Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.

On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.


They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.


They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.

Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?

On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:38:27 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.


They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.

Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?

There may not be a difference. The one reference I have that
addresses is says that Ficus microcarpa nitida has no botanical
standing.

Ficus retusa is apparently a synonym for the same plant.
Or Ficus retusa nitida.

Check http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/r...microcarpa.pdf

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:38:27 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.

They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.
Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?

There may not be a difference. The one reference I have that
addresses is says that Ficus microcarpa nitida has no botanical
standing.

Ficus retusa is apparently a synonym for the same plant.
Or Ficus retusa nitida.

Check http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/r...microcarpa.pdf

Thanks again. Thanks for the reference document. I'm now seeing a lot
of stuff on the Net that makes sense. Apparently this species produces
aerial roots, but not in the typical So. Cal. dry, sunny environment. I
hate to see these trees taken out. One of the things this city needs
is more shade, rather than less. I've noticed that in some
neighborhoods they enlarge the space in the sidewalk, apparently also
wanting to keep these trees. But, I have a feeling the ones in
Hollywood are doomed to be taken out at some point in the near future.

On Tue, 19 May 2009 18:27:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:38:27 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.

They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.
Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?

There may not be a difference. The one reference I have that
addresses is says that Ficus microcarpa nitida has no botanical
standing.

Ficus retusa is apparently a synonym for the same plant.
Or Ficus retusa nitida.

Check http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/r...microcarpa.pdf

Thanks again. Thanks for the reference document. I'm now seeing a lot
of stuff on the Net that makes sense. Apparently this species produces
aerial roots, but not in the typical So. Cal. dry, sunny environment. I
hate to see these trees taken out. One of the things this city needs
is more shade, rather than less. I've noticed that in some
neighborhoods they enlarge the space in the sidewalk, apparently also
wanting to keep these trees. But, I have a feeling the ones in
Hollywood are doomed to be taken out at some point in the near future.


Mine started aerial roots, but the low humidity kills them. I took
mine out when it broke the driveway. The city here has taken out
mostly, if not all, from the sidewalks. they were a poor choice for a
street tree where the streets are narrow.

We have a Moreton Bay ficus here, that is huge. Takes up what could
be a residential sized lot.

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 18:27:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:38:27 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.
They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.
Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?
There may not be a difference. The one reference I have that
addresses is says that Ficus microcarpa nitida has no botanical
standing.

Ficus retusa is apparently a synonym for the same plant.
Or Ficus retusa nitida.

Check http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/r...microcarpa.pdf
Thanks again. Thanks for the reference document. I'm now seeing a lot
of stuff on the Net that makes sense. Apparently this species produces
aerial roots, but not in the typical So. Cal. dry, sunny environment. I
hate to see these trees taken out. One of the things this city needs
is more shade, rather than less. I've noticed that in some
neighborhoods they enlarge the space in the sidewalk, apparently also
wanting to keep these trees. But, I have a feeling the ones in
Hollywood are doomed to be taken out at some point in the near future.


Mine started aerial roots, but the low humidity kills them. I took
mine out when it broke the driveway. The city here has taken out
mostly, if not all, from the sidewalks. they were a poor choice for a
street tree where the streets are narrow.

We have a Moreton Bay ficus here, that is huge. Takes up what could
be a residential sized lot.

The problem is more the space available on the sidewalk. They seem to
need a full yard in every direction, maybe a bit more. On a lot of
sidewalks, this wouldn't leave any room for pedestrians. But on wide
sidewalks, in areas that have opened up enough sidewalk space for them,
the ones that are fifty years old or so form a great canopy. I find
this to be a tremendous relief from the endless, skinny palm trees. Do
you think there's any truth to the belief that the ficus have a special
ability to filter the air pollution out, or is that just folklore that
has grown up?

On Thu, 21 May 2009 19:05:40 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 18:27:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:38:27 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.
They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.
Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?
There may not be a difference. The one reference I have that
addresses is says that Ficus microcarpa nitida has no botanical
standing.

Ficus retusa is apparently a synonym for the same plant.
Or Ficus retusa nitida.

Check http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/r...microcarpa.pdf
Thanks again. Thanks for the reference document. I'm now seeing a lot
of stuff on the Net that makes sense. Apparently this species produces
aerial roots, but not in the typical So. Cal. dry, sunny environment. I
hate to see these trees taken out. One of the things this city needs
is more shade, rather than less. I've noticed that in some
neighborhoods they enlarge the space in the sidewalk, apparently also
wanting to keep these trees. But, I have a feeling the ones in
Hollywood are doomed to be taken out at some point in the near future.


