bigger yields with guano

[Crazy Composer]

how do you flush a plant that is growing in the ground?

Jeesh, well... all I want to ask is this... What makes one outdoor chem D taste like shit while another turns out to be legendarily good pot?

Also, why has the best outdoor pot been the plants that were never fed, while the ones growing in lots of chicken shit or cow manure tend to taste and burn worse?

See, I respectfully, but COMPLETELY disagree that you can't flush organic mediums with good effect. Now before blind rage at my absolute ignorance sets in on you... let me tell you how I see this.

I think anyone with a clue about the organic process can agree that bacterium, fungi, etc reduce organic matter down to a soluble form that plants eat. Does that not mean there are often unused, soluble nutrients sitting in the soil that the plant has not yet taken up into itself?

In other words... The organic matter is reduced to micro and macro nutrients (N, P, K, Mg, Ca, etc...), and I think it's safe to assume that too much of these elements in soluble form at harvest time will effect the burn and taste of the herb. No?

See... I already know the answers to these questions, I'm just trying to understand why other folks don't seem willing to go as far as to admit this is the truth about organics. A plant eats the same thing, whether organic or chemical hydro... Soluble elements. We can leave too much nutrient in the plant at harvest time with either organics or Chemically grown.

There may be some need to explain my definition of "flushed"... to me this means the soil has been depleted of a food source. In chemically grown gardens flushed means all the given nutes have been used up or flushed away by a systematic overwatering. With organics this means ALL (or nearly all) of the available organic matter in the soil has been consumed by the microherd and delivered in soluble form to the plant. Again... the point is to harvest a plant that is drinking as close to perfect, pure water as possible. A plant drinking pure water is going to consist, mainly, of water and pure, clean plant matter... and the water dehydrates... leaving pure, clean plant matter. On the other hand... if a plant is harvested in organic soil that is still giving off soluble nutrients at harvest time, you ARE harvesting herb with unnecessary, fire retardant elements on board.

I have NEVER... EVER seen a well fed plant taste/smoke better than a flushed plant... (again... "flushed" --to me-- simply means not having access to soluble nutrients). I can ask, 'what's this plant growing in?' and the guy will say, "chicken shit", and I can see that the plant is getting too much nitrogen, and will taste like it's getting too much nitrogen, too.

Of course, it's also possible that this is about relativity... everything's relative. If your best pot experience sucks compared to another guy's best experience... you have a high opinion about pot that sucks compared to the other guy's. No one's fault... and I KNOW this is the case sometimes because several old timers have proudly handed me their weed, saying (or insinuating) it'll be the best I can imagine... only to hack and cough for all the wrong reasons. This WAS the best herb this guy had ever had... he had no better experience with weed, ever... But I would not smoke it, personally. It's all relative, and I wonder how much of the "no need to deplete the soil by harvest" crowd simply haven't seen the quality of weed, on a regular basis, that I expect from my own garden.

I expect people to take this in a matter-of-fact way, as I would. I know there's better weed than mine out there somewhere, but I haven't found it... I've found weed as good as my own, but not yet better. Again, I fully expect and hope there is better out there than my own... But as of now... I'm still waiting to see it. My herb is consistently of this quality not by accident... but because I understand the facts behind what it takes to achieve this highest grade of pot. Chief among the consideration that make for consistently superb pot, that burns well, tastes clean, etc... is THE LACK OF SOLUBLE NUTRIENT IN THE PLANT AT HARVEST TIME. It's not just nutrient, either... a plant eating its nutes will produce plenty of simple sugars/starch, etc... and will also not yellow as completely... meaning the chlorophyll levels won't diminish sufficiently by harvest time.

This argument about senescence is flat, IMO. The argument is that a plant will turn yellow on its own by harvest time because this is what they do naturally. Yes... perhaps if you let a well-fed Afghani go 200 days... it WILL yellow eventually, as it dies. But as long as the plant has access to nitrogen... it seems to keep a dark green, chlorophyll-laden color. So it seems second nature --to me-- that it's up to the cultivator to take control of when the plant has no more access to nutrients. The lack of nutrient access means there are no more dissolved salts and minerals being transported into the plant, and the lack of Nitrogen means the chlorophyll levels will diminish, and the starch and simple sugar content also diminishes. This process can be thought of as a triggered late fall event, orchestrated --purposely-- only by knowledgeable, experienced cannabis cultivators.

