# Phrag kovachii culture!



## orchidman77 (Feb 24, 2010)

Hey Guys!

I would first like to say that I have been reading on this forum for a LOOOONG time....but not posting. Thank you all very much for providing completely phenomenal pictures, information, and support!

I figured that, since there is a Phrag kovachii in our midst :drool::drool::drool::drool::drool:, we should have a thread devoted to the culture of this orchid. I do not possess one yet, but after these pictures from Jason and DrOrchid, I want one!!! Only problem, I don't know how to grow it.....I have paphs, phals, catts, and a dendrobium, but no phrags.

SO..........anyone want to post a comprehensive culture sheet for kovachii? I'll start off with a question.....can it be grown in ~70 degree inside temps?

David


----------



## gonewild (Feb 24, 2010)

orchidman77 said:


> I'll start off with a question.....can it be grown in ~70 degree inside temps?
> David



Are you asking about day or night temperature?
Low 60's at night to mid 80's in the day works well.


----------



## Hera (Feb 24, 2010)

NYEric just posted this to another thread and it has culture notes.

http://www.phragmipediumkovachii.com/


----------



## orchidman77 (Feb 24, 2010)

thanks guys! I read the website you just posted, hera, and it was helpful. Lance, i don't know exactly, but the room is very near french doors so there would be a temperature differential, but an average of about 70 degrees.

I was asking for personal experience in the US, really. I want to know what you guys have done, what works, what doesn't, etc.... 

David


----------



## gonewild (Feb 24, 2010)

For established plants....

I tried letting the nights go down to the high 50's with day temps in the low 70's and the plants basically sit still.

Raised the night temps to the low to mid 60's and they started growing a little.

Raised the day temps to low to mid 80's and growth kicked in.
So now I'm running about 64 night and 82 days. 
Light is only CMH, no natural sunlight.


----------



## slippertalker (Feb 24, 2010)

My experience is that they enjoy cool temperatures, and grow quickly during the spring and fall. If you can keep the night temperature to 55-60F and the day temperatures 75-80F, that seems to be ideal. They definitely slow down in the summer heat.


----------



## Paul (Feb 25, 2010)

my experience after 3 years growing them: 

humidity +++ at roots and air at all time, 
temps: temperate nights are the best (~15°C). days can be up to 30°C with no problem if very humid. but 25°C is more suitable
low light when very small, then Phalaenopsis light when starting to grow fast (10-15cm). fertilizing: very low when very small (almost pure water), then a little higher when the roots get bigger (a little more than for besseae & co), usually when the plant reach at least 10cm wide. then the growth rate increases a lot.
water should be neutral, and/or better is to put something at the top of the pot to maintain the pH close to 7 (or a little less): dolomite, oister shells, egg shells ...


----------



## TyroneGenade (Feb 25, 2010)

What doesn't work: sphagnum mixed with limestone/coral chips. The roots rot... My seedling is now in gravel with limestone chips with some sprigs of sphagnum for moisture and the rot has stopped. Whether the plant will grow or just die slowly remains to be seen...


----------



## Paul (Feb 25, 2010)

TyroneGenade said:


> What doesn't work: sphagnum mixed with limestone/coral chips. The roots rot... My seedling is now in gravel with limestone chips with some sprigs of sphagnum for moisture and the rot has stopped. Whether the plant will grow or just die slowly remains to be seen...



very acid + very alcaline = chemical reactions = production of salts... too bad for the roots, yes!! :evil:


----------



## Bolero (Feb 25, 2010)

With respect to the temps listed above they should grow well and flower well below 15C considering they are a cool growing species. I know others (I don't have any) who grow them well below 50F and they grow well at these temps. They are one of the cooler growing Phrags.


----------



## gonewild (Feb 25, 2010)

I don't think pk should be considered or classed as a cool growing orchid species. Temperatures as low as 15c would be on the rare extreme side in the natural habitat. Most of the year the environment is tropical.

When I have tried low temperatures my plants sit still and don't grow. When I raise the temperature they grow. 

I think extreme high summer temperatures may be a problem but I don't have that problem here. 

The key factor when dealing with high temperatures is to keep the foliage wet.


----------



## orchidman77 (Feb 25, 2010)

Thanks guys! I have a much better idea of what to do when I get one.

Ok.....I'm worried about not getting cool enough during the night. I measured the temp where I will eventually have one, and it got down to at least 65 F, maybe lower during the night. Keep in mind, this is winter.....from what I DO know, they appreciate slightly higher temps during the summer. And, from Lance has said, it may be ideal anyhow. I guess it will be something that I learn as I grow it.

I don't think that it will be a major issue, since I'll have everything else it will need to flourish. Is there any way that I can artificially lower the temperature in a very small space?

David


----------



## gonewild (Feb 25, 2010)

orchidman77 said:


> Is there any way that I can artificially lower the temperature in a very small space?
> 
> David



Evaporate water.


----------



## smartie2000 (Feb 26, 2010)

Mine has been growing in Sphag, but I think some of the other members here seem to have more impressive plants. But my plant gave good growth this summer, after the addition of garden dolomite to the sphag. Sphag by itself is not a good thing with kovachii, seems to be a theme! I think I made the sphag less acidic with the dolomite, and also dolomite added magnesium to the mix

I just repotted my kovachii today in a clay pot with crushed coral, lava rock, etc on the bottom half of the pot, and loose sphag with dolomite and perlite, etc. on the top half of the pot.
I decided on the clay pot to keep the root system cool. I have not bloomed schlimii (thought it keeps growing), and they are related. I also repotted my schlimii in clay, as well as two besseae today. (besseae I don't have trouble with, but I thought I'd see if they would do better in clay)

Hopefully it was not a mistake to repot my kovachii with crushed coral. This coral was once in a freshwater aquarium, so salts should have been leached out by now.

