SKU: 27063422339
red spider lily scientific name

red spider lily scientific name Red Spider Lily (Lycoris radiata) Southern Heirloom Triploid

Sale price$20.79 Regular price$23.10
Save 10%

Pay in installments of $5.78 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 23 - Jul 28

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

red spider lily scientific name Red Spider Lily (Lycoris radiata) Southern Heirloom TriploidRed Spider Lily (Lycoris radiata): A Gardener's Guide to the Enchanting Resurrection Flower Red spider lilies are beloved perennials that thrive in zones 7 10, bringing a burst of vibrant beauty to gardens when fall rains arrive. A Lily of Many Names: The Red Spider Lily's Regional Nickname: One of our favorite things about the red spider is its many names as you travel across the country. This also makes for interesting conversations with our

Red Spider Lily (Lycoris radiata): A Gardener's Guide to the Enchanting Resurrection Flower

Red spider lilies are beloved perennials that thrive in zones 7-10, bringing a burst of vibrant beauty to gardens when fall rains arrive.

A Lily of Many Names: The Red Spider Lily's Regional Nickname:

One of our favorite things about the red spider is its many names as you travel across the country. This also makes for interesting conversations with our customers to make sure that we are talking about the same flowering bulb. The names don't change the striking beauty of this fall-blooming flower. Here in East Texas, we call it the "red spider lily". It is red, and the stamens look like spider legs. Along the coast, it is often referred to as a "hurricane lily" because it often blooms after the first fall hurricane. Many people call this a "naked lady" because it blooms on a naked stalk. Others simply call it a "surprise" lily because it shows up out of nowhere and surprises you one day with a flower. No matter what it is called, its beauty will make you glad that you have it in your garden.

The Red Spider Lily's Unique Bloom Cycle: A Timeline

Understanding the Red Spider Lily's bloom cycle is key to successful cultivation. Most people still expect to see something growing during the summer months. You won't see anything. These lilies are dormant in the summer. The flowers suddenly appear with the first later summer or early fall rains. One day there is nothing growing and then suddenly you have a surprise, a fully blooming flower! That is why they are called "Surprise lilies". Yellow spider lilies act very similarly to yellow spider lilies, schoolhouse lilies, and naked ladies. Simply put, they bloom in the fall and then have foliage for the winter. I have spider lilies planted almost 2 years ago that have not yet produced blooms but have produced increasing foliage each year.

1. Planting (Anytime): Avoid hard freezes, but otherwise you can plant the bulbs anytime that you are thinking about them.
2. Dormancy (Summer): Bulbs rest underground, conserving energy.
3. Surprise Blooms (Late Summer/Early Fall): Flowers emerge seemingly overnight.
4. Foliage Growth (Fall/Winter): Leaves appear, gathering nutrients for the following year.

Nurturing the Foliage: The Key to Red Spider Lily Success

The foliage is vital for the bulb's health and reproduction. Don't be discouraged if you don't see blooms the first year – healthy foliage is a positive sign of bulb establishment. The foliage tells you the bulb is growing and multiplying. We know that we all want to see the beautiful unusual blooms in the fall, but the foliage is very important. The foliage is what allows the bulb to grow and multiply. Many people get very concerned if they don't see the spider lily bloom the first year that they plant it and believe that maybe the bulb isn't any good. The foliage is what you watch for if you don't see your spider lily bloom, or even if you do.

Below you will see a picture of the foliage of the red spider lily - it looks like grass. We took the picture on November 1st. The foliage has been popping out of the ground a little over the previous couple of weeks, but now you can really see the stand. All of those different tufts of foliage are bulbs, and someday you will see a beautiful stand of red spider lilies here. In this area because of the super dry summer, not one red spider lily bloomed. However, you can see that the bulbs are growing. The foliage is up and ready to take in nutrients over the next several months while helping the bulbs grow, mature, and multiply. I know you will have to take our word for it, but there wasn't even 1/2 that much foliage there last year which shows you how quickly the bulbs multiply. The foliage will continue to grow. Even if it gets hit by a winter cold snap, it will have taken in nutrients for months! Always allow the foliage to die down naturally and don't cut it off. If you cut it, you are killing the bulb. Once the foliage is completely dead which is usually around the beginning of May, this area can be mowed. Remember, it takes a lot of energy for the bulb to push that bloom up out of the ground and open wide. The more time the bulbs can take in nutrients, the more energy they will have for that fall bloom.

