John Scheepers, Inc

I got a book from this place, and I am wondering if anyone here knows about them? Are they any good?

I am especially interested in the Allium Globemaster, It says 10 inch globes of flowers. Do they really get that big? so is the 10 inches around or across or ?
do these spread by seed all over the place and make a nuisance of themselves? Just wondered because it says 'flowering onion' and I don't plant anything that resembles the 'o' word lol
Do they need staked? Anything I should know about them?

Also had some gorgeous daff bulbs, but wow the price is kinda high. I guess it doesn't help that I want half the book lol :)

Scheepers is an excellent source. The large alliums I've planted are quite tame and very strong.

yes, Scheepers is excellent. I think you'll find that the large alliums like Globemaster won't seed around too much. Some of the small relatives might.

so is the 10 inches around or across or ?
Across. The actual size can depend on the age of the plant and how happy it is, but yes, they can indeed get that large. Staking is usually not needed unless grown in too much shade.

J Scheepers is great. Huge bulbs for among the best prices out there. I use them every year.

thanks, I will keep them on my favorites list then!

I order from them every year, too. Great bulbs.

I grow Globemaster and Gladiator in fairly deep shade. Neither one requires staking. Sometimes the baby offshoot bulbs will require staking in their first two years after separation.

Stormyla would you have any offshoot bulbs for trade next year?
I have lots of things I could offer to trade for them.

I might Frilly. Let's wait and see in May.

ok, I will write a note in my calendar to d-mail you in May then.

The species that Globemaster and Gladiator come from don't put out many baby bulbs, but maybe these (I don't know, maybe they are hybrids) will.

Leftwood, I'm pretty sure that it's Gladiator that's putting out the small ones.

So do the Globemaster spread then or not? I was thinking I could order some and then in a few years could give some starts to my mother? They are quite pricey for something that won't increase. :(

Frilly, I don't know about Globemaster, Mine were new last year. My Gladiator are about 4 years old and they have increased.

As it turns out, (I did a little research), both are hybrids, so all bets are off. They may very well increase satisfactorily. But since it took 20 years from introduction to commercial availability for Gladiator, I would expect it is the more shy one for multiplying.

Leftwood, that leads me to wonder if the bulb company really sent me Gladiator. I had at least 8 new bulbs from them last year as I seperated them and planted them elsewhere. I got them from a well know bulb supplier, whom we all use.

It does seem odd. But as I said, since they are both hybrids, who knows?

There are some Allium hybrids that breed fairly true from seed. Perhaps one or both of these are in such a group. If that's the case, the Dutch could have selected from seedling populations for natural bulb division. (Another "who knows?".)

In my personal experience, of the big guys Christophii comes true from seed. And after being in a few years, it seeds very enthusiastically.

All of these are seedlings.

And these. But in catalogues they are generally $1.00 to $1.20 each. Go figure!



This message was edited Dec 16, 2009 8:54 AM

do they get 'fuller' than that? or stay sparse looking?
I assume they fill in better with maturity.
So do the original ones come back each year or new ones from seed?
do they get tall?

Seems like the description lists Globemaster as being 32 inches tall and the Christophii is only to 24.
I think the height would be nice to use at the back of a border area or in the middle of something.

What I showed you are seedlings. They get much fuller and bigger.

This one is still expanding.

Ik heb daarentegen de kweker gebeld en deze wist mij te vertellen dat ze beide op de zelfde manier groeien en bloeien.

Freely translated

I called the grower and he said that both Gladiator and Globemaster grow, multiply and flower the same way.

I realize that I did not answer your question. The answer is both. I put them on top of tulip bulbs that I put in every year. When I lift my tulips later in the year the Christophii bulbs are there. They are very hardy, and the bigger bulbs produce bigger plants. But they also seed, and within a couple of years are full sized. The height varies, for me, from 12 inches to 18 inches, maxing out at about 20 inches. They also grow well in semishade.

I just love the amethyst color and the fullness they can achieve. They really sparkle.

Allium cristophii is a species. It should always come true from seed, if it is not cross pollinized with something else.

And a fabulous species it is. Hard to believe that something as gorgeous and unearthly looking is a species, but what I'm experiencing makes it clear that it is.

The full grown Gladiators that I have are well over 3' tall. The babies were around 20 to 24 inches tall, this their second summer.

oh, wow I want those really tall ones!
The stems seem strong and don't need alot of staking?
I had a hibiscus last summer that ALL broke off in a terrible windstorm, I've never seen anything like that. I guess they are brittle, and all snapped off at the ground. Thankfully it grew back.
whew!

next summer, will stake it!

