Vegan Organics with Professor Matt Rize

[Yankee Grower]

MAP can be used to increase growth of many higher fungi perfecti like shiitake (dunking logs in MAP infused water), shrooms (P.cubensis), etc. MAP is used in agar mixes and nutrient broths (i.e. liquid culture) for P nutrition of P.cubensis and other fruit body producing fungi. However, I am not following your line of reasoning for mentioning Ca, could you elaborate please?

First thought in my post was to combat against soluble P by ensuring a healthy lactobacillus population which can easily be controlled or encouraged. If a healthy all around organics program no need to think about excess P.

Ca, from what I understand, is a very important part of the PM equation. For one calcium deactivates the pectolytic enzymes produced by PM thus halting it's spread dead in it's tracks. You can foliar with Ca and one thing I know that's been used with great success is applying micronized CaC03. The smaller the particles the better and you can get like .06 micron man-made nano precipitates which are also much more even in particle size distribution as compared to something like milled CaCO3 and there you're looking at more like 1 micron particles but also a decent amount well above that to like 5 microns. Best thing is to ensure proper Ca levels from your soil program.

I got some .06 nano precipitated for a friend to play with cause I gave him a 'super' strain of PM from the SF Bay area so a nice test ground to play with some things. Know some details about using low grade micronized CaCO3 and figured the .06 stuff would rock even better. Still when foliar feeding Ca like that it's a treatment and the problem was created elsewhere.

 

[Microbeman]

What I reported concerning increased P correlating to increased PM is not intended as a be all..end all but as an observed contributing factor. One which prompted me to discontinue the use of P except in the form of soft rock phosphate and I noticed no decrease in fruit/flower yield nor quality.

 

[spurr]

What I reported concerning increased P correlating to increased PM is not intended as a be all..end all but as an observed contributing factor. One which prompted me to discontinue the use of P except in the form of soft rock phosphate and I noticed no decrease in fruit/flower yield nor quality.

I too rely solely upon S.R.F. for P when growing organically, well, except for the P provided by fish hydrosolate. I think you are onto something in terms of fungal rich ACT providing sufficient levels of P to the plant (without need of AM fungi) if P rich organic matter (OM) is present. Most papers cite 20-30 ppm of P as sufficient for fast growing plants. That and the citrate exudated from roots and microbes help keep the solublized P from OM in soluble form considering media used in organic media is often mineral rich (from compost, vermicompost, etc.) and often rich in clay.

 

[Yankee Grower]

However, if excess soluble P is a concern then flushing media with water will remove lots of soluble P because they are anions; that might be the easiest and most efficient method. Most media has low AEC (Anion Exchange Capacity) and that is why phosphorous pollution of ground water is a major problem (same for nitrate and nitrites).

Flushing causes problems also like upsetting the medium's microlife so a bit of a double whammy....get rid of the soluble P and piss off the microbeasties at the same time. O2 levels drop when flushing and when watering in general. You could look at things like adjusting solution ORP with H2O2 though...that's what Tom Hill does . When I see peeps flushing hard at the end of flower probably the worst time to be doing that IMO. Just work with the soil critters.

I think the major contributing factor to phosphorous pollution of groundwater is the form of P typically being used which is soluble. Most of it gets washed out. Just encourage the microlife and bind it up. Farmers will end up using less P inputs. One thing I read which was interesting was The Biological Farmer by Gary Zimmer. The info I got about MAP and lactobacillus came from a crop consultant that follows his philosophy. This dude oversees production on over 10,000 acres of crops all over the Northeast quadrant of the US.

 

[Yankee Grower]

I too rely soley upon S.R.F. for P when growing organically, well, except for the P provided by fish hydrosolate.

SRP is technically classified as mine tailings or waste. It comes from settling ponds from hard rock phosphate mining. Maybe try working with Tennessee Brown Phosphate instead...it's a bit different. If the SRP is coming out of Florida then probably high in heavy metals for starters. I'm not with you guys using SRP as a primary P source for organic growing.