Sunlight Requirements: Ensuring a Spectacular Bloom

The single most important thing about landscaping with spider lilies is the sun. They need at least 6+ hours a day of WINTER sun. That means about 6-8 hours of sunlight during the winter months. If you look at the photo above, you will see that they are in the shade of the trees. You can be sure that most, if not all, of those trees, will lose their leaves in the winter when the greenery needs sunlight. The spider lily puts on its foliage during the winter (November - May) and that is when it takes in the nutrients it needs to produce those golden flowers the following September. The winter foliage soaks up sun energy during winter as it prepares for summer dormancy. The foliage normally completely dies down by around May.

Planting and Care Tips for Red Spider Lilies

Don't plant the bulb too deep. You will plant the bulbs 2-3 times deep the height of the bulb (so if your bulb is 2" tall, then you will plant it 4-5 inches deep). You can plant 2-3 per hole to make the blooms look more natural. Spider lilies really do well in any type of soil. They thrive in soil that has plenty of organic material mixed in, but they do not require fertilizer. Newly planted bulbs would actually be harmed by exposure to fertilizer, so if you are going to apply nutrients, limit the application to established plants when the plants are producing their green leafy foliage during the winter. After planting the bulbs, water the soil thoroughly. Damp soil is ok, as long as the bulbs are in a spot where they will receive plenty of winter sun and the foliage is allowed to die down naturally in the spring. Standing water is not good. Once the summer season starts the spider lily will do best in soil that dries out a bit, as this facilitates its entry into the dormant stage when its leaves die back. This period is followed by its blooming season when it will reward daily watering with long-lasting blooms. Too much moisture in the soil will lead to the bulbs rotting.

Planting Depth: Plant bulbs 2-3 times their height deep.

Soil Type: While adaptable, they thrive in soil rich in organic matter.

Watering: Water thoroughly after planting and during dry periods. The bulbs are dormant during the summer so you don't need to water them.

Fertilizer: Avoid fertilizing newly planted bulbs; established plants benefit from fertilizer during active foliage growth.

The performance of red spider lilies primarily hinges on two factors:

1. Winter Sunlight: To produce lush blooms, the bulbs need to absorb sufficient nutrients from the winter sun. Energy stored over months is used to create these breathtaking blossoms. For this, they require at least six hours of winter sun for several months to ensure they have the energy needed.

2. Fall Rains: The magic trigger for these blooms is the arrival of fall rains. Without adequate rainfall in September, the bulbs won't bloom, as the rains are the signal they've been waiting for.

Dividing and Multiplying Your Red Spider Lily Garden

Early spring is ideal for dividing, but it can be done whenever convenient. Remember, transplanting might cause the lilies to skip a blooming cycle.

Companion Plants for Red Spider Lilies: A Symphony of Color

Enhance your garden's beauty by pairing Red Spider Lilies with other perennials, annuals, or bulbs for continuous blooms:

Perennials: Salvias, Lantanas, Plumbago, Phlox
Annuals: Alyssum, Snapdragons, Pansies, Cyclamen
Bulbs: Narcissus, Iris, Snowflakes, Rain Lilies, Crinums, Hymenocallis

FAQ's

Do animals bother the red spider lilies?

Pollinators adore yellow spider lilies...hummingbirds, bees, and butterfilies.

While deer will eat anything (including plastic flowers if hungry enough), spider lilies are more resistant to their urges than many other ornamental garden products. They definitely leave the foliage alone during the winter, but can be attracted to the bright flowers. So the answer to this question, is that they are mostly resistant, depending on how hungry the deer are. Remember, humans ate tulips during times of hunger/famine, yet tulips definitely aren’t on our menu either.

We understand that online sources sometimes raise concerns about toxicity, so we want to offer some clarification. Much of the alarm you may see online stems from generalized or exaggerated toxicity listings. In reality, cases of actual poisoning are extremely rare, and the plants are not considered a serious risk. While red spider lily bulbs, like many ornamental bulbs, do contain alkaloids that could cause mild irritation if ingested in large quantities, they are not considered dangerous to humans or animals under normal garden conditions. The key is that even for mild irritation they would need to be fully consumed in large quantities. Even if animals chew on the bulbs a little bit, they aren't interested in them (even deer who have been known to eat plastic flowers leave them alone). In fact, they’ve been grown safely in Southern gardens for generations—including in areas with pets and children. You can feel confident they won’t pose a hazard just by being in your garden.

