Cycling Fertilizers for growth vs blooms

[Baku1875]

So I have inadvertently procured a bunch of flowering tropicals via learning how to take cuttings, air layers, over the past year, and it so happens that most of the new raw material I have now is all flowering tropicals (singapore holly, barbados cherry, bougies) and hopefully the supply chain will keep churning.

Does anyone cycle high nitrogen fertilizers to push green growth on flowering tropicals for a year or two at the expense of blooms, THEN switch to high phosphorous to get the tree to use some of that energy for blooms?

I think I may have fed too much nitrogen to my singapore hollies in the past year and my bigger bougie doesnt bloom for as many months as my smaller ones, but they are extremely vigorous and leafy. Is it possible that the high nitrogen is suppressing blooms(vigoro all purpose 12-5-7, miracle gro 24-8-16 lmfao).
Should I let the nitrogen settle down before adding a high P fert to encourage blooms?

What is the consensus on this, and can blooms vs growth be triggered via fert composition on these flowering tropicals?

 

[Paradox]

I am not 100% sure but I think amount of light has more to do with flowering in tropicals than type of fertilizer.

Perhaps @Leo in N E Illinois or someone with more knowledge of flowering tropicals can give us some insight?

 

[Shibui]

High nitrogen definitely drives growth at the expense of flowering.
P is associated with root growth.
Potash (K) is the element more associated with flower and fruit. Look for any fertilizer designed for flowering or fruiting plants - roses, azaleas, citrus, tomato, or just some generic 'flowers and fruit' products - 14:2.6:21 is one that's available down here. 14:11:33 is another.

Flowering is not purely about nutrient levels. Maturity is one other factor, suitable flowering wood is another that defeats many bonsai growers because regular trimming can remove embryonic flower buds before we even see them. Light, water, temps, etc will also have an impact on flowering.

Soluble fertilizers will leach out of the pots pretty quick when you are watering plenty - probably only a week or 2 depending on the CEC of the soil mix. Solid granules may stay around longer but probably a good plan to lay off the high N for a few weeks then transition to the flowering fert.
It can take some time for the higher K to show up. I switch to high K in late summer because that's when most spring flowering species start to form embryonic flower buds. Fertilizing for flowers in spring is too late for flowering that year. You will probably be fertilizing for next year's flowers now.

A grower down here disputes it is high K that drives flowers. His claim is low N is responsible. Whether that's the same thing by another name or not I am not sure but definitely look for a product where the last (K) number is higher than the N to assist with flowers.

 

[Wires_Guy_wires]

The only solid research I've found for either P and K had the outcome that fruit yields (in weight) increased in soft fruits and cereals. For some reason people translated this to "there must have been more flowers too". I haven't been able to get more or larger flowers with high P or high K or both.
But I'd love to see more, so if anyone knows an article with analyses and not just anecdotes, I'm happy to broaden my mind.

 

[Baku1875]

To fuel the experiment, I got some vigoro 'bold blooms' 15-30-15 and im going to dose my bougies and singapore holly to see what they do this summer.

 

[Baku1875]

Alright here's some of the trees in question, dosed them yesterday afternoon with a lite sprinkling of the bold blooms granules

Malpighia coccigera (singapore holly) cutting took root last august, grew fast as hecc (pumice, coarse perlite, tiny bit of cocopeat, earthworm castings top layer)
top view


^^ Another malpighia coccigera airlayer from May of last year
My OLD big bougie

High nitrogen definitely drives growth at the expense of flowering.
P is associated with root growth.
Potash (K) is the element more associated with flower and fruit. Look for any fertilizer designed for flowering or fruiting plants - roses, azaleas, citrus, tomato, or just some generic 'flowers and fruit' products - 14:2.6:21 is one that's available down here. 14:11:33 is another.

Flowering is not purely about nutrient levels. Maturity is one other factor, suitable flowering wood is another that defeats many bonsai growers because regular trimming can remove embryonic flower buds before we even see them. Light, water, temps, etc will also have an impact on flowering.

Soluble fertilizers will leach out of the pots pretty quick when you are watering plenty - probably only a week or 2 depending on the CEC of the soil mix. Solid granules may stay around longer but probably a good plan to lay off the high N for a few weeks then transition to the flowering fert.
It can take some time for the higher K to show up. I switch to high K in late summer because that's when most spring flowering species start to form embryonic flower buds. Fertilizing for flowers in spring is too late for flowering that year. You will probably be fertilizing for next year's flowers now.

A grower down here disputes it is high K that drives flowers. His claim is low N is responsible. Whether that's the same thing by another name or not I am not sure but definitely look for a product where the last (K) number is higher than the N to assist with flowers.

Since I jumped the shark with a 15:30:15, could I compensate with a little bit of low NP and slightly K fert to get that effect?

