Thanks! No risk the soil is too rich...a thin layer of prepared/improved soil that got some pea stone plowed into it at some point, covering rocky sand. Only flaw with the spot is partial shade. Wondering if that kept the older plant from blooming. (Or maybe it was a "foo foo" cultivar.)

I mean a Hibiscus syriacus "Miverva". I figured it could take care of itself, but didn't realize how tall false indigo could get.

Only smaller plants for it smother are some bulbs. Daffodil, liatris, nodding onion, grape hyacinth. Kind of expendable anyway.

Long term plan is to maybe use a tomato cage or perhaps tie the false indigo to the Rose of Sharon when it gets big. The Rose of Sharon leafs out very late and is boring until it flowers in late summer...want to get something pretty growing around it in the Spring. The older baptista came up every year but never bloomed or got big. Like three years old. It's at my moms place, so it could have got weed whacked by landscapers...or died in the drought.

It's hard to imagine a H. syriacus getting outmuscled by much of anything. We have them everywhere in this part of the country -- especially anywhere there is a chain link fence.

I'm curious to hear how your Baptisia fares this year. I've got a number of seed-grown B. australis var. minors (and one B. bracteata) out in the hell strip. This will be their third year, hoping for flowers this year but would be satisfied with some increase in size and stiffer stems.

I wonder if it's possible that the first plant was lacking the appropriate rhizobia.

Rose of Sharon is one of those plants that, on the up side, will grow where nothing else will and make it through a drought with ease, blooming its head off on no water for weeks on end. I discovered this by moving a few, relegating them to the sorry, infertile, shady, crappy areas of my lot, back there in the dry shade where I hate to work because nothing does good back there due to the neighbors unkempt hackberry forest. They also bloom in shade, no surprise. A real cast iron plant if ever there was one. I've since dug them out because....

On the down side, I'm not particularly drawn to them and I don't like seeing the pile of dropped flowers littering the ground (or the seedlings). When we first got this house, there were several growing here. Due to all these factors, I discovered digging them out is not too hard.

Rose of Sharon reminds me of my childhood almost more than any other plant because back in the day before nurseries offering endless plant choices became so common that exotic imports started taking over people's yards here in the midwest, the variety of plants people grew was much simpler. When we were kids everyone had at least one Rose of Sharon and usually more, they were always seen on farms close to the house and I see them on abandoned farms. Another common shrub everyone had was Bridal Wreath Spirea. My parents always took Easter pictures standing in front of ours growing close to the house on Oak Street.

I agree with Woods, it won't be outmuscled by anything. I've seen ones that have trees growing up through the center and they seem to not even notice. There was a particular one up the street in the park that was downright ridiculous looking, not to mention, a real eyesore and every year that tree got bigger until the city came and ripped out the whole ugly mess and hauled it off. Same thing applies to Crepe Myrtle. Those two reliable standby's will stand up to just about anything around here so of course, theres at least one of each in nearly every yard of the entire metroplex although crepe myrtle is more popular.

WoodsTea. I actually did buy rhizobium innoculum and try to apply it.

Neither of mine is seed grown. The one that limped along was a two foot length of taproot I got by mail order and sort of buried in a trench. The one that did well was in a one quart pot. They are in partial shade...so kind of the opposite problem from your "hell strip"

Um, I didn't notice the part shade bit - which is remiss of me because baptisias are not happy in shade at all. I have one which is shaded by a euonymous europaeus which now no longer flowers. Because I am an idle sod and didn't fancy hoiking out the taproot, I plonked a vigorous daylily in front of it and ignored it. A few (non-flowering stems still straggle to the surface every year but not a bloom in sight...whereas Purple Smoke, in full sun, has been a wonderful performer. I couldn't really recommend a tomato cage though - far better would be supports which have a wide mesh top (I use an old metal hanging basket with 4 galvanised steel 'legs' attached). The foliage grows through the mesh and fountains prettily over the top - no part of the hanging basket contraption can be seen when in leaf...but a tomato cage will squash the foliage together for the whole height of the plant...which defeats the purpose of this plants graceful growth habit.

Although they grow tall(ish) no baptisia matches a fully grown hibiscus for height - your idea of growing nicely underneath is essentially a good one...and I will wager that very pale hibiscus wood looks rather attractive with a healthy baptisia next to it.

So essentially I have no need to worry about the Rose of Sharon's health...the question is whether the Baptista can flower with shade from the house to the Southwest and the shade of the Rose of Sharon above it in the summer. (I suppose the new one I got from Lowes might have been running on stored energy in the tap root.) It's in a better position then the one shaded by euonymous, because the Rose of Sharon leafs out VERY late..

