Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs, or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots out of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Gene,

Could your observation not be explained simply by the fact that the runoff -
draining into pots or onto the root system - is simply fertilizing your
plant more than if you were misting with pure water?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not challenging your observation, just offering an
alternative explanation.

I often get a bit frustrated by my own testing in the GH - see something I'd
like to attribute to some change I've made, only to realize there are a
number of other explanations that could explain the observation.

Yet another reason we all need MUCH bigger greenhouses so we can do better
studies (yeah, that's the reason...)

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!
..
"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs, or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Keep in mind that mineral deposits will build up quickly if fertilizer/water
misting is the only way H2O and dinner make it onto the mounted and hanging
plants. I am not trying to contradict here I am just adding that a good
drenching on a regular basis is very helpful to keep plant parts healthy.
People with hoses in their greenhouse who 'mist' may have a very different
idea of the word than people in their homes with a spray bottle. Just a
thought...

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs, or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Keep in mind that mineral deposits will build up quickly if fertilizer/water
misting is the only way H2O and dinner make it onto the mounted and hanging
plants. I am not trying to contradict here I am just adding that a good
drenching on a regular basis is very helpful to keep plant parts healthy.
People with hoses in their greenhouse who 'mist' may have a very different
idea of the word than people in their homes with a spray bottle. Just a
thought...

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs, or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Hi AJ,

If I knew of any empirical data for orchids I have forgotten it. I
would assume that what goes for thin leaved, thin cuticle crop plants
would hold for orchids with a similar leaf morphology. I would not
expect a Cattleya or Phal to get much out of it unless the liquid went
down into the crown and came into contact with the softer developing
tissue (which is what could use the nutrients the most).



I gleaned the info out of either

Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. 2nd Ed. H. Marschner, 1995.

Physiochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology, Park S. Nobel
or
The Physiology of Tropical Orchids in Relation to the Industry, Hew
and Yong


Hew and Yong have the graphs of Phal CO2 levels over a day but do not
discuss it in relation to stomata, only water stress.


The whole debate about foliar fertilizing seems academic for hobby
growers. If you are growing in a greenhouse the leaves are gong to
get fertilizer splashed on them anyway, and if you are growing in a
windowsill many factors other than fertilizer are probably limiting
growth.

I rather protect the leaves/plant from infection by keeping them dry
than possibly get a little bit more growth from foliar fertilization.






(Aaron Hicks) wrote in message ...
Hello, TZ!

Not that I doubt you, but I'd be interested in finding any
empirical data that indicate that there is substantial foliar uptake in
orchids- CAM or otherwise. I know there was one paper (Sheehan?) that was
in one of the Orchid Biology books (book 2 or 3) that used radioactive
tracers to show this was the case. Reportedly, the author recanted his
results some years later, indicating it was probably contamination.

In any event, I'd like to know of any papers on the subject. I've
always thought the cuticle of orchids is too thick for substantial uptake
of nutrients via the foliar route.

I do have an anecdote to share with the group: some orchids do not
like foliar feeding. I have noticed that bacterial infections (apparently
anthracnose) form more readily when water with fertilizer gets onto the
leaves, even when given time to evaporate. I suspect, but have no
evidence, that it supports bacterial growth which in turn may facilitate
infection.

The address in the header is a spam trap. Send no email there.

-AJHicks
Chandler, AZ

Thanks to both of you!

I will continue to mist my plants with fertilized water. I give my plants a
"shower" once a week or so, so I'm not really worried about mineral
deposits. If I do see any, however, I'll take care of it with leaf polish.

Thanks again for your excellent advice!

Sarah


"Al" wrote in message
...
Keep in mind that mineral deposits will build up quickly if
fertilizer/water
misting is the only way H2O and dinner make it onto the mounted and
hanging
plants. I am not trying to contradict here I am just adding that a good
drenching on a regular basis is very helpful to keep plant parts healthy.
People with hoses in their greenhouse who 'mist' may have a very different
idea of the word than people in their homes with a spray bottle. Just a
thought...

