None of the rate differentials will matter at any sort of meaningful scale in your lifetime.

That is: after 30 years, their differences will be measured in single feet.

"None of the rate differentials will matter at any sort of meaningful scale in your lifetime. That is: after 30 years, their differences will be measured in single feet. "

That isn't true.

An average growth rate for a species specimen is about two feet per year. Of course, as has been discussed here so many times, growth rate depends on numerous factors. My seedling ginkgos grow closer to about 2.5 feet per year, around here. I've seen reliable reports of over 3 feet per year.

There are many dwarf cultivars out there that grow much much slower than that. Some may be only a few feet tall after many years.

I'd agree the species grows fast even around here. You just can't tell if you are getting a male or female. I put a dense oval shaped Autumn Gold at my old house 4 years ago and it "looks" the same size today.

I also put one in at my new house 2 years ago that has grown close to 1' each year which if fairly impressive for a recent b&b transplant. Similar ph but the the new one is growing in loose loamy sand and the other in rocky clay.

Brandon, are you saying that there are vars. out there that are so much faster than other ones that there will be a, say, 10 ft difference between them and another after, say, 30 years?

Absolutely (unless you are using the word variety in it's strict scientific sense)! Many of the dwarf cultivars will stay tiny compared to species and full-sized cultivar plants. Some of the smaller cultivars take on more of a small shrub form.

My point was that the differences in growth rate for the generalized, vague "gingkos" (gingkoes? gingkoii?), in a typical lifetime the differences are minimal. That rate was clarified expanded upon upthread with anecdotes.

I think the point is that there aren't faster growing cultivated plants over the straight species. At least not that I know of.

What whaas said too.

"My point was that the differences in growth rate for the generalized, vague "gingkos" (gingkoes? gingkoii?), in a typical lifetime the differences are minimal. That rate was clarified expanded upon upthread with anecdotes."

I'm not sure what you mean there.

"I think the point is that there aren't faster growing cultivated plants over the straight species."

I'd bet you're probably right about no super-fast cultivars, however, I think the growth rate of the plain-species is underestimated by many. If Ginkgos are happy, they can easily put on more than two feet of height per year, and that's relatively fast for most trees. They'll never compete with hybrid poplars for speed-of-growth, but hybrid poplars are never going to be able to compete with ginkgos for just about every other good characteristic.

Gingko cultivar A's rate of growth is close to that of B and C and D and E. The differences are such that after 30 years there is little difference.

The plural of 'Ginkgo' is 'Ginkgos' or 'Ginkgoes' or 'Ginkgo', for those that won't be able to sleep at night without knowing! The ACS prefers 'Ginkgo' as both singular and plural form.
Sara

Wish ours would grow like those above. Ours has grown about 2.5' since planting in Spring 2007. Part of the problem is late freezes getting new shots, but even when that has not happened, growth has been far less than impressive. Think we got 15" one year, but that's about it. Most otherwise is maybe 8". Plus we have gotten yellow color ONE time!!!! Can you tell that I'm a little less than pleased?

BTW, our tree is Princeton Sentry, and it also seems to have later color from the trees locally that I believe to be PS.

Arktrees

This post was edited by arktrees on Sun, Mar 17, 13 at 11:14

Does anyone have experience with 'Shangri-La'? Some sites list it as "faster growing".