And the consensus is they are self fertile?

The ultimate objective of this question was to determine if I should
1.) Buy a boyfriend for my Baptista if I want it to reseed.
2.) Wait and see or
3.) Abandon the idea and just stick an echinacea or some daffodils at the foot of the Rose of Sharon.

I can't imagine that you would need a second Baptisia for cross-pollination. From what I understand they are not only self-fertile but also self-pollinating without necessarily needing insect help.

Is there a sunnier location in the yard where you might want a Baptisia? Perhaps you could take a stem cutting this spring and get that started. Then you could give the current one another year or two and eventually pull it if it's not vigorous enough in that partial-shade location.

I would think you'd have lots of other options besides echinacea and daffodils. Is the main point to provide some earlier season interest?

The point is to provide earlier season interest, hide or distract from the Rose of Sharon when it looks dead in the spring, and feed pollinators.

My gardening strategy is influenced by three often contradictory impulses.
1.) The desire to be "Earth Friendly" by planting native plants pollinators like. 2.) The fact I'm cheap.
3.) The fact I'm lazy.

There is relatively little overlap between native, pollinator friendly, cheap, and low maintenance. Bees love echinacea and it is native and cheap and does well in a spot near there. Daffodils aren't native of course but are super easy, cheap, and would do their thing before the Rose of Sharon leafs out.

I would say there's a lot of overlap between native, pollinator friendly, and cheap -- especially if you grow from seed. Effort is another story, though.

Short-toothed mountain mint, Pycnanthemum muticum, comes to mind. It attracts all sort of insects and is easy to grow. The flowers aren't showy but it's got nice silvery foliage that would contrast with the Rose of Sharon. You could throw in some daffodils or other early spring bulbs to kick off the season with a flash of color.

http://www.luriegarden.org/blog/plant-weekend-blunt-mountian-mint

As a general rule, prairie plants do NOT like shade.

Mmm, I think you are onto something, Woodstea, advocating silvery foliage...so I am adding my twp-pennorth and suggesting an artemisia. I was astonished to discover how much shade these sub-shrubs can take - having always assumed that pale foliage was always a sign of a sunlover.

Interesting. As I said, the second Baptista I tried bloomed, so this might be premature. (No seeds though).

Why that mountain mint variety? I'd probably want the most shade tolerant kind of mountain mint. Also, Bee Balm nearby suffers from bad powdery mildew. Mountain mint is related...is it susceptible?

Although we are back to the issue of prairie plants not liking part shade.

Artemisia is an interesting idea. I know they sell some very attractive varieties of it at the Lowes near me. I also found a native North American variety from Prairie Moon Nursery...
Artemisia ludoviciana. Do pollinators like Artemisia?

I'm a little concerned anything too shade tolerant would get behind the foundation plantings like the Rose of Sharon volunteers did. Kind of a delicate balance here.

Pycnanthemem muticum isn't a prairie plant, at least not a Midwest/Great Plains type of prairie plant -- it's more of an Appalachian plant, one that grows in various open places like cliffs or meadows. I suggested it because:

1. It's native to the East Coast (you're in coastal NH if I'm not mistaken?)

http://bonap.net/MapGallery/County/Pycnanthemum%20muticum.png

2. Mountain mints in general are big draws for pollinators. While I don't grow P. muticum in my garden, I have P. tenuifolium (native to my area), and it gets mobbed. Not just by bees, but also various other interesting insects like syrphid flies.

3. I think it's the most ornamental of the mountain mints with those silvery leaves.

4. Should do reasonably well in partial sun.

5. Very easy plant to grow.

As far as Artemisia goes, most of them that are native to the U.S. are western plants. Texasranger2 could probably tell you more as I think she grows at least one type. The only East Coast native I can find is beach wormwood (Artemisia campestris), but I don't think it's a plant you'd want in your garden, if it could even grow there.

A. ludoviciana 'Silver King' is quite popular and I see it in nurseries a lot. It's wind-pollinated, so not directly useful for pollinators. The Lady Bird Johnson Center website says that bees use it for constructing nests. I have never tried it in my garden since I hear it suffers in hot, humid summers and also gets floppy in rich soils. Hard to beat for contrast, though.

We used to grow the Artemisia called "Silver Mound" when I was a kid. Cool-looking plant, but it always died out/split in the center and so needed division every couple of years to keep looking good. It's not a native.

Close. Coastal Massachusetts.

