Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #16   Report Post  
Old 17-08-2004, 02:47 AM
unknown
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Susan Erickson wrote:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:48:02 -0400, Rob Halgren
wrote:

J Fortuna wrote:



That said, I've tried it both ways often enough to know that a secondary
blooming can really stress a plant.


I had a large white phal in a 8 inch pot with a considerable
number of leaves. Note the had. I just let it bloom until it
died. This was years ago and I did not realize it was going down
hill but when it quit blooming after 18 months there was no
strength left to live.





i have a golden peoker daughter that's been blooming on two spikes since
march of '03. plant seems fat and happy; just grew a nice big new leaf.
one spike has 2 flowers left, *may* be trying to do a keiki thing, and
looks like it might try to branch. the other spike lost its last flower
the other day.

i was going to leave it alone, but reading this is making me nervous, so
i compromised and cut the flowerless spike off (time for Experiments in
Stem Propagation ; am watching the other one. if it tries to branch
a flower spike, i'll cut that branch off, but i want to see what the
itty bitty green things are, to see if they'll develop into anything.

--j_a, fingers crossed...
  #17   Report Post  
Old 17-08-2004, 02:47 AM
unknown
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Susan Erickson wrote:

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:48:02 -0400, Rob Halgren
wrote:

J Fortuna wrote:



That said, I've tried it both ways often enough to know that a secondary
blooming can really stress a plant.


I had a large white phal in a 8 inch pot with a considerable
number of leaves. Note the had. I just let it bloom until it
died. This was years ago and I did not realize it was going down
hill but when it quit blooming after 18 months there was no
strength left to live.





i have a golden peoker daughter that's been blooming on two spikes since
march of '03. plant seems fat and happy; just grew a nice big new leaf.
one spike has 2 flowers left, *may* be trying to do a keiki thing, and
looks like it might try to branch. the other spike lost its last flower
the other day.

i was going to leave it alone, but reading this is making me nervous, so
i compromised and cut the flowerless spike off (time for Experiments in
Stem Propagation ; am watching the other one. if it tries to branch
a flower spike, i'll cut that branch off, but i want to see what the
itty bitty green things are, to see if they'll develop into anything.

--j_a, fingers crossed...
  #18   Report Post  
Old 17-08-2004, 12:27 PM
Leo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Xi Wang wrote in message ...
Besides, if you leave the spike, you might just get some keikis. Never
know.


I know the advice to cut off spent spikes to 'conserve the strength' of
a plant represents the wisdom of generations, but it doesn't correspond
very well to my recent experience with phals or to my own humble opinion
of biology.

A previous poster urged us to think of what happens in nature but my
conclusions are somewhat different: the flowers are long lived and
wilt as soon as pollinated so the strategy must be to persist until
a (possibly infrequent) pollination event occurs. If weather, passing
wildlife or other hazards of life in the wild damage the flowers, it
may make sense for the plant to sprout another branch off what's
left of the spike. Presumably there's some regulatory mechanism
that only allows this if the plant can afford it (admittedly this
may be partly bred out in domesticated varieties).

What is the metabolic cost of a flower spike? Well obviously it is a
bunch of growth that doesn't photosynthesise much, but it doesn't
weigh more than a big bunch of aerial roots such as phals often have
and no one worries about those sapping the life of the plant.

On my office windowsill for example I have an unidentified white phal
in a 5 inch pot, originally bought in bloom but spent from a florist
for 50 pence. It has been in bloom most of the time since. Currently
it has 8 open flowers and couple buds coming on branch from a spike that
first came up in october and had 10 flowers. Since that time there has
also grown a new leaf bigger than the previous ones and a new, thicker
flower spike that's shooting up a quarter inch a day. Will I chop off
any presentable flowers or even any nodes that might sprout more?

Phals are pretty vigorous growers and normally what you want is maximum
flower enjoyment. If you're grooming the plant for exhibition or
something your mileage may be different, but I'm a convert to
squeezing out the maximum flowers.

