i have no idea what this does. but i heard good things about it on the web. and i know jason and martin uses it. what exactly does it do? and what's difference do you see between plants you use this on and ones you do not use it on?

pete

It contains vitamins and minerals some of which may do nothing, but apparently some do help, especially useful for starting young plants.

This question comes up very regularly. Here is something I put together in '05 that relates my experience and what I discovered about using it. Within the text, you'll find a link to what Dr Linda Scott, PhD had to say about it in 2010.  

From a past thread:

Superthrive or Superjive
The question regarding the value of Superthrive as a miracle tonic for plants is often bandied about in horticultural circles. Over the years, I had read claims that ranged from, "I put it on my plant, which had never bloomed, and it was in full bloom the next day." to, "It was dead - I put Superthrive on it and the next day it was alive and beautiful, growing better than it ever had before." I decided to find out for myself.

If you look for information on the net, you will probably only find the manufacturer’s claims and anecdotal observations, both so in want of anything that resembles a control. Though my experiments were far from purely scientific, I tried to keep some loose controls in place so that I could make a fair judgment of its value, based my own observations. Here is what I did, what I found, and the conclusions I made about any value the product Superthrive might hold for me.

On four separate occasions, I took multiple cuttings of plants in four different genera. In each case the group of cuttings were taken from the same individual plant to reduce genetic variance. The plant materials I used were: Ficus benjamina, (a tropical weeping fig) Luna apiculata (Peruvian myrtle), Chaenorrhinum minus (a dwarf snapdragon), and an unknown variety of Coleus. In each instance, I prepared cuttings from the same plant and inserted them in a very fast, sterile soil. The containers containing half of the cuttings were immersed/soaked in a Superthrive solution of approximately 1/2 tsp per gallon of water to the upper soil line. The other half of the cuttings were watered in with water only. In subsequent waterings, I would water the "Superthrive batch" of cuttings with a solution of 10 drops per gallon and the others with only water. The same fertilizer regimen was followed on both groups of cuttings. In all four instances, the cuttings that I used Superthrive on rooted and showed new growth first. For this reason, it follows that they would naturally exhibit better development, though I could see no difference in overall vitality, once rooted. I can also say that a slightly higher percentage of cuttings rooted that were treated with the Superthrive treatment at the outset. I suspect that is directly related to the effects of the auxin in Superthrive hastening initiation of root primordia before potential vascular connections were destroyed by rot causing organisms.

In particular, something I looked for because of my affinity for a compact form in plants was branch (stem) extension. (The writer is a bonsai practitioner.) Though the cuttings treated with Superthrive rooted sooner, they exhibited the same amount of branch extension. In other words, internode length was approximately equal and no difference in leaf size was noted.

As a second part to each of my "experiments", I divided the group of cuttings that had not been treated with Superthrive into two groups. One of the groups remained on the water/fertilizer only program, while the other group was treated to an additional 10 drops of Superthrive in each gallon of fertilizer solution. Again, the fertilizer regimen was the same for both groups. By summer’s end, I could detect no difference in bio-mass or vitality between the two groups of plants.

Since I replicated the above experiment in four different trials, using four different plant materials, I am quite comfortable in drawing some conclusions as they apply to me and my growing habits or abilities. First, and based on my observations, I have concluded that Superthrive does hold value for me as a rooting aid, or stimulant if you prefer. I regularly soak the soil, usually overnight, of my newly root-pruned and often bare-rooted repots in a solution of 1/2 tsp Superthrive per gallon of water. Second, and also based on my observations, I no longer bother with its use at any time other than at repotting. No evidence was accumulated through the 4 trials to convince me that Superthrive was of any value as a "tonic" for plants with roots that were beyond the initiation or recovery stage.

Interestingly, the first ingredient listed as being beneficial to plants on the Superthrive label is vitamin B-1 (or thiamine). Growing plants synthesize their own vitamin B-1 as a by-product of their metabolism, as do many of the fungi and bacteria having symbiotic relationships with plant roots, so it's extremely doubtful that vitamin B-1 could be deficient in soils or that a growing plant could exhibit a vitamin B-1 deficiency.

Some will note that I used more of the product than suggested on the container. I wanted to see if any unwanted effects surfaced as well as trying to be sure there was ample opportunity for clear delineation between the groups. I suspect that if a more dilute solution was used, the difference between groups would have been even less clear.

It might be worth noting that since the product contains the growth regulator (hormone) auxin, its overuse can cause defoliation, at least in dicots. The broad-leaf weed killer Weed-B-Gone and the infamous "Agent Orange", a defoliant that saw widespread use in Viet Nam, are little more than synthetic auxin.

