-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Tutorial Organics for Beginners
- Thread starter BurnOne
- Start date
analogcricket
Member
im confused on how much amendments i need... i figured out i wanted to use the following to amend my soil following lc mix#2
1/2cup dolomite lime
3/4cup greensand, gypsum, azomite, oyster shells, soft rock phosphate
if i had 1000gallons of soil. how much lbs of each amendments would i need of these per cubic foot of soil?
1/2cup dolomite lime
3/4cup greensand, gypsum, azomite, oyster shells, soft rock phosphate
if i had 1000gallons of soil. how much lbs of each amendments would i need of these per cubic foot of soil?
I'm not sure how to explain it any differently - but I'll try.
You asked - originally:
Then you stated:
Well, LC #2 says:
Sooooo....
Given the above data - you wanted to know how much lime to use for 3,000 gallons of LC#2.
Since the LC#2 gives a ratio to use for a cubic ft. as well, we are going to use that figure.
1 cubic foot of soil is equal to 6.4285 gallons.
This number (6.4285) can thus be used as a conversion factor to show us how many cubic feet are in 3,000 gallons.
I wanted a smaller decimal to work with so I rounded the number up to the nearst one hundreth of a part. The number 8 in the thousandths place is greater than 5 and as per the mathematical rule, I should round the 2 in the hundreths place to 3.
This gave me 1 cubic foot = 6.43 dry gallons (dry gallons such as soil are measured differently than liquid)
I then converted 3,000 gallons of LC#2 into how many cubic foot of LC#2 that is by using division.
3,000 gal LC#2 / 6.43 gal per cubic foot = 466.562986 cubic feet
I again only wanted to work with a number represented to the hundreths - so I rounded the number down to 466.56. Given there is a 9 in the ten thousandths place, I round the 2 in the thousandths place up to 3. But given that 3 is still smaller than 5, I can still safely round the full number down to 466.56.
Since LC#2 calls for 1 cup of dolomite per cubic foot - and I now know that 3,000 galllons is 466.56 cubic feet - I know that I need 466.56 cups of dolomite limestone.
In order to save time and not have to scoop out 466.56 cups of limestone, it became relevant to know how much 1 cup of limestone weighs.
Since I happen to know that 1 cup of limestone weighs 0.73 lbs - I can then figure out how much 466.56 cups of limestone would weigh by using multiplication.
466.56 cups x 0.73 lbs (weight of a single cup) = 340.5888 lbs.
Keeping consistent with using numbers only to the hundredths place, and since 8 is greater than 5, I rounded up to 340.59 lbs.
From this, I can accurately state if I was to follow LC#2 at the exact ratios provided of 1 cup per cubic foot, I would need to add, 340.59 lbs of lime to 3,000 gallons of LC#2.
------
You then asked:
To answer that question in terms of limestone:
Since we already know that 1 cup of limestone weighs 0.73 lbs...
And LC#2 calls for 1 cup per cubic foot - you would need 0.73 lbs of limestone per cubic foot.
Since your original question was 3,000 gallons and 1,000 gallons is 1/3 that amount, we can take the previous amount of limestone needed for 3,000 lbs of LC#2 and simply divide by 3.
340.59 divided by 3 gives us our answer.
340.59 lbs / 3 = 113.53 lbs
If you making 1,000 lbs of LC#2, you would need 113.53 lbs of limestone.
--------
If you are reading carefully, you will notice that LC#2 is a SOIL-LESS mix - meaning it is has no actual soil in it. You are using a peat based medium if you are using LC#2.
dank.Frank
Last edited:
To address the question regarding the rest of the amendments...
Buy a bag - take the amount you need per cubic foot and put it on a scale, to get an accurate measurement of the weight.
So if you wanted to add 3/4c kelp meal per cubic ft - then weigh 3/4c kelp meal.
1 cuibc ft = 6.43 galllons
1,000 gallons / 6.43 = 155.52 cu ft.
Then all you need to do is multiply the weight of 3/4c kelp meal x 155.52 to figure out lbs to add to 1,000 gallons...
dank.Frank
Buy a bag - take the amount you need per cubic foot and put it on a scale, to get an accurate measurement of the weight.
So if you wanted to add 3/4c kelp meal per cubic ft - then weigh 3/4c kelp meal.
1 cuibc ft = 6.43 galllons
1,000 gallons / 6.43 = 155.52 cu ft.
