Why Use Coco With All These Known Problems?

[LJB]

coco affects ph little to none, ive checked my ph after three weeks of feeding, the run of that is, its spot on the same as it was when i put the nutes in, run the lucas or a modified lucas formula and call it a day, sick of hearing about cation exchange and all this, its all been worked out by experienced growers and we have the nute regimens on theese threads if u just look, i check no ph or run off ec period,im actually able like a normal grower to read my plants by how they look and how heavy the pots are, i just water every day or so and my plants thrive, like i said if u want to have a huge headache u can make one no problem , if u want super easy then buy good coco, skip the rinse, skip the cal mag , run a good nute and enjoy the ease of coco, it doesnt get any easier.

These type of posts always crack me up. The high cation exchange capacity of coco is on your side of the argument that measuring the coco runoff is a useless endeavor. No need to hate on the science of growing because in their own right, experienced growers are scientists.

 

[Mr. Greengenes]

Cool thread, a good read. I have a local friend who's doing straight coco and has had lots of trouble with it. I've suggested he come here for help, but access at his house is limited. I'm an aquarist from way back and have some knowledge about water I could share here. I grew up on the east coast and lived in NYC for some 18 years where the tapwater is as soft as rainwater. Now, I'm out on the southwest coast where the water is quite hard. Generally, hard water is better for both fish and plants. Some fish prefer soft water, but keeping soft water clean is more difficult than with hard. Soft water can't hold as much protein. PH drops when ammonia, nitrates and nitrites build up as the protein breaks down. The Calcium in hard water buffers against PH swings, so hard water can hold more stuff without being 'dirty', so to speak. I often have house plants growing out of my fishtanks, either partly or completely submerged. They do better out here with the hard water. In NYC, plants in the fishtanks sometimes showed deficiencies, but never out here. My friend who is experiminting with coco started out using RO water, but I think I've convinced him to switch to the tap, which I'm sure he'll have less trouble with.

Now, I'm gonna speculate and muse a bit; It seems like the main reason for using RO is to get a low starting PPM just so that exact amounts of nutrients are known. I don't see why one can't take the starting PPM of their local water and just add the PPM's of the nutrient. I don't think that an extra 300ppm of mostly calcium and halide does anything except shift the scale up 300 points. Whatever concentration you have above that 300 is your nutrient concentration. But, I'm talking through my hat here, I'm no hydro guy as y'all know.

Thanks Castelvetro for your exellent contribution. You're my hero for doing coco 'by ear', I wish I could put you together with my struggling friend.

 

[Mr. Greengenes]

Oh yeah, I almost forgot to mention, I convinced my local friend to try putting a biofilter in his res which keeps the water sparkling and shiney. He hasn't had any problems with slime and rootrot since.

 

[LJB]

I have plants exhibiting Zinc deficiency. I have low K and moderate P, per a little soil test kit from the hardware store. This was medium + runoff that was tested.

pH has been quite high. And I've been using very hard well water.

The performance of any plants could be affected by several factors, pH being just one of them. So when measuring a flush with a pH of 5.8 going in, and 24 hours later measuring 7.5 coming out, over the course of three days, something pH-related is in play. That much we could tell, couldn't we? This is after draining the water table.

Also if we assume that the coco's caton exchange has been bound up with Calcium, this system's effect on pH would seem to be minimal. In my mind, that is. I have no data either way.

I'm a little confused by your reply but still think you're confusing the issue. High CEC means the coco retains cations, therefore what does measuring the pH of the runoff tell you? It's painting an incomplete picture. The number is always going to be higher than from a low CEC medium. N, P and even K (although it's a cation) are easily flushed, Ca and Mg are not.

I'm now wondering if maybe my hard well water isn't simply buffering pH up. Calcium carbonate = lime. I was told the system would tend to be very pH stable and that well water would have more trace minerals = good. However maybe this may not have been entirely accurate.

Now this where it really gets confusing.

Buffering the pH of what up?

Were you not previously measuring the pH of the well water mixed with nutrients before you used the solution to feed the plants?

You mention a Zinc deficiency, well this would be caused by watering with a high pH.

 

[LJB]

 

[Miss Blunted]

Botanicare coco works really well with foxfarm chunky perlite. You don't have to rinse botanicare, so that's convenient We use the ionic soil/coco line (h&g next run) and haven't had any issues with coco at all. As a matter of fact, we stumbled over other hydro methods and soil way more than coco.

Best of luck!

 

[LJB]

Cool thread, a good read. I have a local friend who's doing straight coco and has had lots of trouble with it. I've suggested he come here for help, but access at his house is limited. I'm an aquarist from way back and have some knowledge about water I could share here. I grew up on the east coast and lived in NYC for some 18 years where the tapwater is as soft as rainwater. Now, I'm out on the southwest coast where the water is quite hard. Generally, hard water is better for both fish and plants. Some fish prefer soft water, but keeping soft water clean is more difficult than with hard. Soft water can't hold as much protein. PH drops when ammonia, nitrates and nitrites build up as the protein breaks down. The Calcium in hard water buffers against PH swings, so hard water can hold more stuff without being 'dirty', so to speak. I often have house plants growing out of my fishtanks, either partly or completely submerged. They do better out here with the hard water. In NYC, plants in the fishtanks sometimes showed deficiencies, but never out here. My friend who is experiminting with coco started out using RO water, but I think I've convinced him to switch to the tap, which I'm sure he'll have less trouble with.

Now, I'm gonna speculate and muse a bit; It seems like the main reason for using RO is to get a low starting PPM just so that exact amounts of nutrients are known. I don't see why one can't take the starting PPM of their local water and just add the PPM's of the nutrient. I don't think that an extra 300ppm of mostly calcium and halide does anything except shift the scale up 300 points. Whatever concentration you have above that 300 is your nutrient concentration. But, I'm talking through my hat here, I'm no hydro guy as y'all know.

Thanks Castelvetro for your exellent contribution. You're my hero for doing coco 'by ear', I wish I could put you together with my struggling friend.

It's all about pH mgmt. Your friend needs to keep cations balanced in the coco. It's accomplished by knowing the nutrient profile and managing the pH according to it: ph below 5.8 achieves higher Ca uptake and lower Mg uptake, thus reducing the Ca stored in the coco and increasing the Mg. Watering with pH over 5.8 achieves the inverse. Keeping the amounts of Ca and Mg balanced in the coco is the key to heving the best yields and avoiding problems.

 

[humble1]

and flush your coco if the source is questionable.
i almost always flush mine, but i didn't this time and killed off half the plants in a 4kW room...... lesson learned?

 

[rrog]

High CEC means the coco retains cations, therefore what does measuring the pH of the runoff tell you? It's painting an incomplete picture. The number is always going to be higher than from a low CEC medium. N, P and even K (although it's a cation) are easily flushed, Ca and Mg are not.

Wouldn't the coco be completely saturated with the Ca+? That's the preferred cation to bond with. The coco could only hold just so much Ca+ before it's maxed out. After max, it would seem to be rendered inert.


Now this where it really gets confusing.

Buffering the pH of what up?

Calcium Carbonate building up in the medium would tend to act lime lime, and buffer the pH of the medium and runoff up.

Were you not previously measuring the pH of the well water mixed with nutrients before you used the solution to feed the plants?

As I said a while back, no. I have not been measuring the pH. I had some apparently bad advice that the system would be extremely pH stable. Not the case. So now I do all of the things I mentioned in a previous post, including pH the water to 5.5 before adding.

You mention a Zinc deficiency, well this would be caused by watering with a high pH.

... That's the conclusion I came to.

 

[indifferent]

dunno what problems your experiencing ,but i been growing in coco since 1994 and never had any ,,

persevere ,dont treat it like soil ,you'll dial it eventually and u will love it ,it truly is the best medium for growing cannabis

I agree wholeheartedly, never looked back since hazy first persuaded me to try coco.

Recently did a few plants in soil with organics just to try something different.

Took me one grow to realise coco was a far better medium for me, and this pic sums up why.

Two White Rhino cuttings, they were roughly the same size when I put them into flower, the big one is in coco, the little one in soil. They have been fed exactly the same, handwatered daily. You can clearly see the greater nutrient uptake in coco, this will be due to the superior cation-ion exchange properties and superior aeration. It's one thing reading about the advantages of coco, but when you see the superior performance as clearly as this, it's pretty clear it outperforms soil by a good deal in intensive indoor situations.

I bet the coco one is gonna yield 3x as much as the soil one and it will have no less resin, taste or quality.

Cal/mag issues are rare with a quality complete nutrient, never see cal/mag issues with canna nutes for instance. PH is buffered well in coco and with a good nutrient, ph issues are rare, just keep it around 6. I had loads of ph issues with my soil grow and hardly ever see any ph issues at all with coco.

 

[Castelvetro]

rrog did u read my previous post, gh nutes mate.

 

[indifferent]

Yeah, some of what you said i agreed with, some i didn't.

I don't rate GH nutes, they are just basic hydro nutes and lack lots of things I think are essential. I don't agree with what you said about messing with additives, with the Gh nutes there are a load of things you would need to add - there is no humic or fulvic acod for instance, so that's an extra bottle, an while GH Diamond Nectar is okay, there are much better humic/fulvic products on the market same as there are better, more modern nutes.

This is the basis of a killer coco regime imho:

1. Base Nutrient - I prefer Canna Coco A+B, Hesi and H&G are also good. As long as it has a suitable NPK and a full range of chelated trace elements it will work in coco, I've used all kinds of stuff with success, even Tomato Feed.
2. Seaweed Extract - I like Vitax, Maxicrop will also do, plenty of trace elements, aminos, vitamins etc.
3. Humic/Fulvic - my current preference is for DutchMaster Max Bloom as it also has phospholipids giving it an NPK of 0.114-2-3
4. Liquid Silicon - AN Barricade is the most concentrated, I've used several brands with success
5. PK Booster - Canna PK13/14 is good although I find AN Hammerhead gives a little bit more resin.
6. Molasses - enhances flavour, acts as chelating agent, feeds good microbes, has trace elements and a fair bit of K, just fantastic stuff.

To me that is all you need to produce top notch product in coco, handwater daily ensuring at least 15% runoff, keep PH around 6, just don't need to complicate it beyond that. Most feeding guides from manufacturers are a load of crap, I ignore them and use my ec meter. Start at ec.14 or 1.5 and build up till the plant says no more, with some plants you can get as high as ec 2.4 in my experience, while others won't go beyond 1.8.

 

[Castelvetro]

i have no time for all that b.s. read the threads, people are even running maxi crop which is the dry ferts with straight tap n no additives and getting amazing results, that stuff excess n hype, taste comes down to genes and grower know how and a proper flush.trust me gh isnt lacking in anything but grower now how, . good luck.

i do piss in my nutes once in a while and use molasses ocassionly also... the rest is for the birds-

 

[Castelvetro]

These type of posts always crack me up. The high cation exchange capacity of coco is on your side of the argument that measuring the coco runoff is a useless endeavor. No need to hate on the science of growing because in their own right, experienced growers are scientists.

all your science is Is a way of conditioning your eyes to remember whats going on and when through numbers, i do it without the numbers but through experience just the same, i engage the same science as u my friend, and i respect that u do it your way and understand that its a valuable tool for a grower to get into, maybe i will in the future. thanks. be very careful with the word (HATE)... i could never hate u for the way u grow a weed like cannabis or dill. its not that big of a deal to me., i just try to pump my ladies up as much as i can without any burnt tips, my last grow i acheived this to my standards by just reading the plant and its disposition, i think what a newbie can do, (im a super newbie) is use the tools like ph pens n tds meters n such to quantify things and make more use of experience from the get go,and waste less time learing from mistakes, but ive had no need for them so im plenty happy, even from the very first time i grew i never had problems, good luck to u.

scientist=nature quantified through numbers that u read through your brain n relate to what u see already?, beleive me your no scientist because u grow a weed- stay humble n grateful and enjoy mother natures gifts, its a labour of luv not math-good luck.

 

[krunchbubble]

i use h@g nutrients with calmag, silica and a few other goodies. canna coco, no flush, straight out the bag.
i like to let my ph fluctuate. start at about 6.1-6.3 and let it drop till the res is empty, about 4-5 days, ph ends around 5.2-5.6. absolutely no flushing, i use drip clean for salt buildup.
pretty sure my plants are as happy as can be, no lockout, no deficiency and yields are really good.
only reason im posting this is because it seems to be opposite of what the majority is saying here, and i get outstanding results!



--my current grow, spot anything wrong with them?--

 

[indifferent]

i have no time for all that b.s. read the threads, people are even running maxi crop which is the dry ferts with straight tap n no additives and getting amazing results, that stuff excess n hype, taste comes down to genes and grower know how and a proper flush.trust me gh isnt lacking in anything but grower now how, . good luck.

i do piss in my nutes once in a while and use molasses ocassionly also... the rest is for the birds-

Oh dear, I can see you have an attitude problem and it's pointless arguing with you.

Gh bloom and grow nutes have three ingredients in a bottle and two are water and dye. I'd rather buy the raw salts and add my own tap water thankyou very much. Their micro is not bad, but again I could just buy a dry powdered trace element mix for a fraction of the price and add my own water.

All canna nute companies engage in hype, marketing and outright BS, doesn't mean they don't have some good products though. I like different products from different companies for different reasons. I also tend to change products often, depending on what I can get where and for how much.

However my feeding regime and method stays the same, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[Moldy Dreads]

,it truly is the best medium for growing cannabis

This is what I hate about misinformation on the net....

 

[indifferent]

Well hazy has tried every medium and method in a long grow career and that is his strongly held opinion, Can you name a better medium? Urban Garden magazine has an article about coco being the best hydro medium I read recently, I've read loads of other things that make similar conclusions. If there is a better medium than coco, I'd love to know what it is as it must be a closely-guarded secret than not one of the growers i know has been able to discover.

 

[Moldy Dreads]

Well hazy has tried every medium and method in a long grow career and that is his strongly held opinion, Can you name a better medium? Urban Garden magazine has an article about coco being the best hydro medium I read recently, I've read loads of other things that make similar conclusions. If there is a better medium than coco, I'd love to know what it is as it must be a closely-guarded secret than not one of the growers i know has been able to discover.

Many mediums work great for what you want the end product to come out looking, smelling and tasting like...Coco has advantages, and yes offers explosive growth, but so do other mediums. It has to do with grower skill and methods.

I've had great results in many mediums, I just hate when people say one thing is the best, it's clearly a lame generalization. Hidroton, rockwool, soil, coco, they all have advantages and disadvantages...

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

my personal experience agrees with hazy.