Does fungal infection induce keiki production?

[SouthPark]

SG ----- When the infection occurs ------ then does the infected pseudobulb remain alive? That is, do you apply a treatment so that he original bulb survives, and then continues to support the keiki?

Of will the keiki need to be transferred to something like sphagnum moss ------ a nursery environment?

Naturally ---- time is required to test what is the underlying mechanism behind these observations. That is - is it due to the fungus killing portions of the bulb in a particular way (eg. it is attacking the bulb, and the bulb cells are dying, and a keiki is produced as a response to the condition) ----- or is it 'chemically' related? It is probably not easy to tell what the mechanism is at this moment.

Just like the usual procedure ---- it might require lots of testing, labs, research. But - if the keiki production occurs due to the need for a bulb to start dying ------ then maybe a consideration to be made is ----- is that particular method of keiki production going to be good? As in ----- it require sacrifice of an existing bulb ----- or maybe requires the appearance of an existing bulb to be tarnished/damaged by fungus or something else.

Although - if there are enough samples ------ where it can be shown that keikis are consistently be produced by an infection approach (regardless of whether the infection is triggering keiki growth by killing cells of the bulb, or introducing some chemical, or otherwise) ------ while another big batch of samples don't form keikis ........... then at least some workers can then look into the situation in more detail, in order to work towards the reason. Eg. due to dying cells? Or due to chemical? That is ------ this is all done under tightly controlled conditions ----- same environment for samples -- same temperature, humidity, light etc.

[SG in CR]

Originally Posted by SouthPark

SG ----- When the infection occurs ------ then does the infected pseudobulb remain alive? That is, do you apply a treatment so that he original bulb survives, and then continues to support the keiki?

Of will the keiki need to be transferred to something like sphagnum moss ------ a nursery environment?

No the infected p-bulb eventually rots away leaving a small keiki with roots big enough to put in a small pot or gently tie to a branch. Though I'll generally do that as soon as I notice the keiki starting to form. I figure the sooner I put it where it can continue growing the better. My nursey is just a wind protected area with shade cloth over half of it. Rainy season is too wet for me to use sphagnum moss. I generally fill the bottom 70% of a pot with coarse rot resistant media like charcoal, coconut shell, wine corks, whatever I can find that will hold up a few years. then I top it with a finer grade of the same stuff with some wood shavings.

My guess is that a fungal attack provokes some sort of "immune response" ( not sure if plants have an immune system, but some sort of metabolic response to help fight the infection) And that response might be the trigger that just making a clean cut lacks. Of course its all just speculation. Just thought it was an interesting observation.

[SouthPark]

Originally Posted by SG in CR

My guess is that a fungal attack provokes some sort of "immune response" (not sure if plants have an immune system, but some sort of metabolic response to help fight the infection) And that response might be the trigger that just making a clean cut lacks. Of course its all just speculation. Just thought it was an interesting observation.

True ----- a clean cut is certainly a significantly different form or type of damage. The first test would probably involve infecting lots of the same sort of orchid ----- such as 100 of them, or more.

And have another set of 100 (not infected). And if the behaviour is consistently and reliably seen in the infected plants, then the focus will be on narrowing down the possibilities - such as whether the behaviour is due to an immunity response of some sort, or due to a health degradation response (just due to health deterioration from fungal attack), chemical response (chemicals etc introduced by the fungus attack).

The first challenge is probably to have enough sample cases that shows unmistakeably that fungal attack means 100% (or close to 100%) certainty of keiki growth. And this can be compared with the 'control' cases, with no infection.

I totally agree ------- very intersting observation. Worth investigating.