 

[Tela]

But where I stand, my veganics is already sold at 4. And it is still vegging

where i live, patients can get it for a donation of 420 a oz. plus tax. closer to 460 or 470 after tax. keep in mind folks that this is in a place where medical cannabis has been legal nearly 15 yrs and in the land of hippies... and they still have trouble keeping it in stock. i rarely get meds from a dispensary and the only reason i consider getting it is cause i know is hasnt been sprayed with any bullshit(avid, floramite, eagle 20,etc.) and it tastes and smells better than anything else on the shelf. heck even the water extracted veganics concentrate dings for 40 a gr...

hey matt. what do you like more about the biocanna vs the general organics vegan line(not including the fish emulsion they sell) vs the biobizz line?

 

[spurr]

Flushing causes problems also like upsetting the medium's microlife so a bit of a double whammy....get rid of the soluble P and piss off the microbeasties at the same time.

I'm not so sure that happens to a degree we need to worry about. I have looked at leachate water from flushing and the numbers of microbes were not high; most bacteria forms biofilm which helps hold them in media and fungi holds onto media via. mycelium/hyphae. Micro and meso fauna are very happy in water, they can swim around, so their numbers are low in leachte water too from my experiments. I am not claiming that is hard and fast rule, only what I have seen in my (limited in number) tests with a microscope.

I know some guy here made an article about flushing pre-harvest claiming flushing looses lots of microbes to leachate water but I did not find that to be the case when using a microscope; and I know he didn't use a microscope, he just made an assumption and called it fact. I for one do not flush pre-harvest, but flushing to remove excess P anions is sound.

MM: have you looked at/counted microbes numbers in leachate water from flushing media?

O2 levels drop when flushing and when watering in general.

That has more to due with the air porosity, water holding capacity, total porosity and Perched Water Table of media than with flushing. If the media is well designed and handled properly (e.g. little intentional compaction and no movement of media like moving pots around and pre-wetting media before filling pots) flushing won't decrease O2 to a degree we need to worry about. In fact, with good media (i.e. sufficient air porosity of > 15%) flushing brings in fresh O2 to the media. And the taller the container (i.e. deeper the media) the greater the % air porosity and reduced % water holding capacity (aka. water-filled porosity).

I have conducted media testes calculating media properties I listed above using "as is" (i.e. wet weight) gravimetric basis; for microbes and roots using "as is" gravimetric basis is best vs. dry weight gravimetric basis or volumetric basis. I tested various depths of media using Coco coir, peat moss, and Cornell peat-light mixes and I found as long as the media is at least 8-10" tall it was not possible to bring air porosity down to anaerobic levels after flushing (i.e. < 10-13% air porosity on a "as is" gravimetric basis).

What that means is as long as the media has air porosity of at least 15%, is deep (at least 10" is ideal) and the media isn't too dense (i.e. high bulk destiny) flushing shouldn't make us worry about reducing O2.

Ideally we want our media after saturation to provide 20-30% (and higher) air porosity, 50-65% water holding capacity (water-filled porosity) and about 75-90% total porosity. If those numbers are meet than flushing won't hurt O2 levels at all because the media will allow water to drain away, which actually *pulls* in fresh O2. The Perched Water Table (PWT) is the other major concern, but as long as the media is at least 8-10" deep the PWT will be low.

You could look at things like adjusting solution ORP with H2O2 though...that's what Tom Hill does . When I see peeps flushing hard at the end of flower probably the worst time to be doing that IMO. Just work with the soil critters.

I think probably a better way to adjust ORP is to water with AEM (Activated Effective Microorganisms) that was fermented under light to induce high levels of Purple Non-Sulfur Bacteria (PnSB). That makes the AEM have higher ORP. Using H2O2 is a very bad idea because it will kill many microbes. I think Tom Hill has a lot to learn about biological organics from what I have read of his posts about media pH, etc.

I think the major contributing factor to phosphorous pollution of groundwater is the form of P typically being used which is soluble. Most of it gets washed out. Just encourage the microlife and bind it up. Farmers will end up using less P inputs.

That's the problem, it gets flushed before microbes can bind it. Better to use soft rock phosphate and let the roots and microbes mineralize the SRF to provide P to plants, thus no chem ferts are needed. In soil there are many more minerals than in peat or coco based media so the soluble P anions gets bound (made insoluble) by Fe, Al, high pH, cold media temps and clay particles. The extreme amount of P (usually as super-phosphate) applied by conventional growers means increased ground water pollution to the nth degree.

One thing I read which was interesting was The Biological Farmer by Gary Zimmer. The info I got about MAP and lactobacillus came from a crop consultant that follows his philosophy. This dude oversees production on over 10,000 acres of crops all over the Northeast quadrant of the US.

Do you have links I could check out? I believe using MAP (or any synthetic fertilizer) in fertigation water with a biographical organic growing paradigm is a fail; there is simply no need.

That said, I am testing the use of chem fets with ACT to grow cannabis, and the effects of adding chem ferts to ACT once it's brewed. I am testing this because many people make claims about chems killing microbes and I want to collect solid data on the effects of various ppms of ionic elements upon microbes. Most microbes can use ions from ferts as food, but most people over do application of chem ferts with organics/microbes which can hinder microbes. YMMV.

 

[spurr]

SRP is technically classified as mine tailings or waste. It comes from settling ponds from hard rock phosphate mining. Maybe try working with Tennessee Brown Phosphate instead...it's a bit different. If the SRP is coming out of Florida then probably high in heavy metals for starters. I'm not with you guys using SRP as a primary P source for organic growing.

There are many mined sources of SRF, it is organic matter and has a long and proven track record. Much SRF comes from middle America and overseas. YMMV.

That said, you do make good points worth considering. What do you use for a primary P source with biological organic growing?

About heavy metals, many microbes can convert various heavy metals into harmless substances; myco-remediation and bacterial-remediation of polluted soil are two examples.

 

[Yankee Grower]

MM: have you looked at/counted microbes numbers in leachate water from flushing media?

That has more to due with the air porosity, water holding capacity, total porosity and Perched Water Table of media than with flushing.

I think probably a better way to adjust ORP is to water with AEM (Activated Effective Microorganisms) that was fermented under light to induce high levels of Purple Non-Sulfur Bacteria (PnSB). That makes the AEM have higher ORP. Using H2O2 is a very bad idea because it will kill many microbes. I think Tom Hill has a lot to learn about biological organics from what I have read of his posts about media pH, etc.

That's the problem, it gets flushed before microbes can bind it. Better to use soft rock phosphate and let the roots and microbes mineralize the SRF to provide P to plants, thus no chem ferts are needed.

Do you have links I could check otu? IMO using MAP (or any synthic fertilizer) in fertigation water with a biographical organic growing paradigm is a fail; there is simply no need. But, YMMV.

Lots of good stuff but mainly due to time can only respond to a few points...

I don't know what the counted numbers in leachate has to do with what I was saying before. Mainly it was the drop in medium O2 levels for a very short period.

In regards to medium characteristics for sure that will change in a soil container with the growth of the root mass and also vary from the top of the container to the bottom. It's not static from the time a growth cycle is started to the time it's finished also so no standard formula can be applied IMO cause the dynamics of the medium will change over time. Outdoors a bit different regarding this.

I'm not familiar with PnSB dom teas to respond intelligently but from what I understand it comes down to ORP values so however to achieve that. You add 'plain' water and ORP value drops and as the medium dries ORP goes up. H2O2 use does work if used properly and I would not be too concerned about short term microlife disturbance cause if the H2O2 whacks some stuff then basically highly available nutes in an O2 rich enviro which are easily uptaken. H2O2 gets reacted out, medium dries, microlife recovers and feeds the plants a bit differently and more 'natural'. From what I understand bacteria are affected more strongly than fungi regarding H2O2 but also recover faster. This is a bit of a manipulation of natural laws. Best I can say is look into the work of the Austrian farmer Siegfried Lubke regarding ORP stuff. Tom has it going on and when he returns get on his case...lol.

