How much success have you had rooting old rootless Cattleya back-bulbs.

[Ben_in_North_FLA]

the clay pots turn whitish due to limestone and or fertilizer build up, you can pressure wash them or soak in either vinegar or diluted muriatic acid or scrub with scouring pad and lots of elbow grease and voila!

[K-Sci]

Originally Posted by K-Sci

Questions: Is it worth the effort?...

One of the two C. Violacea 'Muse' back-divisions has an eye just starting to swell and a new 3mm long root. This just happens to be the 9-bulb division shown in my OP, and the older of two divisions from the same plant. Coincidentally, this is also one of the two Muse divisions I hung from a tree outside and posted photographs for on 7-17-2021 three days ago per Orchid Whisperer's suggestion. Here's the data:

- Cut 7-10-21 (10 days ago).
- The division has no other living or dead roots (at all).
- The eye and root are on bulb #15 back from the lead of the original plant.
- Division was soaked in Kelp Max and KLN for around 2 hours immediately after being cut.

Though this plant is far from being a rooted back division, it has passed the first and arguably biggest hurdle - it started to grow.

Incidentally, the well-rooted lead division has plenty of good roots and two buds emerging from the sheath. This was the wrong time to divide. I didn't think the lead division would flower before the new growth was fully matured.

I have not been watching the other back-bulb divisions as closely. They're not as easy to monitor because their stems are not completely bald. More results later.

K-Sci

[K-Sci]

This is an update on the outcomes I've had so far. All plants were soaked overnight in 1Tbs/gallon KelpMax (not at the same time). It could be the KelpMax (I think it is likely) or the Mississippi 95F day/75F Night temperatures (also possible), but I've never seen old back-bulbs with no roots start growing this fast, and in one case with three (3) new leads. In my experience, once an eye develops and begins growing, the Cattleya division will survive.

Cattleya Violacea 'Muse' FCC/AOS #1 - Four fully mature partially shriveled back bulbs around 6-8 years with dry leathery leaves. I hung this one on a tree outdoors where it would get early morning sun. The dead roots it started with are all visible in the photo.




Cattleya Violacea 'Muse' FCC/AOS #2 - This is a three-bulb rootless back division of bulbs around 4-6 years old. They were propped up in a pot filled with chunk Orchiata. It was kept in my greenhouse getting 50% filtered sun. It has a 1/4 inch root underneath, not visible in the photo.




Cattleya walkeriana 'Tokyo #1'. This is two badly shriveled 5 year old bulbs on a completely bald rootless rhyzome. The bulbs were so dried out I thought this one had zero chance of survival This division was wedged into tightly packed sphagnum in a small clay pot. I kept it in my greenhouse getting 50% sun.




C. Perciviliana aurea. Two badly shriveled old rootless bulbs, also wedged into in sphagnum and kept in my greenhouse.





C. tigrina (leopolodii). This divisions is four 5-9 year old backbulbs with a few live roots. It was planted in scoria and kept in my greenhouse. Note there are three (3) new leads! I'm wondering if the live roots allowed it to absorbed more hormones from the KelpMax.



C. intermedia 'Boa Vista' Four leafless 5+ year old rootless back-bulbs, also wedged into tightly packed sphagnum and kept in my greenhouse at 50% shade.



Three old rootless back-divisions still have no growing eyes, but may still survive:
- C. violacea 'Muse' nine leafless back bulbs all ten years or older. One eye might be swelling, but it is hard to tell.
- C. trainaei 'jungle feather' (two, two-bulb back divisions).
Note: In my initial list, the leuddemanniana, should have been trianae.

As I mentioned, I've never seen back-bulbs start to grow or root this quickly. An as yet unproven hypothesis but significant anecdotal supporting evidence KelpMax helped a lot, and that the more roots the plant had to begin with, the more vigorous and numerous the new leads. I would chalk this ujp to greater absorbtion with plants having at least some root. Ray's assertion that Kelp max stimulates meristem tissue growth is supported by these results, especially in the case of the C. tigrina (leopoldii) that began with some roots, and which developed three new leads.



Still, more research is needed.