Pycnanthemem muticum seems difficult to find. Is Mountain Mint susceptible to mildew?

Artemisia ludoviciana and "Silver Mound" seem to be the only varieties of Artemisia readily available cheaply from my usual sources.

We have as a part of our "standard moist prairie mix" the related Pycnanthemum virginianum. So I would say that for our purposes, that is most definitely a prairie or wet meadow species here in Wisconsin. Of course, if you've read my diatribes to date, you will know that while many of these species are indeed native to the state, that plant community itself is not particularly native to the state, lol. So it goes, round and round....an almost obsessive focus on local genotypes, for grasses and forbs, all the while managing to ignore those big hard-stemmed native plants that we're bulldozing all over the place. We call them trees. And evidently, their local genetics are not so important! But I digress-as usual.

I couldn't say about mildew and Pycnanthemum. From what I've read it certainly doesn't have the reputation for it that Monarda does.

Golden Alexanders, Zizia aurea, comes to mind. It's an excellent pollinator plant -- might even bring in some black swallowtails. I think it works best in a combo, especially with blues and violets. This Zizia/Tradescantia/Salvia combo, for instance:

http://mgdisplaygardens.blogspot.com/2012_05_01_archive.html

Wow.

Yeah, that's nice. I like golden Alexanders and we are blessed to have some in some of our "prairies", but more so, they exist all on their own up in my wet meadow up north. Great plant.

Well, conveniently everything else I have growing there is violet or pinky-violet. (Including the Rose of Sharon, the Baptista, and the nearby echinacea/liatris/bee balm bed.

The issue is not that the Rose of Sharon leafs out late, it's that it shades the baptisia (at all).

So...do you think the Baptista Australis is a lost cause in this spot, then? If not, what native plant with nice foliage and flowers would you suggest in the spot?

In general, most native plants that have season long presence require sun..and don't want to hide inside a shrub. I can't think of a thing that isn't ephemeral or a vine that would tolerate this position.

Inside a shrub is a bit of an exaggeration. At the foot of something that has been pruned into a small tree.

Scuttelaria has been said to thrive in those conditions. In Texas, I've seen scuttelaria ovata doing well with high limbed up things.

I would just plant a native clematis (like pitcherii which I grew up a small serviceberry).

I've got nice wide patch this year of Scuttelaria from a few starter plants wantanamara sent me that I set in last year (actually they were planted in late fall the previous year). Its full dry shade-- that most difficult of situations. They are now growing densely (original plants and several new ones) with heart shaped fuzzy leaves and form nice stiff blooming spikes in summer which still look good & add interest after blooming. Its also evergreen and low when not blooming, a good ground cover plant that has 4 seasons of interest.

I've got tons of Silver King artemisia all along the same high dry bank and it does well in mostly to part shade as long as the soil is on the dry side, if the soil is too wet, it suffers. It really brightens up the darkness. Same thing, 4 seasons of interest.

Other than that, Salvia greggii does quite well in dry shade and so do lantana if its half day sun so I've done a mixed border created mostly by cuttings (quick & easy to do on both of these) along with digging out rooted stems of the artemisia and making new plants along the whole border.

Cost me $00.00. How's that for cheap??? Lazy is another matter. Personally I enjoy gardening

Keep in mind, our sun is much brighter down here and plants that require full sun will often tolerate and even appreciate more shade, especially in the afternoon.

I don't see how the 'shade' from the Rose of Sharon is an issue if thats what that smallish skinny bare shrub is between the two dominating fat green ones. The shade from the house seems like it would eclipse the shade from the shrubs, meaning, you'd have shade with or without the shrubs from the house blocking the sun. I don't quite get the shade comment/problem. Rose of S. looks like its planted slap up against the house (a foot away?) flanked between two much larger bushes which leaves the Rose of Sharon looking a bit lost and outdone visually, in other words its seems like it was planted as an afterthought and it seems off due to the scale. It would've been better planted further out as a specimen, the bare stems would be a nice contrast against the dense green background but the poor thing seems to be unsuccessfully competing for attention, lost in a row of bullies, the way things are now.

What that area needs most is bulk and continuity on that bare ground. Plants that spread outward filling spaces will create bulk and visual interest. That will get rid of the stringy looking, regularly spaced, too many different weak varieties look that comes across as unplanned and weedy looking, sorry but it does.

