I am astonished that my post 01/21 dit not receive any comments. It seems to me that the mass roots play a big role in elements absortion. What about one or two poor roots in presence of 10 mgr N in one litre of water. This a situation which is not so rare in Paphs culture. Maybe be growers which have good succes with low concentrations have plants with very good mass roots.
Fertilizer: Less Is More
- Thread starter Happypaphy7
- Start date
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
Happypaphy7
Paphlover
Sometimes people just don't reply. Don't know why, but I am aware that this topic has already been heavily dealt with, and it tends to get really heated. so I understand many are tired and want to avoid. lol
I started this thread after what I saw at a friend's and wanted others to think about it.
Mass roots might mean bigger specimen.
I see multis and bulldogs ( hense section paphiopedilum) are root champions. Even as rather small plants, plants in these groups make more roots than others.
Then parvis are pretty good root growers.
The other groups seem to make much less with some individual exceptions, especially when they are single growth or two.
It makes sense that plants with more roots will take in more nutrients.
It also means bigger plants are already stronger and have more nutrient reserve in the roots and leaves?
Paphs with only one or two roots are in big trouble.
Root attacking fungus or potting medium staying too wet too long, or just weaklings. I only occasionally see this and these of course are poor growers.
With only one or two roots, one might want to be extra careful not to burn those away.
Speaking of one or two root plants, even tiny seedlings ( great majority of them)from a flask usually have a multiple roots, at least that's what I observe.
I started this thread after what I saw at a friend's and wanted others to think about it.
Mass roots might mean bigger specimen.
I see multis and bulldogs ( hense section paphiopedilum) are root champions. Even as rather small plants, plants in these groups make more roots than others.
Then parvis are pretty good root growers.
The other groups seem to make much less with some individual exceptions, especially when they are single growth or two.
It makes sense that plants with more roots will take in more nutrients.
It also means bigger plants are already stronger and have more nutrient reserve in the roots and leaves?
Paphs with only one or two roots are in big trouble.
Root attacking fungus or potting medium staying too wet too long, or just weaklings. I only occasionally see this and these of course are poor growers.
With only one or two roots, one might want to be extra careful not to burn those away.
Speaking of one or two root plants, even tiny seedlings ( great majority of them)from a flask usually have a multiple roots, at least that's what I observe.
Just one comment; if we assume that paphs grow best when conditions mimic conditions found in nature where they grow,,,,,,why do some of us think that in nature, nutrients are only available once a week? And that adding larger amounts compensates for those days without feeding?
My point is that low TDS feeding should be a continous thing, not just every saturday or whatever.
Thanks....
My point is that low TDS feeding should be a continous thing, not just every saturday or whatever.
Thanks....
Happypaphy7
Paphlover
I understand.
But fertilizing is done with watering under cultivation.
Not everyone grows plants in a way that plants can be watered nearly every day.
oke:
No roots will be left before long.
So, it's not just watering ( hence fertilizing) frequency, but the whole package, which I doubt can be reproduced.
But fertilizing is done with watering under cultivation.
Not everyone grows plants in a way that plants can be watered nearly every day.
oke: No roots will be left before long.
So, it's not just watering ( hence fertilizing) frequency, but the whole package, which I doubt can be reproduced.
If you believe in the concept,,,,,,,everything is possible. If not, then ,,,not.
Ok, I am not proposing to increase watering frequency, but to have all water with fertiliser. That should be manageable. However due to lower rootmass, I do agree that higher fertiliser levels than found in nature may be applied. Personally I use N of approx. 15ppm with occasional kelp adeed. That is probably on the brink of too little, but has been ok for a year or so. Perhaps I will increase to e.g. 25ppm, time will tell......
Ok, I am not proposing to increase watering frequency, but to have all water with fertiliser. That should be manageable. However due to lower rootmass, I do agree that higher fertiliser levels than found in nature may be applied. Personally I use N of approx. 15ppm with occasional kelp adeed. That is probably on the brink of too little, but has been ok for a year or so. Perhaps I will increase to e.g. 25ppm, time will tell......
Happypaphy7
Paphlover
Yes, i do believe it is possible, but very difficult to achieve.
I think the way you grow is quite close, at least closer than many other growers.
Perhaps, attach things like henryanum, helenae, charlesworthii for example on rock with lots of crevice, fill them with little moss and sand.
