Benefits of misting w/ fertilized water?
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 mist my plants often with fertilized water. I use approx 1/4th of the
concentration recommended for orchids. Haven't had any problems yet!. I keep the fertilized water away from my leafless orchids though as they have a possibility of getting damaged. Dada "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 mist my plants often with fertilized water. I use approx 1/4th of the
concentration recommended for orchids. Haven't had any problems yet!. I keep the fertilized water away from my leafless orchids though as they have a possibility of getting damaged. Dada "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 |
The degree of benefit is determined, to some degree, but the type of orchid.
Some orchids - notably phalaenopsis, as they are so commonly grown - have a type of metabolism in which their stomata are only open at night, to absorb moisture from the air during the cooler hours when the relative humidity is higher, but are closed in the daytime as a ploy to reduce moisture loss from within the plants' leaves. Because of that, misting with nutrient solution in the daytime will not be readily absorbed. Do not think that switching your misting to the nighttime will be better, as while the plants might actually absorb something, you will also be setting them up for bacterial or fungal rot, as both types of critters do very well in cool, moist conditions. The bottom line is that if you feed the plants properly when you water, that's sufficient. Not to mention their leaves will stay cleaner and healthier. -- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! .. "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 |
Ray:
Interesting point that you mentioned about the stomata being open during the night. Can you provide me with any reference where you got the information. I would like to read more on this topic. Thanks Dada "Ray" wrote in message ... The degree of benefit is determined, to some degree, but the type of orchid. Some orchids - notably phalaenopsis, as they are so commonly grown - have a type of metabolism in which their stomata are only open at night, to absorb moisture from the air during the cooler hours when the relative humidity is higher, but are closed in the daytime as a ploy to reduce moisture loss from within the plants' leaves. Because of that, misting with nutrient solution in the daytime will not be readily absorbed. Do not think that switching your misting to the nighttime will be better, as while the plants might actually absorb something, you will also be setting them up for bacterial or fungal rot, as both types of critters do very well in cool, moist conditions. The bottom line is that if you feed the plants properly when you water, that's sufficient. Not to mention their leaves will stay cleaner and healthier. -- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! . "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 |
Ray:
Interesting point that you mentioned about the stomata being open during the night. Can you provide me with any reference where you got the information. I would like to read more on this topic. Thanks Dada "Ray" wrote in message ... The degree of benefit is determined, to some degree, but the type of orchid. Some orchids - notably phalaenopsis, as they are so commonly grown - have a type of metabolism in which their stomata are only open at night, to absorb moisture from the air during the cooler hours when the relative humidity is higher, but are closed in the daytime as a ploy to reduce moisture loss from within the plants' leaves. Because of that, misting with nutrient solution in the daytime will not be readily absorbed. Do not think that switching your misting to the nighttime will be better, as while the plants might actually absorb something, you will also be setting them up for bacterial or fungal rot, as both types of critters do very well in cool, moist conditions. The bottom line is that if you feed the plants properly when you water, that's sufficient. Not to mention their leaves will stay cleaner and healthier. -- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! . "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 |
Ray:
Interesting point that you mentioned about the stomata being open during the night. Can you provide me with any reference where you got the information. I would like to read more on this topic. Thanks Dada "Ray" wrote in message ... The degree of benefit is determined, to some degree, but the type of orchid. Some orchids - notably phalaenopsis, as they are so commonly grown - have a type of metabolism in which their stomata are only open at night, to absorb moisture from the air during the cooler hours when the relative humidity is higher, but are closed in the daytime as a ploy to reduce moisture loss from within the plants' leaves. Because of that, misting with nutrient solution in the daytime will not be readily absorbed. Do not think that switching your misting to the nighttime will be better, as while the plants might actually absorb something, you will also be setting them up for bacterial or fungal rot, as both types of critters do very well in cool, moist conditions. The bottom line is that if you feed the plants properly when you water, that's sufficient. Not to mention their leaves will stay cleaner and healthier. -- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! . "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 |
Search for "CAM" plants: Crassulacean Acid Metabolism
-- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! .. "Dada" wrote in message . .. Ray: Interesting point that you mentioned about the stomata being open during the night. Can you provide me with any reference where you got the information. I would like to read more on this topic. Thanks Dada "Ray" wrote in message ... The degree of benefit is determined, to some degree, but the type of orchid. Some orchids - notably phalaenopsis, as they are so commonly grown - have a type of metabolism in which their stomata are only open at night, to absorb moisture from the air during the cooler hours when the relative humidity is higher, but are closed in the daytime as a ploy to reduce moisture loss from within the plants' leaves. Because of that, misting with nutrient solution in the daytime will not be readily absorbed. Do not think that switching your misting to the nighttime will be better, as while the plants might actually absorb something, you will also be setting them up for bacterial or fungal rot, as both types of critters do very well in cool, moist conditions. The bottom line is that if you feed the plants properly when you water, that's sufficient. Not to mention their leaves will stay cleaner and healthier. -- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! . "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 |
