Why such small pots?

[estación seca]

Bill, it goes back to growing space and time constraints.

Almost none of the continental US is completely frost-free. People have to move their plants in and out with the seasons, or they have to be grown inside. Many of the people who grow plants are ladies who do not want to lift containers any heavier than necessary.

Wide, shallow containers dry out rapidly. They might need daily watering. Many people don't have time every day to spend with their plants.

Circular, wide, low plastic and terracotta containers, of different diameters, are readily available in the southwest for growing annuals. They can be repurposed for other plants.

In his Catasetinae talk Fred Clarke shows a photo of an enormous Catasetum from habitat. It had been growing in the ground. The root mass was somewhat wider than the plant, perhaps 70 centimeters / 28 inches, but only about 20cm / 8 inches deep. Seeing the photo made me think Catasetinae should do well in low, wide pots. The one I put in such a container has done much better than the ones in the tiny pots, chiefly because it stays wetter longer during the summer. It does take up a large amount of bench space when compared to the others.

[bil]

Originally Posted by AvantGardner

I have overpotted and underpotted before. Much better to underpot. I underpot and hang them. I water and fertilize (almost) every day.

This gives the plants more aeration to the root mass and more exposure to nutrients

This is exactly what drives me crazy. I'm not getting at you, but I see this said over and over and over.

What you should say is that it is better to go too shallow, than too deep.
A wide shallow pot allows the roots to grow more and because they are getting plenty of air to the roots, you get better use of the pot.

Basically, a plant will endeavour to fill the pot with its roots. Give it an undersized pot, and the root mass will be small and cramped. How can that be good? When I potted my Den phals in 14inch pots that were barely 2 inches deep, the roots were at the edge of the pot in record time.

---------- Post added at 06:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:22 AM ----------

Originally Posted by estación seca

Bill, it goes back to growing space and time constraints.

Almost none of the continental US is completely frost-free. People have to move their plants in and out with the seasons, or they have to be grown inside. Many of the people who grow plants are ladies who do not want to lift containers any heavier than necessary.

Wide, shallow containers dry out rapidly. They might need daily watering. Many people don't have time every day to spend with their plants.

Circular, wide, low plastic and terracotta containers, of different diameters, are readily available in the southwest for growing annuals. They can be repurposed for other plants.

In his Catasetinae talk Fred Clarke shows a photo of an enormous Catasetum from habitat. It had been growing in the ground. The root mass was somewhat wider than the plant, perhaps 70 centimeters / 28 inches, but only about 20cm / 8 inches deep. Seeing the photo made me think Catasetinae should do well in low, wide pots. The one I put in such a container has done much better than the ones in the tiny pots, chiefly because it stays wetter longer during the summer. It does take up a large amount of bench space when compared to the others.

Yeah, I know all about time and space constraints. I specifically mentioned that at the start.
As for weight, I use plastic pots because I have a bad back and hips, and I simply can't lift heavy pots. The point is that their shallow nature makes them superlight.

I am delighted to see you say that your plant in the wide shallow pot has done well.... Remember, what I am going on about here is what is best for the plants.

If you start from what is best for you, and make a few concessions for the plant, it is less likely to do well than if yoou start from what is best for the plant.

If we only refer to 'overpotting' without referring to media depth, there wuill be a whole bunch of newcomers who simply don't grasp that there should be a maximum depth for each type of media.

[AvantGardner]

Whatever dude. Just sharing my experience

[bil]

Originally Posted by AvantGardner

Whatever dude. Just sharing my experience

My apologies if I offended you. I was merely trying to clarify a point.

[isurus79]

I think smaller pots generally dry out faster than larger pots, hence the stigma saying epiphytes should be grown in them. Big, deep pots will stay wet and kill your Cattleyas and many other orchids.

However, many of the South American growers have water retentive media in deep pots that don't really dry out. In fact, many of those growers leave a well in the pot so there is water sitting in the pot most of the time!!

I've seen this group successfully grown in wide and narrow pots. They do well with nearly all media types and pot sizes. I prefer not to let my plants dry out completely during the peak growing season. It really depends on what you can provide for your plants.

My recommendation is to start with the conventional wisdom and change your potting style to suit your growing conditions as you develop better skills regarding what this group needs. Overall, I'd say Catasetinae are the easiest group to pot because they seem to do well in all media types.

[DeaC]

FWIW,my recent purchases from http://SunsetValley Orchids.com are a new genera for me and I'm following Fred Clarkes regimen. So far,so good.

[bil]

Originally Posted by isurus79

I think smaller pots generally dry out faster than larger pots, hence the stigma saying epiphytes should be grown in them. Big, deep pots will stay wet and kill your Cattleyas and many other orchids.

However, many of the South American growers have water retentive media in deep pots that don't really dry out. In fact, many of those growers leave a well in the pot so there is water sitting in the pot most of the time!!

I've seen this group successfully grown in wide and narrow pots. They do well with nearly all media types and pot sizes. I prefer not to let my plants dry out completely during the peak growing season. It really depends on what you can provide for your plants.

My recommendation is to start with the conventional wisdom and change your potting style to suit your growing conditions as you develop better skills regarding what this group needs. Overall, I'd say Catasetinae are the easiest group to pot because they seem to do well in all media types.

Poots dry out in a number of ways. Plants remove water from the media, surface evaporation dries it and from the bottom it drains.
Now what we are interested here is loss of water from the surface.
Basically this is not area dependant as the water loss is a per unit area. So a small pot loses more for a given plant, but what we are worried about is anoxia, and the risk from that is a function of depth.
Basically, for a given media, there is a depth beyond which it is dangerous to go.

"Big, deep pots will stay wet and kill your Cattleyas and many other orchids."

Big isn't the problem, it's depth.

[isurus79]

Originally Posted by bil

Big isn't the problem, it's depth.

Good point!

[nogreenthumbs]

Interesting thread and info.