SKU: 23431494748
cactus palm plant

cactus palm plant Buy Madagascar Palm Phoenix, AZ | Pachypodium lamerei

Sale price$22.11 Regular price$24.57
Save 10%

Pay in installments of $6.14 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Aug 11 - Aug 16

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

cactus palm plant Buy Madagascar Palm Phoenix, AZ | Pachypodium lamereiPhoenix's Boldest Tropical Succulent Madagascar Palm for Desert Statement Landscapes Madagascar Palm (Pachypodium lamerei) is one of the most striking and unusual plants you can grow in the Phoenix Valley. Despite its common name, it's not actually a palm it's a succulent tree from Madagascar with a thick, spiny silver trunk topped by a crown of glossy tropical leaves. The sculptural silhouette commands attention in any landscape, adding instant

Phoenix's Boldest Tropical Succulent — Madagascar Palm for Desert Statement Landscapes

Madagascar Palm (Pachypodium lamerei) is one of the most striking and unusual plants you can grow in the Phoenix Valley. Despite its common name, it's not actually a palm — it's a succulent tree from Madagascar with a thick, spiny silver trunk topped by a crown of glossy tropical leaves. The sculptural silhouette commands attention in any landscape, adding instant exotic drama to Scottsdale courtyards, Gilbert poolside plantings, and Chandler modern desert gardens. Extremely drought-tolerant once established, Madagascar Palm thrives in Phoenix's heat and sun with almost zero supplemental care — making it one of the most rewarding statement plants for Valley homeowners.

Madagascar Palm Plant Details

Attribute Detail
Scientific Name Pachypodium lamerei
Common Names Madagascar Palm, Club Foot, Pachypodium
Mature Height 6–15 feet in Phoenix landscapes (up to 20 ft in ideal conditions)
Mature Width 3–5 feet (crown spread)
Growth Rate Slow to moderate — 6–12 inches per year in Phoenix
Sun Full sun (6+ hrs). Loves reflected heat from walls and pavement.
Water Very low once established. Store water in trunk like a cactus.
USDA Zones 9b–12 (Phoenix is Zone 9b–10a — protect from hard frost below 28°F)
Soil Well-draining required. Thrives in sandy, rocky Arizona soils and caliche.
Foliage Semi-deciduous — glossy green leaves in warm months, may drop in winter
Bloom White fragrant flowers at crown in summer (mature specimens)
Trunk Thick, silver-gray, covered in sharp spines — stores water for drought survival

Madagascar Palm Uses in Phoenix Landscapes

Sculptural Focal Point & Specimen Plant

A single Madagascar Palm commands attention in any front yard, courtyard, or entryway. The thick spiny trunk and palm-like leaf crown create a silhouette unlike anything else in the desert landscape. Plant a 10–25 gallon specimen in a prominent gravel bed in Scottsdale, Paradise Valley, or Gilbert for instant architectural drama. Uplight at night for a stunning shadow effect against stucco walls.

Modern Desert & Tropical Fusion Gardens

Madagascar Palm bridges the gap between desert and tropical aesthetics — perfect for Phoenix homeowners who want an exotic look without the water bill. Pair with Firestick Euphorbia, Blue Agave, and Golden Barrel cactus for a curated succulent collection. In Tempe and Mesa, group 2–3 Pachypodium at varying heights with Desert Spoon and Ponytail Palm for a dramatic "succulent forest" effect.

Pool-Friendly Plantings

Madagascar Palm is an excellent pool-adjacent plant. It drops minimal litter, has no invasive roots, and its upright form won't encroach on walkways or pool equipment. The tropical crown adds resort-style ambiance to Chandler and Peoria pool decks. Plant at least 3–4 feet from high-traffic areas due to the spiny trunk.

Container & Patio Accent

Smaller specimens (1–5 gallon) thrive in large decorative containers on Phoenix patios. Container planting also makes it easy to move indoors during rare hard freezes. A Madagascar Palm in a sleek modern planter adds instant character to outdoor dining areas, rooftop terraces, and office entries.

Best Time to Plant Madagascar Palm in Phoenix

Spring (April–May) is the ideal planting window when warm soil and rising temperatures fuel rapid root establishment. Fall (October) works as a second option if you can protect from early cold snaps. Never plant in winter — Madagascar Palm is frost-sensitive and needs warm soil to establish. If temperatures are expected below 28°F, provide frost cloth protection or move containers indoors.

How to Plant Madagascar Palm

  1. Dig wide, not deep — 2–3x the root ball width, same depth. Do not plant deeper than the original soil line.
  2. Ensure excellent drainage — break through any caliche layer. Add coarse pumice or gravel if soil holds water. Root rot is the #1 killer.
  3. Backfill with native soil — a 70/30 mix of native soil to pumice or coarse sand is ideal.
  4. Spacing — 4–6 feet from structures; 5+ feet between multiple specimens.
  5. No water basin — Madagascar Palm must dry out between waterings. Skip the soil ring.
  6. Gravel mulch — 2–3 inches of decomposed granite. Avoid organic mulch that traps moisture at the base.

