Lama Temple

[johnw]

Wufeng - Thanks but that's the email address I had for Paul when I was getting his newsletter. Seems the site and address went defunct when he sold to the Bowdens.

johnw

[Leo S]

I may have negleted to mention, I think 'Lama Temple' is indeed a very beautiful cultivar of P. aureosulcata. I have P. a. 'harbin Inversa', P. a. 'Spectabilis' or if you prefer P.a. var spectabilis and P. a. var. aureocaulis and of the 3 clones I think the aureocaulis is more beautiful, especially from a distance. For me, my 'Spectabilis' and 'harbin Inversa' have enough green striping that at a distance it is not as bright, not as much visual impact. Up close my favorite is 'harbin Inversa' for its range of colors and beautiful details, like its lovely culm sheaths. (for some reason my aging laptop refuses to type a capital h). For me 'Lama Temple' looks even brighter than aureocaulis from photographs, it is now on my list to acquire. I also like the look of 'Argus'. Very beautiful. In my growing area there are few bamboos with culms in a color other than green which are reliably rhizome hardy. These cultivars are an important addition to the bamboo ''pallet'' for northern cold climate growers.

Briefly back to names once more. If the German translated document is the oldest (first or priority) publication for 'Lama Temple' it states that it came from the Tanzhesi Temple, north-west of Beijing, China. It does not mention whether it originated as a seedling, or a found mutated culm cluster from an existing cultivar. If there is no previous document stating anything different, then the correct name is Phyllostachys aureosulcata 'Lama Temple', without any reference to varieties spectabilis or aureocaulis. Now it may be a mutation of one of those two, or it may have arisen independently, but without proof, the only 'correct' name would be as I stated.

To include 'Lama Temple' under one of the varietal names, one would have to publish a ''valid'' article that examines the original description of the variety chosen, for example say aureocaulis. Itemize the traits that constitute aureocaulis, as written in the original description (modern interpretations will not do unless also outlined in the article with references) and then include an itemized list why the traits of 'Lama Temple' indicate that it should be included as a clone under the variety chosen. Until the article is published, correct name will have to be as I mentioned, P. aureosulcata 'Lama Temple' without further varietal indications. In the orchid world, there is a plant that was awarded as Restrepia anteniferum 'Edwards' AM/AOS, it was awarded for its unusually large flowers. Time has shown that this individual plant (clone) it is not really the species anteniferum, but rather it is a mediocre example of the large flowered species Restrepia guttata. Until someone gets around to writing a botanically correct article to assign this clone to Restrepia guttata, its only correct name is Restrepia anteniferum 'Edwards' AM/AOS as originally published. Yet most orchid nurseries include it under Restrepia guttata, with a note in the sales catalogs about why it is there and not with their clones of true R. anteniferum. So that is an example of ''problems'' with taxonomy that orchid growers deal with, and clearly the bamboo world is no different. There is not easy answer, other than encouraging those who like to write to write a ''botanically valid'' article to correct the mess.

So my advice is unless you are motivated to do the writing necessary to correct the mess, become comfortable with the idea that there are only a few clones of each species of bamboo in cultivation and that there are many, many more names being tossed around for the much shorter list of actual, genetically unique clones. It is a frustrating mess for the novice to walk into, but with time and reading and growing some of them it will all make some sense, and there is useful information out there. Be tolerant of those who don't quite understand which names are the ''correct this week'' names to use. And of course, each name is correct only until the next publication is published. Then it is back to arguing whether the new names proposed are correct.

Think about the fact that Phyllostachys nigra 'Henon' is likely the only clone of P.nigra that represents the 'wild type' or naturally occurring form if P. nigra, where the form that was used for the original description was the black culm form, which most likely was selected by man over many generations for the black culm color. Sort of like using a pug breed of dog as the 'type description' for wolves. Wonderful mess we create when trying to name everything.

[ShmuBamboo]

Amusing. I was once heavily involved in the AOS when I lived in California, and I had over 100 different species of orchids at one time, most of them Cymbidiums. My orchid collection is now on permanent loan to a woman in Mendocino Co. in California near Anchor Bay.

As for the bamboo cultivar naming observations made here: One thing I have noticed is that BG tends to use their own short names for things, like Far. Rufa and Phy. Lama Temple. They are the largest wholesaler of bamboos in the US I believe? I do not agree with them on the naming issue, but maybe might makes right? Or it is just that labels are cheaper and faster to make with shorter names? I am also confused as to what species my Far. Rufa/Green Panda is actually. There seems to be some contention that it is one of 3 species... but which one?