My city tap water is naturally high in pH and with plenty of calcium carbonate which is why I chose a slightly acidic medium for my phrags, such as sphag. If I watered with RO water, I think I would change to a more neutral medium


I want to try diatomite with my orchids, but I need to find a source of it

And I agree that it is not a cool grower, it just doesn't need to be hot. I had good growth during the summer. I would not allow it to go above 30 degrees celcius. So household temperatures are good,


----------



## orchidman77 (Feb 26, 2010)

Thanks so much Fren! It seems possible to grow one now, lol. Before it seemed to me to be a hands-off plant, both in price and culture!!!

Lance, I'll be sure to try the water thing when I get one. Thanks for all of your help too!

David


----------



## Leo Schordje (Feb 27, 2010)

I do have several Phrag kovachii maturing in my collection. 

In FLASK ONLY - kovachii in flask MUST be kept cool. Reason as explained by Alfredo Manrique & Glenn Decker's Lab man is complicated, but IN FLASK kovachii must be kept below 75 F. 

HABITAT - YES, Peter is right, Phrag kovachii is an intermediate to warm grower, it DOES experience temps into the low 90's F in the wild (34 +/- C)
The KEY from habitat is that in the valleys where it comes from there are long periods of time where the wind is near 60 mph (100kph). They can take heat if they have GOOD air movement. Now in habitat these 60 mph winds are surely slowed at ground level, but they are still in the range of what we would call a 'blustery day". Give your kovachii a location where there is enough air movement that the leaves are moving at least a little at all times. 

Another habitat note, kovachii comes from an area where the soil pH has a mild alkaline reaction. Strongly acidic soils have proven the kiss of death. It grows in loose rock and on cliff faces where there is constant running water, usuall cool(ish) water. Do not use sphagnum or other acidic potting media. 

They come from very wet habitat, on & in rubble along a stream bank. Plant is up, roots are able to go down into a consantly fresh water. 

Personally I did not have good results with pure diatamite, but a bark mix, with bark, charcol & diatamite is giving better results for me. 

Those are my thoughts. 
Leo


----------



## Bolero (Feb 27, 2010)

Whatever, I know that kovachii grow cooler than 15C. Lima is not a tropical climate despite the position on the planet and Lima gets down to 12C in winter - elevation about 1550m.

Keep in mind that kovachii can grow up to 600m above Lima and the winds get very cold at times at 2100m. So if Lima gets down to 12C in winter......do you think that at 2100m that it might get even colder at times?


----------



## Clark (Feb 27, 2010)

How about growth rates. I know one plant doesn't equal a survey.

Bought mine in Feb. 2008. Tiny. 2 leaves that were a total of 2inches. Width of leaves were as wide as a paper match. I can say that most plants deflasked here were larger.
After 2yrs., plant 2 leaves total 6.25inches, width of leaves .875inch across.
I grow windowsill/sliding door/outside(weather permitting).

Do you folks have similiar experience with growth rate?
Thank you.


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

Bolero said:


> Whatever, I know that kovachii grow cooler than 15C. Lima is not a tropical climate despite the position on the planet and Lima gets down to 12C in winter - elevation about 1550m.
> 
> Keep in mind that kovachii can grow up to 600m above Lima and the winds get very cold at times at 2100m. So if Lima gets down to 12C in winter......do you think that at 2100m that it might get even colder at times?



Careful when you "whatever".... ( do I see a hand up in the air? :wink

I did not realize that sea level was 1550m in Peru? Sorry but Lima is not at 1550m. It is near sea level. 

Lima is on the western side of the Andes. The area is almost a desert with fog and cool temperatures but it does have a mild climate. It is not a cold city. Tropical plants like anthurium grow in peoples yards. 

The kovachii habitat is on the east side of the Andes where the amazon jungle begins. When the winds blow it can be very warm and wet. Not to be assumed cold just because of elevation. 2100m on the eastern side of the Andes supports tropical plant growth.

Now just because the two main kovachii nurseries are located in Lima does not mean that the climate is ideal for kovachii. It just means that the two businessmen that got the permits lived and have their nurseries in Lima.
They grow kovachii right beside all of their other plants..cattleyas and even phalaenopsis. Also in a greenhouse where they can keep them warm.

Yes kovachii probably will grow at the cold temperatures you refer to but probably not as fast or good as in a warmer climate.


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

The Nursery of Alfreado Manrique in Lima....

Orchids growing outside under shade screen, open to the Lima climate....
This picture was taken in the first week of June.
Notice the species growing in the outside environment.
Also notice the glass wall at the back.






This the the area behind the glass wall. It is the enclosed growing area where Alfreado's kovachii are kept.
It was warmer than the outside area.
This pictute was taken in October.





Here is one of his 5 original collected P.kovachii mother plants with seed pods set.





You can look at the species and growing areas and draw your own conclusions about the temperatures in Lima.
In my experience overall it has a very mild climate.


----------



## orchidman77 (Feb 27, 2010)

Why is air movement soooooo important as everyone says?? I'm afraid I'm really ignorant on this one.....

Would a small fan work to provide the air?

Thanks again Lance for your pictures and explanations!!!

David


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

orchidman77 said:


> Why is air movement soooooo important as everyone says?? I'm afraid I'm really ignorant on this one.....
> 
> Would a small fan work to provide the air?
> 
> ...



Generally air movement is a big help to prevent fungal and bacterial growth by preventing stagnant conditions. Air movement will help evaporate water which helps cool.
It only takes a small airflow to be beneficial. I can't think of any reason to subject kovachii to gale force winds.


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

This weeks Lima forecast:

Updated: 7:00 AM PET on February 27, 2010

Saturday
Partly Cloudy. High: 84 °F . Wind South 8 mph . Heat Index: 89 °F .

