Answer impossible, because it's mislabelled in first time as Picea bicolor . (An other japanese Picea). Now it's neccesary to study the plant, cones, needles ... for a better determination.

Ok but what does being mislabelled as bicolor have to do with not being able to tell whether its a hondoensis or jezoensis or not? I thought that it was concluded as a picea jezoensis instead of bicolor. Ok can any of you conifer experts be able to tell by carefully looking?

So according to conifer.org it says this for the description, however I don't have neither of these spruces to inspect closely so I can't really tell

The type subspecies is a monoecious evergreen tree up to 35 m tall and 100 cm dbh. The bark is grayish brown, deeply fissured and peeling off in irregular scales. Branchlets are pale yellowish-brown, deeply grooved, and glabrous; pulvini are 0.5 mm long. Leaves are leathery, linear, flat, slightly keeled on both surfaces, 15-25 mm long, 1.5-2 mm wide, apex pointed, with two white stomatal bands on the upper surface; there are two resin canals two, near the lower surface. There are 1-3 pollen cones, terminal on previous year's shoots, cylindric, red-brown, 1.5-2 cm long, 6 mm across, with numerous stamens. Seed cones are solitary, terminal on previous year's shoots, cylindric, brown, pendant, 4-7 cm long, ca. 2 cm across. The seed scales are thinly woody, ovate or oblong-ovate, with an obtuse or rounded apex, slightly denticulate on upper margin, ca. 10 mm long, 6-7 mm wide. Bract scales are small, narrowly ovate, acute, laxly denticulate on upper margin, ca. 3 mm long. Seeds are obovate, brown, 2-2.5 mm long, 1.5 mm wide; wings oblong-ovate, pale brown, 5-6 mm long, 2-2.5 mm wide. The plant flowers in May to June and the cones ripen in September (Iwatsuki et al. 1995).

Subsp. hondoensis differs from the type in having dull red-brown bark that is shallowly fissured and peels off in small scales. The pulvini are smaller, ca. 0.3 mm long, and the leaves are also smaller, 8-15 mm long by 1.5 mm wide. The seed scales are ovate-rhomboid, 8-10 mm wide, and distinctly denticulate on the upper margin. Plants from Ozegahara (Fukushima and Gunma Prefectures) have gray-brown bark, deeply fissured and peeling off in irregular scales. This form has been named f. ozeensis Hayashi (Bull. Gov. For. Exp. Stn. no. 125: 72, t. 2 33, 1960) (Iwatsuki et al. 1995).

First pic is leaves of hondoensis and second pic is howell's dwarf tigertail. I really can't tell just by looking. Can anyone tell?

Well I think I found the answer from these posts.. if they are correct http://forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/3967499/spring-pics

http://forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/1883673/picea-bicolor-howells-dwarf-tiger-tail

http://forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/4488765/whats-the-deal-with-picea-jezoensis-and-picea-bicolor?n=15

I'm not asking if it's a bicolor or jezoensis. I already learned that the cultivar 'howell's dwarf Tigertail' is a jezoensis. So what I want to know is which of the two jezoensis subspecies(var hondoensis or var jezoensis) is 'howell's dwarf Tigertail'. And I see some people from the posts I linked mention that this is a hondoensis variety. Are they actually correct? Anyone?

The correct name are Picea jezoensis 'Howell's Dwarf' but I don't know if it's var hondoensis.

Picea bicolor (alcoquiana) are anther species. Here cone + foliage

I don't understand how is possible to mix the 2 species .

It's 2 Picea OK, from Japan OK, but for the rest, all are different.

Picea jezoensis have flat needles, bicolor quadrangular.

Picea jezoensis have soft cones like P. pungens, bicolor have hard cones like P. abies.

Picea jezoensis have a conical shape , bicolor have a long horizintal branchs.

Picea jezoensis have some cv : 'Aurea', 'Nana Kalous', Hanzil', 'DwarfJewel' ... and the famous 'Howell's Dwarf Tigertail' P. bicolor have only 2 cv at my knowledge 'Prostrata' and 'Joyau'

90% Picea labelled bicolor are jezoensis, Picea bicolor are very rare of course few cv.

