The best wick I have found is the rope used by boat owners. It has an outside jacket and nylon filbers inside. Will not rot and does a great job.
For small pots use the mop head made from man made material. Already cut in strips for you. Both you can buy at walmart
Container Soils: Water Movement and Retention II
I have gone bonkers with "self watering" containers this year. It's pretty funny nomenclature, since the containers don't actually march over to the spigot and turn it on; I still have to do that!!! But, I'm placing them in areas of my property that are tough to reach w/ my sprinkler system (like the deck). They utilize wicking systems.
I have purchased 7 ready-made containers. I notice that one model uses a synthetic wicking system. It is about a 1" strip of a heavy nylon mesh that's folded over into many layers and stapled. I'm wondering if the mesh nylon fabric sold in fabric stores is the same stuff??? It's with the bridal satins, and it's used for veils and trim.
BTW, I found directions a DGer posted on making your own "self watering containers"- they are meant to be like a product that rhymes w/ Mirth Fox. I have made 20 so far... 10 out of 10-gal black tote boxes, and 10 out of black pails and perennial pots. I'm planting roses, tomatoes, salad greens and cut flowers! (I saved $$$ by buying almost everything at the local dollar store!)
Thanks for the information on wicking.
Al
Ok, I have all of the ingredients to make a cubic yard of the batch. My question is about the lime. Is dolomite lime the proper lime to use? I will be planting in earth boxes, mostly peppers, bell, banana, Jalapenos and eggplant so would the amount of lime be any different for these. I also have calcium nitrate available if needed.
oldude
Yes, dolomite/dolomitic lime is what you need & it generally comes with a ratio of about 4:1 Ca:Mg, which is considered a favorable ratio. The Ca(NO3)2 will supply N and Ca, but then you'll need to find a way to supply needed Mg (Epsom salts) in something close to a favorable ratio. I generally lime at the rate of 1/3 - 1/2 cup of dolomite per cu ft of container soil.
Al
Al:
In your post that started this thread you state that one can expect the mix to last 2 years but you say that ...
"If a soil is desired that will retain structure for long periods, we need to look more to inorganic components. Some examples are crushed granite, pea stone, coarse sand (see above - no smaller than ½ BB size in containers, please), Haydite, lava rock (pumice), Turface or Schultz soil conditioner"
As you may remember my "containers" are 8 foot x 2 foot by 1.5 foot and hold almost a cubic yard of potting mix. Changing every two years
is not an attracticve option for me. So... how much of these "inorganic components" (and of what size) in relation to the pine mulch fines should I add to extend.
Thanx
Laska1 - Mike
This message was edited Mar 19, 2008 2:14 PM
If you want a soil that will see extended use (more than 2 growth cycles), and if you do not wish to worry about aeration/drainage/soil collapse, you can solve the problem by using about 2/3 inorganic components. For my long term soils, I use equal parts of pine bark fines, Turface, and crushed granite. I generally don't use these soils for more than three years in one container, but I could, and without worry about collapse, as long as I was able to turn the soil over each spring before planting and add additional pine bark as the old decomposes.
When building soils for long term applications, the three most important considerations are particle size, durability/longevity of the particles, and the water holding ability of the soil as a whole, as well as the individual particles - in that order. I try to maintain an average particle size of just under 1/8", with the range in size from about 1/16 to 3/8". The heaviest concentration pf particles would ideally be in the 1/16 - 1/8" size, with few particles being larger than 1/4 inch.
You'll notice that the Turface and granite will last indefinitely, and the pine bark will have the longest life of any of the readily available organic components that are used for soils. The bark and Turface are excellent at holding water within the particles at the same time their size and shape allows for plenty of macropores in the soil. The granite adds little in the way of water holding ability, serving primarily to promote drainage/aeration. By increasing the volume of Turface and reducing the granite, you can adjust the soil's ability to hold water, while still maintaining the 2/3 inorganic component of the soil. You can also reduce water held by increasing granite and reducing Turface.
