Hi Everyone-
I apologize if this has been covered previously, but I checked the newsgroup
archive and didn't find what I was looking for.

I have been growing orchids for a number of years (mostly phals and species
paphs: venustum, hirsutissimum, spicerianum, armeniacum, micranthum), on the
windowsill, in a barked-based medium. I use Peters 30-10-10 for
fertilizing, with okay, not great results. I have never used a blossom
boosting fertilizer. I have some multifloral phals that I have never
achieved the branching inflorescences that I would like to see. My question
is two-fold: would I really do that much better with a blossom booster
fertilizer (would you have to apply this according to the individual plant's
bloom season), and second, I would like to get some input on Dyna-Gro
fertilizer as an alternative to Peters. Thanks in advance.

Bill Landers

Bill,

I'm not sure that a blossom booster will help much, but have read that
excess nitrogen is a negative for blooming.

If you are diligent about repotting before the bark-based medium gets too
sour, then the extra nitrogen formula you've been using may be unnecessary.

--

Ray Barkalow First Rays Orchids
http://www.firstrays.com
Secure Online Ordering & Lots of Free Info!


"Bill Landers" wrote in message
...
Hi Everyone-
I apologize if this has been covered previously, but I checked the
newsgroup
archive and didn't find what I was looking for.

I have been growing orchids for a number of years (mostly phals and
species
paphs: venustum, hirsutissimum, spicerianum, armeniacum, micranthum), on
the
windowsill, in a barked-based medium. I use Peters 30-10-10 for
fertilizing, with okay, not great results. I have never used a blossom
boosting fertilizer. I have some multifloral phals that I have never
achieved the branching inflorescences that I would like to see. My
question
is two-fold: would I really do that much better with a blossom booster
fertilizer (would you have to apply this according to the individual
plant's
bloom season), and second, I would like to get some input on Dyna-Gro
fertilizer as an alternative to Peters. Thanks in advance.

Bill Landers

On Wed, 5 Feb 2003 16:58:47 -0500, "Ray @ First Rays Orchids"
wrote:

Bill,

I'm not sure that a blossom booster will help much, but have read that
excess nitrogen is a negative for blooming.

If you are diligent about repotting before the bark-based medium gets too
sour, then the extra nitrogen formula you've been using may be unnecessary.

I have to agree with Ray. I have heard several speakers say that
if your going to just use one general fertilizer you should use
an evenly balanced one. Then you are not deciding for the plant
what it wants, and it has what ever it needs available.

Nitrogen is known for 'pushing lush green growth' at the expense
of flowers. Is that not what we use to "green up" our spring
lawn? A high nitrogen formula always works if it does not burn
the lawn.
SuE
http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php

I always use a high N formula, on bark, coconut husk chips, even
sphagnum.....with no loss of blooms (although I sometimes switch to a
high P bloom formula as bloom season approaches). I use Dynagro, Jerry's
Grow for a few plants (catt's and phrags). Since N is used at a faster
rate by plants, there is really no need for a balanced formula...you are
just getting excess P and K wasting away or building up as the N gets
used up. Although I do sometimes use bloom boosters, I believe that the
same effect can be achieved by reducing or stopping the fertilizing
entirely, as I do for some paphs in the winter. Take care, Eric Muehlbauer

Always an interesting topic. I remember reading somewhere that fertilizer
with the
numbers 15-15-15 or 20-20-20 are not balanced?
Why not? Are the numbers not a % of the amount of N, P & K
Cheers Wendy

"Eric Muehlbauer" wrote in message
...
| I always use a high N formula, on bark, coconut husk chips, even
| sphagnum.....with no loss of blooms (although I sometimes switch to a
| high P bloom formula as bloom season approaches). I use Dynagro, Jerry's
| Grow for a few plants (catt's and phrags). Since N is used at a faster
| rate by plants, there is really no need for a balanced formula...you are
| just getting excess P and K wasting away or building up as the N gets
| used up. Although I do sometimes use bloom boosters, I believe that the
| same effect can be achieved by reducing or stopping the fertilizing
| entirely, as I do for some paphs in the winter. Take care, Eric Muehlbauer
|

For some reason, the N-P-K numbers on a fertilizer label are expressed as
weight percent N, P2O5 and K2O, even though none of them really is in the
package as those chemical species.

Gravimetrically, N = 100% N, P2O5 = 44% P, and K2O = 83% K, so a 10-10-10
fertilizer might be looked at as 10 - 4.4 - 8.3.

--

Ray Barkalow First Rays Orchids
http://www.firstrays.com
Secure Online Ordering & Lots of Free Info!


"Wendy" wrote in message
...
Always an interesting topic. I remember reading somewhere that fertilizer
with the
numbers 15-15-15 or 20-20-20 are not balanced?
Why not? Are the numbers not a % of the amount of N, P & K
Cheers Wendy

"Eric Muehlbauer" wrote in message
...
| I always use a high N formula, on bark, coconut husk chips, even
| sphagnum.....with no loss of blooms (although I sometimes switch to a
| high P bloom formula as bloom season approaches). I use Dynagro, Jerry's
| Grow for a few plants (catt's and phrags). Since N is used at a faster
| rate by plants, there is really no need for a balanced formula...you are
| just getting excess P and K wasting away or building up as the N gets
| used up. Although I do sometimes use bloom boosters, I believe that the
| same effect can be achieved by reducing or stopping the fertilizing
| entirely, as I do for some paphs in the winter. Take care, Eric
Muehlbauer
|

