# Temp at the roots.



## Stone (Dec 6, 2012)

I read somewhere once about someone measuring the temp at the roots of a Dend. atroviolaceum growing on a tree in New Guinea. If I remember correctly, the air temp was around 14C but the root temp was over 20.
If we think about all the rock dwelling paphs like bellatulum and many others which have there roots deep down into cracks in the rock, it stands to reason that the rocks being such huge heat sinks will insulate the roots from cold nights and may be quite a bit warmer than the the leaf temperature. Even during winter. Obviously they (the roots) would also remain cooler during very hot weather. Maybe growing these plants on a mildly heated bench year round would be advantageous and we could possibly get away with cooler air temps at the same time. When we study the climate data for things like armeniacum or micranthum we only really get an idea of average air temps throughout the year but what temps are the roots really seeing?


----------



## Rick (Dec 6, 2012)

Wow so many variables to predict which way to go and then the variable habitats for which they all come from.

I've seen pics of belatulum in cracks on cliff and looking like sitting in soil amongst rocks. Xavier once talked about a big colony of armenicum with some plants in soil, some in rocks, and some in tufts of moss. Then details of lowii growing epiphytically in trees or on limestone cliffs.

How deep are these roots? Are they mostly on the surface with water seeping over them (evaporative cooling). Or really tucking in deep into rocks with good solar incident exposure? If roots into deep leaf litter is there some warming effect from composting?

What is your bench temp during summer? I have to work pretty hard to get night air temps below 20C in the summer.

I think you could spend a lifetime with this one.


----------



## SlipperKing (Dec 6, 2012)

I think its bare out for the most part the bachys shoot their roots deep in the rock cervices. The proof is in the un-potting of a bachy, I find the roots always go straight down the center of the pot and not until they reach the bottom do they spread to the side walls, then climb a round the bottom then back up. The compost dwellers spread throughout the leaf litter. The lowiis, haynaldianums, dianthums and probably tigrinums I find their roots only on the top of pots with dense mixes. When I repot these plants I need to add large rocks or Styrofoam peanuts in the bottom of the pots to get deep penetration. Otherwise, I rot off the roots and end up with root stubs at the top of the pots only. Has anyone else experienced this?


----------



## The Orchid Boy (Dec 7, 2012)

I have a sanderianum that has extremely nice roots and when I repoted it I noticed it doing what you said the brachypetalums do. My delenatii has roots that are much sparser than the sanderianum's roots. It could be that most sanderianums are lithophytes and most delenatiis are saprophytes. So the delenatiis need less roots to take up moisture and hold them in place. That's my theory anyway.


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

The Orchid Boy said:


> I have a sanderianum that has extremely nice roots and when I repoted it I noticed it doing what you said the brachypetalums do. My delenatii has roots that are much sparser than the sanderianum's roots. It could be that most sanderianums are lithophytes and most delenatiis are saprophytes. So the delenatiis need less roots to take up moisture and hold them in place. That's my theory anyway.



I'd double check your definition of saprophyte.

I think those are things like fungi and coral pipes (generally parasitic, often with no photosynthetic capability).


----------



## Stone (Dec 7, 2012)

Rick said:


> > What is your bench temp during summer? I have to work pretty hard to get night air temps below 20C in the summer.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Stone (Dec 7, 2012)

SlipperKing said:


> .
> 
> 
> > When I repot these plants I need to add large rocks or Styrofoam peanuts in the bottom of the pots to get deep penetration. Otherwise, I rot off the roots and end up with root stubs at the top of the pots only. Has anyone else experienced this
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

Stone said:


> SlipperKing said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

Stone said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > You're lucky! I only get maybe 10 nights per year with 20C nights. For instance last night I had to put the heater on to get 16C but today its going to be 37! But I do notice the pots on the warm bench (crib) really get moving way before the others on the open bench. They probably get 20-23C at the roots.
> ...


