I do not stand corrected. I was quoting what an authoritative source said on
the radio. Many natural and unatural events depend on sequences of
operations with first in gaining major advantage.
Regards
David T
"Nick Maclaren" wrote in message
...

In article ,
"david taylor" writes:
|
| Many years ago oak and beech were contrasted in a natural history
programme
| on the BBC-it could have been radio3.
| Beech has a shallow root system, and also holds on to its dead leaves
well
| into the winter thus denying nutrients to other trees.
| Oak with a deep root system lost its leaves early in the season thus
| allowing deep borrowing earth worms plenty of time to drag the leaves
down.
| On this account extensive beech woods do not develope a very dense
| undergrowth.

Grrk. That sounds simplistic to the point of being misleading. The
delay in dropping leaves will merely delay the return of the nutrients,
not reduce it. More plausibly, a shallow root system will also deny
seedlings access to surface nutients and (more seriously) water - you
can see that effect even with herbaceous plants.

However, it is a myth, anyway. For a comparable level of cover, there
is very little difference between oak (Q. robur and pedunculata) and
beech in terms of undergrowth. Look at the trees, and woodlands
comprised of them, to see. Also, only YOUNG beech trees hold onto
their leaves beyond autumn - and hedges, which are artificially
rejuvenated. Large beeches drop their leaves later than oak, but still
leaving plenty of time for worms to drag the leaves down.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Many thanks Nick, Janet and all the others for your input The discussion has been/is
immensely interesting, although somewhat confusing. But that's gardening. On the Rhodo ponticum issue the BBC did interview a forester on a Welsh hillside some time ago whose fulltime job was removing them. His clear statement was that "They poison the ground and nothing will grow here for 5 to 10 years". In retrospect however he might not have been referring to an actual toxin, but indicating that the soil was in some way, - due to an alternative multitude of causes, significantly damaged as regards supporting any species except its own.
Personally I suspect that outside of the bench science of the laboratory the nature of soil is so infinitely complex that we are unlikely ever to thoroughly understand what is going on down there at any moment.
So! members. Do I spread all this Beech leaf mulch around or take it to the local tip?
Dave

In article ,
"david taylor" writes:
|
| I do not stand corrected. I was quoting what an authoritative source said on
| the radio. Many natural and unatural events depend on sequences of
| operations with first in gaining major advantage.

Oh, I don't expect you to, and am certainly neither denying that it is
a factor, nor that an authoritative source said that it was the cause.
I am merely pointing out that, like so many such statements, it sounds
(and probably is) simplistic to the point of being misleading.

I am, as so often, basing my opinions on my own observations and
analysis from the basics. While I do fairly often contradict received
wisdom and have to retract later, over the past 40-50 years, I have
my views rather more often confirmed by a change in received wisdom.
You are welcome to make your own judgement as to which is likely in
this case :-)

I should point out that, in addition to what you say, authoritative
sources have also said that the reason is that beech produces a denser
canopy that oak, and I contradicted that too. Both sets of received
wisdom cannot be right, so I must be right in denying it at least once!


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Dave Roberts writes:
|
| Many thanks Nick, Janet and all the others for your input The
| discussion has been/is
| immensely interesting, although somewhat confusing. But that's
| gardening.

And, in particular, uk.rec.gardening :-)

| On the Rhodo ponticum issue the BBC did interview a forester
| on a Welsh hillside some time ago whose fulltime job was removing them.
| His clear statement was that "They poison the ground and nothing will
| grow here for 5 to 10 years". In retrospect however he might not have
| been referring to an actual toxin, but indicating that the soil was in
| some way, - due to an alternative multitude of causes, significantly
| damaged as regards supporting any species except its own.

He wasn't called Dai the Gloom, by any chance, was he? :-)

Don't trust what you hear on television/radio, especially the sayings
of such people. They are often selected for 'colour' rather than
rationality.

| Personally I suspect that outside of the bench science of the
| laboratory the nature of soil is so infinitely complex that we are
| unlikely ever to thoroughly understand what is going on down there at
| any moment.

Well, you're right there!

| So! members. Do I spread all this Beech leaf mulch around or take it to
| the local tip?

Spread it around. DEFINITELY. The Victorians prized it very highly,
and all their gardening books said that gardeners should go out of their
way to make it.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Dave Roberts writes:
|
| Many thanks Nick, Janet and all the others for your input The
| discussion has been/is
| immensely interesting, although somewhat confusing. But that's
| gardening.

