Fastest USDA zone 10A screening hedge?

[kinzyjr]

2 minutes ago, Sandy Loam said:

Wow, I wish I knew where to buy archontophoenx teracarpa.  I just googled that one and it looks fantastic and, seemingly, grows tall quite quickly.

Given the number that are in flower here in town, you might be better off just grabbing seeds.  They are a signature plant at Hollis Gardens. 

The originals came from Jungle Music @Phil

[Sandy Loam]

1 minute ago, kinzyjr said:

Given the number that are in flower here in town, you might be better off just grabbing seeds.  They are a signature plant at Hollis Gardens. 

The originals came from Jungle Music @Phil

 

I have had no luck at sprouting seeds, so I might just get in touch with Phil instead.   Thanks!

 

[Sandy Loam]

Has anyone here tried growing Clusia Guttifera in the shade?  If so, was it a slow glower?  Did it lack screening capacity because it did not grow dense enough?

 

What about shade-grown Dypsis Lutenscens?  Are they slow growers in the shade? 

[Merlyn]

I'm not sure about Clusia Guttifera, but I think Rosea is less hardy than sea grapes...maybe.    I haven't tried it here, though they do sell it at the big box stores and I might try a plant just for fun. 

Shade grown Dypsis Lutescens seems to still do pretty well, though slower than in sun.  The advantage is that they won't frost burn in a canopy spot...so you won't have a burnt open area after a bad winter.  I moved one of my clumps from the backyard (24-26F and torched with 1/2 the canes dead) to the front East side yard (28F+) just for that reason.  My neighbor's Lutescens clump did ok under canopy with minimal burn.  So I guess my thought is it would work for a quick hedge if you bought initial pots that were reasonably tall and thick.

For a low hedge I am experimenting with Zamia Furfuracea (cardboard palm) because they grow extremely thick and impenetrably thorny.  I moved a couple of clusters to my SE corner because the Viburnum starts thinning out at the bottom when it gets to 10-15' tall. 

Another rapid visual break is a lattice fence hedge with a climbing vine.  I am going to experiment with this in the spring.   There are a lot of hardy vines that would quickly cover a lattice and also not grow massively out of control. 

 

[Silas_Sancona]

1 hour ago, Merlyn said:

I'm not sure about Clusia Guttifera, but I think Rosea is less hardy than sea grapes...maybe.    I haven't tried it here, though they do sell it at the big box stores and I might try a plant just for fun. 

 

 

Both would be within a few deg of hardiness as Sea Grape.. Though C. gutti. and the small-leaved form might be a touch hardier than either C. rosea, or lanceolata.  Didn't realize it but there are 300-400 sp. in the Genus..  Species available in nurseries are barely scratching the surface of these interesting plants.  Anyway..

Think they'll tolerate LIGHT, shifting shade.. Heavier / dense shade and pretty sure they become lanky, ...not as full / lush..  Several other native " shrubs" / small, densely leaved trees that will take more shade though w/ out becoming sparse.

[mnorell]

5 hours ago, Silas_Sancona said:

Both would be within a few deg of hardiness as Sea Grape.. Though C. gutti. and the small-leaved form might be a touch hardier than either C. rosea, or lanceolata.  Didn't realize it but there are 300-400 sp. in the Genus..  Species available in nurseries are barely scratching the surface of these interesting plants.  Anyway..

Think they'll tolerate LIGHT, shifting shade.. Heavier / dense shade and pretty sure they become lanky, ...not as full / lush..  Several other native " shrubs" / small, densely leaved trees that will take more shade though w/ out becoming sparse.

I did some research a while back on this 'small leaf' Clusia being sold in some corners as C. guttifera...the fact is, that is a completely concocted name, there is no such species, and it was obviously created by joining the genus name with a bastardization of the old name for the family Clusiaceae (=Guttiferae). The 'small leaf' form ("guttifera") appears to be in fact Clusia fluminensis, a Brasilian species. I grew it on Big Pine Key and it did well in half-shade. It is slow, it also has a tendency to get leggy in those shady conditions, as it also wants to be a tree and will reach for the light. So I think as hedging, it only really works in full sun, or nearly that.

