In article ,
K writes:
|
| Both are deciduous, so there will be light and water in spring. Even
| bluebells don't do well under evergreens, even when there is plenty of
| water.
|
| Both had good leaf cover before the lily of the valley appeared, so I'm
| not sure how valid the argument about light is. Water is likely to be
| the key factor.

Could well be, but they still wouldn't make dense shade - there is a
world of difference between the shade under such things and under, say,
solid holly or conifers. They (like bluebells etc.) certainly thrive
on a fraction the amount of light that most grasses need, but I have
never seen any photosynthetic plant do well in the UK in dense shade
(unicellular algae excluded), water or no water.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.