Chlorophyll.
It's not a nutrient.
Completely clueless and complete ignorance are terms you use that suggest hypocrisy.
Champ.
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
University of Guelph paper- Flushing is a myth!
- Thread starter CannaRed
- Start date
Chlorophyll.
It's not a nutrient.
Completely clueless and complete ignorance are terms you use that suggest hypocrisy.
Champ.
Lol precisely my learned friend
Bit above you it seems but the point is yellowing of leaves and flowers has bugger all to do with nutrients and lots to do with chlorophyll breakdown. How we going so far? 
Nutrient mobility and uptake is not what you are speaking of.
You cited a study on chlorophyll.
You seem to be convinced that chlorophyll is all that I was speaking of.
It wasn't.
I pointed out that the paper had nothing to do with nutrient mobility or uptake.
And also the fact that the study itself stated that a multitude of factors were at play.
You cited a study on chlorophyll.
You seem to be convinced that chlorophyll is all that I was speaking of.
It wasn't.
I pointed out that the paper had nothing to do with nutrient mobility or uptake.
And also the fact that the study itself stated that a multitude of factors were at play.
Enjoy your party.
They didn't use any molasses on their coco based growing media during the flush period.
G
Gauss
I love how we have like four or five people who have answered the real questions themselves, admit there is a real-world difference, and have a real preference one way or the other— yet WongFu continues to antagonise people at every single opportunity about laboratory and semantic minutia. Is RIU enrollment closed this week or did we all just get lucky? I'm not usually for calling people out, and now that's it's settled down I don't feel like I'm bandwagoning, but dude's been pissing on the legs of people who contribute serious know-how and people who have valuable random insights alike. In my book that's a troll.
This is a good topic and CannaRed shouldn't have to put up with spiteful crap in his thread just because this one person wants to fly the black flag of dismissal over every single counter-argument they read. His ability to digress and insinuate at length, but not pick up on implications of valid real-world input from others is a deliberate mental double standard which slights people and their interest in sharing information. For any statement contrary to his own he will demand elaboration until the wisdom sharer is at a loss to explain (as is he), and then he insinuates they are wholly mistaken even to disagree with him. It's a sarcastic Socratic method at best, and I fully suspect homie is just simply argumentative and aloof. I know we all have been wondering if he even grows and burns or just reads smart shite on the internet to parrot off when it best suits his ego.
Sorry for throwing shade, but it needed to be said for the sake of the topic. I still encourage everyone to test flushing if they do not do it, and to not get dragged into a cyclical debate for the sake of some stranger on the internet who can't accept not being the biggest bush in the hedge every other post. You gotta grow to know, and he don't know.
This is a good topic and CannaRed shouldn't have to put up with spiteful crap in his thread just because this one person wants to fly the black flag of dismissal over every single counter-argument they read. His ability to digress and insinuate at length, but not pick up on implications of valid real-world input from others is a deliberate mental double standard which slights people and their interest in sharing information. For any statement contrary to his own he will demand elaboration until the wisdom sharer is at a loss to explain (as is he), and then he insinuates they are wholly mistaken even to disagree with him. It's a sarcastic Socratic method at best, and I fully suspect homie is just simply argumentative and aloof. I know we all have been wondering if he even grows and burns or just reads smart shite on the internet to parrot off when it best suits his ego.
Sorry for throwing shade, but it needed to be said for the sake of the topic. I still encourage everyone to test flushing if they do not do it, and to not get dragged into a cyclical debate for the sake of some stranger on the internet who can't accept not being the biggest bush in the hedge every other post. You gotta grow to know, and he don't know.
Contains fulvic acid which acts as a chelator.
just because correlation does not equate to causation it still opens the door to challenge the current paradigm and do local testing and since it is so subjective local testing is most accurate in pairing results to subjective taste
at face value, no not the same
White Beard
Active member
I’m trying to imagine what could be learned from learning to cure thick and broad leaves w/o tops that could be used to improve curing of delicate tops with indifferent leaves....
that they tested nutrient levels in leaves and equated certain levels to certain smoking pleasure
point being there is even consensus in subjectivity
the industry has put much money into studying a legal plant that is combusted
no real other models to base this comparison on
Acannademia
Member
The plants in this study were grown in soil, which has a cation exchange capacity (holds on to nutrients). Doesn't matter if they flushed with water, there would still be some nutes left in the soil.
I suspect there would be significant differences if you flushed for the last week in a hydro setup.
I suspect there would be significant differences if you flushed for the last week in a hydro setup.
I think there are many of us who have learned this over the years. It's not a matter of believing what people say as it is just finding it in your own experience.
Exactly. The first meaning is something growers stop doing once they gain experience. They learn when to stop giving nutes instead of washing out excess, which is a waste of money. The second meaning is more complex because of variables in container size and growth medium, but it's the one that matters. Obviously a plant can run out of nutrients sooner in a smaller container. Also, in a well draining mix with less organic matter. Like tobacco, outdoor cannabis in a well draining sandy soil with no nutrients will produce more 'connoisseur' quality than a loamy forest mix. The forest soil will yield more, but of lower quality.
I prefer the term 'fall foliage' for the colors that are revealed, much like trees in the fall, when the chlorophyll is gone.
The ladies need to be kept happy through and past peak flowering to see these colors. Excess nutrients in the mix won't be used by the plants and they are a source of stress. A small container and ample water makes that long slow descent into scenesense an easier goal for the grower.
I agree Cvh. I think in addition to the moisture and chlorophyll content, there is a genetic factor too. Thinner leafed sativas seem to burn cleaner to me than the leathery leaves of indica dominant plants. It could also be that the longer flowering times of sativas give a wider window for withholding nutrients and so are easier to 'flush', to use that controversial word.
No it doesn’t. Besides this fulvic acid or at least its low molecular weight compounds acts a chelator which acts to make some nutrients more and not less available.
