Old Wives Tales
James Waddick (Tue, 04 May 2004 11:26:59 PDT)
I cannot cite a publication on the benefits of leaving bulbs to seed, but
empirical testing and observation will bear it out. A private correspondent
calls deadheading an old wives' story, and to my mind it is what I call a
'Gardener's Boy' job, invented by head gardeners to keep idle hands busy,
but not strictly necessary.
Dear all;
I tend to agree with John about some long time practices
which do not make ecological or biological sense. People here still
braid daffodil foliage weeks before they are ready to go dormant, mow
herbaceous peony foliage when it isn't attractive and cut iris fans
down to stubs in July.
Even as foliage on all these go dormant they are still
processing sugars back into the roots and even ragged foliage may
still be photosynthesizing.
Logically why should seed production be so harmful to bulb
development? The longer it takes to produce seed, the longer foliage
is present in general and that has to a goods thing to over all
energy production. If seed production were harmful, why would bulbs
produce so much seed when they could vegetatively propagate as well.
And it also figures that sterile hybrids would be even more
vigorously and propagate more readily by vegetative means - both
larger and more bulbs and divisions.
I hope I am not suggesting that there are instances which
might work either way (pro or con), but I think dead heading is
mostly done for reasons of aesthetics not for its biological impact
and for control of too vigorous seeding about.
Does someone have empirical data pro or con?
Best Jim W.
--
Dr. James W. Waddick
8871 NW Brostrom Rd.
Kansas City Missouri 64152-2711
USA
Ph. 816-746-1949
E-fax 419-781-8594
Zone 5 Record low -23F
Summer 100F +