A Primer on Hydroponic Cut Tulips Hydroponic tulip forcing has many foreseeable applications in North America, including both

large-scale grower production and small-scale production at the retail level. ind out if this system of production is right for you. August !", #!!# - Publication August #!!# $%&

$'(( )'((*+ Printer-friendly version,-end by email,

Tulips are a good e.ample of a flower bulb crop that can be adapted to hydroponic culture. 'n Holland, appro.imately /!-/0 percent of the cut tulip crop is forced hydroponically, and we have been evaluating this production method at Cornell over the past two seasons. 1hile our e.periences have been very positive, there are several important details to understand and act upon before a high-2uality crop can be produced. Hydroponic bulb basics The basic procedure with hydroponic tulip forcing is to give appro.imately 30-4! percent of the cold re2uirement to dry, unplanted bulbs 5see igure 6, below7. 8epending on the cultivar and time of year, this might be 6#-69 wee:s. $ulbs are then ;planted< into the system, and a dilute calcium nitrate solution is added for rooting 5about 6.!-6.# mmhos=cm#7. +ooting proceeds at 9!> for /-9 wee:s for early crops or #-/ wee:s for later crops. After the entire cold re2uirement has been provided, bulbs are moved into the greenhouse for forcing. The plants are then fed with calcium nitrate, with the goal of maintaining an *C of 6.#-6.0 mmhos=cm#. 't is important to reali?e that the longer the rooting period 5above #-9 wee:s7, the lower the eventual 2uality of the flower. This is because longer roots cause more rapid o.ygen depletion of the solution and become more susceptible to disease. Also, the longer and more entangled the roots are, the more difficult harvest is 5harvesting one stem pulls up many

more with entangled roots7. +eali?ing the relatively small root system needed to produce a good-2uality plant is the :ey to successful hydroponic tulip production@ the small root si?e is probably much less than is necessary for cut tulips in soil- or peat-based forcing. Compared to traditional ;soil< culture in ;bo.es< 5where bulbs are planted in crates, cooled, then forced7, hydroponic forcing has the following advantages& A it is /-0 days faster than soil culture@ A much less cooler volume is re2uired for chilling bulbs 5because most of the cold period is given to densely pac:ed, unplanted tulips in their shipping crates7@ and A harvesting is easier and cleaner B there is no wasted soil at the end, greatly reducing material handling problems. 1hy do hydroponic plants force faster than plants grown in traditional soil cultureC 't is not due to any inherent superiority of hydroponics@ it is simply due to the prevailing temperature 5ca. 9!> 7 of the plants during the #- to 9-wee: rooting period. This is D-4 degrees warmer than is typical during the last few wee:s of cooling, where, normally, temperatures of /#-//> might prevail to reduce stem growth in the cooler. These few degrees over a #- to 9-wee: period can easily account for the reduced crop time in the greenhouse. Plus, in traditional cut flower forcing in bo.es, the mass of the bulbs and soil is substantial, probably ta:ing 6-# days to warm to prevailing greenhouse temperatures. The disadvantages of hydroponic forcing are& A 1hen grown at the same temperature, the ultimate 2uality of the stem is not 2uite as good as when the same cultivar is grown in soil 5hydro stems tend to be 6-# inches shorter and D-4 percent lighter compared to substrate-grown stems7@ A not all cultivars are suited to this system@ A very high-2uality and disease-free bulbs are re2uired, especially for later plantings 5careful attention must be placed on proper bulb storage, including temperature, humidity and ventilation7@ A especially for individual trays, a level bench or tray support system is critical to maintain a level nutrient solution 5old, uneven benches wonEt cut it7@ and A the need for e.ceptional cleanliness. The trays and components are sometimes difficult to wash and saniti?e 5although, on a large scale, a machine could be used for this7. Fptions and solutions

