Quote:
Originally Posted by kmarch  My real reason for mounting orchids wasn't listed. It is:
Because mounting them most closely recreates the way they grow in nature. |
I was being a bit sneaky in not putting that as an answer on the poll. I find this is very commonly cited as a reason to mount. However, I'm often not sure exactly what that means or why it's important.
There's and aesthetic component to the response: 'I want it to look natural'. Even wanting to grow a plant 'true to type' probably says more about what the grower wants rather than the plant. In so far as the cultural aspect of growing them like they grow in nature, if nature knows best then it would follow that growth and flowering would be better when mounted. Certainly this is the case for many orchids. Sorry for the Australian native bias but that's mostly what I grow. The epiphytic Sarcochilus rarely grow well in a pot. Plectochilus and Rhinerrhiza are reasonably easy species to grow mounted but aren't happy potted. Same goes for Dendrobium aemulum. For orchids that grow either mounted or in bark as most epiphytes seemingly can, if growth and flowering on a mounted plant isn't as good compared to your potted plants how does nature manage hold her place as a convincing mentor in the growers mind.
There is one response that I didn't consider as part of the growing the plant naturally argument and that is "because that's how they're supposed to grow." ie it's not about how they look or whether they can be grown better. Growing on a substrate rather than in it is in the plant's nature and getting it to conform to how we want to grow it is counter-intuitive.
Can anyone expand on why nature is considered to be so influential (especially for a plant in an air conditioned apartment under shoplights tied to a 1' block of bark from a subtropical/warm temperate tree with nylon and covered in a temperate terrestrial bog moss
)