The Garden Professors™

What’s wrong with this picture?

The Seattle Times recently had a front page story on what Seattle’s new waterfront might look like. Back in 2009, the city began work on this project, hiring “rock-star landscape architect James Corner, designer of the celebrated High Line in New York City” to develop the big picture. (Note: I’ve been to the High Line and have posted on it before – it’s fantastic.) As you can see from the linked article from the Times, many of Corner’s architectural renditions for the greenway are presented, including this one:

COURTESY OF JAMES CORNER FIELD OPERATIONS AND CITY OF SEATTLE
An architectural rendering shows what a Pioneer Square beach at the foot of Washington Street could look like.

For those of you not familiar with Seattle’s waterfront, it’s built right next to Puget Sound, a huge inland sea connected at its mouth to the Pacific Ocean. So it was with much surprise that I saw what appear to be Douglas firs (Pseudotsuga menziesii) along the cobbled beach. Douglas firs are not particularly salt tolerant, nor would they be very happy with the tidal action or seasonal storms that will flood the beach on a regular basis. Even if these were not Douglas firs (native to Seattle) but some other salt-tolerant species (mangroves?), it’s doubtful they would look as picturesque as the drawing shows. Neither would the rest of the trees in the area, whose root zones would normally extend far into saline soils under the beach and sound.

Am I being picky? No, I don’t think so. Landscape architects should know better than to use plantings as decorations for their designs, like candy sprinkles on cupcakes. Plants aren’t just design elements. Choosing plants that are appropriate to a site is a science as well as an art.

I can’t believe that in the five years that Seattle’s been working on this project that horticultural science hasn’t been a major component of landscape planning.

Beetlemania

File this under “if it’s not one thing, it’s another.”
Which may be, upon further reflection, the most profoundly absurd statement ever when it comes to gardening. It’s nature! Of course there’s always something!
Here in the Blue Ridge mountains of Virginia, we’ve had insect pests come and go, with each summer featuring something different.

Two years ago? Chewing up everything in the vegetable garden plus lots of perennials… Blister beetles!

Last year we had record rainfall, which brought out the gnats in gnumbers we’d never seen before. While not plant pests, they managed to take a lot of the fun out of gardening, hell-bent on clogging every facial orifice and nibbling on exposed flesh. Then the stinkbugs came. And stayed all winter long, keeping us company in the house.

This season goes down as the summer of Popillia japonica, the Japanese Beetle. Holy cow. I’m no entomologist (let’s ask Dr. Jeff!) so I can’t speak to how we got to this lowly place. But in any gathering of two or more local gardeners, The Beetle Issue will come up immediately.

There’s a ton of literature out there on life cycle, control, etc. They are a noted pest of turf, as the larvae munch away at the roots before emerging in early summer. I am not personally familiar with that aspect, as we don’t really have turf at our house; it’s a mix of white clover, orchard grass, broadleaf weeds, and some kind of fescue that that still make a decent green substance when mowed to 3.25″ (and viewed from a distance). If I come across grubs while pulling weeds or planting, I’ll call over a couple of hens to take care of business. Biological controls such as spores of bacterial Milky Disease and insect parasitic nematodes have been only marginally successful.

For adult control, the debate continue regarding the efficacy (and wisdom) of traps baited with floral or pheromone lures. “Hey there, neighbor! Mind if your Japanese Beetles come over to my place?” Most of the pesticides recommended in the literature are broad spectrum (pyrethroids, carbaryl, etc.) so, heck no on that count. Hand-picking them into a cup or bucket of soapy water to die a bubbly, fragrant death is an option for a small garden (and extremely patient gardener). Note chickens also enjoy the crunchy outer coating and creamy center; spiny, thrashing legs and all.

Back to our regional plight – they attacked the usual suspects – favoring anything in the Rosaceae family including brambles,apple, etc. Any kind of Hibiscus now looks like a lace doily. Veggies were indiscriminately perforated – the beans were especially hard-hit. All that beetle poop is especially unappetizing on chard. A big surprise was the Japanese or Fall-blooming Anemone. They took mine down to the stem. I am currently enjoying flowers on a stick.

There's an "Anemone" pun here somewhere.. — There’s an “Anemone” pun here somewhere..