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose
is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever
seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly
so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given
them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs,
or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots
out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your
way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis
in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months
and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed
to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Thanks to both of you!

I will continue to mist my plants with fertilized water. I give my plants a
"shower" once a week or so, so I'm not really worried about mineral
deposits. If I do see any, however, I'll take care of it with leaf polish.

Thanks again for your excellent advice!

Sarah


"Al" wrote in message
...
Keep in mind that mineral deposits will build up quickly if
fertilizer/water
misting is the only way H2O and dinner make it onto the mounted and
hanging
plants. I am not trying to contradict here I am just adding that a good
drenching on a regular basis is very helpful to keep plant parts healthy.
People with hoses in their greenhouse who 'mist' may have a very different
idea of the word than people in their homes with a spray bottle. Just a
thought...

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose
is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever
seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly
so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given
them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs,
or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots
out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your
way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis
in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months
and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed
to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

I believe the idea is that the guard cells of the stomata allow for uptake
in foliar feeding. At least that's what Alan Koch says, and he quotes alot
from Marschner too.

As to the idea that stomata close during the day and open at night there is
a broad time zone most notable in the early AM when orchid growers (Rebecca
Northen being one) notice the increase benefit of early AM sun - even
direct sun - on their orchids. One of the reasons for that being that the
stomata are still open becasue its not yet hot. So fertilizing can be best
taken up by the plant at those times. Both by the roots and the leaves
(the 'leaf' part is my surmise)

As I get older I'm beginning to wonder about the foliar feeding & cuticle
inhibition thereof idea. I understood that everyone quotes from one study
and that may never have been reproduced. So I'm willing to listen and read
any cites.

K Barrett


"TZ" wrote in message
om...
Hi AJ,

If I knew of any empirical data for orchids I have forgotten it. I
would assume that what goes for thin leaved, thin cuticle crop plants
would hold for orchids with a similar leaf morphology. I would not
expect a Cattleya or Phal to get much out of it unless the liquid went
down into the crown and came into contact with the softer developing
tissue (which is what could use the nutrients the most).



I gleaned the info out of either

Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. 2nd Ed. H. Marschner, 1995.

Physiochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology, Park S. Nobel
or
The Physiology of Tropical Orchids in Relation to the Industry, Hew
and Yong


Hew and Yong have the graphs of Phal CO2 levels over a day but do not
discuss it in relation to stomata, only water stress.


The whole debate about foliar fertilizing seems academic for hobby
growers. If you are growing in a greenhouse the leaves are gong to
get fertilizer splashed on them anyway, and if you are growing in a
windowsill many factors other than fertilizer are probably limiting
growth.

I rather protect the leaves/plant from infection by keeping them dry
than possibly get a little bit more growth from foliar fertilization.






(Aaron Hicks) wrote in message
...
Hello, TZ!

Not that I doubt you, but I'd be interested in finding any
empirical data that indicate that there is substantial foliar uptake in
orchids- CAM or otherwise. I know there was one paper (Sheehan?) that
was
in one of the Orchid Biology books (book 2 or 3) that used radioactive
tracers to show this was the case. Reportedly, the author recanted his
results some years later, indicating it was probably contamination.

In any event, I'd like to know of any papers on the subject. I've
always thought the cuticle of orchids is too thick for substantial
uptake
of nutrients via the foliar route.

I do have an anecdote to share with the group: some orchids do not
like foliar feeding. I have noticed that bacterial infections
(apparently
anthracnose) form more readily when water with fertilizer gets onto the
leaves, even when given time to evaporate. I suspect, but have no
evidence, that it supports bacterial growth which in turn may facilitate
infection.

The address in the header is a spam trap. Send no email there.

-AJHicks
Chandler, AZ

I believe the idea is that the guard cells of the stomata allow for uptake
in foliar feeding. At least that's what Alan Koch says, and he quotes alot
from Marschner too.

As to the idea that stomata close during the day and open at night there is
a broad time zone most notable in the early AM when orchid growers (Rebecca
Northen being one) notice the increase benefit of early AM sun - even
direct sun - on their orchids. One of the reasons for that being that the
stomata are still open becasue its not yet hot. So fertilizing can be best
taken up by the plant at those times. Both by the roots and the leaves
(the 'leaf' part is my surmise)

As I get older I'm beginning to wonder about the foliar feeding & cuticle
inhibition thereof idea. I understood that everyone quotes from one study
and that may never have been reproduced. So I'm willing to listen and read
any cites.

K Barrett


"TZ" wrote in message
om...
Hi AJ,

If I knew of any empirical data for orchids I have forgotten it. I
would assume that what goes for thin leaved, thin cuticle crop plants
would hold for orchids with a similar leaf morphology. I would not
expect a Cattleya or Phal to get much out of it unless the liquid went
down into the crown and came into contact with the softer developing
tissue (which is what could use the nutrients the most).



I gleaned the info out of either

Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. 2nd Ed. H. Marschner, 1995.

Physiochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology, Park S. Nobel
or
The Physiology of Tropical Orchids in Relation to the Industry, Hew
and Yong


Hew and Yong have the graphs of Phal CO2 levels over a day but do not
discuss it in relation to stomata, only water stress.


The whole debate about foliar fertilizing seems academic for hobby
growers. If you are growing in a greenhouse the leaves are gong to
get fertilizer splashed on them anyway, and if you are growing in a
windowsill many factors other than fertilizer are probably limiting
growth.

I rather protect the leaves/plant from infection by keeping them dry
than possibly get a little bit more growth from foliar fertilization.






(Aaron Hicks) wrote in message
...
Hello, TZ!

Not that I doubt you, but I'd be interested in finding any
empirical data that indicate that there is substantial foliar uptake in
orchids- CAM or otherwise. I know there was one paper (Sheehan?) that
was
in one of the Orchid Biology books (book 2 or 3) that used radioactive
tracers to show this was the case. Reportedly, the author recanted his
results some years later, indicating it was probably contamination.

In any event, I'd like to know of any papers on the subject. I've
always thought the cuticle of orchids is too thick for substantial
uptake
of nutrients via the foliar route.

I do have an anecdote to share with the group: some orchids do not
like foliar feeding. I have noticed that bacterial infections
(apparently
anthracnose) form more readily when water with fertilizer gets onto the
leaves, even when given time to evaporate. I suspect, but have no
evidence, that it supports bacterial growth which in turn may facilitate
infection.

The address in the header is a spam trap. Send no email there.

-AJHicks
Chandler, AZ

I believe the idea is that the guard cells of the stomata allow for uptake
in foliar feeding. At least that's what Alan Koch says, and he quotes alot
from Marschner too.

As to the idea that stomata close during the day and open at night there is
a broad time zone most notable in the early AM when orchid growers (Rebecca
Northen being one) notice the increase benefit of early AM sun - even
direct sun - on their orchids. One of the reasons for that being that the
stomata are still open becasue its not yet hot. So fertilizing can be best
taken up by the plant at those times. Both by the roots and the leaves
(the 'leaf' part is my surmise)

As I get older I'm beginning to wonder about the foliar feeding & cuticle
inhibition thereof idea. I understood that everyone quotes from one study
and that may never have been reproduced. So I'm willing to listen and read
any cites.

K Barrett


"TZ" wrote in message
om...
Hi AJ,

If I knew of any empirical data for orchids I have forgotten it. I
would assume that what goes for thin leaved, thin cuticle crop plants
would hold for orchids with a similar leaf morphology. I would not
expect a Cattleya or Phal to get much out of it unless the liquid went
down into the crown and came into contact with the softer developing
tissue (which is what could use the nutrients the most).



