passive plant killer

Hazey the clown said:

With that all said, with regard to perch zone and drainage, I wonder about the wisdom of mixing perlite with coco, or mixing any different sized soil. Is there an optimum size soil particle for all pots (drainage wise), or is there a ratio to pot size, and what the hell is it? Is the perch zone all that important for us to "drain" if were bottom feeders, and most importantly had anyone tried sticking a wick/or part of one out and below the pot. It could theoretically be the same wick bringing the water in. Anyone got any ideas how to test this?(beyond what was expressed earlier in thread)

Click to expand...

stick wick outside of container here, in imaginary garden...
details here:
coco+wick+gh flora nova=never dump run-off|pdg’s imaginary/enjoyable garden
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=127112

while coco is a good medium in general, have found that roots from fresh clones reach out of 4-6" containers using simple orchid bark + pumice & pure perlite... seemingly it is the higher oxygen content & larger collidial particulates. used to mix coco @ 50%/50% perlite, etc. seems 10-15% is enough water holding capacity if want roots to extend beyond 4 or 5 gal top container.

w/ more coco in top container, there is less need for roots to extend their search for a constant water source. there is also thicker media barrier to push thru. the pros to more coco is that the media buffers the solution & is a greater fail safe.

more aeration of the media, more drainage holes (ala kbs buckets) seems to be effective.
maybe lots of shoes strings in lots of holes extended into external res for wicks, instead of 1-4 big ropes.

coco is good, & if use it as primary media, would still top & bottom dress coco w/ @ least 2" of perlite. also, when transplanted into 5 gal buckets, surround 4-6" root-ball of coco w/ perlite/hydroton/marble chips/lava rocks/etc laterally.

the water-holding capacity & porosity of the media particulate seems more factor than size of the media.

hope this helps. enjoy your garden!

Hazey the clown said:

Hey all,
I am super hyped up on this thread, especially the stuff Delta posted about the perch zone and such. I have some ideas and questions but let me start off by saying wicks work, and work well. I went to Aruba for over 2 weeks, left my girls all alone and they looked better than ever when I got back. With that said, I have had really no problems with the wick method, other than trying to run only 1 wick when 2 was needed.. I top water for the first month, then throw the wicks in their individual res. I never had any problems, except for a tiny bit of mold on some OG, but I like to keep my girlies separated so no cross contamination (res wise). I have tried many wick types and the non-nylon(or mixed), poly braided(like mentioned) works very well and is readily accesable. I am very happy reading about the other types of materials available to us, thanks super mucho for all your hard work guys. I also do a wick mat for cloning. 'biggish"rockwool cubes that stand up on their own and I can do a tiny bit a veg in before transplant, which works far better than anything I have seen, including aero, if setup right you can move the clones around, easily check for roots, no F'n hassel trying to get them out of containers, and also lets you "choose" the root mat size for transplanting. I have always done Perlite/soil mixes in the past, but now I am venturing into the coco thing.

With that all said, with regard to perch zone and drainage, I wonder about the wisdom of mixing perlite with coco, or mixing any different sized soil. Is there an optimum size soil particle for all pots (drainage wise), or is there a ratio to pot size, and what the hell is it? Is the perch zone all that important for us to "drain" if were bottom feeders, and most importantly had anyone tried sticking a wick/or part of one out and below the pot. It could theoretically be the same wick bringing the water in. Anyone got any ideas how to test this?(beyond what was expressed earlier in thread)
I love this thread and you guys for taking the time to post.
I have done other types of systems for 20 years. some work good, some are a waste, and some are just a pain in the arse. Wick systems work incredibly well for me, but I would always like to improve myself and meds. I will post more if I'm lucky enough to get a reply.

I read this earlier and I must concur.
"I have had Original Haze that was almost like acid, unexperienced smokers would white-out or pass-out, or throw up after a toke or two...
Oh, and it was Euphoric to say the least. I would feel like I was floating in a cloud, or held in the hands of a comfortable giant, I had no need for anything, I was totally blissed." - Sam the Skunkman

A friend and mentor of mine gave me 6 of these one day when I stopped bye his house. Told me to "get rid of them, too damn stong!"
Skipping all the disbelief and banter between us, I took them home.
After about a year, I too, came to the conclusion it was too damn strong.
After a hard day of work, 1 hit, that still was black and unfinished would sit in the bowl of your bong between your legs for 45 minutes while you visited mars. If you were dumb enough to finish the 1 bonghit, after you returned from you voyage, you would again transport in time like 30-45 minutes, not knowing what happened.
I once watched as 4 teen-age guys at a party all passed out, in a row, doing 1 b-hit of this stuff I packed them. Each one laughing at their friend saying he was a lightweight. The last guy actually sat down before (like recommended by us) and he still passed out. Each time we would have to grab the glass bong from them as they went down. It is by far the strongest weed I have ever smoked, and almost turned your stomach, and unforgettable taste and experience.
Blue Dream is my favorite, perfect compliment for the Haze, and my dream come true.

