Quote:
Originally Posted by K-Sci
It seems very odd to me that we are still discovering this sort of thing in the 21 century. I suppose it is probably because commercial greenhouses don't water with RO.
|
Orchid culture is constantly evolving, as are the demographics of orchid growers.
Early on, potting media were based upon leaf litter, twigs and sharp sand. Fertilizer tended to be manure-based, and water was whatever was available. Only the super-wealthy grew orchids, often under the care of specialized staff. Most were in Europe, with a contingent of neofinetia growers in Japan, but culture was very tradition-based there.
As people experimented, different media components were tried, blended, and gained acceptance “because they worked”, with little understanding of the “why”. The same thing happened with nutrition.
Over time, commercial growers in Europe began to sprout up, often more-or-less as “spin offs” of the growing staff of royalty. That led to larger-scale cultivation and grasp of the plants’ needs.
Some orchid firms sprang up in the US, again mostly specialized in catering to the wealthy, but around the time of WWII, a large percentage of the orchids in England were sent to the US for preservation. That’s probably the beginning of their spread to more growers, but still, culture was passed down and copied, more than studied and improved upon.
When the oldest of us were kids, our parents may have had some tropical houseplants, but the vast majority of horticulture was farming and flowers and shrubs in the yard around the house. That has evolved, as well, and domestic horticulture is now far more prevalent than it was.
As folks got more interested in plants as a whole, the niche of orchids started to grow, as well, but new growers tend to think in terms of
terrestrial plant culture as they expanded. Having a wide array of nutrient
in the soil means that “feeding” was primarily NPK, with little thought about minor or trace elements or what was in the water.
Fortunately, people in general have become more analytical, so nurseries began experimenting with media for uniformity, availability and cost, leading to “soilless” ones based upon peat, wood and the like. Understanding plant nutrition became more important as less was provided by the soil.
As far a water was concerned, commercial growers used what they had because purification processes either didn’t exist or were too costly, especially considering the volume used.
I think that it has been well understood in the commercial sector that nutrition derived from a combination of media, water and fertilizer, and that is why there are so many formulas available. Having the ability to manage nutrition by adjusting media and fertilizer around the water-chemistry variable is relatively easy, compared to orchid growing, where we really only have two variables to contend with, but most growers - especially less-experienced ones - are conditioned to think in terms of their terrestrial plant experience, which is more forgiving.
Thinking historically again, orchid growing by “the common man” is relatively new. When I started, a cattleya hybrid was $40-$50 in a 4.5” pot. In today’s money, that would be $300 or more! There were no “grocery store phals” to be had. It’s only been within the last decade that orchid sales surpassed poinsettias as the largest decorative crop, so I don’t think it’s so surprising that the science - or at least the broader recognition and acceptance of it - is relatively new, as well.
Fertilizer choices and water type
Linear Mode