I find it sad that this Clusia has virtually supplanted the beautiful native tree C. rosea in the Florida nursery trade. While both have their uses, the larger tree is now rather difficult to find. And the foliage of the larger C. rosea is much more distinctive than its little-leafed cousin, which to me sort of looks like an oversized jade plant. 😞

[kinzyjr]

The City of Lakeland uses Clusia rosea in the landscape.  The ones planted look fine in full sun or light shade at Common Ground.

[Silas_Sancona]

14 minutes ago, mnorell said:

I did some research a while back on this 'small leaf' Clusia being sold in some corners as C. guttifera...the fact is, that is a completely concocted name, there is no such species, and it was obviously created by joining the genus name with a bastardization of the old name for the family Clusiaceae (=Guttiferae). The 'small leaf' form ("guttifera") appears to be in fact Clusia fluminensis, a Brasilian species. I grew it on Big Pine Key and it did well in half-shade. It is slow, it also has a tendency to get leggy in those shady conditions, as it also wants to be a tree and will reach for the light. So I think as hedging, it only really works in full sun, or nearly that.

I find it sad that this Clusia has virtually supplanted the beautiful native tree C. rosea in the Florida nursery trade. While both have their uses, the larger tree is now rather difficult to find. And the foliage of the larger C. rosea is much more distinctive than its little-leafed cousin, which to me sort of looks like an oversized jade plant. 😞

Interesting.. Agree, the small leaved sp. does look like a giant Jade. Where i worked in Sarasota, we sold all 3, though the small-leaved sp. and C. guttifera were stocked the most.  Had seen C. rosea multiple times at plant sales as well.  For awhile, some big name nursery the nursery i worked for ordered from in CA. was offering C. rosea in w/ their house plants. Had one but,  ..can't remember why i lost it.  Very neat plant.  Would grow it again if back out there.

[Sandy Loam]

By coincidence, I was at Home Depot today and just happened to be looking at some of the Clusia on offer there.   They generally sell two types, which they refer to as "small leaf clusia" (ie. clusia guttifera) and "large leaf clusia/Pitch Apple" (i.e. Clusia Rosea, presumably the Florida-native one).  I have also seen "Clusia Rosea Nana" for sale in South Florida, which has extremely tiny leaves.  Those appear to be the only three types of Clusia trees for sale in the mainstream commercial/retail markets in Florida.   

 

I was not aware that the guttifera type was more cold-hardy than the Clusia Rosea type which has larger, slightly rippled leaves.  For some reason, the large-leaf type was much cheaper at Home Depot, but I wonder which one would form a more defense hedge and grow faster (???)   I see Clusia Guttifera planted around here in Winter Haven, Florida, so I assume that I am safe to plant either type here.  My house is a stone's thrown from one of the lakes in the chain-of-lakes district.  I am told that this is zone 9b/10a, but I have not been living here long enough to put any plants to the test yet.   

 

By the way, I saw a couple of Dypsis Lutenscens on the streets today and it dawned on me that they often are simply not good screening plants.  They have beautiful trunks and foliage, but the Areca Palm is simply not dense enough to block views.  Do you agree?  To make it worse, if I plant some, they will unavoidable be in shade.  Is it possibly to fertilize the heck out of Dypsis Lutenscens (areca palm) to keep it full of foliage, even in the shade?

 

Thanks for everyone's wisdom!  I really  appreciate it.

[mnorell]

42 minutes ago, Sandy Loam said:

By coincidence, I was at Home Depot today and just happened to be looking at some of the Clusia on offer there.   They generally sell two types, which they refer to as "small leaf clusia" (ie. clusia guttifera) and "large leaf clusia/Pitch Apple" (i.e. Clusia Rosea, presumably the Florida-native one).  I have also seen "Clusia Rosea Nana" for sale in South Florida, which has extremely tiny leaves.  Those appear to be the only three types of Clusia trees for sale in the mainstream commercial/retail markets in Florida.   

