increase growth rate

[Spikylover]

This astrophytun is painfully slow to grow. I was thinking what if i rub off all the white specks off? That way i would almost double photosynthesis surface area and increase growth rate.
Whst do you guys think?

[Tofterigen]

Hi Spikylover

I'm shure you want to test our sense of humor?!

Or you want to demonstrate your own sense?

Mission accomplished!

Tofterigen

PS: In Germany, there exists a tradition of fooling one another with silly statements or questions (apparently not true) on the 1rst of april...

[gemhunter178]

Rubbing the "specks" off would probably damage the plant, so it'll grow slower as it tries to heal. If your Astrophytum myriostigma survives the ordeal, you'll probably have scar tissue form where those "specks" were.

If you really want it to grow faster, may I suggest grafting it? If not, just enjoy the beauty of watching a plant grow and age naturally. Some people are proud of their giant Astrophytums for good reason


Short answer: it's not good for the plant, don't do it

[Tofterigen]

Hi Spikylover

A link about growing Astrophytum: "http://worldofsucculents.com/how-to-gro ... trophytum/"

Here is one of my own topics concerning a similar problem: "viewtopic.php?f=31&t=39233"

Be patient, use your camera and repot it every year (not the camera)!

Best whishes,
Tofterigen

[DaveW]

Some of the wonderful specimens you see in shows are often the result of several growers efforts over the plants lifetime, since they are often acquired when the previous owner dies. Others are solely the result of acquisition by cheque books rather than the exhibitors efforts, since they buy in ready made plants specifically for showing. We used to have a similar person in our local branch. If his cactus got even slightly marked it was dumped and he was around the country with his cheque book for a show replacement. However we should really applaud those that mainly grew the plant to maturity themselves, they are usually the older growers since in our hobby things don't grow quickly.

If you want rapid results you need to be growing an entirely different plant family. The person who really should get the Kudos in shows is the one who has grown a magnificent specimen from seed themselves rather than bought it in at some later stage in it's life. But few of us do that with most plants in our collections, relying on dealers to provide us with 3-4 year old plants to start with. In this hobby if you want to have large plants and not buy in ready made ones you need to start young.

Of course having an ideal climate for growth helps!

[Aiko]

I'm shure you want to test our sense of humor?!

Or you want to demonstrate your own sense?

Mission accomplished!

Actually, I find it an interesting idea to see what would happen on the long run to such 'naked' Astrophytum. Not strange to think outside its habitat the while specks could be more of a burden than it would benefit the individual plant as it might have done in habitat.

Will the specks grow back? I don't think it will, though. I have a plant with about one centimeter clear of specks, and even after quite some years the area is still free from specks. The specks can very easily be rubbed off with a finger accidentaly or willingly, so I don't think removing them will damage the plant effectively by rubbing.

Still interesting to know if a plant without specks would grow faster or slower compared to unaltered plants, if all grown from the same batch to maturity.

[Spikylover]

I'm shure you want to test our sense of humor?!

Or you want to demonstrate your own sense?

Mission accomplished!

Actually, I find it an interesting idea to see what would happen on the long run to such 'naked' Astrophytum. Not strange to think outside its habitat the while specks could be more of a burden than it would benefit the individual plant as it might have done in habitat.

Will the specks grow back? I don't think it will, though. I have a plant with about one centimeter clear of specks, and even after quite some years the area is still free from specks. The specks can very easily be rubbed off with a finger accidentaly or willingly, so I don't think removing them will damage the plant effectively by rubbing.

Still interesting to know if a plant without specks would grow faster or slower compared to unaltered plants, if all grown from the same batch to maturity.

Thanks aiko for taking this seriously! I accidentally rubbed off some specks and saw how easily they come off. Then i saw this huge green area and thought well that's definitely more area for photosynthesis! How will this affect the plant?! Im not a purist. I am a girl of science and like to experiment.

Thanks for your reply!

