Adobe Stock

The new wave of houseplant enthusiasts aren’t your typical garden center patrons. Always on the lookout for the new and unusual, these younger shoppers are searching for the latest trending plants to add to their collections. Often, their only growing space is indoors, and for many, it’s their first foray into the growing world. Make sure you’re growing not only enough stock for your IGC customers but providing them with a lot more than just the basics.

“Houseplants are increasing pretty quickly and it’s bringing in people who aren’t necessarily our garden clientele,” says Brit Dickinson, regional manager at Riddle Plant Farm in Sand Springs, Oklahoma, where houseplant shoppers tend to be in their 30s and 40s. “They’re more of the home décor people looking to spruce up their houses and not really concerned with the gardening side of things, which is our normal customer base.”

As little as five years ago, flowering plants were the hot-ticket indoor plants at Riddle Plant Farm. But now it’s all about the foliage for the IGC, where houseplants make up 5% to 10% of sales during the spring and summer, and 40% to 50% in the late fall and winter. “We really didn’t sell enough to even have a dedicated section here in the store,” Dickinson says. “It was just kind of end caps and in just five years, we’ve seen it kind of gravitate toward foliage and leafy plants.”

At Forest Lake Greenhouses in Florence, South Carolina, houseplants and accessories account for nearly a quarter of sales. While the IGC has a broad base of customers including all age groups, more and more millennials are coming through the doors in search of houseplants. “That’s what makes me so excited — all of these young people coming in — 20-somethings and early 30s,” King says. “That’s the main demographic that’s looking at these houseplants.”

It’s the same demographic at Wingard’s Market in Lexington, South Carolina. “We have the older crowd that buys them too, but the younger crowd buys houseplants disproportionately compared to other plants,” says co-owner Delores Steinhauser. “That might be all they buy, or they at least buy some in addition to other things.”

To appeal to this younger crowd of houseplant enthusiasts, Steinhauser is using the term ‘indoor plants’ instead of houseplants, which she says can have an “old-fashioned” connotation.

Adobe Stock

Instagram-famous plants

Foliage, particularly variegated foliage, is all the rage right now as it trends on Instagram, which is a huge driver of houseplant trends and demands.

“Whatever’s trending on Instagram that year is what people look for,” Dickinson says. “It’s kind of wild how quickly it spreads the desire for plants.”

Monstera and different kinds of hoya are selling well for Riddle Plant Farm, and Dickinson says shoppers can’t get enough of variegated plants. The IGC has a great relationship with a local houseplant club, which also keeps them plugged into demands. “They kind of dictate to us what we need to look for, which is kind of nice,” Dickinson says.

While houseplants have always been a major category for Forest Lake Greenhouse, King has recently seen more and more demand for colorful leaves and different leaf variations, along with new varieties.

She says she noticed the trend starting with fiddle leaf figs. “We had not sold fiddle leaf figs for years — never even had one in the garden center or the greenhouse,” she says. “And then all of a sudden, everybody’s asking about fiddle leaf figs and looking at the magazines — there’s a fiddle leaf fig. And since then it seems like they have moved onto more plants that are featured on Instagram and social media.”

Monstera, in particular, has been trending on Instagram for quite a while (check out #monsteramonday), and the plant is in high demand at the IGC. Once monstera mania has passed, King expects houseplant buyers to move on to the next hot thing on social media.

“Instagram is driving this industry for foliage and our garden centers, no matter what age you are, need to be a part of this so we can help drive that,” King says. “We don’t want them to always control what we’re selling. We need to have some input so that we can tell them what we need to sell.”

But keeping up with ever-changing demands is difficult for garden centers. Dickinson says she has a hard time finding good sources with good availability of the trendier plants like fiddle leaf figs and monstera.

“I think once everyone gets one of the trendy plants, there’s the next unicorn that everyone is looking for,” she says. “And as it becomes more and more available, people seek the new thing because they typically just buy one or two of whatever popular item is out there.”

Wingard’s Market also has a hard time keeping monstera in stock, along with other popular plants like Chinese money plants, fiddle leaf figs and string of pearls. “Everybody just wants these fiddle leaf figs; it’s crazy,” Steinhauser says.

