I have heard of beating on the limbs to increase fruit production the next year, however intentionally beating and maybe damaging the bark seems risky to me. I think choking the tree somewhat falls in the same line. The theory seems to be to make the tree "think" it is dying, so it tries to make one last big splash of seed (fruit) production, but you don't really kill it, so you can try the same thing year after year. Might work but strikes me as kind of nuts, which fits some of the sources where I heard it.

it will need to be hardened off ..... moving from indoors.. to outdoors ... you can not take it straight into sunshine ... you could un pot ... separate.. repot in separate pots... and keep them in dark shade for a week ... light shade for a week ... then filtered light .. perhaps sun at dusk or dawn ... the time lengths also take into account the disturbance of the roots from potting .... and then into the sun ... and you could always keep one potted.. in case you kill the others... you will have a fail safe ... eric.. if you cool the grass around a house ... wind will bring the coolness into the house ... your roof and insulation ... are supposed to take care of what hits the roof ... and with the trees further away ... what will not hit the house.. is the leaves falling off and choking your gutters... seed pods ... roof rats who use trees to get up there.. etc .... ken

beany.. i have read this 5 times.. i have no clue what you are getting at ... you start by air layering the trunk ??? .. and then immediately call it a branch ... whats that all about ... if you cut off the trunk.. the single trunk.. on most trees ... it will regrow two or three new sprouts.. and you have to reduce to one trunk.. if thats the form you want .. i have no clue why you would air layer such ... i have never heard nor thought about air layering.. in this situation.. maybe you need to tell us.. more specifically ... about what you are thinking about doing ... beside butchering your young tree .... this better not be another pear post.. lol ... [which is usually how you do it.. when you dont want the screeds ... lol] bottom line.. maybe you ought to give this plant a few years.. to actually branch.. before you dream about propagating it .... ken

Do yourself a favor - skip the aquarium water and all other miracle additives and products meant to "add more of this or that because someone said it's good for the plant". I thought a lot about what the goal of nutritional supplementation for containerized plants should be. What I come up with is, we should focus on ensuring all the nutrients plants normally assimilate from the soil are A) IN the soil and available for uptake at all times, B) in the soil in a favorable ratio - that is to say in a ratio that mimics the ratio at which the plant actually uses the nutrient, C) at a concentration high enough to ensure no nutritional deficiencies, yet still low enough to ensure the plant's ability to take up water, and the nutrients dissolved in that water won't be impeded (by a high concentration of solubles in the soil solution). Fortunately, that can be accomplished by using a single product. Look carefully at the packaging on the Jack's and compare to the Foliage-Pro to see how many nutrients Jack's is missing. Most soluble 20-20-20 fertilizers don't even contain Ca or Mg, both of which are macronutrients. Also, fertilizers with a 3:1:2 ratio (the fertilizer's 'ratio' is different than its NPK %s. E.g., fertilizers with the NPK %s of 9-3-6, 24-8-16, and 12-4-8 are ALL 3:1:2 ratios. The NPK %s are separated with a dash, and the numbers in the ratio are separated with a colon. You'll also notice that Jack's derives it's N from urea, where 2/3 of the N in 9-3-6 is derived from nitrates. You can also skip the bone meal. It's essentially insoluble in containers. You'll get all the Ca and P you need from the Foliage-Pro - besides, if you're using it as an Fe (iron) supplement, you'll be disappointed. The minute amount of Fe it contains is insoluble except in low pH conditions, which is how iron present in the soil put unavailable because it's locked in other compounds. Reducing the pH of the soil solution (acidifying it) is usually enough to 'cure' an Fe deficiency. During winter, I formerly had to acidify my irrigation water with citric acid or white vinegar to fix a predictable Fe deficiency because my water is high in carbonates. I now have a small reverse osmosis water filtration system that removes all carbonates. If you're flushing your soil when you water, you should be fertilizing every second to fourth time you water - more on that later if you're interested. When the 'tells' are moist only at the tips is when you should be watering this plant. It doesn't like wet feet, so your soil choice and watering habits are very important. This is especially true when we come to grips with the fact that a healthy plant is only wishful thinking if we're unable to maintain the roots, the heart of the plant, in a state of high vitality. You might find this Overview of Good Growing Practices useful. I think this piece about Long Term Care of Trees in Containers to be particularly useful. Edited to add this piece I wrote about using aquarium water: Aquarium Water I'd skip the water from the aquarium - here's why: I look at nutrition methodically. I prefer to use the least number of nutrient mixtures that will ensure my plants are getting all the essential nutrients they normally take from the soil and in the right proportions. The reason is, supplying more of any one element than a plant can use can be as limiting as supplying too little. 'How did he get THERE?' you might ask. What is in aquarium water? - anyone know? So - you use it ..... then what? Obviously, it is going to be entirely inadequate in supplying the major elements, N P K Ca Mg S. So then what do you do .... you need to fertilize anyway - because you have no idea what you supplied with the fish water .... and you still need to be sure all the bases are covered. The point is, if you're using fertilizers that only cover a few of the elements required for growth, additional fertilizers are required to fill in the gaps, Almost always, there will be overlaps, where you are supplying the same element in both products, or the same element will be missing from both products - gaps. Why not choose a fertilizer that supplies ALL the elements required for normal growth, and in a ratio to each other that is favorable, thereby eliminating gaps, overlaps, and potential antagonisms? (Antagonistic deficiencies occur when an excess of one element in the soil solution prevents adequate uptake of 1 or more other elements. Common antagonisms exist between Fe/Mn, P/Fe and Mn, Ca/Mg, others.) I'm not saying the fish water is particularly harmful, only that if you're employing a fertilizer like Foliage-Pro 9-3-6, or MG 248-16 or 12-4-8, it's probably redundant. This question in another form often comes up when discussing the use of water from boiled veggies as a nutrient source. We know neither is a complete fertilizer, and since you have no idea what you DID supply when you used it, you will certainly need to fertilize anyway - thus making the aquarium water/ veggie water/ manure/ .... of little or no value. The easiest and most efficient way to supply nutrients to your plants is with a soluble synthetic fertilizer that supplies nutrients in a ratio the same as the ratio at which the plants actually USE the nutrients. The only reliable way to do that is by using a fertilizer like I just described. When you depart from that plan, there can be no potential for benefits - only limitations that arise from either to much or too little of one or more elements essential for growth. Even if the aquarium water supplied a nutrient necessary for growth, it would not help with growth unless it was supplying the single most deficient nutrient. Al