# Wild Orchids - Roots and Nutrition



## gonewild (Jul 14, 2013)

Looking at how wild orchid roots are associated with what the grow in.
How do the roots obtain nutrients?

Epidendrum growing in moss


----------



## Ray (Jul 14, 2013)

Cascading rainfall, decomposition of the flora around it.

Pretty substantial proof of a meager supply, to my mind.


----------



## Rick (Jul 14, 2013)

Do you have a pic of the whole plant Lance?

It seems a pretty common notion that insitu plants are starving and decrepit. Not realizing their full potential of living in a GH with weekly feedings of 100ppm N


----------



## gonewild (Jul 14, 2013)

Ray said:


> Cascading rainfall, decomposition of the flora around it.
> 
> Pretty substantial proof of a meager supply, to my mind.



Yes the supply looks to be very limited.

These plants have no canopy cover that could leach minerals for them.

This moss is deep and very loose inside. Most of the roots pass through air space and are not in contact with the moss as much as you might think. It appears that all the nutrients must come from the moss. maybe some from the rock under the moss but most roots are in the moss. I have to dig deeper to have a better look.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 14, 2013)

Rick said:


> Do you have a pic of the whole plant Lance?
> 
> It seems a pretty common notion that insitu plants are starving and decrepit. Not realizing their full potential of living in a GH with weekly feedings of 100ppm N



Yes I have more pics to post but am without electricity today. I only had a few minutes late in the day to look at these plants and snap a few pics. i will be looking closer and taking better pictures.

I the past I never really paid attention to where the nutrients might come from. This time looking at what is above the plants it seems that there is very little through fall water hitting the roots. 

Plants insitu are certainly not starving but at the same time they certainly are not a lush green color. yellow green foliage is the norm.
I doubt that rainfall brings much in the way of ppms

I have not had a chance to test water within the root zone but small streams below usually measure less than 30ppm, and these are running over mud and rock that lies below the orchids.

More pics and observations to follow....


----------



## SlipperFan (Jul 14, 2013)

Keep researching, Lance. This is interesting. The more in situ photos I see, the more I notice the association with moss.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 14, 2013)

SlipperFan said:


> Keep researching, Lance. This is interesting. The more in situ photos I see, the more I notice the association with moss.



That is what I am seeing also. Roots almost always have some moss. And the moss is not like sphagnum moss. It could be that moss plays a major role for nutrients. I'll get more serious about what I find and will keep posting in this thread. These pics were just a quick trip (5 minutes to take the pics) to the lower elevation of the orchid zone here.


----------



## paphioboy (Jul 14, 2013)

Source of nutrients: Bird poop!


----------



## gonewild (Jul 14, 2013)

Here are some area shots of the Epidendrum location.
Pay attention to the other plants and vegetation and note the color of the foliage, it is not dark lush green.


----------



## NYEric (Jul 14, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Yes I have more pics to post but am without electricity today.More pics and observations to follow....


Thanks. If you own the place maybe you can get solar panels and batteries?


----------



## goldenrose (Jul 14, 2013)

feeding off fungi for nutrients???


----------



## gonewild (Jul 14, 2013)

goldenrose said:


> feeding off fungi for nutrients???



Or maybe algae
or lichens?


----------



## Trithor (Jul 15, 2013)

NYEric said:


> Thanks. If you own the place maybe you can get solar panels and batteries?



:rollhappy:

That is a great series of in-situ photos, thank you. The close association with lichen is interesting. I had a Madagascar peppercorn tree in my garden which I had planted with a variety of orchids. They always grew much better where the bark had a lot of lichen. So much so that I stopped trying to establish orchids where lichen was not present. I could never figure out if it was just that they appreciated similar microclimate/position or of it was something more?


----------



## Stone (Jul 15, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Looking at how wild orchid roots are associated with what the grow in.
> How do the roots obtain nutrients?
> 
> Epidendrum growing in moss



Oh you just put that there.
(very nice pics Lance!)
Notice the roots going down to find the humus layer where all the goodies are? thats when it will really take off and flower.


----------



## Secundino (Jul 15, 2013)

Nope. The mayor apport of nutrients for tropical epiphytes is dust. The epiphytes alltogether act like a most effective sponge and filter with a high retention capacity. Beside this they provide shadow, high moisture and extra cooling for a great part of the orchid roots. 

Using lichens as potting medium does not work, at least with the _Usnea_ sp. we know over here. Many - including me - have tried, but the lichens decompose very quickly if packed in a pot and make an ugly, bad smelling slime after a short time. Orchid roots don't like that at all, but love to grow under the protection of lichens.


----------



## paphioboy (Jul 15, 2013)

I personally believe that most wild orchids (the epiphytes, at least) are more efficient in extracting nutrients than we expect and believe.. Tell me, where do these Doritis pulcherrima get their nutrients from, other than the occasional dead leaf which collects among the roots?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ObDFi2KqQK4/TqHhAx8LKkI/AAAAAAAACEs/uUWyofDJEiE/s1600/P1320045.JPG

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rhSIHqClZv4/TqHfi-atSPI/AAAAAAAACEE/TM57CQ8y2M8/s1600/P1320124.JPG

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4gWgBXJeORY/TqHf0svyYOI/AAAAAAAACEQ/lvrS2t-RL_E/s1600/P1320122.JPG


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

Trithor said:


> :rollhappy:
> 
> That is a great series of in-situ photos, thank you. The close association with lichen is interesting. I had a Madagascar peppercorn tree in my garden which I had planted with a variety of orchids. They always grew much better where the bark had a lot of lichen. So much so that I stopped trying to establish orchids where lichen was not present. I could never figure out if it was just that they appreciated similar microclimate/position or of it was something more?



Does the peppercorm tree naturally support orchids in the wild?


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

Stone said:


> Oh you just put that there.
> (very nice pics Lance!)
> Notice the roots going down to find the humus layer where all the goodies are? thats when it will really take off and flower.



The roots actually go out horizontally through the moss. they don't head quickly downward as if going for the bottom. Although there are roots down where the rock is and where there is some humus most roots are high in the moss. I have to look more closely at the entire root system.
I don't want to assume that the roots are getting nutrients only from humus, there must be another source.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

Secundino said:


> Nope. The mayor apport of nutrients for tropical epiphytes is dust. The epiphytes alltogether act like a most effective sponge and filter with a high retention capacity. Beside this they provide shadow, high moisture and extra cooling for a great part of the orchid roots.



Possibly and that has been a standard assumption. But where does the dust come from in the wet tropical forest? When it rains everyday and nothing is dry to to produce "dust" and this wet time is when the plants would have the highest nutrient demand?



> Using lichens as potting medium does not work, at least with the _Usnea_ sp. we know over here. Many - including me - have tried, but the lichens decompose very quickly if packed in a pot and make an ugly, bad smelling slime after a short time. Orchid roots don't like that at all, but love to grow under the protection of lichens.



I'm not suggesting lichens are a potting or rooting media. Healthy growing lichens are know to secret various chemicals so my question is... could orchid plants use the secreted chemicals from lichens as a source for nutrients? So do orchid roots love to grow under lichens for protection or because there are nutrients present?


----------



## JeanLux (Jul 15, 2013)

paphioboy said:


> I personally believe that most wild orchids (the epiphytes, at least) are more efficient in extracting nutrients than we expect and believe.. Tell me, where do these Doritis pulcherrima get their nutrients from, other than the occasional dead leaf which collects among the roots?
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ObDFi2KqQK4/TqHhAx8LKkI/AAAAAAAACEs/uUWyofDJEiE/s1600/P1320045.JPG
> 
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rhSIHqClZv4/TqHfi-atSPI/AAAAAAAACEE/TM57CQ8y2M8/s1600/P1320124.JPG
> ...



impressive pics too, thanks Li!!!! Jean


----------



## JeanLux (Jul 15, 2013)

Trithor said:


> :rollhappy:
> 
> --. *I had *a Madagascar peppercorn tree in my garden which I had planted with a variety of orchids. They always grew much better where the bark had a lot of lichen. So much so that I stopped trying to establish orchids where lichen was not present. I could never figure out if it was just that they appreciated similar microclimate/position or of it was something more?



Still active? Some pics would be 'gold' !! Jean


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

Here are a couple plants growing in one specific tree species. The trees are not tall and have a sparse canopy that allows a lot of direct sun on the orchids. There are a lot of orchids on this tree species but none growing on other tree species in the same plot.

The bark of this tree is very smooth and offern little chance for leaves of other organic matter to accumulate from above. The limb structure does not allow for rain water to trun down a trunk to the orchid plants. All water must come from direct rainfall and dew.

Every where an orchid grows so does moss and lichens.
it is obvious that this plant is in a perfect environment nutrient wise or it would not be growing and flowering and producing seed. Also note it is not dark green.







Another orchid species in the same tree. Note here the roots are the host for a type of moss, at least I think it is a moss.





Close up of above roots


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

paphioboy said:


> I personally believe that most wild orchids (the epiphytes, at least) are more efficient in extracting nutrients than we expect and believe.. Tell me, where do these Doritis pulcherrima get their nutrients from, other than the occasional dead leaf which collects among the roots?



Look closely at the surface of the rock..... it looks to be covered in lichens.


