Oh, I confess! I bought one of those arums (I think that's what they're called...the stinky plants). It died. Probably, good thing. I planted it by my neighbor's fence. :(

Tricia (who has new neighbors)

One manÂs trash is another manÂs treasure, is that how they say it?

Not always true, you know.

ha ha, kt. I saw the hibiscus you speak of in a catalog and was very intrigued until I got to the part about no flowers (although I'm not a huge fan of Rose of Sharon, despite the huge and floriforous one that came with my house). In retrospect, though, I'm thinking more about foliage these days, and this one might still make the list.

Great topic, Katy. I have a long list of rare for a reason plants. Some are not nearly as rare as they should be, either, like the thuggish, sparsely-flowered winter honeysuckle, the brown-flowered witch hazel, simpering variegated hydrangea, the deutzia with persistent grey-brown seeds and constantly mildewed leaves ...

By the way, we use that phrase when people ask us what breed our dog is - Curly Coated Retrievers are definitely rare for a reason,they are bull-headed shedding machines. I hadn't thought about it before, but it sure does apply to a lot of plants.

I came across a copy of a 1938 Burpee Seed Catalog in my book case the other day and was curious how many annual flower varieties have stood the test of time? Certainly there will always be trends the thirties seemed to have a love affair with sweet peas devoting seven pages in the small catalog to them verses today's on-line catalog offering six different varieties. I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised that I did not come across a single variety that I recognized in the 2007 catalog. I wonder if we currently are more interested in new and rare rather than the tried and true classic plant? Another notable addition to the 1938 catalog was the frequent illustrations and information about the trial gardens throughout the publication. Do you grow some of the old classics or are you more of a cutting edge gardener?

I suspect that the total choices of annual flowers offered by Burpee back then was much more limited. The vast variety we now has caused Burpee to cut back on sweet peas, but some catalogs still offer a fantastic assortment, all of which meet with so-so success in my yard. I ordered an heirloom variety this year. If I met with better success, I would probably try many different types both heirloom and new.

One question is how you necessarily know what "tried and true is." I order yellow and white torenia from Burpee this year because it is a new color. I have no idea how long torenia has been fairly widely available, and I have no idea if there are "tried and true varieties". I think besides heirloom plants there are also others that don't date back that far but would merit being called tried and true. Perhaps Cosmos Sensation is an example. I think it has been offered for awhile and continues to be offered. In my case it all depends on how it looks and is described.

It certainly seems as if many of the notable new plant introductions touted in magazines each January do not stand the test of time. Part of this is simply that commercial growers always need to have new varieties to sell. It is like a new tomato. Is it really better than any of the myriad of great tomatoes already available? The chances are no. However, if it does well in test gardens, it will be praised, and sold for a time at least.

I am a sucker for new colors, variegation, promises of longer bloom, etc. I also buy some heirloom varieties.

Asarum,
You brought up so many interesting points I hardly know where to begin. Firstly do you think with the myriad of new introductions we are perhaps watering down the integrity of different plant varieties? Lets take for example Echinacea (coneflower) and its commercial popularity within the last 5-10 years. If other gardeners had similar experiences as myself a good number of the new intros were weaker or had such different characteristics that my conditions did not come close to meeting its needs. Which raises the question how long are we trialing plants for these days? Will White Flower Farm/the consumer really pay so much the first year for new introductions that a plants "newness/rarity" rather than the more *scientific* reward of improving the species has become the standard? Then there were quite a few Echinacea that were so extreme in their color or form that I am certain I wasn't alone when I winced at their appearance (I would name the varieties but every time I do I seem to get in trouble). I can no longer find what I would call the "old tried and true" Echinacea who's petals pointed downward. I am in a mad dash this morning but am interested in what you think and will return to address a few more of the many interesting points you raised. kt

I have limited time to respond, but here goes. We all know of plants that are underused, if not rare, for reasons that seem incomprehensible. Why did landscapers turn privet into the hedge of mass consumption when an evergreen boxwood hedge looks so much better? So I am always looking for the good expansion of the range of plants I have to work with, plants I don't know, but will love when I get to know them. Your title rare for a reason makes us laugh because we encounter so many disappointments along the way. Plants that can't succeed in this climate, plants whose variegation leaves them too weak to make it through the winter, plants whose flowers clash (to my mind) with the color of their leaves, etc. Another thing, I note is the tendency of gardening magazines to highlight a different family of plants each month. Sometimes I think that the selected plant is simply one that hasn't been featured before (and not featured before for the reason that it just isn't really that garden worthy). Yet here is some garden writer talking it up. Not always easy to separate out the worth from the unworthy.