Here, you can see what Dr L Chalker Scott has to say about Superthrive: https://sharepoint.cahnrs.wsu.edu/blogs/urbanhort/archive/2010/04/14/thieves-purr.aspx BTW - her take on the product was written much later than mine, though I'm much kinder than she in my offering. No one I know with any horticultural credentials takes ST's claims seriously.

Al 

al,

per your update above, only thing this is good for is initial rooting process. does it in anyway help promote cont. root growth? i'm trying to find way to strengthen the root growth of Black Madeira. or do you know of any other product or things that will strengthen root growth after cutting has been rooted?

pete

Thank you Al for posting this. I actually used it in the past with my bonsai trees. Many Bonsai masters use this product when transplanting their valuable trees, specially after they were root pruned. I never used it with figs. 

The stuff reminds me of a childhood vitamin my mom used to give us kids. It smells almost identical to Polyvisol which I doubt is even still being manufactured. I also have not noted any difference using Superthrive beyond getting new plants started. It does seem to help improve success getting cuttings or young specimens of various house plants going as Tapla noted, but I have not used it on figs. Figs seem to do better when left to their own without any chemical interference 

hmm.. maybe i put drop or two of baby vitamin on my fertilizer next time.. lol

pete

I continue to use Superthrive, along with Peter's liquid root stimulator for my young plants for the garden and rooted cuttings, respectively.  I also implement slow-release Osmocote in my pots. 

Superthrive is something I use not because I've seen exceptional results out of it, but because I've never had any problems with and it's relatively cheap.  It has never wilted/shocked my plants or trees in the same way that Miracle Gro products have - and I've had complete defoliations caused by just half-strength doses of liquid Miracle Gro liquid fertilizer.

It's very possible that what Al says is totally valid, I don't have mass-spec or some other analyzer to break down what it is, and the label isn't really conducive to figuring it out.  I have never run a series of experiments with it, other than, "yep, doesn't kill my plants".  The year I began using it, I went from 30% success from seed break to fruition up to 70% after starting (mostly peppers and tomatoes).  For fig trees, It was more like 40% success from roots to 1gal up to 55%.  I openly admit that this could be success due to other measures (or even luck).  But, as with many people's rooting tactics out there ... superstition wins over science often. 

ordered a small bottle today. if it gives any edge on keeping the root healthy and growing in 1 gal pot for BM.. i'm all for it.

pete

I'm all for the science, but there is so much more to being a good gardener than that. But I don't call it 'superstition', I prefer 'green thumb'.  ;)

I prefer 'luck'!  ;)

black magic.. hocus pocus.. voodoo.. whatever it's called.. if it works or even worth trying. i'll give it a shot. and only for the BM. i want these trees to live through winter and give me something to taste.

all the other plants in 1 gal pots are doing something... but BM is just sitting there taking its own time. i need to get it moving.

pete

Play some nice music for it and sing along, desperate times call for desperate measures! 

The list of things that don't make a green thumb is long. Luck, superstition, voodoo, black magic ...... aren't a part of it. Even experience plays a small part in elevating a grower to green thumb status. The key is knowledge. W/o knowledge we're just stumbling around in the dark and relying on being bitten on the butt by our mistakes as our source of knowledge. The problem with that is, we often make up reasons for our failures that seem to be valid in our own minds while the more obscure but actual cause goes unnoticed for lack of knowledge. Advance knowledge allows you to bypass most of the unpleasant experiences that frustrate us repeatedly.

You'll never find a green thumb in a bottle of Superthrive, any 1 fertilizer, or any of a long list of popular products that promise miracles. Knowing how plants work and what their needs are, and how to go about providing for their needs is all there is to a green thumb.

The term 'green thumb' is an old one and it referred to the greenhouseman, the green thumb, who got his name because his thumbs were always stained green from the incessant pinching of his indoor crops that is now mostly done by chemical means or shearing. These 'green thumbs' were experts in the care of plants because they recognized that knowing as much as possible obout their plants' wants and how they would react to their environment had a significant impact on their livelihood.

The fastest way to a green thumb is, learn all you can about how your plants work (physiology) and how to best provide for them; then, let your own practical experience validate what you've learned. When what you know of science doesn't mesh with your observations, trust science and dig deeper. Be ready to change your view to fit science instead of molding science to fit your views. That is a huge pitfall and the source of the perpetuation of a great number of myths.

Al   

Bullet,

For what it is worth I like using greensand on all of my vegetables, orchard, horticultural plantings.  This is an ancient sea deposit that has over 30 micronutrients as well as a good dose of potassium.  I have more robust root and stem growth and darker green leaves after using.  It does not burn plants.  I don't know if the potassium or the micronutrients are behind the results.

All the knowledge in the world about paints and light and canvas does not a good painter make.

 One can indeed become an excellent technician through education, but being a true artist at one's craft - whatever that might be - is an inborn gift.

