Experimentation is fine if it is based on understanding the peculiar aspects of what ever plant we are dealing with. When it comes to Australian native Proteaceae plants there are unique considerations that need to be taken into account. Once we have an understanding of these characteristics then by all means we can take advantage of them. Experimenting blindly is not nearly as constructive. Australian Proteaceae plants are sensitive to Phosphorous to varying degrees. BUT it all makes sense if we are aware of what their original environment was. Proteaceae from the skeletal sandstone soils that have always been very low in nutrients, especially phosphorous, have over thousands of years, developed special adaptions known as proteiod roots. They are noticeably different. (I shall spare you further details about Proteiod roots, but a Google might give you more.) Plants developed these in order to maximise the surface root area so they can absorb the scarce nutrients that may be present in these sandstone derived soils. However in the more nutrient rich rainforest zones it is quite possible that Proteaceae are more tolerant of nutrients and maybe even Phosphorous. I always err on the side of avoiding common fertilisers with high rates of phosphorous. Even chook poo can cause problems, although I do give my rainforest plants a dose of Dynamic Lifter once a year. For example, I find Banksia ericifolia to be very sensitive while some Grevilleas are a bit more tolerant. As for your last remark Nathan I assume it is a joke. Anyone being wrong, should not inferr anyone is not wanted.

Hello again Rodaf, I've done a little research and come up with the following list. A couple reinforce my previous thoughts. I think you may already have considered and discounted some of the others, and some may be long shots. But if I was in your position, I would try them all and see how I went. Cheers, Frank Angophora floribunda Geijera parviflora Brachychiton populneus ssp. Populneus Brachychiton rupestris Brachychiton australis Petalostigma triloculare Flindersia maculosa Flindersia australis Atalaya hemiglauca Pittosporum phylliraeoides Pittosporum rhombifolium Santalum lanceolatum Ficus platypoda var. platypoda Erythrina vespertilio Agathis robusta Grevillea robusta Euroschinus falcata var. falcata Callitris glaucophylla syn. C. columellaris var. campestris Araucaria cunninghamii Syzygium corynanthum

Here's a list of plants which are said to do well in low light levels, and might be happier in the short days of a Melbourne winter than some others. The asterisks mark the ones which are best at the low light thing. They are all rather undemanding about water, and grow well in "dry" rainforests, so score well on "waterwise" listings. Acronychia oblongifolia Alchornea ilicifolia Alectryon tomentosus Alyxia ruscifolia* Arytera distylis Auranticarpa rhombifolia Baloghia inophylla Canthium buxifolium Cordyline species Croton insularis Cryptocarya microneura * Elattostachys xylocarpa Ficus coronata * Ficus rubiginosa * Flindersia species Glochidion fernandi* Harpullia species Homalanthus nutans Melicope micrococca Neolitsea dealbata Auranticarpa rhombifolia Psychotria loniceroides * Rapanea variabilis Almost all of these are either small trees or shrubs. Ficus coronata is a non-strangling fig which is said have the best flavoured fruits of all the natives, as well as being small enough to grow in a suburban garden. F.rubiginosa is a small strangler - one of those things that is good in a pot and you can do arty things with the lovely snakey roots, but you wouldn't actually want it in the ground near any foundations. (I imagine all the potted figs would do really well in the situation you are proposing). Best of luck. Trish.

I suggest Melicope elleryana. The link shows a few images. It has a corky looking bark and the tree is reasonably open, so I think it would suit your criteria. Cheers, Frank Here is a link that might be useful: Melicope elleryana