----------



## Trithor (Jul 15, 2013)

As I said earlier, I noticed that orchids and lichens kind of go together. The question is, is it as a result of a similar requirement for microclimate, or is there some kind of symbiotic benefit. Old peppercorn trees in Madagascar are covered in lichen and a variety of orchids as well. This was my original logic behind using it as a host tree in my garden in South Africa (Sorry Jean, I have no chance of taking any photographs of the tree, as I cut it down some years back due to the mess it made and the invasive root structure)
In Magoebaskloof, (a wonderful low mountain area in the Eastern part of Northern South Africa) the easiest way to find orchids in the forested areas is to look for lichen covered branches. Plenty lichen = plenty orchids


----------



## Secundino (Jul 15, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Possibly and that has been a standard assumption. But where does the dust come from in the wet tropical forest? When it rains everyday and nothing is dry to to produce "dust" and this wet time is when the plants would have the highest nutrient demand



Don't know if you are kidding??

Obviously the dust comes from very far away. Just google scientific papers and find the two mayor known sources today: Taklamakan desert and the former Lake Chad. You will also find that most red floods caused in the Caribean are due to iron content of saharian dust. This ones - the saharian dust - we know only too well at Canary Islands; we suffer them a few times a year 'undiluted'. And believe me: it's not what you would call 'household dust'.

I lived a 'very hot' time of my life in Piauí, Brazil. (Just another example of a dust source 'nearer' to you, gonewild.) There also is plenty of dust generated every year (as generally is in desert and semidesert areas). Add to this the incredible amount of burnings, that every year comes to a point of closing airports, and you have the sources - both natural and manmade - for regular rainfall in the tropics (cristalization agents) and regular 'week daily' feeding that compenses and exceeds the proposed washing-out effects of haivy rainfalls. 

The only thing I didn't find written down up to now is the synergistic effect I assume must be there where epiphytes appear: first lichens, second mosses, third ferns. I do believe that there must be these effects, because a completely clean branch of a tree (sometimes complete trees, depending on species/smoothness of bark) can be seen beside branches covered with luxuriant life. _If_ this first epiphytes appear, there is nothing stopping it.

\Trithor,
I believe the epiphytes _create_ a microclimate and share it, similar to the benefits of the canopy of a forest: the ecosystem creates the microclimate it needs. There is a quite consistent theory that the southern border of the Amazon forests are artificial, evolving from little isolated 'islands' of cultivated parcels (a system we would now call a kind of shifting permaculture) that would be left to their own evolution after a few years growing over the years to form forest like structures until merging into the nearby pre-existing forests. The forest not only creates internally the microclimate it needs but also helps to the local climate (that is. rainfall) as well. I think there is an analogy: The epiphyte community cannot create rain but is responsible for an increased 'horizontal rainfall' everytime clouds and fogs and dews reach the branches. That works mostly in montane forests, but not only. In semidesert forests and bushes the dews are more intense where lichens and mosses cover the bark of treebranches. The lichens and mosses kind of capture the moisture that otherwise would 'only' be a thin film of moisture. This 'horizontal rainfall' as it is called over here sometime more than doubles the 'official' rainfall meassured at weather-stations.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

Looking into what nutrients lichens might provide for orchids I found this paper.. 

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/chem/2011/420673/abs/

It seems at least one species of lichen is nutrient rich based on the analysis in the report. About everything an orchid needs except Nitrogen.
This table is copied from the paper..

Table 2. Mineral composition of E. cirrhatum
Element Quantity, ppm
Phosphorus (P) 24.67±0.57
Potassium (K) 1542±1.52
Magnesium (Mg) 1506±1.15
Calcium (Ca) 5191±1.00
Iron (Fe) 893.7±1.10
Zinc (Zn) 66.3±0.60
Manganese (Mn) 53.13±0.32
Copper (Cu) 5.83±0.35


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

Secundino said:


> Don't know if you are kidding??
> 
> Obviously the dust comes from very far away. Just google scientific papers and find the two mayor known sources today: Taklamakan desert and the former Lake Chad. You will also find that most red floods caused in the Caribean are due to iron content of saharian dust. This ones - the saharian dust - we know only too well at Canary Islands; we suffer them a few times a year 'undiluted'. And believe me: it's not what you would call 'household dust'.



I'm not kidding.
I'm also not discounting that dust does carry nutrients. But I do not believe dust is the primary source for nutrients in tropical forests. 
Orchid roots systems are not evolved to be dust filters.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 15, 2013)

I will suggest that orchid roots may be extracting nutrients from the bark of the trees they grow on.

This would explain why some tree species contain orchids and other don't. I like this idea better than the usual idea that the trees that don't grow epyphytes have toxins in their bark. The trees that have orchids have the proper nutrients in their bark.

When tree bark gets wet minerals dissolve out of it. If the water is from rain the minerals in the water flow down to the ground. possibly this flow through runs over orchid roots to provide nutrients. But I don't think this is how orchids get most of their nutrients. 
I think the moisture to dissolve the nutrients comes at night as dew. Every night here in the Andean rainforest the humidity approaches 100%. All foliage and limbs and tree trunks are wet from condensation. This happens every night even during the dry season. 
Orchid roots spread out on the tree limbs and are most often tightly attached in contact with the tree bark. The nightly dew wets the bark and the roots, the water on the bark surface dissolves nutrients from the bark and the orchid roots absorb the nutrient enriched moisture (dew).

Orchid roots may get the same benefit from contact with lichens on rocks or from lichen growing directly on the orchid roots.

I don't think orchids rely solely on decaying vegetation for a nutrient supply, too many grow extensive root systems that don't trap detritus.

These are just my thoughts of the day.


----------



## Stone (Jul 15, 2013)

Dust must be one source, Many tons of it from Africa ends up in the Amazon each year. Remember also that rain droplets form around dust particles. But I think a major source of nutrients for epiphyes comes from exudations or leaching from the leaves of trees. Mosses and lichens also disolve rock and bark with acids which release nutrients. Another main source must surely be bacteria and fungi which release nutrients as they die. Add to this mychorriza which can effectivly increase the mass of a root system many times and you have enough nutrients for the orchid.


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Jul 15, 2013)

Could there also be N-fixing cyanophytes in the moss and lichens?


----------



## Secundino (Jul 16, 2013)

Stone said:


> Another main source must surely be bacteria and fungi which release nutrients as they die. Add to this mychorriza which can effectivly increase the mass of a root system many times and you have enough nutrients for the orchid.



Yes, I forgot about the micorrhiza. This fungal relation to (as far as we know now) almost all plants makes the 'sponge' really work. There is nearly no mineralisation occuring outside cells, all that arrives is captured and re-introduced to the living system. This system has NOTHING to do with the feeding we try in a pot based culture...


----------



## gonewild (Jul 16, 2013)

I'm not really concerned about where the nutrients originate from but rather what nutrients are available and in what ratios.
Dust, rain and dead leaves are obvious sources but certainly do not supply the majority of the nutrients.

Leaf litter contains nutrient ratios that have been measured at least in some research papers. Rick used those ratios to formulate the low potassium theory. But leaf litter alone is not necessarily an accurate measure of nutrient ratios orchids growing above the ground have access to. I'm looking for a different source of nutrients since orchid roots are not well designed to forage nutrients from dead leaves. If the major source of nutrients was trapped leaves, dust or other flowing material the orchid roots would have evolved to trap such materials or be more branched and net like. But orchids grow out long thin separated roots. So I want to see what they are getting nutrients from.

Reading the table of nutrient content of lichens how does that compare to the nutrient content of K-lite??? it seems pretty close to me.
Except for Nitrogen which the lichen uses itself, but the nitrogen source for the lichens come from algae and bacteria. Orchids could also access this nitrogen. I don't know much about lichens but reading a little it seems they get all of their nutrients from the atmosphere and convert them to solids within the lichen. If orchid roots are always found in association with lichens then that may be where to look for the exact nutrient ratio to use for fertilizer.

Lichens seem to have very high ppm content of nutrients but how does an orchid root get these nutrients?

Now I need to try to find orchid plants that don't have any lichens near their roots, so far they all do.

Please post any info that might pertain to this subject, my internet connection does not make googleing easy.


----------



## Cheyenne (Jul 16, 2013)

I took a class on mycorrizal fungi and plant relationships. As everyone knows there are many different kinds and they all can perform different functions. Some can be an extention of the root system and increase the root system surface area by a great deal. Some can just adhere to the roots and actually pull elements directly from the atmosphere like nitrogen. I was reading how catasetum in cultivation are heavy feeders but in nature it would seem that they do not have much acces to nutrients. It is because they have a relationship with a special kind of wood eating fungi that breaks down the molecules of wood "eating it" and supplies the plant with what it needs. 

A while ago I was going to start a thread on this but never got around to it. I saw a expeiment done in a forest on mycorrizal fungi. The experiment was to show how vast of an area the fungi covered and that it connected all the plants in the forest so that the small plants and seedlings were able to access the nutrients of the larger plants. Also that plants in the trees were connected to plants on the ground accessing the nutrients of the forest floor. The way they did this experiment was to completely seal a plant on a tree or a single branch with a plastic bag, then in the bag they injected radioactive carbon gas. A day later they took the meter to measure radioactivity around the forest. They found it in small seedlings on the forest floor and in branches of other species and other trees very far away. They hypothesized that the forest was so connected by the fungi that it was almost living as one and plants that do not have access to enough light or nutrients in there area simply share them with the plants that do as a community.


----------



## tomkalina (Jul 16, 2013)

I remember reading somewhere that moss roots secrete very small amounts of amine compounds. Back when we had a number of Phrag vittatum seedlings, we grew them with the com-pots sitting in R/O water. After a few months, a lush carpet of moss grew on the pot surface, and the plant roots were most vigorous directly under the moss. Since the vittatum seedlings were only fed w an extremely dilute (TDS around 15 ppm) urea based fertilizer on a monthly basis, I assume the mosses were also contributing some N through the breakdown of the amine compounds.


----------



## Trithor (Jul 16, 2013)

Now this is getting interesting! The concept of plant inter-connectivity is not revolutionary, it is simply 'right'. Wow, I love it and embrace the concept!


