wild plants/cultivated plants

[Stone]

I would like to revisit this subject (if anyone is interested) I have re-read Xavier's thoughts on the subject. And I've been racking my brain about it too. (with no outcome)
Why can I get Cattleyas and other epiphytes to grow as well -or better- than the wild ones yet not paphs? What is really missing?
Why are paph leaves so big in wild plants compared to ours?
Why do they flower when they seem to be only half developed?

Xavier puts it down to nutrition and correct dormancy. Maybe but it seems to take a plant too long to break dormancy and begin growing vigorously before the season is over. It seems to me that with these seasonal paphs at least, they should mature a complete growth in one season then flower which means 3 to 5 leaves in one growth season. This NEVER happens with me. Why do they grow so fast and big in the habitat? As I said, I have no such problems with other orchids, so there must be somthing fundamentally wrong that I/we are doing with paphiopedilums. Could it be the form of N we give is not to their liking?

Could it be their roots prefer not be in pots? They seem to like the freedom of baskets and the insigne I planted under my benches on the greenhouse floor grew much better than the potted ones (in plain lava)
Is there a good study anywhere from a paph habitat showing complete soil analysis especially regarding nutrient ratios?

Happy 2014!

 

[gonewild]

Could it be their roots prefer not be in pots? They seem to like the freedom of baskets and the insigne I planted under my benches on the greenhouse floor grew much better than the potted ones (in plain lava)

I have always said that paphs, phrags and most terrestrial type orchids grow better when planted in large pots so that their roots dot's have to hit a wall and turn. i know it sounds crazy but it is true based on what i have observed over the years. Orchids that have no aerial roots like their roots to grow free and not crammed together. It just is not even close to natural to have a roths roots all confined into a 6 inch pot. Roots growing in a glob like that just don't have a chance to perform efficiently.

Happy new year!

 

[limuhead]

I planted the runts of a flask (Phrag. boiserianum x besseae) in the leaf litter under my Lychee tree they have surpassed their siblings and they get little, if any fertilizer, fungicide or any other amendments. Why? I haven't a clue, but am looking forward to comparing the flowers when they bloom.

 

[paphioboy]

Root aeration is key. Lighting too.

 

[dodidoki]

Another clue could be the very weak but regular fertilizing in nature with lack of K. As Rick said and it is my experience, too, plants kept in K-lite diet grows bigger, especially if they get only weak solution but with every waterings. Also known, that K indicates flowering before growth-maturing, furthermore I have seen plant kept on K-rich diet, what produced flower stem at the base of old crown surrounded only 2-3 tiny leaves.

 

[Cheyenne]

Another clue could be the very weak but regular fertilizing in nature with lack of K. As Rick said and it is my experience, too, plants kept in K-lite diet grows bigger, especially if they get only weak solution but with every waterings. Also known, that K indicates flowering before growth-maturing, furthermore I have seen plant kept on K-rich diet, what produced flower stem at the base of old crown surrounded only 2-3 tiny leaves.

I will buy the fact that it could have a lot to do with very little fertilize. Also very good water quality low in TDS. But I dont think K is one of the main reasons by itself. Without getting into any kind of debate about it, because I do not want to contribute to starting another conversation about it. I think low nutrients is good and very low if any chemical fertilizers are great. A while ago I visited a local small grower. He had some of the best grown paphs I have ever seen. There was an area that was roped off, it was about 15 ft away and I was stunned by the size of the parvi leaves I could see. I begged him to go back and look at them. He had paph vietnamense with a leaf span of 20-22 inches. Some of the leaves were at least 5-6 inches wide. They were as big as my hand spread out. I could not believe it. He had a bellatulum the same way. He said most of them were four years from flask. When I asked him what he fertilizes with he said "Peters, bloom booster" which is something like 10—20—30(without looking it up). I couldnt stop laughing and he said "you must be a member of slippertalk". He said the key was low light and more constant tempatures. It was dark in there. He had a white plastic roof that was very dirty. He said he tries not to fluctuate the temperatures to much between seasons or it forces the plants to flower To early. They will flower when they are ready. That is not my veiw but a interesting piece of information.

