Keep Calm and Carry On: Part II

Facebook

Recently I posted that many of the “rules” that gardeners cling to so tightly regarding tree planting (i.e., dig the planting hole 3 times the width of the root ball, always amend the backfill with organic matter) are probably better considered ‘suggestions’ than rules.  While these practices won’t hurt, there are much better ways to spend time and effort to ensure long-term survival when planting a tree.  Here are the top four:

Irrigate.  No matter how much time and effort goes into the ‘perfect’ planting hole; for most parts of the country, trees that are not irrigated after planting are doomed.  Linda advocates watering in several small sips during the week; I still stick to the old school notion of one long soak per week.  In the final analysis, logistics will probably dictate which approach you use.  Either way, the key is to provide trees with water during the establishment year and even into the second year after planting, if possible.

Mulch.  Organic matter placed properly on top of the planting hole will do more good than organic matter placed in the planting hole.  Study after study demonstrates that mulch conserves soil moisture by reducing evaporation from the soil surface, controls weeds, and moderates soil temperature.  Oh, and that business about wood-based mulches ‘tying up’ or ‘stealing’ nutrients from landscape plants?  Maybe for bedding plants, but not for trees and shrubs.  Our research and other studies indicate that, for the most part, the type of organic mulch makes little difference compared to not mulching at all.  Hence, my motto “Mulch: Just do it.”

Proper planting depth.  Width of the planting hole may not matter, but planting trees too deep is a recipe for disaster.  Burying roots too deep reduces oxygen levels around the roots and starts a series of unfortunate events for the tree.   Find the root collar flare and keep it visible.

Bad move.  The contractor was going to install drain tile but decided not to at the last minute to save money. Ouch.

Right tree, right place. In my experience, the number one reason newly-planted trees fail in the first year is lack of watering and aftercare.  After year one, improper tree selection takes the top spot.  Here in the Upper Midwest, poor drainage and heavy soils take their toll year after year.  Lack of water can usually be addressed, but once a tree is planted in a spot that is too wet for that species, it’s usually a long, slow, and agonizing decline.  And it’s amazing how often people will ignore obvious red flags in selecting trees.  Our Dept. of Transportation recently planted 25 eight-foot B&B eastern white pine, which are notoriously salt sensitive, about 30’ from I-96 at a rest area between Lansing and Detroit.  Predictably, after one winter’s exposure to deicing salt spray all the trees were dead or wishing they were dead.  Right tree, right place.  This ain’t rocket science, folks.

Facebook

Looks like larch!

Facebook

Great debate on the identity of Friday’s mystery plant! Several of you guessed larch, and this particular one is contorted larch (Larix kaempferi ‘Diane’), a cultivar of Japanese larch:

(As an FYI to a side discussion in the comments, tamarack is the common name for American larch, Larix laricina.)

And the eagle eye award to those of you who saw that YES! WE FINALLY HAVE A SEARCH FUNCTION on the blog! It’s still being tweaked so that the results pages will be a little more sophisticated, but it works. Now you don’t have to sort through hundreds of posts to find that one of Holly’s on pee bales. Or Jeff’s on drunken slugs.

Facebook

How to get the information out?

Facebook

Over the last two weeks I’ve been dwelling on the information that people get about gardening from various sources.  I’m not talking about really serious gardeners – I’m talking about the guy  down the block who might grow six tomatoes, two cucumbers, and a head of lettuce.  He’s got 6 trees on his property and he keeps his lawn nice, but not immaculate, by mowing weekly and fertilizing and applying herbicides once a year.  Where is this guy getting his gardening information?  Can we (and by we I mean scientists like the garden professors) do something more than we currently are to reach him so that he’s using up to date information?

A couple of days ago I walking into the place where I get my taxes done – I’ve had the same person doing my taxes for the last 14 years or so and I’ve become friendly with her – and, after we got the paperwork done she introduced me to the receptionist by saying that I speak and write books about gardening.  The receptionist (who doubled as the cashier) wanted to know more so I said “You know Jerry Baker?”  She said “yes, I have a bunch of his books and I just bought a set for my father.”  I said “Oh…Well I’m the guy who tells you that most of Jerry’s remedies don’t work.

She didn’t seem particularly impressed with me (and the cost of filing my return was higher than usual – coincidence?)

Anyway, my question to you is, how do we reach people like that?

Facebook

Plant containers – does size really matter?

Facebook

A few days ago I got a question from Cynthia about “potting up.”  For those of you for whom this is an unknown phrase (and no, it’s not a euphemism for a certain herbal activity), it refers to the practice of moving plants into ever larger containers.  She was wondering if there was any “real science” behind the practice – in other words, why not just start out with a larger container?

Hah! I needed no further encouragement and spent several days collecting and reading decades’ worth of research. And there is a LOT of research on this topic. As you might guess, it’s geared towards production nurseries and greenhouses.  But the good part is that it’s been done on just about any kind of plant material you could want.  Vegetables.  Annuals.  Perennials. Grasses.  Shrubs.  Native plants.  Ornamental, fruit and forestry trees.  Seeds, seedlings, cuttings, big plants, little plants.  Ahhhhh…data!

Almost without exception, you get better growth on plants grown in larger containers, whether you’re measuring height, number of leaves, leaf area, stem diameter, shoot and root dry and fresh weights, whole plant dry and fresh weight,…you get the idea.  This isn’t surprising, because with a larger root zone you can support more roots, which in turn support more above-ground growth.

The only parameters which tended to diverge for some species were flower and fruit production.  Restricted roots can stimulate sexual reproduction in plants, possibly because poor growing conditions spur the plant to reproduce before it dies.  Other drawbacks include increased probability of circling root systems, and higher ambient soil temperature, compared to plants in larger containers.