Thank you! I guess I'll stop misting my phals in the morning. Maybe I'll
switch to a humidifier. Sarah "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 |
Thank you! I guess I'll stop misting my phals in the morning. Maybe I'll
switch to a humidifier. Sarah "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 |
That CAM plants, and Phals in particular, only open their stomata at
night is probably incorrect. Tests measuring physiological levels associated with CO2 uptake show that when the plants are sufficiantly watered CO2 uptake buy the leaf throughout the afternoon is comperable to that at night. This begins after the plant has used up all of its stored CO2 stored the night before by the CAM pathways. The plant basically shifts from CAM to normal C3. The only way this high rate of CO2 uptake could happen is if the stomata open again in the afternoon in response to CO2 need within the leaf. The same tests show a brief shut down when the lights are turned off followed by the usual CAM nightly high levels of CO2 uptake. The Phals only stopped the afternoon CO2 uptake, exhibiting the CAM nighttime only CO2 uptake, after a week of total chemically induced water stress (not just a dry pot but equal to a bare root plant that has not been watered in a week). This makes sense. CAM has evolved several times as a water conservation device. Why should a CAM plant be inhibited from maximum growth when it does not need to conserve water during the wet season? As for nutrients passing through the stomata....leaves are covered with micropores that the nutrient ions can pass through, and stomata are fairly rare on the upper surface of orchid leaves anyway so the fact that stomata are closed may not have significant bearing on the amount of foliar uptake. What is important in any case is that nutrient liquid remain on the leaf surface for as long as possible before drying, so foliar fertilization is most efficient on rainy-high humidity days when the plant does not need misting. If anyone has more specific/contradictory information from experimental results your input would be welcomed. |
Thank you, TZ. I'm always grateful to get accurate info!
-- Ray Barkalow - First Rays Orchids - www.firstrays.com Plants, Supplies, Books, Artwork, and Lots of Free Info! .. "TZ" wrote in message om... That CAM plants, and Phals in particular, only open their stomata at night is probably incorrect. Tests measuring physiological levels associated with CO2 uptake show that when the plants are sufficiantly watered CO2 uptake buy the leaf throughout the afternoon is comperable to that at night. This begins after the plant has used up all of its stored CO2 stored the night before by the CAM pathways. The plant basically shifts from CAM to normal C3. The only way this high rate of CO2 uptake could happen is if the stomata open again in the afternoon in response to CO2 need within the leaf. The same tests show a brief shut down when the lights are turned off followed by the usual CAM nightly high levels of CO2 uptake. The Phals only stopped the afternoon CO2 uptake, exhibiting the CAM nighttime only CO2 uptake, after a week of total chemically induced water stress (not just a dry pot but equal to a bare root plant that has not been watered in a week). This makes sense. CAM has evolved several times as a water conservation device. Why should a CAM plant be inhibited from maximum growth when it does not need to conserve water during the wet season? As for nutrients passing through the stomata....leaves are covered with micropores that the nutrient ions can pass through, and stomata are fairly rare on the upper surface of orchid leaves anyway so the fact that stomata are closed may not have significant bearing on the amount of foliar uptake. What is important in any case is that nutrient liquid remain on the leaf surface for as long as possible before drying, so foliar fertilization is most efficient on rainy-high humidity days when the plant does not need misting. If anyone has more specific/contradictory information from experimental results your input would be welcomed. |
This is great info, TZ! Thank you!
Sarah "TZ" wrote in message om... That CAM plants, and Phals in particular, only open their stomata at night is probably incorrect. Tests measuring physiological levels associated with CO2 uptake show that when the plants are sufficiantly watered CO2 uptake buy the leaf throughout the afternoon is comperable to that at night. This begins after the plant has used up all of its stored CO2 stored the night before by the CAM pathways. The plant basically shifts from CAM to normal C3. The only way this high rate of CO2 uptake could happen is if the stomata open again in the afternoon in response to CO2 need within the leaf. The same tests show a brief shut down when the lights are turned off followed by the usual CAM nightly high levels of CO2 uptake. The Phals only stopped the afternoon CO2 uptake, exhibiting the CAM nighttime only CO2 uptake, after a week of total chemically induced water stress (not just a dry pot but equal to a bare root plant that has not been watered in a week). This makes sense. CAM has evolved several times as a water conservation device. Why should a CAM plant be inhibited from maximum growth when it does not need to conserve water during the wet season? As for nutrients passing through the stomata....leaves are covered with micropores that the nutrient ions can pass through, and stomata are fairly rare on the upper surface of orchid leaves anyway so the fact that stomata are closed may not have significant bearing on the amount of foliar uptake. What is important in any case is that nutrient liquid remain on the leaf surface for as long as possible before drying, so foliar fertilization is most efficient on rainy-high humidity days when the plant does not need misting. If anyone has more specific/contradictory information from experimental results your input would be welcomed. |
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 |
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 |
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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 nk.net... 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 |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter