I'm a big fan of Wilsons Pink.
Me too! That one is actually a cutting, and I took two air layers last year that rooted very well. It's a strong cultivar for a "dwarf".
Is this just a common misnomer or is there actually another cultivar that is like Wilsons Pink Dwarf, but is larger?
@William N. Valavanis posted on his blog that he gets quite a few arakawa seedlings from his large garden tree that do develop the rough bark including on the roots as his cuttings.
Correct use of/adherence to the term cultivar is important to the preservation of their specific characteristics. Cork bark doesn’t necessarily mean it is an ’Arakawa’ cultivar. This is a bad example because arakawa loosely means rough bark. But it isn’t possible to have a ‘Koto-hime’ seedling.
That makes sense, but wouldn't the arakawa seedlings that show the same traits and characteristics be called an arakawa? I guess the only way to determine if it is the actual cultivar would be by doing a DNA testing, but then again, if the seedlings develop the correct traits how do we know that what we have is the actual cultivar? It could have been a cutting from an arakawa seedling.
Wilson's Pink Dwarf is the whole name. I believe some just shorten it in conversation. Apparently some think the tree grows too large to be called a dwarf, but I think small leaves and good vigor are great for bonsai purposes.
Yes, generically arakawa, but not Acer palmatum, ‘Arakawa’.
Yes, assuming it’s actually mapped.
We don’t, therefore it’s not a cultivar. Cultivars are propagated as clones: air layer, cutting, grafting, tissue culture from a known cultivar.
Generically arakawa, not Ap, ‘Arakawa’.
Probably the correct way to handle this.
I totally agree. However, I wonder if we even know for sure what the exact 'Arakawa' cultivar is any more. It's very possible that enough nurseries have slapped the name on rough bark seedlings for long enough now that it does more generally apply to similar trees, much like has happened with Sango kaku. I also noticed that Meriggioli's book mentions that Arakawa can have varying leaf forms from tree to tree.
Seedlings from an 'Arakawa' will have different genetics, even if both parent plants are the 'Arakawa' cultivar. It will share some, possibly many, traits with the parents, but will not be identical. It may even exhibit characteristics that are better than the parents. If your goal is to create a good bonsai or landscape tree, I wouldn't worry too much about whether it's the cultivar or not, just whether it has the traits you desire. If you're trying to run a nursery and sell JMs, you may care more about having an exact genetic copy of popular cultivars for marketing purposes.
I'm sure this is happening to some extent. I heard on the Mr. Maple podcast recently that they did genetic testing on a bunch of plants being sold as 'Bloodgood' and found 18 unique sets of genetics. This probably happened due to the exact scenario you described. If you really care about getting a particular cultivar, I guess you have to make sure you're getting it from a reliable source.
Interesting! which episode was that on?
I'm only aware of the cultivar Wilson's Pink known as a dwarf variety.