----------



## Stone (Jul 16, 2013)

I just read a paper on epiphyte nutrition and apart from the mycorrhiza, there is aparently a huge population of bacteria living IN the spongy velamen of orchids roots and quite a lot of (very fine) organic material on the roots as well which the bacteria live on and no doubt mineralize and make it available to the orchid.
Also, the acumulated humus which some (many) orchids grow in, such as in tree crotches and between rocks etc. where many of our favorite orchids live, has been found to be richer in nutrients than many top soils in temerate regions! So maybe they are not on the starvation diet that we believe. When you think about it, humus is very fine (colloid sizes) and has a very hich Cation Exchange Capacity ( not like chunks of bark ) so it will be capable of capturing and holding good ammounts of ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium etc. and holding all the anions as well. 
Its pretty obvious to me that to grow orchids well ( like the wild ones in prime positions ) you need to feed them well! I believe that we cant just go by analysis of nutrient through fall etc to determine orchid nutrition. Feeding that way in a modern mix is not enough IMHO.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 16, 2013)

> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > When you think about it, humus is very fine (colloid sizes) and has a very hich Cation Exchange Capacity ( not like chunks of bark ) so it will be capable of capturing and holding good ammounts of ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium etc. and holding all the anions as well.
> ...


----------



## Stone (Jul 17, 2013)

gonewild said:


> > ?
> >
> > So the secret to fertilizing orchids probably lies in how nutrients are applied more than how much is applied.
> 
> ...


----------



## naoki (Jul 17, 2013)

Stone said:


> I just read a paper on epiphyte nutrition and apart from the mycorrhiza, there is aparently a huge population of bacteria living IN the spongy velamen of orchids roots and quite a lot of (very fine) organic material on the roots as well which the bacteria live on and no doubt mineralize and make it available to the orchid.
> Also, the acumulated humus which some (many) orchids grow in, such as in tree crotches and between rocks etc. where many of our favorite orchids live, has been found to be richer in nutrients than many top soils in temerate regions! So maybe they are not on the starvation diet that we believe. When you think about it, humus is very fine (colloid sizes) and has a very hich Cation Exchange Capacity ( not like chunks of bark ) so it will be capable of capturing and holding good ammounts of ammonium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium etc. and holding all the anions as well.
> Its pretty obvious to me that to grow orchids well ( like the wild ones in prime positions ) you need to feed them well! I believe that we cant just go by analysis of nutrient through fall etc to determine orchid nutrition. Feeding that way in a modern mix is not enough IMHO.



Mike, Would you mind of sharing the citation? I have access to most journals, sojournal names, volume, and page is all I want to know. Thanks.


----------



## Stone (Jul 17, 2013)

naoki said:


> Mike, Would you mind of sharing the citation? I have access to most journals, sojournal names, volume, and page is all I want to know. Thanks.


Click on the ''click here''

http://www.oecologiaaustralis.org/ojs/index.php/oa/article/viewPDFInterstitial/281/352


----------



## Rick (Jul 17, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Looking into what nutrients lichens might provide for orchids I found this paper..
> 
> http://www.hindawi.com/journals/chem/2011/420673/abs/
> 
> ...



"rich" is a fairly relative term. These seem like big numbers but for perspective how much moss (by volume) does it take to make a kilogram?

1500 ppm is 1.5grams for every 1000 grams of dry moss (and live moss is 90% water by weight).

And this is total material not the instantaneous bio available material readily available to orchids.

So if the amount of moss in contact with the orchid roots comes to a couple of grams (wet). Then consider multiplying these values by 0.000001 for the amount liberated to a single orchid plant during a rain event.????

You might also want to look at the nitrogen fixing capabilities of lichens and they may pass through a significant amount of fixed atmospheric nitrogen on to the orchid.


----------



## cnycharles (Jul 17, 2013)

The dust (source of nutrients) is in the air, from everywhere. I've seen pics of dust from Africa reaching other continents, and dust from china reaching North America easily (satellite photos)

Okay, didn't see page 2 on my phone before replying... I had read in past that nitrogen ended up in available form from atmosphere when lightning present. A while back, don't have citations
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ray (Jul 18, 2013)

Jumping back to the mechanical side of this a moment - the roots among the moss strands - I think I'll experiment with some synthetics substrates. 

How about a raft of EcoWeb with a cover of Aquamat to provide moisture and nutrient storage, with the roots arranged over the surface. Then, the top of the roots loosely "blanketed" with another layer of the moist fabric?


----------



## gonewild (Jul 18, 2013)

Rick said:


> "rich" is a fairly relative term. These seem like big numbers but for perspective how much moss (by volume) does it take to make a kilogram?



The numbers are big and show that lichens have a substantial amount of nutrients that orchids might access. But that does not mean that orchid roots acquire a large amount at any one time.



> 1500 ppm is 1.5grams for every 1000 grams of dry moss (and live moss is 90% water by weight).
> 
> And this is total material not the instantaneous bio available material readily available to orchids.



Yes and it looks like orchid roots only contact lichens directly in parts of the root system. Certainly lichens are not leaching out all of the minerals they contain.



> So if the amount of moss in contact with the orchid roots comes to a couple of grams (wet). Then consider multiplying these values by 0.000001 for the amount liberated to a single orchid plant during a rain event.????



I don't think the rain events are what releases the nutrients. Sure nutrients leach out with a rain but I think the orchid roots that are in contact with lichen acquire it with dew each night. The nutrients leched out with rainfall are very dilute where dew will have higher nutrient content. But just because the content is higher does not mean the orchid roots are in a large amount of nutrients. An orchid root may be a foot long but only a small part is in contact with a lichen.



> You might also want to look at the nitrogen fixing capabilities of lichens and they may pass through a significant amount of fixed atmospheric nitrogen on to the orchid.



Yep. lichens are fixing nutrients from the atmosphere. That explains where the plants get all the Calcium to grow their mass. They certainly don't get it only from decaying leaves.

The high nutrient content only shows that this could be where orchids acquire nutrients and how much they acquire. But looking at the root system placement as it grows naturally It looks like they only get a small amount but constantly.

The most interesting part of the lichen idea is that it shows that Phosphprous is one of the lowest nutrients present. Assume all the nutrients leach from the lichens equally and this reinforces the K-lite ratios.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 18, 2013)

cnycharles said:


> The dust (source of nutrients) is in the air, from everywhere. I've seen pics of dust from Africa reaching other continents, and dust from china reaching North America easily (satellite photos)
> 
> Okay, didn't see page 2 on my phone before replying... I had read in past that nitrogen ended up in available form from atmosphere when lightning present. A while back, don't have citations
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I think that nitrogen that is fixed by lightning comes down dissolved in rainfall. If that is correct there is not enough to to be the main source for orchids. It adds to the total and maybe the specialized orchid roots make great use of it.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 18, 2013)

Ray said:


> Jumping back to the mechanical side of this a moment - the roots among the moss strands - I think I'll experiment with some synthetics substrates.
> 
> How about a raft of EcoWeb with a cover of Aquamat to provide moisture and nutrient storage, with the roots arranged over the surface. Then, the top of the roots loosely "blanketed" with another layer of the moist fabric?



That comes very close to what is in Nature.
The orchid roots grow through the moss but the moss is not very dense. A very high percentage of the root is surrounded by air space with only sporadic contact with moss. The same is true in orchids growing on the ground in leaf litter. The litter is fluffy and roots grow between the leaves. I found a Lycaste (Ida) growing this way. The roots have hairs that provide separation between the leaf layers. This means that most of the root is surrounded by air even with terrestrial species. I will try to post pics of this soon.

So your idea is good. Use the materials to create a moist humid air space for the roots. But think of a way to have a constant nutrient supply. It may be that the roots need to be constantly moist so support bacteria, fungi, algae and lichens within or on the spongy root. These organisms may be what supply the nutrients.

If the above is correct it is a reason to only use a very weak fertilizer solution, but constantly. Or it may be a reason why some people claim to have great growth without using any fertilizer.


----------



## Rick (Jul 18, 2013)

Yes lichen not moss.

Yes, from a ratio standpoint the Ca to K ratio is pretty typical for leaf tissue ratios in lots of wild epiphytes. 

Dust transfer of Ca, Mg, and K does happen, but the numbers only get (as big as our fert concentrations) when you multiply by hectares and years of area and duration.

Air is 78% N so plants (and lichens) are swimming in it 24/7. So between the lichens (fungi/bluegreen algae colonies) and blue green algae living in mosses, there can be a constant supply of fixed nitrogen getting trickled over to the higher plants in association with them.


----------



## Rick (Jul 18, 2013)

gonewild said:


> I don't think the rain events are what releases the nutrients. Sure nutrients leach out with a rain but I think the orchid roots that are in contact with lichen acquire it with dew each night. The nutrients leched out with rainfall are very dilute where dew will have higher nutrient content. But just because the content is higher does not mean the orchid roots are in a large amount of nutrients. An orchid root may be a foot long but only a small part is in contact with a lichen.



Dew transfer is fine too. You need water as the conduit. I don't think its plausible that there are aerosol transfers of gaseous salts. Just keep track of mass balance and overlay with efficiency. The roots are probably in contact with no more than a few grams of lichen material so even if the plant totally consumed the lichen it was in contact with, then the amount of nutrient is already down 0.0001 times the total concentration of a Kg of dry lichen. 

If you have a good scale handy then try to estimate the total weight of some of these orchids (roots and all). It would also be cool if you could track some growth rates of these plants. At any given time, the NPKCaMg.....only comes to about 1% of the plants dry weight. And in general plants don't eat 5 lbs of "food" and excrete most of it back out like higher life forms do. So the "need" of these inorganics will be pretty low anyway.

http://www.soils.wisc.edu/extension/pubs/A2448.pdf

Check out table 1. Alfalfa is a very fast growing greedy plant, but the amount of Ca, K, P, and Mg sucked up by a DRY ton (2000lb) of growth only amounts to 100 lb's (5%) of "need". Based on wet weight drop this down to less than 1% in the living plant.


----------



## Rick (Jul 18, 2013)

Also it seems pretty routine to get 6 tons per acre per annual growing season for alfalfa. That seems super fast compared to orchids on a good day, but it would be cool to compare rates of tissue growth between some of these domesticated crops.


----------



## Ray (Jul 19, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Use the materials to create a moist humid air space for the roots. But think of a way to have a constant nutrient supply. It may be that the roots need to be constantly moist so support bacteria, fungi, algae and lichens within or on the spongy root. These organisms may be what supply the nutrients.


That shouldn't be a problem. If the fabric overlaps the raft so that the ends dip down into the water supply (I'm picturing all of this in a tray), the wicking will be sufficient.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 21, 2013)

Rick said:


> Yes lichen not moss.
> 
> Yes, from a ratio standpoint the Ca to K ratio is pretty typical for leaf tissue ratios in lots of wild epiphytes.



Yes but the interesting thing is that Lichens get their nutrients from the atmosphere and not decaying leaf litter or rainfall. What is the reason that epiphytes and lichens have the same ratio? is it because that amount is what the lichens have to offer the epiphytes?



> Dust transfer of Ca, Mg, and K does happen, but the numbers only get (as big as our fert concentrations) when you multiply by hectares and years of area and duration.



How much dust from the atmosphere will contact an orchid root directly. The majority of the dust must fall with rain and therefore the nutrient content would be in the rainfall. (actually that is a question!)



> Air is 78% N so plants (and lichens) are swimming in it 24/7. So between the lichens (fungi/bluegreen algae colonies) and blue green algae living in mosses, there can be a constant supply of fixed nitrogen getting trickled over to the higher plants in association with them.



Orchid roots that are exposed to the air also support bluegreen algae so they may be receiving a lot of N from the atmosphere directly. Lichens make N, P, K and other nutrients available to orchid roots indirectly from the atmosphere. It seems most wild orchid plants I am seeing here have more exposure to lichen and air than they do to leaf litter.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 21, 2013)

Rick said:


> Dew transfer is fine too. You need water as the conduit. I don't think its plausible that there are aerosol transfers of gaseous salts. Just keep track of mass balance and overlay with efficiency. The roots are probably in contact with no more than a few grams of lichen material so even if the plant totally consumed the lichen it was in contact with, then the amount of nutrient is already down 0.0001 times the total concentration of a Kg of dry lichen.



Almost every leaf in the rainforest is covered with some species of lichens so it may be reasonable to think that every dew drop that falls from every leaf contains a nutrient solution. The nutrient supply may be constant as compared to how it is supplied in irrigation water.



> If you have a good scale handy then try to estimate the total weight of some of these orchids (roots and all). It would also be cool if you could track some growth rates of these plants.



That is a project for a graduate student! 



> At any given time, the NPKCaMg.....only comes to about 1% of the plants dry weight. And in general plants don't eat 5 lbs of "food" and excrete most of it back out like higher life forms do. So the "need" of these inorganics will be pretty low anyway.



So why then do most orchid growers need to apply excess nutrients? 
It is because other factors are not correct, like moisture on the roots. In nature the plants and roots are never dry at night and growers strive to have them be dry. Perhaps the nutrient uptake happens at night and not so much during the day? The way we grow roots is probably inefficient, In nature most roots grow spaced out and not in a tangled mass like in a pot. Perhaps the roots in a pot have lost their collection surface by being covered by another root? 
Your basket culture comes close to letting roots grow naturally and efficiently.



> http://www.soils.wisc.edu/extension/pubs/A2448.pdf
> 
> Check out table 1. Alfalfa is a very fast growing greedy plant, but the amount of Ca, K, P, and Mg sucked up by a DRY ton (2000lb) of growth only amounts to 100 lb's (5%) of "need". Based on wet weight drop this down to less than 1% in the living plant.



But here you are "forcing" alfalfa to grow fast for a purpose. That relates to forcing Phalaenopsis without regard to long term plant health. And no one cares about long term Alfalfa plant health. Of course even when forcing Alfalfa the nutrient content is a small percent of mass.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 21, 2013)

Ray said:


> That shouldn't be a problem. If the fabric overlaps the raft so that the ends dip down into the water supply (I'm picturing all of this in a tray), the wicking will be sufficient.



Picture thread to show us from the beginning to end please!


----------



## gonewild (Jul 21, 2013)

Lycaste plant that I referenced above.







This plant is in a area under dense tree cover. But low even cover without many layers. Looking up it was perhaps 50% sky. Water from rainfall would be about half pure rainwater and half with nutrients from tree leaves.
The plant is growing in fallen leaves. Strangely the leaves were in layers separated by the orchid roots. here is a lot of airspace around he roots and the majority of any single root does not contact a leaf but rather spans airspace.





You can see the light colored parts of the roots were not in contact with any leaf or decaying plant matter. Also lot of the litter mass is actually old dead orchid roots fro previous seasons growth. 

It was just beginning to bloom with one open flower and many buds.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 21, 2013)

There was many species growing near the Lycaste.

This Sobraila is growing right beside the Lycaste. The leaf litter has to about as fertile as rainforest litter gets but notice the leaves are still not deep green. I thing the color green misleads people into thinking their plants need more Nitrogen. 






Here is a collection of species growing epiphytic on a root/limb a little higher than the Lycaste. These plants have the moss and leaf litter.






Higher up the tree, I don't know what it is but it does have lichens growing on it.


----------



## Rick (Jul 23, 2013)

gonewild said:


> So why then do most orchid growers need to apply excess nutrients?
> 
> That relates to forcing Phalaenopsis without regard to long term plant health. And no one cares about long term Alfalfa plant health. Of course even when forcing Alfalfa the nutrient content is a small percent of mass.



I don't think that most orchid growers need to apply excess nutrients, but they do out of habit. I've cut back application rates by 95% and getting better growth now than ever. Collectively the hobbyist is lucking out on 90% waste of both materials and time, and not even realizing their growing potential 

Actually if you convert the units between the lichen and alfalfa to be the same, then the lichen really only contains about 1/5 the amount of inorganic nutrient per unit mass.

The true agri application of inorganic nutrients (compared to orchid hobby) is quite interesting. In the case of real agri, fertilizer = cost (not profit) so lots of very good math and plant physiology research was done to optimize (not force) the inherent max growth rate of the plant to the amount of nutrient applied. Genetics makes the plants go faster not nutrients. So like race cars, the engines are engineered for torque and HP, but at some point it doesn't make a difference how much gas you give it. It ain't going any faster (and actually looses efficiency at a certain point).


----------



## gonewild (Jul 24, 2013)

Rick said:


> I don't think that most orchid growers need to apply excess nutrients, but they do out of habit. I've cut back application rates by 95% and getting better growth now than ever. Collectively the hobbyist is lucking out on 90% waste of both materials and time, and not even realizing their growing potential
> 
> Actually if you convert the units between the lichen and alfalfa to be the same, then the lichen really only contains about 1/5 the amount of inorganic nutrient per unit mass.
> 
> The true agri application of inorganic nutrients (compared to orchid hobby) is quite interesting. In the case of real agri, fertilizer = cost (not profit) so lots of very good math and plant physiology research was done to optimize (not force) the inherent max growth rate of the plant to the amount of nutrient applied. Genetics makes the plants go faster not nutrients. So like race cars, the engines are engineered for torque and HP, but at some point it doesn't make a difference how much gas you give it. It ain't going any faster (and actually looses efficiency at a certain point).



I am looking very hard here to find a nutrient rich source for orchids. Something that would justify the commonly used rates and ratios we have used for the last 50 years. I can't find any consistent wide spread source of nutrients to justify the amounts. Instead what I see are consistent supplies that correspond to the low levels in K-lite and what you are know reporting. But what I do see is that nutrients are available in a consistent regular steady supply. It looks like orchid roots may have more access to nutrients at night than during the day based on when the roots are exposed to moist nutrient supplies. Orchid plants and roots are not dry at night in the wild. Since we try to have our plants dry at night how does this effect the nutrient uptake?


----------



## NYEric (Jul 24, 2013)

I'm not into all the chemistry mumbo jumbo but the photos are killing me! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jul 24, 2013)

Lance, are you thinking that orchid leaves take up nutrients? Our roots stay wet at night, even though we try to have dry plants by then.

I remember Andy's brother (of Orchids on a Stick) talking to our society. He told us to water in the evening. But his environment (CA) is very different from ours (MI).


----------



## SlipperKing (Jul 25, 2013)

In the 27 years of growing slippers I don't recall crown rot and 9 out 10 times I water it is at "night". Night, meaning 5-7 PM after work or 3:30- 4 AM before work. I have/had basal rot but that happens because of the condition of the mix not my watering. 
In regards to orchids growing only where lichen is found. Isn't it possible that both are growing in the same location because its the best enviornment for both rather then one depending on the other nutrients?


