Ulmus minor 'Pendula'

Last updated
Ulmus minor 'Pendula'
Ulmus minor Pendula (enkhuizen snouck van loosenpark) 110706a.jpg
Ulmus minor 'Pendula', Snouck van Loosenpark, Enkhuizen (2006)
Species Ulmus minor
Cultivar 'Pendula'
OriginBelgium

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Pendula' was said to have been raised in Belgium in 1863. [1] It was listed as Ulmus sativa pendula by C. de Vos in 1887, [2] and by Boom in 1959 as a cultivar. [3]

Contents

Herbarium specimens confirm that more than one field elm clone has been distributed as 'Pendula'. Henry (1913) distinguished "the true var. pendula", with its "dense crown of foliage", from a cultivar Kew called U. glabraMill.pendula nova, "a common form of [field elm] with drooping branches". [4] [5] The van Houtte nursery of Ghent distributed an U. campestris pendula from the 1880s, [6] as did various English nurseries, [7] [8] while Späth's of Berlin marketed a small-leaved U. campestris suberosa pendula Hort. from the 1890s. [9]

Krüssman (1984) equated U. minor 'Pendula' with an U. campestris wentworthii, confusing it with the hybrid Wentworth Weeping Elm. [10]

Description

The tree has slender pendulous branches, [1] with leaves "smooth and glossy above and strongly glandular beneath, with orange-brown sessile glands". [11] [12] Bean described 'Pendula' as "very vigorous and large-leaved". [13] Green reported that the young twigs are prone to dieback in hard winters. [1]

Henry noted a peculiar feature on outer lower branches of the Kew and Cambridge Botanics specimens – "one or two small supernumerary leaflets at the base of leaves" – a feature of Cambridge [14] and Maastricht [15] herbarium specimens. "Other leaves," he added, "are large and broad, as if composed of two ordinary leaves" and "often cleft from apex to base". [4]

Pests and diseases

'Pendula' is susceptible to Dutch elm disease.

Cultivation

'Pendula' was included in many European botanical collections in the late 19th and early 20th C. It is present in Australasia, its leaves matching old European herbarium specimens labelled U. campestris pendula. [16] U. campestris pendula was introduced to North America, where it featured in the 1902 catalogue of the Bobbink and Atkins nursery, Rutherford, New Jersey, as 'Small-leaved English weeping elm'. [17] The tree listed and illustrated in Bobbink and Atkins' 1909 catalogue as U. campestris microphylla pendula, 'English Weeping Elm' [18] is not the European 'Microphylla Pendula', which has much smaller leaves, but was probably the same cultivar as the nursery's 1902 U. campestris pendula. An U. foliacea pendula was present in the New York Botanical Garden in the early 20th century. [19] A 'Pendula', much trimmed, is present in Brighton, UK. [20]

A notably pendulous small-leaved elm in the JC Raulston Arboretum, Raleigh, North Carolina (2019), labelled Ulmus minor subsp. minor 'Pendula', 'Weeping small-leaved elm', has U. pumila-type fruit and is indistinguishable in leaf and form from U. pumila 'Dwarf Weeper'. The arboretum acquired its specimen from Arborvillage Nursery, Holt, Missouri. [21]

Notable trees

A tree in the Cambridge University Botanic Garden from the late 19th to mid 20th C, [22] grafted high on English Elm stock and originally listed as U. nitens, was identified as 'Pendula' by Stearn in 1932. [23] It survived the first DED epidemic, its crown removed after dieback in the late 1940s, [24] and had attained a trunk diameter of 3 ft. by 1962, when it was confirmed as U. carpinifoliaGled. var. 'Pendula' by P. F. Yeo. [11] A notable specimen, planted in 1898, [25] stood in the Snouck van Loosenpark, Enkhuizen, the Netherlands, until it was blown down in 2015. [26] A replacement, cloned from the original by nurseryman Ronnie Nijboer of the Noordplant nursery, Glimmen, was planted there in 2023. [27] Eight old 'Pendula' line Mulwaree Street, Goulburn, New South Wales, Australia, [28] [29] their leaves matching the commonest 20th-century European 'Pendula' clone. [16] [30] The form of the sucker-trees growing around them confirms that the original trees were propagated vegetatively.