Does that cover your questions? Feel free to keep asking until all is clear to you. ;o)
Al
I have had great luck with applying a regular top dressing to keep soil going. In nature, that is what tends to happen in healthy locations. I do find that adding crushed oyster shell, the stuff they use for chickens, helps a lot with long term plantings, as does greensand and rotted granite. Crushed dolomitic limestone is a great regular addition.
Dolomitic limestone is a must for tomatoes, crushed oyster shell is better for less demanding calcium needs and does not seem to swing PH as high.
Greensand, is (Mg,Fe)2SiO4, and supplies Magnesium and Iron in slow release. Magnesium washes out quickly in pots, so this is a great thing to add.
I do try to check ph, and will use wood shavings as a mulch to balance citrus trees in the acidic direction. Works very well for weeding citrus, other things can't take the acid levels that citrus craves.
Bob
AL:
So... After reading and re-reading both threads I came to the following conclusions as to how to deal with my " really raised beds(containers) "
1) Mix up your regular formula but increase the ratio of in-organics to give a longer shelf life.
2) I will water with a drip system with regular "flushes" supplementing any flushes caused by normal rainfall.
3) Feed regularly varying the fertilizer based on time of the season
4) At the end of the season I can add "amendments" to the mix in prepartion for next season.
5) At the beginning of the season I will "turn" the mix to "fluff" it up for the new season and, if necessary, add more organics to compensate for the decomp of the past season.
How am I doin' "teach" ???
Laska1 - Mike
This message was edited Mar 20, 2008 6:28 PM
Very well. ;o) One thing I might change is: Wait to amend the soil until spring. There is no reason to allowing over-winter composting to further break down soil ingredient particles. Make sense?
Al
Al:
Got it.
BTW.... should I add earthworms. I would think not as they would tend to break down my organics more quickly.
Laska1 - Mike
Nooooo! ;o) You're correct, in that they hasten soil collapse in containers and are not a good thing.
Al
Al:
THANX
Mental prep done....
AND NOW!!! ... THE ADVENTURE BEGINS!!!!!!!!! ITS GOING TO BE A GREAT SPRING IN NEW YORK.
LASKA1 - MIKE
Gentlemen - a small technicality - IT IS SPRING!!! Hallelujah! x, Carrie
Yesterday, I was doing some research, trying to help out a person who had contacted me by e-mail. As I was searching the net, I found a fertilizer that was unknown to me, but now after having discovered it, I'm very excited about it. I'm not sure how long it's been on the market, but it has a 3:1:2 ratio and a full compliment of all the minors. It also has only 1/3 of its N in ammoniacal form, so cool weather and/or periods of low microorganism activity shouldn't cause problems with (often undiagnosed) ammoniacal toxicity like the fertilizers deriving their N from urea.
I'm not going to link to it directly, but you can find out more about it by using the search words Foliage-Pro 9-3-6.
After studying the label, I can tell it's a well-thought-out fertilizer because the % of nutrients so closely matches plants' actual usage, and by the fact that all the nutrients are available in the proper ratios to prevent antagonisms (between nutrients, which can cause uptake problems). The manufacturer has even made allowances for nutrient levels normally found in container media. It should be an EXCELLENT fertilizer for a VERY high % of the plants you grow in containers!
Take care
Al
Thanks Al!
Thanks for the update, Al. This thread is so basic! It changed my life. Now I make my own potting soil in a 55 g drum.
So happy to make my own dirt!
gloria
That's terrific news. And so inexpensive too.
I will be gardening from a balcony for the first time and don't want soil (or water) to drip down on my neighbor's patio below. My idea is to fill saucers with gravel and set the pots on top to allow for drainage and air circulation.
Anyone with advice on this method?
There is nothing wrong with this thinking, as long as there is clear separation between the water in the saucer and the soil in the container (to prevent rewicking of the leachate back into the soil. No advantage is to be gained or improvement made in either "air circulation" or drainage, however, except that excess leachate will hopefully be contained in the saucer.
Al
You keep teaching me more and more Al!
