And the 'Best' fertilizer for orchids is...

[gonewild]

I grow in clear plastic pots. I almost never get moss on top of my pots but almost all of my plants have moss growing inside the pots, within a few weeks of repotting. I consider it a nuisance and try to control it with physan. Even my water containers once in a while will start growing algae, reminding me it's time for Physan. Should I discontinue this practice and let the tiny microhabitat do its own thing?

Moss growing in the pot is a desirable thing in my opinion. When you use a chemical to kill it you kill all beneficial organisms. I would never do that.
Algae is a different issue. If it is the right Algae species then it will create Nitrogen for you plants. But probably the algae growth is a result of high nutrient levels and the algae is growing and consuming the fertilizer you are applying. Normally we would say that algae consuming the nutrients we apply is a bad thing but is it? maybe the algae is doing you a favor by reducing the nutrient levels when they are to high for orchids.
I have pictures of slimy algae growing on healthy wild orchid roots so it is actually a natural occurrence.

 

[gonewild]

If symbiotic relationships could be developed to work in pots then I think all orchid growers would be better off not using so many chemicals...

There is a major discovery waiting for someone to discover it.

 

[TyroneGenade]

Fairys play an important role in orchid nutrition. Problem with your method is that you grind up the Fairys. Create an environment and allow the Fairys to live and they carry little buckets for food to each orchid root.
(I hope the Mother does not punish me for letting this slip)
:wink:

A good point. Perhaps this success in Hawaii has to do with the proximity to the forest, which is obviously full of fairies.

But now for some sane points:

1. Dust. Rain drops coalesce around dust particles. These particles can bring various nutrients as the dust can be old skin cells (full of NP and a little K oke: ) or volcanic ash (full of minerals: Mg, Ca, Fe etc...).

2. Trees are really good at catching the rain... and therefore also of dust. So trees are very good at gather nutrients.

3. Trees harbour insects, birds, fairies etc... Which will leave behind little packets of poo which are very good sources of N and P.

Therefore, an orchid in a tree is well supplied with nutrients and the hose pipe would do a very good job of washing all this nutrition away if there weren't some mosses and lichens to hold onto it.

limuhead, do you water with rain water? (but this could be beside the point) Looking at your mix I notice the CHC which has great water retention properties which will increase pot humidity and favor root growth. The perlite would increase pot aeration which is needed to have high humidity without rotting roots.

Mosses and stuff could be correlative with a healthy pot and not be the cause of the healthy pot. Surely an experiment can be performed to test this (there is ample moss in your pig's forest), can you spare some plants for an experiment: 5 plants in normal mix and 5 plants in normal mix with moss. Weigh each plant before and after as we want to calculate the percentage change in mass for each plant as a measure of growth. I suppose we could add a 3rd group of 5 plants in normal mix plus a small twice-weekly amount of dilute fertilizer.

Bye

 

[limuhead]

I am a carpenter by trade. I know that there are more than a few scientific minds that contribute to this forum on a regular basis. Being a person that likes to keep it simple would my organic fish emulsion (5-1-1) and the right combination of dolomite and Epsom salts give me similar results as K-lite type formulation? I would be willing to put more time and effort into my plants if I could eliminate the use of chemicals entirely. I go to First Ray's website frequently and think that some of the things there work great(I am afraid to try some as well). I wouldn't lose any sleep if I didn't give any more of my money to the chemical companies.

 

[gonewild]

But now for some sane points:

Wouldn't that require that we stop growing orchids?

1. Dust. Rain drops coalesce around dust particles. These particles can bring various nutrients as the dust can be old skin cells (full of NP and a little K oke: ) or volcanic ash (full of minerals: Mg, Ca, Fe etc...).

I don't think this concept applies in the tropical rainforests. There just is not enough dust and too much rainfall. Somehow an orchid must get a lot of nutrients in a short time to grow new growth.
Rainfall here in the mountains measures 0ppm and streams measure barely 10ppm so nutrients must come from another source rather than dust delivered by water.

2. Trees are really good at catching the rain... and therefore also of dust. So trees are very good at gather nutrients.

Trees tend to shed water and nutrients to their drip line and not down their trunks or on their limbs where orchids grow.

And if trees catch a lot of nutrients why are tropical soils so poor in nutrients?

3. Trees harbour insects, birds, fairies etc... Which will leave behind little packets of poo which are very good sources of N and P.

This used to be my favorite point and it is valid. But the insects get a huge amount of their food from moss and lichens and that is what they poop on the orchid roots.....don't kill insects.

