Big Island - why are these palms so rare?

[Mauna Kea Cloudforest]

I am curious why palms that are common in California collections are so rare in Hawaii? It's easy to get completely burned out on the usual coco-adonia-areca-livistona over-plantings, it's amazing how the lack of landscaping imagination is a plague even in Hawaii.

Canary Date palm: I realize this is a major burnout plant in California but they're super rare in Hawaii. I saw one on the Belt Rd just before Papaikou that looked beautiful, then one day it was completely gone, they must have sold it. The only other place I've seen one is Palisades Kona side. They're beautiful palms for local folks in Hawaii who experience tropical landscape fatigue and coco burn out. I've tried them from seed, so slow there's no point but why so slow?

Parajubaea: I grow sunkha and it's relatively happy at my elevation but except for a nice but over-shaded specimen at Dean's in Kona I've not seen them planted.

Brahea: I grow several species but I seem to be the only one, never seen them except for a fabulous healthy Moorei at JD's place in Leilani. I did see a picture of a big Clara ice blue in Ka'u.

Trachycarpus: I was surprised to see a 20 footer on Wainuenue right at the main intersection before the Rainbow falls turnoff. But they are otherwise nonexistent.

Rhopies: never seen a healthy one anywhere. There's a few tall but grungy looking Kentias around but otherwise the NZ and Lord Howe Island palms seem to be missing.

Sabal minor is perfect for landscapes were one needs a small palm but these are also nonexistent. They thrive at my farm and I am drowning in seedlings which I plant everywhere.

Jubaea: never ever seen a single one in Hawaii anywhere, why?

Any insights are appreciated.

[idontknowhatnametuse]

It's like people in cold areas trying to find tropical palms that are rare but reverse.

Since Hawaii has a potential climate to grow almost any tropical and cool-looking palm, which is rare for the rest of the world, common palm species that are grown in colder areas are not imported.

Queens for example, are very common here in my state, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. But they are rarer in tropical cities, Examples: Tuxtla Gutierrez, Cancun and Merida

[Alberto]

The seeds of my Brahea moorei all came from Hawaii sent by our deceased palm friend Allan Bredeson.

[hbernstein]

If Sabal minor propagates that aggressively, perhaps it isn't the best choice for Hawaii.

[PalmatierMeg]

Regarding the Sabal genus, the State of HI forbids importation of them from the mainland - at least that was true about a dozen years ago. I sold a large batch of Sabal seeds - I can’t remember which species - to a college professor in HI. He contacted me a day later to say he had learned that HI had a prohibition against Sabals so he had to cancel our sale. I don’t know why HI did this. I abide by that rule and now don’t ship any seeds/plant material to HI.

The takeaway may be that some species of palms can’t be brought into HI at all. And who outside the state wants to hassle with HI’s plant patrol over a few seeds?

[flplantguy]

@PalmatierMegis dead on. Invasive species control is all about it not being worth the risk essentially.  Honestly i would be removing those plants that self seed so readily there that are not native.  A miconia type issue may not be likely with them but its a scary thought anyway.  Some of the palms may not get the correct seasonal variation too.  Does Hawaii have a banned list to access or an assessment? It may provide some clues on some that seem like slam dunks. Florida has an assessment that is similar and it provides a window into what kinds of plants are problematic here, even if not banned.

[aztropic]

Archontophoenix alexandrae has become a weed in Hawaii. 🤷‍♂️ 

 

aztropic

Mesa, Arizona 

[WaianaeCrider]

I bought a small Sabal minor about 20+ years ago.  Planted it out in the full sun and watered it for a few years.  Has been living on rain water, about 30 inches a year on average for at least the past 1 6 years.  It drops seeds but it's to dry for any to sprout.