----------



## keithrs (Jul 25, 2013)

Andy/Harry do recommending watering at night in summer months to allow the plants to soak up more moisture. I water when I feel like watering. I mostly water before and after work but some times it pull out the "fire hose" and water at night. Especially on warm, dry days. In the winter time most of my plants stay out side. They will stay moist for for weeks. I had two plants show signs of rot. Both where warm growing plants and I think there cell walls broke down allowing rot to set in. I truly believe that most folks get rot issues because they have a very low amount of beneficial microbes in there collection. I was reading an article about 6 month a go about how Azotobacter and Azospirillum bacteria pull N out of the atmosphere and feed to the plants thought there leaves, stems and roots. Also help produced some sorta antibiotic that helped fend off disease causing microbes. I think its very possible for (wild)orchids to be associated with these N fixing microbes along with other "plant protecting" microbes.


----------



## KyushuCalanthe (Jul 25, 2013)

Nice habitat shots Lance. Seeing orchids in the wild rocks!

I've never seen an epiphytic orchid growing naturally on a truly sterile surface. Lichens would provide some protection from desiccation, but something more seems afoot. Given the complexity of relationships between organisms in the wild (fungi weighing in heavily), I don't think it is possible to generalize too much about how or why a particular plant grows where it does.


----------



## Ray (Jul 26, 2013)

keithrs said:


> Andy/Harry do recommending watering at night in summer months to allow the plants to soak up more moisture.


You think that's primarily because of the very dry atmosphere? RH naturally goes up at night, as the temps drop, slowing the evaporation rate.


----------



## keithrs (Jul 26, 2013)

Ray said:


> You think that's primarily because of the very dry atmosphere? RH naturally goes up at night, as the temps drop, slowing the evaporation rate.



Yes, Thats the thought behind night watering here. Its not uncommon to see single digits RH and blazing hot sunshine. Plants that need high RH shrivel and dead a very slow death. 

On a side note.... I remember a thread by ChrisFL where he mentioned that tropical regions get lots of rain at night. Those regions also have very high RH and plants in that region dont have rot issues. I'm curious if the microbes that cause root rot become active as temps fall below 60 or so? I have zero issues in the spring, summer and fall. As temps drop in the winter is when I become nervous.


----------



## Rick (Jul 27, 2013)

I was recently looking for some in situ pics of nepanthes, and came across a link that had a bunch of in situ pics in Malaysia/Bornea. (Paphioboy probably linked on ST recently).

Lots of epiphitic orchids on smooth bark with no moss or lichens. Phalae appendiculata was the focus of several pics growing on smooth barked twigs. So nothing but direct stemflow uptake for those species.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

SlipperFan said:


> Lance, are you thinking that orchid leaves take up nutrients?



Yes they do take in nutrients through the leaves. I proved this to my self many years ago (nothing to do with science just learned it).



> Our roots stay wet at night, even though we try to have dry plants by then.



OK here is where there might be a fine line about "wet".
There is a difference between 'staying" wet and "getting" wet.
There is also a difference between "wet" and "moist".

In nature orchid roots seem to dry out during the day whenever it is not raining. They are exposed to air and have great drainage. Now they don't normally get completely dry but they dry out. Humidity is lowest during the day so everything gets driest during the day.

Imagine the orchid roots are like sponges and soak up moisture that contains nutrients. The roots hold the nutrient rich moisture allowing the plants to take it in. But when a sponge is "wet" it can't soak up any new water and perhaps neither can an orchid root, so when the roots stay wet the nutrients may not be accessible to the plant.

So here is one concept. during the day orchid roots have some time to evaporate out water and become drier sponges. the surrounding environment, bark, moss, lichens, soil, leaf litter, ect. all are drier. Then night comes and the dew gets everything wet. As the surface of everything gets wet it dissolves all the accumulated surface nutrients and the nutrient ladden moisture is sucked up by the root sponges. Over night the roots remove the nutrients and the the next day a the humidity drops the roots dry out. 
Of course day time rain alters this process but when we consider how much water comes with rainfall the nutrient supply is almost zero in the water.......
requires more thought so think about it.



> I remember Andy's brother (of Orchids on a Stick) talking to our society. He told us to water in the evening. But his environment (CA) is very different from ours (MI).



Think about what I said above and how it might relate to this.
I have a lot more observations to write about as I get time. But the jungle is calling now.


----------



## Rick (Jul 27, 2013)

gonewild said:


> so when the roots stay wet the nutrients may not be accessible to the plant.



chemicals travel through water (standing or not) via osmosis and active transport means. 

As long as the plant is in contact with water, and the plant has a demand for a particular chemical, it will travel through the contact water into the plant.

Now if the water around the roots has a concentration of nutrients higher than the concentration in the plant then it will be able to passively transport the chemicals "uphill" into the plant, and the plant won't need to uptake bulk water to transport both water and nutrient into the plant at the same time (simple osmosis). If the external concentration is weaker than inside the plant the plant needs to uptake the water with nutrients to obtain nutrients. This is basic evapotranspiration which is generally a day/light requiring process.

Orchids are not different from other household plants like philodendrons that you can stick into water (like in a hydro or semihydro sytem) and have the roots become totally submerged, and still uptake nutrients by either osmotic or evapotranspiration mechanisms. There are also active transport mechanisms that generally require an exchange of one chemical for another at the root surface for uptake into the plant.

Think of your phrags that like to have "wet feet".


----------



## Rick (Jul 27, 2013)

Osmosis can go both ways to transport water or solutes across membranes to bring around solution equilibrium. In some conditions having very salty concentrations outside the plant will suck water out of the plant to even out solute concentrations on either side of the root membrane.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

Rick said:


> Osmosis can go both ways to transport water or solutes across membranes to bring around solution equilibrium. In some conditions having very salty concentrations outside the plant will suck water out of the plant to even out solute concentrations on either side of the root membrane.



This reinforces what I'm saying about wet verses moist....(sort of).

When water around roots is nutrient poor like in heavy rain it may draw nutrients out of the plant tissues while the moisture from dew may be richer in nutrients so the movement is into the plant.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

SlipperKing said:


> In the 27 years of growing slippers I don't recall crown rot and 9 out 10 times I water it is at "night". Night, meaning 5-7 PM after work or 3:30- 4 AM before work.



Like I have said orchids get wet at night in the wild, at least in the South American tropics. I have never see an orchid with crown rot or actually any condition resembling the "rot" problems we see in our collections.




> I have/had basal rot but that happens because of the condition of the mix not my watering.



Yes. The condition of the mix is the problem. Maybe it is the fault or poor aeration or incorrect nutrition. We always have assumed it was the aeration but now with the results from K-lite it looks like it is a nutrition problem. Since orchids can grow with their roots pertinently in water we should not assume aeration.



> In regards to orchids growing only where lichen is found. Isn't it possible that both are growing in the same location because its the best enviornment for both rather then one depending on the other nutrients?



It would seem that way but lichens source their nutrition completely differently than orchids. Lichens obtain their nutrients directly from the atmosphere. Orchids can take advantage of the lichen and get nutrients from them.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

keithrs said:


> Andy/Harry do recommending watering at night in summer months to allow the plants to soak up more moisture. I water when I feel like watering. I mostly water before and after work but some times it pull out the "fire hose" and water at night. Especially on warm, dry days. In the winter time most of my plants stay out side. They will stay moist for for weeks. I had two plants show signs of rot. Both where warm growing plants and I think there cell walls broke down allowing rot to set in. I truly believe that most folks get rot issues because they have a very low amount of beneficial microbes in there collection. I was reading an article about 6 month a go about how Azotobacter and Azospirillum bacteria pull N out of the atmosphere and feed to the plants thought there leaves, stems and roots. Also help produced some sorta antibiotic that helped fend off disease causing microbes. I think its very possible for (wild)orchids to be associated with these N fixing microbes along with other "plant protecting" microbes.



Q: How to get everything in a correct balance to keep orchids in the best health? 

A: keep trying different conditions until one works. 

If some people can water at night then why can't everyone?
Some factor or factors other than the water are what caused the rot.

Some things are simple. If you allow water to stand in the crown of a Phalenopsis plant at night it will probably get crown rot. But the problem is not the night water it is that the water stayed in the crown because the crown is pointing up like a vase. In nature Phalaenopsis are tilted downward so the crown drains naturally.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

KyushuCalanthe said:


> Given the complexity of relationships between organisms in the wild (fungi weighing in heavily), I don't think it is possible to generalize too much about how or why a particular plant grows where it does.



I agree completely. We especially have the problem of working with so many different species from different environments.

What I actually trying to find out is what makes wild orchids grow poorly rather than what makes them grow well. The idea of looking for a common nutrient source is to see why K-lite is working so well at very low nutrient levels as compared to the old standards. 
Is it simply the Potassium content in the plant?
Does the potassium content suppress beneficial organisms?
Does excess potassium factually cause the plant to be sensitive to rot?
If K-lite eliminates the rot problem can people safely water at night?
Will watering at night improve plant growth?

I'm not trying to prove anything I just am enjoying the search.
And taking pictures to share!


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

Ray said:


> You think that's primarily because of the very dry atmosphere? RH naturally goes up at night, as the temps drop, slowing the evaporation rate.



What I see here is a step beyond the night time humidity rise.

The humidity goes up so high that everything get wets with dew and it is almost like rain at night in the jungle from dripping dew.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

keithrs said:


> Yes, Thats the thought behind night watering here. Its not uncommon to see single digits RH and blazing hot sunshine. Plants that need high RH shrivel and dead a very slow death.



I think there may be a significant difference between high nighttime humidity and watering at night. Perhaps a better approach would be to raise the humidity without raining" on the plants, like a fogging system?



> On a side note.... I remember a thread by ChrisFL where he mentioned that tropical regions get lots of rain at night. Those regions also have very high RH and plants in that region dont have rot issues.