The weight and length issues of hydroponic tulips are solvable problems, and ongoing wor: in The Netherlands indicates that adGustments in rooting period and aeration can compensate for most of the weight and length reduction. After considering the biological merits of hydroponic forcing, thought must be given to the hydro system itself. A tray designed by the $ulbfust Company 5#9 . 6D inches, appro.imately four inches tall, designed to fit inside a blac: plastic bulb crate7 is still the maGor one used in The Netherlands. 't is characteri?ed by a grid of plastic ;pins< that the bulb is pressed onto for upright support. The tray has two drainage holes to maintain the proper solution depth when the tray is level. A number of other systems are available from manufacturers in The Netherlands. These systems are very similar in appearance to large plug trays and come in a variety of si?es to match the si?e of the bulb being forced 59-0 inches, etc7. As e.pected, each system has its own plusses and minuses. The $ulbfust ;pin tray< has proven to be popular because it is durable, and the pins, while causing some inGury to the bulbs, are usable for nearly all si?es of bulbs and provide an infinite number of spacing and arrangement options. The plug-li:e trays are designed for specific bulb si?es, and multiple trays are needed if a company forces different si?es of bulbs. 'n either case, there are two components to handle& the crate and the water tray itself 5though this is being solved by new, larger-scale systems designed to utili?e larger ebb-and-flow greenhouse benches7. Fur research at Cornell has indicated that static nutrient solution 5as is characteristic in individual trays7 is often difficult to maintain at optimal *C, aeration and pH levels. The volume of solution in each tray is only about 6! liters@ this is not a lot of solution for D!-4! tulips. 1e adapted our irrigation and fertili?ation practices such that new calcium nitrate solution 5at an *C of 6.#7 was used during the wee:, and only clear water was applied on wee:ends. 'n this way, we were able to maintain the *C at an acceptable level and grow e.cellent-2uality tulips. And even though the solution in hydroponic trays is only about 6.0-# inches deep, it is possible for the dissolved o.ygen level in the solution to drop sufficiently low that root growth is reduced. +esearch in The Netherlands at the HwaagdiG: e.periment station confirms this and has demonstrated the e.pected advantages of larger nutrient reservoirs with solution that flows constantly over the roots. 'n this way, there is a greater buffering of nutrients, a slower rate of change of pH and *C, and better aeration of the solution. Thus, it should be easy to adapt e.isting I ebb-and-flow benches to hydroponic tulip production. An indication of the plant and root response to simple aeration of the solution is shown above. 'nterestingly, the dissolved o.ygen level of our non-aerated treatment was still above the minimum needed for good growth of hydroponic lettuce crops@ perhaps this indicates tulips have an especially high dissolved o.ygen re2uirement for growth. Currently, the answer to this 2uestion is un:nown. The uture for Hydroponic Tulips

't is easy to see hydroponic tulip production continuing to increase worldwide. 'n the Jnited -tates and Canada, one can envision its use for large-scale production with all the advantages noted in this article. 't is also easy to see it as an interesting component for smaller retail greenhouse operations, where a few trays could be forced wee:ly to provide very high-2uality, locally produced products. $ecause a smaller cooler volume is needed, capital costs are lower, ma:ing it easier to get into cut tulip production. *liminating the direct cost of the substrate and the associated handling costs probably allows for payment of the hydroponic trays in two years 5although costs and savings would vary tremendously between companies7. Fur own e.perience with hydroponic tulips at Cornell has been very positive, and in most cases, the advantages more than compensate for the negative aspects of this way of forcing. Fne thing is clear& An ultra-fresh cut flower tulip is a beautiful thing and is rarely seen by most consumers in North America. There would seem to be many opportunities to incorporate hydroponics into the product mi. of many smaller growers. Than:s are e.pressed to the 8utch *.porters Association for flowerbulbs and nursery stoc:, and -eP+F, Jniroyal and Kalent J-A for financial and material assistance with aspects of the research reported herein. Also than:s to CornellEs $arbara -tewart and Leffrey 1agema:er and Pieter Heems:er:, two 8utch student interns involved with this wor:. !# part ''.pdf About The Author $ill )iller is professor of flowerbulb and greenhouse crop physiology in the 8epartment of Horticulture, Cornell Jniversity, 'thaca, N.%. He can be reached by phone at 5D!37 #00-63"" or *-mail at wbm4Mcornell.edu. )ore li:e this 6 Nrowing Cut lowers %ear +ound # usarium in Tulips / -o (ong -oil 9 lower bulb Transportation and Handling 0 Hydroponics& -uccessful -urfing