Turface is calcined (fired at a high temperature) clay. The special clay is heated until the tiny particles fuse, so they are like hard little ceramic sponges. After screening, their large size allows water to flow through the particles, leaving large air pores between the particles, with water trapped INSIDE the particles for plants to use. The result is lots of aeration, no perched water, and good water retention.
In the picture, you can see Turface on the left and crushed granite on the right. Pay no attention to the soil on the top. It's a handful of soil from my raised beds & too fine (water-retentive) to be suitable for use in containers.
Very good Timmijo! You definitely 'got it'. The only thing I would add to what you said is that drainage layers don't eliminate PWTs, they only serve to raise them in the pot. E.g., if you have a soil that supports 3" of perched water in a 4" deep pot, after a thorough watering, 75% of the soil will remain completely saturated. If you put that soil on top of a 1" deep 'drainage' layer, it will leave you with the entire soil mass saturated.
Al
Container Soils - Water Movement and Retention III
Al, with this thread you have achieved immortality. ;-)
Hey Al!
Getting ready to screen the pine bark fines for my eBuckets! I am sooooooooo excited! Gilraen already screened and did her raised beds, and she's happy, too!
Question: I'm about to plant potatoes in my 20-gallon SmartPots and old washing machine tubs. Can I use the 5:1:1 mix or should I go with regular garden soil in those containers for growing potatoes? Last time I started with 8" of aged compost, and hilled up as the potatoes grew to the top of the containers. Then, I wrapped the containers with plastic poultry wire, and continued hilling with leaves. Had a nice little harvest.
Should I use any of your mixes for growing potatoes in containers? They like a loose, well-draining growing medium...
Thanks!
Linda
Lol - I don't know about that, Steve. I have a thread over at GW with almost 1,800 posts to it. ;o) Thanks though. I hope all is well with you! Spring's just around the corner.
Linda! The pictures didn't come through to my phone. ;-( Chime, but no pics.
If the bumper crop of sweet potatoes I had from the ornamental varieties of sweet potato vine is any indication, the 5:1:1 mix should do a bang-up job for you. Half way through the summer, the containers I had the vines in started showing soil well above the pot rims. It was really hard to water because the soil was much higher than the rims. I knew it had to be sweet potatoes ..... and it was. ;o) I found the bottom of the containers loaded with them after the frost came. Too bad they're no good for eatin'! TTYS
Al
I've spent hours reading through the first two threads, dating back to 2007, and I think I've got a basic understanding of everything. It's a lot of information, but the discussion (questions and answers) really do help clarify most everything. After posting my question about Turface (a half-dozen posts above this one), I found the answer in the second thread, but I hadn't read that far at the time. Sorry to have asked you to repeat yourself, Al.
So now, I just have to wait until better weather to get the materials and repot my dozens of houseplants. I found a source for pine fines right off, at a local mulch dealer. They have "Pine Bark", described as "made from the bark of a pine tree (duh!) with a particle size of 3/4" minus." So, that means I screen it to remove the smaller particles and dust, right? When I called them, they said it had been "aged" but not composted. They use it in their "perennial mix" soil containing "pine fines, sphagnum moss, and hardwood fines".
If I understand correctly, I could use small grade haydite to substitute for Turface, if I can't find the latter, but I would have to smash and screen it to get it down to size. I think I can find turkey grit though.
Sphagnum peat moss is no problem. Looking forward to spreading out the tarp and getting started mixing!
Al,
Here's the picture of the pine bark fines we found. I'm really, really, really happy to have found a source, even if I do have to screen it. Nothing will go to waste, since I can throw the larger chunks into the raised beds I'll build for the fall! I'll have a good bit of "dust to nickel-size" material to work with for my eBuckets. I bought fresh MG Potting Mix as the peat component and I have the course perlite. I also found the MG Liquid Plant Food in the 3-1-2 ratio (it's 12-4-8)!
I think I'm in business! Can't wait to see the results. It's been a long time coming!
Hugs!
P.S. Could I run the larger pieces through a wood chipper if I ever needed more "fines"?
This message was edited Feb 16, 2011 9:27 AM
I believe I read a post, maybe by Al, a while ago and it said you can run the larger pieces through the chipper.
You know what? I truly love my DG friends. Thanks, Pirl!
Me, too, Gymgirl! We all help each other - just as the site was designed to have happen.