To increase offerings, Wingard’s Market opened a greenhouse in March of last year. Prior to that, the garden center sold houseplants outside during the spring and summer, and a few fall months. “But we never did a very good job of it,” Steinhauser says. “So, our increase in sales of houseplants is directly related to opening this greenhouse.”

In its first year with the greenhouse, Wingard’s Market did $50,000 in houseplant sales — a huge increase from the $3,000 to $5,000 in previous years’ sales.

The 3,000 square-foot greenhouse is filled at least with one-third houseplants during the peak spring and summer months. During the winter, the greenhouse is used to about half houseplants and half other flowering plants like hydrangea.

Wingard’s Market tries to place types of houseplants and accessories, like air plants and spray bottles, together in the store. “Otherwise it’s kind of rows of houseplants,” Steinhauser says. “So, we have some focal points especially for commonly asked for types of things. Otherwise folks are just walking up and down the rows looking at all the different plants.”

Kate is the editor of Garden Center magazine, a sister publication. The accompanying exclusive research was conducted by Garden Center earlier this year. The story and research appeared in the April issue.

Despite regional marketing and educational campaigns, consumers in general often have a skewed perception of drought and water conservation techniques.

Research from Texas A&M and Michigan State University has revealed data that will allow the green industry to craft targeted messages to consumers that may help stretch a diminishing water supply.

Melinda Knuth, who recently earned her PhD in horticulture at Texas A&M, and her team focused on the practical applications of the global concern that potable water will become less accessible in the future and how it impacts plant life in landscaping and horticulture.

“As water sources diminish, there will still be a need to install and support landscape plants. Future water availability could change the American landscape,” Knuth says.

Knuth conducted the research with Charlie Hall (economist and Texas A&M Ellison Chair), as well as Michigan State’s Bridget Behe, Patricia Huddleston and Tom Fernandez. The collaborators published a detailed account of their research in HortTechnology (“Consumer Perceptions of Landscape Plant Production Water Sources and Uses in the Landscape During Perceived and Real Drought”). Read the full transcript here: bit.ly/water_conservation_perceptions.

According to previous research by Brian Hurd at New Mexico State University, “outdoor water-use preferences are not only influenced by water prices and conservation motives, but also the time needed to implement conservation activities, knowledge on how to conserve water and monetary restrictions. Influencing consumer attitudes, in turn, results in longer term responses for landscape water use, thereby potentially reducing future water demand.”

Knuth notes that recent research suggests consumers’ attitudes and behavior toward potable water supplies have changed in other countries because of greater social awareness and increasingly widespread exposure to drought conditions. But the United States is not as advanced in its acceptance of using recycled water for landscape irrigation, the researchers discovered. Recycled water, or gray water, is that which has already been used in various household capacities, except for toilet and sewage needs.

Previous research found that recycled wastewater — from washing machines, bathtubs, showers, and sinks but not toilets — constitutes about 60% of the total wastewater from households. This can equate to about 30,000 gallons of gray water per year for a family of four. The expanded use of gray water for irrigation may result in groundwater recharge and may play a substantial role in the reuse and total reduction of water usage by households.

Knuth and her collaborators conducted an online survey of 1,543 U.S. consumers to assess their perceptions about landscape plants, the water source used to produce them, and plant water needs to become established in the landscape.

They discovered that consumers placed greater relative importance on water source in production over water use in the landscape for both herbaceous and woody perennials.

“They preferred fresh water over recycled water and least preferred a blend of fresh with recycled water for perennials and recycled water used for woody perennial production. In addition, the group that did not perceive a drought but experienced one placed a higher value (higher utility score) on nursery plants grown with fresh water compared with those which were actually not in drought and did not perceive one,” the team writes in HortTechnology.

“In Texas, we use the term ‘reclaimed,’ and that can come from showers, sinks and washing machines, for example,” she says. “The use of reclaimed water is done mostly at the city level for irrigating parks, school yards and athletic fields.”

In the study, participants were presented with the terms fresh, blended and recycled. Fresh and blended were more accepted than recycled, she says. Municipalities and other public entities will need to increase educational and promotional efforts to improve the perception of recycled water, its safety and its benefit to overall water conservation.

One possible reason the U.S. hasn’t adopted a widespread use of recycled water compared to other countries is the lack of extreme drought experiences – at least until the devastating California drought of the 2000s, she says.