I see what you mean, in the 'industry' the middle number is generally pushed for blooms. After a quick search I found this debunking of phosphorous as a 'bloom booster' lmfao! https://www.gardenmyths.com/bloom-booster-fertilizer-nonsense/

These trees are really healthy, so I guess it is worth the experiment for the sake of science anyway (do bloom boosters boost blooms?)!

 

[Shibui]

I probably would not worry to much this summer. If flowers are your main aim just go easy on the fert this year to allow the vegetative growth to slow a bit. Move to a flowers type fert after middle of summer and see what happens next year but it may not have enough effect until the following flowering season.

If development is your main focus (and these are still pretty immature trees so that's where I'd be going) then forget about forcing flowers and concentrate on development. Plenty of time for flowers once the trees are well developed. Can't see any point in prematurely slowing development for a few days of colour.

 

[Kievnstavick]

Another consideration is that you can try and expirement and see what fertilizer amounts do what.

As they are cuttings, they should be genetic clones and thus would eliminate the genetic factor. The only slight difference would be the amount of foliage between the cuttings.

If you have enough to spare, I'm sure you can make some anecdotal remarks to better inform your path forward.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

First, fertilizer requirements for pretty much all vascular plants is the same across genera, family and even orders of plants. There is a tremendous amount of junk science published about fertilizer, some of the worst continuously perpetuated by the Royal Horticultural Society at Kew Gardens UK. The worst fertilizer information is found in "gardening books", if you want good information go to serious agriculture sources. Michigan State University did a series of experiments and publications, goal was to optimize growth of potted plants in synthetic soils for the nursery trade. Composted bark, peat, coir, perlite, vermiculite, all were common components of the these synthetic soils.

Turns out no matter what the genus of plant, the year round, need is roughly 12-1-4. With the condition that the need for potassium varies depending on the nitrogen source. If the nitrogen comes from ammonia or amino acids (fish emulsion and similar lysates) then no extra potassium is required.

If the nitrogen source is nitrate, then the potassium needs to equal or slightly exceed the nitrate content due to the chemistry of processing nitrates. Typical would be 12-1-14 or something similar.

So an "organic" or protein lysate based fertilizer the required ratio year round would be 12-1-4. No need to change it up. Cool weather less is needed. Warm weather more is needed, but the ratios don't change.

The low nitrogen fertilizers are actually for outdoor growing where acid rain through polluted air provides the bulk of the needed nitrogen. This is were Kew's malpractice comes in. They did outdoor vegetable trials, developing fertilizer for smog choked 1890's London, and did not realize that the nitrogen was being supplied by the smog. The result was the incorrect assumption that in autumn, when the coal being burned in London for heat pumped nitrates into the air, Kew assumed plant's metabolism changed with the season, rather than the chemicals in the air that changed.

Because controlled experiments are difficult and expensive, the poor research from Kew was repeated over and over in gardening books. So to get good fertilizer information need to go to the agro industry.

12-14 for ammonia and or amino acid nitrogen source fertilizer

12-1-12 to 12-1-14 for nitrate based fertilizer.

A high phosphorus fertilizer is potentially harmful. You can seriously damage your trees with too strong a dose of a high phosphorus fertilizer.

Good news, if concentration is relatively dilute, and trees are at least occasionally watered with clear water (or get a heavy rain) excesses of one nutrient or another are usually flushed out.

I have a few references on my website
www.leosorchids.com

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

There is a metabolic cost for using nitrate fertilizer. Plants - trees will grow somewhat faster if the fertilizer is ammonia or amino acid based for the nitrogen source.

 

[Clicio]

A high phosphorus fertilizer is potentially harmful. You can seriously damage your trees with too strong a dose of a high phosphorus fertilizer.

I see.
If so, can I assume that something like 10-10-10, or 04-14-8 , very popular in Brazil, contain too much P and should be avoided?

 

[Baku1875]

First, fertilizer requirements for pretty much all vascular plants is the same across genera, family and even orders of plants. There is a tremendous amount of junk science published about fertilizer, some of the worst continuously perpetuated by the Royal Horticultural Society at Kew Gardens UK. The worst fertilizer information is found in "gardening books", if you want good information go to serious agriculture sources. Michigan State University did a series of experiments and publications, goal was to optimize growth of potted plants in synthetic soils for the nursery trade. Composted bark, peat, coir, perlite, vermiculite, all were common components of the these synthetic soils.

Turns out no matter what the genus of plant, the year round, need is roughly 12-1-4. With the condition that the need for potassium varies depending on the nitrogen source. If the nitrogen comes from ammonia or amino acids (fish emulsion and similar lysates) then no extra potassium is required.

If the nitrogen source is nitrate, then the potassium needs to equal or slightly exceed the nitrate content due to the chemistry of processing nitrates. Typical would be 12-1-14 or something similar.

So an "organic" or protein lysate based fertilizer the required ratio year round would be 12-1-4. No need to change it up. Cool weather less is needed. Warm weather more is needed, but the ratios don't change.