So please, someone, explain to us how it's okay to harvest plants with their roots growing in an organic medium that is still feeding the plant soluble nutrients. If someone has a real, sensible answer, I will listen and maybe learn something. But you'll be working against every personal experience I've had on this subject... Let's hear it.

BTW, I find this fun, so don't go getting heated thinking I'm looking to argue non-constructively... I'm certainly not. If I said this to you in person, I'd be smiling and truly trying to understand where you're coming from. cc

 

[happyhi]

i grow in the ground and you don't. if you tried it would cause more harm than good.

thanks, i guess when i did from '73 to '81 i did a lot of harm growing the original haze. whatever

 

[happyhi]

To CComposer: Great reply. I asked lots of questions you gave lots of answers very cool.
when i grew outdoor 35 yrs ago we prepared the soil and cooked it for a couple of months
we then filled very large holes in the ground with the mix, planted our ladies and watered.
never was a bottle of nutes used just water. they stayed in the ground 8 months when completed
the leaves had died off for the most part and a tree of flowers remained. Since all we used was pure water for the duration we would have complied with your method, but how did we know that biological action would stop in the ground to such an extent that it met what you describe is required in terms of nutrient depletion. I'm only suggesting, and i don't know but it seems pretty difficult to measure this nutrient depletion in a large soil growing situation. And seems even harder to imagine that in a large soil grow you could keep the herd from continuing to munch, unless you, as you say have a nute free medium that you add to only when needed.
I am exposed to so many different strains of medicine living in no cal and i have yet to see anything better than what we grew in the 70s. It took four times as long but it was imo better, with more flavor and a better effects, just my O.
I really think things change in a container in terms of this subject, particularly when you've amended ground soil with things like blood and bone meal.
Peace/HH

 

[happyhi]

sanity

sanity

happyhi

The whole 'flushing' deal is based on the hydroponic growing paradigm, i.e. it has ABSOLUTELY no basis in any level of SCIENCE, i.e. it's strictly a 'stoner grow' deal and little else.

As one poster noted that when talking about growing 'dope' that science can't be considered because this is some kind of 'special plant' which dictates that a 'new science' must be applied to understand this 'special process'

Laughable to say the least.



I didn't see your reply until reading the later ones, thanks for the sanity.
i knew i wasn't nuts yet. this is new to me, i just grew it, loved it, care for it but didn't know how it really worked. seemed like common sense always prevailed and worked. i now have very healthy soil thanks to CT's guys brewer, even cured my sick Tea Tree! I suppose you could have a hungry herd which would sort of comply with some of these concepts but i prefer to think that if i provide a very active soil with sufficient food for the soil that the plant will take what it needs and die when it needs. Does this make sense? thanks, HH

 

[maryjohn]

CC, what about the idea that if your soil is not excessively fertile you get better results, plain and simple. Seems that explains Both sides of this discussion.

I think a wrong answer I gave on another thread illustrates this. In response to what kind of soil mj needs, I said highly fertile , but CT guy had a much better answer when he suggested more of a grasslands type soil.

It's a fact though, that when your leaves turn yellow all those nutrients stored are going straight to your buds, which leads me to question what truly makes overfed bud less palatable. Grapes have the same issue. My dad once kicked my ass over feeding a vine.

We know: over "fed" bud is not good
we don't know: why.

Could it be that good bud is a result of stress, nutrient or otherwise? That would explain both the flushing and mutilation approaches, and validate both, while only changing the explanation. You seem a true artist, so who cares if the theory changes? It only exists to explain your success.

 

[jaykush]

thanks, i guess when i did from '73 to '81 i did a lot of harm growing the original haze. whatever

oops it should say could, not would sorry. at my last house i grew in the same spot in the ground for 5 years, used only water and compost tea and would never consider that flushing. what i really meant was if you tried to flush an outdoor( i.e 5 gallon after 5 gallon after 5 gallon of water ) your better off just leaving the plant be rather than possibly killing it.

did you really try and flush your soil back in the 70s?

