Figs at last! Figs at last! Oh my god, figs at last!

The black ones are called "Petite negri". The green ones are called "Lattarula". Supposedly, Thomas Jefferson grew Lattarula at Montecello, under the name "White Marseilles". They sound so much better in French!

Usually there are fewer brebas (summer crop) than main crop (fall crop). I am very appreciative of these rich-tasting summer figs. They are delicious and sweet, and richly flavored. I'm glad they don't all ripen at once.

This is the first year that I've had a significant # and large size for Lattarula. I grew it 3 or 4 years in a container- bad move. Then 2 or 3 years in ground. Now it's come into it's own. They're really good.

reliable euphorbias

This red-leafed Euphorbia is great. I don't know the variety name. Each fall I let it dry out, then put it into the garage (nonfreezing) for the winter. Each Spring I say It's dead, but what the heck, I'll sit it outside and see what happens". Sure 'nuf, it always breaks into leaf again and makes for a handsome burgundy-leafed potted shrub. If I forget to water it, no problem, but it appreciates some pampering for better growth.

A more classic appearing Euphorbia splendens, with smaller flowers. I left it in a spare room, forgetting to water for a few months. Once I discovered my crime, I started watering again and here it is. It's not as tame as the other Euphorbia splendens - the stems are more sprawling and twisty. In the full sun, the leaves take on a burgundy coloration, but inside the leaves are greener.

I grew this Euphorbia splendens from cuttings. It's equally tolerant of abuse. In the full sun, the leaf edges take on a red tinge. It's in a freely draining medium, and I water about once a week. I gave it and the others a boost of Miracle-grow, but otherwise they are very low maintenance.

These are green due to their low water use, and because the red-leaf variety can be kept to grow year after year, with no winter maintenance other than sitting dry in the garage. They require little by way of watering. The Euphorbia splendens is easy to grow from cuttings, so makes a great gift that requires no shipping or greenhouse culture.

Bathroom progress report

Not there yet, but getting closer. I can't say that this is the "greenest" bathroom possible, but I'm not the only one calling the shots here so I did the best I could! Is stone a "green" material? I'm not sure. It takes energy to cut, polish, and transport. It isn't baked (like porcelain), it isn't made from petrochemicals (like linoleum), it doesn't make carcinogens (like vinyl). The wainscot is a somewhat soft marble, somewhat rough and irregular, so not as energy intense as perfection. I like the appearance much better than "perfect" stone, it looks more "natural". So at least the THOUGHT of "green" is there. Plus, it's durable, of course, so shouldn't need replacing for a very long time - unlike some other materials. Durablility is a green concept as well.

The light fixtures are glass. The bulbs are fluorescent.

The granite counter top was a remnant, just needed a bit of a trim and polishing. In addition to the 'pseudo-green' aspects of that approach, a "new" granite counter top cost 5 times as much (ouch!). The sink bowl is glass, which seems fairly green to me. The vanity is wood and bamboo, rather than composite materials which put formaldehyde/urea into the air. In its first life, it was a buffet.

You can't see it here, but all of the framing was recycled lumber, taken from this house when I demolished the original bathrooms and a closet. I cut the nails rather than pull them out (too difficult). Many of the studs fit with minimal, and sometimes no, trimming, I just had to use trial and error to see what fit. The drywall is mold-resistant paper-free, to avoid need for replacement due to mold issues that happened with the original bathroom. A ceiling fan will also draw out moisture, unlike the original bathroom.

The light is fluorescent - I tried to go with even more energy efficient LEDS but the ones that I could find were not bright enough. I'll keep trying when these burn out, which I hope won't be for a long time.

Old toilet was 3 gallon, this one is 0.6 gallon, so much less water use.

There will be a cabinet on the wall to the left, free standing, wood and bamboo, matches the vanity.

The framing for the pony wall is also built from recycled 2X4s from demolition of the original bathrooms.

The bedroom wall, with entry into bathroom. At long last, I can finish that as well. That will be me, not the contractor, but the needed work is minimal. A few hours at most. The baseboards are all material I saved when doing demolition of prior bathrooms, so fairly green as well. Can't see it here, but the framing of the main door is also recycled (or is it, repurposed?)

Now just re-mud/spackle, smooth, and maybe get it textured, then paint.

A few Phalaenopsis hybrids

I tend to take Phalaenopsis for granted. There are so many available, all of the time, after a while they tend to blur together. I guess they're just too common. Plus, of ones I have bought so far, I haven't been able to rebloom them. But it's been less than 9 months, and some of the earlier ones are growing new leaves - slowly, like most orchid growth.

That's too bad - they are very nice flowers, very long lasting, and if bought in bloom, don't need a lot of care to be kept in bloom for at least a couple of months.