 

I was not aware that the guttifera type was more cold-hardy than the Clusia Rosea type which has larger, slightly rippled leaves.  For some reason, the large-leaf type was much cheaper at Home Depot, but I wonder which one would form a more defense hedge and grow faster (???)   I see Clusia Guttifera planted around here in Winter Haven, Florida, so I assume that I am safe to plant either type here.  My house is a stone's thrown from one of the lakes in the chain-of-lakes district.  I am told that this is zone 9b/10a, but I have not been living here long enough to put any plants to the test yet.   

 

By the way, I saw a couple of Dypsis Lutenscens on the streets today and it dawned on me that they often are simply not good screening plants.  They have beautiful trunks and foliage, but the Areca Palm is simply not dense enough to block views.  Do you agree?  To make it worse, if I plant some, they will unavoidable be in shade.  Is it possibly to fertilize the heck out of Dypsis Lutenscens (areca palm) to keep it full of foliage, even in the shade?

 

Thanks for everyone's wisdom!  I really  appreciate it.

I have never seen the 'nana' miniature type, but now that you mention it, I remember seeing it referenced in the past. In the Keys these days, Home Depot ONLY brings in the "guttifera" (C. fluminensis); and it is very, very difficult to find the large-leaved Clusia rosea. Usually there is one hiding in a corner at one of the mom-and-pop nurseries, but it has just fallen out of favor with mainstream nurseries there for some reason. Although the Keys are a very strange and disappointing landscape for the nursery trade considering it has the most tropical climate in the lower 48. It's a different world of course in Homestead and Miami. I've noticed also on Plant Ant that the majority of plants listed from growers in Florida are the "guttifera" (small leaf) Clusia. 

As regards Chrysalidocarpus lutescens (yes, the authorities have changed the name back), I find that they make very dense screens in Florida, at least in sun. They will be denser if they are planted 100-to-a-pot as is typical in the trade (and I for one certainly don't endorse that practice for the health of the plant). If you raise a single plant from seed, it will grow much better and faster but will have a more open habit. It will also have a looser look in shadier conditions, so perhaps that's why it seems to you that it's not a dense enough screen. You could also try a Ptychosperma (P. macarthuri or P. lineare). They can make very dense screens but you'll have to plant them close together and buy more plants than you would with C. lutescens. And I think Chamaedorea cataractarum will make a very dense screen for you in shade or sun. But it tops out about 6' or so high I think, maybe a little taller in shade. Rhapis excelsa will also make a very dense hedge but of course it will take some years to get to that point.

[Eric in Orlando]

To straighten out the Clusia name confusion...Clusia guttifera is an invalid and totally made up name.

 

The tiny leaf, semi dwarf form being sold as C. guttifera/rosea 'Nana' is Clusia fluminensis 'Pedra Azul'.

The "common" Clusia sold as C. guttifera or C. rosea is Clusia flava, this has the thicker, bright green leaves. There is a variegated form of this that is available. This has become the most widely available Clusia in the FL nursery trade and very commonly planted.

True Clusia rosea is the bigger leafed plant with darker green leaves and is the most cold sensitive. It is fairly common in SoFL and is native to a few of the Keys.

The "normal" form of Clusia fluminensis looks similar to the common Clusia flava and is floating around a few SoFL nurseries. Also C. lanceolata and C. orthoneura can also be found in a few nurseries.

Just to add to the confusion there is an unknown Clusia sold in Europe as a houseplant as Clusia rosea 'Green Magic' or 'Princess'. It is not C. rosea. It has round leaves that a bigger than C. fluminensis 'Pedra Azul' but smaller than the common C. flava. I saw a couple 4" specimens at the blue box store the other day mixed in with the assorted tropicals. I bought them to grow them up and see what they are and how cold hardy they are. So they are starting to show up in FL.