Synonymy

Accessions

Europe

Australasia

Nurseries

Europe

Related Research Articles

<i>Ulmus</i> Purpurea Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Purpurea', the purple-leaved elm, was listed and described as Ulmus Stricta Purpurea, the 'Upright Purpled-leaved Elm', by John Frederick Wood, F.H.S., in The Midland Florist and Suburban Horticulturist (1851), as Ulmus purpureaHort. by Wesmael (1863), and as Ulmus campestris var. purpurea, syn. Ulmus purpureaHort. by Petzold and Kirchner in Arboretum Muscaviense (1864). Koch's description followed (1872), the various descriptions appearing to tally. Henry (1913) noted that the Ulmus campestris var. purpureaPetz. & Kirchn. grown at Kew as U. montana var. purpurea was "probably of hybrid origin", Ulmus montana being used at the time both for wych elm cultivars and for some of the U. × hollandica group. His description of Kew's U. montana var. purpurea matches that of the commonly-planted 'Purpurea' of the 20th century. His discussion of it (1913) under U. campestris, however, his name for English Elm, may be the reason why 'Purpurea' is sometimes erroneously called U. procera 'Purpurea' (as in USA and Sweden.

<i>Ulmus</i> Crispa Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Crispa' [:'curled', the leaf margin], sometimes known as the Fernleaf Elm, arose before 1800 and was first listed by Willdenow as U. crispa (1809). Audibert listed an U. campestrisLinn. 'Crispa', orme à feuilles crépues [:'frizzy-leaved elm'], in 1817, and an Ulmus urticaefolia [:'nettle-leaved elm'] in 1832; the latter is usually taken to be a synonym. Loudon considered the tree a variety of U. montana (1838). In the 19th century, Ulmus × hollandica cultivars, as well as those of Wych Elm, were often grouped under Ulmus montana. Elwes and Henry (1913) listed 'Crispa' as a form of wych elm, but made no mention of the non-wych samara.

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>hollandica</i> Serpentina Elm cultivar

The putative hybrid cultivar Ulmus × hollandica 'Serpentina' is an elm of unknown provenance and doubtful status. Henry identified it as intermediate between U. glabra and U. minor, a view accepted by Bean and by Melville, who believed that the specimens at Kew bearing the name 'Serpentina' were U. glabra "introgressed by U. carpinifolia" [: U. minor] and were similar to but "distinct from 'Camperdownii'".

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Propendens Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Propendens', described by Schneider in 1904 as U. glabra (:minor) var. suberosa propendens, Weeping Cork-barked elm, was said by Krüssmann (1976) to be synonymous with the U. suberosa pendula listed by Lavallée without description in 1877. Earlier still, Loudon's Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum had included an illustration of a pendulous "cork-barked field elm", U. campestris suberosa. An U. campestris suberosa pendula was in nurseries by the 1870s.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Umbraculifera Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Umbraculifera' [:shade-giving] was originally cultivated in Iran, where it was widely planted as an ornamental and occasionally grew to a great size, being known there as 'Nalband' Persian: نعلبند [:the tree of the farriers]. Litvinov considered it a cultivar of a wild elm with a dense crown that he called U. densa, from the mountains of Turkestan, Ferghana, and Aksu. Non-rounded forms of 'Umbraculifera' are also found in Isfahan Province, Iran. Zielińksi in Flora Iranica considered it an U. minor cultivar.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Rueppellii Elm cultivar

Ulmus minor 'Rueppellii' is a Field Elm cultivar said to have been introduced to Europe from Tashkent by the Späth nursery, Berlin. Noted in 1881 as a 'new elm', it was listed in Späth Catalogue 73, p. 124, 1888–89, and in subsequent catalogues, as Ulmus campestris Rueppelli, and later by Krüssmann as a cultivar.

<i>Ulmus</i> Koopmannii Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Koopmannii' was cloned from a specimen raised from seed sent from Margilan, Turkestan by Koopmann to the Botanischer Garten Berlin c. 1880. Noted in 1881 as a 'new elm', it was later listed by the Späth nursery, catalogue no. 62, p. 6. 101, 1885, as Ulmus Koopmannii, and later by Krüssmann in 1962 as a cultivar of U. minor. Margilan is beyond the main range of Ulmus minor. Augustine Henry, who saw the specimens in Berlin and Kew, believed Koopmann's Elm to be a form of Ulmus pumila, a view not shared by Rehder of the Arbold Arboretum. Ascherson & Graebner said the tree produced 'very numerous root shoots', which suggests it may be a cultivar of U. minor. Until DNA analysis can confirm its origin, the cultivar is now treated as Ulmus 'Koopmannii'.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Webbiana Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Webbiana', or Webb's curly-leaf elm, distinguished by its unusual leaves that fold upwards longitudinally, was said to have been raised at Lee's Nursery, Hammersmith, London, circa 1868, and was first described in that year in The Gardener's Chronicle and The Florist and Pomologist. It was marketed by the Späth nursery of Berlin in the late 19th and early 20th centuries as U. campestris WebbianaHort., and by Louis van Houtte of Ghent as U. campestris crispa (Webbiana). Henry thought 'Webbiana' a form of Cornish Elm, adding that it "seems to be identical with the insufficiently described U. campestris var. concavaefoliaLoudon" – a view repeated by Krüssmann.

