Beautiful plant,Euan!

I like cashmeriana very much, but unfortunately not hardy in Germany.
I saw 2 clones at Jozsef www.arizonica.hu

Wolfgang

Here's mine at link below...the name of this plant seems to still be up in the air (cashmeriana doesn't seem quite right as I believe the plant is from Bhutan!) Quarryhill Botanical Garden here in Sonoma County has 10-12, all planted from seed, and the variation amongst them is notable. What constitutes a clone in this context?
It is such a lovely, graceful plant.

Here is a link that might be useful: Cupressus cashmeriana

thats a heck of a wooden stake down there..

is it vampirish.. and you are driving steak thru its heart [sp? on purpose] ...

otherwise.. fine specimen ..

why did i never figure you to have native scrub behind you??? ... hmm.. perhaps i havent been paying attention...

ken

Ken :) me thinks you go in and out of consciousness erratically! LOL.

We've seen Euan's woods 100's of times, in fact.

Ha!

Dax

My other clone???

{{gwi:842860}}

For me this is one of the most beautiful conifers. Shame it isn't still in the wild.

It doesn't like anything below freezing for any length of time. But I got one anyway I'm zone pushing badly to see if I can get it to adapt. I planted it in very early spring as a two year graft and it grew well over another foot this summer. I put one of my large 24" round by 4' tall tomato cages around it for the winter. I wrapped the cage in clear plastic drop cloth material so light will still get in but it will act as a thermal barrier. It should keep the interior several degrees above outside termperatures. Now I'll watch and see what happens.

If it hardens off over the next couple of winters I will be thrilled. If not, I at least tried.

mark

There are several clones in cultivation and also sometimes seedlings found. I haven't found them to be fully hardy here in zone 8. My best one died from Armillaria root rot. It was a flawless specimen, growing 3'+ a year, then died.

Seeing these specimens at both pics I don't understand why "they" classified in the past Chamaecyparis nootkatensis/ Xanthocyparis nootkatensis as separate species.
The leave structure of those is almost the same as from the Cupressus cashmeriana...

Seeing these specimens at both pics I don't understand why "they" classified in the past Chamaecyparis nootkatensis/ Xanthocyparis nootkatensis as separate species.

Very good point indeed! I guess you want to say "separate genus". Imho because someone wanted to have the glory to associate his name with a new genus. Spach in his diagnose of the genus Chamaecyparis wrote: cones maturing in one year, which is not the case of Cupressus nootkatensis. So from the start it should never have been classified as Chamaecyparis.

How many people did see both species (Cupressus cashmeriana and Cupressus nootkatensis) grow next to each other? The author of the following article could only observe: it is obvious that both these species are congeneric.

Here is a link that might be useful: NOOTKA CYPRESS: CHAMAECYPARIS OR CUPRESSUS ?

Yep, I meant to say separate genus, the foliage structures of Cupressus cashmeriana and Cupressus nootkatensis are almost identical...

Saying all this make's me think that the Xanthocyparis vietnamensis is in fact a Cupressus as well...

It is ;-)

Resin

Genussus and species are not my kind of field, but everybody with a good eye for foliages can see that these are quite simular...

How about the "experts", is this really a "new genus glory" thing?

Isn't is based more on reproductive parts than foliage? That was what I always thought, and have damned the DNA analysis more than once as it has resulted in all of these reclassifications.