“The U.S. really hadn’t experienced extreme drought for long periods of time, so the behavior mindset wasn’t there for Americans,” she says. “It’s a deliberate change that has to occur. And with regulatory changes, such as temporary water restrictions, many people go back to their old ways once the regulations stop.”

In tandem, the green industry must promote their own use of recycled water and explain its benefits.

“Educate the consumer and tell them how you recycle water,” she explains. “Use language that this plant has been grown with recycled water to communicate that you’re conscious of your environmental footprint. And if you have some sort of accreditation regarding water conservation, let the consumer know. Tell the story.”

Photos from iStock

Drought perception

The public tends to have a skewed perception of drought and Knuth’s research shows that people often perceive a drought when there actually isn’t one occurring. Consequently, the team found that attitudes toward water conservation between those who correctly perceive they are in a drought differs from those who correctly perceive they’re not in a drought.

Therefore, the industry must also tout the benefits of low water-use plants in the landscape, not only to conserve water, but to encourage plant sales in times of adequate and low-water periods.

“People don’t buy attributes, they buy benefits,” she says. “Explain the benefits of a low water-use plant and the benefits of saving water at the production level and the landscape level. Consumers will be interested and eager to learn, and this could be your competitive advantage. It’s an incredible engagement tool if the grower is willing.”

Growers can use tools such as social media and videos to help tell the story, but much of this conversation will need to happen at the retail level, she adds.

“Signage that explains ‘this plant was grown with recycled water’ or ‘if you’re interested in water conservation, consider these plants’ is a great way to start,” she says.

The use of water-conserving plants has been promoted as a water conservation strategy for homeowners. A better understanding of consumer perceptions of water source and landscape plant water use “would help plant sellers and policymakers know what consumers are currently thinking and what motivates their water-use behavior before additional reductions in water use change the industry in unintended ways,” Knuth and her team writes in their research article.

All interested parties, including the green industry, need to be aware of why consumers may not understand the drought situation, she explains. For instance, there are unconsciously aware consumers who may simply need to hear about drought conditions and water conservation benefits and regulations. Or the consciously aware consumer may be sensitive to the education and signage and take the appropriate action.

Photos from iStock

This study revealed that water source in production and water use needs in the landscape are relatively similar to plant price in terms of relative importance to the consumer. Therefore, efforts to communicate water source and water needs may be favorably received by consumers. Previous research has found that consumers are willing to purchase and, in some cases, pay a premium for products and services that enhance their quality of life, including environmental well-being.

“This research is important because drought is far-reaching and non-selective, making water conservation crucial,” Knuth says. “Understanding how homeowners behave in drought conditions, and lack of drought, can potentially affect which plants horticulture retailers provide, drive future water conserving policy, and nudge consumers to more positive water conservation behavior."

Most of us spend the majority of our time at the office, actively working inside or as part of a human work system. Whether we are conscious to it or not, the corporate culture of an organization can make or break how we feel about the organization and our place in it.

While most aware leaders say they want a constructive corporate culture, many are uncertain of what it really takes to shape it. Consequently, these executives and managers unintentionally lead their people toward the fatal, destructive side of the culture coin. They do this by buying into five double-edged sword philosophies: Winning above all else, commanding and controlling, opposing others, pursuing perfection and keeping the peace. These philosophies will undermine your mission to craft a constructive corporate culture.

Winning above all else

Winning is an incredibly powerful motivator. The desire to win can move mountains and bring in profits. However, when the need to win overwrites better judgement, it fragments and erodes core values, runs over people and leads people to the brink of exhaustion. When values disintegrate attention must be called and new behaviors that promote and inspire must be reintegrated into the culture. The pursuit of results above all else can cost relationships, health and wellness, trust, quality and safety.

Inside competitive work cultures, members are often expected to operate in a “win-lose” framework, outperform peers and work against (rather than with) their coworkers. What begins with a healthy race often devolves into unproductive dog-eat-dog internal workplace behavior.

When the once healthy desire to “beat the competition” goes unchecked, very often it creates opportunities for unproductive behavior and ways of thinking that result in an organization eating itself alive. This shows up on the floor by people arguing in win/lose scenarios and fighting for power, control, rewards, promotions and resources. A focal shift from we to me must exist, where siloed and personalized thinking prevail.

Even though the intentions of leaders who want to “win” is well-meaning, a workplace culture that values winning above all else can be fertile ground for destructive behavior and employment erosion.

