Thank you for all the comments above. Most of my work was as a Forest Entomologist. I am not a taxonomist. I originally decided to compile my list as a checklist for collecting cones for another project I am working on. As the list progressed, I thought other people might benefit from a list that could be easily edited. I choose Farjon as it seemed to me to be the most up to date information available to me in the Michigan State University library. Please feel free to edit the list in anyway that works for you. Even with flaws, and all works of this type are bound to have mistakes and variances of opinion, at least it is a beginning to build on that is in a format that allows it to be easily rearranged, corrected or edited, which to my knowledge is not available anyplace else.

The person who criticized my posts for being too complicated, better just stop now. I guess it helps to remember the zones are 'USDA', which is the US department of agriculture and really has nothing to do with ornamental plants. Nein. Ornamental plants ARE part of the USDA's mission. That's why the National Arboretum is under their aegis. Remember wholesale nurseries definitely are a form of agriculture. The USDA zone system gives the barest measure of whether a plant can survive in a given area. Obviously, something hardy only in zone 10 cannot survive in zone 6. Beyond that, there are many other factors. The latest revised USDA zone map seems very accurate to me. I know of gardens along the Delaware river in NJ that really do seem like zn 7b. But it took a ridiculously long time to come out...considering the overall crunching of data probably took a few hours on a high perf. workstation or server. (in case you don't know, it's based on a climate model developed at U Oregon called "Prism") This was not some advanced climate simulation going on like trying to predict hurricanes. And given that computer technology has advanced so much including the algorithm development one would have to say the current USDA map reflects a certain lack of vision, though, again, at least they finally got it correct. By this I mean something like the Sunset system could have been developed, although there were problems with that approach if you try to extend it over the country. Rather than discrete numbers that could get ridiculously long for certain plants (i.e., this grows in 21, 33,34,35,36,37,38,40,52,61,62,63,64,75,78 etc) it could have used a series of vectors that graph a space representing the plant's preferences. Zones 1 to 10 would still be the first dimension of this system so you don't "break compatibility" with what we already have. The two main additional factors I would propose would be aridity, and summer temperature. There are several reasons for this; namely, there are already 2 factors certain nurseries use when selling plants. The AHS "heat zone" map exists, and is used by a few nurseries to show warning on certain species, and aridity scales have been adopted by Desert Northwest and High Country Gardens. Mind you these scales would not necessarily be linear and could code a sub-dimension, or even be matrixed to code an additional factor. For example it might make more sense for moisture to go: part of year arid - sporadic/none of year - all year - part of year but high atmospheric moisture. Because there are non-linearities in the way plants behave with respect to that, and with summer temperature. Some cool summer seasonal plants are actually known to grow in all year rainfall climates like England, but only with cool summers. The point is the arrange things in the way that leads to the most chances of solid groupings. Such mathematical shenanigans might make it hard for people to understand how to derive their own zone, but the point is it doesn't matter. They will get their zone off a map. Also different from the Sunset zones, there no need for a comprehensive, singular map because everyone will use some kind of smart device in the future that can easily click one location between 3 or more different maps. So a zone like mine would go from 7a (I think the a/b is of more limited usefulness than most people realize, though I have and will continue to reference the subzones) to something like 7J6. 7 being 0 to 10f min annual temp, J being a climate with rain all year but some expectation of brief droughts, and 6 being heat zone 6. Let's call it the Comprehensive Plant Zone. A _PLANT_ ranges, versus a gardening location, would go from "USDA zone 7-10" for a maritime climate plant like Eucryphia, to "CPZ (comprehensive plant zoning) zone "7H2-10M4" meaning that range of minimum winter temps, and a generally moist climate though accepting somewhat dry summers, as long as 3) the summers are cool. I would instantly recognize that I can't grow the plant because I'm off on one of the codes. Of course, this will never happen and there will be howls of "it's too complicated" but you can be sure in the early 1960s some hayseeds saw the first Harvard zone map and said "oh them fancy professors and their durn maps, I know what grows here and uh don't need some map." Also let's face that other than the big midwestern cities the net migration in the country is towards the SE, S & W where the USDA zone system is least useful. USDA system is most useful for telling people in Iowa there are many, many plants that they are far too cold to grow (sorry Iowans, someone had to be an example) than answering the question for someone in Phoenix, Arizona of whether a certain species of Protea could grow there. (and I reckon a couple of the most heat tolerant ones could) That a sunset zone map was made for the whole country is something I applaud, my idea just tries to make their system easier to use when dealing with a lot of customers and plants. Instead of saying "that only grows in 31, not 42" it's more helpful to say "your moisture factor of J is too much for an A-E plant, it will rot".