Saturday Night
Partly Cloudy. Low: 64 °F . Wind SSE 11 mph .

Sunday
Chance of Rain. Partly Cloudy. High: 84 °F . Wind South 11 mph . Chance of precipitation 20% (trace amounts). Heat Index: 84 °F .

Sunday Night
Scattered Clouds. Low: 71 °F . Wind SSE 8 mph .

Monday
Partly Cloudy. High: 82 °F . Wind South 11 mph .

Monday Night
Overcast. Low: 71 °F . Wind SSE 11 mph .

Tuesday
Overcast. High: 82 °F . Wind South 13 mph .

Tuesday Night
Partly Cloudy. Low: 71 °F . Wind SSE 11 mph .

Wednesday
Partly Cloudy. High: 82 °F . Wind South 15 mph . Heat Index: 82 °F .

Wednesday Night
Partly Cloudy. Low: 71 °F . Wind SSE 11 mph .

Thursday
Scattered Clouds. High: 82 °F . Wind South 15 mph . Heat Index: 86 °F .

Thursday Night
Chance of Rain. Partly Cloudy. Low: 71 °F . Wind SSE 11 mph . Chance of precipitation 20% (trace amounts).

Friday
Chance of Rain. Scattered Clouds. High: 86 °F . Wind South 11 mph . Chance of precipitation 20% (trace amounts). Heat Index: 91 °F .

Friday Night
Partly Cloudy. Low: 68 °F . Wind SSE 11 mph .


----------



## smartie2000 (Feb 27, 2010)

thanks for the info Lance



orchidman77 said:


> Why is air movement soooooo important as everyone says?? I'm afraid I'm really ignorant on this one.....
> 
> Would a small fan work to provide the air?
> 
> ...


if your humidity is low and you have few plants then air movement is not as big of a deal. You probably will have some natural air movement in the house. Under very dry winter conditions too much air movement would dessicate a plant. 

Probably be more careful during the summer, especially if it is hot. I double my air movement during the summer on all plants except for those on the windowsill. My windowsill plants get no extra artificial air movement, just whatever moves around the house naturally. You might have a openned window, etc.

If you have a overly dense collection, you will need air movement because of stagnant conditions. Or if you are growing in a enclosed space (like terrarium). Especially if your humidity is high, you will need air movement, otherwise plant your plants can potentially get rot. I do need to fan my collection that is not an the windowsill

Paphs seem to rot much faster than Phrags...but intermediate growing phrags like kovachii might be susceptable to rot in high heat if the air is stagnant


----------



## orchidman77 (Feb 27, 2010)

Ok..........i don't have too many chids, but they are rather close. I'll probably get a fan of some sort sometime and just make sure they don't get into those stagnant conditions. Those temps, Lance, look ideal for indoor growing, at least in my house.

With growing on a windowsill, wouldn't the leaves heat up too much if the sun is beating down directly on the leaves???

David


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

orchidman77 said:


> With growing on a windowsill, wouldn't the leaves heat up too much if the sun is beating down directly on the leaves???
> 
> David



That depends on how intense the sun is. What time of day does direct sunlight hit the leaves?
You can keep the leaf temperature down by misting the leaves when the sun is hot and allowing your fan to blow across them. The evaporation will cool the leaf tissue. Take care not to put cold water directly on leaves that are already real hot. The sudden change in temperature can cause tissue damage. Best to wet the foliage before it gets hot and keep it wet to keep it cool. If the leaves are hot and you want to cool them down do so by indirectly misting the leaves. Let the mist slowly fall through the air onto the leaf. 
Or just add some shade to your window?


----------



## Clark (Feb 27, 2010)

ok. There are tables in front of windows. When summer days are longer- mini-blinds. Plants are not actually on sill/stool. That would create a limit.
The black/green plastic pots in the front row can heat up.


----------



## Bolero (Feb 27, 2010)

You are right of course, I read on a website that Lima is 1500M but that obviously is wrong after checking other sites.

I just know of several people who grow them successfully much cooler than 15C as long as they are protected. I've also read some articles that suggest kovachii does get some very cool temps and cooler winds at the elevation it grows at. 

I've done some research on the climate as I do whenever I grow plants I need cultural information on and it suggests the highlands get down to 5C. I know climates are variable though. 

I am sure they don't grow as fast at cooler temps, many plants don't.


----------



## Bolero (Feb 27, 2010)

gonewild said:


> This weeks Lima forecast:
> 
> Updated: 7:00 AM PET on February 27, 2010
> 
> ...



Isn't it summer there now?


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

Bolero said:


> You are right of course, I read on a website that Lima is 1500M but that obviously is wrong after checking other sites.



Maybe it was a typo and should have said 150m. I don't really know the exact altitude but it may as well be sea level.



> I just know of several people who grow them successfully much cooler than 15C as long as they are protected. I've also read some articles that suggest kovachii does get some very cool temps and cooler winds at the elevation it grows at.



When you say they grow them much cooler than 15C do you mean that is the constant temperature or that it sometimes gets that cold?



> I've done some research on the climate as I do whenever I grow plants I need cultural information on and it suggests the highlands get down to 5C. I know climates are variable though.



Yes the highlands can get that cold. but not on a frequent basis at the 2000m level on the eastern side. I've seen a lot of plants growing at 3000m that you would assume would die with freezing temperatures. Above 3000m is where the "highlands" really start. On the western slope that is a different story, it gets cold over there even at lower elevations.



> I am sure they don't grow as fast at cooler temps, many plants don't.



I guess the main points about kovachii growing cold are:
1. do they need that cold temperature to grow well?
or
2. Do they only tolerate the cold temperatures without suffering?


----------



## gonewild (Feb 27, 2010)

Bolero said:


> Isn't it summer there now?



Yes it is summer now.