 

[JeanLux]

While I had a very bad year conc. flowering, (esp. for my paphs, but also for catts and family), I am really glad to see lots of spikes on my viets (of course not the leaf size Cheyenne mentionned) : a new one from Popow with 1 spike, 1 of my elder with 3 spikes , another one with at least 2 starting spikes! I def. do not have the green thumb , but my vietnamense do well! I am happy about that without really knowing what in my culture does them good!?? Jean

 

[NYEric]

Are you really comparing why plants dont grow and bloom in your environment as compared to the place where they developed and grow naturally!?!

 

[gonewild]

When I asked him what he fertilizes with he said "Peters, bloom booster" which is something like 10—20—30(without looking it up). I couldnt stop laughing and he said "you must be a member of slippertalk".

Did he also tell you where his secret fishing hole is? :rollhappy:

 

[Rick]

Why are paph leaves so big in wild plants compared to ours?
Why do they flower when they seem to be only half developed?


Happy 2014!

After 2.5 years of eco-relevant feeding: (Whether or not you want to call it low K or low TDS, or just plain old low), my slippers are acting more and more like big wild plants.

So I feel like I'm getting farther away from your generalized observation, and not looking for a new "what's missing" concept.

 

[naoki]

I've also wondered about this after reading Xavier's document. It is also observed in several Phals, right? For example, you'll rarely get the giant Phal. gigantea or doweryensis under cultivation. Also the shape of leaves become rounder in GH. Even if you start with the collected Phals with large leaves, they change the size and shape of the leaves after cultivation. There could be several factors:

1. light spectrum and intensity
2. humidity
3. difference in mycorrhizae association

Shade in nature is created by canopy trees, so the spectrum may be different from GH condition. For example, if red:blue is biased toward red in nature, then it may promote elongation of leaves. Also, some plants produce larger and thinner leaves under shadier condition. These are the general plant response of photomorphogensis, and I'm not sure Paphs show those responses.

If humidity is lower in GH (and light intensity is not too low), it is more advantageous to make smaller (and possibly thicker) leaves.

In the case of Paphs, I wonder if mycorrhizae association plays more dominant role in adult plants than other epiphytic orchids. According to a paper (I just read the abstract), the association is relatively flexible, and different species are associated with Paphs in GH than in nature. This could be due to the plants choosing the different fungi in GH, which is more suitable for GH condition, or the lack of optimal fungi in GH. Since mycorrhizae are like the "extension of roots", the plants can maintain larger shoot mass with the optimal fungi.

Plasticity of association:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20217434

Effect of mycorrhizae on Paph growth (I could only read abstract since it is in chinese):
http://europepmc.org/abstract/CBA/356131

 

[Cheyenne]

Did he also tell you where his secret fishing hole is? :rollhappy:

I dont understand your question. I was just telling you what he said because he obviously knew what questions I was going to inquire about.

 

[Rick]

Looking it up is 10-30-20.

But lots of other factors go into what the plant experiences.

What is the concentration being applied?
What is the frequency of application?
What is the total volume applied per feeding?
What is the retention rate of the potting mix and pot configuration?

Xavier presented some interesting data (that I put into graphical form) that showed how the type of potting substrate, primarily based on the CEC of a given mix, profoundly changes the uptake rate of K.

So based on Stones observation of the insigne in lava rock compared to maybe plants in various moss and bark matrices that are still problematic for him, the total exposure of K would be a lot less over time than in moss.

Xavier's work was to highlight what Orchiata bark does, which the data showed also reduced the amount of K in the study plants relative to the other potting matrices. And that was feeding at non ecorelvant nutrient rates to a complex hybrid Phal.

Then we got to see some crazy pics of wall mounted "forests" of Paphs grown by a friend of Paphioboy. Lots of rain very little supplementation and no extra K at all.

 

[Rick]

Is there a good study anywhere from a paph habitat showing complete soil analysis especially regarding nutrient ratios?