One thing I looked at was why plants do better after a thunderstorm and part of that is the N fixation in the atmosphere but another thing, IMO, is the higher concentration of H2O2 in the rainwater and there's some abstracts/research about that out there...natural law actually.

SRP applications in large scale agriculture is not practical and neither is something like bonemeal. MAP works in conjunction with lactobacillus activity and it's the microlife which cooperates and makes it all possible. I doubt you will find references for this and a bit of an industry secret. For sure not what I would consider organic growing just like the use of H2O2 is not but for sure not a fail.

Best I can do right now...

 

[Yankee Grower]

About heavy metals, many microbes can convert various heavy metals into harmless substances; myco-remediation and bacterial-remediation of polluted soil are two examples.

Yeah like there's organic and inorganic forms of arsenic. When I test I'm looking for the inorganic form and don't care too much about the levels for the organic form.

Got nothing I really wanted to get done today...lol.

 

[spurr]

Lots of good stuff but mainly due to time can only respond to a few points...

I don't know what the counted numbers in leachate has to do with what I was saying before. Mainly it was the drop in medium O2 levels for a very short period.

I was referring to what you wrote about flushing out microbes from media when flushing with water. Unless I misunderstood your point? I thought you were stating when one flushed media they also 'wash away' many microbes into the leachate?

In regards to medium characteristics for sure that will change in a soil container with the growth of the root mass...

Sure, but from my trials before and after root growth the air porosity does not drop to a degree that matters, roots can increase air porosity by making larger pores in media that hold air and not water. Likewise, roots can reduce air porosity by reducing pore size in media. From my tests there was only a slight drop in air porosity and sometimes no drop. Likewise with water holding capacity; roots can both increase and decrease % water holding capacity but I didn't see a big difference. I did not conduct enough tests to form a solid opinion, however, from what I have found it's not a big difference either way, of course this depends upon the biomass of roots.

... and also vary from the top of the container to the bottom. It's not static from the time a growth cycle is started to the time it's finished also so no standard formula can be applied IMO cause the dynamics of the medium will change over time. Outdoors a bit different regarding this.

Media below the Perched Water Table will always be anaerobic right after watering, that is why a low PWT is ideal. The media below the PWT has reduced aerobic microbe life until the roots suck up some water, and "evapotranspiration" of H20 from media reduces the Perched Water Table.

I am not sure what you mean by "standard formula", the numbers I provided are what we want all the time, at all stages of growth except seedlings which can use more water in the media crust. That is why we use ranges and not single % figures. When air porosity drops below 10-13% the (majority of) media becomes anaerobic, and when water holding capacity exceeds 65-70% the media also becomes anaerobic.

H2O2 use does work if used properly and I would not be too concerned about short term microlife disturbance cause if the H2O2 whacks some stuff then basically highly available nutes in an O2 rich enviro which are easily uptaken. H2O2 gets reacted out, medium dries, microlife recovers and feeds the plants a bit differently and more 'natural'.

If the air porosity is over 15% on a wet weight gravimetric basis there should be plenty of 02 after watering because 02 is sucked in the media, which should negate the use for H2O2, but YMMV.

From what I understand bacteria are affected more strongly than fungi regarding H2O2 but also recover faster.

I'm not sure about that, I know some fungi perfecti mycelium like P.cubensis can breakdown H2O2 so it does not do much harm as long as it's not overly strong H2O2, i.e. lab grade. I do know H2O2 kills many bacteria and lower fungi, but again, YMMV. Your right there is no hard and fast rule.

Best I can say is look into the work of the Austrian farmer Siegfried Lubke regarding ORP stuff. Tom has it going on and when he returns get on his case...lol.

