For years, growing blueberries in pots was primarily associated with the need to compensate for soil limitations. Heavy soils, drainage problems, and inadequate physical conditions drove the adoption of production systems based on substrates.
However, this reality has changed. According to Simón Muñoz, international advisor at CASM Blueberries, pots are now becoming a strategic tool for optimizing agronomic management and gaining greater control over crop development, even in areas with favorable natural conditions.
The consultant notes that the expansion of these systems is a trend that can be observed in virtually all blueberry-producing regions around the world. He points out that even countries such as Peru, known for having extensive areas of sandy soils and excellent conditions for blueberry production, have significantly increased the adoption of pot-grown plantations.
“The use of pots is no longer solely a response to soil limitations. More and more growers are incorporating them as a strategy to exercise greater control over the production unit, that is, the orchard,” he explains.
Control as the main advantage
The growing adoption of pot-based systems is associated with the possibility of achieving greater precision in managing key factors that determine crop productivity. Unlike soil, where many variables are difficult to modify or correct, substrate allows for faster and more efficient interventions.
Muñoz explains that soils can present problems associated with toxicities or imbalances that require long correction periods due to their high buffering capacity. In contrast, substrate constitutes a much smaller and more manageable unit.
“The main advantage of a pot is that it allows production parameters to be managed with much greater precision than soil. The substrate represents a smaller base, where small adjustments in management can have significant impacts on crop development and yield,” he says.
This responsiveness is particularly important in an industry seeking to optimize the use of resources such as water, fertilizers, and labor, while also aiming to improve productivity and fruit quality.
Volume over shape
One of the aspects that often generates debate among growers is the choice of pot type. There are numerous alternatives available on the market that differ in design, color, shape, and capacity. However, based on experience managing different countries and production systems, some of these factors appear to have a much smaller impact than is commonly attributed to them.
According to the advisor, no relevant differences have so far been observed in relation to pot shape, whether square or round, nor in relation to color.
Although he acknowledges that substrate temperature is a variable that deserves further research in the future, trials and observations to date have not shown significant effects on water consumption, substrate degradation, or overall plant performance attributable to these characteristics.
By contrast, one factor does make an important difference: the volume available for root development. “The most relevant effects are associated with pot volume. A larger pot allows the plant to better express its growth potential, while a smaller one limits its development,” he explains.
However, the choice is not as simple as always opting for the largest volume possible. The decision should be part of an integrated production strategy that takes into account yield targets, planting density, and project profitability.
A smaller pot allows growers to increase the number of plants per hectare, while a larger one promotes more vigorous individual plant development. The balance between these two variables will depend on the production goals and specific characteristics of each project.
Thinking long term
In addition to volume, there is another factor that deserves particular attention when selecting a pot: construction quality. For Muñoz, both the manufacturing material and plastic thickness are key aspects that should not be underestimated. The reason is simple: modern blueberry projects are designed to operate over long periods and require tools capable of supporting that lifespan.
“Pots must provide the durability needed to support projects lasting 15 or even 20 years. Ideally, a pot should allow for at least two complete planting cycles, with each cycle expected to last between seven and ten years,” he says.
Along these lines, the initial investment should not be evaluated solely based on acquisition cost, but also by considering its performance over time and its ability to maintain the structural stability of the production system.
