My Indoor growing/dormancy experiments

Messages
118
Reaction score
16
Location
minnesota
USDA Zone
4a
I am writing this post as documentation for techniques I implemented/implement for indoor bonsai growing. I know this is a taboo subject for a lot of people, especially if you’ve been growing trees for a long time. Keep an open mind, and be sure to read the “disclaimers” section before you hate-comment Even moreso if you're new and looking to grow plants inside it's not easy.

Due to my circumstances, I do not have a place to grow my plants outdoors as i live in an apartment. Additionally, I have some special insight because I am a physicist (no Ph.D yet though)

DISCLAIMERS:
I am not a bonsai master- I am simply recording what I myself do, in hopes that others may add to it, share advice, or learn something new.

  • Indoor growing is NOT OPTIMAL. This method of growing is more expensive, more time consuming, slower, and will always produce extra challenges to overcome. It is not for the faint of heart.
  • All of my trees are “pre-bonsai”. Therefore, I will focus more on the general requirements of the trees.
  • I do not wish to create “show quality” bonsai: In the same way that I love playing piano, but do not want to be a concert pianist. My trees are for me, they are my expression, and only need to look good enough for myself, and myself alone. Many of the species and styles i use are not typical, and that is ok with me.
Basic tree info
I have several species of tree right now which are, Maple, Ficus natalensis, Juniper procumbens , Norfolk pine (1) (rescued from Home Depot), Poinsettia(1) (gift over Christmas), and Willow.

All of my trees are potted in diatomaceous earth mixed with small, sifted pine bark (except my juniper). I fertilize with generic 20-20-20 water soluble stuff.

Avid growers have told me that I cannot grow trees inside, and the following are the main reasons, light, humidity, air circulation, temperature, and dormancy. Here is how I’ve attempted to battle these things.

Light:
For reference, I am using the SI system of units, Google should convert to any silly lumens or foot candles you might want. Definitions [power]: Watts (W) or Joules per second (J/s), [Length]: Meters(m), [intensity]: joules/second/area (J/(s m^2)) or W/m^2, [Temperature]: Kelvin or Celsius or Fahrenheit K or C or F.

What I use: Right now I use 4 24W T5 bulbs @6,400K mounted overhead with reflective lining then two CFL bulbs as spotlights directed towards the center of my plant–area. See picture below.

Color:
A lot of people complain that florescent lights are not the correct color for plants, and that only full spectrum halide lights will do the trick. This is in general not correct. The two common types of chlorophyll cells (a,b) have highest rates of photosynthesis in the wavelengths of 400-500 nm and 600-700 nm. Though, it is true that leaves will absorb all wavelengths of light (except for the wavelengths we see as the color of the leaves, these are reflected – hence why we see them). It is best to try to match the Sun’s spectrum as closely as possible.

What is referred to as “color temperature” is actually an extremely physical concept. In physics, we call an object that emits radiation at a characteristic temperature a “black body”. Max Planck, a physicist long dead, figured out that you can describe the wavelength and energy of this radiation by only measuring this temperature. We all know this to be true, if you heat a fire poker up – “red hot” is cooler than “white hot”.

The Sun’s Characteristic temperature is about 6,500K if you're not on the poles or equator, so my 6,400K lights are pretty good.

Intensity:
There is an extreme amount of confusion in gardening communities about intensity or “brightness”. Intensity is power per area, or how much energy hits an area, every second. Light intensity is determined by the distance from the source, and the area we care about. It is worth noting that the area we actually mean is the leaf area of our plants which I’ll approximate to the area of my table.

The area of my plant table is .35 m^2 and my lights are .51 meters above the table or .27m above my shortest plant. I will include mathematical details in a link below, but intensity is in this case the average of the Poynting vector, or in other terms, the power divided by the area. I am making a large approximation here – my lights are actually about the same area as my table, which is not too bad for reasons explained in the link. Turns out, the intensity over the area of my table, on average is 275 W/m^2. Work is shown here. This does also only take into account my T5 lights.

It is worth noting that this is highly idealized – it does not take into account some thermal radiation produced by the lights, but this effect will be small with CFL and T5 lights.

Duration:
I keep my lights on an 18hr/day timer to make up for some of the intensity loss. Furthermore, my plant table is situated near a north and a west window, and gets “some” sunlight from those. Plants DO need to rest for a period of at least 6-8 hours every night. This was incredibly hard to research and I am going on what two master gardeners from the local arboretum have told me.