I am very familiar with the Luebke's of Controlled Microbial Composting (aka Luebke composting). I have spoken with their (at one time) lead man in the US on a few occasions. Steve Diver has written what I consider the best public document about CMC and Luebke method to date[1] (except what can be learned when attending a CMC seminar or reading the Luebke's book).

I have never read of the Luebke's suggesting use of H2O2, I would be really surprised if they did so. They do however use ORP as a means to judge the quality of compost[2], but this seems like a very separate issue than what you are referring to. Please correct me and provide references if I am misunderstanding something.

Here is further reading on rH (Relative Hydrogen Score) found via pH and ORP for AEM, and info about CMC:
(using a pH and ORP meter is an easy method to test rH)

[1] (CMC by Steve Diver) http://www.ibiblio.org/steved/Luebke/Luebke-compost2.html

[2] (ORP and rH info about AEM and ORP info about CMC) http://h-minus-ion.vpinf.com/rH-score-1.html

(CMC by Steve Diver) http://mailman.cloudnet.com/pipermail/compost/2004-February/011737.html
​

One thing I looked at was why plants do better after a thunderstorm and part of that is the N fixation in the atmosphere but another thing, IMO, is the higher concentration of H2O2 in the rainwater and there's some abstracts/research about that out there...natural law actually.

I looked around a little for info to back up the claim that increased h2o2 in rain water due to lightning strikes in a thunderstorm increases plant growth and I found nothing. Admittedly I didn't look really hard (see below). The only source I found was not legit, it's from an Ehow article and un-referenced.

The reason some people claim h2o2 helps plants is by increasing o2 in media, however, if the media is well designed than there is plenty of o2 in the first place. And I am pretty sure the large degree of damage done to microbes from H2o2 totally offsets the possibly slight increase in O2.

Either way, if you use H2o2 and it works for you, great. If you come across those studies you wrote about I would love to read them.

"Evidence for the production of hydrogen peroxide in rainwater by lightning during thunderstorms"
Yuegang Zuo and Yiwei Deng
Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Volume 63, Issues 19-20, October 1999, Pages 3451-3455

"Electrical and chemical consequences of point discharges in a forest during a mist and a thunderstorm"
J-P Borra, R A Roos, D Renard, H Lazar, A Goldman and M Goldman
J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 30 84 (1977)

"How to Use Hydrogen Peroxide in the Garden"
By Phyllis Benson
http://www.ehow.com/how_2364185_use-hydrogen-peroxide-garden.html
​

SRP applications in large scale agriculture is not practical and neither is something like bonemeal. MAP works in conjunction with lactobacillus activity and it's the microlife which cooperates and makes it all possible.

FWIW, SRP (aka Calphos SRP; aka colloidal calcium phosphate) is untreated soft phosphate, it's not from hard rock phosphate like is the case with MAP.

MAP is sourced from hard rock phosphate, so either way with SRP or MAP minerals from the earth are being used. MAP, DAP, etc., accounts for ~90-95% of hard rock phosphate mined from the U.S. So, if your using MAP you still using rock phosphate. It seems you are contributing to hard rock phosphate depletion more so than a person who uses SRP is contributing to the depletion of SRP because SRP is more sustainable and used in lower quantities. It seems to me using SRP in an biological organic farming system means it is more practical than using MAP in the same system or in a conventional farming system.

That said, I agree that neither use of SRP or MAP is sustainable in the short term. The bonus with SRP is application each season is not needed, as is the case with MAP (and sometimes MAP is applied a few times per season). Thus it seems less soft rock phosphate would be used overall vs. hard rock phosphate.