[bgl]

There are probably a number of reasons, and some of them personal. When I moved from San Diego to Leilani Estates on the Big Island in 1995, my primary interest was growing palms that I could not successfully have grown in San Diego. Planting a bunch of Phoenix, Brahea, Trachycarpus and Sabal palms made little to no sense so I planted very few of those. I did plant a couple of Sabal mauritiiformis because I liked it (and they are still doing quite well).  I also planted a Rhopalostylis bauerii some 20 years ago and it is doing very well, even though it is slow. I tried Jubaea, and I am guessing it is too wet here in Leilani Estates for it. In other words, the few I planted didn't make it. Would probably do well on the Kona side, though. It's very unusual to find it in a nursery, so that is also part of the "problem". And there is a good sized Phoenix canariensis on a property here in Leilani Estates, and yes, they are beautiful palms, and Phoenix palms in general thrive here. But then again, why plant a palm with vicious spines when you have so many other choices?

[Than]

If I lived in Hawaii with all those stunning species around, the last thing I'd like to see or plant is a canary palm. Also why importing more weeds?

[mnorell]

Here are Hawaii's plant import rules...these are apparently current though they went into effect on 1 July 1981...42 years ago! This seems not so much about invasives but about pests and diseases, particularly those that could destroy the agricultural interests in Hawai'i (much as with the current ban on importing any Phoenix into the Coachella Valley due to the threat to the date industry). Obviously a lot has happened in terms of the understanding of lethal yellowing and other diseases that had set off a panic at the time these rules were drafted, so these no doubt would benefit from some reappraisal/updating (maybe they have been, but this was the linked file). The gist is that it's about importing from "infested areas" (e.g., Florida, Guam, Puerto Rico and the other Antilles). Much of this doesn't seem to apply to non-stated areas (e.g., California), as noted in the text. Palms are covered on page 17.

[WaianaeCrider]

But then again, why plant a palm with vicious spines when you have so many other choices said  BGL

I agree.  When you  have to haul off dead fronds in your truck I don't want to worry about them spines. 

I have 3 different Phoenix palms and no plans for more.  LOL

 

[CLINODAVE]

I don't see the point of planting temperate/desert plants in rainy East Hawaii.  We live in the only state in the U.S. that supports true tropical rainforest vegetation.  On the Big Island,  most of that has been obliterated at low elevations.  Why would people move here -- many East Hawaii palmtalkers are not Kama'aina -- only to plant vegetation from a completely different biome?  We who have studied Hawaii's native flora know that most of our rainforest vegetation is Indo-Pacific in origin.  It makes more sense to utilize the vast palm availability from this region to diversify our plantings.  I get what you are saying about coconuts/adonidias being overused, but at least in East Hawaii, there is a wealth of Indo-Pac palm flora available that will thrive here.  And that could include Rhopalostylis at higher elevations.  After all, it is from the same place that our beloved 'Ohia trees originated.   Certainly, the Kona side super-dry areas can support Canaries and other desert palms, but is that what visitors want to see?  Honestly, I have to avert my eyes at the lines of Washingtonias flanking the Hilton Waikoloa entrance lol!  BTW, don't hold ur breath waiting for homeowners and businesses to vary from coconuts/Manila palms.  They are easy and that is what wins out for most people.

Edited June 13, 2023 by CLINODAVE

[Mauna Kea Cloudforest]

On 6/12/2023 at 6:06 AM, hbernstein said:

If Sabal minor propagates that aggressively, perhaps it isn't the best choice for Hawaii.

They refuse to volunteer, zero risk of being invasive. I have to germinate in the nursery to get any offsprings.

[Mauna Kea Cloudforest]

5 hours ago, CLINODAVE said:

I don't see the point of planting temperate/desert plants in rainy East Hawaii.  We live in the only state in the U.S. that supports true tropical rainforest vegetation.  On the Big Island,  most of that has been obliterated at low elevations.  Why would people move here -- many East Hawaii palmtalkers are not Kama'aina -- only to plant vegetation from a completely different biome?  We who have studied Hawaii's native flora know that most of our rainforest vegetation is Indo-Pacific in origin.  It makes more sense to utilize the vast palm availability from this region to diversify our plantings.  I get what you are saying about coconuts/adonidias being overused, but at least in East Hawaii, there is a wealth of Indo-Pac palm flora available that will thrive here.  And that could include Rhopalostylis at higher elevations.  After all, it is from the same place that our beloved 'Ohia trees originated.   Certainly, the Kona side super-dry areas can support Canaries and other desert palms, but is that what visitors want to see?  Honestly, I have to avert my eyes at the lines of Washingtonias flanking the Hilton Waikoloa entrance lol!  BTW, don't hold ur breath waiting for homeowners and businesses to vary from coconuts/Manila palms.  They are easy and that is what wins out for most people.

Thanks for your reply, very interesting. This biome technically actually only includes Pritchardia, everything else is brought in unless you artificially create a bigger biome, "Indo-Pacific" definitely opens it up. My conclusion is that it seems immaterial where other palms come from. I get the washingtonia dislike, but they don't really bother me in Waikoloa where it's bone dry and nothing else grows anyway.

It's good to remember that much of Hawaii is not in the rainforest belt (Köppen Af) and not even tropical, my elevation and microclimate on Mauna Kea is temperate (Köppen Cfb). My palms grow amidst coast redwoods and pines and koa.

I get that California transplants wouldn't be interested in these palms. But this isn't about pleasing transplants or tourists. It's about living and gardening.in Hawaii I spend all my time in Hawaii, so to me different palms are interesting because we don't see much of them here. Why should it be ok for Californians to grow tropical palms yet Hawaiians can't grow temperate palms? 

Interesting unique artistic landscapes come about when people are willing to break unwritten rules. This thread has clearly exposed a lot of these rules. There are very few places in the world where tropical dypsis can thrive next to coast redwoods. To me it's about realizing the full potential of a particular climate. Anyway, thank you for your insights 

 

[hbernstein]

15 hours ago, Mauna Kea Cloudforest said:

Thanks for your reply, very interesting. This biome technically actually only includes Pritchardia, everything else is brought in unless you artificially create a bigger biome, "Indo-Pacific" definitely opens it up. My conclusion is that it seems immaterial where other palms come from. I get the washingtonia dislike, but they don't really bother me in Waikoloa where it's bone dry and nothing else grows anyway.

It's good to remember that much of Hawaii is not in the rainforest belt (Köppen Af) and not even tropical, my elevation and microclimate on Mauna Kea is temperate (Köppen Cfb). My palms grow amidst coast redwoods and pines and koa.

I get that California transplants wouldn't be interested in these palms. But this isn't about pleasing transplants or tourists. It's about living and gardening.in Hawaii I spend all my time in Hawaii, so to me different palms are interesting because we don't see much of them here. Why should it be ok for Californians to grow tropical palms yet Hawaiians can't grow temperate palms? 

Interesting unique artistic landscapes come about when people are willing to break unwritten rules. This thread has clearly exposed a lot of these rules. There are very few places in the world where tropical dypsis can thrive next to coast redwoods. To me it's about realizing the full potential of a particular climate. Anyway, thank you for your insights 

 

Actually that's what fascinates me about California, too. To a Florida boy, the low, coastal tropics are found in the low, coastal tropics, and horticultural zones gradually change as one moves North and inland. Seeing bananas growing next to a cold ocean, or temperate conifers growing with tropical palms in California confuses and excites me. I think that Hawaii might make a little more sense: altitudinal/ mountain influenced temperatures and rainfall. The coastal areas are where warmth-loving plants grow.

[flplantguy]

This explains why i feel Florida is boring compared to California (relatively speaking of course!)  I have never seen it so concisely and clearly put, but it shows when you see certain areas in cali, or australia, etc.  Artificial urban opportunity leading to some really cool landscapes.

