About fertilysers for Slipper orchids.

Slippertalk Orchid Forum

Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I would think that insect poop (which has uric acid, like bird and lizard poop) would be in tiny particles more easily broken down...and a lot of insects could lead to a lot of very tiny turds more evenly distributed.

You are right... insect poop is extra tiny!

I found a study done on spider poop and bromeliads.....
http://departments.oxy.edu/biology/gnorth/250/tank-bromeliad-spiders.pdf

It is about bromeliads and not orchids but does pertain to some things mentioned in this thread. They found that spider poop accounts for a high percentage of the plants nutrient source. The spider poop has molecules smaller than amino acids and so probably enter the leaf easier.... Maybe true for orchids as well?

Here is one paragraph from the study..

Although absorptive trichomes are more abundant on
the leaves of B. balansae than on other terrestrial, rootbased
bromeliads, and can absorb minerals (Benzing
and Burt 1970), they are probably unable to absorb
amino acids (Benzing et al. 1976). Because the N
compounds excreted by P. chapoda spiders (e.g.,
guanine) are simpler than some amino acids, they might
be incorporated directly through the trichomes. In
addition, the larger amino acids and other complex
organic molecules (e.g., insect carcass) may possibly be
mineralized by bacteria (and perhaps other microorganisms)
found on the leaves and roots of B. balansae.
 
Do bats poop while they are flying through the forest?

At least they poop when they enter the houses in the tropics to catch insects, which are flying around the lamps. Therefore I would assume they also poop when flying through the forest...
 
At least they poop when they enter the houses in the tropics to catch insects, which are flying around the lamps. Therefore I would assume they also poop when flying through the forest...


Yes the bats we have here at the warehouse all poop when they leave their roost. Well, maybe they pee when they leave the roost? Something falls! But I don't remember being dropped on while they are flying around catching bugs. But they mostly must poop in bed so as to fill up the bat cave with guano. Hmm... maybe bat pee is even a better foliar fertilizer?

Now if you saw some bat poop land on an orchid plant in your house we can document that bat poop is a natural foliar feed for orchids.
We may be on to something here...:clap:
 
not really bat poop landing on orchids, but landing on the table and furniture of my sister's house... and no, the bats do not sleep in the house :) they just fly in during the night to catch the bugs flying around the lamps during the rainy season... so, I think that if they do it in my sister's house, they can do it anywhere else too :)
 
Bat's often "lighten their load" just before takeoff for the evening, but given the amount they put down, they probably crap all over the place as they fly around. Bats don't always spend the days in big cave colonies either. I find them under the bark of old dead trees too.

I think I once heard that guanine (the amino acid in spider poop) is also a biggy in bat poop.

Actually I think the odds of fertilizing orchids by anything randomly flying or crawling around, with direct hits to leaves is pretty low. However, the amount of higher life forms living on trees (or in the soils) in the tropics is probably impressive. It always seems like everything is constantly in competition in all 3 dimensions for nutrition in a rain forest. As a gross generalization, orchids seem to be on the fringe to glean whatever they can from whatever media is available (air, rain, compost). I think the whole symbiosis thing with fungi contests to a really tight nutrient budget wherever orchids are found.

Given the (relatively) successful orchid collections that I'm aware of where NO conscious fertilizing is going on I would go out on a limb to say that a big part of peoples problems with nutrition are due to excesses of fertilizer causing over doses of certain constituents with antagonism as a result.

In the quest for perfection, I'm sure we can push better growth of plants than what they would do in the wild, but recently we've had a few posts that seem to indicate (mostly for the multifloral species) that some species eluding our best GH efforts.
 
Thank you all for your interventions on a vast subject that still fascinates the orchid growers.
 
Lance, going back to your original post, the only thing I could disagree with is the statement that dried fertilizer on the leaf surface would be available to CAM plants when the stomata open. It is my understanding that plants can only absorb minerals in solution. How would dried material be transported into the stomata, anyway?

Also, my statement that fertilizer is "less critical" than air and water was not meant to imply for a second that it wasn't important, just that water and gas exchange are "life and death" level, while nutrition is a factor in how well the plant grows. Surely we have all heard of someone's grandmother whose phals bloom profusely, and she has never fertilized them...

The "low sap concentration" potentially requiring a low, but more constant supply of nutrition is not something I had connected before, but I like the concept, and I may have experienced it first hand (see my response to Rick, below).