Even without rain in the tropics everything gets wet at night. Even in the dry season when it does not even rain once a week everything is wet at night. We just finished 4 days of extreme cold temperatures here. One day the temperature was 29c at noon. As the front moved it it rained and the temperature dropped to 12c by night. Over night the temperature dropped to 9.6c and during the day never got above 12c.
4days later now the temperature is 28c. Cold and wet day and night and not a single plant in the jungle has rot from it.



> I'm curious if the microbes that cause root rot become active as temps fall below 60 or so? I have zero issues in the spring, summer and fall. As temps drop in the winter is when I become nervous.



Temperature is not the cause but rather a catalyst. 
So far the best clue we have is Rick's potassium toxicity theory. Maybe the potassium inhibits beneficial microbes?
This could be within the plant tissues or even in the immediate plant environment like around the roots or on the leaf surfaces.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

Rick said:


> I was recently looking for some in situ pics of nepanthes, and came across a link that had a bunch of in situ pics in Malaysia/Bornea. (Paphioboy probably linked on ST recently).
> 
> Lots of epiphitic orchids on smooth bark with no moss or lichens. Phalae appendiculata was the focus of several pics growing on smooth barked twigs. So nothing but direct stemflow uptake for those species.



Can you post a link to the pictures?
Some lichens are very tiny and hard to see. 
As well I still think some species can get nutrients directly from the tree bark when they get wet. Wet bark makes tea!

If they are growing on twigs where is the stem flow from? Most twig growers I see here are situated so they don't really get stemflow. They either are watered from direct rainfall of dew. Standing at the base of big trees in a rainstorm I stay pretty dry because the canopy sheds most of the water away from the trunk.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

Rick said:


> chemicals travel through water (standing or not) via osmosis and active transport means.



As far as we know! At least that is what science believes today. oke:



> As long as the plant is in contact with water, and the plant has a demand for a particular chemical, it will travel through the contact water into the plant.



Then why does a plant uptake too much potassium if it does not need (demand) it?



> Now if the water around the roots has a concentration of nutrients higher than the concentration in the plant then it will be able to passively transport the chemicals "uphill" into the plant, and the plant won't need to uptake bulk water to transport both water and nutrient into the plant at the same time (simple osmosis).



A lot of orchids grow with their root "uphill" so does this rule still apply? oke:




> If the external concentration is weaker than inside the plant the plant needs to uptake the water with nutrients to obtain nutrients. This is basic evapotranspiration which is generally a day/light requiring process.



Or nighttime process if the concentration around the roots is higher?
In the evolutionary scheme of things I'm not ready to accept that orchids follow the basic evapotranspiration method. (They are special  )



> Orchids are not different from other household plants like philodendrons that you can stick into water (like in a hydro or semihydro sytem) and have the roots become totally submerged, and still uptake nutrients by either osmotic or evapotranspiration mechanisms. There are also active transport mechanisms that generally require an exchange of one chemical for another at the root surface for uptake into the plant.



But orchid roots are different. Even though the grow side by side Philiodendron are more adaptable. You can take a philodendron stem with roots and put it in water and the roots continue to grow and live. You can't do that with orchid roots that have been air grown. Orchids will grow nes roots that adapt to being in water but they don't like it.



> Think of your phrags that like to have "wet feet".



You kind of have me on this one!
But Phrags are special. 
The wet feet lovers have evolved to grows in wet places and adapted their root systems. Try to grow a Phrag mounted on cork beside a Phal and it won't grow roots.....Unless the humidity is extreme.
As well Phrags that like wet feet and grow roots into the water also have roots above the water.


----------



## Rick (Jul 27, 2013)

gonewild said:


> As far as we know! At least that is what science believes today. oke:


Osmosis is pretty basic stuff, even Shamans use the principal for decoctions and extractsoke:




gonewild said:


> Then why does a plant uptake too much potassium if it does not need (demand) it?


 That one is an active transport mechanism. The bromeliad paper documented that one to a pretty good detail, but it happens in just about all plants. (orchids not special)





gonewild said:


> A lot of orchids grow with their root "uphill" so does this rule still apply? oke:


I was speaking figuratively about going against an osmotic gradient. But if salmon can make it upstream against strong current then I'm sure plants can defy gravity to move water uphill too. Redwood trees do a good job with this.






gonewild said:


> Or nighttime process if the concentration around the roots is higher?
> In the evolutionary scheme of things I'm not ready to accept that orchids follow the basic evapotranspiration method. (They are special  )



All plant life is special and gifted with basic sound principals to live by:wink:





gonewild said:


> But orchid roots are different. Even though the grow side by side Philiodendron are more adaptable. You can take a philodendron stem with roots and put it in water and the roots continue to grow and live. You can't do that with orchid roots that have been air grown. Orchids will grow nes roots that adapt to being in water but they don't like it.


 Seems like the SH growers do it quite frequently with lots of orchid species.





gonewild said:


> You kind of have me on this one!
> But Phrags are special.
> The wet feet lovers have evolved to grows in wet places and adapted their root systems. Try to grow a Phrag mounted on cork beside a Phal and it won't grow roots.....Unless the humidity is extreme.
> As well Phrags that like wet feet and grow roots into the water also have roots above the water.


 Actually I'm getting pretty close to this in my GH. I set up a pearcei in a basket, and it ran roots all over the outside of the basket (the location was about 1ft away from some mounted phalaes). The long petaled species and kovachii are sending roots outside the baskets too. I have a lindenii and exstaminodium in baskets hung up next to a bark mounted Phalae fasciata and they run roots along the outside of the basket. Henryanum, and villosum seem to be pretty happy in mounted/basket systems, but they are pretty much epiphytes anyway.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 27, 2013)

Rick said:


> Osmosis is pretty basic stuff, even Shamans use the principal for decoctions and extractsoke:



That is what scientists say but not what a Shaman would say.



> That one is an active transport mechanism. The bromeliad paper documented that one to a pretty good detail, but it happens in just about all plants. (orchids not special)



Orchids are too special. :fight:
Bromeliads are weird. They trap their water and eat frog poop.



> I was speaking figuratively about going against an osmotic gradient. But if salmon can make it upstream against strong current then I'm sure plants can defy gravity to move water uphill too. Redwood trees do a good job with this.



Wonder why plants did not put their roots on top so they could take advantage of gravity?



> All plant life is special and gifted with basic sound principals to live by:wink:



Some plants are Outlaws just like some people. They don't like rules.




> Seems like the SH growers do it quite frequently with lots of orchid species.



The biggest problem people have when switching to S/H is the die off of old roots.



> Actually I'm getting pretty close to this in my GH. I set up a pearcei in a basket, and it ran roots all over the outside of the basket (the location was about 1ft away from some mounted phalaes).



pearcei is one that does not like rules. It grows on rocks that get submerged during the rain season.



> The long petaled species and kovachii are sending roots outside the baskets too.



If they only find nutrients in organic matter why would they grow out of it into the atmosphere?

I have a lindenii and exstaminodium in baskets hung up next to a bark mounted Phalae fasciata and they run roots along the outside of the basket. Henryanum, and villosum seem to be pretty happy in mounted/basket systems, but they are pretty much epiphytes anyway.[/QUOTE]

Once we know the secret they can all live together in harmony!


----------



## keithrs (Jul 27, 2013)

Heres a besseae video... You may have seen it already. 
Phrag besseae


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

keithrs said:


> Heres a besseae video... You may have seen it already.
> Phrag besseae



Awesome Phrag tour!!


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Can you post a link to the pictures?
> Some lichens are very tiny and hard to see.
> As well I still think some species can get nutrients directly from the tree bark when they get wet. Wet bark makes tea!
> 
> If they are growing on twigs where is the stem flow from? Most twig growers I see here are situated so they don't really get stemflow. They either are watered from direct rainfall of dew. Standing at the base of big trees in a rainstorm I stay pretty dry because the canopy sheds most of the water away from the trunk.



http://www.ukorchidforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=2765&sid=d7cdf4b03e9a208dc339fb9a9d8cb23d&start=25


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Some things are simple. If you allow water to stand in the crown of a Phalenopsis plant at night it will probably get crown rot. But the problem is not the night water it is that the water stayed in the crown because the crown is pointing up like a vase. In nature Phalaenopsis are tilted downward so the crown drains naturally.



Is it really that simple? I'd put money on leaf tissue data from wild Phalaenopsis plants would show a different balance of K and Ca, with a completely different immune response to disease organisms. 

Extra K causes increase in carbohydrate/sugar production, and decrease in cell wall integrity. Sweet/soft plants are more attractive to predators (bacteria, fungal, insect ...) than bitter and tough plants regardless of standing water in the crown.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Rick said:


> Is it really that simple? I'd put money on leaf tissue data from wild Phalaenopsis plants would show a different balance of K and Ca, with a completely different immune response to disease organisms.




No, I'm not saying it is that simple and the extra K factor is a big factor.
What I was comparing is one factor. Dry crown vs wet crown, dry no rot wet rot in artificial conditions. Even with low K in the wild some plants design themselves to keep water out of their tender spots.
Perhaps by keeping the K levels low as in nature there will be more tolerance for errors in other parts of the environment.
What I was trying to point out is that there are a lot of simple factors of how orchids grow in Nature that are overlooked.



> Extra K causes increase in carbohydrate/sugar production, and decrease in cell wall integrity. Sweet/soft plants are more attractive to predators (bacteria, fungal, insect ...) than bitter and tough plants regardless of standing water in the crown.



A quick test would be with Phalenopsis plants side by side.
Planted in pots with crowns up.
One half gets MSU the other K-lite.
Water during the day as is most peoples practice and keep crowns dry at night
After 4 months water them at night keeping the crowns wet.
It has been pretty standard for Phals to develop crown rot quickly.
If the K-lite plants don't rot and the MSU plants rot then the point is proven.