----------



## Stone (Dec 7, 2012)

Rick said:


> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > However, some things like the micranthum and armenicum come from places that can have frost. (Isn't that 0C?) I would doubt that you would have 20C at the roots with air temps that low (unless they were on a compost pile).
> ...


----------



## Stone (Dec 7, 2012)

Rick said:


> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > Mike
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

Stone said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > I have had a kovachii in these balls for about 3 months now sitting in a saucer of water with a fert solution to about 0.4 dS/m. but rather than topping the level up with more solution, I always soak in plain water for a few minutes first (submerge) then top up with solution again. So far its doing well with nice white roots snaking through.
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

Stone said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > I have had a kovachii in these balls for about 3 months now sitting in a saucer of water with a fert solution to about 0.4 dS/m. but rather than topping the level up with more solution, I always soak in plain water for a few minutes first (submerge) then top up with solution again. So far its doing well with nice white roots snaking through.
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

Ok this may say more about global warming, or the benefits of my new insulating blanket I put over the GH.:wink:

Here it is 10pm 1st week of December (Northern Hemisphere) and its about 55 (12.8C) outside. It was cloudy all day. The GH heaters are only set at roughly 1/2 power and barely warm to touch. Air temp in the GH is 71 (21.6C), humidity at 80%. 

The temp in the middle of some 6" moss baskets is 21.1C (70F). So no significant warming or cooling effect. (Actually with 80% humidity I wouldn't expect any big difference).

Now just to add another layer of complexity. How would you account for roots outside (and on top) of the substrate as well as buried in the substrate? In this case both are present.


----------



## Rick (Dec 7, 2012)

I'm pretty excited about this new insulating blanket.

It's a clear swimming pool cover made of heavy duty bubble wrap. After taking off the shade cloth, it didn't cut the light level much at all. I'm cutting it up to fit pretty snug. I still haven't got one side of the GH put up yet.

It cost $150, but since my winter electric bill from just the GH could be as high as $300 a month, it should make payback this winter.


----------



## paphioboy (Dec 8, 2012)

Interesting note on the pattern of root growth of cultured paphs. But, the shape and size of the pot also plays a role. IMHO, I do not think you can use plants in culture as a reference for how the roots behave under natural conditions..


----------



## paphioboy (Dec 8, 2012)

I think with brachys, there is no definite pattern of root growth. Being shallow rooted and with limited space for roots to grow, when growing in rock crevices, I guess it is sensible for them to grow as many roots as possible to fill available spaces, as brachy roots are quite succulent compared to other paphs. Roots do not always grow deep, sometimes they are quite shallow and spread sideways, as the following photos show:

Paph bellatulum in rock crevices in situ (not my photo, I forgot where the original link for these photos are):














Intact root systems of collected bellatulum:









Root systems of collected niveum:


----------



## JeanLux (Dec 8, 2012)

Very interesting pics Li, thanks!!!! Jean


----------



## biothanasis (Dec 8, 2012)

Nice pics Li. What type of soil is this on the bells' roots (clay, peat?)? It seems that there is too much root mass of other plants too. Kind of keeps the substrate airy..


----------



## paphioboy (Dec 8, 2012)

biothanasis said:


> Nice pics Li. What type of soil is this on the bells' roots (clay, peat?)? It seems that there is too much root mass of other plants too. Kind of keeps the substrate airy..



Thanasis, I don't know what kind of soil that is.. Looks to me like just organic debris.


----------



## Marc (Dec 8, 2012)

Nice to see these pictures of plants growing in quite a compact substrate. And here we are working with bark, perlite, charcoal etc. etc. to keep our substrate "airy" enough.


----------



## keithrs (Dec 8, 2012)

Looks to me like clay with some gravel. Im sure there's organic mixed in as well.


----------



## Marc (Dec 8, 2012)

Seeing these pictures makes me wonder if we wouldn't have more succes with these Orchids if we would grew them in pans / undeep pots instead of the standard plastic containers.