Both the Anemone and I will live, of course. But here’s the thing. One of the mantras that got us all through one of the coldest winters on record was “At least the bugs won’t be as bad this summer!” Ha, ha! If it’s not one thing, it’s another! Aargh.

Go here to download a PDF of the exceedingly-informative 20-page USDA APHIS Homeowner’s Guide to Managing Japanese Beetles

Don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

Posted by Bert Cregg
Yesterday afternoon I did a little fall garage clean-up and listened to former MSU Extension colleague Dean Krauskopf’s call-in gardening show on the radio. A couple callers in a man phoned the show worried about his Japanese maple tree, which had a near-death experience from this past winter’s severe cold. The man had heard this coming winter was supposed to be just as bad as last winter and he wanted to know how best to protect his struggling tree from further calamity. Dean quizzed the caller for details about the tree and the site and gave some reasonable advice to try to modify the micro-environment around the tree to limit exposure to winter wind and cold. But I wondered where the caller got his information that winter 2015 was going to be as bad as 2014. As if anyone around here needs a reminder; January-March 2014in Michigan was the coldest since 1978 and the 4th coldest on record, with most locations reporting snowfall totals well above average. Many surrounding states has similar winter weather issues.

To get some insights on predictions for the upcoming winter, I consulted with the two most trusted sources of such information: The NOAA Climate Prediction Center and the Old Farmer’s Almanac.

The Climate Prediction Center maps present probabilities of colder or warmer than average weather for a given three month period. The most recent NOAA projections available on-line are predicting near-normal temperatures for January-March 2015 for most of the eastern half of the country, above average temps for the Northwest and below average for Texas and Florida. NOAA predicts below average precipitation for the lower Great Lakes and Northwest and above average precip for much of the South.

Current NOAA temperature predictions for Jan-March 2015

Current NOAA precipitation prediction for Jan-March 2015

Apparently, however, Dean’s caller is dismissing NOAA and all of their satellites and computer models and is relying on the Old Farmer’s Almanac instead for his long-term weather outlook. The Old Farmer’s Almanac is currently predicting colder and drier than normal for most of this upcoming winter for the lower Great Lakes.

Current temperature outlook for lower Great Lakes regions from Old Farmer's Almanac. — Current temperature outlook for lower Great Lakes regions from Old Farmer’s Almanac.

So, how much stock should we place in these predictions? Let’s step inside the Wayback Machine for a moment and see what each source was saying a year ago about the then-upcoming winter of 2014. NOAA and the computers are up first.

For most of the eastern U.S., NOAA predicted a warmer than average Jan-March 2014 with normal precip. Ooh, sorry about that NOAA but we thank you for playing ‘Guess that Winter’! Please be sure to pick up your parting gifts on your way to our Loser’s Lounge.

September 2013 map of NOAA prediction for Jan-March 2014 temperatures.

September 2013 map of NOAA predictions of Jan-March 2014 precipitation.

Next up is the Old Farmer’s Almanac, which predicts winter weather based on… well, no one’s quite sure. In any event, this time last year the Almanac predicted Jan-March 2014 would be mostly warmer and drier than normal for the lower Great Lakes. Oh no, bummer Almanac. Looks like you and NOAA can commiserate in our Loser’s Lounge. And that means Old Man Winter repeats once again as our champion!

Old Farmers Almanac September 2013 weather prediction for Nov. 2013-Oct. 2014.

So, what does all this mean for Winter 2015? Even with huge datasets and sophisticated models, long term weather projections are an iffy proposition. And, as much as everyone loves to say, “See, the Old Farmer’s Almanac was the only one to get it right”, there is little evidence that it does better than chance alone. Beyond that all we can say with certainty is that NOAA and the Computers would make a really cool name for a rock band.

Cross-pollination making you cross?

No, your cucumbers have not hybridized with your melons.

I’ve been fielding different versions of the same question a LOT lately.
Three different people have sent pictures of “cucumelons” telling me they planted cucumbers next to their melons, and now the cucumbers look strange, so they’re concerned that they have cross pollinated with the melons. One person planted what was supposed to be a red raspberry next to their yellow raspberry, but the new plant is producing yellow fruit, so they think that it must be cross pollinating with their yellow plant, causing the fruits to turn yellow. Not to mention similar queries about tomatoes, peppers, and watermelons. It seems like every time a piece of produce turns out looking differently than what people expect, they blame pollen from the plant next to it.