The Elm cultivar Ulmus 'Tiliaefolia' was first mentioned by Host in Flora Austriaca (1827), as Ulmus tiliaefolia [:linden-leaved]. The Späth nursery of Berlin distributed a 'Tiliaefolia' from the late 19th century to the 1930s as neither an U. montana hybrid nor a field elm cultivar, but simply as Ulmus tiliaefolia, suggesting uncertainty about its status. Herbarium specimens appear to show two clones, one smaller-leaved and classified as a field elm cultivar, the other larger-leaved.

<i>Ulmus pumila</i> Pendula Elm cultivar

The Siberian Elm cultivar Ulmus pumila 'Pendula' is from northern China, where it is known as Lung chao yü shu. It was classified by Frank Meyer in Fengtai in 1908, and introduced to the United States by him from the Peking Botanical Garden as Weeping Chinese Elm. The USDA plant inventory record (1916) noted that it was a "rare variety even in China". It was confirmed as an U. pumila cultivar by Krüssmann (1962).

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>hollandica</i> Klemmer Elm cultivar

Ulmus × hollandica 'Klemmer', or Flanders Elm, is probably one of a number of hybrids arising from the crossing of Wych Elm with a variety of Field Elm, making it a variety of Ulmus × hollandica. Originating in the Bruges area, it was described by Gillekens in 1891 as l'orme champêtre des Flandres in a paper which noted its local name, klemmer, and its rapid growth in an 1878–91 trial. Kew, Henry (1913), and Krüssmann (1976) listed it as an Ulmus × hollandica cultivar, though Henry noted its "similarity in some respects" to field elm Ulmus minor, while Green went as far as to regard it as "possibly U. carpinifolia" (:minor).

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Umbraculifera Gracilis Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Umbraculifera Gracilis' was obtained as a sport of 'Umbraculifera' by the Späth nursery of Berlin c.1897. It was marketed by the Späth nursery in the early 20th century, and by the Hesse Nursery of Weener, Germany, in the 1930s.

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Microphylla Pendula', the Weeping small-leaved elm, was first listed by the Travemünde nursery, Lübeck, and described by Kirchner in Petzold & Kirchner's Arboretum Muscaviense (1864), as Ulmus microphylla pendulaHort.. By the 1870s it was being marketed in nurseries in Europe and America as Ulmus campestris var. microphylla pendula.

<i>Ulmus glabra</i> Latifolia Elm cultivar

The putative Wych Elm cultivar Ulmus glabra 'Latifolia' was identified in Audibert's Tonelle (1817) as U. campestrisLinn. [ = U. glabraHuds.] latifolia. The tree is reputed to have originated circa 1750 in or around Mechelen, and to have been widely planted throughout Belgium. A 1912 herbarium specimen from Oudenbosch, however, shows a hybrid leaf labelled Ulmus hollandica latifolia.

<i>Ulmus</i> Scampstoniensis Elm cultivar

The elm cultivar Ulmus 'Scampstoniensis', the Scampston Elm or Scampston Weeping Elm, is said to have come from Scampston Hall, Yorkshire, England, before 1810. Loudon opined that a tree of the same name at the Royal Horticultural Society's Garden in 1834, 18 feet (5.5 m) high at 8 years old "differed little from the species". Henry described the tree, from a specimen growing in Victoria Park, Bath, as "a weeping form of U. nitens" [:Ulmus minor ]; however Green considered it "probably a form of Ulmus × hollandica". Writing in 1831, Loudon said that the tree was supposed to have originated in America. U. minor is not, however, an American species, so if the tree was brought from America, it must originally have been taken there from Europe. There was an 'American Plantation' at Scampston, which may be related to this supposition. A number of old specimens of 'Scampstoniensis' in this plantation were blown down in a great gale of October 1881; younger specimens were still present at Scampston in 1911.

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Rugosa' was distributed by the Späth nursery, Berlin, in the 1890s and early 1900s as U. campestris rugosaKirchner. Kirchner's tree, like Späth's a level-branched suberose field elm, was received from Belgium in 1864 as Ulmus rugosa pendula. Kirchner stressed that it was different from Loudon's Ulmus montana var. rugosa, being "more likely to belong to U. campestris or its subspecies, the Cork-elm".