I had the m-39xHaze for years as well, most explosive strain I have ever seen, ever, just lacked the bouquet and flavor bliss of the Blue Dream. I dreamed of a better hybrid years ago and hadn't found it till this year.

I hope we can contribute to each other's grows and produce the best meds around. Thanks people, time for sleep.

Click to expand...

how, hi are you hazy!

thanks for your interest, as you can tell this is not one of the most exciting threads and so doesn't attract a crowd.

essentially, the finer the medium the higher the pwt will be up to the point where you get particles so large that the total porosity overcomes capillary rise. even regular hydroton, with it's mixed diameter material achieving superior sphere packing to uniform size spheres, will have a pwt. i think you would have to use a very large particle non-conventional media to eliminate the pwt by drainage. at that point you probably would have to run a continuous drip just to keep the plant alive.

From a conversation with “tapla” at gardenweb.com
“The height of a perched water table (PWT) is almost exclusively dependent on particle size. Tiny soil particles like you find in most bagged soils - peat, sand, compost, coir, vermiculite (because it breaks down easily, quickly, and compacts), all support tall PWTs. As soil particle size increases, the PWT height diminishes, until finally at a particle size slightly under 1/8", all perched water goes down the drain. ;o)
The soils I grow in are all comprised of particles in roughly the 1/16 to 1/4" size, with the largest measure occupying a range from about 3/32 - 3/16". I can be sure there is no perched water in these soils, and that is exactly how I prefer them - holding lots of water in both internal micropores and inter-particular micropores while insuring great aeration because soil macro-pores always remain air-filled.
Can you over water with this material if roots never reach the PWT?
Yes. That there IS a PWT is evidence in itself that you CAN over-water. The key is not necessarily that there IS a PWT. The important question is how long will it persist?
Plants will grow best in a damp soil with NO perched water. That is NO saturated layer of water at the bottom of the pot. Roots begin to die a very short time after being subjected to anaerobic conditions. They regenerate again as soon as air returns to the soil. This cyclic death/regeneration of roots steals valuable energy from the plant that might well have been employed to increase o/a biomass, and/or produce flowers and fruit.
You can't keep roots from growing into that layer of saturated soil. As the water is used by the plant or evaporates, the PWT disappears and the lower regions of the container become favorable for root colonization - so of course they oblige and grow into that area. We come along and water, and suddenly the PWT is back and roots in that pot region die if the plant cannot use the water so air quickly returns to the soil.
So - IF you are using a soil that supports a shallow PWT, simply add a wick to the container to drain it. Once the planting has matured to the point that the plant uses the water from the PWT quickly, allowing air to return before root death (a half day), simply remove the wick and your soil suddenly has a greater ability to retain water, ;o) “Containers stop draining when the force of gravity pulling down on the water in the container is equal to the upward capillary pull of the soil. Every soil with small particles will support a PWT of a given depth. It doesn't matter if a container is 12 inches deep, or 12 feet deep, 12 inches or twelve feet in diameter; the depth of the PWT will be the same for that soil. Adding an extra, or a thousand extra holes (like growing in a screen container) won't change the depth of the PWT at container capacity (this is the degree of saturation after the soil has been thoroughly saturated and has has just stopped draining). Drill enough holes, though, and it will have some effect on eliminating the PWT more quickly, but it will be via evaporation, rather than drainage.
From another conversation with “tapla”.
Containers stop draining when the force of gravity pulling down on the water in the container is equal to the upward capillary pull of the soil. Every soil with small particles will support a PWT of a given depth. It doesn't matter if a container is 12 inches deep, or 12 feet deep, 12 inches or twelve feet in diameter; the depth of the PWT will be the same for that soil. Adding an extra, or a thousand extra holes (like growing in a screen container) won't change the depth of the PWT at container capacity (this is the degree of saturation after the soil has been thoroughly saturated and has has just stopped draining). Drill enough holes, though, and it will have some effect on eliminating the PWT more quickly, but it will be via evaporation, rather than drainage.
In addition to wicking, tilting the container at a 45* angle after watering will remove a substantial amount of additional perched water from saturated soils, depending on how heavy the soil is, the container dimensions, & drain hole locations."