The root systems looke quite undeep and very widespread.


----------



## keithrs (Dec 8, 2012)

I have been thinking the same thing for a while. I've been wanting to try root bags and cut them so there 2-3" high, then fill them with mostly organic mix but have large chunks of perlite or leca in the mix for air. I have tried a small experiment like this with a Maudie type. I used CHC, coir, sand, compost, and leca. A very light top dressing of a blended organic fert. It's in a 4" pot but I only filled it 3/4 way. Plant seems to be ok! It's spiking. Can't say it did any better then it would have in bark/perlite mix. The key is not to water it like you would with traditional potting mix. I'll give it a good water once or twice a month and just mist it daily. Some of the water rolls into the mix to help keep the mix at an even moisture level.
Here's the plant... Two new growths






Shot of the mix.... The finer stuff have worked there way into the mix.


----------



## Ray (Dec 8, 2012)

Rick said:


> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > You might want to keep track of EC on these pots with LECA.
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 8, 2012)

Ray said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > Don't paint with such a broad brush, Rick. The properties of LECA vary all over the map between brands, and in some cases, manufacturing lots. Variables include capillarity, surface characteristics, particle size & shape, porosity forms, which affect absorption capacity & the release of absorbed fluids, which in turn affects buildup.
> ...


----------



## Rick (Dec 8, 2012)

paphioboy said:


> Thanasis, I don't know what kind of soil that is.. Looks to me like just organic debris.



I would also note the moss growing in close proximity to the bellatulums. Suggests some continuous moisture and low nutrient conditions.


----------



## keithrs (Dec 9, 2012)

Rick said:


> I would also note the moss growing in close proximity to the bellatulums. Suggests some continuous moisture and low nutrient conditions.



Low nutrients or low salt based nutrients?


----------



## Rick (Dec 9, 2012)

keithrs said:


> Low nutrients or low salt based nutrients?



What's your definition of nutrient vs "salt based". Even if it has carbon associated with it, it is still a "salt".


----------



## keithrs (Dec 9, 2012)

K-lite vs leaf mold

K-lite being salt based.


----------



## keithrs (Dec 9, 2012)

I think the industry thinks of products that look like salt(MSU, k lite, miracle gro) as salt based.


----------



## Marc (Dec 9, 2012)

I'm not an expert but from a chemical point of view N is N, K is K and P is P. So would it matter to the plant if the nutrients come from decaying plant matter or from a salt like substance that has been dissolved in water?


----------



## cnycharles (Dec 9, 2012)

most everything that is biochemically active and can be taken in/up by living things, is in the form of a compound and not pure elements. things on the periodic table of elements are in different classes, and one section of elements is called 'salts'. any compound which is paired or joined with elements in this section usually get labeled as 'salts' in general. 

pure nitrogen is usually a gas which you can find alot in our atmosphere, and is pretty un-reactive which also means that it is difficult for plants to use it. also potassium and phosphorus in their elemental state may be somewhat difficult to take up either physically, or purely because the plant cells would be basically poisoned or because of pH concerns, would cause the plant problems in one way or another. again usually, plants/living things use certain elements in very diluted amounts, and to be exposed to a pure element in any amount would likely cause problems for the living thing exposed to it

so, fertilizer 'salts' are compounds that have n, p and k in them and are tied with other elements in the 'salt' classification, but relatively less and more available safely than pure elements. more 'organic' compounds may be different than the usual 'salt' fertilizer types that are artificially formed by people; these organic types are usually formed or create by or through some plant-based process or input item (composted plant or animal waste or compounds) (general from the top of my head, not a definition from an encyclopedia or such)

it's often assumed that 'organic' fertilizer sources are more friendly or useable by plants than other sources; that may or may not be true, or in some cases it is and others it isn't true


----------



## Rick (Dec 9, 2012)

keithrs said:


> I think the industry thinks of products that look like salt(MSU, k lite, miracle gro) as salt based.