----------



## orchidman77 (Feb 28, 2010)

Thanks to all of you! I think I could grow a kovachii now...i just need to get one lol.


----------



## Carper (Aug 18, 2010)

I had already put my order in to Peruflora before reading this thread and next month have 6 kovachii plants being delivered. 4 plants within 2 years of flowering and the other 2 within one year. I already acquired 2 plants a few months ago from europe, potted these up, and these are double the size already. Leafspan is about 10 inches at present. New roots and new leaves have devloped so I am well pleased with their progress, so the conditions seem well suited and they seem to conform to many of the ones described in this thread. I take it that it could be an advantage to add crushed oyster shell or dolomite lime but also what PH would be ideal for my MSU to be applied at for optimal uptake?

Gary
UK


----------



## Carper (Sep 21, 2010)

Well, they have finally arrived and I can say I am very pleased with the plants. They were very well packed, all have a very good root system and it looks like a couple of them have flowered before. I have now cleaned them, treated them with a weak solution of physan, and potted them up and as you can see from the photos, they don't look bad. They've had their first feed along with a KLN root hormone boost, so looking forward to the next 12 months, which will hopefully produce a flowering specimen. I have put a 30 cm ruler in the photo to give an idea of the size.

Gary


----------



## SlipperKing (Sep 21, 2010)

Looks great, good luck


----------



## paphioboy (Sep 21, 2010)

Great acquisitions...


----------



## SlipperFan (Sep 21, 2010)

They do look nice and healthy.


----------



## NYEric (Sep 22, 2010)

Those are a pretty good size, nice acquisitions. I wish I could get a bunch that size w/out losing a limb!


----------



## JeanLux (Sep 22, 2010)

Wow: nice, strong and healthy looking !!!! Just waiting to see pics of your blooms now ! Jean

(my 2 seedlings just do survive but not grow )


----------



## Carper (Nov 26, 2010)

Hi All,

Its been a couple of months since I received these, but some of them are showing cause for concern! There is no sign of any root growth yet and some of the leaves are becoming dry, becoming a lighter green and leathery to the touch, not firm. Some are turning brown on the leaf ends. The medium is well drained, and I water once every 7-10 days or so. I wonder whether this is enough as most of my other phrags get a soaking and dont mind it. I feed weakly at around 400 m/s with the MSU 13-3-15, should this be stronger? Light levels are very low now we are in winter, with no supplementary lighting. Temps are 13C min and 20C max. 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Gary
UK


----------



## Shiva (Nov 26, 2010)

You don't say anything about your potting medium, but my guess is you're not watering enough. I have one growing well in straight diatomite and it is always wet.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 26, 2010)

Wet.


----------



## gonewild (Nov 26, 2010)

Water them EVERY day if they are in a well drained media.
They need to be moist or wet.


----------



## Carper (Nov 27, 2010)

I'm growing in husk chunks, with a sprinkling of fir bark and charcoal. The outer covering of the roots after checking have gone soft but the inner part of the root seems firm and ok. Can the plant still take in the feed or would it be a good idea to foliar feed regularly for a while to help it along.

Gary
UK


----------



## gonewild (Nov 27, 2010)

How much of the outer part of the root has gone soft?

Sounds like the roots are probably dead or at least inactive. Without active roots soil nutrients do no good but they also don't do any harm. Foliar feed is better. You have to keep the foliage from drying out, so mist the plants as often as possible. Especially try to keep the media surface moist at all times without letting the lower media get too wet. New roots will come from the base of the plant at the media surface so that is where you need to keep the moisture constant. Maybe covering the surface with moss to act as a mulch will help.


----------



## Carper (Nov 27, 2010)

How often would you foliar feed and what strength. I foliar fed a few plants this morning and most were completely dry in half an hour. I just don't want to overdo it so would you foliar feed at the same strength or stronger and if so at what strength in PPM Nitrogen or m/s.


----------



## gonewild (Nov 27, 2010)

Carper said:


> How often would you foliar feed and what strength. I foliar fed a few plants this morning and most were completely dry in half an hour. I just don't want to overdo it so would you foliar feed at the same strength or stronger and if so at what strength in PPM Nitrogen or m/s.



The perfect answer to this question probably does not exist.

Foliar feeding at the same strength that you use on your other plants would be fine. However it is probably a good idea to use a more dilute strength and apply more often. Gauge the need for nutrients on plant growth. Even though the roots are bad are the plants still producing leaf growth? If the plant is growing then it needs more nutrients than if it is not increasing bulk. 

Don't put too much concern on foliar feeding but rather do something to get new roots growing soon.


----------



## Jim Toomey (Nov 27, 2010)

I have seen a successful grower here in Florida who grows them sitting in trays of water. Water seemed to be very shallow. 
The plants are absolutely huge with many, many growths (too many to count).
They had no burned leaves and looked immaculate.
I have some of mine sitting in an oven pan liner (about 1/4" deep).
Seems to be working very well.


----------



## NYEric (Nov 27, 2010)

Thanx Jim; I'll take 2!


----------



## Carper (Nov 28, 2010)

Thanks for your suggestions so far.

It would be great for those that hold these plants to please advise me of their current mix. I normally use KLN for root growth, so would also appreciate any advice on any products members use for this purpose. 

Thanks again.

Gary
UK


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 28, 2015)

Great Tips guys ! But should the roots be CONSTANTLY moist or should dry out just a bit between waterings ?!!! What else ?


----------



## Justin (Mar 28, 2015)

the roots have to be constantly moist even wet. i am finding that a mix of moss and fine fir bark with perlite and charcoal works well, with oyster shell mixed in. give it bright light and frequent watering with very dilute fertilizer.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 28, 2015)

Thanks ! What do you think about the recommendation by many growers here to water from above with good quality water (low dissolved salt content) and then let a thin (?) or thick (?) film of the run-off water on the plate underneath the pot . This means actually being soaked by the substrate by capillary action! This would be my first time doing this to an orchid and I have successfully grown many genera but never Phrag. kovachii ! Thanks for the detailed help here (sorry but I am an engineer...


