Growth rate

[xerophyte_nyc]

Palm growth rates are often described as fast, moderate or slow...what exactly does that mean?

I have a Bottle Palm in a pot, I know it is slow but what exactly is "slow"?  Shall I expect 1 or 2 new leaves per year?  Or 1 inch of trunk height a year?

What then is fast?  4-5+ leaves a year?

Also, I realize that the following question may not have an answer, but is there some sort of normal % increase in the number of leaflets or length per frond as a juvenile palm gets older?

For example, a seedling may have say a dozen fused leaflets per frond, and with each successive frond, they get bigger until the adult leaf size is attained - is this a predictable growth trend or does it depend on growing variables?

Just curious.  Well, I guess I'm really trying to figure out when I can expect some fuller leaves and taller trunks from some of my plants.

[sonoranfans]

(xerophyte_nyc @ Jun. 27 2007,18:32)

QUOTE

Palm growth rates are often described as fast, moderate or slow...what exactly does that mean?

I have a Bottle Palm in a pot, I know it is slow but what exactly is "slow"?  Shall I expect 1 or 2 new leaves per year?  Or 1 inch of trunk height a year?

What then is fast?  4-5+ leaves a year?

Also, I realize that the following question may not have an answer, but is there some sort of normal % increase in the number of leaflets or length per frond as a juvenile palm gets older?

For example, a seedling may have say a dozen fused leaflets per frond, and with each successive frond, they get bigger until the adult leaf size is attained - is this a predictable growth trend or does it depend on growing variables?

Just curious.  Well, I guess I'm really trying to figure out when I can expect some fuller leaves and taller trunks from some of my plants.

This is really complex in my experience.  Often growth rates in AZ are measured in ft/year, not numbers of new fronds.  

In AZ here are some typical numbers

very fast: washngtonia robusta: up to 5' a year after developing a trunk.  Its a weed, will self seed, take over an irrigation dripper meant for another plant and just overgrow it.  40' Tall in ten years (from a 5 gallon plant 2' tall) is possible if watered and fertilized regularly.

fast: queen palms/ washingtonia filifera, 2-4' a year.  Filiferas are really massive here, scary big for a residential site.  The CIDP(phoenix canaresis) are a little slower but not too far behind.  I have neighbors that have some CIDP's within 5' of their house foundations(ha ha ha ha!), it will be a rude awakening for them.

medium: Bismarckia Nobillis: about 2' a year/ w developed trunk in the heat, slower if less heat or undeveloped trunk(much slower).

slow:  Chamaerops humilis, Butia capitata, brahea armata: 1/2- 11/2' a year

Palms grow very fast here if you can keep them happy and they like the heat.  Palms that grow faster in heat(all the faster ones from above) will grow much faster here than in say northern california, so grow rates( eg fast , slow) are relative to each other in a particular climate.

In my experience most fan palms grow faster after th e development of a trunk, establishment of roots(2-3 years).  Also, if in containers, EVERYTHING grows much slower here than in the ground.

[bgl]

Yes, this is a very complex issue! However, most people would probably rate growth in how much more trunk a palm will produce in a year, as opposed to how many fronds it'll put out. One palm (Palm A) may put out 10 fronds a year and therefore, on average, also lose 10 older fronds per year revealing that much more trunk. Let's say each old frond that falls off reveals 4 inches of trunk. That'd be 40 inches in a year (or 3 ft 4 inches). Another palm (Palm may only open up/lose 5 fronds in a year, but every old frond that falls off may reveal 10 inches of new trunk, so that would be 50 inches (4 ft 2 inches) in a year. The general concensus would certainly be that Palm B is a faster grower even though it opens up fewer fronds in any given period of time.

Don Hodel wrote a fascinating article in Principes quite some time ago. Just now, looking for this article I decided to pull out a bunch of Principes from the bookshelf, hoping I'd be able to find the article, which I knew was published in the early/mid 90s. Talk about hitting the jackpot - I found it in the second issue I opened up: Vol. 37, No. 3 (July 1993). This is a VERY detailed and scientific comparison of palm growth in Tahiti with an article and a table listing about 90 different species and a number of different ways of measuring growth rate. For instance: years in ground to flowering, trunk produced per year, number of leaves per year, just to mention the most important ones.

A few noteworthy ones:

Chamaedorea geonomiformis took only one year in ground to flowering. C. seifrizii took two and the following took three years: Areca multifida, Chamaedorea sartorii, Pinanga copelandii, P. kuhlii, P. maculata and Rhapis subtilis.

As far as new trunk produced per year, I was personally under the impression that Pigafetta is the king here, but Hodel actually has another palm in the #1 spot: Syagrus sancona with 270 cm of new trunk per year and Pigafetta filaris (I guess that's the one we now refer to as P. elata) in second place with 217 cm, followed by Veitchia winin (133 cm), Veitchia montgomeryana (121 cm), Caryota rumphiama (120 cm), Hydriastele microspadix (110 cm), and Clinostigma samoense (108 cm). And for those who are metrically challenged: 30.5 cm = 1 ft.

Number of leaves produced per year since trunk first formed: The clear leader Phoenix roebelenii with 40 (!!), then Pigafetta filaris (33), Livistona aff. benthamii (32.5), L. rotundifolia (26.7), Licuala spinosa (20) and Syagrus sancona (19.3).

Finally, length of internodes on the trunk: Caryota rumphiana (37.5 cm), Areca triandra (22.5 cm), Caryota mitis (21.7 cm), followed by Syagrus sancona and Wallichia (both at 20 cm).

All names are as of July 1993 - some of these names have been changed since. And keep in mind, this is in TAHITI!! If these palms are grown on Long Island or in Wichita, growth rates WILL be less than quoted here!

[DoomsDave]

Mark!

Nice to meet you!

You have asked a simple question, which, as Bo ably points out, is rife with complexity.

In your case, I'm assuming you mean that a bottle palm is Hyophorbe langencaulis.  They're on the slow side, definitely.  Out here in the ground or in a pot (I'm in Orange County Cali) they put out about 5-6 leaves a year, when they're happy.

That said, consult BobbyNY (who's also in Long-Guy-Land) and he's gotten excellent growth from his plants.

How about some pictures, and more about you?

If you want.

And, welcome to our large, happy highly functional family . . . .

dave

[www.dadluvsu.com]

Check out this link for some growth rate knowledge....

http://palmtalk.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboar...=ST;f=17;t=5358

:cool:

[sonoranfans]

(PiousPalms @ Jun. 27 2007,21:53)

QUOTE

Check out this link for some growth rate knowledge....

http://palmtalk.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboar...=ST;f=17;t=5358

:cool:

the growth rates in the link may be highly dependent on age, some of the palms are older.  For example the bismarckia in the link grew 11 cm in one year, well I have seen 30+ cm in younger ones.  They also measured faster growth rates for brahea armata(17 cm) compared with both bismarckia and sabal domingenisis.  I have multiples of all 3 in trunked out form(2' trunk), and I can assure you that braheas are the slowest of the three.  

My problem with measuring trunk is that I gain more palms than I lose over the last 2 years, so while the palm may have grown 3' in this time, the bare trunk only increased 1 1/2 feet.

[xerophyte_nyc]

So-Cal Dave

I'm not that new to this forum, I've chimed in a few times, I am a relatively newbie to palms though.  I have come to realize the limitations where I am in NY, but there are enough species that will work, i.e. P roebellini and Hyophorbes due to their smaller stature.  I have lots of room with large windows in my house so overwintering in pots is very much realistic.

I have been successfully growing and flowering dozens of different cactus and succulents for 20 years so I am not new to horticulture by any means.  I have a greenhouse and HID lights.  The resources are there.

I inherited a large Cycas rumphii when I moved into my house 2 summers ago, and that triggered a greater interest in tropical plants.  I also have 15 different cycads, they are very easy to grow and overwinter in pots, as long as watering is minimal, they spend the entire winter without the need for strong light in the house.  They are severely underutilized in the northeast.

Anyway, attached is a picture of my H lagenicaulis, about 6ft from bottom of pot to the top, it is a new acquisition, enjoying the heat and moisture outdoors.  I also have a smaller 3-gal seedling along with a juvenile Spindle, Dypsis decaryi, 5-gal P canariensis, a small clump of P roebellini, 2 Bismarckias in 3-gal pots, and young King Alex Palm and Royal Palm.

I'm basically playing around with the smaller plants, to see what grows well and how to optimize growth in pots.  The dilemna is really 3-fold:

1-can I muster enough light indoors during the cold season

2-can they tolerate being pot-bound, and

3-what happens when they get too big to haul around

Well, 1) is achievable with the right exposure or supplemental lighting

2) seems to not be an issue for the slow growing specimens I have, it will be many years before I worry about the Hyophorbes and roebellini

3) may not be a problem in my lifetime for some, for others, well, they can be donated somewhere (shopping mall or conservatory) and I can start over I suppose.

The CIDP is interesting - I wintered it in my cold garage last year without any real light, and it survived just fine, and surprisingly it had to be watered more than I realized.  I can probably keep one in a pot for many years this way, I'll just trim off older leaves and tie up the new ones for storage.  They are easy enough to get as small plants, I can rotate 2 of them so that I always have a decent sized one in a pot before it gets too big.

The Bismarckia is another experiment, we'll see what can really be done with them in pots and for how long.

I think I will get rid of the King Alexander and Roystonia, they will get too tall too fast for me to know what to do with them, I don't know what I was thinking when I bought them but they were cheap so no real loss.

The Hyophorbes are probably the most realistic crownshafted palms I will be able to grow and enjoy for a very long time.

Maybe one day if I can get a very large home I will put in a high ceiling large sunroom to expand my capabilities, but not yet ::  

I have a lot more to learn before I really know what I'm doing, but it's fun trying.

[tikitiki]

All three of these guys were planted at the same time at the same size. Three years ago on their first pinnate leaf. All three I would rate different on growth rate. one as fast one at moderate and one at slow. Eric from Orlando has two Ravenea at leu that were planted at the same time but in different locations and the difference in growth is amazing. eric if you read this please post. you know the ones.

[bgl]

I got a little bit side tracked with the Don Hodel article, so I forgot to mention some of my own experiences. One of them, which confirms what was said above, is the fact that if you plant X number of palms of the same species, even in the same area, in many cases there WILL be a difference in growth rate. Some species are relatively uniform in growth rate, while others can display dramatic differences, one individual being twice as fast as a sibling right next to it. The more palms you plant of the same species, the more obvious this will be. And I should also point out that as interesting and scientific as Don Hodel's article is, it's also, for the most part, based on a very small number of palms of each species (typically 3 or less) which means that numbers which appear to be very exact, in fact are not. It'd probably be necessary to have populations of at least 10-12 palms of the same species AND observe them for a longer period of time than 10 years in order to reach scientifically useful conclusions and results when it comes to growth rates. In a number of cases Don Hodel's article is simply missing data because 10 years was too short to measure various types of growth.

[www.dadluvsu.com]

Very valid points...  I have plenty of examples of those very differences in my own colletion...  Even in the same containers the plants can have amazingly different growth rates...  I potted three 2 leafer seedlings of A. purpurea about a year ago...  One has done nothing, another has growth two or three leaves and the other is already 2 feet tall with many new (and big) leaves.  This is a very complicated subject.  More data is needed...