Based on what I have seen here the blue cedar will have a stake due to a deformed rootstock being used, and the tops of the box are plenty big enough for their roots to be matted - the magnolia will not be the only one that needs work at planting. With deciduous magnolias it appears you want to be subjecting them to root damage only when they are in leaf. Otherwise they may just sit there and rot. When a potted plant has the correct proportion between top and roots the top looks undersized to many consumers. This and growers not keeping up with potting on anyway results in under-potted stock being the general situation in the retail setting. Loosening up the outside of a matted root system is not too hard to deal with; corkscrew roots, hard woody root turnips and other severe deformities in the center of the root mass, right below the crown - resulting from stock being left in bands, liners or 4" pots way too long at production facilities - is a different story, and just the thing to spoil a woody specimen after it has grown for many years and made a nice big top. Tall, fast growers like cypresses or pines may even break loose and go over, when part of the root system is caught up in going around and around - instead of all of the main roots immediately leaving the vicinity of the trunk and radiating outward to their full lengths and forming a good anchorage. This post was edited by bboy on Tue, Dec 31, 13 at 16:38

Recently dtd and I visited the Massachusetts Horticultural headquarters at Elm Bank Reservation during the one year anniversary celebration of the "Bressingham garden." The installation of this perennial demonstration garden was one of the largest installations (1.01 acres) accomplished in one day with the help of countless volunteers. The purpose of this garden is to display to the New England community varying plants that could work well in the typically small residential garden. Our visit to Elm Bank was a first for me so my expectations of a perennial garden designed by Adrian Bloom I fully expected to have been limited to perennials with a few annuals filling in some holes, regardless of Mr. Blooms notoriety in the world of conifers. I was however pleasantly surprised to see what I would consider a mixed border with many conifers, and deciduous shrubs, now that I am thinking back I dont recall seeing many evergreen shrubs(perhaps if anyone else remembers they can let us know). Immediately we noticed a different use of low growing plants in the garden, rather than limited to edging between the front of the garden and the path, or encircled around the conifers, low growing plants were used for different purposes and in ways far more creative than I have ever seen. Adrian Blooms affection for Geranium Rozanne was very apparent and might even surpass arbo_retums passion for this flower, but of course this is just one of over one hundred plants he has introduced that are still being sold world wide (Achillea Moonshine , Crocosmia Lucifer, and Astilbe Sprite, ect). Bloom used G Rozanne to tie together the entire 1.01 acre garden by using this plant to create what he called rivers to flow in and around one bed twisting, turning, and spilling into the next. The Elm Bank garden is not the only garden that he has used G. Rozanne to create a river Adrian also completed a garden with a 130 ft run of G . Rozanne in Bad Zwischenahn, Germany. The effect even after just one year of growth caused the visitors eye to follow the river of Rozanne throughout each section of the garden. This path of low growing plants flowing through taller perennials, conifers, and grasses creatively permitted the visitor to appreciate the deep and rolling garden beds much in the same way a garden path cutting through a bed would open the vista. This technique of using low growing plants to open up vistas within the garden bed is certainly a creative way to allow conifers the elbow room (even if only on one side) they might need to shine. Would you consider planting a river in your garden? Sorry about the lousy camera/phone photo but take my word for it "Adrian Bloom" is adorable After one year of growth the garden is beginning to shine I was too busy guzzling down the free wine to snap many photos and unfortunately this section on the garden suffered from irrigation problems but if you take note dry or not the river of G.Rozanne survived and really thrived elsewhere under irrigation.