So does that mean the alcoquiana I have might possibly be a jezoensis? The Link you posted, which is my thread, has pics of my alcoquiana. Can you tell whether that's really an alcoquiana or a jezoensis?

I don't think it's a hybrid, the needles and cones look typical. About his origin, maybe the seeds come from some Picea jezoensis identified and labelled for Picea bicolor.

I remember my prévious comment : ' 90% Picea labelled bicolor are jezoensis'

From Keith Rushforth - book 'Conifers' : Picea jezoensis var hondoensis is the form in cultivation. By this way, it's very probable the correct name are Picea jezoensis var hondoensis 'Howell's Dwarf'

This cultivar are just a strange form , all other carasteristics are normal.

Thanks. Now I'm convinced that it is a hondoensis if a conifer expert is claiming it. There's no way for me to get in touch with the people from Skyland so I think I will accept it as a hondoensis variety. I'll still get a howell's dwarf myself and inspect it though just to confirm it.

So wait, all picea jezoensis and it's cultivars in the market are hondoensises? So even 'landis' and 'yosawa' would be hondoensis.

But back to my previous question.. I recently bought 3 picea alcoquianas and would like to know if they are really an alcoquiana or a jezoensis. I just took close up pics. The needles look sorta flat to me but I don't want to make any conclusions yet since I'm not an expert. Can any of you tell?

The plant showed here are Picea jezoensis.

'Landis' and 'Yosawa' are Picea glehnii ! = Picea glehnii 'Yosawa' (and possible Picea glehnii 'Landis' because I don't know this cv , I never see a good photo.)

Omg... really!? Are you 100% certain? So all these times I thought I had an alcoquiana it was actually a jezoensis?? Then how come you didn't say anything about it when I posted the photos here? http://forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/4532314/picea-alcoquiana-size You said 'thanks for the photos'

Yes, you have Picea jezoensis. Now I'm 100% sure.

I repete again, Picea bicolor (= alcoquiana) are rare.

Ok thanks.. Well I was just about to post more pics for reassurance. I measured the needles and they were just around or a little over half an inch. Now conifer. Org stated hondoensis has shorter needles than var jezoensis at around 8-15mm, 15 mm being around0.6 inch. So is it possible I have a hondoensis variety? Or maybe the needles are short because the tree itself is still small? Also I think I see white underneath the needles.

The bottom of the measure tape you can see the comparing needle at just over half an inch

The measure are relativ, if you have a young plant or old, in pot or in ground, many rain or not, meat or not ...But no doubts it's well jezoensis, possible var hondoensis.

Yea because var jezoensis has needles 15-25mm long and var hondoensis has needles shorter at 8-15 mm long which describes what I have here in the pic but just wondering if needles are typicaly shorter on younger plants because my spruces are only around 2 feet tall although it is 11 years old

an 11-year old tree that's only 2 feet (60 cm) tall has been systemically stunted by a combination of malnutrition and root restriction, resulting in all classification metrics being potentially atypical.

Plant your tree in real earth in conditions where it's adapted to thrive, wait 10 years and remeasure.

Well I saved it and put it in a much bigger pot with oscomote so it now has nutrients and more space. The reason I don't put it in the ground yet is because I still don't have my own house yet. I will plant it once I get my own property.

Btw David, do you also agree that the pics I posted are of jezoensis? And a hondoensis variety?

If Clément says that they are Yezos, then who am I to argue? He's done way more study on the differences between alcoquiana, jezoensis, and glehnii than I care to ever do.

As far as distinguishing between the type and subsp. hondoensis, there's no way I'd even try without field study of a mature tree's foliage, bark, and cones. A foliage picture of a potted immature specimen isn't nearly enough data to work with.

Rushforth's claim, although interesting, is pretty bold. How can he possibly know his claim to be true? It doesn't pass the common sense test with me.

Hello. I am pretty sure that I got the correct answer for this threads question. My co worker's father has been a manager at what is now called Skylands New Jersey Botanical Garden for 30 years, which used to be Skyland nursery. I've visited there several times and there is one mature spruce labeled 'picea jezoensis subsp. hondoensis' So if they say the 'Howell's dwarf' was selected at Skyland's nursery, then it must've came from that picea jezoensis subsp. hondoensis that is currently there.