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

gonewild said:


> A quick test would be with Phalenopsis plants side by side.
> Planted in pots with crowns up.
> One half gets MSU the other K-lite.
> Water during the day as is most peoples practice and keep crowns dry at night
> ...



This is going on informally as we speak. Although I tend to grow most of my phals mounted (with "natural" crown orientation) most of the members in my society still grow in pots. Even with watering during the day they still experienced crown rot, but over the last year they are claiming that the incidence of both rots and mealies is greatly reduced. Unfortunately not side by side, and completely anecdotal.

I have a handful of phales in baskets sitting horizontally. In my GH the fogger comes on both at night or day (to maintain humidity), and during the winter it is frequently on at night. But these horizontal phales doen't get crown rot either. My last phal that rotted was a brand new acquisition, fed a standard high K diet, that rotted 2 weeks after I got it.


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

keithrs said:


> Heres a besseae video... You may have seen it already.
> Phrag besseae



Awfully healthy looking phrags for living out in the jungleoke:oke:

Lance get your conductivity meter out there and get some numbers!!!


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

Quote from Tom. Given the complexity of relationships between organisms in the wild (fungi weighing in heavily), I don't think it is possible to generalize too much about how or why a particular plant grows where it does.

Quote from Lance. I agree completely. We especially have the problem of working with so many different species from different environments.

But isn't it amazing at the other end of the spectra that we can grow hundreds to thousands of species in a single gh with 99% overlap of physical/chemical conditions.:wink: A Philippine Phaleanopsis growing within a foot of an Ecuadorian Phrag, about 1 ft away from a Vietnamese Paph all getting the same water and chemistry regime!! Something pretty fundamental going on here, that I think we are over-thinking.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Rick said:


> This is going on informally as we speak. Although I tend to grow most of my phals mounted (with "natural" crown orientation) most of the members in my society still grow in pots. Even with watering during the day they still experienced crown rot, but over the last year they are claiming that the incidence of both rots and mealies is greatly reduced. Unfortunately not side by side, and completely anecdotal.
> 
> I have a handful of phales in baskets sitting horizontally. In my GH the fogger comes on both at night or day (to maintain humidity), and during the winter it is frequently on at night. But these horizontal phales doen't get crown rot either. My last phal that rotted was a brand new acquisition, fed a standard high K diet, that rotted 2 weeks after I got it.



The informal observations of assorted growers has me convinced that the low k fertilizer is a huge advancement in our knowledge. I said in the very beginning that these informal tests carry more credence than does a controlled commercial trial. I still feel that way and only suggest the simple trial to have the side by side for the rot issue not the nutrient factor.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

keithrs said:


> Heres a besseae video... You may have seen it already.
> Phrag besseae



Great video! I had not seen it before. About the cleanest wild orchid I have ever seen. What the guy is saying and showing with besseae is basically what I'm seeing with most orchids, but I'm looking at many different species and many different environments.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Rick said:


> Awfully healthy looking phrags for living out in the jungleoke:oke:



maybe this is a re-planted location? The flower quality looks like well bred plants. Regardless they are growing wild.



> Lance get your conductivity meter out there and get some numbers!!!



Next week I will be in the mountains and take readings from dense orchid plots.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Rick said:


> Quote from Tom. Given the complexity of relationships between organisms in the wild (fungi weighing in heavily), I don't think it is possible to generalize too much about how or why a particular plant grows where it does.
> 
> Quote from Lance. I agree completely. We especially have the problem of working with so many different species from different environments.
> 
> But isn't it amazing at the other end of the spectra that we can grow hundreds to thousands of species in a single gh with 99% overlap of physical/chemical conditions.:wink: A Philippine Phaleanopsis growing within a foot of an Ecuadorian Phrag, about 1 ft away from a Vietnamese Paph all getting the same water and chemistry regime!! Something pretty fundamental going on here, that I think we are over-thinking.



Yes something very fundamental is missing and that is basically what I'm looking for. I actually think your low "k" hit it on the nail as far as the imbalance or even excess of K. But why do the plants continue to grow so well with such lower amounts of nutrients than we thought was needed? I'm looking for any justification in Nature to apply the amount of fertilizer that has been common for the last 50 years. I'm not finding anything to back it up.

Although I have not yet tested EC of the orchid media moisture in the past while collecting kilifish I tested a lot of small streams that carry the runoff, most were about 25 ppm. Now the rains are less and I can look for higher numbers that reflect soil water as opposed to rainfall.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

OK did a quick experiment.

Shaved a handful of lichen bearing bark off a tree.
Tree does not have epiphytes or moss (it is a young tree in secondary forest)

Put 1/2" filtered well water in a cup. Water is 12ppm pH6.7
Put bark into water. (about 3x more water than bark volume)
Wait 10 minutes.
Now the water reads 188ppm pH5.3

This indicates that something in or on the bark dissolves into water very quickly.
I have no idea what chemicals are involved but it does indicate that when bark is wet by dew it may release nutrients into the moisture accessible to orchid roots. Also don't know if the dissolved substance is from the bark or lichen or if the substance has any nutritional value for orchids.


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

Cool! That was fun. Might also be the surface dust accumulation if it hasn't rained in a bit. 

Might also try a rinsed off handful prior to the soaking.

Most likely a lot of different things. Given the pH drop probably lots of organic acids. But it wouldn't make good tea if you couldn't leach something out of it.

Can your meter give results in uS/cm instead of ppm?

I ways back I posted a link to a paper on nutrients draining out of birdnest ferns in Sabah. They did pour through tests on big in situ ferns and got peak conductivity of around 80 uS/cm ( if salts that comes out to about 40ppm). I contacted them via email, and they also said that birdnest ferns were generally infested with ants as well as being big leaf litter traps. They also measured N and K and only got 5-8 ppm of either by either the artificial pour through, or collection cups of natural rainfall events.


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

I just did something fun too.

I took 150 mls of room temp RO water (conductivity = 0) and stuck a single teabag of Bigalow green tea (with pomegranit) into it. Conductivity is >500 uS/cm and climbing in less than 5minutes. That should register about 250ppm on most meter algorithms.

I know from drinking green tea its neither salty nor full of nitrates or ammonia. Most likely all tanic acids and sugars.

Of the dry mass of plant material, the bulk of it is carbon based compounds.


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

I just stuck 1/4tsp of white table vinegar (acetic acid) into 200ml of RO water and got a conductivity of 100uS/cm.

I could barely taste the sourness (less than the tea).

Most likely your bark decoction is mostly organic acids.

http://andrewsforest.oregonstate.edu/pubs/pdf/pub1957.pdf This is old and for temperate lichens, but does address leachates from lichens


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Rick said:


> I just did something fun too.
> 
> I took 150 mls of room temp RO water (conductivity = 0) and stuck a single teabag of Bigalow green tea (with pomegranit) into it. Conductivity is >500 uS/cm and climbing in less than 5minutes. That should register about 250ppm on most meter algorithms.
> 
> ...



I think tea leaves have a high potassium content. Not just tanic acids.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Looking for possible mineral content of tropical tree leaves I found some info. No info on content of bark but it might be similar to leaf content.

mango trees often have orchids growing in them and the mango leaves contain the following:

N (%)1.20
P (%)0.10
K (%)0.50
Ca (%)3.04
Mg (%)0.47
S(%)0.17

The NPK ratio would be 12-1-5
The CaMgS would be 30-5-2

Here are a couple documents that have some interesting data on mineral content of tropical forest trees

tropical trees leaf analysis
http://www.agnet.org/htmlarea_file/library/20110804160807/eb398.pdf

leaf analysis Hawaiian crops
http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/pnm4.pdf

More wild plant pictures coming tomorrow!


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

Somebody read this and see if it has any good info...

http://phylodiversity.net/bb08/students/wan/Projects/p3_anna+greg+wan.pdf


----------



## gonewild (Jul 28, 2013)

This one gives mineral content of tropical tree bark...

http://books.google.com.pe/books?id...q=mineral analysis tropical tree bark&f=false


----------



## Rick (Jul 28, 2013)

gonewild said:


> I think tea leaves have a high potassium content. Not just tanic acids.



Then it would taste salty and not sour, but you just can't do it by the math either.

The inorganic constituents of plants (that's all the NPKCaMg...) only account for about 1% of the dry material the rest is carbon based molecules. The tea bag probably holds less than a gram (1000mg) of material. So if the tea leaves totally dissolved I would only get 1% (10mg) total inorganics back, of which less than half of that could be K (5mg)

On the other hand with total dissolution there would be 990 mg of carbon based chemicals to pick from.


----------



## gonewild (Jul 29, 2013)

Here are some plants that are growing on one specific tree species along this creek. No other trees at this location have orchids growing on them but they do have other epiphytes. No one knows what species the tree is.



























Close up here shows how roots sit on limb. Not much chance here to trap dead leaves.





Pepperomias and othe epiphytes grow in crotches but here not orchids.





Bromeliad grows on trunk of tree. Note the lichen patch above in the water flow path.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jul 29, 2013)

Cool. Must be an orchid tree!


----------



## Rick (Jul 30, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Looking into what nutrients lichens might provide for orchids I found this paper..
> 
> http://www.hindawi.com/journals/chem/2011/420673/abs/
> 
> ...



You might also compare these values to Table 2 in my AOS article for leaf litter concentrations in Sumatra

In general the lichen concentrations are about 1/2 those in Sumatran leaf litter. For instance the K concentration is 2,470 mg/Kg (ppm) in the leaf litter

The inorganic consituents in Sumatran leaf litter also comprise only 4.5% of the total mass of litter. The rest is all organics.