-Keith

[Shadeflower]

Keith, those pictures are a real joy, I am especially impressed with the walkeriana.
You are showing us mastery in progress but I told you it could be done. You have proved it can be done even better
I have no doubt that the kelpmax will have helped but ultimately I think it was you paying more attention to the general fertilizing. Not too long ago you told us you were using imbalanced fertilizer with really high N content but since switching and maybe adjusting the ph you might have seen these results now whereas with an imbalanced fertilizer, even adding kelpmax might not have produced such results.
I don't want to knock kelpmax, it certainly is a beneficial product, I just think too much emphasis is put on what it can do. It isn't a miracle potion and if a plant is stressed it will still sulk even with kelpmax. It might reduce the period of sulking though.
It's so difficult to judge as so many factors can affect things. Like most of the conclusions I made this year I've thrown out the window already because it turned out that thrips were affecting my results so now that things are hopefully thrip free I can make new observations but then winter is approaching in which time everything slows down affecting things again.

I dunno, maybe I am putting too little faith in kelpmax as since using it nearly every one of my phals is now actively producing a leaf. In the past this was always a bit sporadic with some growing new leaves, others not.
I think I can attribute that to kelpmax.

These pictures do also sway me a bit more to believe kelpmax can improve results. Thx for showing anyway. Nice varieties too

[K-Sci]

Originally Posted by Shadeflower

Keith, those pictures are a real joy, I am especially impressed with the walkeriana.
You are showing us mastery in progress but I told you it could be done. You have proved it can be done even better
I have no doubt that the kelpmax will have helped but ultimately I think it was you paying more attention to the general fertilizing.

You are right, I did change my fertilizer, though it was after I took these cuttings and most didn't have roots. I just finished using my first 1/2 Lb package of MSU 13-3-15 fertilizer, which also includes Calcium and Magnesium, so it is more balanced than the 30-10-10 Miracid I'd been using for the last 40 years.

Not too long ago you told us you were using imbalanced fertilizer with really high N content but since switching and maybe adjusting the ph

I only recently began updating my knowledge of orchid growing needs, mostly by reading Orchidboard, but I previously used an acidic fertilizer because I though it was good for orchids. Has that thinking changed?

you might have seen these results now whereas with an imbalanced fertilizer, even adding kelpmax might not have produced such results.

Do you think significant fertilizer will get into rootless plants?

I don't want to knock kelpmax, it certainly is a beneficial product, I just think too much emphasis is put on what it can do. It isn't a miracle potion and if a plant is stressed it will still sulk even with kelpmax.

Agree, I would not expect KelpMax to be at all helpful with orchids divided during a winter rest.

I apologize for disagreeing about the KelpMax, but I've done a few experiments and consistently seen surprisingly positive results. In one case I used KelpMax on one of two identical Rlc. Sun Spots. The KelpMax plant grew roots like crazy, while the other plant didn't. I posted pictures somewhere on Orchidboard, but I couldn't find the post.



Update: It turns out, the post and photo was earlier in this thread.


So, is an experiment with sample size N=2 proof? No, but evidence, such as in this thread, has been piling up.

I'm a scientist and tend to set the bar pretty high when it comes to products such as these. I've tried other products over the years, such as Superthrive but concluded that they didn't do anything. I should qualify this by saying the unimpressive outcomes could have been due to an old batch. This was probably 20 years ago.

This year is also my first summer growing in a greenhouse in Mississippi, so my surprisingly positive outcomes could, in some cases, be due to the high summer heat and much higher daytime light levels. The last two years I've been growing in Mississippi, but on a patio that only gets morning sun, and with plants indoors under lights in winter.

I dunno, maybe I am putting too little faith in kelpmax as since using it nearly every one of my phals is now actively producing a leaf.

Mine usually grow new leaves all summer, but this summer one grew two side shoot. I've never had a Phalaenopsis do that before. Maybe you or other people have. Here's the picture.


Incidentally, this is a huge Phalaenopsis having a leaf span well over two feet with flowers as big as many whites. Its size and its persistent efforts to grow over the side of the pot indicate P.gigantea somewhere in its background. It came from Lowes, I've never seen anything similar to it anywhere, and I don't know anything else about the breeding. Still, I had to digress, because this is my favorite Phal. of all time.



Here is a picture from two years ago (pre KelpMax)when it flowered on three spikes (one is still developing). It isn't easy to see in the photo, but the base color is a very pale green. The contrast is very striking.

These pictures do also sway me a bit more to believe kelpmax can improve results. Thx for showing anyway. Nice varieties too

Don't believe in KelpMax on faith, or on my outcomes, but play around with it and let us know what you get for results. I'm being surprised by the outcomes very consistently.

-Keith