I recall this being some strange cultivar or species of philadelphus.
Lost the tag of course. And no philadelphus I can find on line looks anything like it.
Can someone help ID if it's really a mock orange and if so, which one?
Doesn't someone want to take a crack at this one??
It's a pretty shrub; deserves a better fate than passing through the Plant ID forum without a single hit!
Surely there are some woody plant officionados out there who can help give it a name?
Have found a photo of Philadelphus lewisii, that reminds me of your plant. What do you think?
I'm not seeing the Philadelphus serrations on the edges of the leaves. Do you have another pic of a leaf? More details - height, width, etc.
It's growing in my woodland (but of course, if I planted it, it doesn't mean it's meant to grow there..)
It looks like it's thriving in that setting. About 10yrs old & approx 8ft tall.
Large, rather coarse opposite leaves, slightly rugose.
I'll admit the flowers certainly don't resemble any philadelphus I've seen, but leaves could be philadelphus.
I also looked at philadelphus lewisii pix on line (because, frankly that's what I thought it was).
But the flowers aren't nearly as narrow and 'helicopter-like' as these.
I can get more pictures of foliage (it's done blooming) this weekend, if needed.
I presume it's an obscure species or cultivar, because those are the ones I enjoy. I have planted a gazillion of them over the years. The more peculiar, the more likely I planted it. The problem of course is that it takes years to get them to grow to decent flowering size; by then, I've lost track of the tag or was marked in invisible ink!
Thanks for your help!!
Certainly looks like Philadelphus seed structures.
Maybe you just had an unusual flowering mutation this time...
Thanks for your help, VV.
If it's a mutation, it's a stable one, as it's bloomed the same for years.
It's quite pretty in bloom. I guess it will have to remain unidentified.
I see the slight serrations in the leaves now. Can't say I know which one you have there but it is a rather attractive bloom or atleast interesting.
If you happened to mention some of the vendors you've dealt with over the years (at least in the era in which you acquired it), maybe we could be autobots and help you track it down that way...
Let this be a lesson to scan/save all your order forms! They don't usually weather away - like labels, and minds...
Believe it or not, I do keep the orders.
But organization has never been my strong suit.
I'll look thru to see what I can find.
Thanks for helping.
I'll let you know if I figure it out.
Edited to say, I just looked thru all my on-line orders for past 10yrs - nothing helpful.
So I presume it was longer than 10yrs ago, which makes sense, given the size of the shrub now.
I still have the receipts somewhere, but before I had a computer... Hopeless!
This message was edited Jun 18, 2012 7:28 PM
Scans, my friend, scans.
I'm going to start perusing arboretum accession lists.
I was amused by Moon's recent assertion on a recent PlantID thread that the intrepid Plant ID'ers at DG have never failed to identify a plant.
So I'm bumping up my poor abandoned philadelphus mystery from this past summer.
He is still lacking a proper ID. Any new ideas?
He should be blooming again this spring, so I'll post some more pix, if I remember to take them.
I'd hate for him to keep blooming his heart out in perpetual anonymity.
Sorry, I messed up this posting... please see following posting.
This message was edited Jan 6, 2013 1:08 PM
Suse already posted one photo of Philadephus lewisii that shows very narrow petals, similar to your plant. Here are some more:
This message was edited Jan 6, 2013 1:11 PM
I still think the flowers on my plant are different, but maybe this is as close as we're going to get.
Thanks for taking another look at it.
Correct me if I'm wrong. The seed structure (second set, centre photo) shows Philadelphus coronarius seed pod structure? It'd be nice to narrow it down to the species, whether lewisii or coronarius and then work on the cultivar.
In reviewing the original flower pics, I'm having trouble figuring out if they are just stamens or if there is also a stigma in there. Is that part of the bloom deformed?
It does seem to be an imperfect flower. I'm surprised the sepals are so obvious. I'm going to make it more complicated by adding Deutzia as another possible genus.
I wonder what Johan van der Deutz would think about growin's assertion. I, personally, find it a valid possibility.
I think that Philadelphus and Deutzia would have quite different seed capsules - though I can't drum up any images to support that.
Same goes for other dormant characteristics - buds, stems, branches, WHOLE PLANT...
Weerobin could help matters immensely by providing additional images/info.
Don't I see five petals in these Deutzia flowers?
Is that a rule out for that guess for the posted plant?
Intersting... I'm not sure what I think other than suspecting it belongs to Caprifoliaceae.
Well, I wouldn't go on the petal count for this one. The only Philadelphus that comes close is P. lewisii. P. microphylla as a close second but them don't look like phyllas that are micro to me. Was this plant very dry, as in drought conditions when it bloomed? Any purchase records, source information, etc?
The blooms look very much like Fendlera but the leaves just don't match.
OK, VV, here are the last 3 images I have from last spring. I'm not if they'll be useful or not.
I can go out this weekend and take some of the dormant plant, if you think it might help.
They might not turn out very clear, as it's growing in a fairly congested woodland.
Growin, it's growing on a wooded slope. The blooms above were taken on May 5.
As I recall, we had a fairly wet spring (before the terrible heat and drought later in summer).
I don't recall the bloom this year being any different from prior years.
As for any purchase records, VV has already roundly criticized me for my deficient record-keeping.
I simply recall it being some sort of a philadelphus, but I can't find the specific ID from that time.
I appreciate everyone's effort in identifying it for me.
I must admit, this one has me very stumped. I can only suggest it is a mutation from the norm.
(Muttering under breath...)
Thanks for the additional images, which confirm (for me) that it is still more Philadelphus than Deutzia.
What about something novel like, cut a branch and bring it indoors for very clear images of small dormant parts? Just a thought...
There are a few hybrids that appear similar to you photos. Some cultivars of P. x virginalis, P. x cymosus and P. x falconeri.
Oh, wow. I used P. x cymosus and came up with this google result: http://site.plantes-web.fr/brochetlanvin/0/boutique/28393/philadelphus_x_cymosus.htm
Hmm. It's certainly a narrow petal, but leaves seem too narrow. And the petals don't seem as thick...
I went out as ordered to try take pictures of the 'small dormant parts'.
Not having a clue what small dormant parts are, I winged it as best I could.
Here are some mid-winter pictures of the mystery plant.
#1 is plant habit.
#2 the multistemmed trunk.
#3 seed capsules.
#4 terminal bud.
#5 side branch buds.
(I don't really know if those terms are correct, but they seemed apt to me.)
I didn't see any other structures that might qualify as small dormant parts,
so I hope these images will be adequate.
You done good there, Weerobin - for a lousy weather weekend. But you could make it easier on yourself by using that camera's Felco attachment...
By cutting a stem/branch and bringing it in (disobeying orders, eh?), you could also have investigated the pith.
That is a separating feature between the two genera - Philadelphus is with pith, Deutzia not so much.
I would say that #4 and #5 illustrate buds with valvate and mostly hairy scales. Solitary and sessile, too - all fits Philadelpus.
The philadelphus pubescens flowers look pretty similar to mine, including the slight twist of the petals.
But I googled other pictures of p. pubescens and the petals are generally broad, so I'm still confused.
I gather the floral variance will make identification based on just a picture of the flower fairly impossible.
I'll try to get some more pictures this spring when it blooms again.
I'd like to know if there is anything I should look for with the bloom to help with identification?
Methinks Weerobin ought get thee hence...travel is good for the soul.