Rachel

[apoplast]

Hi Rachel - Interesting to ponder greater photosynthetic area on cacti. I could be wrong, but I believe on of the (many) hypotheses about the function of cacti spines is the shade the epidermis to reduce heat load. That and CAM plants typically aren't limited by light (with exceptions). Typically they exist in high light environments and are more often limited by CO2 uptake at night. A such they don't actively photosynthesize all day, and thus aren't necessarily light limited. That's the dogma. Now, is there data? Not that I know of. So if you could do a controlled experiment, with enough power, maybe shave a few Oreocereus too then it's study for sure. Regardless I'll be interested if you see a difference.

[Spikylover]

Hi Rachel - Interesting to ponder greater photosynthetic area on cacti. I could be wrong, but I believe on of the (many) hypotheses about the function of cacti spines is the shade the epidermis to reduce heat load. That and CAM plants typically aren't limited by light (with exceptions). Typically they exist in high light environments and are more often limited by CO2 uptake at night. A such they don't actively photosynthesize all day, and thus aren't necessarily light limited. That's the dogma. Now, is there data? Not that I know of. So if you could do a controlled experiment, with enough power, maybe shave a few Oreocereus too then it's study for sure. Regardless I'll be interested if you see a difference.

Thanks for your reply! I wanted to do a controlled experiment but sadly i couldnt get my hands on another astrophytum. And my oreocereus are way too dear to me to try and shave one. Maybe i'll try with some other species.

[Robb]

It would be interesting (if you rub off all the flocking) to compare its growth to the "nudum" variety of myriostigma. In my limited experience with these plants there doesn't seem to be much of a difference if they're fully flecked or not, but maybe in the long run there could be a discernible effect.

[DaveW]

As Robb says you do not need to rub the white flecking off since there are green forms of almost all the Astrophytum's and these do not seem to grow significantly quicker.

http://www.cactus-art.biz/schede/ASTROP ... _nudum.htm

http://www.cactus-art.biz/schede/ASTROP ... _nudum.htm

Even A. asterias.

https://www.123rf.com/photo_24284717_as ... actus.html

The only Astrophytum that grows quicker than the rest is A. ornatum which varies enormously in the amount of flecking on the body and that is now thought to be an old stabilised natural hybrid from way back in time between an A. myriostigma type Astrophytum and either a Ferocactus or Echinocactus, just as DNA Sequencing now indicates Echinocactus grusonii was originally a stabilised natural hybrid between an Echinocactus and a Ferocactus.

To illustrate they will outcross:-

http://www.llifle.com/Encyclopedia/CACT ... chwarzii)/

[rtb1980]

(if you rub off all the flocking)

Flocking - Is that the technical term for the specks? What are they, technically?

Does an Astrophytum produce more "specks" when exposed to more sun in comparison to those that have grown in areas with less sun?

[Kamos]

The "specks" are called trichomes. I believe they are the plants way of protecting itself from strong sun .

[DaveW]

Its also possible that the trichomes collect and absorb water. See:-

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j28_2/j28_2_9-11.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3535335/

[apoplast]

Hi Dave - Interesting hypothesis. Thanks for providing the second link, it was very useful! Intriguing study on many levels, though in regard the the ecological and evolutionary conclusions they do seem to make a fundamental mistake - they assume that if a function exists it was selected or that purpose.

This may be a case where the studied result the structure has little to do with why the disallowed - see forum rules. Certainly greater water availability would not hurt a xeric species in habitat, but I'm not convinced from this study alone, that these glochids primarily serve to condense fog water in this species. The species is native to the Chihuahuan Desert, which gets little fog and most of its water inputs from summer thunderstorms, thus this species is unlikely to experience the benefit of fog collection often. Secondly, though it's not uncommon for trans-epidermal uptake of water to exist in plants, indeed it seems to be far more common than previously thought, they've not demonstrated on this species that the water concentrated at the base of the glochids benefits the plant.

Both of the ecological issues around this species mean there is more to be done to indicate that this otherwise highly functional system, is indeed acting in this capacity which would select for this process. Basically, though the spines can function this way, it doesn't mean they were selected to do so. Still, from an engineering standpoint, it's an interesting study!