"PHOSPHATE ROCK"
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/phosphate_rock/phospmcs07.pdf

Domestic Production and Use:

Phosphate rock ore was mined by 6 firms at 12 mines in 4 States, and upgraded to an estimated 30.7 million tons of marketable product valued at $852 million, f.o.b. mine. Florida and North Carolina accounted for more than 85% of total domestic output; the remainder was produced in Idaho and Utah. Marketable product refers to beneficiated phosphate rock with a phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) content suitable for phosphoric acid or elemental phosphorus production. More than 95% of the U.S. phosphate rock mined was used to manufacture wet-process phosphoric acid and superphosphoric acid, which were used as intermediate feedstocks in the manufacture of granular and liquid ammonium phosphate fertilizers and animal feed supplements. Approximately 45% of the wet-process phosphoric acid produced was exported in the form of upgraded granular diammonium and monoammonium phosphate (DAP and MAP, respectively) fertilizer, merchant-grade phosphoric acid, and triple superphosphate fertilizer. The balance of the phosphate rock mined was for the manufacture of elemental phosphorus, which was used to produce phosphorus compounds for a variety of food-additive and industrial applications.

"Phosphate Rock"
http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/phosphate_rock/540400.pdf


"Tomatoes: Farm and Garden"
http://www.aglabs.com/newletters/tomatoes.html
​

 

[spurr]

Yeah like there's organic and inorganic forms of arsenic. When I test I'm looking for the inorganic form and don't care too much about the levels for the organic form.

Got nothing I really wanted to get done today...lol.

I too was referring to inorganic forms, such as toxic waste. I am lucky that I work from home and spend many hours in front of the computer per day, so I can multi-task and post here while doing other things I have to do; I didn't mean to drag you into a full day discussion, sorry.

 

[Microbeman]

So much stuff:

The soft rock phosphate I use is mined directly in WA state.

I don't believe that flushing is a great thing for the microbial population in general because not all media is going to be perfectly aggregately structured. For one who understands the porosity contructs of their soil/media sure, if you think/know you need to dump some soluble P okay. I don't side with flushing because most people completely misunderstand its potential function and think they are preventing the plant from uptaking the left-over nutrients. (kinda a throw back to Professor Rosenthal's orange juice or cool-aid flavored marijuana; giggle) I have not examined leachate from flushed pots.

IMO using H202 on your soil or in your digestive tract is insane. The amounts found in rainwater are miniscule compared to what the peroxide groupies are advocating. The lambasting of the myth that it is a productive growing technique is number 3 on my list when my new lab is finished (December/January I hope) It is an oxidizer..right? We want anti-oxidants don't we?
We can say, heck the effects of the H202 are temporary; a few microbes bite the dust, then they come back but what about the effects on the cellular membrane that was not fatal and the potential effects passed down the chain?
Of course I can be wrong...anybody can....but I doubt it. <GRIN>

I think old Luebke would have a fit about the use of peroxide.

If using AEM (PNSBs) as Spurr has suggested, to effect ORP, then one is employing anti-oxidants (as far as I know) rather than opening the free radical box employing H202. I'm definitely not expert on this and I'm justaguy who looks down a microscope tube and reads as much as time and my dwindling brain cells allow so certainly kick me in the head if I'm full of veganics.

 

[Microbeman]

I too was referring to inorganic forms, such as toxic waste. I am lucky that I work from home and spend many hours in front of the computer per day, so I can multi-task and post here while doing other things I have to do; I didn't mean to drag you into a full day discussion, sorry.

Lucky guy Spurr who can type fast. There Rize, now you see jealousy.

 

[MrFista]

Outstanding guys. But this stood out the most for me "so certainly kick me in the head if I'm full of veganics".

On PM and P levels, my only palnt on the section (outdoor) that has PM is planted on top of where some old fish scraps went. About 4 kilos of them 2 years ago. High P perhaps?

I just did a nice amateur experiment with compost. I wanted to kill kikuyu grass and onion flowers so I cut them to the ground, mulched it all on top, added a touch of dolomite, a sprinkle of compost and put a black breathable cover on it. The cover made it get hot as compost in no time.