Then all you need to do is multiply the weight of 3/4c kelp meal x 155.52 to figure out lbs to add to 1,000 gallons...
dank.Frank
Last edited:
For example - you said you wanted to add 3/4c of rock phosphate per cu ft
1 cup of rock phosphate = 0.92 lbs
Divide by 4 to get the weight of a 1/4c = 0.23 lbs per 1/4c
0.23 x 3 = 0.69 lbs per 3/4c
Since you would add 0.69 lbs per cubic foot...as that is the weight of 3/4c you can figure the weight for total amount
0.69 lbs per cu ft x 155.52 cu ft = 107.31 lbs per 1,000g
dank.Frank
1 cup of rock phosphate = 0.92 lbs
Divide by 4 to get the weight of a 1/4c = 0.23 lbs per 1/4c
0.23 x 3 = 0.69 lbs per 3/4c
Since you would add 0.69 lbs per cubic foot...as that is the weight of 3/4c you can figure the weight for total amount
0.69 lbs per cu ft x 155.52 cu ft = 107.31 lbs per 1,000g
dank.Frank
What are SST's?
Seed sprout teas. Full of enzymes.
LOL - Thanks for the nod, Burn1 - I just want people to grow better medicine. 
redclover - if you are doing seed soak teas...
I suppose if you have the notion that using something that is "full of enzymes" is of benefit - then you should have an understanding of what specific enzymes are being extracted from the seed you are soaking and in what concentration. It also helps to know how those enzymes act within the plant normally and learning what is taking place (being regulated) within the plant when those levels are in flux naturally. That will give you a better understanding of what impact introducing more enzymes as a stimuli will have...
From my understanding of such practices, "sst" in general, are primarily used to influence hormone levels or essentially utilized as organic plant growth regulators, but they are not really implemented for the purpose of nutrional provision.
If you plants are fading before you want them to - perhaps you should try a stronger amendment / fertilizer application - ie slightly increasing the ratios of what ever you are currently utilizing as nutritional sources or try utitlizing teas in the 3rd and 5th weeks...
dank.Frank
redclover - if you are doing seed soak teas...
I suppose if you have the notion that using something that is "full of enzymes" is of benefit - then you should have an understanding of what specific enzymes are being extracted from the seed you are soaking and in what concentration. It also helps to know how those enzymes act within the plant normally and learning what is taking place (being regulated) within the plant when those levels are in flux naturally. That will give you a better understanding of what impact introducing more enzymes as a stimuli will have...
From my understanding of such practices, "sst" in general, are primarily used to influence hormone levels or essentially utilized as organic plant growth regulators, but they are not really implemented for the purpose of nutrional provision.
If you plants are fading before you want them to - perhaps you should try a stronger amendment / fertilizer application - ie slightly increasing the ratios of what ever you are currently utilizing as nutritional sources or try utitlizing teas in the 3rd and 5th weeks...
dank.Frank
LOL - Thanks for the nod, Burn1 - I just want people to grow better medicine.
redclover - if you are doing seed soak teas...
I suppose if you have the notion that using something that is "full of enzymes" is of benefit - then you should have an understanding of what specific enzymes are being extracted from the seed you are soaking and in what concentration. It also helps to know how those enzymes act within the plant normally and learning what is taking place (being regulated) within the plant when those levels are in flux naturally. That will give you a better understanding of what impact introducing more enzymes as a stimuli will have...
From my understanding of such practices, "sst" in general, are primarily used to influence hormone levels or essentially utilized as organic plant growth regulators, but they are not really implemented for the purpose of nutrional provision.
If you plants are fading before you want them to - perhaps you should try a stronger amendment / fertilizer application - ie slightly increasing the ratios of what ever you are currently utilizing as nutritional sources or try utitlizing teas in the 3rd and 5th weeks...
dank.Frank
I will top dress more and see what happens. Think the growth boost the SST provides makes em grow and need more food. Sound right?
I have no clue without knowing what you are applying...at what ratio and during which phase of growth, what week of flower, etc.
There are all kinds of enzymes with all sorts of various of purposes...you'd have to be much more specific. Such a general statement comes off sounding more like a hydro mentality / approach - "bloom booster" - etc.
dank.Frank
There are all kinds of enzymes with all sorts of various of purposes...you'd have to be much more specific. Such a general statement comes off sounding more like a hydro mentality / approach - "bloom booster" - etc.
dank.Frank
I use barley seed (version 2) throughout very short veg and every third watering through bloom. Gorgeous forrest green until 6-7 week fade on 6 strains now
Bloom top dressing per 5 gal pot:
1-2" EWC (very rich)
1T neem, crab shell, potash, crushed dolo, kelp, and 2T fish bone.
Thanks.
SST is more likely to green up your plant than cause early senesce.
the "fade" you notice is likely caused by something else. also, plants don;t suck up nutes at all. it's not the worst analogy cause "nutes" do get metabolized by the plant but anyway; not so much on the too much too fast thing.
it's pretty common for SST users to apply them every watering in flower ~if anything, it should prevent early senesce.
the "running out of nutes" paradigm is a somewhat flawed thinking
So it's something lacking in my soil? Could I drench a 'Nutrient tea' before the SST? The fade isn't PH or lack of amendments, I would assume. I 'cook' nice rich soil. The SST has to be part of it. Are there hormones that aren't supposed to be used during certain times in bloom? Maybe a lockout? Too much N? I'll post pics of plants the day I feed SST...around 2 days from now. Thanks for all the helpful replies!