When should I plant red spider lilies? How far in advance should lily bulbs be planted before the first frost in the fall?

For fall planting, aim to have fall lily bulbs in the ground at least four weeks before the first frost. This gives them time to get settled and adjusted before the freeze. You can plant red spider lilies anytime, but avoid a hard freeze.

How do you ship red spider lilies?


During the spring, we ship these vibrant bulbs "in the green," which means they are plump, healthy, and eager to be planted. Expect the foliage to yellow and die back naturally—this is a normal process where the leaves nourish the bulbs for future blooms. Once the foliage is dead, you can cut it off. The rest of the year we ship dormant bulbs. Plant them, water them, and then just wait. Remember - you won't see anything during the summer as the bulbs are dormant. You may not see blooms the first fall depending on when you planted the bulbs. Many perennial bulbs need 6-12 months in the ground before they bloom.

Your Red Spider Lily Journey Starts Today!

Order your Red Spider Lily bulbs now and witness the magic of these captivating flowers in your own garden. With their unique charm and resilience, they are guaranteed to become a treasured part of your landscape.

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 27063422339

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell red spider lily scientific name

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.5 ★★★★★
Based on 14 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
P
Verified Purchase
Patrick S.
Birmingham, US
★★★★★ 5
A fun and fulfilling book - would love to own the series
Format: Paperback
I had a lot of fun with this book. About a year ago, I really came down on the side of presuppositionalism and have studied the approach, see if it was useful against two of the leading atheistic books (God Is Not Great and The God Delusion), and now I wanted to match it up against four other views of apologetics. I will try to not go into too much detail here as I think the book is an important read for developing an apologetic standpoint. The book follows the 1)"model of Approach X is presented" then 2) "Response from other 4 approaches to counter Approach X" and then move on to the next approach. The book allows final statements from each writer for a final opportunity. Steven Cowan has a good introduction and epilogue that bookends the book well. Craig (Classical Approach) really surprised me as he brings in the role of the Holy Spirit early into the conversation. I really thought I was going to just be reading the finer points of the Kalam argument he's known for. The role of the Holy Spirit is reflected in the other authors' approaches as well and that was nice to see. It's also nice to see Craig debating with Christians for once and it's here that you really get to see his thought process contrasting with other people with the same worldview. There are issues that Craig tries to bring up against the presuppositionist view point that could be applied for him. He doesn't seem to get that all foundations are, by definition, circular because if you can appeal to something more foundational, then your foundation isn't your foundation at all. Craig seems to bring in some higher concepts about probability to make some of his points and I think that's really a miss for anyone who's not a high level philosopher (and even some philosophers might have issues understand what he's talking about here). Habermas (Evidential Approach) seems to have an undue hatred for presuppositionalism. He's also another person who doesn't realize that the approach he uses isn't really the foundation he is starting from. I think he resents doing the hard work that the other approaches then build up to. Feinberg (Cumulative Case Approach) seems to miss the point of presuppositionalism entirely. He's got the approach of what I call the "shotgun approach" in the sense that he wants to use everything possible and sees what he hits. Frame (Presuppostional Approach) does an ok job with presenting the method. I don't think he would be my first choice in representing the approach. He doesn't do a good job of explaining the "problem of circularity" isn't a problem. He just does an "ok" job. Clark (Reformed Epistemological Approach) is one I was excited to read. I liked some of his points he made when talking about the other approaches. Then I read his approach and was extremely disappointed. The biggest flaw is that he states literally that his approach doesn't help to show the Christian God is real. I would say then your apologetic method is worthless and not a real method at all. I understand the R.E. approach but if I went only with Clark's explanation and argumentation, I wouldn't have even considered it a real area of focus. The book is well laid out, the footnotes are at the bottom of the pages (SO helpful!), Cowan does a good job of wrangling the writers and offering expanded reading and other authors for each area of focus. Myself and my mentor spent from January to August every other week going over and discussing the book. Finding flaws, comparing and contrasting, and seeing where points were made and where points were missed. I think the biggest deficit we found was that the writers tended to assume agreement on definitions of words that played a big role (for example - the word "evidence" NEEDED to be defined right off the bat by every author and it wasn't until Frame in his response to the objections raised did we even have one person define it). My suggestion for this book to maximize the fun is to pick a method and try and defend that method throughout; even with the writer arguing your side. My book is filled with notes and highlights that just made this book a great enjoyment to meet and discuss with a fellow Believer about. It does not settle all the issues, but it does help you focus on the fact that we still aren't done learning yet. Final Grade - A-