 

[Crazy Composer]

It's a fact though, that when your leaves turn yellow all those nutrients stored are going straight to your buds

Huh????????????? Jeesh... your understanding of the facts is completely different from mine. I guess you mean that the buds gets the ENERGY reserves... which is sugar. And yes, I guess so... but the point is to deny nutrients long enough to slow the production of sugars down to the lowest common denominator.

As for natural soil types... Pot doesn't grow everywhere, even where it's native... because there are probably as many types of soil as there are types of plants. A burdock plant grows well by my house, but not in the dirt driveway. The dirt driveway grows chamomile, naturally, like crazy... Both are organic soil systems. An organic system should NOT be considered superior for growing cannabis unless it IS superior for growing cannabis. The word organic, alone, does NOT mean it's automatically a better smoke. It takes either a very lucky grower, or a talented grower to harvest the really really good stuff. This is as completely true to me as the fact that I have skin on my body.

 

[bigherb]

Also, why has the best outdoor pot been the plants that were never fed, while the ones growing in lots of chicken shit or cow manure tend to taste and burn worse?

very interesting and ime true
not exactly by choice ive grown a plant in a container used from the yr b4 grow soo no soil amendment n given just plain water n som molasses seem to be the best smoke ive grown n som of the best smoke ive experienced period

1luvbigherb

 

[happyhi]

oops it should say could, not would sorry. at my last house i grew in the same spot in the ground for 5 years, used only water and compost tea and would never consider that flushing. what i really meant was if you tried to flush an outdoor( i.e 5 gallon after 5 gallon after 5 gallon of water ) your better off just leaving the plant be rather than possibly killing it.

did you really try and flush your soil back in the 70s?

Back then the only thing flushing was the toilet!

I don't get it, i have smoked herb from every system of growing and find that
good herb imo is genetically produced not grower produced. i don't know squat about the chemistry but i really enjoying learning about it here. but i do know one thing for sure, the earth is too big to flush! Thou we are collectively doing a good job of making it a toilet!

the method is personal, there is no right way there is only your way
imo. as i've said before, the best i've ever smoked was grown using the
Leave it the fuck alone method, i've returned to it after being duped into
buying bottles of pixy dust! As someone said earlier, MN does the heavy lifting we are just care takers.

can a thoughtful grower get more out of a plant than someone who is
careless, for sure, but even a careless grower blessed with a great genetic
variety will end up with passable herb.

peace/hh

 

[CT Guy]

Okay, I'm going to leave the whole "flavor" argument alone, because I have no experience on that. Here's my dilemma though:

Crazy Composer mentions,
"I think anyone with a clue about the organic process can agree that bacterium, fungi, etc reduce organic matter down to a soluble form that plants eat. Does that not mean there are often unused, soluble nutrients sitting in the soil that the plant has not yet taken up into itself?

In other words... The organic matter is reduced to micro and macro nutrients (N, P, K, Mg, Ca, etc...), and I think it's safe to assume that too much of these elements in soluble form at harvest time will effect the burn and taste of the herb. No?

See... I already know the answers to these questions, I'm just trying to understand why other folks don't seem willing to go as far as to admit this is the truth about organics. A plant eats the same thing, whether organic or chemical hydro... Soluble elements. We can leave too much nutrient in the plant at harvest time with either organics or Chemically grown."

Here's my take on this. Yes, the organisms in the soil break down the organic matter and make the elements in the soil available to the plant. What I think is missing from this argument is that when you use chemical nutes, you're putting on NITRATES in a highly concentrated form. Excess nutrients are not staying in your soil, they're leaching through into the groundwater. When you use organics, the nutrients are "locked up" inside the bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and nematodes. Therefore, how the heck do you "flush" or "remove" the organic matter or soil microbes at the end of the growing cycle? Maybe I'm missing a key point here, but it just doesn't make any sense to me.