Here are a couple more links to some longer reads.

http://www.turftechnow.com/TTN FloWick for Planters Lit.pdf

http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/ornamentals/floriculture/aeration.pdf

edit. the 2 links above and the conversation with "tapla" all refer to using wicks as devices to eliminate the pwt. The idea of the "controlled water table" uses the proximity of the water table to regulate flow. "inverted leaching" makes a wick a 2 lane highway for nutes while also helping to balance salt concentrations and ph. later on, d9

hi, mistress!

you snuck a post in while i was writing the above. stay tuned for tommorrow's "weekend update". i have a couple of photos just for you. later d9

best wicking material?
apparently the nylon ropes been using are inferior to polyester?

1/2"-1" polyester ropes? or other polyester item/fabric cut to spec?

enjoy your garden!

hi!

the material i use is "thermolam plus". it is designed to be an upholstery batting or insulator and is 100% polyester. it comes flat on three ft wide rolls. sold by the yard. very common at all fabric stores and hobby lobby. it is flat so if you want it in a round form you just roll it up. i use it that way in my wick cloners. in my first series of photos there is a shot of the wick material in place. i cut out what i want with scissors.

i mentioned that acrylic scored just slightly higher than 100% polyester, but the difference was so slight as to be negligible.

it's not just the form but the weave as well that make this a superior wick material. for example ropes made from this do not score as high. probably due to the ropes much tighter structure. later

ammunition

ammunition

Well, victim # 1 has survived to flower. 7 weeks of intense pruning and shaping. No liquid was removed and no changeouts have occurred. No top watering with nutrients since 10-2 and one top watering with ro water on the 17th. The plant is nearly perfect. Very solidly built and robust at 28”. I normally have 32-36” plants at this point but only flowering it out will determine effect on yield. Ph is 6.3 @ 865 ppm at .5.

Victim #2, also 100% turface, has been treated a little differently for effect. No changeouts but I am top watering it all the way using it's own res or inputting fresh solution. By the way, #2 is the same size as #1. the only differences are that it is a week younger and has been top watered all the way.

#'s 3-4, which are also 100% turface are being top watered.

# 5, which is 70/30 perlite/coco has not been top watered for a week and the top of the medium is still moist. I'm going to try to bottom water only and not do changeouts with this one. Essentially treated the same as #1. this one is the bell of the ball, full figured, a little top heavy, and has a nice bottom. it is larger than #4 started a week earlier.

#6 is 90/10 turface/coco and will be top watered and have res changes.

#7 is finishing it's first week. It uses 70/30 turface coco plus one quart of worm castings. I will include the media report I had done at a nationally known lab.

As I grow perpetual harvest I can play around with this kind of stuff without getting hurt too bad if one totally flops. It takes me 16 weeks to see the results of each one.

Complete soilless media analysis of worm castings i purchased in bulk. 50 bucks for a cubic yard.

PH 6.61

EC 3.03

in ppm @ .7

NO3 108.6

NH4 n/a

P 43.07

K 599.2

Ca 84.63

Mg 26.67

SO4 61.33

Fe .70

Mn .55

B .14

Cu .10

Zn.12

Mo .02

Al 3.82

Cl 310.0

what i find the most interesting about this report is that there is no ammonium nitrite. this is good for us "hydro" types because it is the ammonium that makes ph hard to manage. it goes in, pulling the medium ph down and then gets taken up at a fast rate causing the ph to climb again within a short period of time. it has a good amount of nitrate which is much more stable from ph standpoint.

but would you take a look at that K! should work great with coco. i used a quart of this in the mix for #7. it could be too much as my tds was 1560 @ .5 immediately after watering with my standard filling solution of 750 ppm fnb 100 ppm calcium nitrate and 50 ppm magnesium sulfate. i had to pour 2 gals of ro water through it just to get it down to 1178. funny thing is ph is 6.2. i would have expected 5.4-5.6 with all this crap in there. next time i'll load a pint instead. it has a great ca, mg ratio, too.

pics are of #1, #5, and #6.

later on, d9

worm castings are good mixed w/ perlite/pumice, etc... mixed in @ 10-15% seems to be good. retains lots of water. needs lots of aeration... how are those #'s measured? per cubic meter/cm/inch?

good point on the different n compounds.

nice observations on victim #2... they seem to prefer rotating the watering from top to bottom too... primarily favor top-dry, slightly moist, mid-wet, bottom wet+dry=air & water.

enjoy your garden!

you mean #1,#5,and#6?

if so those are the plant #'s in the photos in sequence of appearance.

if you mean the media report, i'm not sure, but i do know they all use the same one for standardization. it's something like 1 liter of media to 1.5 liters of di water, shake it for a set period of time and strain it through a filter of some kind.

well, it's bedtime for bonzo dogballs.