Automated sprinkler system water them lightly in the early morning imitating the morning few, then water heavily during the day while warmer months.
Adjust the temperature accordingly,,, but then what about other non orchid plants and micro organisms that are present in their natural habitat?
How might that be achieved?
Regarding root mass, I remember seeing the root mass on wild paph. delenatii and some brachys. It was shockingly large!!! And these were all pretty much single growth plants too!
So they must help gather every little benefits from all around them.
You already grow plants very well, but I would love to see any change in results after feeding at that level.
One year later?? It might still be rather vague though if there will be an improvement, because plants will be now older and perhaps grow stronger any how.
One must have two groups at the same time to better tell any influence.
I think the way you grow is quite close, at least closer than many other growers.
Perhaps, attach things like henryanum, helenae, charlesworthii for example on rock with lots of crevice, fill them with little moss and sand.
Automated sprinkler system water them lightly in the early morning imitating the morning few, then water heavily during the day while warmer months.
Adjust the temperature accordingly,,, but then what about other non orchid plants and micro organisms that are present in their natural habitat?
How might that be achieved?
Regarding root mass, I remember seeing the root mass on wild paph. delenatii and some brachys. It was shockingly large!!! And these were all pretty much single growth plants too!
So they must help gather every little benefits from all around them.
You already grow plants very well, but I would love to see any change in results after feeding at that level.
One year later?? It might still be rather vague though if there will be an improvement, because plants will be now older and perhaps grow stronger any how.
One must have two groups at the same time to better tell any influence.
C. Rothschild
Well-Known Member
my fertilzer mix.
As somewhat of a beginner I don't really understand all the components in plant food. If I feed them I use trace amount of various orchid food mixed with liquid seaweed (pretty safe but stains the carpets and everything else). Occasionally I'll add root-stimulator but only on orchids with very poor root systems. I don't think it works but it's more of a last resort.
As somewhat of a beginner I don't really understand all the components in plant food. If I feed them I use trace amount of various orchid food mixed with liquid seaweed (pretty safe but stains the carpets and everything else). Occasionally I'll add root-stimulator but only on orchids with very poor root systems. I don't think it works but it's more of a last resort.
Stone
Well-Known Member
troy
Well-Known Member
I also flush every week midweek when pot drys out in summer months and feed 1/4 strength every week alternating ferts with great success, pots full of active roots, although there is more variables that contributes to good root growth but watering is huge
Mike, whether or not plants grow better in nature can of course be discussed forever. Evolution has however adopted them to the conditions in which they live, everyone should agree on that
Whether or not it is possible to make them grow "better" under artificial conditions (i.e. conditions deviating from "natural") is of course a matter of dispute and no-one of us really know the answer.
In my perception, supplying nutrients at low levels has two main effects; one is to stimulate root growth, makes the plant produce more roots, the second is to avoid degradation of the compost.
I rarely repot, I have plants that has been in the same pot for more than 20 years (only a few that is right)
I do not flush intentionally. Occasionally I give the plants a thorough watering with the hose (not trying to avoid water in the crown btw). I probably water too much generally. And all my water contains a low dose of nutrients. Not ultralow, but low (e.g. 60-70ppm TDS). That is way more than in nature, but my roots are not big enough to sustain "natural" fertiliser levels.
Another thing; based on old knowledge, it is said that orchids should receive 1/4 to 1/10 of fertiliser strength (among others, the Bakers suggest that). This is probably based on fertilisation of crops like tomatos etc. Tomatos like approximately 1000ppm fertiliser, this equals a N Level of 100-200 ppm. So, with 125ppm N, where is the recommended 1/4 - 1/10 strength? Just wondering.oke:
Whether or not it is possible to make them grow "better" under artificial conditions (i.e. conditions deviating from "natural") is of course a matter of dispute and no-one of us really know the answer.
In my perception, supplying nutrients at low levels has two main effects; one is to stimulate root growth, makes the plant produce more roots, the second is to avoid degradation of the compost.
I rarely repot, I have plants that has been in the same pot for more than 20 years
(only a few that is right)I do not flush intentionally. Occasionally I give the plants a thorough watering with the hose (not trying to avoid water in the crown btw). I probably water too much generally. And all my water contains a low dose of nutrients. Not ultralow, but low (e.g. 60-70ppm TDS). That is way more than in nature, but my roots are not big enough to sustain "natural" fertiliser levels.
