Matching Fertilizer Quality to Tree Quality

DrTolhur

Mame
Messages
126
Reaction score
78
Location
Midland, MI
USDA Zone
6a
I fully recognize the differing experience/opinions on which fertilizers to use/not use in general, so I'm not looking to have that discussion. My question is based on the premise that there is a difference in quality/efficaciousness of different fertilizers with regard to bonsai. So, given that:
Is there any validity to the idea of using a cheaper/lower quality fertilizer when trees are very young and just need to put on growth and then switching to a more expensive/higher quality fertilizer once they start to move into refinement?

One thing I find challenging in researching bonsai is the amount of underlying variables that go unsaid when discussing principles of bonsai, oftentimes things like species and age of tree. It seems like much of the varied opinions are more around the refinement stage of trees, which isn't apparent to people just starting out and perhaps don't even have a tree in refinement.
 

Vin

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
5,257
Reaction score
7,645
Location
Panama City, FL Zone 9a/8b Centr
USDA Zone
8b
Fertilizer is a ratio of nutrients. Primarily; Nitrogen, Phosphate and Potash. I'm not insinuating that you don't know that or understand how the ratios determine application. Rather, I'm asking what determines the quality of fertilizer? Does one brand that contains 3 parts of nitrogen have a quality advantage over another brand that contains the same 3 parts? It should be interesting reading the replies of those that may know. I'll certainly follow this thread in an effort to learn something.
 

DrTolhur

Mame
Messages
126
Reaction score
78
Location
Midland, MI
USDA Zone
6a
I'm sure there are more aspects to quality of fertilizer I'm not aware of, but one thing I was thinking of was the idea of additional nutrients that may or may not be present besides NPK, whether present naturally as an organic or chemically added. As I said before, I know there's plenty of debate as to organic vs. chemical fertilizers, so I'm staying away from that particular notion and just leaving it broadly at "quality," whatever that might mean.
 

Deep Sea Diver

Masterpiece
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
9,134
Location
Bothell, WA
USDA Zone
8b
It seems to me that the needs of trees in your inventory, presence of micronutrients, method of application, longevity of product in one’s media and the speed of release are key variables.

Yet NPK is NPK as long as you understand those variables.

I imagine if you asked @Walter Pall I’m pretty sure he might say the cheaper the better, considering the above …..and what I call his Triangle = the draining quality of the media, the amount/type of fertilizer and the frequency of watering.

Cheers
DSD sends
 

Bnana

Chumono
Messages
641
Reaction score
672
Location
The Netherlands
USDA Zone
8
All your trees need micronutrients besides NPK. Fertilizer with only NPK has very limited uses.
NPK-ratios are relevant but that is not quality, that's different products with different uses.
For the rest "quality" is mainly pr-budget. Your trees don't care.
 

Potawatomi13

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
6,168
Reaction score
4,403
Location
Eugene, OR
USDA Zone
8
Overthinking🤪! Development fertilize weekly. Refinement less often;). High NPK #s fine.
 

Shibui

Imperial Masterpiece
Messages
7,545
Reaction score
15,224
Location
Yackandandah, Australia
USDA Zone
9?
Is there any validity to the idea of using a cheaper/lower quality fertilizer when trees are very young and just need to put on growth and then switching to a more expensive/higher quality fertilizer once they start to move into refinement?
This obviously assumes there is some relationship between price and quality or effectiveness or the amount/number of nutrients in the mix.
It seems to me that the more outlandish or dubious the claims of the promoter the higher the price. I've seen high priced 'fertilizer' that really cannot justify the name because there are so few actual nutrients in the mix.
Fertilizers that are sourced from 'organic' products are generally higher cost than those where nutrients are manufactured in a factory. The 'organic' claims are sometimes dubious but seem mostly to appeal to the human growers. I have not seen any evidence that any of my plants prefer 'organic' fertiliser to synthetic products.

I cannot see why plants at different stages of development would want or need different 'quality' nutrients. I can see a need for different levels of nutrients - more growth in early stages and less as ramification develops - at different development stages but that's more a factor of application rates or possibly nutrient ratios rather than quality or price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vin
Top Bottom