If you start out with a good soil, most of your nutrients are already present, slowly being taken in by the soil microbes and excreted to the plant during its life cycle, based primarily on the exudates the plant is releasing. It will change its exudates to adapt for it's needs by promoting certain species of bacteria over others. The plant is in charge.

Sure, a soil will become depleted over time without additions of organic matter and minerals and nutrients (typically topdressing with compost and manure, and other bio-amendments), but not during the length of one grow cycle.

 

[vonforne]

Okay, I'm going to leave the whole "flavor" argument alone, because I have no experience on that. Here's my dilemma though:

Crazy Composer mentions,
"I think anyone with a clue about the organic process can agree that bacterium, fungi, etc reduce organic matter down to a soluble form that plants eat. Does that not mean there are often unused, soluble nutrients sitting in the soil that the plant has not yet taken up into itself?

In other words... The organic matter is reduced to micro and macro nutrients (N, P, K, Mg, Ca, etc...), and I think it's safe to assume that too much of these elements in soluble form at harvest time will effect the burn and taste of the herb. No?

See... I already know the answers to these questions, I'm just trying to understand why other folks don't seem willing to go as far as to admit this is the truth about organics. A plant eats the same thing, whether organic or chemical hydro... Soluble elements. We can leave too much nutrient in the plant at harvest time with either organics or Chemically grown."

Here's my take on this. Yes, the organisms in the soil break down the organic matter and make the elements in the soil available to the plant. What I think is missing from this argument is that when you use chemical nutes, you're putting on NITRATES in a highly concentrated form. Excess nutrients are not staying in your soil, they're leaching through into the groundwater. When you use organics, the nutrients are "locked up" inside the bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and nematodes. Therefore, how the heck do you "flush" or "remove" the organic matter or soil microbes at the end of the growing cycle? Maybe I'm missing a key point here, but it just doesn't make any sense to me.

If you start out with a good soil, most of your nutrients are already present, slowly being taken in by the soil microbes and excreted to the plant during its life cycle, based primarily on the exudates the plant is releasing. It will change its exudates to adapt for it's needs by promoting certain species of bacteria over others. The plant is in charge.

Sure, a soil will become depleted over time without additions of organic matter and minerals and nutrients (typically topdressing with compost and manure, and other bio-amendments), but not during the length of one grow cycle.

So, Tad....in your opinion is my approach correct?

BTW I dd not direct my comments toward you.......YOUR HIGHNESS. LOL

You are saying that the plant has itself in charge. I know from experience that when I reuse my soil that I do not have to amend to complete another grow.....well I always add EWC and Compost for fresh material but leave out the manures. I guess I just answered my own question.

So, I would like your opinion on that please.

V-man

 

[maryjohn]

Huh????????????? Jeesh... your understanding of the facts is completely different from mine. I guess you mean that the buds gets the ENERGY reserves... which is sugar. And yes, I guess so... but the point is to deny nutrients long enough to slow the production of sugars down to the lowest common denominator.

When you diagnose a deficiency, the first thing you look at is whether new or old growth is affected. When older growth is affected, we look to mobile nutrients like N. We know that the plant cannibalizes old growth to make new growth because it is a priority for reproduction and collecting light.

Your budsites are made of flower parts and leaf, and in order to make those structures the nutrients stored in the older leaves are removed. If there are too few resources to make flowers, there are no flowers. You can't get blood from a stone. To make buds you need nutrients, light, and ATP. The fact that buds must be exposed to light is evidence to me of on site production, not tota dependence.

Sometimes I get the impression people believe that buds are made entirely out of pure carbon. Buds aren't green just for our viewing pleasure. Nature does everything for profit.

I'm not sure for certain about the sugars, except to say that a yellow leaf produces little or none. That leaves stored sugars only, and I'm not sure when those run out we certainly are not talking about a sophisticated storage mechanism like a tuber.

 

[maryjohn]

Huh????????????? Jeesh... your understanding of the facts is completely different from mine. I guess you mean that the buds gets the ENERGY reserves... which is sugar. And yes, I guess so... but the point is to deny nutrients long enough to slow the production of sugars down to the lowest common denominator.

edit: cc, do you grow that burdock for food? I have an experiment going with some gobo which is edible burdock. Can't figure out how to get it out of the ground without a hole digger. Just breaks if you pull. Root must be about 2 feet.

