|
|
| Line 5: |
Line 5: |
| | *Ravenea rivularis | | *Ravenea rivularis |
| | *'''Howea forsteriana''' | | *'''Howea forsteriana''' |
| − |
| |
| − | Archontophoenix cunninghamia - Howea forsteriana To me, this is a pretty narrow zone, as I see very little difference in hardiness between these two species... both are equally fried by temps in the high 20s. I would probably put Rhopalostylis in here, too. But I can't think of too many other palms that would squeeze in between two palms I consider about the same hardiness. I have yet to see a freeze where one got killed and the other did not. Here in California, these two palms are on the borderline of 9b-10a.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Do these zones only take into consideration of cold hardiness? What about heat hardiness, drought hardiness, wind hardiness, low-light hardiness or hardiness to bud damage? I certainly would rate Howeas as more hardy than Kings to heat and bud damage, and possibly drought hardiness. Low light hardiness Howeas far exceed kings (and just about anything). They may even be a bit more wind hardy, though salty winds trash both species here in So Cal pretty badly- perhaps Kings more so than Howeas.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | In terms of cold hardiness, I would rate most other Archontophoenix less hardy than these two, but hardier than Wodyetias... but that makes them fall inbetween these proposed zones. Is there a zone 3c?
| |
Revision as of 09:59, 6 July 2007
Ranking is from more hardy to less hardy.
If a Howea forsteriana is hardy in your area, so is everything else on this page.
- Archontophoenix cunninghamia
- Ravenea rivularis
- Howea forsteriana