I would also point out that in the world of bamboo, English (and German) are not the dominant languages. Chinese and Japanese are. I have an extensive list of names and translations on bamboos, and a whole lists of common and variable names given to said same bamboos. It is a mess. Also the assigning of not only names, but the genus assigned to many bamboos is not always correct, especially when it comes to Borindas and Fargesias. One could do a genetic assay and actually figure out the exact Genus, species, clones, cultivars, and chimeras of bamboos out there. I have seen it done in grape cultivars. I have a small Pinot Noir vineyard that I planted and left behind in Southern Oregon. It has Dijon clones 114, 115, 667 and 777. I was lucky to get them, as there is an out of state import ban on all viticulture grape plants into Oregon at this time and most vineyards will not let you near their cuttings.

Another aspect of this is that many of my bamboos have been unstable. For example, I bought a Phy. vivax aureocaulis from BG some years ago. One winter it faded, and the next spring it shot up plain green vivax culms. So it reverted, or so I thought. Last year it shot again, and whallah! Phy. vivax Huang. Inversa culms! Yellow with green sulci. So some chimeras of bamboos are regularly occurring, and cycle through phases. It is a common enough event, and I have photos of giant green and aureocaulis vivax transitioning mid culm; half green, half yellow. What do we call that? I do not consider a chimera a different species, but many do.

So yes, it is confusing. For me my Phy. a. A. Lama Temple was so similar to my Phy. a. Aureocaulis that I do not think that it is worth pursuing acquiring another one. I like the photos of the Phy. a. Argus, but I do not know of any source for that in the US.

[wufeng]

Briefly back to names once more. If the German translated document is the oldest (first or priority) publication for 'Lama Temple' it states that it came from the Tanzhesi Temple, north-west of Beijing, China. It does not mention whether it originated as a seedling, or a found mutated culm cluster from an existing cultivar. If there is no previous document stating anything different, then the correct name is Phyllostachys aureosulcata 'Lama Temple', without any reference to varieties spectabilis or aureocaulis. Now it may be a mutation of one of those two, or it may have arisen independently, but without proof, the only 'correct' name would be as I stated.

What i know is, that Lama Temple - aureocaulis, spectabilis, aureocaulis were imported from Tanzhesi Temple like divisions from plants growing near this temple. No mutation, no seedlings, only divisions. So I think if Vaupel on his site, have marked these only different imports like cultivars, he made trable with it. But i do not know if it is intention or he only do not know, how to make names correctly. For me, all Lama Temple plants are only different imports, not cultivars.

For me my Phy. a. A. Lama Temple was so similar to my Phy. a. Aureocaulis that I do not think that it is worth pursuing acquiring another one. I like the photos of the Phy. a. Argus, but I do not know of any source for that in the US.

I think Lama Temple (yellow one) is very similar with Phyllostachys aureosulcata aureocaulis, so it is not new cultivar for me. Only another clon in circulation, little bit different from "normal" aureocaulis. If you plant both in one garden you will se differencies between them, but not so big to make new cultivar from Lama Temple clon. So older name Phyllostachys aureosulcata aureocaulis Lama Temple is more suitable, than Phyllostachys aureosulcata "Lama Temple", I think. Its good to distinguish Lama Temple from normal aureocaulis, but do not giv it cultivar status.

[wufeng]

I am also confused as to what species my Far. Rufa/Green Panda is actually. There seems to be some contention that it is one of 3 species... but which one?

Why do you think, it is one from 3? I think rufa Green Panda is from tissue culture, and on bamboogarden website is:

"Green Panda is the trademark name for a single specimen of Fargesia sp. 'Rufa' that was selected originally by Jan Oprins of Bamboo Select in Belgium. He chose this particular plant, based on its exceptional vigor and beauty, to be the subject for tissue culture propagation. Bamboo Select has made thousands of plants with identical genetics to the original favorite which has proven very successful in landscapes all across Europe. Recently our friend Susanne Lucas of Pioneer Plants began a partnership with Bamboo Select, allowing this variety of Rufa to be available in the United States for the first time. "

I do not like tissue plants. I have mostly bad experience with plants from tissue, so I can recomend buy another rufa from nursery where is normaly divided. Oprins - Bamboo Select is only about money, not about quality.

[johnw]

Back in 1999 or so Jos had 2 Rufas Gansu 95-1 & Gansu 95-2. I'm not sure which one I got. Later he named one 'Valkensvaard' which was reputedly the tallest one. Was it one of the previous two? I have no idea.

Then came 'Green Panda'? Was it one of Jos' or a different selection from other Gansus to Oprin? Most of these Green Pandas go through the winter with zero problems but some freeze to the ground every winter be it -15c or -17c or -20c. No question that I'd be inclined avoid GP in the future.

