Preference for and performance of some Australian native plants grown as hedges

Indigenous and other native plants are commonly restricted to informal or naturalistic designed landscapes. This research project investigates the use of native plants as a formal landscape element – the hedge. A multidisciplinary approach was used with distinct horticultural and social science components. The first study explored the response of 14 native and one exotic species to hedging every 4 months. Digital imaging techniques were used to measure changes in growth, density and canopy distribution. All species responded well to hedging, greatly increasing in density. Significant differences in growth rates and shoot regrowth patterns were recorded between the species. Some hedges grown from genetically diverse plant material had noticeable morphological variations and would be more suited to use as informal hedges, however growth rates were found to be a much better predictor of hedging performance than genetic uniformity. A second study explored gardeners’ (n=162) preference for these native hedges. Photomontages were created of the hedges grown in the horticultural experiment and a photo-questionnaire distributed to several groups of gardeners. The preference results showed that many gardeners did like some Australian plants used as hedges. Significant differences in preference were found between species. A principal components analysis found that factors positively affecting preference for hedges included neatness, foliage colour (green and grey), presence of flowers and the absence of visible woody stems. In general, genetically diverse hedges were slightly less preferred than genetically uniform hedges, but some genetically diverse hedges were highly preferred. Personal style preferences based on gardeners’ expressed gardening behaviour were also observed, with grey and softer hedges preferred by those participants with low-maintenance, drought tolerant or native gardens.

[1]  D. Mccollin,et al.  Editorial: Hedgerow policy and protection - changing paradigms and the conservation ethic. , 2000 .

[2]  T. M. Nelson,et al.  Perception of tree canopy , 2001 .

[3]  M. Cline,et al.  Is auxin the repressor signal of branch growth in apical control? , 2002, American journal of botany.

[4]  Joan Iverson Nassauer,et al.  Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames , 1995, Landscape Journal.

[5]  Susan Barton,et al.  Consumer Preferences for Geranium Flower Color, Leaf Variegation, and Price , 1999 .

[6]  Paul J. Kramer,et al.  Physiology of Woody Plants , 1983 .

[7]  M Cline,et al.  Concepts and terminology of apical dominance. , 1997, American journal of botany.

[8]  Andrew Lane,et al.  The meaning of hedgerows in the English landscape: Different stakeholder perspectives and the implications for future hedge management , 2000 .

[9]  Andrew J. Kaufman,et al.  DOES PLANT COLOR AFFECT EMOTIONAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL RESPONSES TO LANDSCAPES , 2004 .

[10]  T. Daniel,et al.  Measuring landscape esthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method , 1976 .

[11]  Richard Smardon,et al.  Perception and aesthetics of the urban environment: Review of the role of vegetation , 1988 .

[12]  R. Sommer,et al.  An Exploratory Study of Preferred Tree Form , 1995 .

[13]  Alexis A. Alvey Promoting and preserving biodiversity in the urban forest , 2006 .

[14]  J. Palutikof,et al.  Climate change 2007 : impacts, adaptation and vulnerability , 2001 .

[15]  S. Robert,et al.  Cross-National Rankings of Tree Shape , 1996 .

[16]  Assenna Todorova,et al.  Preferences for and attitudes towards street flowers and trees in Sapporo, Japan , 2004 .

[17]  Joan Iverson Nassauer,et al.  The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care , 1988, HortScience.

[18]  J. Hitchmough Urban Landscape Management , 1994 .

[19]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective , 1989 .

[20]  Jing Li Wang,et al.  Color image segmentation: advances and prospects , 2001, Pattern Recognit..

[21]  J. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Gardens and the Bush: Gardeners’ Attitudes, Garden Types and Invasives , 2004 .

[22]  M. Cannell Growth Control in Woody Plants , 1996 .

[23]  V. I. Lohr,et al.  Responses to Scenes with Spreading, Rounded, and Conical Tree Forms , 2006 .

[24]  Preference and meaning of arboretum landscapes: Combining quantitative and qualitative data , 1991 .

[25]  J. Hitchmough PHILOSOPHICAL AND PRACTICAL CHALLENGES TO THE DESIGN AND MANAGEMENT OF PLANTINGS IN URBAN GREENSPACE IN THE 21st CENTURY , 2004 .

[26]  R. Sommer,et al.  Further Cross-National Studies of Tree Form Preference , 1997 .

[27]  D. Kendal Measuring Distances Using Digital Cameras , 2007 .

[28]  T. Wilbanks,et al.  Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2007 .