Therefore, an orchid in a tree is well supplied with nutrients and the hose pipe would do a very good job of washing all this nutrition away if there weren't some mosses and lichens to hold onto it.

I see so many trees here that support orchids but when I look up I see only sky. The tree is not delivering nutrients by rain runoff to these plants, nor are leaves falling and collecting around the roots.
So far the only logical source is directly from the moss, lichens and tree bark. There is no reason to dismiss the possibility that orchid roots get nutrients directly from the bark of the host tree. Maybe that makes them parasitic?

Mosses and stuff could be correlative with a healthy pot and not be the cause of the healthy pot.

Agreed. All parts work together to complete the whole. That is why we need to figure out the correct artificial fertilizer to replace the missing parts in our pots.

Surely an experiment can be performed to test this (there is ample moss in your pig's forest),

We would need to know if the moss is a nutrient supplying species to make the experiment valid. If the plants grew better it would prove that moss supplied nutrients but if the plants grew poorly then we would have to question the moss species. To do the experiment the forest moss must be known to exist with orchids.

 

[Stone]

Its great to see activity in SOC again:clap:
I absolutely agree that fertilizer should always come dead last on the list of things to get right when you are setting up for growing orchids. The environment is 95% (or more) of the equation. But when you have done everything you possibly can (or can afford) to get the environment right, then the feeding is the only thing left you have to play with.

Firstly, if your growing rothschildianum and micranthum in the same greenhouse, one is going to suffer, it has to. So there's your first limiting factor, so we can't expect optimum results for everything we try to grow. The ultimate would be to specialize in just one species and do that to perfection but who's going to do that??

As for nutrients, every species is probably different so how on earth can we perfect that aspect? Again we cannot so I beleive that in the absense of irrefutible information ( and unless we feed each species a different formula ) that we should probably settle on a balance of the 2 N forms together with an organic source of N and (agruably) medium to lowish K, low P together with all the other requirements and use that on everything at a very dilute strength. At least until we know more. Thats what I do unless some shows me I'm wrong :wink::evil:

 

[Stone]

3. Trees harbour insects, birds, fairies etc... Which will leave behind little packets of poo which are very good sources of N and P.

HA HA fairies!
But actually there was an experiment where some branches supporting various epiphytes in a rainforest were regularly sprayed with a P solution. Growth was explosive so P is definately a limiting factor in epiphyte communities. The question is: Does this mean we should supplement P over and above what the plants have evolved with to get faster (better?) growth?? Would this harm them long term??

 

[gonewild]

Its great to see activity in SOC again:clap:
I absolutely agree that fertilizer should always come dead last on the list of things to get right when you are setting up for growing orchids.

I can't agree fertilizer should be dead last to get right for many reasons.

The environment is 95% (or more) of the equation. But when you have done everything you possibly can (or can afford) to get the environment right, then the feeding is the only thing left you have to play with.

This I agree with. :clap:

Firstly, if your growing rothschildianum and micranthum in the same greenhouse, one is going to suffer, it has to.

But biologically why does it suffer?

So there's your first limiting factor, so we can't expect optimum results for everything we try to grow. The ultimate would be to specialize in just one species and do that to perfection but who's going to do that??

You wouldn't need to limit to one species but rather limit to species that grow under the light and temperature you provide.

As for nutrients, every species is probably different so how on earth can we perfect that aspect?

Perfect it by learning what the nutrient requirements actually are and not continue the assumption that what we know is correct and the best.
The ideal goal is to determine a nutrient supply that satisfies a wide range of plants. This knowledge won't likely come from commercial Phal forcing programs.

Again we cannot so I beleive that in the absense of irrefutible information ( and unless we feed each species a different formula ) that we should probably settle on a balance of the 2 N forms together with an organic source of N and (agruably) medium to lowish K, low P together with all the other requirements and use that on everything at a very dilute strength.

We cannot if we do not try. oke: Is a small amount of junk food a healthy diet?

A garbage dump contains everything a dog needs to eat in very low amounts (dilute strength). Why do dogs that live in garbage dumps look so bad when they have so much to eat?
I prefer to look for the best nutrient supply for orchids rather than to settle for the garbage dump method.

At least until we know more. Thats what I do unless some shows me I'm wrong :wink::evil:

Keep your eyes open!

 

[gonewild]

But actually there was an experiment where some branches supporting various epiphytes in a rainforest were regularly sprayed with a P solution. Growth was explosive so P is definately a limiting factor in epiphyte communities.

