the much hated burning bush ...

more specifically.. the winged euonoymous . sp??

see where the winged part comes from ...

an invasive in many areas ... not favored by many in this forum ...

ken

Liable to be the 'Compactus' cultivar.

The 'Compactus' I had did not have very noticeable wings. Is that unusual? I got rid of it because it reseeded prolifically.
I see it used all over in commercial and govt. plantings. I wonder how long before it's declared invasive here.
Mike

Yes, wings on 'Compactus' usually quite reduced. But dense twigginess like in photo typical of 'Compactus', with normal E. alatus having sometimes quite broad wings and usually a more open and large habit. The next thing would be to compare with known correctly labeled examples elsewhere to see where this one falls.

This post was edited by bboy on Fri, Dec 19, 14 at 22:28

This plant, in both its full-size and "dwarf" guises, is rightfully popular, with its invasiveness only coming to light in perhaps the last decade or so. I did not see it as a strong threat to native plant communities until just in the last few years, I discovered an urban ravine full of the stuff.

So while it doesn't have the mobility of say, common buckthorn, it does get around, and as such, should no longer be sold. My state is moving in that direction, with it being unavailable in the populous SE part of the state, and a rolling ban going forward.

Good riddance, especially given the fact that there are fine native Euonymous species, albeit little seen in garden centers, such as E. atropurpurea, which also has one of the better common names-eastern wahoo. You'll be saying wahoo if you are ever able to see this one out in the wetlands in fall and winter, with its brilliant red fall color and fruits. Quite a plant.

+oM

Various Old World trees and shrubs long since seen to have become nuisance plants in eastern North America are still nursery staples on this continent - it seems various wholesale producers have new yellow or purple Japanese barberry selections in particular they are trying to push every few years.

As a subscriber to American Nurseryman,
I always relish the" New Plants" issue, this year's version of which just came out. Pages of new Berberis cultivars! Yes, things change slowly.

+oM

Euonymus alatus 'Compactus' never has extended corky wings. Conformation or density of habit has no relationship to this characteristic of the twigs. There are many selections of the Burning Bush in the eastern half of US that have the exemplary corky wings, and no doubt that some of them are denser in twigginess than the species.

It is always good to temper exclusively west coast experiences against eastern and midwest knowledge, when the subject matter is in the midwest.

Above photo does not show extended wings. And I said

Yes, wings on 'Compactus' usually quite reduced

above.

You think the plants make different wings in different parts of the country? Some things vary regionally and others do not. Where I am has nothing to do with what shrub asked about may or may not be.

I posit that the photo above DOES show extended wings, though without further information I absolutely agree that it doesn't have the widest/biggest wings of a Euonymus alatus individual that I've ever seen. There used to be one sold as 'Monstrosus' from Chicago area nurseries that could be used as a glider.

Here is an image from the Morton Arboretum's herbarium collection that looks similar to the photo above:

http://redwood.mortonarb.org/images/jpg/sheet/4/0035464MOR.jpg

The posted photo above appears to almost taken in "plan view", i.e., directly from above and doesn't provide nearly the information that photos from various other angles might provide.

"Wings" on 'Compactus' are often/always reduced to lines on the twigs - nearly absent. I believe what I see in the photo above does not equate whatsoever with "nearly absent." I'd say they equate with "average winginess" for the species.

I also think the photo angle may create an idea of denser twigginess, but examination of the number of bud breaks along the stem for additional twigs along those main branches shows that there are fewer (far fewer) than one will see on run-of-the-mill 'Compactus' in eastern US landscapes.

I did not suggest that "...the plants make different wings in different parts of the country..." I suggested that when a plant is typically found in abundance in a certain region - and some participants here may have encountered it far more often than other participants - that the seeker of information consider that when assessing the posted information.

I would assert that your evaluation of plants and performance for northwest coastal conditions is superior to many contributors here.

I do believe that plants can express different growth characteristics in different locations (not necessarily winginess of twigs, but certainly things length of shoots during growth spurts) due to common variables like fertility, moisture levels, daylength, etc. Certainly traits like maximum size for a species will be different in the Ohio River valley region than in the Puget Sound region.

Shrub is very common here, I see it all the time. That said, unlike you I am not insisting on any particular matter that cannot be determined from available information being the case - there is no basis for deciding specimen asked about definitely is or isn't 'Compactus'. Anymore than your continuing statements that my geographical location makes my remarks on various topics applicable only to my part of the country. The facts are what they are, and where someone who is stating them lives has nothing to do with it.