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 13, 2013
L
Verified Purchase
Lyndon Unger
Fort Morgan, US
★★★★★ 4
Great Introduction to the Various Schools of Apologetics
Format: Paperback
In reading "Five Views on Apologetics", I first had to wonder why the book was called "Five Views" and not "Three Views", since the first three authors admittedly had so much in common with each other that it seemed that their positions were subcategories of a singular system of apologetics. In fact, Habermas claimed Craig as an evidentialist on multiple occasions and admitted they had relatively minor disagreements. Feinberg was also an evidentialist, but he differed from Habermas and Craig in supposing that any one argument could possibly be persuasive to a skeptic. All three individuals definitely agreed on so much though that their three essays proved to be slightly disappointing as in the end, I figured that any one of them practically utilized a combination of all three approaches (I've heard Craig make cumulative case presentations...). I wondered exactly why they were representing different apologetic camps. Don't get me wrong: I like Craig and Hambermas and Feinberg; they're brothers in the Lord. I just find that evidentialism's off-shoots are so similar to each other that taking three chapters for the various forms of evidentialism didn't seem that worthwhile. Ironically, it seemed that the other two views of were related by what seemed like a mutual distaste for the other, Frame wrote that he "was rather disappointed at Clark's treatment of the role of the Bible in determining apologetic principles" (310) and the suggestion that Clark might not have "tried hard enough to find out what the Bible says" (310) also seemed like a needless jab, but Frame still commended Clark on plenty and suggested that "presuppositionalists too are Reformed epistemologists" (312). On the other hand, Clark wrote that Frame's essay is "the best version of presuppositionalism I have ever read" but then went on to suggest that presuppositionalism (at least as presented by Van Til) was either too confusing for him or was "obviously false" (255). Clark parroted the often repeated gross misunderstanding of presuppositionalism that "non-christians cannot know anything" (256), suggested that Frame implied this concept (257) and then spent several paragraphs refuting an obviously silly postulate; it's strange how Clark would insinuate that Frame would be so plainly stupid and I got the idea that Clark thought that all presuppositional apologists were somehow mentally lacking. Even in my early reading of Van Til, I understood that he was writing about how unbelievers cannot account for how they know anything, not whether or not they can know anything. What was even more alarming was Clarks' confession that "anyone can find some support for his or her position in Scripture" (275), as if scripture lacks a clear meaning and is somehow malleable enough to consistently conform to anyone's presuppositions. I was left dissatisfied by how Clark didn't seem to exhibit reformed theology and I was also puzzled why Frame didn't present the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (the main positive argument of presuppositionalism). What was even more humerous was how Craig presented a fairly solid version of the transcendental argument and gave Frame a slight poke for not presenting the "main course" of presuppositionalism. On the whole, I found "Five Views" to be reflective of much of my general feelings of the current state of apologetics; too distracted, too unscriptural, and too confusing. It was a difficult read at times; William Lane Craig's constant scampering into symbolic logic was frustrating and made me wonder whether the publisher clearly communicated the target audience to the authors. I was disappointed that none of the authors attempted to establish any component of their case from scriptural exegesis but instead presented philosophical constructs aided by proof texts (i.e. Habermas referenced Romans 8:16 on page 97 as `proof' that the Holy Spirit may work through apologetics to bring "full assurance to believers", arguably not the meaning of Romans 8:16). I also found myself wondering if the authors were agreeing on theological points due to lack of clarity (i.e. Craig's writing about the inner witness of the Holy Spirit was general enough that it sounded Mormon...). The book was good, and it DID expose me to five (arguably) different apologetic systems, but I hesitate to give it 5 stars due to some of the weak/unclear presentations of the systems and the thought that this isn't the best that evangelicalism has to offer. It's still a worthwhile buy and I'm likely being too hard on it. I'd recommend it as an intro book for a college level Apologetics class, or for someone who's already familiar with theology and the concept of apologetics but isn't familiar with it in depth.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on November 4, 2009
J
Verified Purchase
J. E. Lindsey
Houston, US
★★★★★ 5
Great Contrasts
Format: Paperback