And, in particular, uk.rec.gardening :-)

Ah yes. It started with beech and went on to others.
So, I'll add another. Elder berry (sambucus) does seems to have a nasty
habit of being able to wipe out its immediate neighbours, especially
within a privet hedge


| On the Rhodo ponticum issue the BBC did interview a forester
| on a Welsh hillside some time ago whose fulltime job was removing them.
| His clear statement was that "They poison the ground and nothing will
| grow here for 5 to 10 years". In retrospect however he might not have
| been referring to an actual toxin, but indicating that the soil was in
| some way, - due to an alternative multitude of causes, significantly
| damaged as regards supporting any species except its own.

He wasn't called Dai the Gloom, by any chance, was he? :-)

Don't trust what you hear on television/radio, especially the sayings
of such people. They are often selected for 'colour' rather than
rationality.

| Personally I suspect that outside of the bench science of the
| laboratory the nature of soil is so infinitely complex that we are
| unlikely ever to thoroughly understand what is going on down there at
| any moment.

Well, you're right there!

| So! members. Do I spread all this Beech leaf mulch around or take it to
| the local tip?

Spread it around. DEFINITELY. The Victorians prized it very highly,
and all their gardening books said that gardeners should go out of their
way to make it.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article .com,
"a.c." writes:
|
| Ah yes. It started with beech and went on to others.
| So, I'll add another. Elder berry (sambucus) does seems to have a nasty
| habit of being able to wipe out its immediate neighbours, especially
| within a privet hedge

Not in my garden, it doesn't, nor in any of the (mainly whitethorn and
blackthorn) ones that I was familiar with in Wiltshire. But it could
well happen sometimes.

There are known to be many dozens of ways, physical, chemical and
probably other, by which many species attempts to discourage others.
The big mistake is when people extrapolate an observation that there
is SOME effect under ONE circumstance into the claim that there is
an ABSOLUTE effect under ALL circumstances. And, with a VERY few
exceptions, SOME in the above is a synonym for SMALL.

The same thing applies to ants, aphids and broad beans :-(


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Many Thanks Nick - Will spread it around. Can't beat the Victorians for
knowing what they are doing.

Whilst on this, (allelopathy ? ), subject may I mention the vine Solanum
Crispum - 'Glasnevin'. For myself I would take a lot of convincing that this
does NOT poison its immediate root area. I have on three different occasions,
in three diferent gardens, lost substantial shrubs, - Viburnum tinus, Berberis
darwinii, and such like, by a process of gradual die-back, when close to it.

Although I like this vine - and it has its uses, I would never plant it in the open ground again. In a container, maybe.
Dave

In article ,
Dave Roberts writes:
|
| Whilst on this, (allelopathy ? ), subject may I mention the vine
| Solanum
| Crispum - 'Glasnevin'. For myself I would take a lot of convincing that
| this
| does NOT poison its immediate root area. I have on three different
| occasions,
| in three diferent gardens, lost substantial shrubs, - Viburnum tinus,
| Berberis
| darwinii, and such like, by a process of gradual die-back, when close
| to it.

I have never seen that, and there is still a possible physical
explanation! It is a moderately drought-resistant plant, and could
well be good at extracting water. B. darwinii, at least, isn't as
nearly as drought-resistant as its leaves would imply.

From a gardener's point of view, there is little difference.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Janet Baraclough writes:
| The message
| from Dave Roberts contains
| these words:
|
| Whilst on this, (allelopathy ? ), subject may I mention the vine
| Solanum
| Crispum - 'Glasnevin'. For myself I would take a lot of convincing that
| this
| does NOT poison its immediate root area.
|
| Haven't found that. I have one growing in a very large pot (and in
| flower atm). For the last year and a half the soil surface in the pot is
| almost completely covered with self-seeded purple leafed violets (also
| inflower atm) and verbena bonariansis, which flowered well last year and
| looks very healthy atm.

I am very fond of quoting Oscar Wilde, but he is very relevant to such
ecological issues:

The truth is rarely pure and never simple.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Hi! Nick.
My concern with the Solanum species and its poisonous effects arises not only from my gardening experience, as noted, but from reading of the potato's, (virtually the same plant), association with solanine and other toxics.
Check out: -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato

- bottom of the page.

Quote: - " Potatoes contain glycoalkaloids, toxic compounds, of which the most prevalent are solanine and chaconine "
" Solanine is also found in other plants, in particular the deadly nightshade "

My suspicion is that if these componds are down there in the tubers/roots; then there must be a possibility,at least,of some "leakage" into the surrounds. The fact that these substances are toxic to humans, of course, doesn't mean they are necessarily soil pollutants with regard to other species. However!!!!!! Who knows??? Would explain my practical experience.

Regards dave