<i>Ulmus</i> × <i>hollandica</i> Wentworthii Pendula Elm cultivar

Ulmus × hollandica 'Wentworthii Pendula', commonly known as the Wentworth Elm or Wentworth Weeping Elm, is a cultivar with a distinctive weeping habit that appears to have been introduced to cultivation towards the end of the 19th century. The tree is not mentioned in either Elwes and Henry's or Bean's classic works on British trees. The earliest known references are Dutch and German, the first by de Vos in Handboek tot de praktische kennis der voornaamste boomen (1890). At about the same time, the tree was offered for sale by the Späth nursery of Berlin as Ulmus Wentworthi pendulaHort.. The 'Hort.' in Späth's 1890 catalogue, without his customary label "new", confirms that the tree was by then in nurseries as a horticultural elm. De Vos, writing in 1889, states that the Supplement to Volume 1 includes entries announced since the main volume in 1887, putting the date of introduction between 1887 and 1889.

<i>Ulmus minor</i> Suberosa Elm cultivar

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Suberosa', commonly known as the Cork-barked elm, is a slow-growing or dwarf form of conspicuously suberose Field Elm. Of disputed status, it is considered a distinct variety by some botanists, among them Henry (1913), Krüssmann (1984), and Bean (1988), and is sometimes cloned and planted as a cultivar. Henry said the tree "appears to be a common variety in the forests of central Europe", Bean noting that it "occurs in dry habitats". By the proposed rule that known or suspected clones of U. minor, once cultivated and named, should be treated as cultivars, the tree would be designated U. minor 'Suberosa'. The Späth nursery of Berlin distributed an U. campestris suberosa alataKirchn. [:'corky-winged'] from the 1890s to the 1930s.

The Field Elm cultivar Ulmus minor 'Viminalis Betulaefolia' (:'birch-leaved') is an elm tree of uncertain origin. An U. betulaefolia was listed by Loddiges of Hackney, London, in the catalogue of 1836, an U. campestris var. betulaefolia by Loudon in Arboretum et Fruticetum Britannicum (1838), and an U. betulifoliaBooth by the Lawson nursery of Edinburgh. Henry described an U. campestris var. betulaefolia at Kew in 1913, obtained from Fulham nurseryman Osborne in 1879, as "scarcely different from var. viminalis ". Melville considered the tree so named at Kew a form of his U. × viminalis, while Bean (1988), describing U. 'Betulaefolia', likewise placed it under U. 'Viminalis' as an apparently allied tree. Loudon and Browne had noted that some forms of 'Viminalis' can be mistaken for a variety of birch. An U. campestris betulaefolia was distributed by Hesse's Nurseries, Weener, Germany, in the 1930s.