Do you have more info about this?

 

[Ray]

If I may be so bold...

Orchids are 90%-95% water, so that makes me think that the BEST thing you can do for your plants is give them an environment where they can be watered very frequently, and use very pure water to do so. Then, add a tiny amount of a complete nutrient, and you're about as close to hitting the mark as you can in a domesticated environment.

 

[gonewild]

If I may be so bold...

Orchids are 90%-95% water, so that makes me think that the BEST thing you can do for your plants is give them an environment where they can be watered very frequently, and use very pure water to do so. Then, add a tiny amount of a complete nutrient, and you're about as close to hitting the mark as you can in a domesticated environment.

100% agree. Moisture is the most important factor. Ideal conditions allow for humid air and frequent wetting of leaves and media.

Now let me be bold too...
Under these ideal conditions moss and lichens will grow and produce nutrients for the orchids.
(Now how do we keep the moss from growing on the kitchen cabinets? )

 

[TyroneGenade]

Orchids are 90%-95% water, so that makes me think that the BEST thing you can do for your plants is give them an environment where they can be watered very frequently, and use very pure water to do so. Then, add a tiny amount of a complete nutrient, and you're about as close to hitting the mark as you can in a domesticated environment.

Our minds tend to think in terms of absolutes: 10 ppm vs 100 ppm instead of time: 10 ppm every week vs 100 ppm once a month. The real issue is nutrient supply, i.e. whether the required nutrients are supplied constantly to allow for constant growth. In which case, 1 ppm every day could be better than 10 ppm once a week.

This nutrient supply issue continues to vex planted aquarium folks. You can find lush, algae free, plant growth in Amazon basin with virtually zero NPK but if you try maintain an aquarium with anything less than a constant 10 ppm N and you get an algal mess. WHY??? :sob: Aquariums seem even more sensitive to CO2 levels (too low ==> algae!) which isn't the case in the wild... Of course, in the wild the water has a near constant supply of 0.00...1 ppm N and constant low CO2 levels during the day.

Part of the virtue of mediums such as agra and stone is that you can keep them wet and the plants aerated all the time. In SH you can keep a constant supply of low concentration nutrients as well. Of course, not everyone has success with SH so there is a lot more going on than simply nutrient and water supply.

Getting back to moss: limuhead, do you think you could rescue some moss from a plants that are doing well to put with seedlings?

As regards your organic fish emulsion, it is already low PK and if you look closely it has a good supply of calcium and magnesium. I was very surprised when I had a look at my Seagrow and did the math (now long forgotten) and discovered that it approximates the K-light very closely.

 

[gonewild]

Our minds tend to think in terms of absolutes: 10 ppm vs 100 ppm instead of time: 10 ppm every week vs 100 ppm once a month. The real issue is nutrient supply, i.e. whether the required nutrients are supplied constantly to allow for constant growth. In which case, 1 ppm every day could be better than 10 ppm once a week.

Or 0.1ppm constant 24/7.
Do orchids take in nutrients during the day or night?
Or do orchids take in nutrients constantly like fuel to a fire?

As regards your organic fish emulsion, it is already low PK and if you look closely it has a good supply of calcium and magnesium. I was very surprised when I had a look at my Seagrow and did the math (now long forgotten) and discovered that it approximates the K-light very closely.

Don't let the big chemical companies hear you say that.
(You know the guys that have done all the trials that show we need to use huge amounts of potassium and phosphates and just happen to be the ones that sell it to us.)

 

[keithrs]

Now let me be bold.....

If you have perfect conditions, perfect watering schedule, moss growing, potting media should be extremely coarse to nonexistent.

I also have to say that humidity and watering will trump condition to a degree.

Now that we have determined how to ideally grow an orchid. What is the ideal watering schedule? I water most my plant more then I should because of my dry contions, but I water daily in the summer. Im hooked to a timer sprinkler system now... Thank God! I would spend hour and half watering after work. Ill water for 10 mins wait 30 min then water for 3 mins every 15 for two hours in late afternoon. That about a total of about 30 min of watering daily.

 

[gonewild]

Now let me be bold.....

If you have perfect conditions,

What is the ideal watering schedule?

oke: Depends on the species of orchid!

Under perfect conditions....
Set your timer to mist the plants one minute every hour.
Under perfect conditions the plants and media will not be over watered and beautiful moss will grow on everything.