HoosierGreen,
Thanks for the affirmation that the lengthy discussions truly are sometimes necessary for clarification. Al worked with me in discussions for over 3 months. So much came from the discussions, and I finally believe I have an understanding of his process.
At first, I wanted no part of the "technical" jargon, but, the more that was revealed, the more I was drawn into gaining a complete understanding of the discussion. I, too, have gone back to reread the posts for clarification. I'm glad they were there for reference.
Al is a blessing to this gardening site, and I am happy to be among his "cheerleaders!"
Linda
P.S. I was answering you about what Turface is, immediately after you posted. I had half a reply typed up on my itty-bitty cellphone, then hit the wrong button and lost it all. I got totally aggravated...sorry you had to plow through so much of the discussion to find that answer.
Hey....
How about some of us "plow through so much of the discussion" and pull out some sort of "glossary of terms" to be put into a sticky at the beginning of this Forum? That way, people coming in at the end wouldn't have to dig so hard for the answers that already exist?
Or, we could pull out the major terminology and include the link to where Al explains the term.
Something Like this:
PERCHED WATER
http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=1608726
It would be quite an undertaking, but Al has spent so much time explaining for us, we could do this for him (and others)
How about it?
This message was edited Feb 16, 2011 10:14 AM
Great idea!
It's actually great fun to respond to a question from a neighbor, as to why their potted plants are not doing well, and be able to say: Most likely it's your perched water problem: soil which retains appreciable amounts of 'perched water' and remain soggy after it’s saturated.
It never fails to raise a few eyebrows.
Jeez! Just when I thought I had it down... QUESTION!!! I thought screening the pine fines was to get OUT the dust and smaller particles, but the way I'm reading the latest posts is that the stuff that drops through the screen is what you use... right? To make sure, the screen used is like hardware cloth, correct? Boy, I'm getting confused all over again. I know Al posted photos, but I am still unsure of the size of the pine fine pieces.
While I'm asking...Al's basic soil mixes have pine bark fines, peat, perlite, lime or dolomite, and CRF + micro-nutrients. His "long-term" mix for woody plants including houseplants is pine fines, Turface (or haydite, perlite, or lava rock 1/8"), BUT ALSO crushed granite (or turkey grit), a little gypsum, the CRF and micro-nutrients. But NO PEAT. Am I understanding this correctly? What I want to do is repot my houseplants with the second mix, but just wanted to make sure there is NO peat in the recipe.
Thanks so much.
John
John,
You're right -- just confused...
I'm using Al's 5:1:1 SOIL mix for container veggies. PBFs:Peat:Perlite. It will provide good aeration plus drainage for my veggies. Al has suggested I go with a 2:1:1 or a 3:1:1 mix which utilizes more peat (in my case, MG Potting Mix) ratio so I will have more of a wicking action in my self-watering units that have a built-in reservoir. All the 5:1:1 mixes contain a peat component. And, all the 5:1:1 mixes used the PBFs that are anywhere from "dust to nickel-size". Whatever drops through 3/8" hardware cloth is used in the 5:1:1 mix.
The lime and calcium are added to the 5:1:1 mix to supplement veggies that require these additives, more specifically, tomatoes.
Then there is the second "GRITTY Mix" . This recipe for planting all the other stuff (it's Al's "long-term" mix for woody plants including houseplants). This includes PBFs, Turface (or haydite, perlite, or lava rock 1/8"), crushed granite (or turkey grit), a little gypsum, the CRF and micro-nutrients. But NO PEAT.
Hope this helps.
P.S. I think there's actually a 3rd mix or a variation of the Gritty Mix. But, I'm not using any mix other than the SOIL mix, so I can't really speak to the Gritty mix, except I know it doesn't have the peat.
Here's the link to the original site where all FOUR recipes ( I was short by one!) are found toward the top of the thread (whew!). If the link doesn't activate itself, just copy it and paste it directly in your browser to go there...
http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/p.php?pid=7522442
Linda ^^_^^
Hoosier - You don't have to wait until better weather to GATHER the ingredients. I make sure I always have on hand what I need to make my years supply of soil (plus I'm always sharing with others - which means I buy Turface & bark by the pallet. ;o) That way there's never any last minute scrambling to find the 'last ingredient'.