Chad Husby at Fairchild straightened out the naming mixup for me. He is a Clusia expert and has been acquiring new species to try. I have gotten some from him and are testing their cold hardiness here.

 

[Eric in Orlando]

From left to right...

Clusia rosea

C. flava

C. fluminensis 'Pedra Azul'

C. fluminensis

 

[Silas_Sancona]

1 hour ago, Eric in Orlando said:

To straighten out the Clusia name confusion...Clusia guttifera is an invalid and totally made up name.

 

The tiny leaf, semi dwarf form being sold as C. guttifera/rosea 'Nana' is Clusia fluminensis 'Pedra Azul'.

The "common" Clusia sold as C. guttifera or C. rosea is Clusia flava, this has the thicker, bright green leaves. There is a variegated form of this that is available. This has become the most widely available Clusia in the FL nursery trade and very commonly planted.

True Clusia rosea is the bigger leafed plant with darker green leaves and is the most cold sensitive. It is fairly common in SoFL and is native to a few of the Keys.

The "normal" form of Clusia fluminensis looks similar to the common Clusia flava and is floating around a few SoFL nurseries. Also C. lanceolata and C. orthoneura can also be found in a few nurseries.

Just to add to the confusion there is an unknown Clusia sold in Europe as a houseplant as Clusia rosea 'Green Magic' or 'Princess'. It is not C. rosea. It has round leaves that a bigger than C. fluminensis 'Pedra Azul' but smaller than the common C. flava. I saw a couple 4" specimens at the blue box store the other day mixed in with the assorted tropicals. I bought them to grow them up and see what they are and how cold hardy they are. So they are starting to show up in FL.

Chad Husby at Fairchild straightened out the naming mixup for me. He is a Clusia expert and has been acquiring new species to try. I have gotten some from him and are testing their cold hardiness here.

 

 

1 hour ago, Eric in Orlando said:

From left to right...

Clusia rosea

C. flava

C. fluminensis 'Pedra Azul'

C. fluminensis

 

  Excellent information Eric..

[miamicuse]

Lutenscens can form a dense hedge.  Tall, and can get so dense to make cleaning & maintenance a challenge.  You can't really take a hedge trimmer and shape the hedge like other plants, and the suckers can be overwhelming.  If you neglect it and just let it take off, it will pile up in the middle and create a higher and higher mount.

but it is dense enough for privacy.

[mnorell]

On 12/14/2022 at 6:01 AM, Eric in Orlando said:

From left to right...

Clusia rosea

C. flava

C. fluminensis 'Pedra Azul'

C. fluminensis

 

Thank you Eric! You (and Chad) to the rescue in the confused world of Clusia...and, by the way, if nobody here knows Chad Husby at Fairchild, he is a great guy and, as with you, Eric, a friendly fount of knowledge on all things horticultural and very much worth contacting with any questions on plant IDs, etc.

I'm pretty sure the plant I installed in our landscape on Big Pine was C. fluminensis but I certainly could be wrong. I got it from a local nursery, and though I think they as with many other retailers often source from Doug Ingram, they also buy from some of the other local Homestead growers, including the less-well-known mom-and-pop sources that come up with some bizarre stuff. I never saw it flower, but the leaf is more like "no. 4" above in shape and doesn't have the curving "deformation" (maybe that's an individual fluke?) at the base of the blade adjacent to the petiole of No. 2. Luckily C. rosea is easy to ID not only because of the size of its leaves but the odd, almost rhomboid leaf with a sort of dimple at its broad apex. The one pictured doesn't really show that peculiarity but it is present on most of the leaves on any given specimen (again, they are somewhat variable on any one tree). I got to know C. rosea when I was living in Honolulu many years ago and so its characteristics are etched in my mind (just like the graffiti etched onto those leaves!)...and always my favorite for its unique foliage. But what a messed-up genus in the trade! About as bad as Pandanus (though I think Pandanus must take the cake in that department).