Commanding and controlling

In power-driven organizations, hierarchy reigns and members of the management team are expected to take charge, control subordinates and yield to the demands of superiors. Historically, this has been the ‘right’ way to lead and for many decades it actually worked. This model is flawed, and those managed under this model atrophy and stagnate. In workplace cultures where this type of behavior is rewarded, the powerful take over and the powerless surrender.

When leaders and team members are expected and even encouraged to power up over others, people in the organization often view themselves as pawns in the micromanagement chess game, or simply as cogs in the profit wheel. They lose motivation and initiative and give less of their discretionary time to make the organization better. Being commanding and controlling is a vicious cycle, and the only way out is to call it out and inspire a new way to lead and a new way to follow.

Opposing others

In oppositional workplace cultures there is often a root of overcoming obstacles that afforded the organization sustainability and success over years. But what often got us here will not get us there; and opposition is one of those elements of culture, much like winning at all costs, that turns the organization against itself. In work cultures where members are expected to be critical, oppose ideas of others and make ‘safe’ decisions, people drop into fear, and suppress their ideas and creativity. Opposition shows up in communication such as, “Yes, but,” “We already tried that and it failed,” “I have been here for years and I know it won’t work,” and “No, because…” While everyone ought to be singing from the same overall hymnal and work together in tolerance and engagement, members of this type of organization spend far too much time navigating personalities and conflict, than collaborating, innovating and solving problems.

Pursuing perfection

In other cases, there are leaders of quality-driven organizations who pride themselves with a commitment to excellence. While that intention may have been initially pure and congruent with the leader’s values, all too often the unconscious underlying behavior that is fostered with this value, is perfection. In a culture of perfection, people do not take risks, they do not try new things, and they almost certainly do not put themselves or their reputation on the line to color outside the lines.

Leaders of many modern organizations often stake their reputations on delivering excellence or superior service. There are not many CEOs who would stand behind sending out sloppy work or delivering code to customers littered with errors; but there is a subtle difference between standing for quality and being in pursuit of perfection.

Perfection, by nature of its definition, leaves very little room for risk-taking and creativity in your organization. When curiosity is stifled and looking good is the primary focus, mistakes are hidden, learning is mitigated and growth is constrained. In an environment where perfection is celebrated and rewarded, conventionality emerges as a safe bet for staying out of the boss’ cross hairs. In a workplace that prioritizes perfectionism, members are expected to conform, follow the rules and make a good impression. However, the byproduct of making a good impression and following the rules is that creativity and risk-taking are thwarted and innovation becomes impossible. Resistance to change becomes a blocker to progress and complacency sets in. While certain roles demand perfection or someone could die, perfection as a culture, limits and constrains what is possible for the organization and the people in it.

Keeping the peace and getting along

Everyone who is anyone in business understands the need to cooperate with others in the workplace and the need for teamwork and collaboration. However, creating a work culture where everyone has to be liked and everyone has to get along with little to no emphasis on performance or results; most often leads to over-the-top consensus building, perceived favoritism, a loss of focus and ambition, inconsistent accountability and a very destructive fear of conflict.

In a work culture where needing approval is a core component of how the organization works, team members are expected to agree with, gain the approval of and be liked by others. In a workplace such as this, disagreements are frowned upon and people are encouraged to go along with the crowd — even when the crowd is prepared to drive off a cliff. When team members fear conflict, even constructive conflict, they are incapable of engaging in debates or openly voicing opinions. The team avoids conflicts, which involve speaking up against bad decisions thus leading to inferior organizational results.

It’s imperative to understand that “keeping the peace” workplace cultures can be an insidious thief of organizational and talent optimization. Keeping the peace has the potential to rob the organization and its people experiencing the highest levels of role fulfillment and satisfaction. When people and the system they operate in does not actively engage in productive ways of being including; constructive conflict, speaking their truth, giving new ideas, and sharing insights of what is not working; they can never really get to real engagement in the workplace.

The five double-edged sword philosophies can sweep the rug out from under your company’s overall mission and set you drastically off track. Shaping constructive culture is about intentionally causing the kind of corporate culture that exemplifies your brand promise. Intentional culture is all about monitoring what you are creating and making necessary shifts along the way to ensure you are accomplishing what you set out to by creating the intentional culture in the first place.

About the author: Magi Graziano is the CEO of KeenAlignment, a speaker, employee recruitment and engagement expert and author of “The Wealth of Talent.” www.KeenAlignment.com

“One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.” An idiom we have all heard many times in reference to a product or material unwanted by some but prized by others. In many cases, bark and other tree products fall in this category. The scope of this article (and series) is to provide an overview of some of the more well-known and perhaps lesser known uses of one of nature’s most valuable and abundant resources — bark. Special emphasis will be made on pine (Pinus sp.) bark, but other bark species will be highlighted, as well. The function, utility and reliance that the horticultural industry has on bark materials is pretty comprehensive. Let’s take a look at some valued aspects of bark and bark products including aesthetics (ornament), soilless substrates, synthetic turf infill, landscape applications, container mulching and fuel sources.

Ornament

Peely, flaky, blocky, ridged, furrowed, stringy, smooth, warty, on and on the adjectives could go to describe the uniqueness and beauty that tree bark can provide to a landscape, forest or specimen planting. Often the highlight of a winter landscape or the focal point of night up-lighting, the use of trees in landscapes specifically for their bark is a long-standing tradition. Highlighting various pine trees, the bark of P. sylvestris (Scots pine) and P. bungeana (lacebark pine) have stunningly colorful bark on mature trees (Fig. 1) and are used as specimens in landscapes across the globe. Not to be forgotten, the mature platy bark of our native P. tadea (loblolly), P. palustris (longleaf), and P. elliottii (slash pine) add incredible texture and boldness to mature landscapes. While other horticulturally prized genera may be more known for their extravagant bark displays, I argue that some members of the genus Pinus can rival any others.

Soilless substrates

The backbone of the horticulture container plant production industry, soilless substrates are one of the advancements that have allowed crop production to be as efficient, economical, and successful as it is today. Not exclusive to the nursery industry, bark materials are used in numerous garden soil or substrate products and applications. The nursery industry can however stake its claim as the originators of bark-based materials as the predominant, and in many cases, sole source of growing material. Dating back to the production of nursery plants in egg and coffee cans, the switch from mineral soil to bark-based substrates was a turning point in the container production world. Fast forward to today and bark substrates remain the dominant player in outdoor container production. On the west coast, Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) bark is utilized while the eastern half of the country rely on pine bark as the primary source of feedstock for substrate production. Large bark yards can be seen across the Southeast where pine trees are prevalent (Fig. 2A). These bark producers source their raw bark from lumber yards, paper mills and other forestry operations. Bark products undergo various processing, handling, aging and formulation steps to create the consistent and functional bark substrates that nursery growers rely on. Growers will often incorporate various additives to their substrates on site at the nursery (Fig. 2B) or rely on the supplier to make these additions prior to shipping. Substrates are often tested for chemical, physical and biological properties to ensure quality control (Fig. 2C). Recent advances in bark engineering (to be thoroughly discussed in future articles) allow substrate producers to create substrates of any air, water, or density parameters a grower could want for any container type or size, irrigation delivery method, production system, etc. (Fig. 2D).

Bark products are also heavily used in greenhouse substrates, as well as consumer soil and soilless products (Fig. 2E). Many professional substrates for floriculture production, vegetable production and more recently Cannabis and small fruit production (blueberries, strawberries, oranges, figs, etc.) are using bark as one of the main constituents with peat moss. The bark in these mixes provides additional airspace porosity and drainage, which is often desired to improve production management strategies and control plant growth. The aforementioned advances in bark engineering and formulation practices now allow specific bark products to be made with specific sizes and properties suitable for orchid production, woody cutting propagation or any other niche production need.

Cork products

Maybe one of the coolest and most versatile tree barks in the world, cork has many functions and attributes. The cork oak (Quercus suber) is a medium-sized evergreen tree native to Southwest Europe and Northwest Africa with 50% of the world’s production (cork plantations) coming from Portugal alone. Cork is produced by the cork cambium in the outer bark of the tree, and is considered a natural and renewable raw material. Beginning at around 25 years of age and for as long as 200 years, cork trees have their bark harvested every 8-10 years (Fig. 3A-D). The harvested cork, as witnessed during a visit to a production facility in Espinho, Portugal, is stored as large slabs outdoors before processing into wine bottle stoppers (Fig. 3E) flooring, cork boards, fishing bobbers or a thousand other products. Waste cork from these primary industries is further processed to make cork granulates (Fig. 3F). This granulated cork can be used to make filters, insulators, clothing materials (shoes, handbags, bowties, etc.). Horticulturally, these granulates have been used as an aggregate in peat-based greenhouse substrates and top-dressing materials (alternative to vermiculite) for seed germination in plug trays. There is also an organic infill product (Corkonut from GreenPlay) used in the synthetic turf industry that use cork granulate as a component in the infill.