Please note there are multiple discussions going on - primarily that we are going back & forth, discussing two different soils with different ingredients, so it's easy to get confused. ;o) If you're making the gritty mix & using pine bark, you can use what does pass through a 3/8" screen but what doesn't pass through 1/8". I see you're talking about Haydite & Turface, which usually don't go in the 5:1:1 mix, and also about peat, which is absent from the gritty mix.
Finding Haydite in a good size has always been problematic for me. It's always too big. Actually though, Haydite holds considerably less water than Turface, so it would probably be a more suitable sub for the granite - if you can find a suitable size.
Hey, Linda! - It DOES look like you're in business! The bark has a lot of large particles, so running it through a chipper before you start would be great - if you have access to one. How about posting a picture of the bark you settle on before you add in the peat? I can probably help you with a guess as to how much peat to add, based on the bark particle size.
Thanks to everyone for being so kind & for all the enthusiasm. If it wasn't for you're enthusiasm, I'd be tired of covering the same material, but I find it catching. I love being around plant people as much as I enjoy tending my plants, so all the friendly people can take a bow for making this thread so much fun, and such a pleasant place to hang.
I've become so comfortable talking about soils, and it's made such a difference in so many peoples growing skill set, that I'm starting to get asked more & more to speak to various groups - most often by far about soils, but sometimes about pruning, bonsai, propagation, fertilizing, tending houseplants ....... Where I probably averaged a talk per month for the last several years, I find that now I'm getting busier. I already have 4 commitments in the next two months, and 3 others between then & August.
How interesting can soil be? The last talk I gave was supposed to last an hour. I ran over by 20 minutes & not one person had left yet (one might have got up to leave, if she was awake). ;o) Even after I ran over 20 minutes, there were still people gathered around asking questions as I was picking up my stuff - for about another half hour. It doesn't trip everyone's trigger, but when I stand in front pf people, I see that light go on - again and again. People are struck suddenly by what I'm saying about the PWT and soggy soils. I've heard "Oh! NOW I get it!" more times than I can count - here on the forums, too. It's soo much fun to be the good news provider! Lol Now YOU guys have the goods & can help others see how/why these highly aerated soils work so well - but make sure to be straight & tell them they have to scout out the ingredients and make the soil - then water a little more often. ;-)
John - Gritty mix for houseplants =
1 part screened pine or fir bark (1/8-1/4 if fir - 1/8 - 3/8 if pine)
1 part screened Turface MVP or Allsport (over insect screen)
1 part crushed granite (Gran-I-Grit in grower size, #2 cherrystone, other)
Maybe gypsum (depending on what you use for a fertilizer - I choose Foliage-Pro 9-3-6)
I screen the dust out of the granite over insect screen, even though it's pre-screened.
Al
She beat me by only 1 minute! ;-) Linda and I were typing feverishly at the same time, it seems. Lol - no shortage of help around here - I like that!
Al
Hey, Al!
Thanks for the comeback! I'm gonna go ahead and make a 3/8" screen, and use whatever falls though (that's the right grid, right, 3/8"). If you look vertically along the far RIGHT edge of the picture, you'll see the particle sizes I'm hoping to capture (give or take those 3-4 chunky pieces); from dust to no larger than nickel size. Nickel size may require a larger screen, huh?
Or should I shoot for no larger than dime size? Which screen for dime? Which screen for nickel?
This message was edited Feb 16, 2011 4:24 PM
For a nickel, try chicken wire
By cracky, I think I'm beginning to understand! Didn't think I would be so dense at comprehending... must be consecutive senior moments.
Anyway, just a couple of (hopefully) final questions:
Is the 3/8" screen hardware cloth? (Insect screen I understand for screening out dust.)
For the gritty mix: I don't want any "dust" from the pine fines, the Turface, or the granite, right?
I can use perlite if I don't find Turface, screening out any perlite dust first, correct? I think that'd be easier than crushing haydite, although we actually have a haydite plant in the area.
Does Dyna-Gro Foliage-Pro liquid 9-3-6 still needs added micro-nutrients, or does it have those already?
If I use a time-release product like the fancier Osmocote Plus (with micro-nutrients), that would take the place of fertilizing with every watering, right?
Added Note: I agree that Al should check into marketing his soil mixes. Here in central Indiana, we have a retired extension agent, kind of a folksy character nicknamed "Dr. Dirt", who makes a killing with a newspaper column, speaking engagements including radio spots, special appearances at the Indiana State Fair, AND as the creator of a special blend of his soil mix, "Dr. Dirt's Premium Growing Mix". It contains pine fines, sphagnum peat, and hardwood fines. It's mixed, bagged, and promoted by a local mulch business, with great success.
I think Al's mixes would be a great improvement, and a much needed choice for gardeners!
Hear! Hear!
"Tapla's Tremendous Turf!" ^^_^^
Linda - nickle size pine bark is fine for the 5:1:1 mix - no problem - as long as there are lots of finer particles, too.
Hoosier - hdwe cloth comes in lots of sizes. I have two sets of screens (different sizes), & I think they are insect screen, 1/8, 1/4, 3/8, 1/2' sizes. See picture.
No dust in the gritty is the best course.
Most people use a calcined DE (diatomaceous earth) product if they can't find Turface. Perlite doesn't retain much water, so would be better as a replacement for the granite.
Each of the ingredients in the gritty mic are selected for a reason, and they are the best at what they do, according to what I've been able to come up with. You can get Turface at Harrell's Inc. in Whitestown (800) 966-1987, Cisco in Indy (800) 888-2986, Tenbarge Seed Company in Haubstadt (812) 768-6157, John Deere Landscapes on Castlegate Dr. in Indy (317) 576-1888 ..... that should be enough to get you on the right track. Ask for Turface MVP or Allsport.
The Foliage-Pro 9-3-6 has ALL 12 essential nutrients (including Ca & Mg, commonly missing from soluble fertilizers) plants get from the soil, in the right NPK % AND in a favorable ratio to each other (the same ratio in which plants actually USE the nutrients). It doesn't get any more foolproof than that.
You can use the CRFs if you choose, but you pretty much give up control over your fertilizing program. I rarely use them.
Thanks very much for the kind thoughts - a nice compliment. ;o)
Al
Many thanks for the clarification info. Looks like I can find Turface easily in this area.
(I was mixed up about the perlite. From what I understand now, the Turface in the gritty mix does the same job as the peat in the basic soil mix and is the water-holding material. The crushed granite in the gritty mix takes the place of the perlite in the basic mix and is the drainage/aeration material.)
But, just one more clarification about fertilizing:
If I don't use a time-release fertilizer, what strength and frequency do you recommend using the Foliage-Pro 9-3-6, which if I understand correctly, you apply with every watering? I would imagine the instructions give the dosage if using with every watering, so perhaps I've answered my own question!
Edited to ask: Is Redland Supply in Florida still the best source for buying Dyna-Gro's Foliage-Pro liquid 9-3-6?
This message was edited Feb 19, 2011 2:52 PM
This message was edited Feb 19, 2011 3:08 PM
Many thanks for the clarification info. Looks like I can find Turface easily in this area.
(I was mixed up about the perlite. From what I understand now, the Turface in the gritty mix does the same job as the peat in the basic soil mix and is the water-holding material. The crushed granite in the gritty mix takes the place of the perlite in the basic mix and is the drainage/aeration material.)
Close enough that it doesn't need clarification. You got it.
If I don't use a time-release fertilizer, what strength and frequency do you recommend using the Foliage-Pro 9-3-6, which if I understand correctly, you apply with every watering? I would imagine the instructions give the dosage if using with every watering, so perhaps I've answered my own question!
I fertilize with every watering in the winter, because I over-winter only about 100 plants indoors. In the summer with 300+ containers to attend to and no fertilizer injection system, it's not practical for me to fertilize at every watering, so I try to fertilize every week or two, depending on how robustly everything is growing. I pretty much use leaf color as my guide to when plants actually NEED fertilizer, but after a while, you get pretty good at anticipating your plants nutrient needs and supplying them before they show a need. Fortunately, you have a much wider margin for error in both fertilizing AND watering when using fast (draining) soils that allow you to flush the soil when you water. I think the 'recommended' dose on the 9-3-6 label is too light in most cases. I'm able to fertilize at 4-5 teaspoons in 2-1/2 gallons of water weekly when plants are growing well and it seems to be just right. If it's cool or hot, I'll either increase the interval between fertilizing or decrease the dose.
I don't really know where the best place to get the FP 9-3-6 is. I either pick it up in CHI where I buy bark for the gritty mix (no freight), or just shop around online for the best buy.
