After correcting a few missteps in the way I was growing it, the micromeris finally established a strong, healthy root system last summer. However, I underestimated how much water this very thirsty plant wanted. Watering frequency was every 2 weeks, followed by the winter dry period, then taking up that schedule again in spring. I upped the frequency to once a week at the beginning of June, and the sulk rings are almost gone. Wonderful to see, but this tells you how long it took for me to figure things out. I'll show you the results after more weekly watering with a sulk-free micromeris. For that, we still have some waiting to do with photos I'll post up in a new thread. Until then, I'm keeping my eye on the 2 new Epithelanthas I received in December -- as the story here continues...
One is a bokei which started establishing more easily than I expected. This tiny gem is definitely taking up water and growing, although a sulk ring should still be expected. Like here:
I put it on the same summer watering schedule as the micromeris, so the bokei probably won't be sulking much longer. My other new Epithelantha is a gregii 'rufispina'. After knowing what they are, sulk rings on the micromeris and bokei were readily apparent. But in the absence of sulk rings, the gregii is something of a mystery to me. As with the bokei, this cactus has established well enough to take up water and grow, but I'm darned if I know whether or not it's thirsty enough to justify keeping it on weekly watering for the rest of the summer. I decided to put this to a test when I let it go for a week between waterings. So that was watering on 6/28, then 2 weeks later. Here it is a few hours before watering on 7/12, then 6 days after on the right:
I'm satisfied with how well the gregii has done thus far, so this is just a request for some feedback from anyone who knows more about the species. And there you have it -- is this Epithelantha sulking? If the answer is "yes", I'll keep up with the gregii's weekly watering schedule until the growing season is over.
Thanks for your help!
) The other is to grow our cacti so that they'll emulate their growth in the wild as closely as possible. Not being a fan of "either/or" propositions in general, IMO I believe there should be a "middle ground" approach open to hobbyists. This proposes the idea that we can maintain our cacti with more growth potential than they would have under habitat conditions, but without veering into the opposite extreme of producing lush, overfed plants that bear little or no resemblance to their wild brethren. While I do prefer growing my cacti on the hard side, I find that middle ground more attractive in the approach I'm taking. If us hobby enthusiasts are keeping collections at all, let's face it -- we're growing cacti for our own enjoyment! (Botanical gardens are more well-suited to the higher purpose of conservation, but that is subject better left for debate elsewhere.) So here's a rhetorical question growers should answer for themselves. Do you know all your choices when it comes to how you grow your cacti? If you can make comparisons among nursery-grown cacti, plants being cultivated by other hobbyists, and the same (or similar) species in the wild, then you'll be able to make up your own mind instead of going by what someone else says you should be doing. Then how you implement your decisions will be up to you. After my grand disquisition, this bring us back to the topic at hand...