Stunning was the word that first came to my mind... then I saw that David beat me to the post, so what can I do, but echo him!Again a stunning clone!
Stunning was the word that first came to my mind... then I saw that David beat me to the post, so what can I do, but echo him!Again a stunning clone!
Sure, PM me.I would love some pollen and cross it with my Brassavola grandiflora!
Deb, if Leslie tells us the fc reading, we won't know the exact conversion factor because it varies modestly with specific light source, but we can multiply his reading by about 0.15 to get a rough approximation of PPFD. This will be assuming he is using a broad spectrum white fluorescent. So, 2000 fc will be roughly 300 PPFD on our meters if Leslie's light spectrum is roughly similar to our LED spectrum.Oh boy… I’m old school so fc only. I’ll measure tomorrow.
At leaf level it measures 1250 fc under 2 x T5 sun blaster fluorescents. But the area of spread of light catch on 8 leaves for 14 hours.Deb, if Leslie tells us the fc reading, we won't know the exact conversion factor because it varies modestly with specific light source, but we can multiply his reading by about 0.15 to get a rough approximation of PPFD. This will be assuming he is using a broad spectrum white fluorescent. So, 2000 fc will be roughly 300 PPFD on our meters if Leslie's light spectrum is roughly similar to our LED spectrum.
That calculates to a PPFD of about 188 micro moles/m2/sec. At 14 hours per day the daily light integral is 9.45. This is good, but not particularly high Cattleya light.At leaf level it measures 1250 fc under 2 x T5 sun blaster fluorescents. But the area of spread of light catch on 8 leaves for 14 hours.
I was surprised at the low fc when I measured too.That calculates to a PPFD of about 188 micro moles/m2/sec. At 14 hours per day the daily light integral is 9.45. This is good, but not particularly high Cattleya light.
Deb, a reading of 250 PPFD with our Apogee quantum flux meters and 12 hours of daylight is even higher at 10.8 DLI. So, Leslie’s good results are not due to aggressively high light. He is doing others things well to get the nice blooming!
I have a “special care nursery” area for less mature (and struggling) small Cattleyas that is under 2’ x 2’ LED panels that are delivering only 190 PPFD to the top of the leaves. This was intended for growth without worrying about blooming. Nevertheless, some Cattleyas are blooming, including my percivaliana (‘Summit’ x self) that bloomed a month ago. I think good Cattleya growth and blooming may not require as high a light as often given.
Thanks!Sure, PM me.
Ok I sent a PM. Funny why I can and some can't? Happened to Hien too.Thanks!
However, it says "you may not start a conversation with the following member" when I tried to send you a message.
Hehe just think semialba has white petals and sepals that should match the white walls.Just kidding, I couldn't tell if it was simi-alba or coerulea in the first photo.
-Patrick
Enter your email address to join: