What's new

passive plant killer

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
hey, cactus! i was about to declare you awol! good to hear from you! i don't know if you have kept up with the thread or not, but i have harvested every one so far.

still seeing the results of various media experiments before the switch to 100% coco. love the stuff. i switched before harvesting one based on observing the plants. the coco plants are bigger, more robust plants. obvious difference. i'll harvest the first one in three weeks.

sorry about your plants. i need one transplant per week without fail so i take two first class cuttings every week. as they don't all grow out at the same rate i have multiple choices every week. i throw out a lot of large, fully rooted clones that have gotten larger than about 8".

your design looks good but i would give thought to installing an external standpipe in case of the need to overflow or change the res or to check ec or ph. in your design it should be slightly higher than the float controlled level.

i really like the split ring trick. is the screen glued on too?

there is no way to install that float valve without it being dead center. i like your solution to the problem.

the first plant with no cloth wick, last week's root ball from immediately above, yielded 9.74 oz. It was 90/10 turface/coco. It was switched to the jack's stuff three weeks before.

The jack's hydro formula is doing exactly what they said it would in ro water. They only problem i've had was my fault. The largest plant in the photos below was on my flora nova, calcium nitrate, epsom salts recipe for the first week after transplant as an 8” clone. Then an abrupt switch to jacks, which ph'd at 5.2-5.4 in my ro water. I figured that might be ok so I did not adjust it at all. About a week later I noticed a couple of leaves with slight inter-veinal chlorosis. Looked like a magnesium deficiency. Which is highly unlikely since they put a whopping 6.36% mag in their formula. Which left ph as the culprit. I re-read their instructions and they recommend keeping ph at 6-6.5 with their product. So I added gh's dry ph up, which is potassium chloride and potassium citrate, and brought the ph up to 6. end of problem. Btw, it was the only plant that showed this.

Again, good to hear from you, cactus!

The first plant is the plant discussed above at the end of four weeks, one week fnb and three weeks jack's. Same as large plant from 3-25 and 3-30.

The second is the same as small plant from same dates at end of week three. Jack's only.

The last two are end of weeks two and one, respectively. All jack's.

Hey, turbohead!
 
Last edited:

*mistress*

Member
Veteran
so, the other plants thrived in 5.2 ph?

adjusting to 5.0-5.5 ph + adding nitrogen thru-out seem to = :yes:...
5.7-6.2 used to be target. tried adjust lower for more micronutrients & found much healthier...

maybe just specific cultivar(s)...?...
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
hey, mistress!

yes, just the one plant and only three lower leaves on it, same branch. so the mag reaction may have been a fluke.

within 2 days of introduction the solution went from 5.2 5.4 and then just sat around 5.5-5.7 in most reservoirs. this is without any ph adjustment.

everything looks better at 6-6.2.

i liked the idea that it went to 5.2-5.4 with no adjusters but at this point i think these people at jrpeters have really put some thought into this for the benefit of "small indoor growers".

ph ranges are a weird subject. mr ito at og and gc wrote a very good argument for 5.2 in pure mediumless hydro. some greenhouse tomato growers in turkey using drip through perlite are running 4.2-4.6 and have nice looking plants.

the medium ph of coco fiber is 6.2

i think where you start ph in a hydro solution depends on water, nutrients, and medium ph. some nutrients ph low initially and some ph high. i think if you have a nutrient/medium/water combination that requires you to continuously adjust to keep it right then you should change something.

i didn't adjust ph with the flora nova at all. my recipe went in at 5.8 and by the next day was 6.0 to 6.5 and then just floated back and forth between those numbers.

the jacks commercial dose of 846 ppm is well thought out as my readings in any part of the system will always be slightly lower. well balanced. so far i'm not building up salts and i've got one plant in the 7th week of flower at 865 ppm.

i'm feeding the same mix with the calcium nitrate in flower and veg. i'm not seeing any ill effects on bud development in flower yet and i don't think 150 ppm nitrate is too much N in flower after looking at several popular manufacturers label recommendations.

well, gotta go have a mri. fun.

later on, d9
 

Slimm

Member
Great thread delta - lots of great ideas and info. Great info on top vs bottom watering - I'm convinced that bottom feeding is best, with the exception of early veg for root development.