Hard to believe that something as gorgeous and unearthly looking is a species

That is because it is from Asia, where the Himalayan chain of mountains has kept the ice sheets in the ices ages from advancing south as they did in the western hemisphere. On our half of the world, the ice ages kept wiping out the flora, and species had to keep starting over again, starting from square one, as it were. Asian species that were never extirpated just kept kept on improving themselves through the millennia without roadblocks. At least that is my theory.

Leftwood,
Just for the sake of intellectual stimulation...(LOL)... I beg to differ...Though parts of your postulation seem logical, there's a couple of statements in your theory that seem to be too inclusive.
I think the furthest south that glaciation extended as an ice sheet in our hemisphere was southern Illinois., thusly ice would only factor as a hindrance to botanical evolution north of there. Species south of there kept evolving like the Energizer Bunny.
Your argument about Asian species were free to evolve because the Himalayan Mountains acted as a barrier to an ice sheet spreading lacks merit because there was no march south of ice sheets in Asia proper. Granted, the Himalayan chain itself has hosted an ice sheet (probably from its inception, due to it's altitude), but most of Asia proper never had any glaciation to speak of (though Eurasia did).
http://images.encarta.msn.com/xrefmedia/zencmed/targets/maps/map/T041365A.gif

uuuuh, yeah.
so if a glacier slides over my yard in July will this baby need staked?
:)
I'm thinking its a good idea. How thick are the stems on it?
I have some daylilies that I stake up because they get so tall and sometimes the scapes are kinda thin. Then if it gets windy they break off :(

Frilly, None of the Alliums that I grow have ever needed staking. Some of them are growing in total deep shade. Others grow in a very windy bed along side a road that gets 40 to 50 mph traffic. The babies have thinner stems and will lean a bit, but have never broken.

OH, wow I am SO excited. LOL the perfect flower for me!

:)

Can't wait to see these in my yard someday!

Nice link, jmorth. I would have thought more of the southern tip of South America would have been frozen out.

I do appreciate the critical thinking. I tried to abbreviate my thoughts for the sake of a simple end, but in doing so, neglected to explain myself thoroughly. obviously, I misled readers. Some of your argument actually fits well with my hypothesis.

What the east-west chain of mountains in Asia actually did is stop the southerly advancement of the cold air masses from the polar north. Consequently, it was not just a lack of ice sheets involved, but an entirely "warmer" climate existed compared to the "not Asia northern hemisphere". That there was very little ice sheeting north of the Himalayan mountain chains proves my point. Of course, there must be other things involved, like weather patterns, but this end result is not in contention by scientists.

An ice sheet need not occur to extirpate plant species. Just as it is today, temperatures well above those needed to form glaciers would have been a major determining factor for the survival of individual plants species. Thus, as the ice sheets advanced, temperatures cooled well in advance of them, and if plant species could not relocated themselves to acceptable warmer climes with equal speed, those species would die out.

According to palynological findings (the study of pollen as it relates to history), the Canada hemlock (tree) survived the last ice age only in the very southern Appalachians, well south of the most southerly ice sheets. Its distribution advanced northward only as the ice sheets retreated. (I happened to write a paper on this in college.)

A similar "march" south (or to acceptable climes) as of the cold advanced, and then back after the ice age would have been repeated by many, if not most surviving plant species.

Not only did the Himalayan mountain chain keep a continual southerly advancement of cold air at bay, the mountains actually made other parts of the world colder. After all, where is all this cold going to go?

Think of the cold air as a flowing river, originating at the polar north. It splits into two parts: River A goes south to Asia, River W goes south to the rest of the world. If River A is blocked by the Himalayan chain, than more water (i. e. cold air) is forced to flow through River W.

So I contend that in comparison, Asian species could continue to improve themselves for "beauty" (rather, better pollination and reproduction), while our species had a more pressing problem: dealing with a far more severe weather change. For the most part, our interpretation of beauty was not a high evolutionary priority. "Beauty" requires a lot of extra energy. As energy becomes more and more scant as temps cool and summers shorten, "beauty" may have even become a detriment. If significant evolution were to occur, it might have been away from beauty and in favor of the practicality of the time. No, the survival priority would have been to stay warm! (or somehow adapt to the cold) And "warm" being a relative term, whether it be zone 3 or zone 10, whatever the previous adaptation a particular species had.

An actual ice sheet certainly has more devastating repercussions, but the effect of the overall temperature change, and its related factors are much further reaching than the ice sheet itself.

Rick

Ah, nice presentation of your theory; after digesting it's contents a couple of times I believe I follow your train of thought and feel enlightened. Thanks for the clarification.
J

Well I never expect anyone to "see my thought" in the same way that I think, but it's nice to know someone does understand it.
Rick

I looked for this photo when this thread started but only found it tonight. Tall alliums.

cool pic!

Quite ingenious