 

[Rick]

I am a carpenter by trade. I know that there are more than a few scientific minds that contribute to this forum on a regular basis. Being a person that likes to keep it simple would my organic fish emulsion (5-1-1) and the right combination of dolomite and Epsom salts give me similar results as K-lite type formulation?

There's definitely Ca, Mg and micros in the fish emulsion too, so most likely you can (or are) able to get similar results to K lite.

Adding the fish emulsion to your local drinking/stream/well water would probably ensure that you end up with a good mix of Ca and Mg without messing with dolomite and epsom salts.

A good drinking water will have very little N P K, but will often have plenty of the other good things that plants need. But as frequently pointed out that "need" is tiny compared to what we've learned (incorrectly applied) from agriculture science.

Lots of people have been sending me analysis of the drinking water, to determine a good balance of whatever fert mix and/or individual compounds to add. I'm getting my best results in 13 years of growing just adding a tiny "spit" of feeding to my daily watering routine, instead of the old "weakly weekly" routine. And using a fraction of the fert I used to use per week.

 

[Rick]

In which case, 1 ppm every day could be better than 10 ppm once a week.

This nutrient supply issue continues to vex planted aquarium folks. You can find lush, algae free, plant growth in Amazon basin with virtually zero NPK but if you try maintain an aquarium with anything less than a constant 10 ppm N and you get an algal mess. WHY??? :sob: Aquariums seem even more sensitive to CO2 levels (too low ==> algae!) which isn't the case in the wild... Of course, in the wild the water has a near constant supply of 0.00...1 ppm N and constant low CO2 levels during the day.

Part of the virtue of mediums such as agra and stone is that you can keep them wet and the plants aerated all the time. In SH you can keep a constant supply of low concentration nutrients as well. Of course, not everyone has success with SH so there is a lot more going on than simply nutrient and water supply.
.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:


YES! And this works great for orchids too even if you stick them on bark plaques or in pots of bark mixes.

 

[Trithor]

If I am reading the above correctly, there are a number of factors which we are considering. This all goes back to basics, and I am sure a discussion we have all had with novice growers at our respective Orchid Societies, namely the various factors which we need to attend to in order to successfully grow orchids (or any plants for that matter). We are not all as lucky as those living and growing in Hawaii to have most of them taken care of naturally, so we need to attend to each factor individually, but still being aware that they are mutually dependant and not exclusive. So factors such as temperature, light, air movement, humidity, potting medium, water quantity and quality, and feeding (or not). These are all inter-dependant and a change in one will require a change in the others. I have always believed that no amount of tweeking of feeding will be met with any success if the other factors are not in line. I always advise the novices to first worry about those factors which are easy to adjust before trying to adjust those that are not. Again it goes back to a multitude of threads, no sense in tweeking fertilizer if you don't know what your water composition is. I firmly believe that water quality is something most of us are aware of as being of paramount importance, but many choose to ignore for some reason in favour of changing potting mixes and tweeking chemical additives.

 

[Rick]

If you have perfect conditions, perfect watering schedule, moss growing, potting media should be extremely coarse to nonexistent.

I also have to say that humidity and watering will trump condition to a degree.

Now that we have determined how to ideally grow an orchid. What is the ideal watering schedule? I water most my plant more then I should because of my dry contions, but I water daily in the summer. Im hooked to a timer sprinkler system now... Thank God! I would spend hour and half watering after work. Ill water for 10 mins wait 30 min then water for 3 mins every 15 for two hours in late afternoon. That about a total of about 30 min of watering daily.

Size of collection is a concern in figuring out time constraints, but I spend about an hour a day watering/pruning/feeding/....my orchids. I use a pump sprayer, and kind of take care of all three simultaneously. Also during that hour of watering/poking, I identify conditions that will take more serious time (for the weekend), plus enjoying whatever is flowering. But my collection fits in a 12X12 GH so if it was bigger, then time expenditure would go up, and I'd never get to work.

In some ways, the orchid growing is the fun/passion in my life, so I consider the watering aspect as much of an excuse to spend time appreciating and keeping tabs on the plants rather than a chore that gets in the way of some other aspect of growing. I really can't see how or why I would come up with a set watering schedule to account for all the variables of my growing conditions, or to increase the efficiency of management so I can spend more time at work and less with the plants.

 

[Rick]

no sense in tweeking fertilizer if you don't know what your water composition is.

Yup, but that's why so many have inadvertently gone to RO or other pure water sources rather than looking into what their local water source is capable of providing.