Gymgirl/Gilraen: Your new theme song. Pay particular attention to the chorus!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LBn6rq8OlE
Al
Haha! Al, You hit the nail on the head with GG's theme song! Perfect! :>)
Shoe (always grateful to be getting educated by Al)
Thanks, Al. I think I'm ready to go! I'm looking forward to this "project".
I can order the fertilizer from Redland Supply, unless I can figure out what CHI is (Chicago?).
I'm assuming that when repotting into the gritty mix (or either one actually), you need to shake most of the old potting mix off the roots, right?
CHI = Chicago.
When repotting into any soil, you should bare root in one or two repotting sessions a year apart. That is, some plants can be bare rooted & all soil removed in one session, others should have half the old soil removed one year & the rest in the subsequent year.
Al
I'm about to repot several plants from crappy broken-down soil into your gritty mix. Any tips/tricks to offer on safely getting the old soil loose w/o overdoing it?
CHI = Chicago! Yeah! Do you buy it at a supply place there ...well, obviously... but is it retail, open to the public? Where please? I have a daughter in Chicago, and we go there quite a few times a year to visit. Thanks!
PP - what are you repotting? How big are the plants?
HG - http://oakhillgardens.com/htm/supplies_growingmedia.htm
I buy the fine fir bark on the page I linked to for use in my bonsai soils/the gritty mix. I see the price just went up to $20 for 3 cu ft bag, prescreened 1/8-1/4". It's actually NW of CHI in Dundee. I was getting it for $15 if I bought 20 bags. I'm guessing I'll have to wheedle to get him down to $17/20 bags. ;o)
Al
Thanks for the info. I plan to go right through Dundee this spring after visiting our daughter in Chicago, and on up to Rich's Foxwillow Pines NW of Chicago.
I'll tell 'em Al sent me.
I LOVE MY THEME SONG!!!
Thank you for making my day. Unfortunately, there was exactly ONE thing that broke my stride on this long weekend I took to start my potting -- I strained my back Friday and couldn't move for the two days without almost unbearable pain.
Bummer! I took enough painkillers to down a whale. And nada. But, ya'll know I'm determined. I sat on the floor and managed to sift one bucket of PBfines. And this evening I planted one seedling in an eBucket...
"I've got to keep on movin'!!"
Al, I sent you pics of my sifted Pbfines so you could tell me whether to go 2:1:1 or 3:1:1 in the eBuckets, but you didn't see them. So I did a 3:1:1. It sure seems to soak up a lot of water before it drains! I was getting worried, thinking I was filling the whole bucket with water! We'll see in about a week.
Linda
Tapla, this vendor ...
http://www.orchidmix.com/cat2.htm
... is just down the road from my home. Do their prices look reasonable to you?
Nice quality!
I've taken to buying medium pine bark "mulch" from a good nursery, $8 / 2 cubic feet.
What Home Depot sells for "bark mulch" is really junky, but half the price or less.
I can screen the better mulch with 1/2" & 1/4" hardware cloth and get usable chunks. I THOUGHT I had a fast-draining mix for seeedlings, but when I potted them up, I saw that the first batch had too many fines - there was no visible air space, and it was fairly soggy.
That's why I switched from 1/2 & 1/2 fine and medium mulch. The medium grade has fewer fines.
What passes through the 1/4" screen is good for amending heavy clay soil in raised beds.
What won't pass through the 1/2" screen at all I use for literal mulch on RBs.
Corey
PP - it's not the best price, but it's not highway robbery, either. There is a place between Toledo & Sandusky that sells fine fir bark, but I can't seem to find where I saved the info. It's a wholesale/retail outfit that sells all kinds of forest products. I'm thinking your 'flower supply' outfit almost certainly buys their product from the entity I'm referring to. I'll see if I can find out for you, but give me a couple of days. I owe a friend from Ann Arbor, MI an email, but he may be away for the weekend or about to leave.
I'm low on fir bark now, but I'm heading to CHI in Aug. I last paid $15/3 cu ft, but I see the regular price is up by $3 to $20, so I expect I'll probably pay $17 or $18 if I buy 20 bags or more, but that price is for 3 cu ft bags.
Al
At another forum site, I wrote the following because someone had asked if Scott's Premium Soil was a 'good' choice. You may find it of interest.
Is Soil X a Good Soil?
I think any discussion on this topic must largely center around the word "GOOD", and we can broaden the term 'good' so it also includes 'quality' or 'suitable', as in 'a quality or suitable soil'.
How do we determine if soil A or soil B is a good soil? and before we do that, we'd better decide if we are going to look at it from the plant's perspective or from the grower's perspective, because often there is a considerable amount of conflict to be found in the overlap - so much so that one can often be mutually exclusive of the other.
We know that grower A isn't happy unless he is squeezing every bit of potential from his plants, and grower Z isn't happy unless he can water his plants before leaving on a 2-week jaunt and still have a weeks worth of not having to water when he returns. Everyone else is somewhere between A and Z; with B, D, F, H, J, L, N, P, R, T, V, X, and Y either classically ignorant (it just means they're not aware there is a difference) or they understand but don't care.
I said all that to illustrate the futility in trying to establish any sort of standard as to what makes a good soil from the grower's perspective; but lets change our focus from the pointless to the possible.
We're only interested in the comparative degrees of good and better here. It would be presumptive to label any soil "best". 'Best I've found' or 'best I've used' CAN be useful for comparative purposes, but let's tackle 'good', then move on to 'better', and finally see what we can do about qualifying these descriptors so they can apply to all growers.
I would like to think that everyone would prefer to use a soil that can be described as 'good' from the plant's perspective. How do we determine what a plant wants? Surprisingly, we can use %s established by truly scientific studies that are widely accepted in the greenhouse and nursery trades to determine if a soil is good or not good - from the plant's perspective. Rather than use confusing numbers that mean nothing to the hobby grower, I can suggest that our standard for a good soil should be, at a minimum, that you can water that soil properly. That means, that at any time during the growth cycle, you can water your plantings to beyond the point of saturation (so excess water is draining from the pot) without the fear of root rot or compromised root function or metabolism due to (take your pick) too much water or too little air in the root zone.
I think it's very reasonable to withhold the comparative basic descriptor, 'GOOD', from soils that can't be watered properly without compromising root function, or worse. I also think anyone wishing to make the case from the plant's perspective that a soil that can't be watered to beyond saturation w/o compromising root health can be called 'good', is fighting UP logic hill.
So I contend that 'good' soils are soils we can water correctly, that is we can flush the soil when we water, without concern for compromising root health/function/metabolism/. If you ask yourself, "Can I water correctly if I use this soil?" and the answer is 'NO' ... it's not a good soil ... for the reasons stated above.
Can you water correctly using most of the bagged soils readily available? 'NO' I don't think I need to point to a conclusion.
What about 'BETTER'? Can we determine what might make a better soil? Yes, we can. If we start with a soil that meets the minimum standard of 'good', and improve either the physical and/or chemical properties of that soil, or make it last longer, then we have 'better'. Even if we cannot agree on how low we wish to set the bar for what constitutes 'good', we should be able to agree that any soil that reduces excess water retention, increases aeration, ensures increased potential for optimal root health, and lasts longer than soils that only meet some one's individual (and arbitrary) standard of 'good', is a 'better' soil.
All houseplants, unless grown from seed, have the genetic potential to be beautiful specimens. It's easy to say, and easy to see the absolute truth in the idea that if you give a plant everything it wants it will flourish and grow; after all, plants are programmed to grow just that way. Our growing skills are defined by our ability to give plants what they want. The better we are at it, the better our plants will grow. But we all know it's not that easy. Lifetimes are spent in careful study trying to determine just exactly what it is that plants want, to make them grow best.
Since this is a soil discussion, let's see what the plant wants from its soil. The plant wants a soil that contains in available form all the essential nutrients, in the ratio in at which the plant uses them, at a concentration high enough to prevent deficiencies yet low enough to make it easy to take up water (and the nutrients dissolved in the water). First and foremost, the plant wants a container soil that is evenly damp, not wet. Giving a plant what it wants, to flourish and grow, doesn't include a soil that is half soggy for a week before aeration returns to the entire soil mass, even if you only water in small sips. Plants might do 'ok' in some soils, but to actually flourish, like they are genetically programmed to do, they would need to be unencumbered by wet, soggy soils.
We become better growers by improving our ability to reduce the effects of or eliminate limiting factors, by clearing out those things that stand in the way of the plant reaching its genetic potential. Even if we are able to make every other factor that influences plant growth absolutely perfect, it could not make up for a substandard soil. For a plant to grow to its potential, every factor has to be perfect, including the soil. We'll never manage it, but the good news is that as we get closer, our plants will get better and better. It's that one little factor that we willingly or unwittingly overlook that limits us in our ability and our plants in their potential.