To Rick's query about feeding method and whether we are doing foliar and roots-only feeding simultaneously - I use the "fire hose" technique. When I water (which always includes fertilizer) everything in the greenhouse gets thoroughly soaked (even me) with essentially no surface unwetted. However, years ago when I ran a six-month, daily watering experiment to see if a plant established in S/H culture could be overwatered, the pots (150 each Phalaenopsis Lemforde White Beauty and Oncidium Sharry Baby) were fed by individual hoses from a manifold, so the foliage did not get wet. After six months, the plants were larger than the ones I hand watered "as needed". I have no doubt it was due to the more-or-less constant supply of "target" solution chemistry - i.e., more mass of prime nutrition - and I know it does not address whether that PLUS foliar might have been better, but it does show that roots-only feeding certainly can be adequate, and I'll be damned if I'm going to risk that much crown rot!
 
Lance, going back to your original post, the only thing I could disagree with is the statement that dried fertilizer on the leaf surface would be available to CAM plants when the stomata open. It is my understanding that plants can only absorb minerals in solution. How would dried material be transported into the stomata, anyway?

At night moisture condenses on the leaf surface and re-hydrates the dried nutrient salts. Then the nutrients are once again available for the leaf to take in. It does not require visible moisture to have this work and in situations where there is no moisture on the leaf surface then the plants are not likely to be in an actively growing state anyway.

Also, my statement that fertilizer is "less critical" than air and water was not meant to imply for a second that it wasn't important, just that water and gas exchange are "life and death" level, while nutrition is a factor in how well the plant grows. Surely we have all heard of someone's grandmother whose phals bloom profusely, and she has never fertilized them...

Everyone knows granny has bats in her bellfry!

The "low sap concentration" potentially requiring a low, but more constant supply of nutrition is not something I had connected before, but I like the concept, and I may have experienced it first hand (see my response to Rick, below).

To Rick's query about feeding method and whether we are doing foliar and roots-only feeding simultaneously - I use the "fire hose" technique. When I water (which always includes fertilizer) everything in the greenhouse gets thoroughly soaked (even me) with essentially no surface unwetted. However, years ago when I ran a six-month, daily watering experiment to see if a plant established in S/H culture could be overwatered, the pots (150 each Phalaenopsis Lemforde White Beauty and Oncidium Sharry Baby) were fed by individual hoses from a manifold, so the foliage did not get wet. After six months, the plants were larger than the ones I hand watered "as needed". I have no doubt it was due to the more-or-less constant supply of "target" solution chemistry - i.e., more mass of prime nutrition - and I know it does not address whether that PLUS foliar might have been better, but it does show that roots-only feeding certainly can be adequate, and I'll be damned if I'm going to risk that much crown rot!

I don't understand your statement about the risk of crown rot.... you said you water like a fire hose? You know crown rot is not caused by overhead watering or getting the foliage wet. As long as you have adequate air movement and proper environmental conditions crown rot is not an issue having to do with irrigation techniques, I think you eluded to that eariler.
 
I think there could be a lot said for constant/frequent low dose of target nutruients.

Even witht the "fire hose" technique I've been using for years, I've noticed some pretty big improvements when I started adding back a percentage of well water with the RO or the frequent small spikes of Epsom salts between the weekly feeding regime.

Since I know there is a dash of phophate and potassium in my well water (no measurable nitrogen), I am now giving a daily, very low dose of Ca, Mg, Cl, SO4, PO5, K, and Fe with the daily mistings (whether or not it trickles down to the roots). The sporadic Epsom salt spikes would alter the Ca/Mg ratio on most of the sunny days.

Now to account for top dresses or mix additives of bone meal or oyster shell.......
 
A new kettle of worms:

Any thoughts on using aquarium water?

The local municipal water is very soft. To grow aquarium plants we have to add Ca, Mg and K to it to get the carbonate hardness to 72 ppm and general hardness to 80 ppm. My nitrate levels are between 5 and 20 ppm and I guess phosphate is in the same ball park.

Any thoughts on using the waste water for the orchids?
 
Any thoughts on using the waste water for the orchids?

We use it sometimes on orchids. Most of it goes on tomatoes, Musa (banana), dracaena, and elephant ears just because of proximity. Have noticed no ill effects. If you add aquarium salt (non-iodized table salt), as some recommend, of course don't put it on your orchids.
 
At night moisture condenses on the leaf surface and re-hydrates the dried nutrient salts. Then the nutrients are once again available for the leaf to take in.
I thought you might throw that qualifier in there.

I don't understand your statement about the risk of crown rot.... you said you water like a fire hose? You know crown rot is not caused by overhead watering or getting the foliage wet. As long as you have adequate air movement and proper environmental conditions crown rot is not an issue having to do with irrigation techniques, I think you eluded to that eariler.
1) I made that comment because it seemed reasonable to me that SOME TIME during any 6-month period, the conditions might not be favorable for sufficient evaporation - increasing the risk of such rots.