I gleaned the info out of either

Mineral Nutrition of Higher Plants. 2nd Ed. H. Marschner, 1995.

Physiochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology, Park S. Nobel
or
The Physiology of Tropical Orchids in Relation to the Industry, Hew
and Yong


Hew and Yong have the graphs of Phal CO2 levels over a day but do not
discuss it in relation to stomata, only water stress.


The whole debate about foliar fertilizing seems academic for hobby
growers. If you are growing in a greenhouse the leaves are gong to
get fertilizer splashed on them anyway, and if you are growing in a
windowsill many factors other than fertilizer are probably limiting
growth.

I rather protect the leaves/plant from infection by keeping them dry
than possibly get a little bit more growth from foliar fertilization.






(Aaron Hicks) wrote in message
...
Hello, TZ!

Not that I doubt you, but I'd be interested in finding any
empirical data that indicate that there is substantial foliar uptake in
orchids- CAM or otherwise. I know there was one paper (Sheehan?) that
was
in one of the Orchid Biology books (book 2 or 3) that used radioactive
tracers to show this was the case. Reportedly, the author recanted his
results some years later, indicating it was probably contamination.

In any event, I'd like to know of any papers on the subject. I've
always thought the cuticle of orchids is too thick for substantial
uptake
of nutrients via the foliar route.

I do have an anecdote to share with the group: some orchids do not
like foliar feeding. I have noticed that bacterial infections
(apparently
anthracnose) form more readily when water with fertilizer gets onto the
leaves, even when given time to evaporate. I suspect, but have no
evidence, that it supports bacterial growth which in turn may facilitate
infection.

The address in the header is a spam trap. Send no email there.

-AJHicks
Chandler, AZ

As usual, I am not even sure what everybody is talking about. There are
several slants being discussed here.

I was actually talking about misting mounted plants with fertilizer water as
I kind of thought that is what Gene was talking about when i read his post.
I imagine this would work quite well as a way of getting fertilizer to the
exposed roots on mounted and hanging plants but my caution was directed at
not letting the fertilizer minerals build up on roots as well as leaves as a
result of 'spritzing" behaviors that comes to my mind when people with spray
bottles talk about misting.

I would worry to use leaf shine type products on exposed roots to remove
mineral deposits on them or on bark/cork mounts. Different tissue types
equals different absorption and pore clogging qualities.

I have no idea if fertilizer can or cannot be absorbed through leaf tissue
application except for what people tell me the "studies" they have read say.
I don't even trust myself to interpret what I read correctly. I have too
many examples to the contrary.

The stomata concentration is greatest on most plants in general on the
underside of the leaf. I think it is like a 10 to 1 ratio.

Misting Phal leaves is always risky. If you must do it then always do it
when the temperatures are on the rise, when there is plenty of air movement
and when there is the best chance that the mist will evaporate from the leaf
surface quickly.

"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Thanks to both of you!

I will continue to mist my plants with fertilized water. I give my plants
a
"shower" once a week or so, so I'm not really worried about mineral
deposits. If I do see any, however, I'll take care of it with leaf
polish.

Thanks again for your excellent advice!

Sarah


"Al" wrote in message
...
Keep in mind that mineral deposits will build up quickly if
fertilizer/water
misting is the only way H2O and dinner make it onto the mounted and
hanging
plants. I am not trying to contradict here I am just adding that a good
drenching on a regular basis is very helpful to keep plant parts
healthy.
People with hoses in their greenhouse who 'mist' may have a very
different
idea of the word than people in their homes with a spray bottle. Just a
thought...

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose
is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to
be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted
plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever
seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly
so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts
look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I
could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given
them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago
and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs,
or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots
out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your
way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis
in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months
and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed
to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Yes...that's why I said it was not a scientific experiment. I was just too
lazy to switch the hose back to the spiggot from the fertilizer injector.