 Truly lucky are those with both the acquired knowledge and 'the knack'. :)

in any form of art, there is certain something that goes beyond knowledge or experience. things just come easier to some people.. while other will have to work very hard just to get to enjoy little of what is offered. i'm sure same goes for growing plants/trees. until now, i was known in my house as someone who kills plants by just looking at them, but i'm having better luck with figs.

無心 might help. growing fig is good for my mental health.

pete

I don't look at growing plants well as an art form. Assembling them or guiding their growth habit in a way that is pleasing to the eye takes artistry, but artistry doesn't come with a green thumb attached - it's separated entirely from the ability to consistently keep plants healthy by horticulture.

I also don't think that artists are born. We might be born predisposed to a passion for some art form, but the art form itself has to be learned. For instance, how many people do we know that were born with the ability to play a cello, or paint a masterpiece, make a crafty item everyone wants, or landscape a home or office building? No one. You may have a wonderful voice, but you need to learn how to sing. A few savants might inexplicably be abnormally gifted in ways we don't yet fully understand, but the normal person, all of us, has to learn their art and refine it. Even the ability to express ourselves in our art is a learned behavior or a learned way of perceiving beauty or the feeling we wish to express.

People may be artistic in one regard and completely devoid of artistry in most others. One reason we all don't have green thumbs is the same reason we're not all concert pianists. We may not have the fortitude to sit through the lessons and learn all we need to to become proficient because we don't find it exhilarating or interesting. Some of us are blessed with minds that love to be fed and find learning exciting, especially in areas that provide an enjoyable return for our efforts. Others might be bored silly with the pedant who tries to explain things in the depth of detail required for something better than middling.

I was born with nothing I would call artistic talent or ability. I decided more than 20 years ago that I NEEDED to become proficient at bonsai, which is probably the epitome of horticultural artistry. After more than 20 years, I'm reasonably proficient in both the artistic and horticultural phases of the art, but the artistic side didn't come easy for me at all. For others, it's much easier. They seem to have the 'eye' for natural looking trees, but in fact, they just learn what looks natural much faster than I did. It's not the artistry side of bonsai that determines failure or success; it's the frustration that comes with the inability to keep trees alive - something I call the revolving door policy because you're forever buying trees to replace those that have expired - IOW - a lack of knowledge.

Growing plants is much more mundane than artistry. It's all about the science that makes plants work and grow, and how well you're able to use that science in practical application. Art, luck, superstition ..... knack, even experience to a very large degree, have nothing to do with growing well.

I started as a failure at both bonsai and in my gardens, so I wouldn't say I have any sort of knack or innate ability. I decided I needed to learn, so I hit the books for about 4 years before I returned to bonsai and the garden. The transformation in my ability was profound. Had there not been that 4 year lull in my growing endeavors, I might have missed the stark difference. I'd say I've helped enough growers along the path to proficiency to be able to say that a knowledge of the science behind growing will always be our most valuable asset on the road to Green Thumbdom. I've also watched the developing artistry in a number of budding bonsai artists I've had the pleasure of being friends with, and I've watched them acquire the art through learning the rules first, so they can break them in a properly artistic fashion - each of them within varying time frames.

Interesting discussion. If there is one thing related to growing that I'm very good at, it's keeping trees healthy and growing well in containers. That is the direct result of applied knowledge - nothing else. It's not a gift, a knack, or luck - just putting science to work ..... and it's actually very easy if you follow a few simple rules, starting with how to keep the heart of the plant - the roots - happy.

Al      

I hear what you are saying, it makes perfectly good sense, however, there are some people who are gifted with a natural knowledge or even ability to grow stuff really good with no real training. I would say there is a sliding scale of ability, some are at the end of excellent culture and others are cursed with the brown thumb seemingly unable to grow a dandelion. Those folks need the formal training the most, the others are almost instinctive in their "ability" to grow most anything. I've seens it and experienced it myself. Some have a feel for what a plant needs with no training and minimal knowledge.

"plant whisperers"

That's right. Greater knowledge will make everyone better, but there will always be some who are better than others simply because of innate talent. This is true for just about every discipline - athlete, artist, surgeon, writer, carpenter... You name it.

A person with desire but not natural talent can become a good cook by following recipes to the letter, in addition to taking classes, reading, practicing... but will never be as good as someone with the same training, but who has always been able walk into the kitchen and 'whip up something good' out of almost anything.

There are people who walk into their yards and can identify different varieties of the same species (figs for example) just by subtle leaf characteristics. People who were born with an innate gift of recognition. Recognition of which plants are which by their aspect, which plants need water just by look or feel, which plants are prospering, and which are in trouble. And others, regardless of training or desire, who just will never be as blessed. Though they can become good. Just not as good.