A 2-bit plant in a $10 soil has a future full of potential, where a $10 plant in a 2-bit soil has only a future filled with limitations. ~ Al
Al
Hello, Al, from a fellow Michigander!
I primarily grow orchids, but came to this site in search of some information that would help me grow healthier and more productive tomatoes. What a fantastic resource you have provided here...you are to be commended!
Light bulbs were popping off for me all over this thread, as many of your concepts have application for growing orchids, too. Most orchids are epiphitic (grow with roots in the air)...we only grow them in pots for OUR convenience. Discussions of potting medias is always a hot topic on orchid forums. Everyone is in search of the "best". But one key and often overlooked element in providing the right culture is "what kind of waterer are you?" I do all my growing from a wheelchair, so frequent watering indoors is sometimes a challenge (unless the plants like to actually have wet feet.)
Frequent watering for tomatoes in summer is not such a big deal, so I am raring to go with your approach! I have already discussed your recipe with my DH (I had to warn him that my tomato pots were going to be dumped out...again), and even with a quick overview, your suggestions made sense to him, too.
I sure wish you grew orchids! There are a lot of people who could benefit from your knowledge.
Have you ever evaluated MSU fertilizer (yes, from Michigan State)? It's been specifically formulated for orchids and uses non-urea nitrogen sources; I'm wondering if it is similar to Foliage Pro 9-3-6.
Also, have you heard of Orchiata bark? It comes in a variety of sizes and is supposed to have 2-3 times the useful life over other barks. I have started using it with many of my orchids, and the results so far are extremely favorable.
BTW, if anyone is interested, not all "orchid bark" is the same. My experience with most packaged barks is that they begin to decompose in a matter of months and turn into mud...yuk!
Do you have any specific recommendations for your soil and tomatoes? I get really tall plants, but not many tomatoes. And I fight with blight and/or powdery mildew.
I also realized that the perched water issue might be why I haven't been able to grow shallots in pots. I will try again this year!
Thanks again for being so generous with your time and knowledge!
Katherine
Hi, Katherine. We're almost neighbors, eh? ;^) First, let me thank you for the kind words and the compliments. I really appreciate your making the effort. I'll probably seem to skip through topics like a kid through spring puddles, but it's because I'm following your post and commenting as I read. I do grow a few hardy terrestrial orchids in the gritty mix, and they do exceptionally well. Great looking foliage & excellent bloom quality and quantity. I've had a number of others contact me to say they use it for non terrestrials too, but not being well versed in orchid nomenclature,I can't be helpful in sharing what they were growing. Sorry about that part, but its would seem worth some experimentation?
MSUs's orchid fertilizers are similar to Foliage-Pro in that they don't derive their N from urea, and they relegate P levels to something more realistic than 1:1:1 ratio fertilizers like 20-20-20 solubles or 14-14-14/15-15-15 controlled release. These fertilizers supply excess amounts of P for all plants, and the 'bloom booster' fertilizers are worse offenders, some of them being so far out of line for containerized plants as to be ridiculous. 10-52-10 (a commonly found 'bloom booster' blend), after applying the the required factoring to determine the actual P supplied, (X.43 of what's reported) supplies almost 14X as much P as the plant can use in relation to N. That's ridiculous to the point a case could easily be made it's irresponsible. MSU's fertilizers also contain a full compliment of all nutrients, including Ca/Mg, and in favorable ratios. I would have no problem using it if I couldn't get the FP 9-3-6.
That I haven't used it doesn't mean much. The science involved with how it's made and what it's made from, as well as what it provides, is quite clear - you don't need to be a bus driver to understand the wheels go round & round. ;-)
I'm familiar with P radiata, which is the tree the Orchiata brand bark comes from. Lignin is what makes trees stiff & woody, and suberin is a lipid. Both are bio-compounds shown as having extremely difficult hydrocarbon chains for microorganisms to cleave, which is what makes conifer extremely difficult for soil biota to break down. Whether it is in FACT has 2-3 times the useful life of other pine/fir/redwood bark products, or if they are referring to hardwood bark products that contain only fractions of these products compared to conifer barks is a question that would need clarification before I would take the claim at face value as being superior to ALL bark products. I just don't know and retain some degree of skepticism about the statement. It may even be a moot point because I've NEVER seen the gritty mix with for or pine bark break down before it was well past being prudent about repotting due to root congestion. IOW - why pay for a product purported to last for 10 years when the state of root congestion might require repotting at 2-3 year intervals?