Hi guys,
Thanks for your reply's.

Hey Mistress,
I haven't used to orchid bark or pumice yet, but usually i do rockwool for cuttings, as I described before, just more functional imho.
Yeah, I always do the drainage thing (in the past), but I like to read all the "new" stuff (to me) and try and make sense/use of it.
I was going to do about 25% coco, 75 perlite mix this time, as that seems like a safe ratio, and close to what I've done in the past.
Turface also has some interest to me, but have not used that either. Am watching a thread or two with this in mind.

Also I have read a few people talking about "half" strength nutes when using wicks. Not sure if I agree with this, and have not done that myself. Not to say I run "full" strength, but half seems light to me. Half of the "full" strength maybe, but not half of the normal nute strength. (ec/tds guided)

I wonder has anyone done tests running ton/coco vs perlite/coco turface/coco at same ratio. I wonder about growth diff, potential ph issues, or "losing" the coco fibers because they drain out from bottom, between the ton/turface. (never used coco before, sorry if dumb question)

And Delta, I must admit trying to wrap my head around the perch thing, I think I need to read it a couple more times and the link you sent me. But what do you think about this? I use 2 wicks, and arch them through the soil till about 1/2 way up the pot. I do not spiral at bottom or go near sides of pot. I wonder if I can just pull one of the ends of the wicks out of the res, and will this suffice to drain the perch table? I guess that's hard to answer, since one end is always in the res, but what is your guess? I think just adding another independent wick is the safe answer, but i prefer to keep things as kiss as possible, so if my mandatory wick can pull double duty, than all they better. Also could rotate the wicks that are out, cycling through the different regions of the pot.

My next run I also plan on doing a test run of net baskets in the 2 gallon pots, so that there is airflow into the bottom and up the sides of the pot, increasing airflow dramatically. Any thoughts on this anyone? Thanks mucho guys(girls).

And before anyone gets offended by the "pass-out" story, let me first qualify that they "high pressured" me into packing for them, as I didn't know many people, and it was my friends' girlfriend's birthday party. Taken out of context i guess it could seem...not good. But they were asking for it, and I warned them thoroughly

I guess i should first say that my wicks run a "long" distance from res to pot, I believe this "caveman" aerates the nutes on the way up, and keeps the roots from going into the res. Frequently I pull all the wicks out and let them "dry" if I just flushed or think they need some "dry" time. Spray the wicks frequently with h202 once being used regularly.
Thanks again for any reply's and keep up the good work.

P.s. am very interested on the turface/coco comparison especially with regards to yield/rooting, etc. You guys kick ass!!!!

Also I have read a few people talking about "half" strength nutes when using wicks. Not sure if I agree with this, and have not done that myself. Not to say I run "full" strength, but half seems light to me. Half of the "full" strength maybe, but not half of the normal nute strength. (ec/tds guided)

I wonder has anyone done tests running ton/coco vs perlite/coco turface/coco at same ratio. I wonder about growth diff, potential ph issues, or "losing" the coco fibers because they drain out from bottom, between the ton/turface. (never used coco before, sorry if dumb question)

Click to expand...

full strength fertilizers, which is usually bottle instructions for rapidly growing/flowering plants... has seemed to work, in any media/method.

>coco & more perlite, lava rocks, or other high drainage media seems to have faster growth rates than 75-100% coco.

what seems to work well is to concentrate the coco, or other water-holding media, around the core root ball. or, keep the media of a 4-6" container of coco when transplanted into a 4-10 gal container. the remainder of the media, surrounding the newly transplanted tomato plant, is perlite, hydroton, marble chips, bark nuggets, aquarium gravel, etc, etc,... this is where the air holding capacity of the media allows air roots to form around surface of the planter... inert, aearting amendments that permit air space

watering less may also be good for passive type method... though watering daily @ >amount per watering also doable.

enjoy your garden!