----------



## Justin (Mar 28, 2015)

i would only sit the plant in water if there are new roots active to grow into this environment. you would also want to avoid stagnant conditions in the root zone with the sitting water with frequent changes. i'm not an expert phrag grower, though. i do just ok enough that i was brave enough to try a PK.


----------



## Rick (Mar 28, 2015)

I went to Manola's (from Peruflora) talk on Pk insitu and culture program.

In the wild it rains every day and there is constantly water at the roots for the population he's working with.

The water quality at the rhizosphere was pretty much devoid of NPK, but very similar to tap water in most parts of the US. I posted the major cation/anion concentrations once on a different thread, but I'll try to dig it out again for this thread.


----------



## Rick (Mar 28, 2015)

OK water at the roots (this is "dry season" which means it only rains once a day instead of continuously for days on end).

Calcium = 45.6ppm
Magnesium = 3.96ppm
Potassium = 0.39ppm
sodium = 1.2ppm

bicarbonate = 127ppm (alkalinity = 104ppm as CaCO3)
sulfate = 7.68ppm
chloride = 14.2ppm

Conductivity was 0.25 dS/m (I think that's 250uS/cm for most of us).

Nitrate was listed at detection limit of 0.39ppm (so was probably less than that).

Wet season is probably more dilute than this.

This is like a basic tap water of hardness 129ppm as CaCO3

For reference Nashville tap water has a hardness of 80-100ppm with a conductivity of 250 uS/cm.

I have a few pK that came from Glenn Decker. (I received one as a 9" seedling) I find them very fast easy growers with unlimited water and extremely light/frequent feeding. If you pile on the K they will stunt and become Ca deficient (no matter how much oystershell you put in the pot).

I also have in situ leaf tissue concentrations. These are surprisingly low N content plants and the Ca content is several times higher than K in the leaves.


----------



## [email protected] (Mar 28, 2015)

Thank you guys ! You have been very helpful indeed! Thanks & thanks again. I willNOT however let my sit on water but instead will water every day. My mineral water (Volvic in Paris) should be fine and I grow on a northeast bay window with supplemental artificial light. So far so good. I'd love to see more pictures of flowers here though, especially of the widely distributed (Laura x Ann) from Glen Decker! Cheers !


----------



## Bjorn (Mar 29, 2015)

Rick, what about the sodium and chloride in particular? I have seen similar in leaf analyses, and still, no fertliser contain chloride and sodium, at least not sodium, the chloride is normally there from other ingredients
This discepancy is normally explained with 'its there anyhow' and that is right, but when chloride gets one of the major as in this case......just my twocents


----------



## Rick (Mar 29, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Rick, what about the sodium and chloride in particular? I have seen similar in leaf analyses, and still, no fertliser contain chloride and sodium, at least not sodium, the chloride is normally there from other ingredients
> This discepancy is normally explained with 'its there anyhow' and that is right, but when chloride gets one of the major as in this case......just my twocents



Sodium chloride (or sulfate) in environment is more ubiquitous than potassium nitrate. It's frequently more available than magnesium salts. 

I think one reason you don't see it in fert mixes is because (outside of hobby orchid growers) the majority of users mix fertilizers in regular surface or well waters that have plenty of these ions already in it. RO water is very expensive to produce at commercial scale, so ferts with NaCl added are pretty rare.

I haven't seen anything in the physiological literature on the role of chloride, and other than osmotic balance I haven't seen anything special for sodium.

From the ion toxicity work I do with aquatic organisms, Na is not particularly bioactive (certainly compared to K and Mg). Chloride is generally more toxic than sulfate, but not as toxic as bicarbonate ion. But a "sweet spot" has been demonstrated for combinations of sulfate and chloride. The two working together somehow in the organism.....and Calcium mediating the toxicity of both chloride and sulfate.

The take home point may be to not use strict RO water as irrigation water for you plants, and not add unnatural amounts of NPK to your irrigation water. 

Our tox lab "reconstitutes" all kinds of surface and well waters for testing every day. Our basic EPA moderately hard formula which we use as the dilution and control water for all our tests is reconstituted with the 7 major cations/anions in RO water. (This only needs 3-4 different salts to accomplish). This assures that we don't have random toxicants coming in from uncontrolled sources.

This appears what you are suggesting we do with orchid fertilizer.:wink:

But I think I'm getting too old to do this for my hobby when I can just black box a bit of well water into my irrigation water


----------



## Bjorn (Mar 29, 2015)

You're right, at least in agriculture use of eg potassium chloride is common as potassium fertiliser and sodium is everywhere. I fully agree on the sugesstion to use normal(means low amounts,right?) fertiliser levels with some well/surface water as well. I use rain and surface water (from a bog ) and probably get whatever sodium I need, but just had this thought that people using RO only might have a deficiency.


----------



## Rick (Mar 29, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> but just had this thought that people using RO only might have a deficiency.


:wink: There's always a good chance you are correct on this Bjorn.

I started out as a strict RO user, and while still on my old "weakly, weekly" campaign with MSU fert I noticed a bump in culture when I started cutting in some of my well water.

A baby step compared to cutting out most of the K, but noticeable. Problem is I don't know if I can attribute to adding back in some sodium or silicates or sulfates or chlorides (or all of the above):sob:

I would guess that the above mineral additions are getting to some fine tuning at this point, but I might let someone else take up the torch for those items. Did you already get bored with the silicate angle??