[CLINODAVE]

No one is saying Hawaii plant growers “can’t “ grow temperate-climate plants.  But you asked why one doesn’t see more of that flora here, and it’s not unreasonable to link our humid, wet, tropical climate to the use of tropical vegetation.  Plus, given the near complete destruction of our low and mid-elevation indigenous forests, many local growers are now planting more native vegetation.  If it makes u feel any better, our endemic Pritchardias seem to be— acc. to phylogenetic research of molecular data — most closely related to Washingtonia (or possibly Copernicia).  Washingtonia is native to warm temperate environments .

[Mauna Kea Cloudforest]

5 hours ago, hbernstein said:

Actually that's what fascinates me about California, too. To a Florida boy, the low, coastal tropics are found in the low, coastal tropics, and horticultural zones gradually change as one moves North and inland. Seeing bananas growing next to a cold ocean, or temperate conifers growing with tropical palms in California confuses and excites me. I think that Hawaii might make a little more sense: altitudinal/ mountain influenced temperatures and rainfall. The coastal areas are where warmth-loving plants grow.

It feels good to be understood, this is exactly what I am talking about when it comes to combining plants from different biomes. Our climate is ideal for this combination. For example our giant attalea cohune grows next to a cryptomeria, which is a Japanese redwood.

[WaianaeCrider]

LOL  Keep thinking how hard you Calf guys work to grow a coconut.  Me I just have one and it took me like 24 years of growing palms to break down and get one.  To common.

[Mauna Kea Cloudforest]

1 hour ago, CLINODAVE said:

No one is saying Hawaii plant growers “can’t “ grow temperate-climate plants.  But you asked why one doesn’t see more of that flora here, and it’s not unreasonable to link our humid, wet, tropical climate to the use of tropical vegetation.  Plus, given the near complete destruction of our low and mid-elevation indigenous forests, many local growers are now planting more native vegetation.  If it makes u feel any better, our endemic Pritchardias seem to be— acc. to phylogenetic research of molecular data — most closely related to Washingtonia (or possibly Copernicia).  Washingtonia is native to warm temperate environments .

I hear you on the indigenous forest, keep in mind that indigenous forest actually has a temperate appearance and adaptation, not a tropical one. That's because all the plants that migrated here without human help, ie pre-polynesian canoe plant arrival all came from temperate regions and 90% of the land area of Hawaii is temperate, not tropical. 

On additional interesting factoid is that both koa and ohia are no longer viable at low elevations because of lack of resistance to pathogens from tropical biomes. I am not a big fan of the junk trees that make up the lowland forests, namely albizia, African tulip and gunpowder trees along with the nasty waiwi, aka strawberry guava. At my elevation I can right at the border of the viable Koa belt but ohia won't grow. I use conifers as a substitute for Ohia. The conifers have a symbiotic relationship with koa, making the Koa stronger.

[CLINODAVE]

35 minutes ago, Mauna Kea Cloudforest said:

I hear you on the indigenous forest, keep in mind that indigenous forest actually has a temperate appearance and adaptation, not a tropical one. That's because all the plants that migrated here without human help, ie pre-polynesian canoe plant arrival all came from temperate regions and 90% of the land area of Hawaii is temperate, not tropical. 

On additional interesting factoid is that both koa and ohia are no longer viable at low elevations because of lack of resistance to pathogens from tropical biomes. I am not a big fan of the junk trees that make up the lowland forests, namely albizia, African tulip and gunpowder trees along with the nasty waiwi, aka strawberry guava. At my elevation I can right at the border of the viable Koa belt but ohia won't grow. I use conifers as a substitute for Ohia. The conifers have a symbiotic relationship with koa, making the Koa stronger.

0ur tropical forests are indeed adapted to the tropics.  They grow in the tropics, therefore they are tropical.  You are incorrect about Hawaii’s plant origins;  it’s estimated that nearly 60% alone are of IndoMalay origin (see “Origins of the Hawaiian flora: Phylogenies and Biogeography…” (Price/Wagner)).  Altho if Pritchardia did indeed speciate from Washingtonia, one could say its origins are warm desert subtropical, or something like that.

[Darold Petty]

Axel, did the conifers I obtained for you survive ? 

