wild plants/cultivated plants

[Cheyenne]

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:

Maybe, but I dont think he saw me as a threat. We talked for a while and he was saying that he uses peters because it is cheap. That the kind or makeup of the fertilizer doesnt seem to matter as long as it is low and not everytime you water. He said what made the biggest difference for his greenhouse is when he put on the white plastic roof which really cut the light down and put in a cooling system for the summer so the temps were more even all year. Basically I think nutrition plays a very small role in culture. I think creating the right environment is a bigger part and not overdoing the fertilizer will help more than fertilizing itself.

 

[Cheyenne]

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?[/QUOTE]

Yes, your right. Back to wild plants. I just wanted to tell the people on this forum something amazing that I saw. I am not this person, and yes maybe he is just laughing when I left because he secretly only gives his plants low k. Maybe they were 30 years from flask and maybe he is the owner of Peters. I had never seen parvi or brachy leaves like that before. Like I said I just wanted to tell you about some well cultivated plants I saw and the little bit of info I got from it. I know nothing else and if I coukd replicate it I would be posting some huge parvi's.

 

[Erythrone]

Interesting post...but I will stay away from nutrition discussion.

I wonder if we can compare mature plants in nature with plants grown for horticultural purposes.

Question 1:
How old are the famous big Paphs. in nature?

Question 2:
How many seeds/seedlings are needed to produce only one big plant in situ? Usually much more than it takes to get a plant to sell. My point here is that there is a very strong selection process in nature. Only a few seeds germinate; only the best seedling survive to become mature plant.

And the best plants for Mother Nature are not the same as ours. The plants in situ are selected by Mother Nature because they are vigorous, strong, have a good pest resistance, etc. Never because they are cute in a pot, with flat flowers with a straight dorsal, with nice colors for our human eyes, etc.... So here is my 3rd question :

If the only criterias for breeders were fast growing, vigour, perennity, etc. could they produce plants growing much faster? I think so...Of course many of you will tell me they select vigorous plants. But I am not sure anyone will try to breed with vigorous plants that bear blooms with « poor » form and color.

 

[Rick]

How many seeds/seedlings are needed to produce only one big plant in situ? Usually much more than it takes to get a plant to sell. My point here is that there is a very strong selection process in nature. Only a few seeds germinate; only the best seedling survive to become mature plant.

.

However, it doesn't seem to be too uncommon to see 100% mortality in GH grown flasklings in cultivation, and even the survivors don't match the quality of those rare in situ plants you refer too.

Furthermore all the plants in cultivation originally come out of the wild, and the vast bulk of those have already been killed in cultivation.

Right now folks that have spent some time in the jungle (or even temperate forests) would be hard pressed to say that orchid hobbyist and general orchid cultivation practices are anywhere near as good as what mother nature provides (or withholds).

 

[Rick]

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. He had a bellatulum the same way. He said the key was low light and more constant tempatures. .

So white painted roofs are the secret for bellatulum and vietnamense for this grower.

Now compare Bjorns before and after results with parvis since changing his nutrition regime (and nothing else).

Or Ed Merkles results with vietnamense since changing his nutrition and nothing else.

I'm sure there's other before and after stories that don't involve white painted roofs.

So ultimately what we are trying to do is a huge mental ANOVA to see what correlates to good growth and what doesn't.

I know lots of growers with low light systems (including white washed GH roofs) that complain of poor results with potted orchids in general.

 

[Rick]

Cheyenne

Did you happen to catch his repotting frequency?

One guy I know (who also grows low light) does pretty good with MSU and CHC as long as he repots (religously) every 6 months.

He does not do any "diffucult" species though.

There is a new article in AOS about tracking pot conductivity (with what seems to be a Cattleya dominated collection). And also points to low fert usage as a defining criteria. He uses pots with moss, and indicated the use of TDS tracking to maintain better health. He also noted religious anual repotting.

Standard MSU was used, and no attempt at isolating different constituents (especially K). And the photos of the plants look pretty average.