----------



## Stone (Mar 30, 2015)

Rick said:


> > If you pile on the K they will stunt and become Ca deficient (no matter how much oystershell you put in the pot).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## naoki (Mar 30, 2015)

Mike, I remember that there were a couple papers showed some trends in negative correlation between K and Ca from leaf analyses, which Rick pointed out. So there is a possibility, but we don't know the causal relationship, though. But I'm guessing that you wanted to see the data from Phrag.

It is an interesting point about the fertilization when the plant isn't growing. The relationship between the root growth and lack of N is observed frequently.

Bjorn, here is a bit of info from the time when I looked into this info (mostly from Marschner's). There are some plants which accumulate Na in leaves (called natrophiles), but I don't know if there is any orchids which does this. Na is essential for some halophyte (plants growing in brackish area), and beneficial for some.
1. Relatively recently, it's been shown that Na can enhance C4 plants growth (but no orchids are C4).
2. Also if K is limited, some plants (not all plants) can substitute K with Na. So in these plants, leaf analysis can show negative correlation between K and Na. But this doesn't mean that K will cause Na deficiency.
3. Then it was shown that some plants supplied with Na can close the stomata quicker than plants with only K. K is important in controlling the stomata. This indicates that Na could be beneficial in the environment where there is irregular rain fall (and plants experience sudden drought). So there is a possibility that Na could be beneficial for some epiphytes. It would be interesting to see if there is any research about Na and orchids.


----------



## gonewild (Mar 30, 2015)

naoki said:


> It is an interesting point about the fertilization when the plant isn't growing. The relationship between the root growth and lack of N is observed frequently.



Just to continue on your comment.... I disagree with the idea that plants only need nutrients when they are growing or when the roots are actively growing. The only time this is true is when the plant is truly in or entering a stage of true dormancy.
If nutrients are available in correct ratios and amounts and environmental conditions such as temperature and light are adequate the plant will grow.
You may not be able to see it getting bigger but metabolism is active and it is growing. During periods when the light is too low and temps are too low plants may be stalled in growth and appear to be not growing but the moment the light comes on and temp rises above the minimum they will grow. Don't get caught at this moment with no food available. Supplying nutrients when a plant is not visibly growing does no harm but on the contrary if you have withheld nutrients and the sun comes out the plant cant grow.

A root does not have to have an active growing tip to take in nutrients so thinking the plant does not need fertilizer when there is no active root growth is wrong. Even when the plant has no live roots it can still benefit from nutrients absorbed through the foliage and stem, also the stubs of old roots can have active cells.

Seems logical that when a plant is struggling to recover from root loss that application of additional nutrients will make nutrient access easier.


----------



## Stone (Mar 30, 2015)

gonewild said:


> > A root does not have to have an active growing tip to take in nutrients so thinking the plant does not need fertilizer when there is no active root growth is wrong. Even when the plant has no live roots it can still benefit from nutrients absorbed through the foliage and stem, also the stubs of old roots can have active cells.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## gonewild (Mar 30, 2015)

Stone said:


> gonewild said:
> 
> 
> > Not correct. Calcium, Iron and probably various other nutrients are taken up at or just behind the active growing root tip. Feeding the plant when they are not present is the good way of inducing imbalances.
> ...


----------



## naoki (Mar 31, 2015)

Lance, as you said, there could be the other side to it. But I think that it is an interesting idea to "hack" the plant physiology. Plants have highly-tuned (but could be imperfect), internal programs, and we can manipulate these programs in some degrees. So this is a part of the reasons that natural data could be a good start point, but imitating the natural condition may not be the ultimate method in horticulture which uses artificial environment in my opinion.

In addition to the overall C assimilation rate, one of the program is how plant allocate the resources within a plant body. By limiting the nutrients and water, it will hack the program so the plants reallocate more resources toward roots (increased root:shoot ratio). Similar to how we use phytohormones to play with plant physiology. I think that it is probably case by case (and your logic may be more appropriate for some cases), but it is an interesting thing to try out to kick start these sleepers.

Mike, with other major nutrients, I thought that there are papers showing that pretty old roots of orchids can absorb nutrients at a little bit reduced rate (I vaguely remember that they used isotopically marked minerals to test this). Some Cattleya study I believe.

Another thing to consider is that water absorption is a passive process (mostly driven by transpiration), but most nutrient uptake by root is active (costs energy).


----------



## Stone (Mar 31, 2015)

gonewild said:


> > Where is the published research for this on orchid roots?
> 
> 
> 
> Still unpublished sitting someones draw.


----------



## Stone (Mar 31, 2015)

naoki said:


> > but imitating the natural condition may not be the ultimate method in horticulture which uses artificial environment in my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## gonewild (Mar 31, 2015)

Stone said:


> Yes I have no doubt that they can still take up NPK with old root back from the tip. But there will eventually be an imbalance with say....I don't know....Calcium and potassium? :evil:



There should not be an imbalance by applying nutrients when roots have reduced capacity because at some point the roots would start to grow again and pick up the missing nutrients. If the nutrients are not in the root zone because the grower has with held them that is when the imbalance can occur.


----------



## gonewild (Mar 31, 2015)

Stone said:


> gonewild said:
> 
> 
> > Still unpublished sitting someones draw.
> ...


----------



## Stone (Apr 1, 2015)

naoki said:


> > Mike, I remember that there were a couple papers showed some trends in negative correlation between K and Ca from leaf analyses, which Rick pointed out. So there is a possibility, but we don't know the causal relationship, though.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Rick (Apr 4, 2015)

Stone said:


> What would you call ''piling''on the K.
> 
> My kovachii has been recieving about 25 to 30 ppm K (at each watering) and similar N. Is that piling?



Well you are applying N and K at roughly 50X more than what they see in the wild (and growing better than in GH conditions BTW). So "piling" and "good growth" is in the eye of the beholder. I apply N at ~5 and K<1ppm daily and find Pk as fast growing as "easy" phrags like pearcei and longifolium. I seem to recall in the early years of Pk that seedlings of these guys were slow and died like flies on the typical balanced fert regime.