[mike in kurtistown]

I thought that the reason Hawaii is considered tropical is that it never freezes. In fact, the temperature rarely ever goes below the upper 50's, which is what makes it possible to grow hundreds of Indo-Pacific species. But it's also not very hot - there are several tropical American palms that just won't grow here, and I suspect that it isn't hot enough.

[hbernstein]

I think that this conversation is starting to get real interesting!

[CLINODAVE]

1 hour ago, mike in kurtistown said:

I thought that the reason Hawaii is considered tropical is that it never freezes. In fact, the temperature rarely ever goes below the upper 50's, which is what makes it possible to grow hundreds of Indo-Pacific species. But it's also not very hot - there are several tropical American palms that just won't grow here, and I suspect that it isn't hot enough.

Yes, there’s a perception that the tropics are- by definition- “torrid.”  Likely stems from early explorers from temperate areas experiencing equatorial heat.  In fact, most climatologists define a tropical climate as one in which the minimum average temperature of the coldest month is 64.4F or higher.  Most low elevation Big Island experiences a higher average than that.  As one goes to higher elevations, many scientists determine that tropical submontane climate takes over, then tropical montane…

[Silas_Sancona]

2 hours ago, CLINODAVE said:

0ur tropical forests are indeed adapted to the tropics.  They grow in the tropics, therefore they are tropical.  You are incorrect about Hawaii’s plant origins;  it’s estimated that nearly 60% alone are of IndoMalay origin (see “Origins of the Hawaiian flora: Phylogenies and Biogeography…” (Price/Wagner)).  Altho if Pritchardia did indeed speciate from Washingtonia, one could say its origins are warm desert subtropical, or something like that.

This is an interesting tidbit since ...Please correct me if wrong, but i know i have heard of ..at least a couple... native plants which grow here / Western Mexico, supposedly also occurring naturally in Hawaii.  Brittle bush being an introduced Sonoran Desert native plant that i've heard has become troublesome there..

If the idea of Pritchardia diverging from Washingtonia  is correct, how did their ancestors reach Hawaii from the Mexican mainland? .. Birds would be an obvious thought, but.. 

Will have to check out the blue highlighted info.. 

[jgi27]

I'm in CA - we can trade places   There are several Jubaeas here, lots of P. Canariensis and Dactyliferas, and what feels like an infestation of Queens and Washingtonias. Our holy grail here is the Coconut Palm, as we can only see those on TV and screensavers. Hell I would trade my car for a Coconut Palm! I would also kill for an Areca palm, they are so nice and reminds me of my childhood in the islands. People just like what they can't have 😅

Edited June 14, 2023 by jgi27

[Kim]

As a part-time transplant to Hawaii, my intention has been simply to try to create a beautiful garden. That is a personal and subjective description. Coming from California where the predominant palm palette is relatively limited, I feel like a kid in a candy store in Hawaii. Why would I not plant the palms that thrive in the East Hawaii climate if they please me aesthetically? I still have my Howea and pygmy date palms in California, but find I don't spend much time in the California garden, whereas in Hawaii, I'm out there for 4-5 or more hours every day. Still have a long way to go to even begin to approach my goal of a "beautiful garden," but I am enjoying the journey, even when I experience failures. (and pigs!) I don't recall anyone ever telling me I should only plant certain kinds of palms. 🧐     

Edit: And of course, space is an issue. Things are filling up quickly. So many plants, limited space. My neighbors who have lived in Hawaii for many years are wanting to grow roses. 

I have not seen any two palm enthusiast gardens that look alike. If your goal is to mix it up with temperate plants, no one and nothing is stopping you, or even remarking on it. I doubt anyone has visited your garden and asked why you are wasting space on conifers. 😆 Right? More likely they are saying, wow, this is fantastic! If the garden pleases you, do continue. You do you.

Oh, as an aside, I saw a most astonishing group of massive Sequoiadendron giganteum outside London, of all places. Wakehurst Garden. Amazing!

[CLINODAVE]

5 hours ago, Silas_Sancona said:

This is an interesting tidbit since ...Please correct me if wrong, but i know i have heard of ..at least a couple... native plants which grow here / Western Mexico, supposedly also occurring naturally in Hawaii.  Brittle bush being an introduced Sonoran Desert native plant that i've heard has become troublesome there..

If the idea of Pritchardia diverging from Washingtonia  is correct, how did their ancestors reach Hawaii from the Mexican mainland? .. Birds would be an obvious thought, but.. 

Will have to check out the blue highlighted info.. 

Actually, western North America has been a very meaningful contributor to Hawaii's native flora.  For example, there are plants called tarweeds in California that are now believed to be the ancestors of Hawaii's iconic silverswords.  Some botanists think that Hawaii's "sky islands" - cooler, drier mountainous areas above the tradewind inversion -- have proved to be a good habitat for many of these temperate colonizers.  The Pritchardia story continues to be interesting.  It's believed that all of HI's flora is the result of colonization by seeds borne on the 3 W's -- wind, wings, or waves.  I haven't read specific research on how the Washingtonia or Copernicia seeds would have arrived here, but it seems there remains a question of whether Pritchardia's ancestors first colonized the S. Pacific, perhaps Fiji and/or Tonga, and then were moved up to HI;  or, was it the reverse, HI got the seeds and eventually some vector carried them to the S. Pacific?  Contemporary research has indicated that HI doesn't just receive colonizers;  it has also sent them to other locations.

[Silas_Sancona]

14 minutes ago, CLINODAVE said:

Actually, western North America has been a very meaningful contributor to Hawaii's native flora.  For example, there are plants called tarweeds in California that are now believed to be the ancestors of Hawaii's iconic silverswords.  Some botanists think that Hawaii's "sky islands" - cooler, drier mountainous areas above the tradewind inversion -- have proved to be a good habitat for many of these temperate colonizers.  The Pritchardia story continues to be interesting.  It's believed that all of HI's flora is the result of colonization by seeds borne on the 3 W's -- wind, wings, or waves.  I haven't read specific research on how the Washingtonia or Copernicia seeds would have arrived here, but it seems there remains a question of whether Pritchardia's ancestors first colonized the S. Pacific, perhaps Fiji and/or Tonga, and then were moved up to HI;  or, was it the reverse, HI got the seeds and eventually some vector carried them to the S. Pacific?  Contemporary research has indicated that HI doesn't just receive colonizers;  it has also sent them to other locations.

Very interesting...   Appreciate the extra insight..  The Sky Island effect is interesting as well since a similar " effect " is seen in mountain islands here in the Southwest / N. Mexico.






 

[Xenon]

1 hour ago, CLINODAVE said:

Actually, western North America has been a very meaningful contributor to Hawaii's native flora.  For example, there are plants called tarweeds in California that are now believed to be the ancestors of Hawaii's iconic silverswords.  Some botanists think that Hawaii's "sky islands" - cooler, drier mountainous areas above the tradewind inversion -- have proved to be a good habitat for many of these temperate colonizers.  The Pritchardia story continues to be interesting.  It's believed that all of HI's flora is the result of colonization by seeds borne on the 3 W's -- wind, wings, or waves.  I haven't read specific research on how the Washingtonia or Copernicia seeds would have arrived here, but it seems there remains a question of whether Pritchardia's ancestors first colonized the S. Pacific, perhaps Fiji and/or Tonga, and then were moved up to HI;  or, was it the reverse, HI got the seeds and eventually some vector carried them to the S. Pacific?  Contemporary research has indicated that HI doesn't just receive colonizers;  it has also sent them to other locations.

 

7 hours ago, Silas_Sancona said:

This is an interesting tidbit since ...Please correct me if wrong, but i know i have heard of ..at least a couple... native plants which grow here / Western Mexico, supposedly also occurring naturally in Hawaii.  Brittle bush being an introduced Sonoran Desert native plant that i've heard has become troublesome there..