can't wait to get started, must be patient

can't wait to get started, must be patient

Hi Mistress,
Thanks for the info, couple questions.
1.Do you think perlite or hydroton is better for the outside dressing after transplanting, and will either one work well enough alone to wick up to the root ball? (with the method you described)
2. When applying the "root ball" method with the coco, is the center mass of that pure coco, or the coco/perlite mix and what ratio?(any links?)
Thanks for your time.
Hazey

looks like an intresting concept..
waiting to see the flowering stages..any issues with calmag

so whatname brand would be a decent humic acid fairly priced

hi, vegan!

hi, vegan!

welcome aboard! in veg, i'm using 750 ppm flora nova bloom, 100 ppm calcium nitrate and 50 ppm magnesium sulfate. none of the plants have displayed any symptoms of deficiency and are visually nearly perfect. in bloom i substitute calcium chloride for the calcium nitrate to cut out the extra nitrate.

as i use fnb, which contains ample humics and fulvics, i don't feel that i need to supplement further. also the worm castings are rich in them.

i just built #8 and filled it with 85/15 turface and coco with a double handful of castings.

thanks for stopping by.

later on, d9

Hazey the clown said:

Hi Mistress,
Thanks for the info, couple questions.
1.Do you think perlite or hydroton is better for the outside dressing after transplanting, and will either one work well enough alone to wick up to the root ball? (with the method you described)
2. When applying the "root ball" method with the coco, is the center mass of that pure coco, or the coco/perlite mix and what ratio?(any links?)
Thanks for your time.
Hazey

Click to expand...

1. perlite. yes, perlite works very well. have not attempted hydroton.
2. yes. center mass has the coco/perlite, @ 50/50. media surrounding is 75-100% perlite, or other inert, aerating media. hydroton should work. perlite/hydroton 50/50, etc. not really necessary to add coco to the media surrounding transplanted clone. if desire water-holding in this part, @ 10-30% seems good. more than that does not get those huge air roots @ top & right under surface. more air space seems to = larger top air roots.

enjoy your garden!

one hell of a document!

one hell of a document!

this link is from argus controls, a company that supplies nutrient dosing equipment to the greenhouse industries. it is one of the most complete tutorials on nutrients i have ever read. no matter what you grow or how much, you need to read this.

http://www.arguscontrols.com/articles/Argus_Nutrient_Dosing_Handbook.pdf

enjoy your garden!

Hey guys
Thanks for the info, mistress you answered my question perfectly.
This makes me wonder, has anyone tried using coco chips, like 100%, or other ratios with perlite/ton, etc. If air space is very important(and we know it is), and we can get the same or better "air space" as hydroton, but better wicking action, shouldn't this be of interest to us? Do you think the pot would be too "light"? Would a addition like ton/pumice/turface help with anchoring? This seems like a hugely viable option, with incredible air flow. If there is enough water holding capacity (I suspect it should be close for US) to run it alone, and if so, it would eliminate enough "loss" of coco (coir)fibers running out bottom of pot?(which would help in set up, and potentially lessen the need for big drainage layer) HAS ANYONE TRIED THIS IN ANY FASHION?
I have been out of the game for a couple years, just helping friends with their medical grows, so I haven't gotten to experiment lately. But I have been thinking in new ways, and trying to incorporate my knowledge with some of this new "technology". I am reluctant to have my friends experiment with unproven methods, so I'm here bouncing some ideas off you guys..... experience means a lot, actually doing that exact method, etc.
Another note, I have noticed (after thinking about it), the pots with wicks are always lighter after watering(even top watering) than the pots with no wicks, and when I do the "tip the pot method", little to nothing comes out, compared to non- wicked pots. So I believe that even submerged (could be wrong) the wicks do not allow for a perch table, which again, seems very advantageous to us.
question:
If you guys were running heavy veg with the cns17 G, what ec (roughly) we you go with?(foot tall with multiple tops) Seems like they need more but not confident to go above 1.6(not mine to lose, so always extra careful helping others)

Hey, killer post Delta, and thanks for the greeting.

Another question peeps, so if orchid bark and pumice are good for rooting, would coco chips/pumice be about the same? And why pumice and not something else?
You guys rock!

hello, hazey!

you are talking about media that i personally have no experience with and therefore don't feel qualified to answer.

i have never used orchid bark or pumice, or even coco chips.

even my coco experience is limited to what i have described in this thread. and all of it is with only one brand.

if you look at the ppk design, the way the wick fabric is used prevents pieces from falling through.

my experience has all been limited to perlite, turface, lava rock, and hydroton.

maybe some other folks could be more helpful. later, d9