Of course when I mist the exposed roots get a mist too so that fed the
vandas every couple of days with the mist.

During the summer one week I use plain water. So the roots get flushed. Now
that the days are short I use plain water 3 weeks then fertilize on 1 week.

Good Growing,
Gene



"Ray" wrote in message
...
Gene,

Could your observation not be explained simply by the fact that the
runoff -
draining into pots or onto the root system - is simply fertilizing your
plant more than if you were misting with pure water?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not challenging your observation, just offering
an
alternative explanation.

I often get a bit frustrated by my own testing in the GH - see something
I'd
like to attribute to some change I've made, only to realize there are a
number of other explanations that could explain the observation.

Yet another reason we all need MUCH bigger greenhouses so we can do better
studies (yeah, that's the reason...)

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!
.
"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose
is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever
seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly
so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given
them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs,
or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots
out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your
way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis
in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months
and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed
to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

Yes...that's why I said it was not a scientific experiment. I was just too
lazy to switch the hose back to the spiggot from the fertilizer injector.

Of course when I mist the exposed roots get a mist too so that fed the
vandas every couple of days with the mist.

During the summer one week I use plain water. So the roots get flushed. Now
that the days are short I use plain water 3 weeks then fertilize on 1 week.

Good Growing,
Gene



"Ray" wrote in message
...
Gene,

Could your observation not be explained simply by the fact that the
runoff -
draining into pots or onto the root system - is simply fertilizing your
plant more than if you were misting with pure water?

Don't get me wrong. I'm not challenging your observation, just offering
an
alternative explanation.

I often get a bit frustrated by my own testing in the GH - see something
I'd
like to attribute to some change I've made, only to realize there are a
number of other explanations that could explain the observation.

Yet another reason we all need MUCH bigger greenhouses so we can do better
studies (yeah, that's the reason...)

--

Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com
Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info!
.
"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news
Sarah,

Last fall I bought a fertilizer injector for my greenhouse.

When I mix the concentrate that is sucked into the water when the hose
is
turned on I usually have some extra concentrate left when I finish
watering.
For the last year I have been using the what remains in the bucket to be
sucked into the hose when I mist the plants.

Since I've been doing this I see a huge difference in the mounted plants
and
vandas. The root development on the vandas is better than I've ever
seen.
In years past I was not too good about fertilizing my vandas regularly
so
I'm sure they are pleased to get regular feeding. The other mounts look
good. Most of them are winter bloomers and I expect better flowers this
year
since the plants are more robust.

The Dendrobiums in clay pots are looking really good this year. I could
say
it's the misting with fertilizer water or it could be that I've given
them
more attention this year. Most of them were seedlings two years ago and
may
just have begun to really grow up. I'll say its the water.

I can't say I see much difference in the big oncidium types, the paphs,
or
phals. I don't see anything bad from the water and fertilizer mist.

In a long winded email I guess my advise is mist the stuff with roots
out
of
the pot with fertilized water and the other stuff don't go out of your
way
to do it.

Small print: The above is purely personal observation and has no basis
in
scientific fact. It just worked for me during the previous 12 months
and
subject to change if I observe something different.

Good Growing,
Gene






"Sarah" wrote in message
...
Hi all!

Are there benefits to misting with mildly fertilized water as opposed
to
plain water? I live in a very dry climate so I mist every day.

Thanks!

Sarah

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 05:56:25 -0500, "Ray"
wrote:


Yet another reason we all need MUCH bigger greenhouses so we can do better
studies (yeah, that's the reason...)

I'll go for that. You financing the project? G

SuE
http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 05:56:25 -0500, "Ray"
wrote:


Yet another reason we all need MUCH bigger greenhouses so we can do better
studies (yeah, that's the reason...)

I'll go for that. You financing the project? G

SuE
http://orchids.legolas.org/gallery/albums.php