adaptations Archives - In Situ Plants Toronto | Green Walls | Live Walls

Epiphyllum oxypetalum, grown here epiphytically on a date palm, and showing a huge flush of flowers that can reach nearly a foot wide. Image © Kiwoncello; image retrieved from Compagna del Giardinaggio.

A small colony of young Sinningia pusilla, growing comfortably in a 2" nursery pot, with blooms nearly the size of the plants. Image © In Situ Plants

Columnea microphylla being shown at a Toronto Gesneriad Society meeting. Image © The Toronto Gesneriad Society; image retrieved from their website.

Stapelia gigantea, shown here with a ridiculous amount of huge stinky flowers. Image © gardenmaniac; image retrieved from the Dave's Garden website.

Lepanthes telipogoniflora, a tiny species with a huge name and a huge flower. Image © Thomas; image retrieved from the Species Specific forum.

What follows below is a short list of several species that have a wonderful aspect to their morphology; they just happen to have ridiculously large flowers, either in fact or in proportion to themselves (perhaps it’s the same as in ants and other smaller creatures, which are able to lift many times their own body weight, that only smaller plants can grow a flower that is larger than the rest of the plant). These are all species that can be grown indoors, though some are more challenging than others.

Epiphyllum oxypetalum and related species

One of the many plants with the common name ‘queen of the night’ (and also known as ‘orchid cactus’ ‘Dutchman’s pipe cactus’ or ‘night-blooming Cereus’), E. oxypetalum is an epiphytic cactus native to Mexico and a good part of Central America. It produces dinner-plate sized white flowers that open for a single night and are heavily scented. This plant grows easily enough in a pot or hanging basket, and will bloom well enough indoors if care is up to snuff. It is pretty rambly by nature, and can get awfully large if you give it room, though it is easily pruned to shape, and at least the stems are spineless, which makes brushing past one in a tight space not as uncomfortable as it might be with some of its close relatives.

Sinningia pusilla

I know that terrarium gardening has been a fad of late, but I fear that the concurrent popularity of succulent plants may cause people to be frustrated by limited success with terrariums (this being for the simple fact that succulents by their very nature are not good candidates for terrarium culture); more on that whole thing later, but in the interest in promoting terrariums as an actually quite easy way to grow plants and have them do well (read grow well and flower), I would like to make Sinningia pusilla the poster child of terrarium gardening.

This species has everything to recommend it; they are adorably tiny (leaves are around 3/8″ long), have fuzzy, somewhat iridescent foliage, and, best, throw huge (relative to the plant, at least) pale tubular flowers. They self-pollinate and are quite prolific, able to quickly start colonies of seedlings that form an attractive ground cover. They also are quite easy to grow if provided with one thing above all: humidity. Enter the terrarium; given the added humidity, these plants will flourish when the soil is kept reasonably moist; if allowed to dry too far or too long, they will go dormant, reducing themselves to a tiny tuber to await the return of more favourable times. They are also fairly undemanding of light, which sets them worlds apart from succulents and other plants commonly toted for terrariums.

Columnea microphylla

This species and S. pusilla above both belong to the family Gesneriaceae, which contains a great many species well suited for growing indoors, of which the ubiquitous African violet is a familiar one. Columnea is a large genus with much variety, but Columnea microphylla has to be one of the most impressive. Again, it is not the largest plant (the one to the left looks like it’s in a 3″ pot), but the red flowers absolutely dwarf the leaves.

This species makes a great hanging basket plant, and the pendant stems will trail downward and show off their freakishly large flowers. This one will need a fair bit more light than the Sinningia above to bloom well, but won’t take up much space in a sunny window.

Stapelia gigantea

A first glance of the foliage and you might want to call this one a cactus, but not only is it not one of those, in fact its more familiar relatives are Hoyas, the tropical vines native to Asia commonly grown as houseplants, as well as the common milkweeds here in Ontario which are the chief food supply for monarch butterfly larvae. Stapelia is a genus restricted mostly to southern Africa, and so need a cooler rest period over the winter. making them a good candidate for a bright but poorly insulated bay window in a century home, say. The flowers can be up to a foot across, but have the unfortunate characteristic of reeking of rotting meat in order to attract flies, which are their natural pollinator. A beautiful plant to be sure, but I suppose not for the faint of heart; perhaps I should recommend that this one be brought outside in summer.

Lepanthes telipogoniflora

I’ve saved the best for last, and this little one is, to me, one of the most incredible orchid species out there, despite being only a couple inches across.

Lepanthes telipogoniflora is a diminutive orchid endemic to Colombia, where it grows in some of the wettest rainforest on earth (one spot once reported 43 FEET of rain in a year), which gives us a pretty fair hint as to how it should be kept in cultivation. Alas. I have personally killed this plant (twice); it understandably does not take to drying out in the slightest, and small plants are completely unforgiving. Enter again the terrarium; many people grow this plant successfully in those little round glass hanging terrariums that are quite easy to find these days, and as long as they’re kept happy (you’ll know it is so because the plant won’t be dead) they will bloom pretty consistently, with the flowers being relatively massive and at least the size of the plant in younger specimens. Another important cultural note is that they, as are many of the Pleurothallidinae orchids, are intolerant of hard water, and require rain or otherwise filtered water to do well. This species is, so far as I know, not produced by any Canadian orchid nurseries (presumably because of the aforementioned cultural challenges), but is brought in by Ecuagenera when they attend regional orchid shows here, and presumably by others as well.

This list of huge bloomers is by no means exhaustive; in fact, I’m sure I’ve only scratched the surface. If any other plants fit the bill, list them in the comments below!

If you’re unfamiliar with the chemical reaction above, then you may also be unfamiliar with the fact that life as we typically tend to think of it would not be possible without plants.

Photosynthesis is responsible for the capture of solar energy that in turn powers nearly all life on earth: everything we eat is either plants, or other animals that formerly ate plants (or that ate other animals that ate plants). Plants absorb sunlight and convert it into chemical energy which is stored within the plant for its own uses; we eagerly exploit this by consuming them and thus the sum of the solar energy they’ve stored. Good deal for us, bad deal for the plants (not that they seem to care).

There are not many other ways to capture and metabolize energy in this way, save chemosynthesis (which is why I need to keep referring to ‘almost all life’ above, which, while definitely less dramatic, is more accurate, as there are organisms which are able to capture energy from chemical reactions, most notably in deep-sea communities colonizing hydrothermal vents, and so have no need of sunlight). So plants really are the foundation of nearly all life on the earth.

And not just regarding energy, either. Though a bit more oft-toted, the fact that plants maintain the planet’s oxygen levels is equally prevalent. This does bring up the subject of conservation, but I can save that for another time. I will add in a shameless plug, though, that plants indoors will raise local oxygen levels and just generally improve the air quality indoors. You can read this post for more information if you like: Plants at Work: The Science Behind how Plants Improve Life Indoors.

For anyone interested in the equation who doesn’t understand the chemistry, basically the plant takes 6 molecules of carbon dioxide and 6 of water, and splits these to create free oxygen (which is released by the plant), and a few other goodies which combine with the solar energy captured by the chlorophyll in the plant to create carbohydrates (the C6H1206 in the equation above) which contain that solar energy. Pretty simple, but critical to life on earth.

It’s a little humorous to me that our industry (speaking very broadly here, of course) provides, in a manner of speaking, a product that no one can live without. Maybe that’s why everyone tends to like plants so much: I’ve met many people indifferent to them (and have changed a few minds there), and many more people who love them but can’t seem to stop killing them (and I can only hope I’ve helped a bit there), but have never really met anyone who’s said that they actively dislike plants (except maybe recent victims of poison ivy or the like). Maybe it’s a stretch to assume that we as a species are that aware of the inexorable connection we have with the rest of life, but for whatever reason the biophilic instinct is certainly alive and well.

A photo of the Atlantic Forest of Brazil, a view of which prompted Darwin's words to the right. Image source unknown; retrieved from Projeto Entre Serras.

The cradle of humankind: the plains of Africa. Image © Gossipguy; retrieved from Wikimedia

`…that the naturalist`s journey will go on forever. That it is possible to spend a lifetime in a magellanic voyage around the trunk of a single tree. That as the exploration is pressed, it will engage more of the things close to the human heart and spirit. And if this much is true, it seems possible that the naturalist`s vision is only a specialized product of a biophilic instinct shared by all, that it can be elaborated to benefit more and more people. Humanity is exalted not because we are so far above other living creatures, but because knowing them well elevates the very concept of life.’

E.O. Wilson, from Biophilia

You may have noticed that we reference and tag a word fairly often here at In Situ: biophilia. Biophilia as a concept was developed by the great Edward O. Wilson, biologist, ecologist and prize-winning author, who used it to describe humans’ innate need for affiliation with other living things. From the plants we have kept in our homes since at least the beginning of recorded history, to the out of work domestic animals we still keep around (there aren’t many professional mousers or herders among them these days, at least from an urban perspective- I’m sure there’s still work in the country), to the way we design our cities and parks, human beings have always surrounded ourselves with other organisms. Here’s another (admittedly long) quote by Wilson, who can put it all much more elegantly than I ever could:

‘I have suggested that the urge to affiliate with other forms of life is to some degree innate, hence deserves to be called biophilia. The evidence for the proposition is not strong in a formal scientific sense: the subject has not been studied enough in the scientific manner of hypothesis, deduction, and experimentation to let us be certain about it one way or the other. The biophilic tendency is nevertheless so clearly evinced in daily life and widely distributed as to deserve serious attention. It unfolds in the predictable fantasies and responses of individuals from early childhood onward. It cascades into repetitive patterns of culture across most or all societies, a consistency often noted in the literature of anthropology. These processes appear to be part of the programs of the brain. They are marked by the quickness and decisiveness with which we learn particular things about certain kinds of plants and animals. They are too consistent to be dismissed as the result of purely historical events working on a mental blank slate.’