Light is always a big concern for leaf size and internode length. With my setup, my plants do not have *extremely* small leaves or short internotes – however, the leaves are no larger than the largest leaves of the trees of the same species outside. Keeping in mind I have not yet started to try to reduce leaf size.

Next issue: Humidity
Water in general can be an issue with indoor growing because of radiating heaters, and our typical AC units drying out the air. I am however, fortunate. I do not have air conditioning, at least not in the room the plants are in (one window unit in the bedroom, that does not cool the living space). During the summer I do not have large issues with low humidity in my apartment. During the winter however, it is very dry. I combat this by nightly misting of the plants. You might say, my soil will stay too wet if I mist every night, or that I might have mold issues. If we use a very free draining soil, the small amount of run-off from misting should not harm the plants in any way – and in fact, I water all my plants at night anyway, so they’re already moist when I mist.

Air circulation
This is another thing that is difficult to get down to with real science. Many will say trees need wind to survive – but from researching online, and speaking with master gardeners, I have only found this to be true in 2 situations. 1) Air circulation will help keep your plants free of mold. 2) very stale air will allow dust to accumulate on leaves, and is in general unhealthy for the plants. However, I do not do anything special for air circulation.

Temp:
Luckily, my apartment only varies between 65-75 degrees F, and in winter specifically, if it’s cooler, the spotlights provide some thermal energy.

Dormancy: The biggest issue
Through much research, I found on average trees need around 1,000 hours of dormancy *not just cold*, and every species varies for the exact hours.

I spent 3 months observing my refrigerator. I bought an inexpensive humidity gauge and used a digital thermometer which is able to upload temp data to a computer (from work). I played with the fridge until I got the temperature to have an average value of -2C or 29F. This is cold enough to allow dormancy, and the worse temperature for mold growth.

Starting October first, I cycled the plants in the fridge for increasing amounts of time, to mimic dropping nighttime temperatures. Starting November 1st I placed the plants in the fridge full time.

One large concern was humidity, as the fridge was very, very dry. However, I was able to raise the humidity to around the same level as my apartment by slight misting on the walls of the fridge. Furthermore, I placed plastic bags, *loosely* over the plants, so that any moisture they lost through transpiration would stick around. I also misted the outside of these bags.

I took the plants out nightly to check on them, checked for watering and signs of mold or freezing, and I also misted them very slightly. I did this until January 1st giving the plants a total of 1464-ish hours in the cold. All of the plants did enter true dormancy, as is evident from winter buds that formed on them., loss of leaves, etc. Additionally, all plants but one lived, and have now broken bud and are growing.

Issues:
I did lose one plant in the fridge. It was a willow cutting I had taken last spring. I may have lost it for two reasons – 1) The plant was not that healthy to begin with – I had to repot it in the early fall because I had dropped it and broke it’s pot. 2) the plant was an awkward shape and I could not cover it with a bag in the fridge so it may have dried out.

I also had my juniper freeze solid for a short time. Through evaporation, the water in the juniper’s pot was able to lose enough energy to freeze. As soon as I found the plant – which was rising out of the pot from the expansion of the water, I let it melt and settle back in. Covering the soil with a cloth prevented this in the future.

Here are a few photos.
Plants in the fridge, but not covered with bags (left). My plant table (center). Leaf size from one of the few hardened(ish) leaves of one of my maples. This was the largest leaf on the plant. I do not have any photos from last year, but they did not get much bigger than this - maybe the biggest was 6 cm. (right)

12079132_10207134686632847_9163034871125522087_n.jpg IMG_20160118_105209_939.jpg IMG_20160118_105448_044.jpg
Here are some of my sources and helpful websites.
http://www.bonsaihunk.us/info/IndoorLight.html
http://photobiology.info/Chalker-Scott.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/biology/ligabs.html
 
Interesting experiment, but this isn't how bonsai are made...bonsai is the art of creating natural looking miniature trees from largely mature stock. Even the little ones weren't always little...

Bonsai are typically not grown up to size, they are largely cut down to size. As far as I can see, none of this experiment addresses the unavoidable trunk growth phase.

You reference bonsaihunk (Jerry Meislik). He grew none of his large trees indoors - he bought them from Florida (and potentially Thailand) where they were grown/developed outdoors. He merely keeps them indoors.

I predict you'll discover that whilst you can keep some plants alive for a few years indoors, no acceptable bonsai can be produced.

