soil, and that process is different than simply being a blanket of "wet" around the rose canes. Worms and critters keep moving the material around, and fungi digesting the material are sopping up the extra moisture. I don't know for sure -- all I can say is that I don't see any negative effects. :-) ~Christopher