Daffodils won't solve anything. You'll get about a week+ of yellow blooms, then the leaves will stretch out long, flop to the ground, start to die back and you'll have to look at and leave them until they finally die back which looks messy. I guess you could braid them to clean up the look some. After that by summer and for the rest of the year until the next brief show in spring, there's nothing there. Its not a problem solver in this situation.

ps. Artemisia doesn't attract pollinators so much but they serve as a nice foil to pinks and purples and set off other colors visually. Trim the plants back hard in late winter, that way they will not split open in the middle, you will have dense new growth and well behaved plants all season.

The Rose of Sharon is actually a good four feet from the wall. It's taller then the yews next to it and stands up to them nicely when it is in bloom. It's real function is to lure humming birds to the window. Looks horrible before it leafs out. The goal was to have something pretty in that spot before the Rose of Sharon leafs out...something that won't jeopardize the Rose of Sharon or Yew. I liked Baptista foliage and it has Spring flowers.

The spot is buried in a snow drift in the winter. Not sure I want anything evergreen there...could get killed by the snow plow, or provide winter hiding places for rodents near the house.

No one's mentioned Scuttelaria...does it attract pollinators? What species do you have? Does it's natural range extend to the East Coast? I have a few dry shade spaces I'm looking to fill. I might be interesting in begging some of those off someone.

I'll have to look into Artemisia. It is readily available near me.

They come up easily from seed direct sown in cool temps. Prairie Moon has a map showing the range where its native.
Scutellaria seeds and bare root plant source

I didn't have anything to say about the baptisias since I failed growing them, but skullcaps I have. I am not sureOne might check into some native east coast specialty nurseries and look for native or close to native scutelleria. I think I remembered some pretty ones. I don't remember their names, but you can research this list of scutellerias from LBJ WILDFLOWER CENTER

Also if you look under the database , you will find Mr. SMARTY PANTS and ask him for varieties for your area. He might even be able to point you towards a source. He takes a few days to get back to you. I have used him several times. Your native plant society in your are might have some suggestions too.

The zone ratings for Scutelleria obvata is rated to Z4 according to DG but that is not with the var bracateata added on. They didn't have much info on the one I have. It does grow in Illinois.

Move the Baptisia--it doesn't like shade. And you don't need to get the whole tap root. Whatever you wrestle out will live--I've done it many times. It's a myth that Baptisias are hard to move. As for what to replace it with, try Geranium maccrorhizum (Big Root Geranium) as an attractive, shade and drought tolerant groundcover. It's easy to manage as well, never invasive, and is semi evergreen with a late spring bloom.

Please-this is a native plants forum. Take your non natives elsewhere, they are not need here.

rigidity is never an a attractive social trait.

The discussion started in the Native Plants forum, that doesn't mean that we can't EVER mention a non-native plant in the thread. I agree, it would be wrong to ask about Rose of Sharons here as the main topic..but that's not what happened Dandy.

What's more, native plant species often (alright, virtually always) are found in association with non-native species. I respect Dandy Line's desire to see this forum maintain its proper focus, but like has been said above..........

Dandy Lines are Eurasian.

Oh, the Baptista Australis finally bloomed this year.

A rather wispy and anemic flowering stalk...but there it is ;)

Can I assume it's "over the hump" and will much get bigger the next year we have a Spring without a drought?

Hopefully -- I think the limiting factor would be sunlight more than moisture.

My B. australis var. minor were about that size last year (though not flowering yet). This year they are much bigger, standing up straight.

So, it's flowering and looks lush, but isn't standing up straight. It's leaning/drooping towards the light. For the time being I'm using a tomato cage.

It will probably always lean toward the light if its doing it now. Lots of plants do that when there are trees close by. My neighbor has tall trees taking over his backyard to the west of me and as everyone around here knows since I complain about them so much, nearly every plant in my backyard leans dramatically toward the east. I've discovered that except for Zach, I'm about the only person who dislikes trees but the thing is--- the plants are in agreement with me on this subject. A plant doesn't have to be smack up against a tree or anything, they instinctively sense the wall of darkness and grow toward the lighter part of the yard even if they get enough hours of sun to qualify as full sun.

I don't dislike trees, but I'm disliking trash trees (like silver maples). I certainly appreciate that many plants require full unshaded exposure to look their best. I have it, for the first time ever, in my beds.

I planted several of these years ago. They always came back. In fact they ended up being a large clump. I had 4-5 of them in a wildflower garden in my front yard. We are in the process of building and moving and I decided that the house will be more appealing to the masses without the "unkempt" wild flower garden. So I contacted people and they dug up all the flowers. But the following spring 4 clusters came back up thru the newly planted grass. I didn't have the heart to mow them over so I let them grow all summer long till early fall and dug them up and transplanted them in a field at the new place. I am glad to report they are up and doing well.