References:

Evergreen Garden works: https://www.evergreengardenworks.com/trunks.htm
bonsai4me (Harry Harrington): http://www.bonsai4me.com/AdvTech/ATfieldgrowing.htm
 
I am writing this post as documentation for techniques I implemented/implement for indoor bonsai growing. I know this is a taboo subject for a lot of people, especially if you’ve been growing trees for a long time. Keep an open mind, and be sure to read the “disclaimers” section before you hate-comment Even moreso if you're new and looking to grow plants inside it's not easy.

Due to my circumstances, I do not have a place to grow my plants outdoors as i live in an apartment. Additionally, I have some special insight because I am a physicist (no Ph.D yet though)

DISCLAIMERS:
I am not a bonsai master- I am simply recording what I myself do, in hopes that others may add to it, share advice, or learn something new.

  • Indoor growing is NOT OPTIMAL. This method of growing is more expensive, more time consuming, slower, and will always produce extra challenges to overcome. It is not for the faint of heart.
  • All of my trees are “pre-bonsai”. Therefore, I will focus more on the general requirements of the trees.
  • I do not wish to create “show quality” bonsai: In the same way that I love playing piano, but do not want to be a concert pianist. My trees are for me, they are my expression, and only need to look good enough for myself, and myself alone. Many of the species and styles i use are not typical, and that is ok with me.
Basic tree info
I have several species of tree right now which are, Maple, Ficus natalensis, Juniper procumbens , Norfolk pine (1) (rescued from Home Depot), Poinsettia(1) (gift over Christmas), and Willow.

All of my trees are potted in diatomaceous earth mixed with small, sifted pine bark (except my juniper). I fertilize with generic 20-20-20 water soluble stuff.

Avid growers have told me that I cannot grow trees inside, and the following are the main reasons, light, humidity, air circulation, temperature, and dormancy. Here is how I’ve attempted to battle these things.

Light:
For reference, I am using the SI system of units, Google should convert to any silly lumens or foot candles you might want. Definitions [power]: Watts (W) or Joules per second (J/s), [Length]: Meters(m), [intensity]: joules/second/area (J/(s m^2)) or W/m^2, [Temperature]: Kelvin or Celsius or Fahrenheit K or C or F.

What I use: Right now I use 4 24W T5 bulbs @6,400K mounted overhead with reflective lining then two CFL bulbs as spotlights directed towards the center of my plant–area. See picture below.

Color:
A lot of people complain that florescent lights are not the correct color for plants, and that only full spectrum halide lights will do the trick. This is in general not correct. The two common types of chlorophyll cells (a,b) have highest rates of photosynthesis in the wavelengths of 400-500 nm and 600-700 nm. Though, it is true that leaves will absorb all wavelengths of light (except for the wavelengths we see as the color of the leaves, these are reflected – hence why we see them). It is best to try to match the Sun’s spectrum as closely as possible.

What is referred to as “color temperature” is actually an extremely physical concept. In physics, we call an object that emits radiation at a characteristic temperature a “black body”. Max Planck, a physicist long dead, figured out that you can describe the wavelength and energy of this radiation by only measuring this temperature. We all know this to be true, if you heat a fire poker up – “red hot” is cooler than “white hot”.

The Sun’s Characteristic temperature is about 6,500K if you're not on the poles or equator, so my 6,400K lights are pretty good.

Intensity:
There is an extreme amount of confusion in gardening communities about intensity or “brightness”. Intensity is power per area, or how much energy hits an area, every second. Light intensity is determined by the distance from the source, and the area we care about. It is worth noting that the area we actually mean is the leaf area of our plants which I’ll approximate to the area of my table.

The area of my plant table is .35 m^2 and my lights are .51 meters above the table or .27m above my shortest plant. I will include mathematical details in a link below, but intensity is in this case the average of the Poynting vector, or in other terms, the power divided by the area. I am making a large approximation here – my lights are actually about the same area as my table, which is not too bad for reasons explained in the link. Turns out, the intensity over the area of my table, on average is 275 W/m^2. Work is shown here. This does also only take into account my T5 lights.

It is worth noting that this is highly idealized – it does not take into account some thermal radiation produced by the lights, but this effect will be small with CFL and T5 lights.

Duration:
I keep my lights on an 18hr/day timer to make up for some of the intensity loss. Furthermore, my plant table is situated near a north and a west window, and gets “some” sunlight from those. Plants DO need to rest for a period of at least 6-8 hours every night. This was incredibly hard to research and I am going on what two master gardeners from the local arboretum have told me.