Watering Madagascar Palm in Phoenix

First Year Watering Schedule

  • Weeks 1–2: Water once deeply, then let soil dry completely (7–10 days).
  • Months 1–3: Every 10–14 days in warm months. Let soil dry completely between waterings.
  • Months 4–12: Every 2–3 weeks in summer; stop watering entirely in winter when leaves drop.
  • After Year 1: Every 3–4 weeks in summer; no water in winter. The trunk stores water like a cactus.

Drip Irrigation

Place 1–2 emitters (1 GPH) 12–18 inches from the base. Madagascar Palm is extremely sensitive to overwatering — more plants die from too much water than from drought. When in doubt, skip a cycle. If the trunk feels soft or spongy, stop watering immediately and let it dry out. A firm, hard trunk means the plant is healthy.

How fast does Madagascar Palm grow in Phoenix?
Slow to moderate. Expect 6–12 inches of trunk height per year in full sun with good drainage. A 1-gallon plant may take 5–8 years to reach 5 feet. Larger specimens (10–25 gallon) provide instant impact and are worth the investment if you want immediate presence.

Is Madagascar Palm cold hardy in Phoenix?
It handles Phoenix winters well in most years. The main risk is hard freezes below 28°F, which can damage or kill the growing tip. Cover with frost cloth during cold snaps, or grow in a container that can be moved indoors. In the warmer parts of the Valley (central Phoenix, south Scottsdale), it rarely needs protection.

Will Madagascar Palm bloom in Phoenix?
Yes, mature specimens (typically 4+ feet tall and 5+ years old) produce clusters of fragrant white flowers at the crown in summer. Blooming is more reliable on well-established, sun-exposed plants that receive minimal winter water.

Is the sap toxic?
Yes, Pachypodium sap is mildly toxic and can irritate skin and eyes. Wear gloves when pruning or handling damaged plants. Keep away from curious pets and small children.

Why is my Madagascar Palm losing leaves?
Leaf drop in winter is completely normal — it's a semi-deciduous plant that goes dormant in cool weather. New leaves emerge in spring when temperatures warm. If leaves drop in summer, check for overwatering or root rot.

You May Also Like

  • Madagascar Palm - Pachypodium geayi — a close relative with a slimmer trunk and narrower leaves for a different silhouette.
  • Ponytail Palm — another sculptural succulent tree with a swollen trunk and cascading leaves.
  • African Ocotillo — tall, spiny stems with a similar exotic character.
  • Boojum Tree — another bizarre, sculptural desert specimen that pairs dramatically with Pachypodium.
  • Firestick Euphorbia — adds vivid orange-red color contrast at the base of a Madagascar Palm.

How Many Madagascar Palm Do I Need?

This is a tall, vertical specimen succulent tree with a 3 to 5 foot crown, so it is planted singly or in small clusters rather than as a hedge. Use one as a courtyard or front-yard focal point, or stagger 2 to 3 at varying heights for a sculptural grouping:

Planting Spacing Plants
Single focal specimen 4 to 6 ft from walls 1
Staggered cluster 5 ft apart 2 to 3
Row along a wall 5 ft apart 1 per 5 ft

Set it back at least 3 to 4 feet from walkways, seating, and pool edges so no one brushes the spiny trunk.

Madagascar Palm Season-by-Season in Phoenix

  • Spring (Apr to May): Glossy green leaves flush from the crown as soil warms. The best planting window. Mature plants may set fragrant white crown flowers heading into summer.
  • Summer (May to Sep): Active growth and peak bloom on established specimens in full sun and reflected heat. The trunk stores monsoon moisture; water sparingly and let soil dry fully between cycles.
  • Fall (Oct to Nov): A workable secondary planting window for well-rooted plants if you can shield early cold snaps. Begin tapering water.
  • Winter (Dec to Jan): Semi-deciduous and dormant: leaves drop in cool weather and the trunk rests. Stop watering entirely. Frost-sensitive, so cover with frost cloth or move containers indoors when temperatures fall below 28°F.

At a Glance

✔ Heat-Loving (Reflected-Heat Tolerant)   ✔ Drought-Tolerant   ✔ Pool-Friendly (Low-Litter)   ✔ Low-Maintenance   ✔ Fire-Wise   ✔ Deer & Rabbit-Resistant

Plant It With

  • Madagascar Palm (P. geayi): the slimmer, narrower-leaved relative for a paired collection of both species.
  • Ponytail Palm: a swollen-based sculptural succulent tree that echoes the exotic crown form.
  • African Ocotillo: tall spiny stems with a matching exotic character for a focal grouping.
  • Boojum Tree: a bizarre columnar Baja specimen that pairs dramatically with Pachypodium.

Is Madagascar Palm Right for Your Yard?

It is ideal for a hot, full-sun spot with razor-sharp drainage: a gravel focal bed, modern courtyard, or a movable container near a pool where its minimal litter is a plus. Amend heavily with pumice, skip the water basin, and let it dry hard between waterings. Not a fit if your site stays wet in winter, sits in deep shade, or drops below 28°F without protection, since overwatering and hard frost are its two biggest risks. Wear gloves when handling: the sap is mildly toxic and the trunk spines are sharp.

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: 23431494748

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell cactus palm plant

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.8 ★★★★★
Based on 28 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
P
Verified Purchase
Patrick S.
Battle Creek, 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
Phoenix, 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
Belleville, 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
Lexington, 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.
New York, 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