"Rusty Hinge" wrote in message
...
harry wrote:
On Jan 28, 3:47 pm, "Jo" wrote:
When I moved house last year one corner of my new garden was awash with
bluebells. They looked very pretty but took up a huge amount of space
and
seemed to be marching up the garden as time went on. The area was
cleared
as part of a garden redesign but they have now reappeared in force and
have
spread all over the beds I cleared last year as well as reappearing in
the
corner. I had dug deep and removed as many of the bulbs as I could.
How else can I rid my garden of these plants or at least limit them to
one
area? It's a shame to have to remove them all, but I can't have a
garden
full of bluebells and nothing else!

Blue bells are an increasingly rare wild flower. You should welcome
them.

And they won't mind if you plant things with them. I can't see the
problem, unless - well - I can't see the problem.

Tell you what, if you're not too far away I'll com and dig them up for
you - and plant them on my plot...

--
Rusty

You'd be only too welcome!

Jo wrote:
"Rusty Hinge" wrote in message
...

Tell you what, if you're not too far away I'll come and dig them up for
you - and plant them on my plot...

You'd be only too welcome!

Where? (ish)

--
Rusty

Jake wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:41:12 +0000 (GMT), wrote:

In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:
English bluebells are a big responsibility: the Brit Isles have most
of the world population, and they are vulnerable to hybridisation.
Well, yes and no. They are merely a subspecies, with only 11,000
years of difference from the Spanish. In terms of importance,
that is negligible on a global scale - it's primarily a concern to
parochial English botanists.

The same applies to several other endemic British species, like
the red grouse. I agree that we should avoid destroying them, but
we shouldn't start confusing molehills with mountains.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Perhaps the issue is that the spanish bluebell is aggressive and could
probably satisfy the definition of invasive before too long. Foreign
introductions usually turn out to be a mistake, not just in the UK of
course - Australia's battling cane toads and even camels! Here the
grey squirrel's killing off the red, well at least the virus it
carries is.

Let's not forget that gardeners introduced Japanese Knotweed,
Hilalayan Balsam, the so-called "Oxford Ragwort" and others. OK, maybe
the last was introduced by botanists not gardeners.

I understand Oxford ragwort to have arrived in ships' ballast, M'Lud.

ortunately, Japanese knotweed requires both sexes to set seed, and (ATM)
only the female plants are feral.

I'm worried about the "being" that's being released to combat
knotweed. If the experiment succeeds knotweed will presumably cease to
be a problem but then a horde of "beings" will look for an alternative
food source. It's called evolution I think.

Biological controls control, they don't eradicate, or the control would
be commiting suicide.

I understand that the young shoots of J.K. can be eaten in the same
way(s) as rhubarb - a very useful biological control...

--
Rusty

Sacha wrote:

I think Christina may be writing about a friend who lives in Germany
where the winters can be really bitter. Think of that wonderful, huge
glasshouse on wheels and track in Pillnitz Gardens, Dresden that is
rolled over the giant Camellia every year.

Doesn't the giant Camellia mind?

--
Rusty

"Rusty Hinge" wrote in message
...
Jo wrote:
"Rusty Hinge" wrote in message
...

Tell you what, if you're not too far away I'll come and dig them up for
you - and plant them on my plot...

You'd be only too welcome!

Where? (ish)

--
Rusty

Leigh-on-Sea in Essex

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 17:49:41 +0000 (GMT), wrote:

In article ,
Jake wrote:

Perhaps the issue is that the spanish bluebell is aggressive and could
probably satisfy the definition of invasive before too long. Foreign
introductions usually turn out to be a mistake, not just in the UK of
course - Australia's battling cane toads and even camels! Here the
grey squirrel's killing off the red, well at least the virus it
carries is.

Er, no. It isn't significantly more invasive than the native one.
It is a bit, but not enough to get excited about.

Let's not forget that gardeners introduced Japanese Knotweed,
Hilalayan Balsam, the so-called "Oxford Ragwort" and others. OK, maybe
the last was introduced by botanists not gardeners.

Only the first is a serious problem. Himalayan balsam is very
invasive, but does not form monocultures by excluding all other
plants. And Oxford ragwort isn't a problem at all.

The point is that almost all of our ecology is new - 11,000 years.
We probably have the ecology that is most resistant to alien
species of anywhere on earth.

I'm worried about the "being" that's being released to combat
knotweed. If the experiment succeeds knotweed will presumably cease to
be a problem but then a horde of "beings" will look for an alternative
food source. It's called evolution I think.

They have been and are testing for that. Species-specific parasites
very rarely behave as you say.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Nick

I have two areas of the garden planted with native bluebells and
they've stayed put. My next-door neighbour and I worked out that a
planting of spaniards by the next door but one neighbour took six
years to migrate as far as my garden. Hopefully they've all been
removed now!

The other next-door neighbour is a farm with a decent stand of
knotweed currently about 80 yards away from me! Himalayan balsam
appeared in the garden the year before last as a single plant but last
year I was yanking it up repeatedly. HB was thick in the field next
door last year. Granted that an upside is that HB's shallow roots
don't half dig up the top of the soil and make it all nice and
crumbly. But I digress. HB's controllable and responds immediately to
glyphosate. Yank it up before seeding and you contain the problem (if
next door also yanks it up!).

Knotweed's a bit more difficult and I would love to have a solution to
the impending problem - at the current rate of advance I guess I've
got about 4 years before it reaches me. But there's a big but!

Cane toads were Australia's answer to cane beetle. Supposedly species
specific.

You say that they have been AND ARE testing ..... AFAIK, the Welsh
Assembly Government approved the release of the parasite into the wild
in March last year. If they are still testing then that, to the
uneducated like me, implies that they do not know for sure. But they
have apparently released it.

So I'm worried. This doesn't seem to be a nematode!

Cheers
Jake

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 20:04:57 +0000, Rusty Hinge
wrote:

Jake wrote:
pruned bits

Let's not forget that gardeners introduced Japanese Knotweed,
Hilalayan Balsam, the so-called "Oxford Ragwort" and others. OK, maybe
the last was introduced by botanists not gardeners.

I understand Oxford ragwort to have arrived in ships' ballast, M'Lud.

AFAIK it was first introduced into Oxford Botanical Gardens whence it
escaped, hence it's "Oxford" name. It's not currently a problem as far
as I know.
ortunately, Japanese knotweed requires both sexes to set seed, and (ATM)
only the female plants are feral.

Well the stand near me has advanced about 10 yards in the last year,
despite being chopped, burned, sprayed and whatever. Must all be
female then. It seems to be spreading underground, not by seed above!

I'm worried about the "being" that's being released to combat
knotweed. If the experiment succeeds knotweed will presumably cease to
be a problem but then a horde of "beings" will look for an alternative
food source. It's called evolution I think.

Biological controls control, they don't eradicate, or the control would
be commiting suicide.

I understand that the young shoots of J.K. can be eaten in the same
way(s) as rhubarb - a very useful biological control...

Great as long as you're preparing your food on the same "plot" as the
weed. It's illegal to move it off your land without a licence. I don't
want to wait until it covers the remaining 80 yards and hits my garden
before experiencing the delights of knotweed salad! I may not like it!

But this is the dilemma. I'm worried about "it" and I'm equally
worried about the "it" released to control "it".

OTOH, the world's going to end next year, I believe, so why worry
;-)))

Cheers

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:41:12 +0000 (GMT), wrote:

In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:

English bluebells are a big responsibility: the Brit Isles have most
of the world population, and they are vulnerable to hybridisation.

Well, yes and no. They are merely a subspecies, with only 11,000
years of difference from the Spanish. In terms of importance,
that is negligible on a global scale - it's primarily a concern to
parochial English botanists.

This _isn't_ the global scale, though. You wouldn't say "Knock down a
few English cathedrals: they're only a sub-species of the continental
ones." The English bluebell is valuable plant in its own right,
differing very significantly from the Spanish in aesthetic terms. It
may well (I don't know) also play a role in our ecosystems that the
Spanish one can't: 11,000 years is quite enough to bring that about.

Note that I'm taking your word for its "mere" sub-species status on
trust: I wouldn't believe it from any old poster, as it seems
unlikely, and it's the first I've heard of it. Again, there's been
time since the last Ice Age for speciation.

The same applies to several other endemic British species, like
the red grouse. I agree that we should avoid destroying them, but
we shouldn't start confusing molehills with mountains.

Have they made the red grouse back into a species again? I missed the
memo.

--
Mike.

In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:

Note that I'm taking your word for its "mere" sub-species status on
trust: I wouldn't believe it from any old poster, as it seems
unlikely, and it's the first I've heard of it.

It hybridises readily and naturally, doesn't it? Lack of natural
inter-fertility is the usual criterion. As you should know, the
classification of such things is very much a matter of taste,
because plants have truly weird sex lives.

Again, there's been time since the last Ice Age for speciation.

Some evidence for that would make it more believable. I don't
know of a single example of a clear, natural speciation event in
higher animals or plants in that period, that wasn't the result
of an inter-species or inter-generic cross.

The same applies to several other endemic British species, like
the red grouse. I agree that we should avoid destroying them, but
we shouldn't start confusing molehills with mountains.

Have they made the red grouse back into a species again? I missed the
memo.

Miaow. Careless wording. Yes, it's probably a subspecies.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article , wrote:
In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:

On rereading, my response sounts a bit ratty. Sorry. It wasn't
intended.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:

English bluebells are a big responsibility: the Brit Isles have most
of the world population, and they are vulnerable to hybridisation.

Well, yes and no. They are merely a subspecies, with only 11,000
years of difference from the Spanish.

Personally I would give serious consideration to lumping English and
Spanish (and Italian) bluebells into a single species (but I'd want to
read the recentish paper in Taxon), but the consensus classification
gives them species rank.

However, not all authorities agree, and I have considerable suspicion
that the species rank is as much political as scientific. I should
have at least clarified that my remark was my opinion and not the
consensus. As you know, I have a decreasing opinion of many of the
botanical taxonomists, especially English ones.

If the hysteria over their promiscuity isn't justified by the facts,
then I would change my mind. If it is, I would like to know why
they are claimed to be so clearly separate species, but equally
different variants of other plants aren't. Do you have a reference
to that paper, or at least a search key?


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:

It hybridises readily and naturally, doesn't it? Lack of natural
inter-fertility is the usual criterion. As you should know, the
classification of such things is very much a matter of taste,
because plants have truly weird sex lives.

That however is not definitive. The red (Silene dioica) and white
campions (Silene latifolia) hybridise readily and naturally, but still
seem to be could species.

Not in the same way. The key is the claim that the hybridisation
is causing the elimination of the separate populations - i.e. the
two 'species' aren't stable in juxtaposition. There are plenty of
good species that will hybridise, but where the parent populations
remain stable even in the presence of the other and the hybrids.

If the only way to keep them distinct is to keep them physically
separate, then it makes a mockery of the term species. Yes, I know
that botanic species is as much a Linnaean as a Darwinian concept.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In message , writes
In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:

English bluebells are a big responsibility: the Brit Isles have most
of the world population, and they are vulnerable to hybridisation.

Well, yes and no. They are merely a subspecies, with only 11,000
years of difference from the Spanish.

Personally I would give serious consideration to lumping English and
Spanish (and Italian) bluebells into a single species (but I'd want to
read the recentish paper in Taxon), but the consensus classification
gives them species rank.

In terms of importance,
that is negligible on a global scale - it's primarily a concern to
parochial English botanists.

The same applies to several other endemic British species, like
the red grouse. I agree that we should avoid destroying them, but
we shouldn't start confusing molehills with mountains.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

In message , Rusty Hinge
writes
Jake wrote:
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 16:41:12 +0000 (GMT), wrote:

In article ,
Mike Lyle wrote:
English bluebells are a big responsibility: the Brit Isles have most
of the world population, and they are vulnerable to hybridisation.
Well, yes and no. They are merely a subspecies, with only 11,000
years of difference from the Spanish. In terms of importance,
that is negligible on a global scale - it's primarily a concern to
parochial English botanists.

The same applies to several other endemic British species, like
the red grouse. I agree that we should avoid destroying them, but
we shouldn't start confusing molehills with mountains.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Perhaps the issue is that the spanish bluebell is aggressive and
could
probably satisfy the definition of invasive before too long. Foreign
introductions usually turn out to be a mistake, not just in the UK of
course - Australia's battling cane toads and even camels! Here the
grey squirrel's killing off the red, well at least the virus it
carries is.
Let's not forget that gardeners introduced Japanese Knotweed,
Hilalayan Balsam, the so-called "Oxford Ragwort" and others. OK, maybe
the last was introduced by botanists not gardeners.

I understand Oxford ragwort to have arrived in ships' ballast, M'Lud.

Wikipedia summarises what is generally believed to be the history of
Senecio squalidus in Britain. It matches what I recall from reading of
botanical journals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senecio_squalidus#History


ortunately, Japanese knotweed requires both sexes to set seed, and
(ATM) only the female plants are feral.

I'm worried about the "being" that's being released to combat
knotweed. If the experiment succeeds knotweed will presumably cease to
be a problem but then a horde of "beings" will look for an alternative
food source. It's called evolution I think.

Biological controls control, they don't eradicate, or the control would
be commiting suicide.

I understand that the young shoots of J.K. can be eaten in the same
way(s) as rhubarb - a very useful biological control...


--
Stewart Robert Hinsley

In article ,
Stewart Robert Hinsley wrote:

Again, there's been time since the last Ice Age for speciation.

Some evidence for that would make it more believable. I don't
know of a single example of a clear, natural speciation event in
higher animals or plants in that period, that wasn't the result
of an inter-species or inter-generic cross.

Mimulus cupriphilus seems to be a decent candidate.

I haven't been following that, but am deeply suspicious. There
are lots of examples of species that will drift genetically to
adapt to different conditions. The key question is whether it
would drift back towards the parent if grown in the parent's
normal conditions.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.