SKU: 2521474019
fish hook hanging plant

fish hook hanging plant Shop 'String of Fishhook Plant - Senecio radicans glauca' Care and Growing Guide

Sale price$18.54 Regular price$20.60
Save 10%

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 13 - Jul 18

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

fish hook hanging plant Shop 'String of Fishhook Plant - Senecio radicans glauca' Care and Growing GuideIntroducing the stunning string of fishhooks, scientifically known as Senecio radicans glauca, which is a trailing succulent variety of the Senecio radicans. The fish hook plant, also known as the blue pickle vine, is a hybrid trailing succulent that belongs to the Asteraceae family and is native to South Africa. The name "string of fish hook" comes from its distinctive appearance, as its leaves resemble tiny fishhooks. This fishhook Senecio plant

Introducing the stunning string of fishhooks, scientifically known as Senecio radicans glauca, which is a trailing succulent variety of the Senecio radicans.

The fish hook plant, also known as the blue pickle vine, is a hybrid trailing succulent that belongs to the Asteraceae family and is native to South Africa. The name "string of fish hook" comes from its distinctive appearance, as its leaves resemble tiny fishhooks. 


This fishhook Senecio plant features long, slender stems that cascade down, making it an excellent choice for hanging baskets or trailing down from shelves.

The stems are covered in small, cylindrical leaves that grow in pairs along the stems.

When the fishhooks plant has the proper growing conditions it grows very quickly and can get up to 32 feet tall. Whether you grow Fishhooks Senecio indoors or out, just make sure you give it room to trail!

The flowers of a string of fishhooks bloom from late summer to winter with daisy-like flowers. These delicate blooms are typically a creamy white or pale-yellow color and appear sporadically. While the Senecio flowers are not the main attraction of this hanging plant, they add a lovely touch when they do appear.

Most sites mix up the string of fishhook and string of bananas plants, but the glauca fishhook differs from the string of bananas (Senecio radicans) by having smaller, cylindrical leaves resembling fishhooks and a bluish-green color, whereas the string of bananas has elongated, banana-shaped leaves and a bright green color. Furthermore, the shape of 'Hooks' is longer and flatter than that of the string of bananas, which is rounded with a plump shape.

The Senecio radicans glauca fish hooks can be propagated from leaf or stem cuttings. This fish hook plant is not frost-hardy and winter-dormant. Avoid placing it directly under ACs, as it may cause leaves to droop. The fish hook plant looks best in hanging baskets as well as pots hung on walls. These can be grown in the driveway too. 

Watering Needs 

Succulents, like the Senecio Fish Hook plant, are excellent at withstanding drought or drought-tolerant fish hook plants. That's because the foliage of these succulent plants has the capacity to store water. Their leaves will explode if the soil is excessively wet or if you give them too much water.

Therefore, you typically only need to let the roots completely dry before watering them again. Watering them before they are completely dry can cause the roots to soak up water, which is bad because they are particularly prone to rotting. When your string of fishhook plants and roots get mushy, you'll recognize that something is wrong. 

If you notice the leaves trimming or wrinkling, this indicates that your Senecio plant needs to be watered. You ought to water these plants once every two weeks or so during the height of their growing season. 

You can dramatically cut back on that in the winter and only do it once a month. It's important to check the moisture level of the soil by sticking your finger about an inch deep into the soil. If it feels dry, it's time to water. If it still feels moist, wait a few more days before watering. 

Light Requirements

The glauca string of fishhooks prefers bright, indirect sunlight. If you are growing his hanging plant indoors it thrives when placed near a window with filtered sunlight or in a well-lit area of your home. Remember to rotate the fish hooks plant occasionally to ensure all sides receive adequate light for even growth.

When outdoors, ensure light shade and full sun indoors. Avoid exposing your fishhook plant to direct sunlight, as it can cause the leaves to burn.

If you notice the leaves stretching or becoming pale, it might indicate that the Senecio plant is not receiving enough light, so you can try moving it to a brighter location. 

Optimal Soil & Fertilizer Needs

The fishhook plant prefers well-draining soil. A good option is a succulent potting mix, which provides the right balance of moisture retention and drainage. You can also create your own potting mix by combining regular potting soil with perlite or pumice to improve drainage.

Planet Desert specializes in succulents and has specialized succulent potting soilGo to soil cactus mix blend 1 gal 4 qt cacti succulent dirt compost growing media that includes an organic substrate with mycorrhizae to help with the growth of a healthy root system to help your string of fishhook Senecios thrive.

When it comes to fertilizing, these fishhook plants don't require heavy feeding. A balanced (5-10-5) natural NPK fertilizer can be applied once a year during the growing season of spring. It's important not to over-fertilize, as this can lead to salt buildup in the soil and damage your fishhook succulent.

If the leaves start turning yellow or the Senecio succulent appears unhealthy, it may be a sign of over-fertilization, so it's best to reduce or stop fertilizing until the Senecio plant recovers.