Leo
  #19   Report Post  
Old 17-08-2004, 12:27 PM
Leo
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Xi Wang wrote in message ...
Besides, if you leave the spike, you might just get some keikis. Never
know.


I know the advice to cut off spent spikes to 'conserve the strength' of
a plant represents the wisdom of generations, but it doesn't correspond
very well to my recent experience with phals or to my own humble opinion
of biology.

A previous poster urged us to think of what happens in nature but my
conclusions are somewhat different: the flowers are long lived and
wilt as soon as pollinated so the strategy must be to persist until
a (possibly infrequent) pollination event occurs. If weather, passing
wildlife or other hazards of life in the wild damage the flowers, it
may make sense for the plant to sprout another branch off what's
left of the spike. Presumably there's some regulatory mechanism
that only allows this if the plant can afford it (admittedly this
may be partly bred out in domesticated varieties).

What is the metabolic cost of a flower spike? Well obviously it is a
bunch of growth that doesn't photosynthesise much, but it doesn't
weigh more than a big bunch of aerial roots such as phals often have
and no one worries about those sapping the life of the plant.

On my office windowsill for example I have an unidentified white phal
in a 5 inch pot, originally bought in bloom but spent from a florist
for 50 pence. It has been in bloom most of the time since. Currently
it has 8 open flowers and couple buds coming on branch from a spike that
first came up in october and had 10 flowers. Since that time there has
also grown a new leaf bigger than the previous ones and a new, thicker
flower spike that's shooting up a quarter inch a day. Will I chop off
any presentable flowers or even any nodes that might sprout more?

Phals are pretty vigorous growers and normally what you want is maximum
flower enjoyment. If you're grooming the plant for exhibition or
something your mileage may be different, but I'm a convert to
squeezing out the maximum flowers.

Leo
  #20   Report Post  
Old 17-08-2004, 09:24 PM
Rob Halgren
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Leo wrote:

I know the advice to cut off spent spikes to 'conserve the strength' of
a plant represents the wisdom of generations, but it doesn't correspond
very well to my recent experience with phals or to my own humble opinion
of biology.

A previous poster urged us to think of what happens in nature but my
conclusions are somewhat different: the flowers are long lived and
wilt as soon as pollinated so the strategy must be to persist until
a (possibly infrequent) pollination event occurs. If weather, passing
wildlife or other hazards of life in the wild damage the flowers, it
may make sense for the plant to sprout another branch off what's
left of the spike. Presumably there's some regulatory mechanism
that only allows this if the plant can afford it (admittedly this
may be partly bred out in domesticated varieties).

What is the metabolic cost of a flower spike? Well obviously it is a
bunch of growth that doesn't photosynthesise much, but it doesn't
weigh more than a big bunch of aerial roots such as phals often have
and no one worries about those sapping the life of the plant.



Leo,

As a biologist, I would have to agree with the sentiment of your
post, but I think you underestimate domestication. Yes, there is (has
to be) some regulatory mechanism that has evolved to limit the blooming
capacity of the phalaenopsis. It does make logical sense, assuming that
these plants are perennial and have evolved to bloom over many years,
although a single sucessful pollination event and seed distribution
would ensure evolutionary 'success' in the strictest sense. An
inflorescence is a substantial metabolic cost to produce, and perhaps
less to maintain, but reblooming a spike invokes the 'production cost'
more frequently. Seed production is expensive, very expensive, if we
let it get that far. Also, it may look like the mature flowers are not
doing anything, but they are respiring (consuming sugars that the green
parts must make) and transpiring (releasing water that the roots must
uptake). If they aren't doing those two things they are dead, and none
of us want that. They aren't contributing much, and they are costing at
least a little. Presumably, based on collective experience, a healthy
happy plant has little trouble paying the bills.

However, we aren't growing these plants in their native
environment. Environmental stimuli which might serve to limit blooming
may not exist in the typical windowsill. More importantly, we have
spent a hundred years breeding the limiting capacity out of the genus.
Generations of orchid breeders have selected for free blooming, long
blooming, and large (more 'metabolically expensive') flowers. Ease of
bloom is probably one of the most important characteristics, and if
breeders have done their job the plants should be too genetically stupid
(to coin a phrase that needs coining) to know when to stop blooming.
This is a good thing for orchid growers (sellers, anyway). If we were
growing species orchids on trees in SE Asia, then there wouldn't really
be an issue.