Edit: your concept of the microherd relationship to the plant is completely passive. From what i've been reading, this is not so. It's not a miracle grow factory dumping into the rhizosphere, but a complex mix of predation, symbiosis, and competition. But there is nothing wasted and no leaching into the water table in a balanced system. It's the best reason to grow organic and not overapply manures.

When you diagnose a deficiency, the first thing you look at is whether new or old growth is affected. When older growth is affected, we look to mobile nutrients like N. We know that the plant cannibalizes old growth to make new growth because it is a priority for reproduction and collecting light. Taking sugars from a leaf will not turn yellow.

Your budsites are made of flower parts and leaf, and in order to make those structures the nutrients stored in the older leaves are removed. If there are too few resources to make flowers, there are no flowers. You can't get blood from a stone. To make buds you need nutrients, light, and ATP. The fact that buds must be exposed to light is evidence to me of on site production of ATP , not totaL dependence on fan leaves.

Sometimes I get the impression people believe that buds are made entirely out of pure carbon. Buds aren't green just for our viewing pleasure. Nature does everything for profit.

I'm not sure for certain about the sugars, except to say that a yellow leaf produces little or none. That leaves stored sugars only, and I'm not sure when those run out we certainly are not talking about a sophisticated storage mechanism like a tuber.

 

[CT Guy]

So, in your opinion is my approach correct?

BTW I dd not direct my comments toward you.......YOUR HIGHNESS. LOL

You are saying that the plant has itself in charge. I know from experience that when I reuse my soil that I do not have to amend to complete another grow.....well I always add EWC and Compost for fresh material but leave out the manures. I guess I just answered my own question.

So, I would like your opinion on that please.

V-man

V,

You totally answered your own question! Basically, it's not a complete system because you're taking out organic matter when you harvest your crop. Therefore, your additions of EWC and compost will bring the soil back into a balance that is suitable for growing more plants.

You don't need manures, I was just using it as an example. This is why farmers have tilled in cover crops for years.

Again, I don't think good soil can be depleted in a single grow cycle. It takes farmers years before they lose fertility in their soil (without proper soil management).

But, this is just my opinion. I'm sure others feel differently.

 

[Microbeman]

I do not agree with how you conduct yourself in this forum but I do agree with this statement.


BTW long before you came here with your microscope and scientific methods we were working this out for 25 years........ alone.

But I do appreciate the added boost we get from discussing these things with you.

Now I am growing is a closed bed system so we shall put this theory to the test. At the cost of me and my wife smoking our medicine with possible effects from nutrient build up that would effect the taste and the way it burns......we shall see.

And I would not phone OMRI. For what? To buy a fake certification?



Then write us one that is perfect and we shall never need another.....nor another proven method. I would buy it in a New York minute.

Now as far as the Compost tea thread goes........there was very little information to go by then....... that was before all the commercial band wagon jumpers showed up with their NEW found methods and microscopes we were working on that for decades. Just like REZDOG said.
I personally have been growing on and off for 25 years and have experimented with everything......just like this grow. It is the only way to learn for yourself.

But you do have some good concepts now and again that warrant a look into just for curiosity´s sake.

But to be quit honest with you........I would go with my fellow growers first....Jaykush-Crazy Composer, Ver-Rezdog Jackthegrower and so on . Even if their methods are not derived from the scientific world where you live.

Give it your best shot Microman, we are waiting for your answer.

Thanks for your contributions BTW.

V-man

I'm not at home but decided to sign in. I'm unsure what the personal attack is about Vonforne. I've advocated all along that everyone should use what is available and used the science only as an explanation of what is occuring in an organic/natural growing system. I've even advocated making compost tea with a stir stick....hardly scientific.

I just mentioned talking to OMRI researchers to get the skinny on the meaning of NPK in organics, not their opinion on fertilizers or the such. This was very clear and I am put off by your implications otherwise even though you are a mentor. I had also thought you a gentleman.

If you wish to flush your pot, you go right ahead. If you wish to believe you can feed plants, that's your choice. I have also grown for much longer than 25 years and just thought I could help out.

BTW I really did clear my desk of work on your behalf and waited and waited to offer you the help you requested but never heard from you. How is that for conduct?

If anyone else needs/wants my input please contact me through my webpage.

NOTE TO Ecinsomethingorother re Trichoderma: If it recommends you should not use it when growing mushrooms, obviously it is not safe to use with mycorrhizal mushrooms.

Over and out.

www.microbeorganics.com

 

[Microbeman]

Oh sorry, one more indulgence. The Basic Compost Tea Guide was written in 2007, I believe and all the information related to DO2, compost vs manure, etc. has been easily available since 2005 to the best of my recollection.

 

[happyhi]

I for one learned an enormous amount reading microbeman's web page, and appreciate his input as i do everyone who shows up to share something insightful or rant and rave to make us laugh.
Can't we all get a long island iced tea?:

microbeman, or anyone, does a plant take on food organic or synthetic
at the end of the day in the same way? does a plant know the difference?
i understand that they are produced and made available in different ways
but does the plant on a chemistry level know the difference?

peace/ hh

 

[maryjohn]

I thought this could help our conversation. It's from a recent paper and it illustrates the acive role of the plant.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070211200654.htm

Plants import nitrogen in the form of ammonium from the soil. The researchers found that the end portion, or so-called C-terminus, of the protein Arabidopsis ammonium transporter AtAMT1;1, located at the surface of the cell membrane, acts as a switch.
"The terminus is an arm-like feature that physically grabs a neighboring short-chain molecule, binds with it, and changes the shape of itself and its neighbor thereby activating all the pores in the complex," continued Loqué. "The pores can't function without this physical stimulation."
"The rapid chain-reaction among the different pores allows the system to shut down extremely fast and can even memorize previous exposures," noted co-author Wolf Frommer. "Imagine a large animal marking its territory. A sudden flow of ammonia could be toxic to the plant. If it weren't for a rapid-fire shutdown plants could die. The conservation of this feature in the related transporters in bacteria, fungi, plants, and animals suggests that an ancient organism, which was a precursor to all known organisms on Earth, had developed this feature because there was much more ammonia on the early Earth. The ubiquitous presence of this structure in all of the known ammonium transporters suggests that the regulation is still necessary today for all of these organisms--cyanobacteria in the ocean, fungi that grow on grapes and make our wine, plants that provide our food--and even in our kidneys, which excrete nitrogen. We also suspect other different types of transporters will be discovered to work in this way."

 

[mrred]

a corn field will either have tons of nitrogen if it is active, or very little if it is not. Corn is an extremely heavy feeder, so during the season tons of N is added, and after the season is over the soil is very depleted.

The runoff from cornfield can be so bad that babies downriver turn blue. When you hear "blue babies" that's what you're talking bout. The high nitrates in the water cause a condition called methemoglobinemia.

If you stick to the no-till fields, you will be better off. They don't need quite as much (still quite a bit).

here they rotate with soybeans and that puts the n back in the soil, you can really tell it lacks N because ths year the beans are already all yellow

 

[vonforne]

BTW I really did clear my desk of work on your behalf and waited and waited to offer you the help you requested but never heard from you. How is that for conduct?

MM, I have a very large work load here in Germany right now....our work season is very short and time is important. I have very little time for my hobby but try and fit time in now and again. Look at my posting count and notice the large gaps in it.

I did not attack you personally. If it was taken that way I apologize.

At this time I am not flushing and have no drainage. So, to say the least I am listening t what you have stated ad am running this grow accordingly. Notice I took your advice and increased the size of my containers to be twice as much as you stated for a minimal amount of soil to provide a living soil.

And if you read everything I wrote......I did thank you twice for your input and information you bring.

So, I will again just to make sure you see it.

THANK YOU and please remain at our forum and continue your discussions with us. It is just a debate. You do not see the Congrss and the Senate going to their websites and not attending the secessions anymore.....not to my knowledge.

V