Thanks for the explanation Ray. Not sure what you mean about "even though
none of them is in the package as those chemical species"?
"Ray @ First Rays Orchids" wrote in message
...
| For some reason, the N-P-K numbers on a fertilizer label are expressed as
| weight percent N, P2O5 and K2O, even though none of them really is in the
| package as those chemical species.
|
| Gravimetrically, N = 100% N, P2O5 = 44% P, and K2O = 83% K, so a 10-10-10
| fertilizer might be looked at as 10 - 4.4 - 8.3.
|
| --
|
| Ray Barkalow First Rays Orchids
| http://www.firstrays.com
| Secure Online Ordering & Lots of Free Info!
|
|
| "Wendy" wrote in message
| ...
| Always an interesting topic. I remember reading somewhere that
fertilizer
| with the
| numbers 15-15-15 or 20-20-20 are not balanced?
| Why not? Are the numbers not a % of the amount of N, P & K
| Cheers Wendy
|
| "Eric Muehlbauer" wrote in message
| ...
| | I always use a high N formula, on bark, coconut husk chips, even
| | sphagnum.....with no loss of blooms (although I sometimes switch to a
| | high P bloom formula as bloom season approaches). I use Dynagro,
Jerry's
| | Grow for a few plants (catt's and phrags). Since N is used at a faster
| | rate by plants, there is really no need for a balanced formula...you
are
| | just getting excess P and K wasting away or building up as the N gets
| | used up. Although I do sometimes use bloom boosters, I believe that
the
| | same effect can be achieved by reducing or stopping the fertilizing
| | entirely, as I do for some paphs in the winter. Take care, Eric
| Muehlbauer
| |
|
|
|
|

Ray @ First Rays Orchids ) wrote:
: For some reason, the N-P-K numbers on a fertilizer label are expressed as
: weight percent N, P2O5 and K2O, even though none of them really is in the
: package as those chemical species.

I don't know the justification but it's a fairly common practice. Aqeous N
is often expressed as NO3. I would guess it's a convenience similar to the
reason industrial chemists use molal instead of molar units.

Speaking of chemical species what's the rationale for the preference of
N as ammonia over N as urea?

Dave Sheehy

On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 18:43:08 +0000 (UTC),
(Dave Sheehy) wrote:

Speaking of chemical species what's the rationale for the preference of
N as ammonia over N as urea?

The theory was that urea had to be broken down by bacteria before it
was available to the plant which wouldn't happen well in an orchid
potting mix. The results of an experiment to test this was published
in the AOS Orchids magazine last year. It showed no difference in
phals grown using ammonia or urea based fertilizers. It would be
interesting to run an experiment to test whether this holds true for
mounted orchids as well.

deg

Wendy,

What I mean is that you'll find no elemental nitrogen, phosphorus pentoxide
or potassium oxide in the box or bottle. Instead, you're likely to find
more complex chemical compounds.

--

Ray Barkalow First Rays Orchids
http://www.firstrays.com
Secure Online Ordering & Lots of Free Info!


"Wendy" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the explanation Ray. Not sure what you mean about "even though
none of them is in the package as those chemical species"?
"Ray @ First Rays Orchids" wrote in message
...
| For some reason, the N-P-K numbers on a fertilizer label are expressed
as
| weight percent N, P2O5 and K2O, even though none of them really is in
the
| package as those chemical species.
|
| Gravimetrically, N = 100% N, P2O5 = 44% P, and K2O = 83% K, so a
10-10-10
| fertilizer might be looked at as 10 - 4.4 - 8.3.
|
| --
|
| Ray Barkalow First Rays Orchids
| http://www.firstrays.com
| Secure Online Ordering & Lots of Free Info!
|
|
| "Wendy" wrote in message
| ...
| Always an interesting topic. I remember reading somewhere that
fertilizer
| with the
| numbers 15-15-15 or 20-20-20 are not balanced?
| Why not? Are the numbers not a % of the amount of N, P & K
| Cheers Wendy
|
| "Eric Muehlbauer" wrote in message
| ...
| | I always use a high N formula, on bark, coconut husk chips, even
| | sphagnum.....with no loss of blooms (although I sometimes switch to
a
| | high P bloom formula as bloom season approaches). I use Dynagro,
Jerry's
| | Grow for a few plants (catt's and phrags). Since N is used at a
faster
| | rate by plants, there is really no need for a balanced formula...you
are
| | just getting excess P and K wasting away or building up as the N
gets
| | used up. Although I do sometimes use bloom boosters, I believe that
the
| | same effect can be achieved by reducing or stopping the fertilizing
| | entirely, as I do for some paphs in the winter. Take care, Eric
| Muehlbauer
| |
|
|
|
|

Aqueoue N2 (aka dissolved nitrogen) is not generally available to
plants. Nitrate ions (NO3-) are taken up by plants and are a usable
source of atomic nitrogen.

Jim

On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 18:43:08 +0000 (UTC),
(Dave Sheehy) wrote:

Ray @ First Rays Orchids ) wrote:
: For some reason, the N-P-K numbers on a fertilizer label are expressed as
: weight percent N, P2O5 and K2O, even though none of them really is in the
: package as those chemical species.

I don't know the justification but it's a fairly common practice. Aqeous N
is often expressed as NO3. I would guess it's a convenience similar to the
reason industrial chemists use molal instead of molar units.

Speaking of chemical species what's the rationale for the preference of
N as ammonia over N as urea?

Dave Sheehy

James Aldridge, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
- www.JamesAldridge.us
- www.FWCDS.org