 

[Stone]

How many seeds/seedlings are needed to produce only one big plant in situ? Usually much more than it takes to get a plant to sell. My point here is that there is a very strong selection process in nature. Only a few seeds germinate; only the best seedling survive to become mature plant.

This may be an important factor! Its certain that any weak seedling germinating in the habitat will be the first to die. Every time I deflask and grow a new lot of plants I noticed there is always 1 or maybe 2 plants which far outstrip all the others in performance. Maybe it is these which are the 1 or 2 that survive in habitat? But we grow all of them, sell them, share them around etc. These are then bred from possibly leading to genetically weaker plants?

 

[Stone]

I continue to see discrepancies regarding the whole K thing so I will leave that out for now but I agree with the general idea about very weak fertilizer concentrations. I have an old book written in the 50's which suggests paphs should not be fed at all and do better with fresh mix than feeding every couple of years. In those days of course they potted in fern roots, leafmold etc not sterile pine bark. I have put a few barbata types into treefern/sphagnum and a little bark amonth ago and given only plain water almost every day. They certainly are not ''starving'' right now. Another old book which recommends osmunda and sphag suggests feeding a little only in the second year! Its also important to remember their plants were all collected wild ones in those days, and usually only the biggest and the best were kept.

 

[Stone]

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.

Was there a break up of trace element availability in that one? I was just wondering if the TE we give our plants are in a similar ratio in relation to the N. In other words are we supplementing to much of the minors? NOT the concentration (which must remain low for all nutrients) but the correct ratio.
As I said in the post above, If a paph can find enough trace elements for an entire year from fern fibre etc., maybe just a little N would be enough..

 

[Erythrone]

Furthermore all the plants in cultivation originally come out of the wild, and the vast bulk of those have already been killed in cultivation.

Yes, I know. Sorry, it is difficult for me to write my thoughts correctly in English. I was talking about selecting vigorous, strong and long-lived plants under specific conditions, but not always the same conditions. Those conditions are different in nature or in cultivation. They are different even in nature as many species live in different ecosystems. And of course they are not the same for every grower in the world. A very good plant for me is often a very bad one on a windowsill of someone else and I am pretty sure it would not survive many years in its natural habitat.

My point here was that we, humans, are selecting orchids for pleasure, because they are cute, not just because they can grow quickly.

Right now folks that have spent some time in the jungle (or even temperate forests) would be hard pressed to say that orchid hobbyist and general orchid cultivation practices are anywhere near as good as what mother nature provides (or withholds).

Well...I can say I spent many times in temperate forests for my job and the clump of Cyp. reginae we have in our garden is more impressive than all the wild plants I saw in our region (Eastern Townships, Qc, Can) :

http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30791&highlight=cypripedium+reginae

And some people grow very impressive clumps of yellow Cyp. ... Just take a look at this one from John M. :

http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21147&highlight=cypripedium

 

[limuhead]

Personally I think the 'low K' or K-lite has something to do with it. For me the solution that has worked is dilute fish emulsion. Cheap and easy and I supplement with dolomite. The smell doesn't bother me at all because my greenhouse is down wind of my house. My neighbors on that side of the yard are knuckleheads, not to mention the stuff his wife cooks smells worse than the fish emulsion...:wink:

 

[The Orchid Boy]

I'm not to scientific or anything but I think it may have to do with more "soft" organics, and less "hard" organics. We plant paphs in bark, CHC, charcoal, perlite, and LECA. In nature, I've always seen them attached to hard surfaces (rocks or trees) and absolutely covered in soft stuff (leaves, ect.) I've always wanted to try growing some in shredded leaves and things collected from our woods. Might try that with a few seedlings from a compot.

 

[Stone]

I'm not to scientific or anything but I think it may have to do with more "soft" organics, and less "hard" organics. We plant paphs in bark, CHC, charcoal, perlite, and LECA. In nature, I've always seen them attached to hard surfaces (rocks or trees) and absolutely covered in soft stuff (leaves, ect.) I've always wanted to try growing some in shredded leaves and things collected from our woods. Might try that with a few seedlings from a compot.

The ''soft organics'' like moss, leafmold, humus, rotted wood etc. (and thats what most paphs grow in.- in fact even the ''crack dwellers'' grow in a mix of fine humus and mineral soil/clay with very fine particles) have very high Cation exchange, pH buffering capacity, and water holding capacity (which means a more steady EC) than pine bark, leca or perlite so fertilization is far less important. Its probably easier to get things wrong without the humus, moss etc.
The problem is that in a pot such materials are difficult to manage.

 

[Rick]

This may be an important factor! Its certain that any weak seedling germinating in the habitat will be the first to die. Every time I deflask and grow a new lot of plants I noticed there is always 1 or maybe 2 plants which far outstrip all the others in performance. Maybe it is these which are the 1 or 2 that survive in habitat? But we grow all of them, sell them, share them around etc. These are then bred from possibly leading to genetically weaker plants?

Since you already admit that your growing conditions do not replicate nature, you are reverse selecting for individuals that can handle what you are offering and not mother nature.
Changing my fert regime, now I see much less spread in fast vs slow individuals.

 

[Rick]

Was there a break up of trace element availability in that one? I was just wondering if the TE we give our plants are in a similar ratio in relation to the N. In other words are we supplementing to much of the minors? NOT the concentration (which must remain low for all nutrients) but the correct ratio.
As I said in the post above, If a paph can find enough trace elements for an entire year from fern fibre etc., maybe just a little N would be enough..

The leaf litter study did include TE's, but as for majors, K was much less than Ca and N.

Another thing to consider with regard to TE, is that like K, they accumulate in potting materials. And the toxicity of trace metals is higher than for the major nutrients. Copper is a very toxic material to plants (but absolutely critical in micro amounts). Is easy to find literature in the waste treatment area that show how you can sequester toxic metals with peat moss, coffee grounds, and activated carbon (charcoal). So once again don't look for what you need to add, but what you need to wash away.

 

[dodidoki]

Xavier pointed to importance of shade and minimal light. I wuold argue with this theory seeing videos about plants habitat. I remember a video about druyrii, I saw a very large mutligrowth plant with huge staight leaves and full of blooms, it was an absolutely open area exposed to full tropical Sun-light surrounded by burned out grass!!!

Another I can remeber is a multigrowth roth growing on the top of a rock, there were no shading trees at all.

Bellatulums and godefroyaes are often living in open rocks near the sea cost.

 

[Rick]

Xavier pointed to importance of shade and minimal light. I wuold argue with this theory seeing videos about plants habitat. I remember a video about druyrii, I saw a very large mutligrowth plant with huge staight leaves and full of blooms, it was an absolutely open area exposed to full tropical Sun-light surrounded by burned out grass!!!

Another I can remeber is a multigrowth roth growing on the top of a rock, there were no shading trees at all.

Bellatulums and godefroyaes are often living in open rocks near the sea cost.

Yes right next to exul. But I wouldn't generalize to much for all 80+?? species. The barbata types want to go much darker.

 

[dodidoki]

Yes right next to exul. But I wouldn't generalize to much for all 80+?? species. The barbata types want to go much darker.

I know that most of paph don't like many light but it is not the most important factor in this question. It is the easiest factor what we can controll, so if it would be the clue for secret, this topic wouldn't be exist.

 

[naoki]

I know that most of paph don't like many light but it is not the most important factor in this question. It is the easiest factor what we can controll, so if it would be the clue for secret, this topic wouldn't be exist.

In addition to the intensity, quality of light also influence the plant physiology, right? How the light quality influences the shape of plants (the process of photomorphogenesis) is a pretty complex topic. There are some agricultural papers, but I haven't seen studies on orchids.

Well, light intensity may be relatively easy to control, but controlling the quality (light spectra) is not so easy. With LED, we can start to control it easier, though.

 

[Erythrone]

Since you already admit that your growing conditions do not replicate nature, you are reverse selecting for individuals that can handle what you are offering and not mother nature.
Changing my fert regime, now I see much less spread in fast vs slow individuals.

Do you really think fert regime can explain all the difference between cultivated plants and wild ones?