Mine started aerial roots, but the low humidity kills them. I took
mine out when it broke the driveway. The city here has taken out
mostly, if not all, from the sidewalks. they were a poor choice for a
street tree where the streets are narrow.

We have a Moreton Bay ficus here, that is huge. Takes up what could
be a residential sized lot.

The problem is more the space available on the sidewalk. They seem to
need a full yard in every direction, maybe a bit more. On a lot of
sidewalks, this wouldn't leave any room for pedestrians. But on wide
sidewalks, in areas that have opened up enough sidewalk space for them,
the ones that are fifty years old or so form a great canopy. I find
this to be a tremendous relief from the endless, skinny palm trees. Do
you think there's any truth to the belief that the ficus have a special
ability to filter the air pollution out, or is that just folklore that
has grown up?


Mine was about ten feet from the driveway that it broke. Root pruning
might have stopped that, but then the top needs pruned for balance. A
friend had a really large one that blew down in the wind, made a real
mess. I don't think they are good city trees.

I know of no reason why they would be any better at filtering
pollution than any other plant of the same mass.

At the LA arboretum they did an experiment one time with two
greenhouses, one with clean filtered air, the other with a simulation
of LA's worst smog. All the plants did better in the clean air house,
except for oleander, which thrived on the smog.

Charles wrote:
On Thu, 21 May 2009 19:05:40 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 18:27:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:38:27 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Charles wrote:
On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:16:54 -0700, David Green
wrote:

Anyone know the particular species name of the famous LA ficus trees
that were planted in the 50's and 60's, produced huge amounts of shade,
gobbled up all the smog, and are now outgrowing their sidewalks, causing
buckling of the concrete, and are now being gradually removed from the
city? They're in the genus Ficus; but what's the species name, the
other half of the scientific name.
They used F. microcarpa here, some argument about nitida. The two are
quite similar.

I thought mine should have been named myriacarpa, there was so much
fruit covering the sidewalk and street.

Near LA, in Ventura county.
Thanks for the info. Do you by any chance know how to distinguish
nitida from microcarpa?
There may not be a difference. The one reference I have that
addresses is says that Ficus microcarpa nitida has no botanical
standing.

Ficus retusa is apparently a synonym for the same plant.
Or Ficus retusa nitida.

Check http://www.hear.org/starr/hiplants/r...microcarpa.pdf
Thanks again. Thanks for the reference document. I'm now seeing a lot
of stuff on the Net that makes sense. Apparently this species produces
aerial roots, but not in the typical So. Cal. dry, sunny environment. I
hate to see these trees taken out. One of the things this city needs
is more shade, rather than less. I've noticed that in some
neighborhoods they enlarge the space in the sidewalk, apparently also
wanting to keep these trees. But, I have a feeling the ones in
Hollywood are doomed to be taken out at some point in the near future.

Mine started aerial roots, but the low humidity kills them. I took
mine out when it broke the driveway. The city here has taken out
mostly, if not all, from the sidewalks. they were a poor choice for a
street tree where the streets are narrow.

We have a Moreton Bay ficus here, that is huge. Takes up what could
be a residential sized lot.
The problem is more the space available on the sidewalk. They seem to
need a full yard in every direction, maybe a bit more. On a lot of
sidewalks, this wouldn't leave any room for pedestrians. But on wide
sidewalks, in areas that have opened up enough sidewalk space for them,
the ones that are fifty years old or so form a great canopy. I find
this to be a tremendous relief from the endless, skinny palm trees. Do
you think there's any truth to the belief that the ficus have a special
ability to filter the air pollution out, or is that just folklore that
has grown up?


Mine was about ten feet from the driveway that it broke. Root pruning
might have stopped that, but then the top needs pruned for balance. A
friend had a really large one that blew down in the wind, made a real
mess. I don't think they are good city trees.

I know of no reason why they would be any better at filtering
pollution than any other plant of the same mass.

At the LA arboretum they did an experiment one time with two
greenhouses, one with clean filtered air, the other with a simulation
of LA's worst smog. All the plants did better in the clean air house,
except for oleander, which thrived on the smog.

Yeah, one of them that had had its roots pruned fell and hit a guy in
Pasadena. I guess it's just a matter of time for the ficus all to be
gone from Los Angeles. I'll miss them. Good to know that oleander
thrives in smog. Thanks for all the information.