Another thing; based on old knowledge, it is said that orchids should receive 1/4 to 1/10 of fertiliser strength (among others, the Bakers suggest that). This is probably based on fertilisation of crops like tomatos etc. Tomatos like approximately 1000ppm fertiliser, this equals a N Level of 100-200 ppm. So, with 125ppm N, where is the recommended 1/4 - 1/10 strength? Just wondering.
oke:
And, in my opinion, it allows you to flush at every watering by default, it provides the greater volume of water that drives plant growth, and, as the water is drawn through and out of the pot by gravity, it draws extra air through the medium.
We don't talk very much about the effects of our growing media on the fertilizer issue. Our discussions of frequency and concentration seem to imply an almost inert potting medium, which can't be true. Doesn't moisture retention have to affect watering frequency? How much of various nutrients are retained in various media for continuing use by the plant after the initial root saturation? A grower in pure sphagnum moss probably can't use the same fertigation routine as a grower in pure Orchiata bark.
For the last two years I have used a mixture of milled sphagnum moss and Growstones for all of my orchids (Paphs, Phrags, Phals, Catts), which are potted in Rands AirCone pots. I chose this deliberately to be able to reduce fertigation frequency to every 7-14 days for all plants. I use 60-70 ppm N in each watering, but this could be every 10-14 days for a number of plants depending on how fast they dry out. I always hope that nutrients from the watering continue to be available to the plants over the interval, but have no evidence to back this up.
This routine seems to be enough for good growth and blooming of the listed genera, but how could I not be irrational and wonder, "If this much is good, can't more be better?" Of course, maybe I could further lower the fertilizer concentration. I am not young enough or a large enough grower to formally experiment, so I guess and check each year with little changes and hope I am not making things up.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
For the last two years I have used a mixture of milled sphagnum moss and Growstones for all of my orchids (Paphs, Phrags, Phals, Catts), which are potted in Rands AirCone pots. I chose this deliberately to be able to reduce fertigation frequency to every 7-14 days for all plants. I use 60-70 ppm N in each watering, but this could be every 10-14 days for a number of plants depending on how fast they dry out. I always hope that nutrients from the watering continue to be available to the plants over the interval, but have no evidence to back this up.
This routine seems to be enough for good growth and blooming of the listed genera, but how could I not be irrational and wonder, "If this much is good, can't more be better?" Of course, maybe I could further lower the fertilizer concentration. I am not young enough or a large enough grower to formally experiment, so I guess and check each year with little changes and hope I am not making things up.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Happypaphy7
Paphlover
Fertilizer, or elements plants need, are taken up with water, so I see what you're saying when you point out "I always hope that nutrients from the watering continue to be available to the plants over the interval, but have no evidence to back this up."
But then again, I don't think plants have to be constantly fed everytime, althoguh everytime they are watered, there will be something in the water, unless one waters his or her plants with pure water in inert mix, which won't be good.
There are many different practice and people swear by their ways, but what is clear is that they do not have to be fed all the time.
My largest specimens (my Armeni White with well over 20 growths now and many bulldog hybrids that grow like weeds) and best growers are fed only a few times a year. Usually once or twice a month during the active growing season, and I usually water about every five days or so depending on plants' need.
Another thing is, since you mentioned interaction between different potting mix and fertilizer, this has been talked about before. I'm not sure how complete the understanding in this area is, but it is quite well studied I think. Search around and see if you can find it, not just on this forum but internet in general.
I wish I could give you the details, but memory is not clear and I rather not mess up.
While it may not be perfect, I think there is a good reason why bark chips have been in use for such a long time.
That should tell you a lot as well.
Yet another thing to consider is that plants will usually fare well as long as pH range is not too extreme as I remember reading about how roots excrete chemicals to maintain optimum pH range just around their roots.
I grew in striaght moss, bark, or mix of this and that, and I did not really see any difference in plant performance.
The main difference was that I had to water them differently.
But then again, I don't think plants have to be constantly fed everytime, althoguh everytime they are watered, there will be something in the water, unless one waters his or her plants with pure water in inert mix, which won't be good.
There are many different practice and people swear by their ways, but what is clear is that they do not have to be fed all the time.