Smaller containers might be considered desirable when one is trying to limit above-ground growth – the “bonsai” effect.   And they require less water than larger containers – which brings us to the bottom line, as far as production nurseries are concerned.

Larger containers take more space.  And water.  In at least one study, water costs were shown to be “prohibitive for larger container sizes.”  Furthermore, smaller containers are preferred by production nurseries to “optimize production space.”  Another economics-based study found that “the smaller of these was the more economical.”

But most of you probably aren’t interested in the economics of plant production – you want to know what’s best for your own container plants, whether they are houseplants or pots of herbs or punches of annual color on your patio.  The science is clear:  it’s best to pot up plants in small containers quickly into their final destination, rather than making several (pointless) intermediate transplants.

Facebook

Mouse Tombstones

Facebook

Doing this…


I must identify each and every Wave petunia!

leads to this…

and this…

Unfortunately, the second and third photo are from a college teaching and display garden. There are a lot of inexpensive yet more attractive ways to relate plant identification to your visitors.

We all do this, of course, to some extent in our home gardens. Walk around with weird plant in hand, dig hole, stick it in, say to self "I’ll come back and get that label to add to my (pick one) Excel garden database/bag of random tags/photographic memory."

Typically, most of mine end up on top of the washing machine from cleaning out pants pockets. Not exactly a good record-keeping system.

Tags as tombstones: during spring mulching, I’ll typically find a few half-buried, printed with, oh, Maybehardii maybenotus – Plant Delights Nursery $25.  Said plant is nowhere to be seen. Dang.
 

Facebook

Heck, it’s hellebore!

Facebook

You were too smart for me this week.  Though my husband was convinced that Friday’s photo was not enough to help identify the plant, JRR, Foy, and an unnamed commenter all recognized hellebore:

Always a welcome sight in the spring.  And don’t be fooled by those old wives’ tales that hellebores don’t like wood chip mulches. These beauties have been in wood chip mulches all their lives, and not only do they do great, their seedlings do as well.

Facebook

Bordeaux Mix

Facebook

One of my favorite stories about pesticides is the story of Bordeaux mix.  It’s a story of France in the 1800s (so it must be pretty romantic, right?) and how they were suffering from a shortage of grapes.  Don’t feel sorry for them — it was really their own doing.  Over the course of the 19th century grape vines were brought from the United States to test their merits against European grapes.  It was quickly discovered that, for the most part, American grapes were not the equal of European grapes for winemaking.  Unfortunately for the French, however, along with the grapes came a disease: downy mildew.  This mildew absolutely ravaged grape vines across Europe, and particularly France from the time that it was introduced, around 1878.

Meanwhile there was another problem for grapes growing in France.  People.  People like to eat grapes beside the side of the road and so, throughout France’s grape growing regions, grapes on the sides of the road were typically bare.  Unlike downy mildew, however, grape growers had a pretty good idea what to do about people.  They sprayed nasty stuff on the grapes.  This nasty stuff took many forms, but the one which was most effective was a mixture of copper sulfate (basically you dissolve copper in sulfuric acid) mixed with lime.  Brushed on a plant’s foliage, it was darn ugly.

Then came 1882; a terrible year for downy mildew.  Grape vines were losing their leaves all over Europe, except for those vines beside the sides of the road.  There the grape vines were doing just fine.  The reason was the copper in the lime/copper sulfate mixture which was eventually dubbed Bordeaux mixture because of where it was first used.  Bordeaux mixture is still available today, and is one of the most important tools in the organic grower’s pesticide arsenal.  Unfortunately it’s nasty stuff – it builds up in the soil and it’s toxic to earthworms and a wide variety of different plants and aquatic organisms.  Using this stuff once in a while – such as once a year – isn’t terrible, but regular use is a good way to ruin your plot of land.

One final thought – Those American vines which originally brought in mildew?  They eventually became very important to French wines because of another introduced pest, phylloxera.  They were used as rootstocks because they were resistant to this pest — unlike European grapes.

Facebook

A salt bath for your tomatoes?

Facebook

This morning I got an email from one of my gardening colleagues, wondering about the wisdom of watering tomato plants with salt water.  He had a link to a UC Davis website which tacitly endorses spraying tomato plants with 10% salt water “to increase their nutritional value and taste.” Unreferenced “worldwide studies” are mentioned, along with the “major potential benefit of providing irrigation for crops in areas with freshwater restrictions.”

Before we deal with the impracticalities and out-and-out harm of using salt water for irrigation, let’s look at why this practice would work on tomatoes.  By training I’m a plant stress physiologist (and I’m well versed in the primary literature on this topic).  Watering tomato plants with a salt solution imposes a drought stress on the entire plant, as less water is taken up under these conditions.  So leaves and fruits are smaller and they may produce stress-induced biochemical compounds in response.  The upshot is that you have smaller tomatoes with a higher concentration of various solutes, some of which might be tastier or more beneficial to humans.

Guess what?  You can do the same thing by decreasing irrigation during fruit set!  Less water means smaller fruit and increased concentrations of sugars and other plant compounds, and voila!  So you can skip that step of adding salt water and just cut back on irrigation to induce a mild drought stress.

So…why in the world would you dump salt water on your garden soil?  The article blithely dismisses this:  “Many are still concerned about salt causing soil degradation and rendering some seawater-treated tomatoes inedible, but scientists cite that plants thrive in balanced soil containing both macro- and micronutrients.”  Sorry, but sodium is NOT a micronutrient for most plants and does NOT contribute to a “balanced soil” in one’s vegetable garden.

An ironic twist to this whole article is that most of the research that’s been done is relevant to arid parts of the world (the Middle East, primarily) where saline soil conditions and limited water are common.  I can’t imagine what they would think about people who would deliberately contaminate good soil by adding salt water to it.

Facebook