Light is always a big concern for leaf size and internode length. With my setup, my plants do Here are some of my sources and helpful websites.
http://www.bonsaihunk.us/info/IndoorLight.html
http://photobiology.info/Chalker-Scott.html
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/biology/ligabs.html

Might want to consider a humidifier and a fan of some sort, as funds permit. As you expand your collection, focus on picking up more trees people have success with inside like ficus, BRT's, etc...

good free read:
http://www.evergreengardenworks.com/indoors.htm
 
Color:
A lot of people complain that florescent lights are not the correct color for plants, and that only full spectrum halide lights will do the trick. This is in general not correct.

Not sure I agree with this. Fluorescent lights work fine so long as you get the right bulbs. You don't need a metal halide. Generalization that fluorescent lights aren't the right color doesn't make much sense.
 
To be frank,

with the Ginkgo, and Celtis, Juniper, all we do is let them go dormant / leafless for those that can, and just plastic bag the
root/soil zone and check for drying out in the soil every two weeks.

Plants enter the fridge around the third week of January and come out April 1st.
The fridge is set for crisper cold.

Been doing this since 1986/7 or so.
Whatever we lost, was lost through an accidental dry out or improper soil mix. Basically 2 plants.
Good Day
Anthony










t
 
@jeremy_norbury I understand the concept of bonsai and the techniques used there is no need to give such a basic definition.I have seen seen in my research a number of people growing bonsai from seed that look quite well, with no, or only one trunk chop. Nigel Saunders comes to mind. Furthermore, I do not wish to have larger trees - so by taking large cuttings, I already have much of the trunk diameter I want, and just have to worry about nebari (specifically, one of my ficus's already has a big enough trunk for me). Please read the 3rd disclaimer again, I am really not interested in what is considered "acceptable". Bonsai is art, and as such is subjective. If we all stuck to the basic forms and species, bonsai would be very boring. I am "branching out" if you will.

@Redwood Ryan I think you misread that, I am saying florescent lights are fine, and that halide lights are unnecessary, and I am saying florescent lights are the right colors (that was the whole point on characteristic temperature, the T5 bulbs are nearly matching the Sun, contrary to popular belief) - hence why i stated that these things are not correct.

@quietobserver I tend to stay away from that website - the posts are largely anecdotal with not much actual evidence to support them. Notice nothing I linked was from any type of forum or anything - I tried to find only hard sources, as others may just be "opinion" or experienced based, which is heavily biased. Not saying that article is is necessarily bad though. Also, the whole point of this is to test methods to grow other species inside - again as i said above, if we only try a few things, bonsai would be boring.
 
Last edited:
@quietobserver I tend to stay away from that website - the posts are largely anecdotal with not much actual evidence to support them. Notice nothing I linked was from any type of forum or anything - I tried to find only hard sources, as others may just be "opinion" or experienced based, which is heavily biased. Not saying that article is is necessarily bad though. Also, the whole point of this is to test methods to grow other species inside - again as i said above, if we only try a few things, bonsai would be boring.[/QUOTE]

Seriously? Wow...Brent's "opinion" has supported him for a very very long time in the very very VERY difficult business of bonsai. Can't think of a more solid source than him. Experience is overrated...:rolleyes:
Thirty years of successfully growing dozens of species isn't easy

http://artofbonsai.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=483

http://bonsainurseryman.typepad.com/
 
Last edited:
I've had the good fortune of meeting and talking with Brent (Evergreengardenworks) on many occasions, although sadly, not recently. I would take his advice as gold, without question. Although he's been perfectly happy answering all the stupid questions I've had. I know it takes some time to learn the difference between the true experts and the knuckleheads on line, but take some time before you dismiss Brent.

Brian
 
I've had the good fortune of meeting and talking with Brent (Evergreengardenworks) on many occasions, although sadly, not recently. I would take his advice as gold, without question. Although he's been perfectly happy answering all the stupid questions I've had. I know it takes some time to learn the difference between the true experts and the knuckleheads on line, but take some time before you dismiss Brent.

Brian
I agree, Brent is awesome to talk to. He answered all of my stupid questions in detail even though hes busy and that takes a certain kind of person to do that.
 
@rockm and others. I wasn't saying that website was necessarily bad, but there are so many people saying so many different things about bonsai that I try to get to the source. When talking about botany and horticulture, there is a fair amount of hard science done by universities that I feel more comfortable using. However, the reason I am doing these things IS to develop methods and experience.

You guys can probably assume that if a website pops up on the first ~10 pages of google when searching bonsai related things, I have read it. I will keep in mind that Brent has a lot of experience and hold his website to a higher standard (as i've done with harry harrington) - though i still prefer scientific evidence for the hort side of things (The art side I more freely use websites and books, again, subjective).