I’m sure the highly educated readers of The Garden Professors know this already, but to clarify, there is a very simple reason why you don’t need to worry about one plant pollinating another plant and changing the quality of your produce UNLESS you are planning on saving seeds to grow for the next year.

When a flower is pollinated and starts developing into a fruit full of seeds, it is only the seeds themselves that combine the genetics of the two parents to develop into something new. Everything else – the flesh of a tomato, or cucumber or melon or raspberry – is produced solely by the mother plant, and the daddy of those seeds inside doesn’t matter a bit. Think about when a woman is pregnant… the identity of the father of the child inside her doesn’t change the character of the skin of her belly.

If you want to save seeds of your plant for next year, it is another matter, and you should be sure to isolate or (better yet) hand pollinate different varieties of the same species from each other to make sure they don’t hybridize unintentionally. You still don’t need to worry about your cucumbers and melons, however – they won’t hybridize by chance in your garden. If a plant doesn’t produce the right colored fruit or flower, most likely it was just mislabeled at the nursery. Grow a strange looking cucumber, chances are it was left on the plant too long. Cucumbers are harvested and eaten when young and immature, leave them too long and they get… strange looking. No need to blame it on the melons next to them.

There IS one exception to this, one common plant in the garden where the source of pollen makes a huge difference in what you harvest: Corn. Corn is the exception because what we’re eating is the seed itself, not the fruit produced by the mother plant surrounding the seed. That’s why if your sweet corn gets a dose of pollen from the field corn the farmer is grown next door, it comes out starchy and not sweet.

It also makes breeding colorful corn for fall decorations REALLY fun… Because when you see a multicolored ears of corn like this from my garden last year:

You can carefully pick out just the seeds showing the colors you like best, say the palest blues and pinks, sow them together the next year, and get something looking like this:

Or plant all the darkest kernels together and get this:

Mark Stennes

This past week the world of trees lost a true friend. Mark Stennes was a tireless worker who selflessly promoted our urban trees and the people who worked with them and was a driving force behind elm research in Minnesota.

When it came to trees, there are few people who could equal Mark’s passion. He had an insatiable curiosity in the world around us. He lived trees and took every opportunity to discuss them. He discovered the St. Croix elm and helped the University of Minnesota’s elm project identify other elms with potential. Any short list of tree experts in Minnesota had to have Mark’s name on it to be complete.

But as good as Mark was with trees, that wasn’t really where his genius lay. Mark was one of those rare individuals who was able to communicate that love for trees to other people and inspire them to actually do something. He was widely known and respected across the Green Industry in Minnesota. When Mark wanted to get something done, he did it through a tight network of friends that was incredible to behold. He had connections with people everywhere, from the tree people to the turf. Everyone knew that Mark was a person you could count on. A person who would go to bat for you when things got tough. For me, Mark was the guy who worked behind the scenes to make sure that everyone knew the kind of work that we were doing at the University of Minnesota, quietly promoting us so that when push came to shove we would have what we needed to make it all work. He took pride in the successes of his friends and wasn’t shy about spreading praise around. Mark was a person that I could constantly and consistently count on.

The day before he died, Mark called up my good friend Chad Giblin about going out and checking on some elms. And that’s how I’ll remember him; anxious to go and look at another tree so he could take notes and tell us all about it.

Plant sentience – “It is happening…again”

Those of you who were Twin Peaks fans will recognize the title quote. And while my topic is not quite as scary as being stalked by Bob, the fact that plant sentience continues to rear its irritating head in legitimate scientific venues makes me want to curl up in a ball and whimper. Here’s what made me cringe: “Sound Garden: Can Plants Actually Talk and Hear?”

I posted on this topic a few years ago, and I’d invite you to read it and the accompanying comments. I’m still not a fan of anthropomorphizing plants, and I still think word choices matter, especially when you are trying to educate people about science.

It’s disappointing that some scientists are deliberately using anthropomorphic language when discussing plant physiology. The cynical side of me says it’s a great way to get press coverage.

