Watering orchids with vodka

[TZ-Someplace]

I wonder if the impurities like fusil oils that give you a hangover from the cheap stuff screw up plants any.

I love me some Popcorn Sutton shine videos.

[Ray]

Looks like my recollections are getting worse by the day. Jerry's Grow, AKA "Wundergrow", contained methanol, an even simpler molecule than ethanol, and is NOT limited to higher-light plants, although Jerry told me there was a greater effect with them.

US Patent for Method of improving growth characteristics of plants of the family Orchidaceae Patent (Patent # 5,642,586 issued July 1, 1997) - Justia Patents Search

US Patent for Use of methanol for improving plant growth Patent (Patent # 5,981,441 issued November 9, 1999) - Justia Patents Search

[K-Sci]

Originally Posted by Ray

Looks like my recollections are getting worse by the day. Jerry's Grow, AKA "Wundergrow", contained methanol...

Ray, you've ruined our vision of drinking a fertilizer. Although we exhale 3-5ppm methanol, drinking only a few grams can destroy the optic nerve and make someone blind.

-Keith

[Shadeflower]

methanol? ethanol?
Nah that's not going near my orchids, I don't care how wunderful they grow.

the article kinda conludes

However, more publications relating to this subject have reported no evidence of growth gain. These contradictory results have left the usefulness of methanol treatment unresolved.

Further testing could no longer replicate the results achieved...

[Ray]

And now that “methanol” comes into focus, I remember getting some pure stuff from the lab and trying it in a side-to-side comparison, blended into MSU RO solutions used on my vandas.

I saw no response to it whatsoever.

[WaterWitchin]

Originally Posted by Ray

And now that “methanol” comes into focus, I remember getting some pure stuff from the lab and trying it in a side-to-side comparison, blended into MSU RO solutions used on my vandas.

I saw no response to it whatsoever.

[Ray]

I think back-growths tend to be more like "storage tanks" for the colony, rather than resource producers that the more recent, active growths are.

Like everything else, I'm sure it's both, but I think the priority shifts with age, suggesting that 3 newer growths, even without an active rhizome tip, are likely to have more overall "vitality" than is a division of three older growths. The older ones will just be starting at a "lower" point, so may take longer to regain their past glory.

[K-Sci]

Originally Posted by Ray

I think back-growths tend to be more like "storage tanks" for the colony, rather than resource producers that the more recent, active growths are.

Like everything else, I'm sure it's both, but I think the priority shifts with age, suggesting that 3 newer growths, even without an active rhizome tip, are likely to have more overall "vitality" than is a division of three older growths. The older ones will just be starting at a "lower" point, so may take longer to regain their past glory.

If they are energy or nutrient storage tanks, why are very old back-bulbs so hard to root.
-Keith

[Ray]

Originally Posted by K-Sci

If they are energy or nutrient storage tanks, why are very old back-bulbs so hard to root.
-Keith

There are myriads of chemical processes involved in life, so who knows if/how/how much the relative degrees of them change with age - that certainly seems to be the case with my own aging body!

Another analogy: your car fuel tank is storage, but without other, viable processes to convert it, full tank or not, your car ain't goin' nowhere...