Tomatoes: For soils I really like the 5:1:1 mix. I get loaded plants to 8' tall in 18 gallon tubs. I use a 3:1:2 RATIO (different than NPK %s) until the vines are 5' or so, then I cut the fertilizer in half & supplement with some additional K, in the form of ProTeKt 0-0-3. It works great. I don't have a problem with spraying my plants with Daconil, so I use that prophylactically & I never seem to be troubled with early/late blights, PM, or anthracnose (gray mold).
I use partially composted pine bark fines (usually) in the 5:1:1 mix when I can find it. If I can't, I use fresh/ uncomposted bark. I've never gone more than 3 years between repots for any of my plants due to root congestion that was obviously affecting growth and vitality by that time. What you may have witnessed turning to mud were other soil ingredients? Also, organic fertilizers can be counted on to hasten soil structure by promoting larger populations of soil biota. I look at that fact as a disadvantage and use soluble fertilizers like the FP, but the MSU fertilizer would be similar along those lines. You don't need a thriving microherd in containers to raise perfectly healthy plants, and courting their populations often proves to be an exercise in futility.
You should be able to grow onions, garlic, shallots .... in pots once you get that PWT under control. Partially burying your containers (just so the drain holes are covered) or using a wick can also be helpful. Tilting your containers on a 45* angle with a drain hole at the lowest pot (until pots/containers stop draining, will make a BIG difference in how much residual PW remains in the soil.
You're welcome .... and thanks again for the kind words.
Al
Hey, Al -- long time no hear. Good to see ya again.
Would you be so kind to elaborate on this: "I use a 3:1:2 RATIO (different than NPK %s)" Thanks.
Mary
NPK % tell you how much Nitrogen (N), Phosphorous (P), and Potassium (K) are in the fertilizer by weight. The fertilizer RATIO is much more important than the NPK %s, and describes the presence of the 3 elements in relation to each other. For example, Miracle-Gro makes 24-8-16 in a granular soluble fertilizer. Those 3 numbers are the % of NPK in the product. They also make 12-4-8 in a liquid fertilizer (yellow jug). Both fertilizers are 3:1:2 RATIO fertilizers. For every 3 parts of N, there are 1 part of P and 2 parts of K, thus the 3:1:2 ratio. It's a little like reducing fractions.
I use another 3:1:2 ratio fertilizer, Foliage-Pro 9-3-6. If you reduce the NPK %s to their lowest whole number form by dividing by 3, that too is a 3:1:2 ratio.
All plants use the same elements, in surprisingly close to the same ratio. They use abut 6X as much N as P, and about 3/5 as much K as N, so it's very difficult to build a solid case for using 1:1:1 ratio fertilizers like the popular 20-20-20 or 14-14-14 controlled release. 1:1:1 ratio fertilizers supply more than 2.5X the P plants want or can use, and the "bloom booster" fertilizers are an extremely poor choice for containerized plants because P they supply in great excess is usually detrimental. Remember, anything dissolved in the soil solution that is not needed has the potential to be limiting.
Unless we're intentionally using fertilizer in a way that limits growth, the perfect goal would be to ensure that all the nutrients plants normally take from the soil are present in the soil and available for uptake at all times, in the same ratio at which the plant uses the nutrients, and at a level concentrated enough that it ensures no deficiencies yet low enough it ensures the plant can easily take up water and the nutrients dissolved in the water. As hobby growers, the closest we can come to that would be by using a fertilizer that has all the essential nutrients in a 3:1:2 ratio.
MG 24-8-16 and 12-4-8 have almost all the essential nutrients in a favorable ratio, but they lack Ca & Mg. This isn't usually an issue if you're using a commercially prepared soil because it will almost certainly have been pH adjusted with dolomitic lime, which raises pH ans supplies the missing Ca/Mg. If you make your own soils, you need to add the lime or supply the Ca/Mg by using other amendments, usually gypsum (CaSO4) and Epsom salts (MgSO4) ...... but now I've drifted well beyond the scope of your question.
Al
Got it! Thanks Al. Foggy mind ....