Hardiness Zones & More 

When growing indoors, they prefer temperatures between 60-80°F during the day and slightly cooler temperatures at night. They become mushy when exposed to chilly temperatures for too long. So, throughout the winter, you should bring the pots indoors. If the air in your home is particularly dry, you can increase humidity by placing a tray of water near the plants or using a humidifier.

For outdoor cultivation, your fishhook plant is generally suitable for USDA hardiness zones 10-12. Like many other succulents, they can withstand heat well, but they can only withstand cold or moisture for a brief period of time.

This fishhook Senecio can adapt to both dry and moderately humid environments. However, they may benefit from slightly higher humidity levels, especially during the drier winter months. 

Remember, these are general guidelines, and it's always best to observe your specific plant's response to its environment and make adjustments accordingly. 

Final Thoughts

Overall, the String of Fishhooks (Senecio radicans glauca) is a fantastic trailing succulent that's perfect for hanging baskets or cascading down shelves. Its unique fishhook-shaped leaves give it a distinctive appearance. This plant loves bright, indirect light, so place it near a window where it can soak up some rays. When it comes to watering, it's best to let the soil dry out between waterings to prevent overwatering. This low-maintenance plant is a great addition to any succulent collection and adds a touch of whimsy to your space.

Give this succulent a try if you're looking for a beautiful plant Senecio radicans glauca - a string of fishhooks to care for! 