Happy 2014!

I've pointed out the leaf litter analysis for forest floors in Sumatra, and attached a link to tropical serpentine soils.

There's nothing new that hasn't already been discused to death.

 

[gonewild]

I dont understand your question. I was just telling you what he said because he obviously knew what questions I was going to inquire about.

My question was in humor.

"Most" successful growers are like fishermen.
Ask a fishermen where he catches all those big fish and he will tell you a location in the opposite direction from where he fishes....he wants to be the one that catches the biggest fish so he misleads you. And many fishermen take pleasure in misleading the competition.

Why would an orchid grower be any different than a fisherman?
A grower that has great success most often does not give the actual truth or facts to his secret of superior plant growth. Instead just say "Peters" and the discussion ends and his secret is his to excel with.
:wink:

 

[Cheyenne]

Anyway, my only points were that I dont think it is one nutritional factor like K or type of N. That all kinds of people can obviously grow great plants with a variety of feeding kinds, types and frequencies. No doubt that people using low k can grow some great plants. But mosy important I think is that it is low to very low to almost nonexistent(especially with chemical fertilizers). And maybe some other things that we have been taught over the years like if a plants does not bloom when we think it should we should give it more light. Might make the plants flower to early or not grow the way they could. I have noticed this when i run out of room. I have a few vandas(high light plants, right?), I put them off to the side where they get maybe a hundred fc from the florescents. It took them a little longer than usual but when they were ready they still bloomed. I had a cerulea with six spikes this hear under that light.

I am not saying low k does not work or you can't grow good plants with it. Nor was I attacking anyone that uses it. I just wanted to state what I saw and what was said when I saw some amazing plants. The way that this grower grows his plants is not how I choose to grow mine or how anyone else might choose to but it works for them and is another way to get to the same end, which is good healthy plants. Does that statement work without ruffling anyones feathers?

 

[Rick]

I find it funny that we keep looking for answers from nature, but then pick and choose what we think is important, and then go back on the quest for the ultimate secret.

Until you actually try replicating the chemical environment of the in situ rhyzosphere, I don't think you should rule out your present regime as a causitive factor of why your plants aren't meeting in situ expecations.

 

[Rick]

I am not saying low k does not work or you can't grow good plants with it. Nor was I attacking anyone that uses it. I just wanted to state what I saw and what was said when I saw some amazing plants. The way that this grower grows his plants is not how I choose to grow mine or how anyone else might choose to but it works for them and is another way to get to the same end, which is good healthy plants. Does that statement work without ruffling anyones feathers?

Sure, I'm not ruffled, but I also can't spend too much time on a post using polite word choices without getting timed out (so please avoid adding emotion to the response).

But we are looking for understanding and answers. Do you think you could replicate your friends results based on the observations you made and the things he told you?

 

[gonewild]

Does that statement work without ruffling anyones feathers?

I don't see any ruffled feathers (yet!)?

My comment about relying on the info from the grower you visited is that what he is doing is nothing new.... peters fertilizer, low light, constant temperature, ect. None of those are combinations that have not been tweaked over and over for more than 50 years, or longer if you exclude Peters fertilizer.

You said he has Paph foliage 5" or 6" wide and that is extreme phenomenal growth that represents some great achievement. When you ask him how he does it and he gives you a standard casual answer that might raise ones suspension about what he actually is doing with his culture. "Most plants are 4 years out of flask" with 6" wide leaves? Fantastic! But how?

Here a re a few questions out of curiosity and not ruffled feathers.
Does the grower sell Peters fertilizer by any chance?
He obviously knows about Slippertalk, is he a member?
Why are most of the plants with big leaves "4 years out of flask"?
Maybe for 75% of these plants life he is secretly using a low k formula?

So to get back on point of wild/cultivated....
Comparing wild and cultivated
How does this growers culture relate to wild conditions?
Is it desirable to have giant foliage on young plants?
Are the giant leaves a sign of obesity that will lead to a short lifespan?

 

[NYEric]

Bad last comment for the Holiday eating season!!