Anurag - the thread about container soils and water retention was written with the hope that those reading it would come away with an understanding of how water behaves in soils, & particularly how particle size and other physical characteristics impact perched water retention and o/a water retention. It's up to the grower to decide what he/she wants to do - how diligently they want to work at reducing the amount of excess water their soils hold. 1:1:1, screened bark:screened Turface:grit is the most productive soil I've used, but I don't use it for everything. Veggies & plants I know are only going to live a year of go 1 year between repots, usually go in the 5:1:1 mix. All of my woody plants, housep0lants including succulents, and other plants I know will be in the same soil for 2 growth cycles or longer, go in the gritty 1:1:1 mix. The 1:1:1 and 5:1:1 ratios are guidelines, but they're good ones. They minimize the amount of perched water a soil holds, and the gritty mix makes a good run at maximizing the volume of water held inside soil particles while still offering additional adjustability. If you live in a rainy climate and you're using the gritty mix, you might want to increase the amount of grit and decrease the amount of Turface commensurately. If it's dry where you live, increase the Turface and decrease the grit - but make sure that the soil holds enough water to carry you through the dry days, but not so much your plant suffers during periods of prolonged rain. Shading the pots when it's hot is very helpful. High soil/root temps is one of the primary limiting factors for container growers. I like soluble synthetic fertilizers. There is no more efficient way to ensure your plants get what they need, when they need it, at the right ratio, and in a favorable o/a concentration. How you fertilize is up to you, but soluble synthetics make fertilizing almost foolproof, as long as the grower holds up his/her end of the deal. When you root prune, the object is to eliminate large roots that aren't attached to the trunk and are in unfavorable positions to make room for and increase the number of fine roots, which do all the work except anchoring and transport. You'll need to develop a feel for root pruning because all plants don't get the same treatment. Reread the thread about water movement in soil, and the one about trees in containers. Make sure you understand what's in those threads. If you do gain that understanding, it should make a significant difference in what you get back for your efforts. Best luck. Al

@dleverette When making 5:1:1 mix, I break-up the compressed chunks of peat so they pass through a 1/2" screen. I toss any sticks and such on top of the raised beds where they break down with time. Here's a tip you'll find very helpful. For large batches of 5:1:1, pour the bark onto a tarp laid on a flat surface, then wet the bark a bit. Then, add the screened peat and spread it over the bark. Add your lime on top of the peat, then put down the perlite and wet that. The trick is to use just enough water to make the mix damp when it's thoroughly mixed. Both peat and pine bark are hydrophobic (water repellent) when allowed to dry below about 20% of their water holding ability. This makes a dry 5:1:1 mix extremely difficult to rewet if you don't moisten it when you make it. The moisture in the mix diffuses, moistening the bark/ peat and "breaking" its tendency to repel water. Within 15-30 minutes of making the mix you can pot plants and water them in thoroughly w/o the frustration associated with trying to rehydrate a dry soil. FWIW, I don't use coir. As many times as I've tried it and cone comparative experiments, I've always had problems or been dissatisfied with the results. You might be interested in a comparison between peat and coir I wrote several years back: Peat vs. Coir Sphagnum peat and coir have nearly identical water retention curves. They both retain about 90-95% of their volume in water at saturation and release it over approximately the same curve until they both lock water up so tightly it's unavailable for plant uptake at about 30-33% saturation. Coir actually has less loft than sphagnum peat, and therefore, less aeration. Because of this propensity, coir should be used in mixes at lower %s than peat. Because of the tendency to compact, in the greenhouse industry coir is primarily used in containers in sub-irrigation (bottom-watering) situations. Many sources produce coir that is high in soluble salts, so this can also be an issue. Using coir as the primary component of container media virtually eliminates lime or dolomitic lime as a possible Ca source because of coir's high pH (6+). Gypsum should be used as a Ca source, which eliminates coir's low S content. All coir products are very high in K, very low in Ca, and have a potentially high Mn content, which can interfere with the uptake of Fe. Several studies have also shown that the significant presence of phenolic allelochemicals in fresh coir can be very problematic for a high % of plants, causing poor growth and reduced yields. I haven't tested coir thoroughly, but I have done some testing of CHCs (coconut husk chips) with some loose controls in place. After very thoroughly leaching and rinsing the chips, I made a 5:1:1 soil of pine bark:peat:perlite (which I know to be very productive) and a 5:1:1 mix of CHCs:peat:perlite. I planted 6 cuttings of snapdragon and 6 cuttings of Coleus (each from the same plant to help reduce genetic influences) in containers (same size/shape) of the different soils. I added dolomitic lime to the bark soil and gypsum to the CHC soil. After the cuttings struck, I eliminated all but the three strongest in each of the 4 containers. I watered each container with a weak solution of MG 12-4-8 with STEM added at each watering, and watered on an 'as needed basis', not on a schedule. The only difference in the fertilizer regimen was the fact that I included a small amount of MgSO4 (Epsom salts) to provide MG (the dolomitic lime in the bark soil contained the MG, while the gypsum (CaSO4) in the CHC soil did not. This difference was necessary because or the high pH of CHCs and coir.) for the CHC soil. The results were startling. In both cases, the cuttings grown in the CHC's exhibited < 1/2 the biomass at summers end as the plants in the bark mix. I just find it very difficult for a solid case to be made (besides "It works for me") for the use of coir or CHC's. They're more expensive and more difficult to use effectively. The fact that some believe peat is in short supply (no where near true, btw) is easily offset by the effect of the carbon footprint of coir in its trek to the US from Sri Lanka or other exotic locales. That's the view from here. YMMV Coir Study: https://sites.google.com/site/plantandsoildigest/usu-crop-physiology-laboratory/coconut-coir-studies Al

Never mind. Found it!

Great post. I tried this method this past weekend. Relative to the lawn mower method of chopping up large pine bark chunks, I found this method to be cleaner (it doesn't shoot pine chunks out the sides like a mower will), a bit slower than the mower, and produced a lot more fine particles. I have a high speed Toro leaf blower/mulcher with a metal impeller. A large percentage of the particles coming out felt like fine compost, and a large number of chunks went through looking unscathed, so I didn't get the mix of particle sizes that I was hoping for. I suppose if I had a 1/8" screen, I could have sifted out some of the fine stuff. As it was, I got about 3 gallons of material, and made a side batch of 5-1-1 to try with some peppers, but I didn't mix it in with the rest of my 5-1-1.