<i>Ulmus glabra</i> Superba Elm cultivar

The wych elm cultivar Ulmus glabraHuds. 'Superba', Blandford Elm, with unusually large leaves, was raised by Gill's of Blandford Forum, Dorset, in the early 1840s as Ulmus montana superba and was quickly distributed to other UK nurseries. It was confirmed as a form of wych, and first described by Lindley in The Gardeners' Chronicle, 1845, later descriptions being added by Gill (1845) and Morren (1848), who called it U. montana var. superba. Morren had adopted the name 'Superba' from the Fulham nurseryman Osborne in 1844, who supplied him with the tree – presumably one of the nurseries supplied by Gill. Morren states that 'Superba', already in cultivation in England, was introduced to Belgium by Denis Henrard of Saint Walburge, Liège, that in 1848 it had been present in Belgium for only three years, and that this variety was the one described as 'Superba' by Osborne, whom Henrard had visited at his nursery in Fulham in September 1844. 'Blandford Elm', with leaves of the same dimensions, was soon for sale in the USA.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Green, Peter Shaw (1964). "Registration of cultivar names in Ulmus". Arnoldia. 24 (6–8). Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University: 41–80. Retrieved 16 February 2017.
  2. ↑ de Vos, Cornelius (1887). Handboek tot de praktische kennis der voornaamste boomen, heesters en conifeeren voor den vrijen grond geschikt. Vol. 1. Amsterdam: M. M. Oliver. p. 206.
  3. ↑ Boom, B.K. (1959). Nederlandse dendrologie. Vol. 1. p. 157.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Elwes, Henry John; Henry, Augustine (1913). The Trees of Great Britain & Ireland. Vol. 7. p. 1893.
  5. ↑ Herbarium specimen 295076, herbariaunited.org, U. campestris glabra pendula nova, Kew Gardens specimen, A. Ley (1911)
  6. ↑ Cultures de Louis van Houtte: Plantes Vivaces de Pleine Terre [Catalogue de Louis van Houtte, 1881-2] p.303
  7. ↑ 'Standard Ornamental Trees' in Forest, hardy ornamental trees, conifers, etc., Richard Smith & Co., Worcester, 1887–88, p.27
  8. ↑ Clibrans Ltd. (1921). Ornamental Trees Shribs & Climbers. Vol. Season: 1921–22. Altrincham, Cheshire, UK: Clibrans. p. 15.
  9. ↑ Katalog (PDF). Vol. 108. Berlin, Germany: L. Späth Baumschulenweg. 1902–1903. pp. 132–133.
  10. ↑ Krüssman, Gerd, Manual of Cultivated Broad-Leaved Trees & Shrubs (1984 vol. 3)
  11. 1 2 Ulmaceae Collection V10, Cambridge University Botanic Garden, determined by P. F. Yeo, 1 September 1965; herbarium specimen in University Herbarium, Botany School, Downing St, Cambridge
  12. ↑ "Herbarium specimen BR0000010841044". Botanic Garden, Meise. Sheet labelled U. campestris pendula (1904 specimen); "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1853097". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet described as "U. carpinifoliaGled. f. 'Pendula' " (with samarae); "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1847107". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet labelled U. nitens pendula, Cambridge specimen, showing supernumerary leaves; not 'Smithii'; "Herbarium specimen 295076, herbariaunited.org Sheet labelled U. campestris glabra pendula nova, Kew Gardens specimen, A. Ley (1911)
  13. 1 2 Bean, W. J., Trees and Shrubs hardy in Great Britain (London, 1988)
  14. ↑ medialib.naturalis.nl/file/id/WAG.1847107/format/large
  15. ↑ "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1846619". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet labelled Ulmus pendula, Maastricht Park specimen, showing supernumerary leaves (1913)
  16. 1 2 Botanic Garden Meise, Herbarium specimen BR0000010841044, U. campestris pendula (1904 specimen)
  17. ↑ Bobbink and Atkins, Rutherford. N.J. 1902. p. 51.
  18. ↑ Bobbink and Atkins, Rutherford. N.J. 1909. p. 54.
  19. ↑ sweetgum.nybg.org, U. foliacea pendula
  20. ↑ Brighton & Hove City Council elm collection, NCCPG (as U. minor var. pendula): street trees in Stanford Avenue, Shaftesbury Road and Denmark Villas
  21. ↑ Ulmus minor subsp. minor 'Pendula', 'Weeping small-leaved elm', JC Raulston Arboretum, Raleigh, North Carolina
  22. 1 2 Lynch, Richard Irwin (1915). "Trees of the Cambridge botanic garden". Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society of London. 41: fig.11, 16.
  23. ↑ Journ. Bot. 1932, Schedae ad Sertum Cantabrigiense Exsiccatum Decades I—II, p.22
  24. ↑ Peace, T. R. (1960). "The Status and Development of Elm Disease in Britain" (PDF). Forestry Commission Bulletin. 33: 41.
  25. ↑ Label, Ulmus minor 'Pendula', Snouck van Loosenpark, Enkhuizen
  26. ↑ "118-jaar oude treuriep omgevallen in Enkhuizen" [118-year-old weeping elm fell over in Enkhuizen]. NH Nieuws (in Dutch). Retrieved 2018-03-09.
  27. ↑ Hanneke Tax, "Ulmus minor 'Pendula' terug op oude stek in Enkhuizen" ('Pendula' back in its old spot in Enkhuizen), 11 April 2023
  28. ↑ "Ulmus minor 'Pendula', Mulwaree St, Goulburn, New South Wales". Google Maps. November 2009. Retrieved 2018-08-22.
  29. ↑ "Ulmus minor 'Pendula', Mulwaree St, Goulburn, New South Wales". Google Maps. November 2009. Retrieved 2018-08-22.
  30. ↑ "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1853095". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet described as "U. carpinifoliaGled. f. 'Pendula' "
  31. ↑ Bailey, Cycl. Amer. Hort., 1882 (1902)
  32. ↑ "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1853100". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet described as "U. glabraMill. f. pendula " [ = U. minor 'Pendula' ]
  33. ↑ "Herbarium specimen - WAG.1853083". Botany catalogues. Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Sheet described as "U. carpinifoliaGled. f. 'Pendula' " (Wageningen Arboretum specimen)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.