@leatherback I guess Lumens are SI, but we never use them. When talking about intensity we always use W/m^2, if only talking about visible spectrum we still use the same or radiant intensity, I usually would use W/sr, (sr = steradian) spectral intensity i would use W/sr*m^2. The less compound units we use, the better in my opinion.
 
If it's horticultural knowledge you seek, you don't need scientific journals. I remember the days of my undergrad and graduate studies, dismissing the work of non-academics. That didn't last very long.

No offense, you'd be an idiot not to take Brent's articles at face value. A professional of 30 years in the business of growing healthy trees vs some pre doctorate in a lab coat ... I'll take the dude with time under his belt and the trees to prove it..

Just sayin..
 
@vaibatron See, this is my problem. Sure, a person with years of experience might have really, really good information and that's alright - I can trust that information. However, once you step out of your comfort zone (like when enthusiasts speak about lights) more and more often you get information that is blatantly wrong. It is just the nature of something that is not a hard science.

I did not say I was only reading journals - in fact, i have read exactly zero journals on botany or hort, because it would not be helpful at all. I was saying, that I generally use sources with evidence to back up their claims - or more so than "This is what i say will work". Even with years of experience, one could carry misconceptions along with them - like how huge amounts of people think that using full strength fertilizer will harm bonsai trees - that is a good example of anecdotal evidence which is not supported by actual science at all.

Again, let me reiterate - Those who have been doing this a long definitely know more than I do, and if someone produces good quality, healthy plants I will listen to them. However, I will not take any advice without thinking critically about it first - it is not in my nature. When we stop thinking critically, we get into bad places where false knowledge is continuously passed around and accepted as true, even contrary to real evidence.

If Brent is really as good as you've explained, his methodology should match any reputable science you can find, because horticulture completely comes down to meeting the plant's needs, which is heavily studied. I agree there can be differences based on experience, but these things should be negligible at best - I suspect his experience has lead him to the same conclusions as others, and if so can be accepted.
 
Also, sorry, but you're never going to convince me to trust someone on experience alone - I will read more of his stuff, and if it is good quality, I will see. As a scientist I have a keen eye for bullshit.
 
For reference, I am using the SI system of units, Google should convert to any silly lumens or foot candles you might want.
I guess Lumens are SI, but we never use them.
Also, sorry, but you're never going to convince me to trust someone on experience alone - I will read more of his stuff, and if it is good quality, I will see. As a scientist I have a keen eye for bullshit.
because I am a physicist (no Ph.D yet though)

Yeah, as I scientist, I have a good eye for bullshit too. And I just detected some :D. Sorry; Not wanting to be argumentative, but I just disagree with you :)

It sounds to me like you only like science when it works your way. First you claim lumen is not SI, then you claim that (in your experience) it is not used. Then you go on you will never trust someone on experience, and only use science. I think you burried your own argument there. And I am sorry, that is just not the way it works. But you'll understand that once you have succesfully defended your PhD thesis. By the way; In my university, someone without a PhD would not be considered a scientist, but rather someone with an advanced degree. Even worse, not having published for some 8 years now, some would argue I cannot lay claim to being a scientist anymore, notwithstanding a decent number of papers in plant physiology & light analysis.

For you to consider, growing bonsai is not a scientific experiment. And what is valid in the lab, is not valid for the whole population; The outliers are what makes Bonsai interesting. The best trees come from Yamadori; Trees that grow on the edge of their range; As such they are statistically as well as geographically, outliers. In normal physiology experiments you would exclude data from these sepcimens, because they are so different they would skew the data. Also, as you are in physics, you think that everything fits in a nice neat world, and you can predict what happens. Biology, however, is the unruly child of science. And here it is a lot harder to reach solid conclusions than in physics.

Experience is the basis for good science. And most of the stuff we do with bonsai, will never be looked into by academics, purely because there is no reason for it. So.. The mechanism for dwarfing of leaves might be looked into. How you push this, and how individual species respond to small pot culture may not; the latter is purely the domain of experimental science, typically by the growers in the field, that would like to maximize output. This research is rarely done by national labs, and will therefor not often be published. Therefor, you will always need to listen to the people that have been doing this stuff for decades. They typically know more about succesfully growing bonsai than the guy in uni, because he asks different questions.

Just because a specific setup was not used, the repetitions are not there and the experiment is not repeatable, does not mean the conclusions are not valid.

Cheers,

Jelle.
 
Should be interesting to see the work produced.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Aside hope I can remember the name - Jelle
Hello Jelle

Good Day
Anthony
 
Back
Top Bottom