ok so I went shopping for nursery stock, and got a maple, not sure what kind, all I know is the label on it says flowering maple, abultilon striatum thompsonii. not sure what all that means, but if anyone can help me further identify what this is, it's be appreciated. this the progression of the plant from the stock, to a training pot, as well as trimming some leaves.
[img]https://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m204/joelewko/churchheart030.jpg[/img]
this is how I got it. Sorry bout the glare, it's a little bright out.
[img]https://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m204/joelewko/churchheart001.jpg[/img]
this is how the roots+soil looked right out of the pot
[img]https://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m204/joelewko/churchheart002.jpg[/img]
after I took all of the soil away. I lost a lot of roots in the process, but I think I should be ok.
[img]https://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m204/joelewko/churchheart003.jpg[/img]
potted in a training pot (plastic), with proper bonsai soil. Some large leaves, and the lower branch have been trimmed.
please post honest critique, and possible ideas for styling, plus any helpful information, if you have dealt with this type of tree before, or any helpful links. thanks
-Joe
It looks sort of like a maple but...I don't think it is.JoeLewko wrote:ok so I went shopping for nursery stock, and got a maple, not sure what kind, all I know is the label on it says flowering maple, abultilon striatum thompsonii. not sure what all that means, but if anyone can help me further identify what this is...
The name says that it is not a maple Joe.
The latin name for ALL maples is 'Acer'. Look at the latin name of any maple in any bonsai book [Or tree book]. The commercial name on the label has nothing to do with it.
Was this in the greenhouse? or outside?
A quick google tells me that 'Abutilon striatum Thompsonii' is the name re a plant from Brazil....? Read a bit about it and the differences between it and acers here: https://www.basic-stuff.com/home/gardening/bedding-plants/a.htm
Do an image search also.
I think you should have been far more carefull wrt trying to preserve the white feeder roots while transplanting, That is a key factor to success.
This is far far to young to worry about styling. Pruning at this point is counterproductive if you should want it to increase in trunk girth, unrestricted growth is the key.
ynot
Last edited by ynot on Mon Oct 09, 2006 5:09 pm, edited 3 times in total.
something does tell me this is a tropical. it was in a greenhouse, that was exposed in the back. (like wide doors were opened). I'm working on the research.ynot wrote:It looks sort of like a maple but...I don't think it is.JoeLewko wrote:ok so I went shopping for nursery stock, and got a maple, not sure what kind, all I know is the label on it says flowering maple, abultilon striatum thompsonii. not sure what all that means, but if anyone can help me further identify what this is...
The name says that it is not a maple Joe.
The latin name for ALL maples is 'Acer'. Look at the latin name of any maple in any bonsai book [Or tree book]. The commercial name on the label has nothing to do with it.
Was this in the greenhouse? or outside?
A quick google tells me what that the name re a plant from Brazil....?
I think you should have been far more carefull wrt trying to preserve the white feeder roots while transplanting, That is a key factor to success.
This is far far to young to worry about styling. [Need to confirm it's a maple first.]
ynot
believ me, I lost more roots than I wanted to, but the plant wasnt being co-operative. I tried my best. (I lost the same if not more roots when transplanting my ficus, and it has recovered.)
It is not a maple. Maples, Being deciduous are outside trees. The nursery would be well aware of this and would not have it inside. The best way to determine is to take it back and ask their LNS [Live nursery specialist].JoeLewko wrote: something does tell me this is a tropical. it was in a greenhouse, that was exposed in the back. (like wide doors were opened). I'm working on the research.
I understand on a nice day they would have the doors open, [I have been wrong before.] But I'm pretty certain this is not an Acer [Maple] of any type.
I understand completely that it wasn't intentional. BTW Ficus [for the most part] are less sensitive to rootpruning than the vast majority of maples.JoeLewko wrote: believ me, I lost more roots than I wanted to, but the plant wasnt being co-operative. I tried my best. (I lost the same if not more roots when transplanting my ficus, and it has recovered.)
Which this isn't anyway.
ynot
EDIT My last post has been edited to include a link you find informative.
-
Gnome
- Super Green Thumb
- Posts: 5122
- Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:17 am
- Location: Western PA USDA Zone 6A
Joe,
One other point, the lower branch that you removed would have been better left. It offered you another direction regarding styling, you could have, in the future, chopped the trunk back to this branch. This would have imparted movement and taper to the lower trunk that this tree lacks.
Even if it did not fit into your final design you could have left it, temporarily, as a sacrificial branch to speed thickening of the trunk. Any branch on your tree serves to thicken the trunk below it.
Just some thoughts to file away for future refernce.
Norm
When I read that you had repotted a Maple now I was concerned about the timing of a repot in early fall, but since this appears to be a tropical the point is moot.please post honest critique, and possible ideas for styling, plus any helpful information,
One other point, the lower branch that you removed would have been better left. It offered you another direction regarding styling, you could have, in the future, chopped the trunk back to this branch. This would have imparted movement and taper to the lower trunk that this tree lacks.
Even if it did not fit into your final design you could have left it, temporarily, as a sacrificial branch to speed thickening of the trunk. Any branch on your tree serves to thicken the trunk below it.
Just some thoughts to file away for future refernce.
Norm
I am glad you reinforced these points again Gnome, An excellent clarification.Gnome wrote:Joe,
One other point, the lower branch that you removed would have been better left. It offered you another direction regarding styling, you could have, in the future, chopped the trunk back to this branch. This would have imparted movement and taper to the lower trunk that this tree lacks.
Even if it did not fit into your final design you could have left it, temporarily, as a sacrificial branch to speed thickening of the trunk. Any branch on your tree serves to thicken the trunk below it.
Norm
ynot