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 2521474019

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell fish hook hanging plant

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.7 ★★★★★
Based on 1811 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
J
Verified Purchase
Joe Neal
Cuba, US
★★★★★ 5
Great (excellent) details for the date written
Format: Paperback
NOTE: I toned this version down in 2021 – I was in a bad place when I wrote the original and there were some hostile and entirely inaccurate personal remarks in it. A few tables/charts with a wealth of information have tiny text but most of this was easy enough to read. The photos are poorly produced (at least in the paperback version I reviewed), which is sad given they would be so handy otherwise. This is a classic post-war treatise on the weapons used for ground warfare during World War II by the U.S. Army and as such the Marines. It was first published around 1947 when the war was fresh and doubtlessly numerous technical details were still classified. It was written by a man intimately involved in many design projects. The coverage pretty much explains the breadth. Examples of use are included for some weapons and detailed tables of data for many. He explains references to the "long primer" for the 76-mm gun and the 81-mm mortar T1 extension tube. I am happy to have bought it for that and numerous other details. One thing I missed when I first wrote the original rambling, a bit over the top review back in September 2015 was that the 57mm M1 antitank gun is not mentioned even though it was a key component of Infantry weaponry in 1944-45, sometimes maligned but often quite effective when carefully used as noted in many, many detailed accounts. Perhaps it was skipped because it was a revision of the British 6 pounder and not designed by Barnes men? Yet, it is an example of the issues caused by the pre war budget minders forcing the Army into desperate choices as explained later – and the using arms who decided to adopt it almost at the last minute, late in 1943. Until a weapon is adopted by the Army ammunition cannot be developed – it costs too much money and time to do so. Most of the book is positive and ignores failures, posed from the viewpoint of a proud designer not an actual user. Yet those failures illustrate the issues Ordnance had to deal with during the war. The U.S. invented the bazooka as the 2.36-inch model in 1942 yet the Germans fielded the more powerful 8.8-cm (88mm) model in 1944; and the U.S. did not get the 3.5-inch (90mm) into production-ready state until the war was ended. This was caused by offloading development onto people who went out for a “super rocket launcher” that had no place in the war. All too often, some excited designers did indeed get ahead of themselves when it came to what worked but was a bit too much (and ultimately impractical for the Army at the time). The inability to develop hollow-charge (HEAT) ammo for cannon and howitzers to reach its minimum potential (twice the caliber in penetration or better) was common for all countries including the U.S. The 105mm howitzer round was pretty good and while disparaged by all and sundry even the 75mm howitzer’s shell could (and did) take out medium armor. Barnes refers to the M3 and M5 light tank as "excellent" when the tanker's epithet would have been "tin plated coffin with a pea-shooter". Here we have an issue with comparing numbers such as armor thickness and penetration power of guns to facts; it is common to think they were butchered such as in Africa when in fact they fought well enough, flaws and all. But they were not the weapons the tankers wanted (nor deserved), and thus tanker’s complaints were valid. And, yes, they were not seen as a prime resource for fighting German tanks and hence reverted to recon and infantry support roles. Where they continued to meet and destroy German armor (but also be destroyed). Any German field commander would have loved to have a battalion of M5s on hand chasing down and chewing up U.S. troops; the contribution of the men in the light tanks in Europe in 1944 and 1945 is all too often belittled by the “number nerds” who toss the light tanks off as useless. They were anything but useless. Why were the M10, M18, and M36 designed as “Gun Motor Carriages” and not tanks? Because they were developed for the tank destroyer forces and the very bigoted officers who held the most sway on development wanted them to be nothing but “motorized antitank guns”. If they had been designed as tanks that would have invalidated Tank Destroyer Doctrine immediately. And yet, in the end, the men doing the fighting needed and wanted tanks, so they used them as tanks as much as they could, despite the open roof and lack of internal machine guns. It is claimed the gun motor carriages were cheaper than tanks (a specious argument given price varied by manufacturer and ultimately depended more on quantities produced not some arbitrary raw number) but to produce the gun motor carriages for a specialist role that was neither tank nor artillery (albeit they were used for both) was a costly thing to do. The failure to develop a better light tank in time is not mentioned even though the T7 light tank with a 57-mm gun was ready in mid-1942 and could have been in the field around 1943 (the Armored Forces botched that one). The M24 was a nice tank but too late simply because development came too late because development had been stunted badly by congress and it’s miserly pre-1941 budget. There are errors: The design of the M24 began in 1943, not 1945. The 76-mm gun could hardly penetrate the "...heaviest German tank armor." But it could penetrate a lot of armor and the myth that all German tanks were Tigers and Panthers is one of those fantasies of the war pursued by people who are glorifying the war not understanding it (most German armor was medium or lighter), let alone the myth that they were always met head-on is ridiculous. The 90-mm gun was not optimized for anti-tank use and hence had the same issues with dealing with the frontal armor of the Panther (though it could handle the Tiger) and yet was better at that than many other guns. The tendency to adapt anti-aircraft guns for anti-tank guns was common and is where Germany got its 88s and the 128mm. The U.S. found it did not need a lot of 90mms (the homeland was not threatened and what it produced was enough for its needs); there was never the demand for a higher altitude version and hence nothing like the 8.8cm FLAK 41 was developed which led to the 8.8cm Kwk43 and Pak43s; yet Ordnance built their own versions of hot 90mm for tank use. I missed the boat in my original review failing to detail how the Army’s main issue was the budget provided by Congress and politicians from 1920 through 1940. They starved the Army; the U.S. was peaceful and they had no interest in making it a military country and as such kept the Army small (and starved the air forces and Navy as well but not as badly). This crippled development; while the Soviets started building a modern Army in 1930 complete with investment in tank forces and tank arsenals; the Germans in 1934 or so; and British in 1934 or so; the U.S. politicians did not begin serious spending on the Army until 1941. Before then, the budget was all about “beans, bullets, and bayonets” and of course bodes to wield them. The Army had to struggle with what it had and put to field what was practical not what was best. Thus, for example, the recoilless rifles (used by the Germans in 1940) did not arrive in U.S. use until 1945. And yet a U.S. officer bult the first recoilless rifle to be used way back around 1916. Indeed, a brief little discussion on how the U.S. produced what it did based on budget would have opened many eyes. The Soviets produced so many thousand T34s for example, more than the U.S. – and in the U.S. the budget people were always saying, “You don’t need any more, stop building them!” As mentioned, the number of 90mm AA guns the U.S. produced was not based on manufacturing capacity but because they didn’t need more. Thus - there is a lot of information and many details many people will never have heard before. There are also many missing details concerning the Ordnance Department struggles to get things done in a very brief time frame thanks to how Congress had refused to let them do anything earlier. Dig into that deeper and you might find it nauseating the way people played games that hindered the U.S. Army in its job of helping beat the Germans. And sometimes couldn't put 2 and 2 together to get the right answer. But, they were human after all, and people do make mistakes. In my original review I argued that “If you want a politics free book you will not get it in this once, not unless you shut your eyes and remain ignorant . . .” but that is wrong. If this was a political book, Barnes might have ripped the budget mongers of the 1920s and 1930s a new sphincter for leaving the Army (and U.S. military as a whole) in such a bad situation as they did when war broke out. But, Barnes had more class than I do.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 19, 2015
P
Verified Purchase
Petey K
Belleville, US
★★★★★ 5
Good content, very small print and photos
Format: Paperback
Get a magnifying glass… the print is tiny. They must have made this book to be a large hard cover because both the print and the photos are so small in paperback. Content looks decent. It’s a gift for my grandson who will probably spend more time with the photos than the reading anyway and his eyesight is better than mine. :D
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on December 16, 2025
M
Verified Purchase
Museum Man
Belleville, US
★★★★★ 4
Printing not up to standards.
Format: Paperback
Printing and pics not up to par.I gifted this book to a coworker and he was not as picky as I.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on March 8, 2020
T
Verified Purchase
TDD
Port Orchard, US
★★★★★ 5
Excellent resource
Format: Paperback
Purchased for my teenage son's history research project. Nice compilation, good information and well illustrated.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 29, 2025
D
Verified Purchase
dederose1
Boise, US
★★★★★ 5
Great for history buff
Format: Paperback
My 13 yr old loves learning about history. This should be a book he enjoys.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on December 29, 2023

recommand products