What types of trees are your plants under? Maples are very, very difficult to plant under; the fibrous roots suck moisture and nutrients out of the soil. Also, Heucheras, Tiarellas and Alchemilla would be happier with partial (morning) sun and afternoon shade; they are not plants for dense, total shade.

you ask about dry shade twice ... then conclude by asking about damp shade ... which is it???

need to ID the trees also .. as noted ....

ken

sorry to be confusing. Please note I live in oregon- Question one: I have tried the huecharas and the ladys mantle under yes a maple tree. I also have them planted in beds I built up under my pine trees. They get dapled shade and I have tried some in more sun. They are in the same spot as my foam flowers, but still under a tree with same results.

Question two: The huecharas ,various varities in my pots are not doing as well as I would think.In the pots they don't seem to be rooting deep. I do have several that are real punney in my pot with my red twig maple- do I fertilize extra or plant something different?

Question three: Berginia why no blooms. Are they lacking something?

Question four: I have another area that is shaded and moist. I have tried lobelia but not enough sun. I already have toad lillies. Any other suggestions for this site.
Thanks hope this is clearer. angelea

angelea, planting anyting under a maple is often a losing proposition. Maples create some pretty dense shade and their roots suck up all the water in the summertime. The things that are most likely to do well there are things that naturally grow under trees in the woods - mayapples, sanguinaria, hellebores, Virginia bluebells, erythronium, hepatica, anemone nemorosa, Canadian ginger, solomon seal, jack-in-the-pulpit, ferns. Many of these plants bloom in the early spring and then the entire plant goes dormant in the summer, which is probably how they avoid competing with the tree roots. Hostas can also do OK under maples and lamium. Most of these plants will need careful attention in their first year or two so they don't dry out. If all else fails, you can try a really pushy groundcover. Or mulch and forget growing under there.

I have found that lady's mantle doesn't really want to be under a tree - it prefers a nice spot in a partly shaded planting bed. Same with the one or two heucheras I've tried. Tiarella ought to be OK under a tree - mine are OK under a magnolia (but a magnolia is not a maple!)

Finally, most perennials don't exactly come flying out of the gate - it can take a couple of years for a plant to really settle in and do something. If your plants are only just now starting their second year, have some patience. It may just be that they're still young.

I can't help you with the pots. Nothing ever grows well for me in a pot.

I agree with all that's already been said. You need to make sure you've got the best choices for your particular planting conditions...there are lots of different kinds of shade - dry, wet, dark, light, dappled - different plants do well in each type of planting area.

Even in the best matched conditions, though, perennials take a few years to really get going. Good rule of thumb came from a friend who quit the Real Estate business and became a master gardener...she said this about perennials, "the first year they sleep, the second year they creep, the third year they leap"...but all of that assumes they love where they're planted.

Best to do some research on the plants you have, to find out what they love the best, and then move them to more suitable conditions. Under maple trees probably not the best spot. And, Bergenia are not always reliable bloomers.

Thanks for the tips. I have never been known for my patience. In fall I moved the plants that were obviosly in the wrong spaces. So perhaps I just need to continue to amend with compost and wait. Also with all the rain some of my foam lowers have really started to go. Late last summer second year in these beds I installed a soaker system. So with better watering in the summer I may be okay. Thanks for the plant list to. I have some but not all. Question: Are we suppose to have beds like in the books all filled out no soil in site, just plants. I have lots of plants but plenty of bark showing. Should I plant a ground cover or just wait and see what fills out?

Are we suppose to have beds like in the books all filled out no soil in site, just plants.

You should have what you like to look at.

Some people really like the look of nicely shaped individual plants, with space in between. The benefit of planting this way is that the pants have plenty of room to reach their optimum size, they don't compete with neighbors for light, water and air and disease is MUCH less of a problem. Staking is easier, too.

Other gardeners think that any visible soil MUST be planted in! The crowded, jumbled look can be charming, but don't be fooled. To keep the plants healthy takes a lot of "management" and often plants end up so close together they don't grow well or one just crowds out and vcan even kill another.

Your plants are mostly young. If I were you, I would wait and see how things look in, say, September. I'll bet you see a lot less empty space by then! If you want to fill in just for this summer, add some annuals. Try cosmos, larkspur and chinese forget-me-not for soft colors on plants that die most obligingly in the fall. Foliage is nice on the larkies and cosmos, too. Purple basil is another idea for a temporary filler-in.