It's beautiful, Gill. Mine has lost a lot of colour over winter, and is just showing new variegation now.

Thanks for explaining that, Josh. I'm not so sure I agree with that ~about planting & eventually them all growing the same shape. I'm experimenting now...especially with 'Hobbit' & 'Gollum' ~the larger versions on the market today (with cute cultivar names). I still need to get one I have in a pot PIG'd in the front yard for this experiment. :) My dogs keep knocking off branches. Crassula ovata & variants have variable leaves. Some of you who collect them still ascertain they are obliqua & other species, but I still believe they are ovata (& those are synonyms). Just my humble opinion. You're allowed to have yours. :)

Thanks for the pic, Gill. Pretty plant! Now, see...I would call that 'Tricolor', showing it's 3rd color! I hope I don't stir up any dust or ruffle any feathers. As I said, it's just my opinion. Plants should be WAY different from each other to earn a cultivar name. Then, it needs to be published to be valid.

Camellia, the leaf size is the same as my 'Hummel's Sunset'. Overall look is the same, but for the stripes! Though, my most recent purchase of 'H. S.' leaves seem larger. I'll have to go measure them! :D

Again, thanks to everyone for your input! I really appreciate it!

Gill's Hummel's Ghost looks like mine, but more variegated at the moment, although this is changing already. My Hummel's Ghost' has different leaves from my Hummel's Sunset. In shape. Just sayin'....:)

I hope you didn't think I meant that a 'Hobbit' would develop a 'Gollum' leaf, et cetera. The 'Hobbit' would retain its 'Hobbit' leaf, but all the 'Hobbit' would begin to look like eachother. I've noticed this over the years....although I might purchase or acquire a 'Hobbit' with very large leaves at first, a year or two in the same exposure and those longer leaves become the same length as my other 'Hobbit' leaves. Same with the various 'Crosby's Compact' I've acquired....they all normalize within a few years.

As for the oblique leafed Jades, yes, they are C. ovata. Crassula ovata variation obliqua. I know I'm guilty of omitting the "ovata" for shortening's sake, but should be writing Crassula ovata obliqua variegata 'Tricolor' when talking about that particular variety.

On Gill's plant, I think the leaves are a bit too round and not stiff enough for 'Tricolor.'

Josh

I tend to write just obliqua as well but that is what I am referring to when I do, as Josh mentioned. I have both regular C. ovata obliqua and the variegate, 'Tricolor'.

You can see how different this little guy is from regular C. ovata. You can't see from the picture but the underside of the leaves maintain a deep red color.

-Erica

Are those leaves shiny or matte, Erica?

Well I wouldn't say they are matte, but they aren't as shiny as regular C. ovata leaves either. The way I bought it lead me to believe this actually grew from a propagated 'Tricolor' leaf. It was in the same pot with this plant:

In the background you can actually see that red underside I mentioned. (You have to blow up the picture to see it).

-Erica

Marguerite, I'm guessing you meant your: "Hummel's Sunset has different leaves from my Hummel's" Ghost. :)

Josh, no, I didn't think you meant 'Hobbit' or 'Gollum' would take on the shape of ovata. I still disagree, but experimentation is needed. I think if I put various plants in the ground with same lighting, water, care...they will still have variations in leaf shape & length. Now, if comparing in a pot to in the ground, big differences because of stunted growth (I have seen already). On any one plant, whether in pot or in the ground, there are differences in leaf shape & length. That's why identifying them is SO much fun!

To me, obliqua should not be used at all. It is a synonym for ovata, which has an extremely variable leaf. I've had this discussion before with someone here. That's why I said just IMHO. I believe if it is written correctly, would be Crassula ovata 'Tricolor'. If you were going to write it out as you indicated, it would have been: Crassula ovata var. obliqua f. variegata OR Crassula ovata var. obliqua 'Tricolor'. But, I don't believe there is a variety obliqua. So, I suppose we can agree to disagree. :D

Interesting thread/discussion! :)

Rosemarie, your plant looks very similar to my plant that I had bought as a variegated Hummel's Sunset. I can't remember if the red/pink faded into the leaves as much as yours when I received it. I hope I can duplicate the culture to get it to turn colors this year. It would be very interesting.

Rosemarie, you're quite right, thanks for pointing out the typo.

To me, the 'Akai' jade much discussed here recently resembles my Hummel's Ghost. I don't know if Hummel's Ghost came from Hummel's Sunset, but they do not seem to have much in common, to me. Your plant above, the subject of this thread, seems to have leaves more oblique than those of Hummel's Sunset, and is one of the reasons, besides the particular variegation, that makes me think of Solana.

Thanks for the reply above, Erica. I think you are right, your plant may well be a reversion from Tricolor.