Landscape usage

One of the most visible and traditional uses of bark is as landscape mulch materials. Mulch and bark producers make various grades or type of landscape bark-based mulches with the three most common being shredded (double or triple), mini-nuggets, and large nuggets (Fig. 4A). Available as bagged products or in bulk loads, bark mulches can be one of the most decorative options for landscaped areas in both the traditional/original brown color or dyed. Unlike some other mulch materials, bark products do not blow or wash away easily. Bark products degrade rather slowly and add organic matter to the soil once they do decompose (Fig. 4B). Some bark mulches can be applied to landscape planting beds in unique (very specific and strategic) ways as seen in Fig. 4C-D where large bark planks are fitted on the ground in single layers to provide both a patchwork aesthetic look as well as providing the reliable weed control and moisture retention that mulches are known for. It’s a common practice seen in Central America and Europe, but rarely here in the U.S., but one that could be considered and desirable in high-end or well-manicured landscapes and highly visual planting areas.

Other uses

Bark as a container mulch (Fig. 5) is a practice that has gained attention and popularity in the past several years — container surface mulching in both plant production systems as well as post-production retail (consumer) use has increased substantially. In nursery production systems, mulching containers is used as a method of weed control as well as moisture retention. In addition to bark other materials including wood chips, rice hulls, and processed low-value trees have been used for this purpose. A lot of research has been published (and available) outlining the benefits of mulching containers as a weed control practice as well as instructions/guidelines on application methods (timing, depth, etc.). More recent and current research is aimed at quantifying the benefits of these container mulching applications on water retention (decreased substrate evaporative losses) during production and reduction of water stress (drying out) in post-production retail settings. There are wood and bark products specifically made and marketed for sale for these purposes, something I first witnessed in Europe where this practice has been common for many years. Lastly, use of bark nuggets as decorative container mulching is becoming more common (Fig. 5) and a practice adopted by many garden centers to enhance the aesthetic appearance of container shrubs, trees, and indoor plants in containers.

Bark as a fuel source has been common for many decades across the county (and world). While bark can’t compete with fossil fuels for burning efficiency, it has been incinerated on a large scale since the 1970s. When burned pine bark consists of 55-66% volatile matter, 30-50% fixed carbon and 0.25-4.0% ash (depending on bark species, age, etc.). The bark ash (often referred to as bottom ash) from incinerators has been used as additives to garden soils, farmlands and potting soils for decades. Most recently, biomass subsides authorized by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (the 2008 Farm Bill) threatened to increase the price of raw bark and other forestry resources. The resulting Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) was a result of the need to meet alternative fuel usage goals that were outlined in the 2005 Renewable Fuel Standard legislation. The BCAP had the original intent of creating incentives for new clean energy biomass fuel sources including pine bark used to make mulch and substrate/soil products. The proposed $45 subsidy per ton of woody biomass would have more than tripled the price of bark going to the horticultural market at that time. Other biomass materials also mentioned within this program included bamboo, miscanthus, switchgrass, wood sawdusts and fibers, among other forestry and agricultural biomass materials. Fortunately, due to lobbying efforts by many in the horticultural industry bark supply streams intended for horticultural use were exempted from this subsidy program.

Research on bark usage and products (substrates and many others) continues feverishly today around the globe. The reliance that many in the horticultural industry have on bark materials continues to increase as the offerings and value of the materials increase. Our usage of bark products provides an end-use or value-added use to raw materials that may otherwise have little or no purpose in the overall biomass utilization stream associated with the sustainable use of our forest resources, often referred to as cradle-to-cradle. So, while bark may be trash to some it sure does provide benefit and livelihood to many others now and well into the future.

Dr. Brian Jackson is an associate professor and director of the Horticultural Substrates Laboratory at North Carolina State University. Brian_Jackson@ncsu.edu