This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Specific Replant Disease



Dave Amorde wrote:

> Scientists have tried for years to identify some organism that might cause
> such a condition without success. Think about this logically for a moment -
> when you plant a new rose in an old rose hole, why did you remove the old
> rose? usually this happens because the plant was not performing well. If the
> old plant doesn't perform well, but you do nothing to improve the soil
> before replacing it, do you really think the new one is going to do any
> better?
>   The important thing to remember is that there is no organism or plant
> hormone in the soil that causes these problems - all the soil needs is some
> organic matter and fertilizer, and possibly a good flushing with water if
> salt buildup is a problem. Specific Replant Disease is neither a soil borne
> organism nor a hormone released by the previous plants roots. If your soil
> is well maintained, you shouldn't have to "remove" anything in order to
> replant.
>
> Dave

I'm no rose expert, but I have in the past planted roses in the same hole I took
another one out of (winter killed hybrid teas- good riddance to bad rubbish) and
dropped a new plant in the same hole without doing more than adding a good
helping of compost.  The roses have done fine for me.  After all, when "they"
tell you to dig out a lot of earth around where you had the rose and replace it
with new soil, what are you doing but replenishing nutrients.  There is no proof
that roses emit growth inhibitors from their roots the way black walnuts do.  No
doubt if your rose expired due to some contagious virus, it would be a good idea
not to plant another rose anywhere near it's orginal location for a number of
years.  But if there is no reason to suspect a contagious disease there's no
reason not to plant there.

Bob Campbell
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index