It seems obvious that as the leachate evaporates it would concentrate and rewick back into the soil. I just never considered the possibility. Thanks again!
Bob
Al, I keep trying to follow along, but so many of the pots I have are annuals and I don't care if the soil fully drains or is perched high or low, but it occurred to me I might be able to save some money by only having to fill up 1/2 or 2/3 of the pot with fresh soil(soilless mix) every year, so now I have a renewed interest in the thread. :))
*Is* it possible to have a layer of inorganic stuff in the lower 1/2 and just refresh the upper part of the soilless mix in a large pot? In one place you sort of say you can, but in another place, you indicate the PWT would be too high.
My other question is about this passage you wrote:
"If you discover you need to increase drainage, insert a wick into the pot & allow it to extend from the PWT to several inches below the bottom of the pot. This will successfully eliminate the PWT & give your plants much more soil to grow in as well as allow more, much needed air to the roots."
The question is, how do I get a wick to extend several inches below the pot if the pot is sitting in the ground or on a saucer or piece of slate?
I have more questions, one about the link to the Miraclegro which I cannot find. Here is the link you posted, but they don't appear to list the exact product you mention -- Miracle-Gro Granular soluble 24-8-16 with micronutrients. The liquid you linked to is a Canadian website. I am only frustrated because I cannot find it here locally.
www.miraclegro.com Miracle-Gro Granular soluble 24-8-16 with micronutrients. Click on "read label" for more info.
Ok, and one more question. You posted about Foliage-Pro 9-3-6. On the same webpage I found they also offer a blooms fertilizer with a totally different ratio than 3-1-2. For somebody wanting a big pot of petunias, are you sure I don't want a high middle number? I am not talking trees, shrubs, bonsai or houseplants... just petunias, geraniums and Lantana or something.
Thanks for clearing this up for me.
Suzy
I keep trying to follow along, but so many of the pots I have are annuals and I don't care if the soil fully drains or is perched high or low . . .
You really should care. The physics involved allows no differentiation between plant types. Saturated soil is as damaging to annuals as it is to perennials. Perhaps the rest of my reply will offer opportunity for better understanding.
*Is* it possible to have a layer of inorganic stuff in the lower 1/2 and just refresh the upper part of the soilless mix in a large pot? In one place you sort of say you can, but in another place, you indicate the PWT would be too high.
I think something of what I said might have been lost in your summation of what I said, so let me explain: Any soil made of small particles will support a perched water table (PWT), which is manifest in a saturated layer of soil, usually at the bottom of the pot, but which can also perch on top of material added to the pot as "an aid to drainage". This PWT will always be consistent in height, no matter the size/shape of the container the soil is in. With this knowledge, we can say that a soil that supports a 3" PWT, used in a 3" deep container will remain 100% saturated at container capacity. Container capacity is the state of the container soil after it has been fully saturated and is just at the point where drainage has stopped. So, a 6" deep container will have 50% saturation and a 12" deep container will have only 1/4 of the soil saturated at container capacity; therefore, it should be easy for us to draw the conclusion that taller containers are easier to grow in, based on soil saturation levels. "Skinny" or fat makes no difference, the PWT height using any given soil will remain consistent from one container to another.
Container shape has no effect on the height of the PWT, but it can/does have an effect on the total volume of water in the PWT. The easiest way to understand this concept is by illustration. A container that tapers toward the bottom will have less soil o/a in the bottom 3" than one with vertical sides; thus, the lesser volume of soil will hold a lesser volume of perched water. Here, we can draw the conclusion that, based on soil saturation levels, containers that taper toward the bottom will be easier to grow in.
Since the PWT height diminishes with increasing particle size, until at around a particle size of just under 1/8" the PWT disappears, there is much to be gained from using a coarse, well-aerated soil. Those that I use and suggest are designed to eliminate or nearly eliminate any perched water and associated concerns.