I am not against the science of botany - far from it. It's absolutley fascinating. But there is so much more to being a good gardener than being able to tell the difference between collenchyma and sclerenchyma, or C3, C4, and CAM, or that the Ascleps got lumped into the Apocynaceae.

There were excellent gardeners before 'science' existed - but knowing a few basic botanical principles probably would have made them even better.

What is most important is getting out there and growing things ...and having fun. :)

If everyone who wants to be a better grower relies only on innate talent to pave the road to a green thumb, only a small % of us will ever make it. If we ALL rely on knowledge and science as our guiding light, each and every one of us will make it. Those growers who grew things before science, still adhered to yet undefined scientific principles to get things to grow, its just that instead of learning from a book, they learned from others who had learned by trial and error, a painfully slow way to learn. You can't buck science and expect plants to grow because you have an inborn gift. That gift needs nurturing. You can feed it by acquiring knowledge that meshes with science, or you can learn from your mistakes, but it grows as a result of knowledge. It makes no sense to suffer the consequences of your mistakes when the knowledge needed to avoid them are at your fingertips.

Much of what occurs in the process of growing is invisible to us, entirely beyond our ability to reconcile w/o an understanding of the science behind why we see what we are seeing. W/o knowledge, we are guided by our assumptions, 90% of which are going to be wrong. The pages of forums are filled with both growers and advisers alike who are operating on assumption, or repeating something they've heard a hundred times and taken for granted it must be true - another assumption.

Many times, the grower hears an idea that sounds good, so they incorporate it into whatever they are doing; this, because they don't have the knowledge to see the potential for limitation in the practice. An example is using aquarium water to water your containerized plants. 99% of growers, if asked, would probably think it's a great idea with no potential downside, but the fact is, it's potentially limiting because you could use a complete fertilizer with all the nutrients in the right ratio and at a favorable concentration, and do better. The aquarium water isn't complete, and you have no idea what nutrients you've provided, so a duplication of some of the nutrients, meaning an excess, ensures limitations (An excess [toxicity] is potentially as harmful as a deficiency). The same thing applies to adding Epsom salts to your plants to green them up. If it makes them greener, it must be better - right. Wrong again. ONLY if the soil solution is deficient in S or Mg does it have the potential to help. In all other cases, it is potentially limiting; so the odds are much greater that the practice is going to be limiting than helpful unless you have good reason to believe there is a Mg deficiency (S deficiencies being very unlikely).

These little factoids only serve to illustrate the traps and limiting behavior we adopt as a result of our lack of knowledge .... and no amount of artistic talent or innate ability could allow us to intuit the fact that much of what we do is limiting.

We have only to ask ourselves what is potentially more limiting to the grower - a lack of knowledge or a lack or artistic/innate ability to put the question into perspective, which brings us full circle to my opening comment, "If everyone who wants to be a better grower relies only on innate talent to pave the road to a green thumb, only a small % of us will ever make it. If we ALL rely on knowledge and science as our guiding light each and every one of us will make it." 

Al

A fig in the mother/daughter style - newly repotted (thus the strings to secure it in the pot) and in need of pruning/shaping - but still a nice tree.

science helps. no doubt about that. however, there is reason why i call this "hobby" and not "profession". if it was a profession where i'm just looking for an end result, sure, i'll stick to exact method and practice standard operating procedure to get the best tree out of what i have.

however, i'm doing this for more of pleasure. trying different things. seeing what work and what doesn't. yes, some of the things are little wacky, but that's all a part of fun.

there are other hobbies that i'm dead seriours about where end justifies everything. take lessons, enter competition.. but with those hobbies, all that stress is a part of the fun.

i'll follow science to prevent doing harm to my trees, but as long as things do not harm the tree.. i'll enjoy my gut feelings.

pete

Spoken like a true scientist. I don't think any one here is disparaging science or knowledge, those are cornerstones of progress. Just want to acknowledge that some are innately better at growing than others. If you take your natural ability and apply science to it you will no doubt have better results. If you go strictly on instinct, some will do well, others will fail miserably. 

 When I was younger I used to play an instrument and was in several bands. With little observation it became apparent who had the natural ability and who didn't. You would have people who were technically superior, through practice and study, but limited in natural ability. Playing the notes technically correct is wonderful, playing them with natural feeling brings them to life. I think to a limited degree the same principal applies with growing.

Well said.

For people who want to learn the science (like me), good for us - it does add a dimension of appreciation. But not everyone is that interested, or has the luxury of time.

Principles of science are the basis of everything. You could reduce the Mona Lisa to math and molecules, but it's her enigmatic smile that makes it a work of art. 'The science' is nice for those of us interested, but not really needed by everyone.

There is more than one way to be a successful gardener. Ask the old Italian down the street whose beliefs would make a botanist cringe, but who can grow anything better than anyone else.

If you are having fun and success, you are doing it right. If not, consider learning more. :)