On 30/8/04 9:44 am, in article ,
"Charlie Pridham" wrote:

snip
the case of the former, D. caerulea. D. tasmanica is much taller by the
sound of things. What's curious is that a Google image search shows the
berries in two completely different forms of growth for D. caerulea and I
can only imagine that is to do with climate differences. Ours grows
berries
like the one on the Zurich botanical page and not at all like the one from
a
Brisbane page.


It didn't come from me! I had been given a couple of species by Roger van
Loon who used to be around on URG. I now have 3, D. caerulea D. tasmanica
and anotherone whose name I can not remember but it flowers out of tall
leafy stems and its growth habit is quite different to the other two. so far
they have flowered but been reluctant to berry, I live in hope as it makes
great ground cover in some of the gardens I know, the plants seem
indestructible.

I'm assuming ours I D. caerulea, then! Those are the only two in the RHS
bible but when you're next this way you can have a look, if you will and
tell us what you think. I had assumed that our had seeded themselves but
trying to dig one up Ray finds they're on runners, by the look of it. Ours
are in the bed beside the narrow path up to the tea room, so don't get a lot
of sun. I don't know if that makes a difference. The berries are the most
fantastic colour - so much so that I only makes me wonder why more people
don't grow it!
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds to email me)