We know that when we use a "drainage layer" under any soil that will support a PWT, the particles in the "drainage layer" must be less than 2.1x the size of the particles in the layer above, or water will perch. Therefore, if we use the 3" water saturation level we refer to above, and if you use a coarse drainage layer below it, water dispersement will be situated like this: You will have the depth of the "drainage layer" that remains quite full of air and relatively free of water. On top of/above that, you will have 3" of saturated soil, and above the saturated soil, you will have soil with an aeration level unaffected by the perched water.
The soils I suggest using are large enough in particle size that they eliminate or nearly eliminate the perched water. This allows the entire container to be filled with soil w/o worry over perched water. If some does occur, it is so minimal that it is dispersed throughout the soil quickly (by diffusion) as the plant uses water & some evaporates. It takes 6 times longer for a 3" water table to diffuse than a 1/2" water table, and during that time, roots that are deprived of O2 are dying.
My other question is about this passage you wrote:
"If you discover you need to increase drainage, insert a wick into the pot & allow it to extend from the PWT to several inches below the bottom of the pot. This will successfully eliminate the PWT & give your plants much more soil to grow in as well as allow more, much needed air to the roots."
The question is, how do I get a wick to extend several inches below the pot if the pot is sitting in the ground or on a saucer or piece of slate?
If you have the container resting somewhere the water can puddle around the container, the wicking ability is negated. It becomes more effective when the drained water can flow away from the container, over a hard surface like the slate or a concrete patio with a slope. Most effective is if the wick can dangle below the container or if the wick is in contact with soil below the container. When the wick contacts the soil, the earth becomes a giant extension of the wick and will absorb water saturating the wick until the physical forces working inside and outside the container are equalized.
I have more questions, one about the link to the Miraclegro which I cannot find. Here is the link you posted, but they don't appear to list the exact product you mention -- Miracle-Gro Granular soluble 24-8-16 with micronutrients. The liquid you linked to is a Canadian website. I am only frustrated because I cannot find it here locally.
Both MG 12-4-8 liquid and 24-8-16 granular soluble are extremely common. The label will say "All-Purpose Fertilizer" on it. Within the last week, I've seen it at Lowe's, Menard's, and two nurseries near me. You'll have no trouble finding it if you look at the analysis on the labels. For some reason, MG seems to HIDE the analysis - as if it's unimportant! ;o)
You posted about Foliage-Pro 9-3-6. On the same webpage I found they also offer a blooms fertilizer with a totally different ratio than 3-1-2. For somebody wanting a big pot of petunias, are you sure I don't want a high middle number?
Yes, I'm sure. Don't wild flowers bloom beautifully year after year w/o the help of someone sprinkling them with additional P? ;o) Plants can only use so much P, and we know that in natural settings or if all nutrients are provided in containers at adequate levels, that plants use about 6 times more P than N. Since a 3:1:2 ratio has only 3X the N than P, you can see that it is already a high P formula, with twice as much P as the plant needs (in relation to N).
Large greenhouse operations use a method of fertilizing that includes injecting fertilizer into the irrigation water. It's called fertigation. They do tissue analysis on the plants to find what nutrients are present at either deficient or toxic levels, and adjust what they inject to correct the deficiency of all the 13 nutrients plants don't get from air/water.
If all nutrients are available in the soil at 'adequacy' levels, the plant will use approximately 1.5 parts of P and 7 parts of K for every 10 parts of N they use. Usage of N:P:K = 10:1.5:7. I'm going to do some division and reduce this ratio to 1/3 of what it is now, for later reference. If I divide 10:1.5:7 by 3.33, it comes out to be 3:.5:2.
Greenhouse growers have learned that they can control plant growth by adjusting the amount of N available, as long as all the other nutrients are available at at least adequacy levels, and they make it their business to be sure they are. You mentioned that they started their plants on a 20-10-20 blend, which is a 2:1:2 ratio.
