gunner wrote:
"jeff" wrote in message
...
mj wrote:
On Sep 17, 1:37 pm, mj wrote:
On Sep 17, 7:47 am, phorbin wrote:

In article 0a2ea65d-b4a5-40f7-ba3d-
,
says...

it would seem to me that the value of the crop must exceed the cost of
growing it. No doubt why there are few hydroponic squash growers.

Jeff


A logical premise, yet hydroponics can be very cost effective and need not
be expensive.

For sure, a bit more than sticking a seed in a hole in the ground and
hoping it grows.

Most cases, hydro foods are much easier to grow; using much less water to
grow much more food on much less acreage.

It almost looks like an extension of drip irrigation, which many here
(including myself) are using. The difference being the soil less medium
and recycling the water. It also appears to me that hydroponics is
almost exclusively done indoors such as in a greenhouse. I imagine this
is to keep from contaminating the system and the fact that the plants
have to be elevated to recover the nutrients and fluid.

So, it looks to be a wise choice for greenhouse gardening and a step
too far for those of us in the great outdoors. Do I misread that?

Jeff


Definitely less labor, plus the cost of nutes is controllable & you get
better pest control.

As for squash growing? done quite often, mostly outdoors:
http://www.hos.ufl.edu/protectedag/p...babysquash.pdf
an old AG study on baby squash production.