If the idea of Pritchardia diverging from Washingtonia  is correct, how did their ancestors reach Hawaii from the Mexican mainland? .. Birds would be an obvious thought, but.. 

Will have to check out the blue highlighted info.. 

 

This paper: https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/61/3/426/1671441 has Pritchardia most closely related to Copernicia, with Washingtonia basal (diverging earlier) to the group that contains Pritchardia and Copernicia. It also supports an American origin for Pritchardia but with an initial colonization event in the central Pacific and the Hawaiian Prichardia being the result of colonization from the central Pacific. The earliest divergence within Pritchardia is seen in P. mitiaroana native to the Cook Islands while the Hawaiian Pritchardia are the result of adaptive radiation within the last few million years. P. minor (native to Kauai, the oldest major island) is the most basal member of the Hawaiian Pritchardia.

This paper: https://bmcecolevol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-12-23 also places P. mitiaroana, P. pacifica, and P. thurstonii basal to the Hawaiian Pritchardia with P. thurstonii the closest to the Hawaiian Pritchardia. This further supports the idea of dispersal of Pritchardia to Hawaii via the central Pacific.  Now how did the American ancestor arrive in the Cook Islands/Fiji? 🙂

Edited June 15, 2023 by Xenon

[Silas_Sancona]

5 minutes ago, Xenon said:

 

 

This paper: https://academic.oup.com/sysbio/article/61/3/426/1671441 has Pritchardia most closely related to Copernicia, with Washingtonia basal (diverging earlier) to the group that contains Pritchardia and Copernicia. It also supports an American origin for Pritchardia but with an initial colonization event in the central Pacific and the Hawaiian Prichardia being the result of colonization from the central Pacific. The earliest divergence within Pritchardia is seen in P. mitiaroana native to the Cook Islands while the Hawaiian Pritchardia are the result of adaptive radiation within the last few million years. P. minor (native to Kauai, the oldest major island) is the most basal member of the Hawaiian Pritchardia. This paper: https://bmcecolevol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-12-23 also places P. mitiaroana, P. pacifica, and P. thurstonii basal to the Hawaiian Pritchardia with P. thurstonii the closest to the Hawaiian Pritchardia. This further supports the idea of dispersal of Pritchardia to Hawaii via the central Pacific.  Now how did the American ancestor arrive in the Cook Islands/Fiji? 🙂

That's a good question..  There is thought regarding contact between Indigenous South Americans, and natives of Polynesia but, that was relatively recent, ...not tens / hundreds of thousands of years ago..  Could seed of some now extinct Copernicia ancestor have drifted from Western S. America to Polynesia sometime long ago?... 🤔

[mnorell]

12 hours ago, CLINODAVE said:

...If it makes u feel any better, our endemic Pritchardias seem to be— acc. to phylogenetic research of molecular data — most closely related to Washingtonia (or possibly Copernicia).  Washingtonia is native to warm temperate environments .

I just wanted to clarify that Washingtonia is not a temperate genus. Washingtonia filifera hails from the subtropical low desert (Sonoran desert, from wet areas, notably in the vicinity of Palm Springs and Borrego, and also in western Arizona, to a southern limit of Sierra Juarez in northern Baja California); and Washingtonia robusta is native to a dry (monsoonal) warm subtropical/tropical climate in the Mexican states of Sonora and southern Baja California Sur (eastern side of the peninsula, adjacent to the warm-water Gulf of California, from Cataviña down to Cabo San Lucas). Washingtonia filifera in particular does not generally perform well in the more temperate, cooler climate of the California coastal zone on the western side of the high mountains that divide it from the low desert.

There is an interesting study on Washingtonia and Brahea here.