These are fairly 'standard' looking Phalaenopsis hybrids. I'm not that enthusiastic about the pale-colored ones, but bought them for variety. They've been in bloom for about 2 months. I brought them home when I started my leave of absence, 2 weeks ago.

In most cases, the grocery-store Phalaenopsis appear to be reently potted up from tiny containers, and the up-grade consists of very tightly wrapped sphagnum moss. I find this difficult to water effectively - they either seem to dry and the water just runs through, or they are very soggy and become rancid. My solution is to repot, carefully remove all moss and all original medium that I can without damaging roots and flowers, then repot in bark-based orchid mix. This doesn't seem to hurt the plants, they act as if nothing happened, but the watering is much less challenging.


Another case of evolving taste. Six months ago I didn't like these plum-spotted "Harlequin" Phalaenopsis. now here we are, one in the house. I bought it to cheer the office, but again, brought it home. It's growing on me, I like it now.

Why are they called "orchids"?

With endless diversity of orchids, it's interesting that the name "Orchid" derives from a trait seen by very few members of the genus - that is of the appearance of the tubers of a handful of European terrestrial orchids, such as Orchis mascula, also called the "early purple orchid".

The name is a 'double whammy', just in case someone doesn't get the point. "Orchis" refers to testicle. Then there's the "mascula" species name. From 'The uses and misuses of orchids in medicine", "The Greeks referred to testicles as orchis, and Theophrastus (372–286 BC) named the orchids from that word, as the underground tubers of many European terrestial orchids resemble a pair of testicles. In his Enquiry into Plants, he reported that the orchids had medicinal properties." The article continues, "In the first century AD, Dioscorides, who was a Greek working as a Roman military physician, wrote his De Materia Medica, including two terrestrial orchids. He adopted and promoted the ‘Doctrine of Signatures’ whereby plants were used for medicinal purposes according to their resemblance to parts of the human anatomy, for example by shape or colour. Naturally this led to orchid tubers being used to heal diseases of the testicles, and to stimulate lust. Moreover if given to men as whole fat new tubers this was supposed to produce male progeny, and if the shrivelled old tubers were given to women, this should produce female children.

From wikipedia (as are the illustrations here), regarding the drink "Salep" that is made from ground tubers of Orchis mascula, "The Ancient Romans also used ground orchid bulbs to make drinks, which they called by a number of names, especially satyrion and priapiscus. As the names indicate, they likewise considered it to be a powerful aphrodisiac." also, "Of Salep, Paracelsus the famous toxicologist wrote: "Behold the Satyrion root, is it not formed like the male privy parts? Accordingly magic discovered it and revealed that it can restore a man's virility and passion" The concept that plant parts that resemble human parts, can be used medicinally to treat those human parts, is called "The doctrine of signatures", "a philosophy shared by herbalists from the time of Dioscurides and Galen."It was thought that divine signatures led to information about the plants, so that humanity would be guided to use those plants for medicines.

The flower itself looks rather plain at a distance, but up close has the typical appearance for orchid flowers.

Not only was it thought that orchids could treat "testicular conditions", the speculation was that they derived from animal sexual origins. Again from "The uses and misuses of orchids in medicine", " In the sixteenth century, Hieronymus Tragus (Jerome Bock) (1498–1554) decided that they must arise (owing to their testicular shapes) from the semen of birds and beasts when this fell to the ground. In 1665, Anthanasuis Kircher, in his Mundus Subterraneus, concluded that as bees arose from the carcasses of bulls, bee orchids must arise from the semen of bulls". Wow.


The closely related, and similar appearing, Orchis militaris, is/was used for the same purposes.

It appears to be a close relative, and carries the same genus name. The flower color may be different, although even the "Early purple orchid" appears to come in pink and white.


Quite a lovely flower, up close. Again, even though there is variation, it's obvously an orchid flower with a colorful lip (labellum).

Interestingly, a different type of mimicry does relate to a "birds and bees" situation. The similar orchid, Ophrys apifera, also a European terrestrial orchid, has a flower that male bees find looks so similar to female bees that they try to copulate with the flowers. They derive no nutrition from the flower, no nectar - just the bogus sexuality that the flower offers. The frustrated bee then flies to the next flower, thus transferring pollen as he again attempts copulation with a fake partner, an orchid flower pretending to be his hot date.

This trend of fakery is repeated frequently in the Orchid family, with many species around the globe luring insects into sexual encounters that benefit the plant but not the insect.

This was from wikimedia commons, labeled as "Ophrys fuciflora". I liked the illustration so included it here.

In medicine, the same words are still used today. "cryptorchidism" refers to undescended, and therefore hidden, testicle. "Orchiectomy" refers to removal of a testicle.

So, bottom line, is that when we speak of "Orchids" we are speaking of plants that are related to plants that had tubers that ancients thought looked like testicles. That's even though very few orchid species have tubers at all, and even though the properties of the tubers had nothing to do with human virility or reproduction.