That's pretty arbitrary Keith.

If it comes out of a bottle the K is a salt? If it comes out of a leaf the K is a nutrient?

So if you see moss growing in the woods, it has a lack of K from leaf mold, but can still take a ton of bottle based K salt?


----------



## keithrs (Dec 9, 2012)

Rick said:


> That's pretty arbitrary Keith.
> 
> If it comes out of a bottle the K is a salt? If it comes out of a leaf the K is a nutrient?



Exactly....I don't make the rules! There plenty of info on the web about this....

As Cnycharles pointed out some elements need to be combined with a form of salt. 

Again, I'll point out that I'm no scientist and have limited info in this.


----------



## Stone (Dec 9, 2012)

Apart from amino acids and such, the nutrients from a packet or leafmold or a heap of maunure are exactly the same and plants take them up in exactly the same form. If you consentrated and purified the nutrients from leaf mold, they would look like fert out of a packet but you would probably need a truckload of leafmold to make one packet. The thing about organics is that they contain many elements like nickle or cobolt or aluminium or silica or growmium or god knows what that may or may not be benificial to plants. But after all, all nutrient salts came from the same place originally...That being the Stars man.
I like using a mix of manufactured and organic. Some studies suggest better overall growth than just one or the other.


----------



## Rick (Dec 9, 2012)

keithrs said:


> Exactly....I don't make the rules! There plenty of info on the web about this....



Yes, but apparently you aren't looking at material from chemists or agronomists.

One comparison that would be easy to understand is the NPK ratings of the "natural or organic" fertilizers vs the manufactured or refined.

I posted that article link previous on another thread.

Comparing the NPK of the seaweed extracts you saw numbers in low single digits (or less) like 0.2 - 0.0 - 0.4. While MSU is 12 -5 -13 (or something like that.

That means pound for pound, the amount of N available in seaweed is about 1/60th the amount for the equivalent mass of MSU. Now consider that refined seaweed extract is considered a "nutrient" rich source of organic fertilizer material, then consider how much "nutrient" is available in fresh leaf fall, or available on the surface of a limestone rock (where moss grows).


----------



## keithrs (Dec 9, 2012)

Rick said:


> Yes, but apparently you aren't looking at material from chemists or agronomists.
> 
> One comparison that would be easy to understand is the NPK ratings of the "natural or organic" fertilizers vs the manufactured or refined.
> 
> ...



I understand all of that.... All I was bringing up is that maybe the buildup of 'salts' in 'standard' fertilizer maybe burning the moss.


----------



## Rick (Dec 9, 2012)

keithrs said:


> . All I was bringing up is that maybe the buildup of 'salts' in 'standard' fertilizer maybe burning the moss.



In pots yes. And other places, in-situ, where nutrient availability is high.

There have been toxicity studies done with bryophytes indicating their tolerance to NPK is considerably less than for higher plants.


----------



## keithrs (Dec 9, 2012)

Stone said:


> Apart from amino acids and such, the nutrients from a packet or leafmold or a heap of maunure are exactly the same and plants take them up in exactly the same form. If you consentrated and purified the nutrients from leaf mold, they would look like fert out of a packet but you would probably need a truckload of leafmold to make one packet. The thing about organics is that they contain many elements like nickle or cobolt or aluminium or silica or growmium or god knows what that may or may not be benificial to plants. But after all, all nutrient salts came from the same place originally...That being the Stars man.
> I like using a mix of manufactured and organic. Some studies suggest better overall growth than just one or the other.



Let me get this right... Your saying a packet of fertilizer is the same form as in leaf mold?


----------



## Stone (Dec 10, 2012)

keithrs said:


> Let me get this right... Your saying a packet of fertilizer is the same form as in leaf mold?



I'm saying that plants take up nutrients in the form of ions such as nitrate, ammonium, phosphate etc and that these ions are the same no matter where they come from. The difference is in the percentage of these soluble nutrients.


----------