E.O. Wilson, from Biophilia

So while at the time the book Biophilia was published (1984), there had been no empirical study on the presence of an innate biophilic instinct shared by all of humanity. Since Wilson’s introduction of the hypothesis, many studies have been done that highlight the importance of proximity to nature and other living things to our mental health (see this literature review for a good discussion on some of the studies that have been done: Biophilia: Does Visual Contact with Nature Impact on Health and Well-Being?). Beyond all this, and at the risk of relying on intuition when so many of our human eccentricities are indeed counterintuitive, it just feels correct. At least to me (biased as I might be). Any client I’ve ever spoken with has always pleased with having plants around, and they often comment on how much better a place feels, which seems like mission accomplished and hypothesis confirmed to me.

But how did all this come about? Rooted in our history the habits may be, but the fact that humanity is itself rooted in the natural world is what has caused our deep-seated need to be surrounded by nature. We are the product of a particular habitat, and to this day we still find space in our urban centres for an approximation of it. Think of practically any city park you can imagine. Open grassy areas, with scattered copses of trees; sometimes a pond, fountain or the like. Maybe something somewhat reminiscent of this?

Our species came to be in just such a habitat, and we still seek these same landscapes for comfort, relaxation and meditation. We select our homes in similar ways: perched atop a hill, overlooking water, with a few trees (not too many) here and there describes some of the most sought-after property available (and indeed will often fetch a hefty price).

Turn now to the indoors, where people have been keeping plants for at least as long as we’ve been recording history. All ancient civilizations have depictions of potted plants indoors in the images they created, and sometimes went through great lengths to cultivate plants difficult to grow outside of their native environment (the Romans were building greenhouses even before glass was invented). It is safe to assume that many of these were functional from a medicinal or culinary standpoint, though the Chinese have cultivated ornamental plants indoors for at least three thousand years. Plant mania swept homes and offices in the 1970s, to an extent that has not yet been rivaled (though what those early pioneers of the interior landscape industry would have made of vertical gardening technology!). The interior landscaping industry was born in this era, and has persisted since.

Said industry has often toted the benefits of keeping plants indoors, primarily from a health and employee productivity standpoint (I went through some of the science that these claims are based on here), and some companies have begun to reference the biophilia concept as another selling feature. They are certainly right to do so, but I doubt that many who belong to these organizations have actually read and understood the ideas behind the concept, and are genuinely interested in fostering the sense of interest and wonder in the natural elements we surround ourselves with.

What In Situ is trying to do (and what we would like to encourage the rest of the industry to try to do) is to create more of those moments when nature really takes us in, where time falls away and we are free to explore with our senses the structure of a leaf, say, or the contrasting textures or colours of different plants growing together, to go on Wilson’s ‘magellanic voyage around the trunk of a single tree’. We wish to recreate the forest edge, viewed from our comfortable place amongst the figurative grasslands of our urban interiors, which draws us nearer, showing us glimmers of the mysteries held deeper within. We want to replicate indoors the richness and splendour that has captivated us as a species forever, has inspired countless works of art, and that still, in the lives we live primarily apart from it, holds a special place in our imagination.

‘Among the scenes which are deeply impressed on my mind, none exceed in sublimity the primeval forests undefaced by the hand of man; whether those of Brazil, where the powers of Life are predominant, or those of Tierra del Fuego, where Death and decay prevail. Both are temples filled with the varied productions of the God of Nature: — no one can stand in these solitudes unmoved, and not feel that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body.’

Charles Darwin, from Voyage of the Beagle

By using new and interesting species, and using familiar species in interesting ways, we hope to satisfy the biophilic instinct by completing indoor environments with the engaging natural elements that have been a part of our species’ evolution since time immemorial. When used this way, plants can create a kind of biotic warmth that tempers the sterility of many modern interiors. I don’t advocate turning every indoor space into a jungle (…): rather, the contrast between our manmade constructions and these natural elements are what highlights their presence and what really makes them come to life. The studies I referred to above seem to indicate that having these elements in sight from any area of an indoor space is the optimal placement, and this is the model that many in the industry use when designing their interior landscapes. It`s sound to me, but I feel it’s only effective if the elements are actually visually captivating: this is why we try whenever possible to use plants that people are not usually familiar with, and that have very unique textures or colours, or some other interesting facet to their biology that creates real interest. We seek to foster a true biophilia, through which we can draw inspiration, comfort and knowledge, secure in the surrounds of our earthly cohabitants.

Tag: adaptations

Freaks of Nature: A Few Plants with Disproportionately Large Flowers

Why You Can’t Live Without Plants

On Biophilia and the Value of Interior Landscaping