I am growing in hempies with 70/30 perlite/coco. I use really big chunks of perlite, many chunks are an inch or two across. This medium is great, lots of air and it wicks really well.

As I was researching a new grow style, I looked at everything I could find. Hempies appealed to me due to simplicity. However I think that growth rate can be improved upon. Other than hempies, the only other method that interested me is the Under Current system due to its small reservoir and high DO.

Have you seen the Under Current system? What do you think of a hybrid system with media wicking on the top and fast moving nutrient bath below?
 

*mistress*

Member
Veteran
fnb @ what it settles, in tap (5.8-6.2) for several fictitious garden.

then, maxi-series, w/ ca-nit, k-nit (usualy protekt + florlicious bloom), then make more acid by adjust to 5.0-5.5... using distilled white vinegar, fwiw...

in imagination, tomato tree seem far more lush, gr%%n, non-brittle leaves, large veins, no yellwing, etc...@ later stages (50+)...

maybe different, more greenhouse grade fert, maybe lower ph... but, not over 5.8 again, in fiction:2cents:
Slimm said:
As I was researching a new grow style, I looked at everything I could find. Hempies appealed to me due to simplicity. However I think that growth rate can be improved upon. Other than hempies, the only other method that interested me is the Under Current system due to its small reservoir and high DO.

Have you seen the Under Current system? What do you think of a hybrid system with media wicking on the top and fast moving nutrient bath below?
undercurrent, ok... but not necessary... just work of kru&ty & kbs/kfb crews, re-named... from many moons ago, same as others that say this/that new, when others did several moments ago...
see:
The Krusty Bucket
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=249

delta9nxs do well w/ simple passive hydro. or... partially active hydro;):D

this may also be helpful:
coco+wick+gh flora nova=never dump run-off|pdg’s imaginary/enjoyable garden
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=127112
passive hydro... w/ wicks...

though, also may use 100gal trough, w/ 10 gal containers... 2" solution in trough 24/7... recirulated/air hosed (from old kbs/aero buckets, last cent)... run-off re-used... doable w/out even run-off recirc/aeration... as long as run-off remain >2" & evporate/used by plant in >36hrs, before precipitation/anaerobic maybe come... even they controlled by right ph...

delta9nxs thread... & may have different view...:2cents:

be well delta9nxs...:ying:...
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
Hi, slimm, thank you and welcome!

I really can't comment on the undercurrent systems as I have no experience with them.

I can say that plants don't need a fast moving supply of water to supply o2 needs if those o2 needs are being met by enough atmospheric o2 in the medium. You cannot get more o2 from water than you can get from air because of water's limited holding capacity. Think of water as the o2 middleman. To me it's like you are forcing o2 from an infinite volume container and putting it into a very limited container with little or no reserves.

Again, if you train the plant's roots to extract o2 from water they shape and grow differently than they would in a medium with good air porosity. Both approaches work.

Hi, mistress, just want you to know that the 3 leaves showing chlorosis are turning green again so it looks like the whole thing was ph related. But, i'll probably start using 5.8 as input so the solution can travel up through the upper calcium range on it's way to the mag range.

d9
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
The Edge of Wetness

Just wanted to report that I have dropped the operating level of the veg system to 4” from 4.5” to see the effect. This will give me a 2” difference between the bottom of the grow container and the res level. Using the “controlled water table” to help regulate moisture content in the medium.

Also, I have been playing around with the frequency and duration of the pulsed irrigation. Currently it is running 6 oz's to each plant every 3 hours. As I have plants in weeks 1-6 of growth, it is obvious that I am feeding the medium more than the plants.

Ideal moisture content in coco as stated by an australian greenhouse vegetable grower is when you can grab a handful of coco from the top, squeeze it in your fist, and water shows between your fingers. If you don't get some water it is too dry. Any time you try.

The old saw about letting the medium nearly dry out before watering does not apply to coco. It is a particularly bad practice in coco as several research papers I have just read indicate the salt levels are lowest immediately after watering and highest immediately before watering when the medium is driest.
Regardless of frequency. So, in coco the longer the interval between waterings the higher the rate of salt accumulation. Frequent irrigation mitigates salt accumulation.