So a gram of leaf litter in a litter of water will yield a max of 2.47 mg of K (completely digested), but can yield 95.5 mg of various organic materials with the same assumption of dissolution.

But we also know you don't get 100% instant solubility of leaf litter material, so its slow release.


----------



## gonewild (Aug 1, 2013)

Rick said:


> You might also compare these values to Table 2 in my AOS article for leaf litter concentrations in Sumatra
> 
> In general the lichen concentrations are about 1/2 those in Sumatran leaf litter. For instance the K concentration is 2,470 mg/Kg (ppm) in the leaf litter
> 
> ...



I'm thinking the leaf litter may be lower in nutrients than the leaves and canopy above. Once the litter is on the forest floor many of the nutrients may have already been consumed or leached out. I'm talking about dense forest environments where there are epiphyte populations above in the trees.

Here is an interesting paper on lichen content.

Still regardless whether leaf litter or active chemicals in the canopy provide the nutrients for orchids the levels are much lower than what we fertilize with.

Not only do wild orchids have their roots in association with lichens most plants have lichens growing on their leaves. 

How many people have lichens growing on their orchid plants?
Perhaps a key towards a better orchid growing environment is one that grows lichens.

Rick, you have referenced the lady that had old plants growing and has never fertilized them, do you know if her plants have lichen growing in association?


----------



## gonewild (Aug 1, 2013)

This Buletin has some interesting info on the role lichens play in plant nutrietion

Ten Things You Should Know About Lichens
_
"Because of their association with cyanobacteria, lichens can provide themselves with nitrogen compounds. Lichens contribute to the nitrogen cycle by converting the nitrogen in the air into nitrates that contribute to their growth and development. Their ability to �fix� atmospheric nitrogen is beneficial to other plant life as well. When it rains, nitrogen is leached from both living and dead lichens and is available to plant life in the immediate areas. When lichens die, they contribute decayed organic matter to the area they inhabited, which enables mosses and seeds from vascular plants to begin developing among the pockets of new soil."_


----------



## gonewild (Aug 1, 2013)

Here is another measurement.

This small orchid species was removed from a limb complete with it's entire root system. The roots and orchid was surrounded by localized moss and small lichens. 

The plant was hung and allowed to completely dry with out any water contacting it for several weeks.
The entire plant sample was soaked in water for 2 hours.

To start the clean water tested 12ppm and pH6.4
After the soaking the water tested 41ppm and pH6.7


----------



## Rick (Aug 1, 2013)

gonewild said:


> How many people have lichens growing on their orchid plants?
> Perhaps a key towards a better orchid growing environment is one that grows lichens.
> 
> Rick, you have referenced the lady that had old plants growing and has never fertilized them, do you know if her plants have lichen growing in association?



No lichens but plenty of mosses which often from associations with BG algae (synonymous with cyanobacteria) just like the lichens (but not internalized). Not all lichens species have N fixing capabilities too. I read another paper on lichen contributions to N in epiphytic communities in temperate forests. N fixers do leak organo N compounds while other species consume N and don't contribute until they die and decompose.

There's no shortage of mosses at the little old ladies place, but no obvious lichen activity.


----------



## gonewild (Aug 1, 2013)

Rick said:


> No lichens but plenty of mosses (which often from associations with BG algaes just like the lichens (but not internalized). Not all lichens species have N fixing capabilities too. I read another paper on lichen contributions to N in epiphytic communities in temperate forests. N fixers do leak organo N compounds while other species consume N and don't contribute until they die and decompose.
> 
> There's no shortage of mosses at the little old ladies place, but no obvious lichen activity.



I wonder why no lichens? Lichens seem to grow everywhere in Nature so why not in/on orchid collections?


----------



## Rick (Aug 1, 2013)

gonewild said:


> I wonder why no lichens? Lichens seem to grow everywhere in Nature so why not in/on orchid collections?




Well maybe we don't know how to identify them. In your picture above I see a lot of what looks like moss with encrusting BG algae (no obvious lichen to me).

With enough humidity you can have dry piles of cyanobacteria with no fungal association. 

Maybe my idea of lichens is too narrow?? In that paper on lichen contribution in temperate forests, the contribution to biomass and nutrient flux was less than 10% (significant but not the majority by any means).


----------



## gonewild (Aug 1, 2013)

Rick said:


> Well maybe we don't know how to identify them. In your picture above I see a lot of what looks like moss with encrusting BG algae (no obvious lichen to me).
> 
> With enough humidity you can have dry piles of cyanobacteria with no fungal association.
> 
> Maybe my idea of lichens is too narrow?? In that paper on lichen contribution in temperate forests, the contribution to biomass and nutrient flux was less than 10% (significant but not the majority by any means).



The lichens in the photo don't show well when they are wet. But if you look on the lower leaves you see the whitish patches are lichen and also one at the tip of my thumb. Also the plant has a large area of lichen growing on the back side, and some of the roots are covered with tiny lichen. I have pictures taken while it was still in flower I'll post later.


----------



## gonewild (Aug 18, 2013)

Here is a picture of the plant in the last post showing the Lichens it grows with.


----------



## Rick (Aug 19, 2013)

Cool.

I like the little red things. Is that lichen fruiting bodies?


----------



## gonewild (Aug 19, 2013)

Rick said:


> Cool.
> 
> I like the little red things. Is that lichen fruiting bodies?



Yes they are a species of lichen. There are probably 6 or 7 different lichen species around this plant. Probably each one secretes something different.


----------



## Stone (Aug 20, 2013)

gonewild said:


> I wonder why no lichens? Lichens seem to grow everywhere in Nature so why not in/on orchid collections?



I've only ever had lichens grow on an old slab of cork with a dend mounted on it. It was mostly outside but continued to grow in the glasshouse. Lichens need fresh air/wind continuously: (3rd pic)
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26712&highlight=dendrobium+teretifolium


----------



## gonewild (Aug 20, 2013)

Stone said:


> I've only ever had lichens grow on an old slab of cork with a dend mounted on it. It was mostly outside but continued to grow in the glasshouse. Lichens need fresh air/wind continuously: (3rd pic)
> http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26712&highlight=dendrobium+teretifolium



That is a great example and a beautiful grown specimen!
You said you planted the lichen on it, how long ago?
What fertilizer do you apply to it?

I don't think lichens need wind to grow as there are plenty inside the dense forest well protected from wind.
But fresh air YES! Fresh air meaning clean air free of pollution.

Our orchid plants are probably more effected by the atmosphere content than we realize. Lichens fix many chemicals from the atmosphere so we should not discount the idea that aerial orchid roots might have some of the same abilities. Even if it is only because the thick spongy orchid roots provide a host environment for lichens, moss, fungi and bacteria that does the job. 

Your specimen looks to be a complete self contained environmental machine.


----------



## gonewild (Aug 20, 2013)

Stone....Look at the roots of your plant.... they are covered with something green.... please look closely and determine if it is algae or tiny lichens.



Stone said:


> I planted a little native bulbophyllum and some lichen on this one and both are growing well!


----------



## Trithor (Aug 20, 2013)

You in Peru grow way better than I in South Africa. I think perhaps I should give up my day job and concentrate on activities that make me happy, perhaps then I will be able to approach what you achieve.


----------



## gonewild (Aug 20, 2013)

Trithor said:


> You in Peru grow way better than I in South Africa. I think perhaps I should give up my day job and concentrate on activities that make me happy, perhaps then I will be able to approach what you achieve.



I highly recommend quitting your job and spending your time being happy.

:drool:


----------



## Trithor (Aug 21, 2013)

Thanks for that Lance. My wife is going to love that advice!


----------



## Stone (Aug 21, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Stone....Look at the roots of your plant.... they are covered with something green.... please look closely and determine if it is algae or tiny lichens.



The plant was sold a while ago. I have a feeling the green was an algae living inside the roots but also on the cork. But isn't lichen a combination of fungi and algae anyway. The grey lichen is a common species here. I actually planted some (just for that wild appearence) here and there using tweezers as apparently lichens can die if you touch them with your fingers. After planting they took hold quickly and colonized other parts of the cork slab within 6 months. I didn't fertilize that often but when I did the lichen was not affected and actually seemed to do better. The orchid definitly had to be fed to grow well. The fert was just standard stuff at your typical 1/2 strength dilution.


----------



## Stone (Aug 21, 2013)

gonewild said:


> Stone....Look at the roots of your plant.... they are covered with something green.... please look closely and determine if it is algae or tiny lichens.



The plant was sold a while ago. I have a feeling the green was an algae living inside the roots but also on the cork. But isn't lichen a combination of fungi and algae anyway. The grey lichen is a common species here. I actually planted some here and there using tweezers as apparently lichens can die if you touch them with your fingers. After planting they took hold quickly and colonized other parts of the cork slab. I didn't fertilize that often but when I did the lichen was not affected and actually seemed to do better. The orchid definitly had to be fed to grow well. The fert was just standard stuff at your typical 1/2 strength dilution.


----------



## NYEric (Aug 21, 2013)

I'm think this is interesting but unless someone can extract a product i can use in an apartment..not helpful , although the links are precious!


----------



## PeteOwen (Oct 19, 2013)

Trithor said:


> :rollhappy:
> Thanks. If you own the place maybe you can get solar panels and batteries?
> That is a great series of in-situ photos, thank you. The close association with lichen is interesting. I had a Madagascar peppercorn tree in my garden which I had planted with a variety of orchids. They always grew much better where the bark had a lot of lichen. So much so that I stopped trying to establish orchids where lichen was not present. I could never figure out if it was just that they appreciated similar microclimate/position or of it was something more?


Yes it is awesome series.. I do have such place where I can use solar panels and batteries so it will try them very soon..


----------