The low nitrogen fertilizers are actually for outdoor growing where acid rain through polluted air provides the bulk of the needed nitrogen. This is were Kew's malpractice comes in. They did outdoor vegetable trials, developing fertilizer for smog choked 1890's London, and did not realize that the nitrogen was being supplied by the smog. The result was the incorrect assumption that in autumn, when the coal being burned in London for heat pumped nitrates into the air, Kew assumed plant's metabolism changed with the season, rather than the chemicals in the air that changed.

Because controlled experiments are difficult and expensive, the poor research from Kew was repeated over and over in gardening books. So to get good fertilizer information need to go to the agro industry.

12-14 for ammonia and or amino acid nitrogen source fertilizer

12-1-12 to 12-1-14 for nitrate based fertilizer.

A high phosphorus fertilizer is potentially harmful. You can seriously damage your trees with too strong a dose of a high phosphorus fertilizer.

Good news, if concentration is relatively dilute, and trees are at least occasionally watered with clear water (or get a heavy rain) excesses of one nutrient or another are usually flushed out.

I have a few references on my website
www.leosorchids.com

This is some good information, and after doing research on the matter, the concept of 'bloom boosters' seems to be commercialized BS to sell phosphorus heavy ferts lol.

I'm glad I asked about it and kept the dosage light on my trees.

I'm gonna stick to teabags of dr earth and a light sprinkling of vigoro all purpose in spring thru early autumn for most of my trees for now

 

[Baku1875]

There is a metabolic cost for using nitrate fertilizer. Plants - trees will grow somewhat faster if the fertilizer is ammonia or amino acid based for the nitrogen source.

wow dude, you just sent me down a rabbit hole of searching for knowledge, i appreciate it. I'm reading up on amino acid based ferts, I knew nothing about it!

What is your take on amino acid ferts and what would you recommend for bonsai in inorganic soil(i apologize if you already have a thread on it, i'll do a search as well)

 

[Kievnstavick]

That was a very informative post. It got the gears in my head turning and like Baku, I have a new research topic to sink into.

 

[Carol 83]

That was a very informative post. It got the gears in my head turning and like Baku, I have a new research topic to sink into.

@Leo in N E Illinois makes his own fertilizer. It works well. Not to mention, he is a font of information.

 

[Glaucus]

First, fertilizer requirements for pretty much all vascular plants is the same across genera, family and even orders of plants. There is a tremendous amount of junk science published about fertilizer, some of the worst continuously perpetuated by the Royal Horticultural Society at Kew Gardens UK. The worst fertilizer information is found in "gardening books", if you want good information go to serious agriculture sources. Michigan State University did a series of experiments and publications, goal was to optimize growth of potted plants in synthetic soils for the nursery trade. Composted bark, peat, coir, perlite, vermiculite, all were common components of the these synthetic soils.

Turns out no matter what the genus of plant, the year round, need is roughly 12-1-4. With the condition that the need for potassium varies depending on the nitrogen source. If the nitrogen comes from ammonia or amino acids (fish emulsion and similar lysates) then no extra potassium is required.

If the nitrogen source is nitrate, then the potassium needs to equal or slightly exceed the nitrate content due to the chemistry of processing nitrates. Typical would be 12-1-14 or something similar.

So an "organic" or protein lysate based fertilizer the required ratio year round would be 12-1-4. No need to change it up. Cool weather less is needed. Warm weather more is needed, but the ratios don't change.

The low nitrogen fertilizers are actually for outdoor growing where acid rain through polluted air provides the bulk of the needed nitrogen. This is were Kew's malpractice comes in. They did outdoor vegetable trials, developing fertilizer for smog choked 1890's London, and did not realize that the nitrogen was being supplied by the smog. The result was the incorrect assumption that in autumn, when the coal being burned in London for heat pumped nitrates into the air, Kew assumed plant's metabolism changed with the season, rather than the chemicals in the air that changed.

Because controlled experiments are difficult and expensive, the poor research from Kew was repeated over and over in gardening books. So to get good fertilizer information need to go to the agro industry.

12-14 for ammonia and or amino acid nitrogen source fertilizer

12-1-12 to 12-1-14 for nitrate based fertilizer.

A high phosphorus fertilizer is potentially harmful. You can seriously damage your trees with too strong a dose of a high phosphorus fertilizer.

Good news, if concentration is relatively dilute, and trees are at least occasionally watered with clear water (or get a heavy rain) excesses of one nutrient or another are usually flushed out.

I have a few references on my website
www.leosorchids.com

Hey Leo, I am planning to buy some water soluble fertilizer from ICL. They have like a ton of products. It is quite confusing.
I asked them what to get for field-growing azaleas. But I was remembering your old post. Seems even the agro & hort industry has made this quite complicated.
They even have a product specifically for orchids, it seems. Never knew you had an orchid website. Just knew that you sometimes mentioned them.

Thing seem quite complicated: soil, climate, water quality, nitrogen deposition from pollution, species, microbiome, etc etc.