I have made adjustments to the feed schedule. At jack's recommended 846 ppm input my ec readings were all going down slowly which means no salt accumulation, which is good but I want to see what they can take. So, i've bumped the jack's to 650 from 630 ppm and the calcium nitrate to 230 ppm from 216. Adding approx 10-15 ppm gh dry ph up gets me an input of just under 900 ppm.

Here is my latest set of readings for the veg system:

4-9
volume tank 876 @ 6.1
control bucket 869 @ 6.1
pump bucket 875 @ 6.1
reservoir #
1- 856 @ 5.9
2- 886 @ 6.0
3- 852 @ 6.2
4- 843 @ 6.1
5- 852 @ 6.1
6- 833 @ 6.0

system average 860 ppm @ 6.07 ph

high 886 ppm
low 833 ppm
spread 53 ppm

I have also been reading a lot about “air pruning” roots. It is a misconception that air pruning produces “more” root mass. Studies indicate about the same dry mass as a plant grown in a conventional pot. But, the general consensus is that air pruning roots results in a healthier, more robust plant. The secondary root growth caused by the root tip pruning is mostly comprised of fine roots that take up o2 and nutrients more efficiently than the larger roots usually found spiraling around the sidewall in a conventional pot.

I have drilled out the lower 6” of the sidewall of one bucket with 5/16” holes spaced to catch roots as they grow by. Now I have to wait 16 weeks to see the result.

Last piece of business. I have finally broken the 10 zip barrier in one of these things. Last week's plant, which was in 90/10 turface/coco with a media wick, produced 10.19.

just a few more shots of plants on the jack's feed including the one with the drilled out side wall. The largest plant is 42” and goes into 12/12 tonight. Six weeks veg.

Later on, d9
 
Last edited:

*mistress*

Member
Veteran
roots like aeration.:joint:
1134Krusty_bucket_construction-thumb.jpg
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
4-18

Well, here we are again. Another week done gone. I added a plant site to the veg area so I can go back to 7 weeks. I really like the maturity the extra week brings.

I've been working on my bloom room all week. Just cleaning up and getting ready to link those containers as I have done with the veggers. I've gone from 3 to 5 k of light (all hortilux) in flower, and re-spaced all lights to 42” centers. Formerly the lights were on 32” centers and the plants were really shoved into each other and the wall to get them away from the lights. Now I can spread them out a little more and let them grow into the center of the room between the lights.

Also, with 3k I had to physically move all plants through different positions in the room to max light potential. I could only get 4 of the 9 plants under the direct influence of 2 lights at any one time. I did this from weeks 4 through 7. So every week every plant had to be moved. I was also turning the plants 1/3 turn every day.

Now, 8 of the 9 are under the influence of 2 lights at all times. I'm not turning them any more, just allowing them to grow to their max potential with one side presented. I will have one plant only getting hit with one light for a week. So, it will be either the first week of stretch or the last week of flower. I don't know which would be more beneficial. Any thoughts?

Last week's plant, 90/10 turface /coco, yielded 8.42 oz's.

I cut another one yesterday, the last one not in 100% coco. Next week we get to see the root ball of the first all coco plant. Should be interesting.

I could not be happier about the jack's professional hydroponic fert, The plant I whacked yesterday spent the last 5 weeks of it's life, weeks 5-9, on jack's at the exact same dose and recipe as I have been using in veg. It produced large, dense, heavy buds the equal of any I have produced before using various gh, botanicare, techniflora, and some other products. No pk boosters, no additives of any kind. Just ro water, jack's, calcium nitrate, and gh dry ph up. Same exact dose in all phases of growth. Clones as 8” transplants go direct to 5 gal buckets at full strength. It is not building up salts. My readings in veg are always lower than the input and in flower I have nine plants that have been on jack's varying lengths of time, one approaching 6 weeks. None of them are showing more than 885 ppm at .5. This stuff seems balanced as far as uptake is concerned. The ratios must be almost dead on correct to have this kind of stability. Oh, and i'm using ¼ strength jacks for cloning now. It's working fine.

