While I am a great fan of the ancient art of debate, I don't think there is need to argue here. This year I didn't use the fridge (because of unacceptable losses for me) and I didn't use the outdoors (because it gets too cold where I live). So, I did the windowsill this year, and my plants came out of it in really great shape, no fungus and more vigorous than with my other attempts. Am I saying this is the only way to do dormancy? No. What I am suggesting is that perhaps lighting plays more of a role in a dormant VFT than the current paradigm suggests. It would be interesting to do a scientific experiment to see if there is any actual difference.
-Hermes.
Well it makes sense that "some light" would be better than "no light" for VFT dormancy..
and "open, airy and uncovered" is better than "in a plastic bag, or buried under two feet of leaves or mulch"..thats just logical..
the BEST possibly dormancy method is..outside in coastal North Carolina! not covered at all.
or a nearly identical climate..
but the point of this entire debate is simply "not everyone is that lucky"..
if you live in zone 7 or 8 of the SE USA, or along the Pacific coast, then maybe you are lucky enough to have that climate and you can leave your plants outdoors in the winter sun, uncovered...if so, thats the most ideal dormancy method of all..
But many of us *must* do the fridge method, or bury deep in an outdoor bog with heavy mulch, (which equals pitch dark, and some risk of mold)..simply because we dont live in those ideal climates..
some people still have difficulty understanding that it seems..I have no idea why..
but thats really why the fridge method exists in the first place..
Sure, im the first to agree that winter light is better than no winter light..
and uncovered is better than covered..
IF you can also achieve temps of 35-55 degrees while your plants are enjoying that winter light..thats the clincher for most of us..light isnt the problem, its the temp..
Scot