I also have a massive clump that I planted out on a hillside in the tall grass. It has done exceptionally well. I decided to move it this spring. Well it was a solid mass of root ball that I could not break out of the ground. I tried hacking a clump off and it didn't work out well. I decided to give up and leave the hacked half exposed clump and go onto other projects. Well that hacked and half exposed clump is doing just fine. Its getting ready to bloom. This root mass was about 1 1/2 ft in dia. and in the summer the "bush" was about 3 ft tall and 4-5 ft in dia. A real prize specimen that I hope the new owners will appreciate.

All off these plants had at least 3/4 of a day of full sunlight. Not all the soil was the greatest. some was clay and the hillside was gravelly and very thin on decent soil.

Barron, I just took a trip to Pawnee and am currently in a state of extreme disgust over the disappearing prairie which is becoming a solid ugly mass of big, thickly growing trees for miles and miles. I just wanted to cry when I saw it because I remember when it was open land and you could see for miles in any direction all the way to the horizon. Thats just gone. Its depressing. Right now I hate trees because they seem to be taking over the world in live in and no one gives a damn because its seems like everyone is partial to trees.

You know, to grow something like Baptista for instance, you really do need a days worth of sun and thats getting harder and harder to find in the city. I'd be tempted to pack up and move to the Panhandle if I could afford it just to get away from this encroaching forest, and not even a nice looking forest at that.

Well, I *LIKE* trees, and trees aren't the problem here...it's the house and a yew hedge. I wanted something native tough, and perennial to hide the daffodils after they bloom and the trunk of the Rose of Sharon until it blooms. Some said Baptista likes gravelly soil. Trying to decide if there is hope for it in this spot...

I saw a couple of mature ones at the History Center here, they were loaded with big green pods, pretty cool looking, in fact I had to walk over closer to take a look because it was the pods that caught my attention. They get really big, like a shrub, I had no idea they got so big. I was considering one but frankly, I don't want to donate so much space to one plant at this point because I've got as many shrubs as I can handle so I backed off.

Trees are fine where they belong. I'm just sad seeing them grow where they kill our native plants and are changing the landscape drastically, thats all. Its heartbreaking.

Well it's human nature to cry 'Wildfire' and put it out...sadly :)

I know what you mean TR.

I apologize for getting off topic on this thread but thanks barron. I'm not a rabid zealot type, politically active or a sign holder but this drive, which I've been making all my life, was so shocking that what I felt was closer to fear & horror than disgust.

I would not rate any tree in its home range a "trash tree". Bottomland forests all over the upper midwest depend on this species-silver maple- now more than ever as green ash succumbs to EAB and American elm is long-gone.. To each his or her own, but what exactly makes one species trash?

I've got a super-redneck brother-in-law who often mocks the preservation of this or that obscure species. He's Scott Walker's dream citizen, ready to pounce on anyone that cares about anything other than the three officially "important" animals-deer, walleyes, and uh............OK, let's leave it at two! So when he's mounting his campaign, I sometimes like to ask him if he thinks the blue-green mold that grows on orange peels deserves to exist. Surely-I ask-this mold must be a trash species, something "we do not need". It is only then that I remind him that this is the source of penicillin. Oh, he'll never get it. But we will..........won't we? We simply do not know "what matters" at any given point. We don't tend to see the future too well.

Maybe we should start a separate thread for the tree discussion -- or perhaps one thread that's sort of a catch-all for whatever people feel like discussing, like I have seen on some of the other forums.

I worry sometimes that this forum tends to get dominated a little too much by the half dozen or so of us that post regularly on it and the running conversations/arguments that we are having with one another. Like a clique that it's hard for others to break into.

As far as Baptisia goes I think it would be worth holding off for another year, see if it does any better. Those plants are slow growing and another year of root growth might help give it better form. Rather than moving it, you could try and collect seeds from it, or possibly take a cutting when it starts coming up next spring, so that you could start to establish one or two of them somewhere else where there is more sun.

Sorry woodstea and edlincoln, I agree. Apologies all around.

If you do collect seeds, check them carefully for weevils. Baptista's really do need a lot of sun and its not a plant you want to move and its also slow growing. The spot should be carefully selected when planting. Many plants I've grown are awkward looking as teenagers. Rabbit Bush and Apache plume look downright gangly.

If the trunk of the Rose of Sharon is objectionable to you, you can cut the whole thing down low and it'll quickly form an oval shaped bush with multi-stems as opposed to a single trunk tree-like plant, that might fit in better and look less awkward anyway.