Lets go back to the division I did a little up the post. We see that plants want to use nutrients at the rate of 3:.5:2, but the greenhouse is fertilizing them with a low N diet, only 2/3 of the N they want, and twice the P. (2:1:2 vs 3:.5:2 yields 2/3 the N and twice the P). The reason for this is pretty simple. The reduced N slows vegetative growth substantially, but it doesn't affect photosynthesis or the amount of photosynthate produced. The plant can't grow leaves & stems, so what does it do with all the extra food it is producing? It makes flowers/fruit with it.
So here's the deal: A 1:1:1 blend like 20-20-20 or 14-14-14 supplies 6 times more P and almost twice as much K as the plant can use, so is probably not the best o/a choice for containerized plants. The surplus nutrients just unnecessarily raise the level of dissolved solids in, and the electrical conductivity of the soil, which makes it increasingly difficult for the plants to absorb water and the nutrients dissolved in the water. A 2:1:2 ratio fertilizer like the 20-10-20 is still a high P fertilizer in relationship to the amount of N applied (greenhouse fertilizer programs usually furnish all the other nutrients as a % of N) and will keep plants compact while still allowing them to bloom well. If you want the plants to grow lusher foliage, & grow closer to their natural growth pattern, a 3:1:2 blend like MG 24-8-16 granular soluble or 12-4-8 liquid is preferred.
I would also advise you that before you attempt to manipulate growth, you'll need to be sure your plants are getting enough of the secondary macronutrients (Ca & Mg are very important - S is usually never a problem in container culture) and a full complement of the other minor elements (Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, are the others to look for). For best results, you should incorporate an insoluble source of the minors like Micromax into the soil before planting, or add a soluble supplement like STEM to your irrigation water every time you fertilize.
I hope this wasn't too confusing or complicated, but it's very difficult to get the message across w/o using the numbers. I hope you take time to digest what I said, as it will give a better understanding of nutrient supplementation for container culture in general, as well as for your specific application.
Take good care.
Al
Oh, My gosh! I read this right after you sent it, but I had to think about some of the things you said, re read it a couple of times, before I could formulate a response, and another series of questions. LOL! Basically I lost the thread and I have looked all over for this thread in the soil and composting forum and wondered where the heck it went. Sorry for the delay and thank you for your answer.
I was able to find the Miracle Grow. I was just so sure that it was somehting special, and you were right; it was on the shelf. I had the name wrong in my head. I also got a bag of Forest Fines, but when I opened it, it didn't look at all like your photo, but later in the spring, they will have a display of little piles of the different milches and soil conditioners they carry and I can select from that. The garden centers here are barely awake.
Thanks again,
Suzy
LOL Suzy "barely awake", well put. x, Carrie
I have decided to try to use containers this year for some of my vegetables.I also have a few raised beds .
Planting two of each in raised beds and containers .
In wheelbarrow I mixed Gator gardening soil [which I noticed had fair amount of peat ],little extra peat , 2 gal.s sand .
6 Plants I started from seed had true leaves about 6in.s tall were placed inside in 4 in.peat pots .
After reading this thread, now I wonder if my soil is ok .
I have 6 pots of soil unused .I think I would like to redo those .What size lava rocks do I use ?
Also about the h.peroxide, we use it to brush our teeth in the 3% drug store brands,rinse it out and use baking soda .It has completely healed hubbys gums .I haven't used toothpaste in 25 years ,but used h2o2 for only 1 yr. now. I am a senior and have only had 4 cavities in past 25 years .
I don't know about the dental advice --I'll just trust you on that part.
I think the soil mix you described is likely to work OK in the short term, is you provide plants the right nutrition, but it's going to compact quickly and become undesirably dense and incapable of good oxygenation.
For the rest of your mix, I'd make it into a half and half --add to it a like amount of some combination of perlite, vermiculite, lava rock or exploded granite type stuff. All perlite would make the lightest mix. I would not go all vermiculite --at most half, with perlite or lava rock. In any case, you'll have twice the volume of mix, so maybe some left over.
Starting next year, you should rototill in the same proportion of these soil amendments into any part of the plantings you 've already done. Again, you should end of with extra mix, since you are trying to double the soil's volume.