Camellia, hope you can get yours to turn color this year. Always better than plain green (or plain variegated), I think! :D

After my last post, I went outside to snap pix of all my variegated Crassula. One hundred or so pix later, I'm back in the house! Whew! I have several 'Tricolor' PIG (planted In Ground) & several in pots (which have been for SO long, they are small leaves & look pathetic). I have a larger potted plant that will be PIG soon. Same goes for 'Hummel's Sunset' ~some PIG, some waiting for me to plant out. ALSO, discovered the variegated plant I bought just last week is tagged Red Jade, 'Akai Jade' Crassula argentea hybrid. (argentea also an obsolete synonym for ovata) Now, IT looks somewhat like the 1st plant I posted above when new, but swap out the yellow for white. It also has a bit of red on a few tips. Then I compared to a Crassula platyphylla f. variegata I have, & it could pass for that one as well (a sprig of it originally looked like a variegated sport-now dead sprig) that could pass for this 'Akai'. Are we confused enough yet?? Whee hee! I also have a 'Red Jade' that actually retained most of its red through the year. Give me a few minutes to proess & select pix & 'll be back with a mini show!

Thanks for a new name to look up, Marguerite...Solana!

Anxiously awaiting pictures!

It is my understanding that Solana is a cultivar of C. ovata var. obliqua. Similar to Tricolor with distinctively different variegation.

Agree to disagree about the use of obliqua :).

-Erica

WooHoo! Picture show! We LOVE picture shows, especially of Jades....are they posted...are they posted yet? LOL

Okay, many pix & rusty at this...so I'll try to upload the pix first & add #s & text in a bit. Numbers are above the pix -so you can match my comments to them. (PIG = Planted In Ground)
1 PIG front yard, retains red color -more red at some times of year than others

7 PIG, 1 part lighter green than other, & 3rd part is something else altogether

8 PIG front yard

9 as suggested, perhaps a variegated 'H.S'

10 just more detail

11 another PIG in front yard, detail

13 fr yd PIG

14 new, big pot

Rosemarie, I really like colors of your Hummel's Sunset and Red jade.
Rina

Rosemarie - Thanks for the pictures :) I just love that Red Jade!

In number 7 you mention an unidentified plant. I think it looks like a Cotyledon orbiculata possibly?

-Erica

Thanks, Rina & Erica. Figured there has to be something in the bunch that one could like. :)

Erica, I believe it is another Crassula ovata, just not a 'Tricolor'. It has the telltale hydathodes (pores?) of a Crassula. If it does bloom like a Cotyledon, I'll change my mind! :D

Really lovely plants, Rosemarie.

Lovely...Absolutely, lovely Jades! The colors are so wonderful! I like how you can show the different variations of the Tricolor. I'm wondering if the Akai jade's variations are like Tricolor or just a regular variegated jade. I love how variegated your Akai jade is. Just lovely!

Thanks, Marguerite & Camellia. Glad you like the colors, the plants & the show. :)

Rosemarie, are your Tricolors different clones? 11, 15 and 16 look more ovate than oblique.

I suppose I should say yes, Marguerite, as most times, they are bought from different places. 15 is a detail shot from the plant in 16 & 11 is a detail view of the plant in 12. Those 2 particular plants were bought from the different places ~ one, a smaller nursery, catering to landscaping biz & the other from a new outfit that opened in an old gas station (being supplied by several nurseries. There's no way to track where they're coming from. Anytime I see variegated plants, they become cart-jumpers! :D

I can say, that on any given plant of mine, you will find both ovate & oblique-shaped leaves. As I said before, ovata has an extremely variable leaf shape & is the reason I say (& believe) there really is no separation of an obliqua species (or variety). I suppose I could find pix of them when first bought them & find out whether there is a difference between then & now. BUT...I have my hubby home...having been bucked off our 2-year-old colt (not once, but twice) yesterday. Big OUCH! I've got my nurse-maid cap on today! Jumping in & out of the forum. :)

Oh, poor him. I see exactly what you mean - I get ovate and oblique leaves on my Tricolor, which confused me initially. My tiny Crassula ovata variegata is all ovate leaves - which leads me to think that Tricolor appeared on an ovate-leaved plant and any ovate leaves on Tricolor are reversions. Then of course, I saw somewhere a Crassula ovata variegata 'Tricolor'......:)

Awesome collection, Rosemarie! I really appreciate that you captured and posted all these images. Indeed, my idea about leaf-shapes normalizing in the same location is just a working hypothesis with anecdotal evidence gathered from my own growing area. Your yard will be a perfect "laboratory" to see if the hypothesis bears out.

Josh

Yes, Marguerite, enough "different" Crassula to make our heads spin! :P

Thanks, Josh. I hope I do better at documenting the plants & changes over time. Goodness knows, I have enough photos of all my plants, & they ARE dated...but getting them into some order is quite the challenge...for me, anyway...as I have SO many fingers in SO many pots these days. I just hope my PIG Lab does not suffer too much neglect from me & I can come up with some results to share.

Fantastic show of jades...I have a bad case of Jade envy now, so many variegates to oggle! They are a rarity here in the UK. Thanks for posting :)

Gill UK

Seriously sweet collection Rosemarie, each one is amazing!! I LOVE the vibrant red on #17 Hummel's Sunset, it's incredible. #9 & 10 ohhh how I wish to find!! Thanks for taking the time to take pics & label them too.