My largest specimens (my Armeni White with well over 20 growths now and many bulldog hybrids that grow like weeds) and best growers are fed only a few times a year. Usually once or twice a month during the active growing season, and I usually water about every five days or so depending on plants' need.
Another thing is, since you mentioned interaction between different potting mix and fertilizer, this has been talked about before. I'm not sure how complete the understanding in this area is, but it is quite well studied I think. Search around and see if you can find it, not just on this forum but internet in general.
I wish I could give you the details, but memory is not clear and I rather not mess up.
While it may not be perfect, I think there is a good reason why bark chips have been in use for such a long time.
That should tell you a lot as well.
Yet another thing to consider is that plants will usually fare well as long as pH range is not too extreme as I remember reading about how roots excrete chemicals to maintain optimum pH range just around their roots.
I grew in striaght moss, bark, or mix of this and that, and I did not really see any difference in plant performance.
The main difference was that I had to water them differently.
Happypaphy7
Paphlover
Both Mike and Bjorn have good points.
I don't think plants in cultivation grow better necessarily, but it might be more correct to say along the line of when right plants (since individual plants of the same species or cross show different vigor and adaptibility) are grown at the right conditions (whether this is natural or artificial situation) they will grow very well.
I see in-situ pictures where plants are all half dead eaten up by bugs and fungal spots all over, while some are a great scattering of single growth plants, and then there are some huge specimens.
Same with plants in cultivation.
Some grow very well and many are so so and some just super crappy. lol
I don't think plants in cultivation grow better necessarily, but it might be more correct to say along the line of when right plants (since individual plants of the same species or cross show different vigor and adaptibility) are grown at the right conditions (whether this is natural or artificial situation) they will grow very well.
I see in-situ pictures where plants are all half dead eaten up by bugs and fungal spots all over, while some are a great scattering of single growth plants, and then there are some huge specimens.
Same with plants in cultivation.
Some grow very well and many are so so and some just super crappy. lol
Ignorance is Bliss
Or shall I say "Ignoring it" is apparently "Bliss"?
So I have this "seedling incubator" in my basement. 3' x 6' x 4' tall, it is illuminated by two 4' Philips Blue/Far Red LED strips on a 14 hr/day timer, and watered 2x a day for 90 seconds with a Mist King system that sprays nothing but pure RO. Definitely an extreme case of "Less is More".
In February of last year, I got in a bunch of Amesiella monticola plugs that were blooming size. I put them in sphagnum in 3" net pots, watered them in with KelpMax & Inocucor Garden Solution, and sold most of them right away. There was one that was the "runt of the litter", so I stuck it in the incubator.
In the 13 months I've had it, this plant has seen nothing but pure water after the initial watering. I have absolutely ignored it.
The moss is growing wild, but the plant is apparently pretty happy, having one open blossom and two buds.
Or shall I say "Ignoring it" is apparently "Bliss"?
So I have this "seedling incubator" in my basement. 3' x 6' x 4' tall, it is illuminated by two 4' Philips Blue/Far Red LED strips on a 14 hr/day timer, and watered 2x a day for 90 seconds with a Mist King system that sprays nothing but pure RO. Definitely an extreme case of "Less is More".
In February of last year, I got in a bunch of Amesiella monticola plugs that were blooming size. I put them in sphagnum in 3" net pots, watered them in with KelpMax & Inocucor Garden Solution, and sold most of them right away. There was one that was the "runt of the litter", so I stuck it in the incubator.
In the 13 months I've had it, this plant has seen nothing but pure water after the initial watering. I have absolutely ignored it.
The moss is growing wild, but the plant is apparently pretty happy, having one open blossom and two buds.
Like plants in flask, eventually it will exhaust its nutrient supply.
I do not know this species, but looks good and the moss thrives as well sooner or later it will have exhausted its nutrient supply, but this is one example of what I try to convey; namely that orchids grow in places deficient of nutrients. Some paphs share the same environment with nepethes, another low fertiliser genous. So why give them excessively much more fertiliser?
and the moss thrives as well sooner or later it will have exhausted its nutrient supply, but this is one example of what I try to convey; namely that orchids grow in places deficient of nutrients. Some paphs share the same environment with nepethes, another low fertiliser genous. So why give them excessively much more fertiliser?
My point in posting this - and this was absolutely not a planned experiment- was to support the "less is more" concept. "Zero" is not "more".
...and upon what information I provided tells you that? Poke yourself.