Here is my last set of readings in the veg system:

4-17

Volume tank 869 @ 5.8
Control bucket 867 @ 5.8
Pump bucket 868 @ 5.8
Reservoir #
1- 852 @ 5.9
2- 822 @ 6.0
3- 842 @ 5.9
4- 801 @ 6.2
5- 802 @ 6.3
6- 819 @ 6.2
7- 837 @ 6.1

The pulsed irrigation system is performing flawlessly. 6 oz's to each plant every 3 hours. After every watering event I get a slight reverse flow from the reservoirs back to the control bucket. After about an hour all levels have equalized and the line from the volume tank drips steadily into the control bucket for about 2 hours. This indicates the sub-irrigation is still doing most of the work. At 15 seconds per burst the pump only runs a total of 2 minutes per day.

There is some kind of dynamic going on here that the plants really like. I believe it is caused by the combination of sub-irrigation and pulsed irrigation.

First of all a perched water table is not allowed to occur in the medium. This means the excess top irrigation water is traveling right through the medium into the reservoir. Probably cleansing excess salts from the medium and blending them back into the main body of solution as it goes. Keeping the top moist also contributes to salt control and increases the wetted profile. And you know it is moving fresh o2 into the medium and expelling co2 every time it fires. The old plunger effect. The plants show no sign of being over watered.

I have no way of quantifying it without instruments but it makes sense that the point of equilibrium between the downward flow of water (gravitational flow potential) and upward flow (capillary rise) is being moved significantly each time the pulsed irrigation occurs. I think it is one of the factors controlling salt build up.

The root growth in the top of the medium is hard to describe adequately. At the end of six weeks it is so thick that I have a hard time even pushing my finger into the medium. Probably 5-10 lbs of pressure on a bent index finger doesn't penetrate. In coco. That's some thick root structure.

The last three plants introduced into veg have all had the bottom 6” of the sidewall drilled out. The first one is showing root tips through those holes now. Air pruning is happening.


Later, d9
 
C

Carl Carlson

I've been using the Flora series and FloraNova, but for a 25 pound bag at $60, I should switch over when the current bottles are empty.

thanks again for the info. D9.
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
Hi, carl! You'll like the jack's. Very stable and clean. No precipitation when used as directed.

I can't remember another hydro fert where the manufacturer states the product recipe is actually designed for distilled or ro water.

In fact, with this product, jrpeters recommends a water analysis only if you don't have ro water. They are a working lab and do water, tissue, and soil analysis all the time. With tap water and an analysis you'll know exactly how much calcium to add.

We have seen, all over the internet, new growers starting out with some supposedly super duper high performance hydro fert and then watch their crop turn into crap.

It's the water almost every time. Rarely is there an actual deficiency in the nutrient formula.

Ro water, without compensating for the extra calcium and magnesium requirements, is bad. Ro water is not inherently unstable, it just doesn't have much ph buffering ability. It is wholly up to the grower to put something that buffers well into their res. Like calcium nitrate. My ph readings are very stable. I'm adding only 10-15 ppm ph up one time. I never touch it again.

Tap water with an unknown carbonate content is bad if the ferts plus the chemicals in your water don't add up right. Antagonisms and stimulations occur. If you are using tap water and are having problems you should have an analysis done.

An antagonism is a decrease in availability to the plant of a nutrient caused by the action of another nutrient.

A stimulation is an increase in the need for a nutrient by the plant because of the increase of the level of another nutrient.

So, nutrient ratios become very important.

Knowing what is or is not in your water is critical. In my opinion all tap water needs an analysis to allow you to correct your formula. For “small indoor growers”, ro water gives you a dependable known starting point every time. You know exactly what is “not” in your water. Very few commercial greenhouse growers use ro water as it is not cost effective for them. They are growing on such a large scale they can't afford it. Approximately 80% of their water would run to waste using ro water. Instead they have an analysis done on their existing water and get a recommendation for adjusting their formula. An imperfect yet necessary solution.

Let's look at the popular grow store nutes. Without naming any names, they are almost all recipes based on the assumption that the end user has “average” tap water. After all, they are trying to market their product to the greatest number of people.

