Researchers give green thumbs up for treated coconut coir

From the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation.

Some good economic advice for the nursery industry today about the cost effectiveness of using the humble coconut as a source of potting mix.

New research by Agri-Science Queensland shows nursery and cut flower producers can actually grow plants more cost effectively using treated coconut coir potting mix, rather than the less expensive untreated varieties.

Agri-Science Queensland’s Dr Rachael Poulter said the use of coir (fibre made out of coconut husks) as a potting mix by the nursery and cut flower industries was increasing as it was affordable, sustainable, light weight, and retained moisture.

"However, the process of treating coir results in a more expensive final product than the untreated version, so many producers have been favouring untreated coir based on price alone," she said.

"Over the past year, Agri-Science Queensland has put this to the test by researching, for the industry’s wider benefit, the productivity and cost/benefit differences between treated and untreated coir products.

"Funded through Horticulture Australia Limited, the aim of the project was to quantify differences of growth, yield and quality of Gerberas grown in different treated and untreated coir products.

"We found there were significant affects on plant health, growth, yield and quality between those grown in treated and untreated coir.

"Overall, the results showed that when it comes to value for money as well as quality growth performance, treated coconut coir is the best option."

Dr Poulter said a field trial was conducted under protected cropping practices in which three growing media were compared in terms of total productivity and flower quality parameters such as stem length, flower diameter and vase life.

"The coir supplied with no pre-treatment or buffering produced significantly fewer flowers than those grown in a pine bark/coir mix or the pre-treated coir," she said.

"While the pine bark/coir mix produced a greater number of flowers, the flowers generally had shorter length stems than those grown in treated coir."

A cost benefit analysis shows the higher return from better stem length outweighs the increase in stem numbers, giving a cost/benefit ratio of 2.58 for treated coir, 2.49 for untreated coir, and 2.52 for pine bark coir mix, for every single dollar spent.

"While this does not seem a large difference, when considering the number of plants a nursery or flower grower might maintain, there is potential significant cost savings from using treated coir instead of untreated coir," she said.

"Using this cost ratio calculation in the case of a grower maintaining 50,000 plants, the difference in revenue from using treated coir instead of untreated coir could amount to more than $60,000 per annum.

"The main conclusion drawn from this study is that favouring untreated coir products based on price alone is a false economy."

Dr Poulter said further research was recommended to assess the products over a longer time period, and using a wider range of plant species.

"Further research and development into coir products would ensure greater understanding of the importance in choosing the right growing media to meet specific needs," she said.

Agri-Science Queensland acknowledges the support of this project by the Flower Association of Queensland Incorporated, HighSun Express and Jiffy and Florist.

Agri-Science Queensland is part of the Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation.

For more information visit www.deedi.qld.gov.au

Response to 'Coconut Killer' article by Mike Foale

By Mike Foale. 



By way of background I have been a coconut specialist for 52 years having begun to study the palm at the Imperial College of Tropical Agriculture in Trinidad in 1958. My current mission statement is “coconut redemption” indicating my attempt to rescue the reputation of the palm, as a component world-wide of the tropical beach ecosystem and as a source of good food, from its many detractors. I see the activity of Dr Spencer as very unfortunate and am at a loss to detect any authentic reason for his campaign to annihilate the coconut in Australia.


Sincerely, Mike Foale


Honorary Research Consultant (coconut) - University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072


Coconut palms are actually a native species of the Australian tropical coast. They were found, for example, on Russell Island in the Frankland group near Gordonvale in the 1840s, by the survey ship Rattlesnake. Because the White-tailed rat loved to eat nuts that were washed ashore, as did the aboriginal people of Cape York, the palm was not widespread before the European settlers came. It is very much a part of tropical beach flora and, worldwide, contributes to the stability of the beach above the high tide mark. The idea that it is a threat to other native strand flora is nonsense.


I would urge northern shire councils to protect the palms on their beaches as they add an authentic tropical ambience to the environment. Any mosquito breeding would be due entirely to the careless leaving of split nuts by consumers who need to be reminded that any free water comprises such a risk during summer.


Please draw attention in your newspaper to my book "The Coconut Odyssey - the bounteous possibilities of the tree of life". This can be accessed on the internet at http://www.aciar.gov.au/publictions/MN101
 The evolution of the coconut palm is described in that book. For tens of thousands of years coconut has been a principal food for coastal peoples from India through south-east Asia, Indonesia, Philippines, Melanesia and right across the Polynesian islands of the Pacific. It has the potential to become an important food source also in tropical Australia and would be especially valuable for coastal aboriginal communities.


The oil of the coconut alleviates the symptoms of Type 2 diabetes, it is an energy food and also has reduced the onset of dementia in some elderly folk.


It is way too valuable a resource to become the obsession of a misguided "beach protector" who seems not to be aware of the huge role that coconut has played in the human story.

"Coconut Killer"

Scientist wages war on Far North's coconuts - by Daniel Bateman
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
© The Cairns Post

COCONUT palms may be ­symbols of the tropics to many, but a scientist says they are damaging the natural environment and may help spread dengue fever.

Cape Tribulation Tropical Research Station director Dr Hugh Spencer has spent the past six years studying the impact the palms have had on native beach vegetation.

He has found the thin 50-100m line of forest that lies between the reef and rainforest - called the littoral zone - is constantly under siege from coconut palms, which edge out native trees, pounding them into submission by constantly dumping fronds and fruit on them. Coconuts that are left to rot on the ground collect water, providing perfect breeding grounds for the dengue-carrying mosquito.

To prevent the palms from conquering the beachfront at Cape Tribulation, Dr Spencer and a small group of volunteers have been regularly removing juvenile palms the only way they know - by hand.

Where there used to be entire groves, native plants such as pandanus and she-oaks are slowly reclaiming the beach. "We're getting very, very good recruitment of natural vegetation," Dr Spencer said. "We've literally removed thousands of coconuts. We're all volunteers. Nobody gets paid in this place. "It basically means that we are protecting and recovering the most endangered of our forest types."

Cairns Regional Council general manager infrastructure services Ross McKim said the council did not have a policy either. But it did have a duty of care denutting palms to reduce the risk of liability. "Council is aware that the removal of coconut palms can be an emotive issue and actively manage the trees that are featured along the foreshores and parks of the region," Mr McKim said.

"Council undertakes denutting and palm frond removal and manage those trees already in place, rather than remove what trees are currently there. "While we are aware that these plants may not be native to Australia, council appreciates these palms play an important part in creating the tropical feel of the region."

Dr Spencer previously took more direct action to eliminate palms from the beachfront by boring holes in a number of palms and poisoning them. The actions angered other locals, who referred to him as a "coconut killer". Dr Spencer said his relationship with his critics appeared to have simmered. "I kind of get the feeling that there is more of a mood of acceptance that they really are a problem," he said. "I get the feeling that is starting to filter though, but I don't have any proof".  "I'm not having many people getting their knickers in a twist about coconuts being removed any more."

Tell us what you think. Do coconut trees have a place in Far North Queensland? Post a comment or vote in the Cairns Post Poll by following this link: http://www.cairns.com.au/article/2010/03/17/99841_local-news.html

Poster of coconut varieties in Fiji

Red fruit super dwarf Coconut Palm in Tonga

A photo of a red fruit super dwarf coconut palm in Tonga. This type of coconut is very common in Fiji.