Trial: Perennial
Trialed: 2009 (planted in 2008; plants flowered second year; no data first year).Good Qualities
Year 2
Large flower; Flower color and stem length are great; It was very floriferous.Problems
Year 2
Too branchy, resulting in lots of short unusable stems, not a good cut flower, ugly double flowers on many; Not very many of the flowers were doubles; Many of the plants did not produce a “double” cone, of the ones that did I thought they had a raggedy appearance like they were diseased, no one liked it so we stopped cutting it.Insect or Diseases
Year 2
None (2).Similar species/cultivars
Year 2
More like regular echinacea with drooping petals.Trial Data
Year 2
| Plants died over winter (%) | Plants flowering (%) | Yield (stems/plant)¹ | Stem Length (inches)¹ | Market Appreciation Rating² | Repeat Again Rating² | Ease of Cultivation Rating² | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average | 0 | 100 | 9.5 | 18.5 | 2.0 | 1.0 | 5.0 |
| Range of Responses | 0 | 100 | 2-21 | 12-21 | 2.5 | 1-5 | 4-5 |
¹Data shown are from those respondents who harvested stems. Some respondents may not have harvested stems because they were too short. Flowering stems may be longer next year after plants are established. See comments section for more details.
²1 to 5 scale, with 5 being the best. Market ratings are based on sales to wholesalers, retailers, or final consumers direct.
Comments
Year 2
Several bloomed in 2009, I can’t sell something this weird in Nebraska — I have enough trouble just selling echinacea, which florists say looks “weedy”.