Here's my possible Hummel's Sunsets. They got the best spots in a southern window, and they were thirsty as well... anyways, they delighted me with their new orange-yellow colors.

Wow, Nancy! Beautiful plants! Interesting they're on the albino-side of colors...meaning I haven't seen any with such pale/whiter colors. :) Glad you enjoyed my collection.

Thanks Rosemarie! My guess is indoor sunlight and less of a chill than outdoors gave it less intense coloring. I have a few sibling plants of above, I'll put one outside (will acclimate it to sunlight) to see how it colors up.

When you say sibling plants, Nancy, do you mean they are all cuttings from the same mother plant?

Marguerite, I was not sure how to describe their relationship shortly... but in more detail, 3 years ago I bought a colorful jade with multiple trunks and I split into at least five pots.

Nancy, definitely 'Hummel's Sunset.'

Josh

Hooray, can finally put my suspicion to rest!!! Thanks Josh!

I think it's nice to bump up valuable old threads like this one from time to time, so here goes !

It would be great to see these wonderful jades after another growing season. marguerite_gw thank you for bumping this up.....forgot about this thread and some beautiful plants and photos here!

That Hummels belonging to Nancy is such a delicate colour isn't it? It's almost in pastel shades, it's very unusual....and very nice!

Gill

Thank you, woodnative, Nancy actually reminded me about this thread, and it really is worth looking at again - many in the archives are, they are a great resource. I often go there for jade threads when I've time to idle away, or when I am seeking to identify a plant.

Just a quick comment that I noticed what Josh observed myself re: leaf sizes dependent as much on culture/conditions as cultivar.

Two of my oldest Jades are a hobbit and plan green c. ovata from a hardware store. Both had huge (etiolated, I assume) leaves when I obtained them. Once they started pushing new growth for me, I removed the existing leaves and what has grown since then is far more compact and consistent. I do try to give my jades ideal conditions - outside southern sun (zone 7/nyc) during the season and artificially supplemented light over winter.

I also have a similar experience with a "blue hale" (which is likely c. ovata/obliqua ssp undufolitia or whatever the wavy blue jades are actually called), though it is younger than the others so jury is still out.

Have some red horn trees that I recently obtained, with very long/etiolated leaves, they weren't given the best care this summer so growing a bit slow, but very curious to see if the leaves end up longer than my hobbit, as the hobbit's leaves have ended up much smaller under my care. I keep hearing there are 2 kinds of hobbit - big and small, and red horn tree is explicitly the big kind (and I guess there's a plain green big and small, but not a small hummels version?)

Would love to see pix anyone who has hobbit/red horn tree's that have grow for a while and exhibit different leaf sizes (small vs. big). Never seen this demonstrated, just talked about a lot. In another year I might be in a position to see for myself.

I don't however have more of the same cultivars from alternate sources to compare to, but I do think what Josh says is what happens.

Daniel

Hey, Daniel, you're right, the Horn Trees do have consistently longer leaves than 'Hobbit.' You're also correct that there is the large green version, which (as far as I know) is simply called 'Horn Tree,' and then the Hummel's version which is 'Red Horn Tree.'

I have a well-established 'Hobbit' whose leaves are uniformly compact, and I have a 'Red Horn Tree' that I can use for leaf-size comparison.

Josh

'Hobbit' and 'Red Horn Tree'

Oksana

thanks Josh and Oksana, and apologies to Rosemariero for hijacking your thread.

Here are mine currently. Most every leaf currently on the hobbit was grown by me, not so with the red horn trees as of now. And yes, that's maruba photo bombing in the front :)

I expect after another year or two the red horn trees will be much larger than the hobbit, time will tell.

daniel

Beautiful, Daniel - I love the shine on the leaves. I always think it's a shine particular to jades.

Hi Marguerite, now that it's the time of year when colors and flowers come out, maybe time for another jade photo contest? [/me ducks, runs]

You are probably too smart to try organizing something like that again, though in the end it was great.

Daniel

Daniel, thank you, and to me it was great fun, and the 'like' button made it simple. The thing is, would there be enough jade people here to warrant it? Many have decamped for most of the time to a Facebook jade group which I enjoy too, but I've been coming to GW too long to give it up - since 2001. If there is any interest, would you please post here, people.

Had been trying to get on to the site all morning...started to believe I was banned, after a go round with customer service (about editing/deleting our posts/pix). Finally got back...after friend told me they were having trouble as well.

Interesting!! Once I posted this, it has option of edit/delete...but not for any previous comments! Sheesh!

Sorry to say ~I will no longer post my photos here if I don't have the capability to edit/delete them down the road. That, in essence, makes them property of this site. Not good! Not okay with me!

Most of the forums I've been on only allow editing for anywhere from an hour or two to a few days. The reasoning, as I understand it, is that threads quickly become incoherent if people go back and change content that people have already responded to. Or something like that.

OTOH, forum administrators can always delete content for privacy or if you don't want something you said out there for some reason, so long as it's reasonable to do it, though Houzz could be so hands off that they don't actually have someone on staff with the time to keep up with the demands.