In the meantime, make sure all your raised beds and containers drain well, and keep them watered regularly --irrigate!
I am not a fertilizer expert, so I pass on giving any advice on that.
Hi, Whatsupdoc. I'm not sure where to start to try to help you with the soil you already mixed. Do you have pine bark available to you that looks anything like one of the examples in the picture I'll leave? The soil might be ok in raised beds, but I would have chosen reed/sedge peat for that application instead of sphagnum (Did you choose that type?), and perhaps native soil instead of sand? That's just a guess, since I have no idea what your native soil is like.
I think the soil you mixed will probably be too heavy & water retentive in containers, so we need to add something to lighten it up (add more air to the mix), and the sand could be a problem. Why don't you let me know about the pine bark & we'll go from there?
Take care.
Al
Tapla,
Does it have to be pine? What happens if you use Cedar bark about that same size?
I've been wondering if spruces and balsam fir are okay, too.
"Cedar" covers a lot of territory. I can think of trees in at least 6 different genera that claim the common name "cedar"; but to be honest, I've never grown in the bark of any of them. My experience has been limited to pine (usually southern yellow pine) bark, hemlock, and fir. I know all of those to be very good.
I can't really say definitively, but the bark you would be getting would likely be that of Juniperus virginiana (eastern red cedar) and I read a recent report detailing that wood extracts from that tree inhibited germination and growth of lettuce seed as much as or more than Juglans nigra (black walnut - widely known as having allelopathic properties) extracts.
To boil it down - if I had a choice, I'd opt for pine bark.
Al
As mentioned, Clay, I stick to pine (because it's readily available, inexpensive) & (Douglas) fir bark, & I know it to be very good. I suppose the balsam fir bark would be good if the size is appropriate, but I can't speak to the value of the spruce. My instincts tell me it would be ok, though.
Al
Oh, bad news on that! Cedar was all I could find of the right size, and so I bought it. I already filled 8 pots with a huge batch of potting mix I made. LOL!
I'll keep close notes on what does and does not do well, I guess. I certainly don't want to empty everything out and start over.
Suzy
I'm sure we're all hoping right along side you, Suzy. Good luck. ;o)
Al
Suzy: Some days you just can't win! But I bet the cedar is fine. Devon
AL:
Hi... It finally warmed up enough here for me to get started mixing.
In the basic mix, are perlite and turface interchangeable?
Is there any benefit to 50-50 ratio of perlite & turface ( comprising 1/3 of the total).
Thanx
Mike - Laska1
This message was edited Apr 30, 2008 9:02 AM
They are interchangeable, but Turface holds both water & nutrients better. That said, I usually limit my use of Turface to soils intended for extended use, which means they will have a lower organic component than the 5:1:1 or 2 bark:peat:perlite mix. I don't want to go to the expense of using Turface in soils I turn into the garden or compost pile after only a single growth cycle (or 2).
Al
Al:
First, to jog your memory, I re-loaded a photo of my "container". (24' x 2' x 1.5')
After reading all the posts here and on GW, I am thinking of modifying your mix a little to the following:
45- 50% pine bark mulch, 20-25 % peat, 15% perlite and 15% turface. I can cook up what I need for about $200.00 and if I can get three years out of it the cost is manageable.
What do you think????
BTW - Turface "MVP" is the same as Turface "ALL SPORT" - "ALL SPORT" is MVP that is private branded to JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPING.
Mike - Laska1
It's your call, but I think I'd like to see you limit the peat component to 15% and make it up with an additional 5% each of Turface & perlite.
I knew about the AllSport - thank you for letting the rest of us know, though.
Good luck, Mike.
Al
Al:
"It's your call, but I think I'd like to see you limit the peat component to
15% and make it up with an additional 5% each of Turface & perlite"
That's no problem, your suggestion is most welcome and I will follow it.
Actually, at first, I was thinking of a 60/40 mix and changed it because I thought it would be too "airy" and I was worried about those dog days of August here. I guess I will just adjust the drip irrigation to compensate.
Thanx
Mike