We’re watching you…

When worlds collide

This past week I was in Alnarp, Sweden to present at the International Urban Tree Diversity Conference. Lots of interesting talks, posters and field tours. Much more to discuss than I can fit into a blog post, but if you’re interested you can read the presentation abstracts.

One of the best features of the conference is that the presenters and participants included not only arborists and urban forester but also landscape architects and urban planners. This might not sound too remarkable but these groups are not always on the same page. While urban foresters are on board with the need to diversify urban and community forests; species diversity can be at odds with uniformity, which is a key element in landscape design. For example, a common application of uniformity in design is the installation of alle’s – long, uniform monoculture plantings along a street or path.

Fredicksberg alle in Copenhagen - street view — Fredicksberg alle in Copenhagen – street view

Fredicksberg alle in Copenhagen - pedestrian view — Fredicksberg alle in Copenhagen – pedestrian view

The aesthetic appeal of an alle’ is undeniable and seemingly universal. We saw many examples in our tours in Malmo and Copenhagen, but alle’s can found almost anywhere mankind has planted trees.

The dilemma, of course, is that any monoculture planting runs the risk of catastrophic failure, especially in an era of increased global trade and potential introduction of destructive exotic pests.

Simply planting a random mix of species leads to a menagerie effect – one of these, one of those – that most eyes find unsatisfactory.

A random mix of species increases diversity though not necessarily aesthetic appeal

One of the challenges addressed at the conference is how to meet the design and aesthetic objectives of uniformity while still achieving diverse landscape. There are no simple solutions and like most compromises, not everyone will be completely satisfied. But at least we are getting to the point where all sides of the discussion are being heard and creative minds are melding the science and the art that will produce the desired aesthetic and diversity.

Another close shave…

Life is full of surprises. A case in point is some recent work on our Social Media Designed Tree Establishment Study (SoMe-Ded-TrEeS). One of the objectives of the project was to determine the impact of root-ball manipulations to remove circling roots on container-grown trees. When we planted the trees (‘Bloodgood plane trees in 25 gal. containers) two years ago, we ‘shaved’ the outer roots on one-third of the trees, ‘teased’ apart the circling roots on one-third, and planted the rest as-is (‘pop and drop’ in Linda’s vernacular).

Rerearch assistant Aniko Gaul shaves a root system with a pruning saw before installation 2 years ago

Research Technician Dana Ellison teases apart a root-ball before installation

Two weeks ago our campus nursery staff dug 12 of the trees for us using their tree spade – four from each of the three groups. We then borrowed an air-spade from MSU Campus Infrastructure and Planning and we excavated the root-balls to determine the amount of new root growth into the surrounding soil. (‘We’ meaning my technician Dana Ellison and Nicole Rowley, one of our new undergraduate research assistants)

Nicole excavating roots with the air spade

The results of the root exam were a surprise to me. Going in to this exercise my expectation was that the roots that were ‘teased’ to remove girdling roots would fare the best – and they did have visibly fewer circling roots and more new root growth than the ‘pop and drop’. But the biggest surprise was the marked improvement in rooting of the ‘shaved’ roots.

'Shaved' root systems — ‘Shaved’ root systems

To be honest, I had some reservations about the shaving treatment. Just based on geometry alone, shaving off the bottom and outer 1” of roots around a 25 gal. tree removes over 20% of the roots; and this proportion is even greater is you consider the proportion of fine, absorbing roots. In the sampled trees, however, shaving essentially eliminated all circling roots. Even more impressive was the amount of new root growth out of the bottom of the root-balls. NOTE: In the photos below the red-dashed lines indicate the approximate dimensions of the roots when the trees were planted two years ago.

Root system on 'teased' tree — Root system on ‘teased’ tree

Rot system on 'shaved' tree — Rot system on ‘shaved’ tree

We (again meaning Dana and Nicole) trimmed all the roots that extended beyond the original root-ball and separated roots based on whether they came from the side or the bottom of the root-ball. They (the roots, not Dana and Nicole) are in the process of drying in the lab and will be weighed shortly. Based on the volume of material in the bags, however, it is clear the shaved trees will be the ‘winners’. Another example of why it pays to keep an open mind when doing research.