[WaianaeCrider]

11 hours ago, CLINODAVE said:

Yes, there’s a perception that the tropics are- by definition- “torrid.”  Likely stems from early explorers from temperate areas experiencing equatorial heat.  In fact, most climatologists define a tropical climate as one in which the minimum average temperature of the coldest month is 64.4F or higher.  Most low elevation Big Island experiences a higher average than that.  As one goes to higher elevations, many scientists determine that tropical submontane climate takes over, then tropical montane…

I'm about 380' on the west (dry) side of O`ahu.  We get about 30' of rain on average.  Most between Late Oct and May.  Temp at the high point of summer can hit 100 on my roof but more likely hi 80's to low 90's at ground level and winter nights MIGHT reach mid 50's but average around 63.

[Than]

Such an interesting conversation! I thought Hawaii was purely tropical so far although at times it did occur to me that it was quite high up the map.

Regarding the comparison between gardeners planting tropical plants in California vs those gardening temperate plants in Hawaii or other tropical places, I guess a big difference is that a tropical plant in California has no chance of becoming a weed while a temperate plant in Hawaii can easily spread uncontrolled and become an issue.

[bubba]

I remember driving to the top area of Kauai to look down into that almost Grand Canyon area. It was quite interesting to notice the variation in vegetation as you moved higher and higher in elevation. It really became a pine forest at the higher elevation.

Roll back down near the coast, and everything changes back to the absolute tropics. Hawaii must be one of the most perfect climates on earth. Not too hot, not too cold with the ability to grow virtually any palm desired.
 

 

[Desertlife4me]

19 hours ago, Mauna Kea Cloudforest said:

I hear you on the indigenous forest, keep in mind that indigenous forest actually has a temperate appearance and adaptation, not a tropical one. That's because all the plants that migrated here without human help, ie pre-polynesian canoe plant arrival all came from temperate regions and 90% of the land area of Hawaii is temperate, not tropical. 

On additional interesting factoid is that both koa and ohia are no longer viable at low elevations because of lack of resistance to pathogens from tropical biomes. I am not a big fan of the junk trees that make up the lowland forests, namely albizia, African tulip and gunpowder trees along with the nasty waiwi, aka strawberry guava. At my elevation I can right at the border of the viable Koa belt but ohia won't grow. I use conifers as a substitute for Ohia. The conifers have a symbiotic relationship with koa, making the Koa stronger.

Isn't the definition of tropical that the land falls within the Tropic of Cancer & Tropic of Capricorn? By that definition Hawaii is 1/2 below the tropic of cancer (including the big island) and 1/2 above it. 

Not that it matters much, but the word Tropical came from these lines.

 

[Darold Petty]

Somewhat off topic, but bear with me,  I am fascinated that the genus Dietes contains six species, five found in South Africa and one on Lord Howe Island.  (D. robinsoniana).  These two points are separated by 120 degrees of longitude and 7200 miles !  In addition, LHI is less than 10 million years old.

[Silas_Sancona]

3 hours ago, ego said:

Such an interesting conversation! I thought Hawaii was purely tropical so far although at times it did occur to me that it was quite high up the map.

Regarding the comparison between gardeners planting tropical plants in California vs those gardening temperate plants in Hawaii or other tropical places, I guess a big difference is that a tropical plant in California has no chance of becoming a weed while a temperate plant in Hawaii can easily spread uncontrolled and become an issue.

Depends on the plant / it's overall distribution / adaptability..  Both CA and AZ ( esp. ) have numerous plant species / a few plant families which are centered in the Tropics, Below the Tropic of Cancer for example.   Passiflora,  Aristiolochia,  Bouteloua,  Bursera,  certain Ferns = Asplenium,  for one... are a few "tropical" Genus with species here in AZ for example.  Palo Verde, our native Ironwood, and Ocotillo are also plants considered Tropical in origin.

Some people may twist in the wind on this but all Cacti, are tropical in origin.. yet a few grow as far north as Canada..

While many of our problem non natives do originate from Mediterranean climate regions, there are a few " Tropicals"  which can also be aggressive / invasive in CA ..warmer parts of the state at least..

Ultra / Equatorial Tropicals? Those would be about the only things where it is definitely too cold for them to spread away from a garden in CA -if they'd even survive themselves in an average garden long term out there themselves..