[jpluddite]

I think Lama Temple (yellow one) is very similar with Phyllostachys aureosulcata aureocaulis, so it is not new cultivar for me.

Hi Wufeng. Do you have the yellow variety of Lama Temple? If so, how big is it? I've not found anyone who has reported that the yellow version is taller than 15 feet.

[wufeng]

Back in 1999 or so Jos had 2 Rufas Gansu 95-1 & Gansu 95-2. I'm not sure which one I got. Later he named one 'Valkensvaard' which was reputedly the tallest one. Was it one of the previous two? I have no idea.

Then came 'Green Panda'? Was it one of Jos' or a different selection from other Gansus to Oprin? Most of these Green Pandas go through the winter with zero problems but some freeze to the ground every winter be it -15c or -17c or -20c. No question that I'd be inclined avoid GP in the future.

Gansu 95-2 was not rufa but F. nitida. This plant died after flowering.

In Europe there are more rufa imports. I think Oprins and Jos choose from this another ones.

[wufeng]

I think Lama Temple (yellow one) is very similar with Phyllostachys aureosulcata aureocaulis, so it is not new cultivar for me.

Hi Wufeng. Do you have the yellow variety of Lama Temple? If so, how big is it? I've not found anyone who has reported that the yellow version is taller than 15 feet.

Yes, I have it from 2002. Now is cca. 6 m, (20ft) tall plant. In northern Germany is older plant bigger - I guess 7-8m (to 25ft).

[jpluddite]

Thanks Wufeng.

Are the culms still getting bigger each year? How much does it run? How deep are the rhizomes?
How does its size compare to other aureosulcatas?

[wufeng]

Are the culms still getting bigger each year?

It depends how strong frost was during the winter. I have it in hardy place, sometimes with very hardy winters. After strong winter, culms are offen the same like year before, when winter is better, culms are bigger. In warmer locality, there will be each year bigger and bigger i expect.

How deep are the rhizomes?

Not more than 2 ft. deep.

How does its size compare to other aureosulcatas?

Similar size like Phyllostachys aureosulcata Lama Temple (green with yellow sulcus) and Phyllostachys aureosulcata spectabilis.

[ShmuBamboo]

I am also confused as to what species my Far. Rufa/Green Panda is actually. There seems to be some contention that it is one of 3 species... but which one?

Why do you think, it is one from 3?

I do not like tissue plants. I have mostly bad experience with plants from tissue, so I can recomend buy another rufa from nursery where is normaly divided. Oprins - Bamboo Select is only about money, not about quality.

I understand where BG got their Green Pandas, and that they are all TC clones. I have a few of them here, but the contention or question is, what species are they of these three? Far. dracocephala. Far. apicirubens, or Far. rufa? I have seen them listed as each.

I also agree that clones are not as good as divisions in any boos. But clones are far more common here, especially for Fargesias and new and rare boos.

[johnw]

Seems the experts agree 'Rufa' is a dracocephala. The confusion arose when seeds of what was thought to be dracocephala arrived in the west in the late 80's - guess the then dying plants couldn't be properly described, grew 3 plants here and rather tender below +5F/-15c - turned out to be F. apicirubens. At the same time they decided 'Rufa' better fit the draco description.

"But clones are far more common here, especially for Fargesias and new and rare boos."

Don't quite understand this. Are most bamboos in N. America - including Phyllos - not solitary clones imported years ago by McClure and company? I suspect even Kimmei imports only a very limited number of clones per species. Always interesting to grow seed when it's available to see if any diversity results, guess we're lucky in one way that so much flowering has taken place in the past 30 years.

[Cooper12]

I have a bunch of Green Panda growing around my chicken runs. I love them the do great up here.
I am not sure the source my Nursery got them from but was able to get a bunch cheap and they take our heat in the summer fine. I have some in full sun and some in shade looks great in the summer

[Tarzanus]

Sorry to wake the topic from the dead. I was just reading old stuff and wanted to write a follow-up on the topic.
Well so I bought Phyllostachys aureosulcata 'Spectabilis Lama temple'. No number with it, I checked my prehistoric emails from eBay store where I bought it. So let's go to the announced follow-up, shall we...

Well, it's now 11 years since I've bought it and just a bit less than that since I planted it. I'm keeping it contained and it shares small patch of my garden with other bamboos. Anyway, the thing is larger than it should be. Largest culm diameter is a bit over 5cm and the culms must be close to 10m. Very nice and agile bamboo.

There is some info about 'Spectabilis Lamatempel2' which would fit though. I'll just skip that name though - it's Phyllostachys aureosulcata 'Spectabilis'.