2 days later the ground underneath is white and completely dominated by fungi. Very fine white threads of it, not mold but the mycelium is very fine. The kikuyu roots are degrading! No idea if the onion flower bulbs are getting eaten as well, one can hope.

Rapidly accelerated the composting process by adding the heat (energy) to it. Might work on winter heaps too though activators are pretty damn good.

 

[Matt Rize]

P during pre-flowering

P during pre-flowering

High P means greater plant stretch (internodal length) and less root growth (root to shoot ratio), along with other potential problems. This is why boosting P during pre-flowering isn't wise IMO.

...This is why I think adding citric acid is wise because it prevents/reduces Fe and media particles from making P anions insoluble.

Two very great things here. Great post. Big up.

On the practical level, for those of us who use bottled/powder food, this means keep using the 'veg' formula for the first one to three weeks (depending on length of flower cycle) into flowering, then begin the transition from 'veg' to 'bloom'. Or use both, meaning don't drop the 'veg' and work you way up to full strength 'bloom'. This can keep your sativas from doing the satty stretch and keep the root mass growing.

And I would like professor spurr's opinion on citric acid sourcing... is purity an issue with common products like pH down? or the citric acid available at health stores?

 

[Matt Rize]

Many similarities between our grows

Many similarities between our grows

I too rely solely upon S.R.F. for P when growing organically, well, except for the P provided by fish hydrosolate. I think you are onto something in terms of fungal rich ACT providing sufficient levels of P to the plant (without need of AM fungi) if P rich organic matter (OM) is present. Most papers cite 20-30 ppm of P as sufficient for fast growing plants. That and the citrate exudated from roots and microbes help keep the solublized P from OM in soluble form considering media used in organic media is often mineral rich (from compost, vermicompost, etc.) and often rich in clay.

This is exactly why I started this thread. I'm not the only one who relies on SRF. OP or not, this thread seems to have brought together some great ideas. Fungal rich ACT, great idea. Thanks again for the contributions.

 

[One Love 731]

Right on Matt, Ive been looking for info on your program for a while. Welcome to ICmag brother. I'm running Kyle's Purple Kush and Strawberry Cough. Ill be watching the thread fur sure, very solid info, thank you. Karma, One Love

 

[Matt Rize]

H2O2, Air and Flushing, Soft Rock Phosphate

H2O2, Air and Flushing, Soft Rock Phosphate

So this is how it goes when I'm at work.

H2O2: Okay, the world is not black and white. Shades of grey. Although the H2O2 fans are certainly advocating the overuse of H2O2, that does not make it a completely use-less garden product. Can we agree on that? I've used H2O2 to keep clones in water for days, and to clean living plant tissue. A splash in 20 gallons can't do much, right? And we CANNOT assume that everyone's soil is 15% this or that, all sorts of gardeners and gardens are on here. If only everyone would set it up correctly from the start... I would be out of a job

Flushing: This relates back the H2O2 in that there are many different gardens out there. "Soil" is a broad term in the indoor container gardening world. And as has been pointed out, flushing is a misunderstood word. For my indoor, mostly peat/coco/bark, flushing simply means not adding food to the water, but that is how my system is designed.

If you are going to add more water than the media wants, you need to do it correctly. As the water percolates through the media, air can be pulled into the dirt as well. There are other factors to consider as well including how root bound your pots are and media source(s).

Soft Rock Phosphate: can't we agree on anything?

Great posts spurr, micro, yank. Run tings, BOOM

 

[Matt Rize]

The "Vegan" Nutes

The "Vegan" Nutes

hey matt. what do you like more about the biocanna vs the general organics vegan line(not including the fish emulsion they sell) vs the biobizz line?

Short answer: the plant extracts that BioCanna uses.

I have all three and am running side by side. BioCanna is the only one registered in Oregon.

I'll bet one of these guys can dig up that link, we've all seen it before.

I personally asked the owner of GH/GO about the organic line and he said the flower formula needs work. Surprisingly frank answer for the industry.