2) What did I do to deserve you picking on me like this?
 
I thought you might throw that qualifier in there.

1) I made that comment because it seemed reasonable to me that SOME TIME during any 6-month period, the conditions might not be favorable for sufficient evaporation - increasing the risk of such rots.

2) What did I do to deserve you picking on me like this?

Sorry Ray I did not know I was picking on you? Not my intention at all.
I questioned what you said because I thought you said you watered overhead and then implied that you did not want to risk crown rot by watering overhead. So I just wanted you to clarify what you wrote.

And yes there are always times when conditions might not be favorable for sufficient evaporation many times in a 6 month period. On those days the grower should not water overhead or even water at all since the plants probably won't use much water.

A simple rule to follow is to water overhead early in the day so that by 3:00 in the afternoon all the water on the foliage has dried up. That is a guideline I was told when I was a kid and it has worked well for a long time. Since I don't really like rules I generally will water later but want the foliage basically dry by 2 hours before dark. When I do water in the afternoon I always remember the old grower that told me the 3:00 rule and that causes me to evaluate just how wet I should get things. He was a short Frenchman that was retired from the Merchant Marines, always had a cigar hanging out of his mouth and his "orchid culture rules" always were shrouded in foul language that kept my mother at the other end of his greenhouse! Fond memories!

In a greenhouse you actually have less control over the drying times than in a room under lights. When I grew in greenhouses I pretty much followed the 3:00 rule because you never know what the next hour of natural weather might bring. Now that I am growing in a room under lights I don't care what the weather is outside, everyday is the same inside, misters go off at about 3:00 and the lights dry things out before dark.

I will also add that back when we grew Phalaenopsis commercially in greenhouses I spent time every late afternoon or evening checking crowns in the plants for water. If there was water I blotted it out with a paper towel.
That is just part of growing, a job or oppertunity to visit and enjoy the plants. A person might figure it is easier and safer just to keep water off of the foliage but through years of experience and trial and error I learned that the plants grow better when you wet their leaves. I have no scientific paper to prove that, just what I have observed in my lifetime with orchids.

Bear in mind I was around to buy some on the first drip emitters when they came out. Little spaghetti tubes with lead weights. The sub irrigation worked great as a time saver but I did learn that the plants grew better with overhead watering. Then later along came ebb and flow. That worked too but even though it soaked the media better than drip the plants still grew better when they got their leaves wet.

Finally after living for some years in the tropical rainforest I have learned without any doubt that plants that come from a rainforest or wet environment really do like their showers. In fact every living thing in the rainforest is happy and excited after water falls on them.

Anyways Ray please don't think I was picking on you. I respect the things you have learned and appreciate hearing what you have to say.
 
... about late watering rules, where I work we used to have management after us to not water after 1pm in the winter and dark/cool months; later on if it was cloudy they got after us if we watered after 11am! it was a big deal with excess humidity in the before and after winter times when it would get quite chilly and no sun, and they had turned down the heat a little to save money. with no venting as a result (would cause the heat to turn on), moisture from drips during the night from the roof condensation would stay on plants all day. cold drips and no sun definitely equals rots of many kinds!

the ellenbergers of e's orchid eden near rochester ny had a good technique to prevent crown rot or anything like that in their greenhouse; if anything looked like it might still have moisture hanging about later in the afternoon during times of higher disease pressure, they would spray a solution of physan to disinfect the water on the plants. things always looked very good, so that could be an option if things really needed watering and overhead but was risk of not drying off before the evening (heating and venting can do that, but of course now is getting more expen$ive!)
 
while I wouldn't use it on new seedlings or things like soft pleuros, the ellenbergers were using it successfully for lots of adult or hardened seedlings. you would have to read the label. an alternative is to use greenshield which is listed for use misting over cuttings or spraying on plants. I don't know what the difference between the two is, but reading the label would help to determine how to use it (or if physan is no longer listed for use on plants)
 
Thanks for the interesting discussion on watering. I've had a major concern with water sitting on leaves through the night as we've moved into November and December. My main heat is in floor, which is great for maintaining high humidity, but the leaves do not dry out before evening, which is at 4:30 PM, now, here in central Minnesota. I've taken to running the back up LP gas heater to dry things out. It seems to be working.

Since moving into the greenhouse in September, I've already noticed the Paphs perk up. I'm sure some of this is due to natural light, but, as Lance has mentioned, I also believe that the whole plant getting doused with water has helped, too. When I was growing in the house, the water was directed CAREFULLY to the media to avoid splashing water on carpets. The leaves rarely got wet. Plants grew and bloomed OK, but I never felt they were at their best.
 
Back
Top