Interesting thoughts though. I'd never really considered it
before. And I may have falsely considered it just now...

Rob

--
Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren
1) There is always room for one more orchid
2) There is always room for two more orchids
2a. See rule 1
3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase
more orchids, obtain more credit
LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list )


  #21   Report Post  
Old 17-08-2004, 09:24 PM
Rob Halgren
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Leo wrote:

I know the advice to cut off spent spikes to 'conserve the strength' of
a plant represents the wisdom of generations, but it doesn't correspond
very well to my recent experience with phals or to my own humble opinion
of biology.

A previous poster urged us to think of what happens in nature but my
conclusions are somewhat different: the flowers are long lived and
wilt as soon as pollinated so the strategy must be to persist until
a (possibly infrequent) pollination event occurs. If weather, passing
wildlife or other hazards of life in the wild damage the flowers, it
may make sense for the plant to sprout another branch off what's
left of the spike. Presumably there's some regulatory mechanism
that only allows this if the plant can afford it (admittedly this
may be partly bred out in domesticated varieties).

What is the metabolic cost of a flower spike? Well obviously it is a
bunch of growth that doesn't photosynthesise much, but it doesn't
weigh more than a big bunch of aerial roots such as phals often have
and no one worries about those sapping the life of the plant.



Leo,

As a biologist, I would have to agree with the sentiment of your
post, but I think you underestimate domestication. Yes, there is (has
to be) some regulatory mechanism that has evolved to limit the blooming
capacity of the phalaenopsis. It does make logical sense, assuming that
these plants are perennial and have evolved to bloom over many years,
although a single sucessful pollination event and seed distribution
would ensure evolutionary 'success' in the strictest sense. An
inflorescence is a substantial metabolic cost to produce, and perhaps
less to maintain, but reblooming a spike invokes the 'production cost'
more frequently. Seed production is expensive, very expensive, if we
let it get that far. Also, it may look like the mature flowers are not
doing anything, but they are respiring (consuming sugars that the green
parts must make) and transpiring (releasing water that the roots must
uptake). If they aren't doing those two things they are dead, and none
of us want that. They aren't contributing much, and they are costing at
least a little. Presumably, based on collective experience, a healthy
happy plant has little trouble paying the bills.

However, we aren't growing these plants in their native
environment. Environmental stimuli which might serve to limit blooming
may not exist in the typical windowsill. More importantly, we have
spent a hundred years breeding the limiting capacity out of the genus.
Generations of orchid breeders have selected for free blooming, long
blooming, and large (more 'metabolically expensive') flowers. Ease of
bloom is probably one of the most important characteristics, and if
breeders have done their job the plants should be too genetically stupid
(to coin a phrase that needs coining) to know when to stop blooming.
This is a good thing for orchid growers (sellers, anyway). If we were
growing species orchids on trees in SE Asia, then there wouldn't really
be an issue.

Interesting thoughts though. I'd never really considered it
before. And I may have falsely considered it just now...

Rob

--
Rob's Rules: http://www.msu.edu/~halgren
1) There is always room for one more orchid
2) There is always room for two more orchids
2a. See rule 1
3) When one has insufficient credit to purchase
more orchids, obtain more credit
LittlefrogFarm is open - e-mail me for a list )
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First lawn, first post. In need of advice.... TeaBag Lawns 21 07-06-2013 09:35 AM
Advice on pruning flowering cherry please. McBad United Kingdom 8 19-11-2005 07:02 PM
Newbie asks - How to post anonymously to newsgroups ? [email protected] Ponds 0 20-02-2005 04:40 AM
Newbie advice post-flowering David Hewitt Orchids 0 13-08-2004 03:19 PM
Post Your Three Favorite Movies - I Post Facts About You The Magnficent Bastard Gardening 275 10-03-2004 02:47 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017