Stone said:


> Ca deficiency often first manifests as browning root tips followed by root death. But I don't see that either. So what does the Ca deficiecy you speak of do?


By the time you are seeing black leaf tips and root tip burn you've already stunted the plant. Slow -stunted growth, susceptibility to disease come before leaf tip burn and root rot.

Part of Manola's talk espoused how the present culture regime that they used produced plants that flowered on growths almost 1/2 the size of their parents. However, he felt this was a benefit in producing "compact" Pks. Some people are pretty happy with plants like these, but then complain about short life span, erwinia rots, and then go back to all the temperature, light, and humidity games to explain the issues.

We all revert to the Mother Nature fantasies for light/temp/humidity when it doesn't work, and I just pointed out Mother Natures chemical regime supporting Pk in the wild. It's certainly up to you if you want to do something not eco-relevant like many of us did for years with bad results, but you can't claim that what you are doing is either natural or superior to what others are doing using a lot less mineral supplementation on their plants.


----------



## Rick (Apr 5, 2015)

I made a table of available leaf tissue data since Stone brought up Xavier's 2008 post with some wild paph data. Note that the potassium discussions didn't start till 2010 - 20111. This table includes leaf tissue data on in situ PK and the Paph leaf tissue sufficiency standards from University of Hawaii (which is what you get if you "pile on" nitrate and potassium via balanced fertilizer application. 





Note that wild plants should be dead from N and K deficiency compared to what U of H considers normal tissue concentrations of these nutrients.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 5, 2015)

Based on the chart it looks like the Uni is under supplying Calcium or oversupplying everything else.


----------



## Rick (Apr 5, 2015)

gonewild said:


> Based on the chart it looks like the Uni is under supplying Calcium or oversupplying everything else.



Keep in mind that the K ranges are inverse to Ca and Mg when you look at individual plant data (i.e the higher the K the lower the Ca/Mg).

So supplying more Ca doesn't put it into the plant if the K is high. (Remember the Cornell data??).

Another point of note is the effect of ammonium as opposed to nitrate. Once again there are references in the Cornell work and others that ammonium (which is a potent cation) is antagonistic to K, Ca, Mg. It seems to be the only cation that effectively blocks K into plants. Nitrate (an anion) does not do this, so as Mike pointed out that Roth's (Xavier's) nitrogen source is ammonium dependent, the difference in leaf tissue NPKCaMg of his cultivated paphs is most likely different than the UH plants (or MSU plants) due to the use of ammonium /urea rather than some unknown natural self K/Ca regulating feature of the plants.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 5, 2015)

Rick said:


> Keep in mind that the K ranges are inverse to Ca and Mg when you look at individual plant data (i.e the higher the K the lower the Ca/Mg).
> 
> So supplying more Ca doesn't put it into the plant if the K is high. (Remember the Cornell data??).



I was avoiding suggesting lowering K.



> Another point of note is the effect of ammonium as opposed to nitrate. Once again there are references in the Cornell work and others that ammonium (which is a potent cation) is antagonistic to K, Ca, Mg. It seems to be the only cation that effectively blocks K into plants. Nitrate (an anion) does not do this, so as Mike pointed out that Roth's (Xavier's) nitrogen source is ammonium dependent, the difference in leaf tissue NPKCaMg of his cultivated paphs is most likely different than the UH plants (or MSU plants) due to the use of ammonium /urea rather than some unknown natural self K/Ca regulating feature of the plants.



That explains to me why I have never liked the results of UREA based fertilizers and why I keep the Ammonia lower than the Nitrate. Doing so will allow using less K which results in higher Ca/Mg. You get more for less.


----------



## ALToronto (Apr 5, 2015)

This may also explain why my living walls do so well. I use ammonia based 25-10-10 with no additional Ca or Mg. The walls provide plenty of Ca, I add a pinch of Epsom salts every time I water, and the ammonia prevents the plants from overdosing on anything other than N. About 10-15 ppm N every day seems to do the trick. The only plants that do less well are the ones in drier areas, and that's an easy fix if I bothered to do it.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 5, 2015)

ALToronto said:


> This may also explain why my living walls do so well. I use ammonia based 25-10-10 with no additional Ca or Mg. The walls provide plenty of Ca, I add a pinch of Epsom salts every time I water, and the ammonia prevents the plants from overdosing on anything other than N. About 10-15 ppm N every day seems to do the trick. The only plants that do less well are the ones in drier areas, and that's an easy fix if I bothered to do it.



That makes sense.


----------



## Rick (Apr 5, 2015)

Bjorn said:


> Rick, what about the sodium and chloride in particular? I have seen similar in leaf analyses, and still, no fertliser contain chloride and sodium, at least not sodium, the chloride is normally there from other ingredients
> This discepancy is normally explained with 'its there anyhow' and that is right, but when chloride gets one of the major as in this case......just my twocents



Check this out Bjorn
http://www.spectrumanalytic.com/support/library/ff/Cl_Basics.htm

Basically infers antagonism amongst anions (Nitrate, Phosphate, Chloride, Sulfate)

And note the picture of the chloride deficient plant.

This could go back to the potential for sclerosis when calcium nitrate is used in RO as the sole source of N, and Ca, and a better reason why epsom salts (magnesium SULFATE) greens things up in the presence of excess nitrate.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 5, 2015)

Rick said:


> Check this out Bjorn
> http://www.spectrumanalytic.com/support/library/ff/Cl_Basics.htm
> 
> Basically infers antagonism amongst anions (Nitrate, Phosphate, Chloride, Sulfate)
> ...



That makes one think then adding a little sodium chloride to ro water to get the chloride might be a good idea. But with 30ppm of chlorides you get something like 20ppm sodium. What good or bad effect does sodium have? More bad than good and a high risk....
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC139373/


----------



## Rick (Apr 5, 2015)

gonewild said:


> That makes one think then adding a little sodium chloride to ro water to get the chloride might be a good idea. But with 30ppm of chlorides you get something like 20ppm sodium. What good or bad effect does sodium have? More bad than good and a high risk....
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC139373/



Sodium is pretty benign (its a lot more common and less bioreactive than potassium) and we used to throw 100ppm of K on our plants all the timeoke:

However, we could work it from the opposite direction (use proportionately less nitrate), and/or mix and match other anions (like more sulfate from gypsum or Epsom salt, or phosphate from bone meal i.e. calcium phosphate).

I generally don't recommend adding more of anything just to counteract too much of something else. Go for eco-relevance and get rid of the excess before adding more crap to the pile.


----------



## gonewild (Apr 5, 2015)

Some old habits die hard, I won't be adding any sodium and I will continue to remove it whenever possible. But a lot of potassium is no longer welcome at my house, it was an old habit.


----------



## Stone (Apr 6, 2015)

Rick said:


> I made a table of available leaf tissue data since Stone brought up Xavier's 2008 post with some wild paph data. Note that the potassium discussions didn't start till 2010 - 20111. This table includes leaf tissue data on in situ PK and the Paph leaf tissue sufficiency standards from University of Hawaii (which is what you get if you "pile on" nitrate and potassium via balanced fertilizer application.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not sure what your trying to say here. From this data, kovachii seems to either have low K or high soluble Ca available or both. However, remember that K is extremely mobile (probably the most) Ca is extremely immobile. Add lots of rainfall/water into that habitat, and you would expect these kind of figures. No doubt besseae would be similar even though it comes from granite.

The ''chlorotic'' mastersianum has less Ca AND less K than the ''wild'' masterianum. I presume this would be caused by higher ammonuim supplementaion given in cultivation. Probably a good case for bringing in more nitrates. In this case though K obviously is not causing a problem lowering Ca and Mg levels. More likely NH4 is.

With all the plants (cultivated and wild and apart from kovachii), the difference in the concentrations of K and Ca in the leaf tissue is statistically insignificant. More proof that there is no need to drastically lower K to keep Ca levels where you want them. More proof that in the habitat (apart from kovachii MAYBE), the orchids are getting similar N/K ratios that we (I) give them arriving at their roots over a year.

If you want to increase the Ca concentration in the leaf, increase your nitrate/ammonium ratio to 3 to1 (what I'm doing). Of course this will also increase K and Mg levels in the leaf as well. Which is absolutlely fine with me.

None of this data shows me that varying Ca leaf concentrations makes the slightest bit of difference in plant performace.
And I can only judge this by the fact that although my orchids get plenty of potassium I see no evidence of sudden death or lack of root growth or erwinia or whatever. 
Since I have made my NO3/NH4 ratio 3 or 4 to 1 I have seen improved growth size and leaf colour (less chlorosis) in the older leaves. I put this down to better Mg absorption. But the K and Ca would also be up.


----------



## Stone (Apr 6, 2015)

Rick said:


> > Keep in mind that the K ranges are inverse to Ca and Mg when you look at individual plant data (i.e the higher the K the lower the Ca/Mg).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## gonewild (Apr 6, 2015)

Stone said:


> I'm not sure what your trying to say here. From this data, kovachii seems to either have low K or high soluble Ca available or both. However, remember that K is extremely mobile (probably the most) Ca is extremely immobile. Add lots of rainfall/water into that habitat, and you would expect these kind of figures. No doubt besseae would be similar even though it comes from granite.



besseae does not come from granite. It comes from red and white sandstone. I'm not sure if any Peruvian Phrags grow on granite.


----------



## Stone (Apr 6, 2015)

gonewild said:


> besseae does not come from granite. It comes from red and white sandstone. I'm not sure if any Peruvian Phrags grow on granite.



My mistake


----------



## Rick (Apr 7, 2015)

Stone said:


> Rick said:
> 
> 
> > Exactly. So why is K the problem? Too much ammonium is the ''problem'' here. There is no evidence that high tissue K causes a problem if it is balanced by high tissue Ca and Mg. (which you get if you lower NH4)
> ...


----------



## Rick (Apr 8, 2015)

Since this is a thread on PK culture I wasn't going to bring this up til Mike posted Xavier's 2008 thread.


To Quote:
"I had plants cultivated for a while, and "new" plants for mastersianum. The latter invariable are much healthier than the former ones as a rule. Mastersianum in the wild has very dark green, shiny leaves, and is a very fast grower. In cultivation the plants tends to become more on the yellowish side, and most die after some years of being chlorotic and necrotic. Only a very few mastersianum in the world survive more than 5 years in cultivation, one has to be realistic..."

My mastersianum are thriving almost 6 years out of flask, and this one, and one of its sibs, are starting to spike again (even after 3 years of an imbalanced and deficient diet).
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33806&highlight=mastersianum

In 2008 Xavier had similar comments on Paph emersonii, But here's my plant bigger than ever in 2015, even after 3 years of an imbalanced and deficient diet. 
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36652&highlight=emersonii


----------



## Stone (Apr 8, 2015)

Rick said:


> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > > Well you haven't figured out why my results (and many others) improved dramatically after reducing the K in our feed.
> ...


----------



## Stone (Apr 8, 2015)

Rick said:


> Since this is a thread on PK culture I wasn't going to bring this up til Mike posted Xavier's 2008 thread.
> 
> 
> To Quote:
> ...



Love those plants. There is no denying that you have their culture down and that they are doing well on your regime, but I can show you plenty of orchids which are considered difficult to grow as well (I have those paph species but they are very small) and they do not get your low K regime at all. So what does that tell us?


----------

