Seems a more scientific test would be to simply pour equal amounts of water into each pot and measure the amount that drains out. Too many factors in the test mentioned to draw conclusions.Interesting article here on crocking pots
But a study by consumer magazine Which? suggests it's a myth. Researchers planted 40 pots each with five "Million bells trailing yellow" - a flowering plant prone to root rot in saturated soils. Permutations involved plastic pot, and terracotta pot, and with either saucers or no saucers. Half got crocks, half did not. The plants were recorded for "vigour and flowering impact". The magazine found that the crocks "made no difference to how well our plants did".
You might think that the bigger gaps where soil meets bits of broken crockery would allow more water to filter through. But this turns out not to be the case, some argue. Guy Barter, chief horticultural adviser at the RHS, says a crock is actually likely to worsen drainage by creating a block. It's better to have a layer of sand underneath soil that will allow water to drain into it and later be sucked up by roots if needed. The only minor points in favour of crocks are that they might block drainage in hot weather, and also save money on compost. In most cases, people would be better off omitting them, he says.
The all point is how the plants in the pots perform most are against crocking now like this itemSeems a more scientific test would be to simply pour equal amounts of water into each pot and measure the amount that drains out. Too many factors in the test mentioned to draw conclusions.
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.