Amazing New Fertilizer

[Calbears]

Interesting debate, many good points well made. We may not have a conclusion one way or the other for years, but it's worth consideration. Many of the most important scientific discoveries have been made by people that challenged the accepted paradigm.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand." -- Albert Einstein

[Jayfar]

Originally Posted by DavidCampen

I see that Jack Peters of JR Peters company has a letter published in the June, 2013 issue of AOS Orchids. The title of the letter is "Value of Potassium". He begins the letter by saying "I read with interest Rick Lockwood's article 'What do Orchids Eat'. While there are some interesting observations made and opinions expressed I feel that the overall impression from the highlighted subtitle, 'Are Your Orchids Addicted to Potassium?' may be somewhat misleading to many of your readers." He concludes by saying "I would urge the loyal readers of Orchids to read more about plant nutrition and the role of all essential elements to better understand and put Lockwood's article in proper perspective when making their decisions regarding their orchids nutritional regimen."

While he is much more circumspect in his criticism of this article than I have been, it is still gratifying to see this in print.

For context, BTW, J. R. Peters is the very reputable lab I used for my tap water tests, but is also the maker of the Jack's line of fertilizers.

Interesting that their Jack's Classic Orchid Special is a 30-10-10 formula , but doesn't include Magnesium or Calcium.

Orchid Special - J. R. Peters Inc. Fertilizer Products And Services

Their Jack's Classic Orchid Liquid, on the other hand, is 7-5-6 and intended for use with rain or RO water and so does include Mg and Ca.

Orchid Liquid - J. R. Peters Inc. Fertilizer Products And Services

I'm still on the fence with the K-lite thinking. I was using it for the better part of a year, but have now adopted a middle ground. I had too many other variables going on in my indoor growing environment and media to come to any solid conclusion, but on some of my Phals I seemed to be occasionally losing leaves, and not always the bottom-most ones, sooner than I'd expect with normal senescence.

[Ray]

FWIW, I have been using it at about 50 ppm N for about a year and ahalf now, and I can see no issues with my plants. I cannot see a particular improvement either, but when you consider the formula is intended to prevent or delay long-term problems, it would be really hard to discern that.

One thing I can say for sure is that I have NOT seen early loss of leaves on older growths, as was reported by one cattleya grower in Florida, nor the loss of leaves on phals.

[Jayfar]

Originally Posted by Ray

FWIW, I have been using it at about 50 ppm N for about a year and ahalf now, and I can see no issues with my plants. I cannot see a particular improvement either, but when you consider the formula is intended to prevent or delay long-term problems, it would be really hard to discern that.

One thing I can say for sure is that I have NOT seen early loss of leaves on older growths, as was reported by one cattleya grower in Florida, nor the loss of leaves on phals.

Right. I've been reluctant to even mention my anecdotal mixed results, because, as stated above, there were just too many other variables involved. At this point I'm hedging my bets and using a what I'd have to call a 'K-middling' regimen.

I wish I had more space, so that I could conduct proper controlled tests with 2 or 3 sizable populations, but that is not to be. Of course I've been following the discussions intently, both here and in the ST forum, and am encouraged to read that others are in the early stages of setting up proper trials.

It's always been a problem that there just isn't enough research being conducted specific to orchids and much of the research that has been done focuses on the needs of big production greenhouses, who need to produce big blooming plants fast, not particularly with an interest in the long-term health of those plants.

[DavidCampen]

Originally Posted by Calbears

Interesting debate, many good points well made. We may not have a conclusion one way or the other for years, but it's worth consideration. Many of the most important scientific discoveries have been made by people that challenged the accepted paradigm.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand." -- Albert Einstein

Imagination is good but it ultimately needs to be validated by facts and logic. Unfortunately there is little to no scientific reasoning in the AOS article.

A quotation that is somewhat apropos:
The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown
Carl Sagan - Wikiquote

[The Orchid Boy]

In my faster growing maudiae type paph hybrids, I have seen MUCH clearer mottling in the leaves and growths.

From what I see, there is scientific resoning in the article. And "Orchids" is a hobby magazine, not a science journal.

[Andrew]

I'm not going to weigh in too much on the argument as K-lite is yet another fertiliser in the long line of next best things that may or may not live up to its claims. To be honest I have no problem with the premiss for using K-lite for orchids from calcareous areas, which includes many of the Paphs the fertilising regime was designed around. Potassium does compete for calcium and magnesium uptake. I don't have any problem with the possibility that giving Paphs potassium rich fertilisers would interfere with the normal potassium/magnesium/calcium uptake ratios they've evolved to need.

What I don't see yet is a reason to get too excited about using it for orchids from neutral-acidic environments based on the claims made for Paphs. What I'm waiting to see is the effect on flowering as well as what effect it has on general pest and disease resistance and, importantly for my situation, cold tolerance. If those don't suffer in the long term in the way that a large body of scientific literature and horticultural lore would predict they should, I'll be more willing to see the K-Lite hype as something different than the rhetoric of Jerry's grow/MSU/worm tea/horse manure/etc, etc.

[Ray]

One of the things that attracted me to the low-K concept was its parallels in other, totally unrelated systems. Rick first saw potassium issues in his professional work with invertebrate toxicology. I am a ceramic engineer and scientist by education, and have worked in that-, and the chemical industry for many, many years. Similarly, I have seen the "interfering" effect that potassium and related ions can have on those systems.

Because I have seen such parallels many times before in totally different areas, these parallels lend a bit of plausibility to Rick's argument, in my mind. Not confirmation, for sure, but enough to make me remain open-minded, and not one of those who automatically disregard something just because it doesn't fit a particular paradigm.

[naoki]

Originally Posted by Andrew

What I don't see yet is a reason to get too excited about using it for orchids from neutral-acidic environments based on the claims made for Paphs. What I'm waiting to see is the effect on flowering as well as what effect it has on general pest and disease resistance and, importantly for my situation, cold tolerance. If those don't suffer in the long term in the way that a large body of scientific literature and horticultural lore would predict they should, I'll be more willing to see the K-Lite hype as something different than the rhetoric of Jerry's grow/MSU/worm tea/horse manure/etc, etc.

I agree with Andrew's point. Both K and Ca are known to be important for cell wall, and therefore disease resistance. Here is a simplified version: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/hs1181

So it would be interesting to see the effect. Rick mentions anecdotal experience of lower disease problems. But I guess that we need controlled inoculation to test this.

Orchid Boy, the mottling of some paphs easily change with light intensity. Is it possible that the older leaves were formed before you got the plants in a greenhouse, and the newer leaves were formed under the light?

[DavidCampen]

Originally Posted by Ray

... enough to make me remain open-minded, and not one of those who automatically disregard something just because it doesn't fit a particular paradigm.

That seems to be a disingenous comment inasmuch as I am not aware of anyone posting in the K-Lite threads, here or at ST, who has "automatically disregard(ed) something (K-Lite) just because it does not fit a particular paradigm."