I don't worry about echinacea or fear the triumph of cultivar over species. We may waste money on plants that don't succeed. I am guessing that species plants are always ready to take back their own, particularly echinacea!
I guess what we worry about is whether bad cultivars may block the success of better cultivars. For instance, we buy and plant heirloom plants which are carefully selected improvements over the species in part because we want to preserve these strains which seem to have had enduring value. (I am just sort of thinking aloud here, trying to figure out what I think). I now have to go back to work.

What you have written made me pause to think and one question seems to have me stopped in my tracks. WHO IS DOING MOST OF THE TRIALING IN THE PLANT WORLD TODAY? Certainly Monrovia for example has considerable trial gardens but I would like to believe they sell much more than they trial themselves and the small grower has a shot at plant introductions. Or has the nursery business gone the way of farming in America today with a few big businesses calling the shots? Hmmm... Do you know who's introducing a majority of our plants today?

Interesting thread. Years ago I fell for white marigolds (remember those?) and yellow impatients because I wanted to be the "first on my block". Those were simply marketing ploys for profit with plants that were weak and unstable. But, lately those "rush to market" species have caused real problems. In the hosta world, several generations of good plants are now infected with HVX because of mass marketing by a relatively small list of growers. Why do they feel it necessary to introduce the "2008 Hosta of the Year" now? They're getting ready to mass produce. The 2005 Hosta of the Year was Striptease...that plant was probably to blame for infecting more gardens than any other hosta.
Which growers are still doing trial gardens? Good question.

OK, I'll admit, I'm a sucker for unusual plants and new introductions. Lately though I have been better about waiting for the reviews from real gardeners before taking the plunge. I actually do have Hibiscus purpureus 'Variegatus'. It's not all that rare at the nurseries I frequent. So far mine is too small to assess the non flower situation but the foliage is clean, boldly variegated and doesn't burn-a nice little plant.

A couple of years ago I got seduced by one of those rare for a reason (at least around here) plants, Leycesteria formosa 'Golden Lanterns'. Spring Meadow has it listed as zone (5)6. I planted it in a zone 7 microclimate bed and it didn't make the winter. My guess is it's really a zone 7/8 plant. It was a sweet little plant but it should not be sold as hardy around here.

Sue

There are still at-home trialers all over the country. Most have been asked by developers of plants to participate. It's painstaking and not necessarily fun or exotic, but it's nice to feel involved.

There have been trialed plants that did wonderfully in someone else's Z6 that died in mine. Likewise, trialing in Z5 at 600' in Central CT brought fantastic results for some material, was reported that way, and pooped out at the distributor's own gardens. Never made the catalog.

Bottom line: It's plants. A living thing and like humans, subtle environmental stuff can get in the way.

Example?: The very first white Marigolds put out by Burpee (late 80's) did double duty as a low hedge spaced 12". Someone earlier had no luck.

One observation: When I trialed extensively, it was never for less than three years on surviving plants. I have a feeling that a lot of stuff is rushed to market these days Because We'll Buy It. LOL

As for "rare," IMHO anything listed in a catalog isn't or it wouldn't be there. It would be held for the seller's best customers or provided to private gardens with staff that would know how to keep it alive. But, as long as places like White Flower Farm can charge $100+ for a trillium and sell it, there will be "rare" plants everywhere.

Martie

"Rare" has caught my eye a couple of times but mostly I think it is probably nonsense. "Heirloom" is headed in this direction also most likely. A word to draw the eye in catalogs that bears no real connection to reality. For me rare sometimes suggests a challenge so I try it now and then. Most attempts have been a bust and likely for reasons mentioned above (its rare because no one can grow it). Some times though I think it means they have short lived or minor flowers. These ones I love. I have no problem with getting up early to see flowers that wont last much past noon or having to walk into the garden and squat to see a little flower hidden by leaves.

I purchased trilliums at HD for 5.99 for two roots, or something there-abouts. On some level I feel guilty. :) I do love trilliums and they take about seven years to get going to blossoms from seeds. OH HOW I WILL TAKE SUCH GOOD CARE OF MY NEW TRILLIUMS!