Cowan tells us, "This is a book about apologetics methodology, not a book of apologetics per se. That is, it is not a book that seeks to do apologetics as much as a book that discusses how one ought to do apologetics" (8). Cowan has achieved the stated purposes of this book in many ways, but due to limited space I will stay focused on three examples; Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts, format, and conclusion by Cowan. Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts (21-24) in this initial section of the book provide a clear and useful starting place for persons who are not academically familiar or comfortable with many terms used in the book. The fact that the key terms section included and defined conceptual terms supports the stated purpose of the book being a methodological rather than an apologetic book with multiple views from various writers' specific understandings and preferred styles of apologetics. As a new person to formal apologetics, this section helped launch me smoothly into the methodological discussions. I returned to these pages a few times to reacquaint myself with meaningful concepts. The format of the discussion with proponents making a methodological case for their form of apologetic followed by critiques from supporters of other apologetic systems brought clarity to the five methods addressed in this book. This format help to highlight both strengths and weaknesses in methods. Cowan as the general editor achieved the goal of keeping the writers away from apologetics and on the goal of providing defense and critiques of these five methods. Each supporter had a unique "tee-up" to their sections. Craig starts by stating, "...methodology in Christian apologetics...raising the age-old issue of the relationship between faith and reason." He goes on further in his introduction to tell a story about his struggle at Wheaton College and why his methodology was helpful to his faith (26). Habermas clarifies that his form of evidential apologetics is, "...characterized as the one-step approach..." (92).This initial piece of information was insightful to me and a helpful clarification between classical and evidential methods. Feinberg on Cumulative Apologetics points out, "A good place to begin the discussion of apologetic methodology is to ask about the nature of the case for theism and Christianity" (148). Frame was probably the most direct in his initial statement by saying, "In apologetics, as in every aspect of the Christian life, the most important thing is to glorify God. Therefore, it is important for us to look in God's Word, the Bible, to see if our Lord gives us any directives relevant to the apologetic task" (208). In principle agree, but I will admit, I find his form of apologetics to be too circular in nature to be convincing to an unbelieving skeptic - as a standalone method. Christians I think would all say, well of course. Clark's section begins with stories meant to set the stage that it is reasonable have faith. Clark writes, "My suppose-this and suppose-that stories are intended to raise the problem of the relationship of our important beliefs to evidence" (267). Each of the five supporters of their method successfully introduced their unique method of apologetics. Cowan regarding to his conclusions says, "Hopefully, this will not only help you, the reader, make your own decisions regarding apologetic methodology, but will also provide a basis for further discussion of the topic among scholars. Cowan's conclusions assured that main points of agreement and disagreement were clear. Here as with the other sections, the textual comments were method focused. My criticism is pointed at the spirit of the debate. The writers did not draw enough contrasting between apologetic methods to clearly show that their individual method should be favored. I think the tone was a little too stilted in the direction of "playing" nice. In a book that purports to have five methods, there were times it seemed like only three or four methods. I guess this is inescapable give that each apologetic style can share some parts in common with another. Yet Craig shares my feeling here, I believe, based on his statement, "Pity our poor editor! Ideally he would like to find a wild-eyed fideist on one end of the spectrum and a hard-nosed theological rationalist on the other. Instead he winds up with a presuppositionalist who argues like an evidentialist..." (122). Overall Five Views on Apologetics provides a good compare and contrast resource for anyone interested in these five common methods of apologetics.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on March 18, 2011
M
Verified Purchase
Mimi
Carnegie, US
★★★★★ 5
Condense Analysis of 5 of the most notable Apologist
Format: Paperback
Looking for a quick reference guide to the major theorist of Apologic study, this book is a great resource.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 12, 2024
W
Verified Purchase
Will L.
Birmingham, US
★★★★★ 5
Not an Intro to Apologetics
Format: Paperback
This book is not for the first-time student of apologetics. It's deep and, at times, difficult. However, for anyone with a serious interest in apologetics, this is a great way to find out which method suits your apologetic style and why. It was eye-opening for me. I am confident that God can use most (if not all) of the five distinct methods covered in the book. But it was very helpful to me to consider pros and cons of each and decide which approach seemed appropriate for me. Great book, if you feel ready for it!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on July 25, 2006

recommand products