So, what is “average” tap water? A factory rep for one of the largest companies told me that they considered around 100 ppm at .5 to be average. I don't think that is even close to being a correct assumption. I personally have never had tap water lower than 120 ppm. But I could grow in 120 ppm. When I moved into this place I had a lot of trouble with water as my source is not stable. It is taken from a surface river in heavy limestone country. During the dry season the water is concentrated and I have had readings as high as 360 ppm. During the wet season when the river is flowing fast and there is a lot of surface runoff I get 175-200 ppm sometimes. I can get a different reading every day. A ro filter became mandatory for me. It's really nice to have a nutrient program designed specifically for ro water.

d9
 
C

Carl Carlson

I get incredibly stable tap water and live right around the corner from the body. It's a protected water supply - no fishing, no swimming, etc.

The alkalinity is just about 40 ppm calcium carbonate. The EC is .2. At this location, GH and Canna nutrients have always mixed to a pH of 5.8. It never fails. There is barely any Ca and Mg in the water and a safe, but somewhat annoying amount sodium, so I do add those two.
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
carl, that is great water! 40 ppm is probably usable with jack's at their ro dose for calcium nitrate, 216 ppm. if anything looks funny all you would have to do is back off on the cal-nit a little bit. say 175-200 ppm or so.
 
C

Carl Carlson

my bad D9, the alkalinity is mostly from Sodium Bicarbonate. And the sodium content is roughly 33 ppm

the Ca and Mg content of the water is actually very low at 4 ppm and 1 ppm respectively.
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
then you could probably use their ro formula straight up. no adjusters.

btw, thanks for the ph links. i read that kind of stuff all day long.
 

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
i had to turn off my veg light today and thought i would use the opportunity to get a few shots without the romantic glow from the 1K hortilux.
 
Last edited:

delta9nxs

No Jive Productions
Veteran
the big plant above is going into flower tomorrow at 7 weeks. 6 weeks on the jack's hydroponic formula. all of the other plants you see here have known only jack's.

the first plant with the air pruning holes (#4 above) has roots coming out of every hole and they are pruning off as expected.

last week's plant, the last 90/10 turface/coco plant, was 9.77.

i'll be cutting the first 100% coco plant shortly. rootball porn for you freaks soon.

later, d9
 
Last edited:

turbolaser4528

Active member
Veteran
sick man, looks good.

any reason for choosing this method over say, the hempy? seems like they share some similarities, no?
 

*mistress*

Member
Veteran
delta9nxs said:
the big plant above is going into flower tomorrow at 7 weeks. 6 weeks on the jack's hydroponic formula. all of the other plants you see here have known only jack's.
properly vegged tree!

they fill in whatever space they are put in, once that large
...> = <...:)... & :) :respect:
the first plant with the air pruning holes (#4 above) has roots coming out of every hole and they are pruning off as expected.
noted that the roots that come out of aerated containers dont always 'prune' themselves...

they can push thru the material/container holes & simply remain suspended in air, still white... or, if the push out lower on the container/material, they grow down into the trough/basin...

if encouraged to grow further, outside of the container - they will. as long as the environment is moist/slightly humid.

what is interesting is that when watering is delayed to point where basin is becoming drier, the roots seem to push thru the material more... there constant 1-2" of water in 100+ gal trough, but, if that level goes to ~1/4" or so, then root-tips expose themselves to the open environment. they seem to stay in the container more when medium saturated w/ solution.

in any event, while root tips can/do prune themselves, found that much of the roots (maybe bottom 1/4-1/5 of container) can be trained to continue growing outside of the container, down into a trough/solution basin/reservoir... when they do continue growing in that water, it is w/ structure of dwc (fishbones), not like the growth in the media (coco/perlite)...

this especially good in veg... to encourage this external root growth. can have a 5 gal container, w/ 10 gal of roots coming out of container. if kept moist & slightly aerated (mainly by >80 temp room), they can become quite large root systems...
turbolaser4528 said:
any reason for choosing this method over say, the hempy? seems like they share some similarities, no?
:D...
a 'hempy' bucket is simply a 5gal bucket w/ 1 hole in the side, @~ 2"... the media is generally a soilless mix, or perlite/vermiculite, or coco, or coco/perlite...

basically, passive hydroponics.

not new technique... perlite bag culture w/ tomatoes in greenhouses...some call bato buckets...etc...
just soilless mix, w/ internal res (2") & hand-watered. keep it simple...
end.
delta9nxs said:
"a loaded question", he thought, with an evil grin on his face.
reply coming soon.
:tiphat: :scripture:
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top