You and me Baby ain’t nuthin’ but mammals…

As spring slowly makes it appearance in the Midwest, homeowners and landscapers are likely to continue discovering damage from our record-breaking winter. While brutally cold temperatures and heavy snow loads took their toll in many areas, some of the most severe damage that occurred to landscape trees and shrubs this winter was caused by mammals.

Our long, harsh winter resulted in heavy feeding damage by deer, rabbits and voles, also called field mice. Depending on the age and type of plant and which animal was feeding on it, mammal damage can range from light pruning to death of a tree or shrub. Developing a strategy to deal with animal damage requires proper identification of the offender. Here are clues to identifying mammal damage.

Vole damage
Voles or field mice are small rodents that gnaw on tree and shrub stems. Voles do not hibernate and are active throughout the winter under snow, so feeding damage that occurred near ground-line when the ground was covered with snow is likely vole damage. Although they are small, voles can wreak a lot of havoc. They can easily kill small trees or branches on larger trees by girdling stems, or removing the bark around the entire circumference.

Voles (or field mice) can completely girdle trees.

Deer damage
During the winter, deer feed on the ends of many types of trees and shrubs. Evergreens, especially arborvitae, are among their favorites. In most landscapes in this area, a “browse line” is a common feature on arborvitae. Eastern white pine, maples, birch, dogwoods and viburnums are also favored trees deer browse. This winter, I received reports of deer browsing on secondary species, such as Austrian pine, reflecting the severity of the winter.

Rabbit damage
Rabbits can cause damage that may resemble feeding by either voles or deer. Like deer, rabbits will chew the ends off of deciduous trees and shrubs. A close inspection of the end point will often indicate the culprit: rabbits typically leave a clean, angled bite mark, whereas deer tear or break stems, leaving a rough edge. Like voles, rabbits can also girdle stems of trees and shrubs. In winters with heavy snow cover like this one, the height of the damage can provide a clue; vole damage will extend down to the soil surface, while rabbits work above the snow-line.

Clean, angled bite-marks: A telltale sigh of rabbit activity.

Managing mammal damage
Managing mammal damage is often difficult and multiple strategies may be needed. Excluding deer with fencing can be highly effective, but is not practical in many instances. Deer repellents can also be effective, but may wear off over time or become less effective as deer become hungrier as winter wears on. Around our place, our dogs to a good job of keeping deer and rabbits at bay, but of course require their own care and feeding.
Reducing weeds and ground cover can help to reduce damage by rodents by eliminating cover from their predators. Trapping may be effective for controlling rabbits, but is usually not practical for voles. Baiting can be used for voles, though care must be taken to avoid poisoning non-target animals. In some situations, erecting raptor perches can also be helpful in keeping rodent populations down.

Go ahead, weed, make my day…

Ridding an ecosystem of invasive plants is never easy. We can bring in goats to munch on offending plants or force armies of schoolchildren into slavery to pull them out; but, in all likelihood the sneaky little devils (the invasive plants, not the schoolkids) will be re-sprouting and back with a vengeance before we can turn around. For many invasive plant infestations the most practical long-term solution is chemical control – in other words, herbicides. Of course, herbicides have their issues such as drift and potential impacts on non-target plants. And what do you do when you want to get rid of invasive plants in a remote, sensitive ecosystem with limited access? Enter Herbicide Ballistic Technology (HBT). The HBT system uses the same technology as a recreational paint-ball gun but instead of filling the projectiles with paint, the balls are filled with triclopyr, which is commonly used in homeowner products for brush and poison ivy control.

Dr. James Leary at the University of Hawaii has been exploring the use of HBT to control invasive plants in various ecosystems in Hawaii. Most of the time Dr. Leary and his colleague use the standard paintball HBT system, but for the big jobs they call in the heavy artillery – literally. Dr. Leary recently presented a seminar here at MSU on work he and his team have conducted in conjunction with the Maui Invasive Species commission to eliminate populations of Miconia calvacens, one of the most problematic invasive trees in Hawaii. According to the seminar abstract, Dr. Leary reports “Our best utility for HBT deployment on a Hughes 500D helicopter platform featuring real-time capabilities in target elimination. …we have conducted 17 tactical search and destroy mission covering a total net area of 3,888 ha and eliminating 7,463 Miconia targets.”

Targeting miconia from a helicopter. Photo: C. Duncan.

Clearly the war on invasive has been raised to a different level