To "run out of something" could be infered to mean the sources of nutritional provision have not been in the medium long enough to be broken down by the microbes and made available...
It is entirely possible to deplete a medium of it's nutrition if it was never made rich enough to begin with. If the growth of the plant isn't being sustained - there are only so many possible scenarios. A simple soil test can provide the information necessary to determine if the soil is actually rich enough in the first place.
If applying the SST everyday doesn't fix the problem - then I suppose there could be a need to compost the soil longer for better bioavailibility, increase the microbial populations, provide more base nutritional inputs...or provide nutritional teas.
A plant entering "early senescense" sounds much less likely than nutritional deprevation to me. Seeing how leaf scenesense is age related and is controlled hormonally not as a result of nutritional variences...
While I suppose it could appear the same externally there are stark differences physiologically between programed cell death (apotosis) such as displayed during actual scenesense and necrosis as displayed by abiotic stressors such as nutritional deficiency.
The only information I have found in regards to regulation of scenesence was in the attmept to artifically delay it through the introduction of hormones. Even in such studies there was still natural apoptosis in the cells, though the leaves remained green and the rates of photosynthesis remained steady.
Seeing as SST are an attempt to affect the plant hormonally - I think any such aplications would delay scenescense and as you stated Xmo, keep the plant greener, longer.
The fact that redcolver's plants are still yellowing early - leads me to conclude necrosis, ie nutrtional deficiency, as "early scenesence" can basically be ruled out, which is the reason I made such a determination in my original post.
dank.Frank
It is entirely possible to deplete a medium of it's nutrition if it was never made rich enough to begin with. If the growth of the plant isn't being sustained - there are only so many possible scenarios. A simple soil test can provide the information necessary to determine if the soil is actually rich enough in the first place.
If applying the SST everyday doesn't fix the problem - then I suppose there could be a need to compost the soil longer for better bioavailibility, increase the microbial populations, provide more base nutritional inputs...or provide nutritional teas.
A plant entering "early senescense" sounds much less likely than nutritional deprevation to me. Seeing how leaf scenesense is age related and is controlled hormonally not as a result of nutritional variences...
While I suppose it could appear the same externally there are stark differences physiologically between programed cell death (apotosis) such as displayed during actual scenesense and necrosis as displayed by abiotic stressors such as nutritional deficiency.
The only information I have found in regards to regulation of scenesence was in the attmept to artifically delay it through the introduction of hormones. Even in such studies there was still natural apoptosis in the cells, though the leaves remained green and the rates of photosynthesis remained steady.
Seeing as SST are an attempt to affect the plant hormonally - I think any such aplications would delay scenescense and as you stated Xmo, keep the plant greener, longer.
The fact that redcolver's plants are still yellowing early - leads me to conclude necrosis, ie nutrtional deficiency, as "early scenesence" can basically be ruled out, which is the reason I made such a determination in my original post.
dank.Frank
Last edited:
sure DF i agree, maybe redclover you know your mix recipe {maybe you stated earlier?}
if the mix is a little light or lop-sided a deficiency could be to blame. But, if the mix is a little heavy, the excess could be causing problems
what formula are you using to make your SST? what about environmental conditions? once or twice getting too hot or too cold {not 5* or 10* ~more like near freezing or well over 100*} can destabilize things pretty good also. If your mix totally dried out, that could be bad as well
there's a lot of angles to look @ this from
if the mix is a little light or lop-sided a deficiency could be to blame. But, if the mix is a little heavy, the excess could be causing problems
what formula are you using to make your SST? what about environmental conditions? once or twice getting too hot or too cold {not 5* or 10* ~more like near freezing or well over 100*} can destabilize things pretty good also. If your mix totally dried out, that could be bad as well
there's a lot of angles to look @ this from
Thanks for good replies! I've been doing 12/12 from seed in a coot type mix. Normal amendments, my own EWC, rich top dressing after showing sex, and keeping soil moist. Good environment and temps.
The plants look great and healthy until the inevitable fade at 6 weeks. I use SST version 2 with barley. I just can't keep those leaves green longer. I don't think I have any lockout as they're very nice until fade.
I'll post pics of before and afters when I can today.
I know my yields aren't what they should be if the fade is starting 3-4 weeks early. What's a good soil test I can buy/order?
Thanks for all the help!
Yep...DankFrank is the diggity dank. Much love for this helpful member and Burn1
This place would be less without you guys.
