What's new
  • 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"!

Science behind pumping 800ppm Potassium

H

Hwmpunk

New member
I've always been on the bandwagon that 150ppm max N, 50ppm max P, 250ppm max K and 150ppm max CA was sufficient for flowering. But this article specifically focuses on raising N and Ca to support synthesis of massive P and K dump in order to increase flower production and weight.

Thoughts?

https://www.cannabisbusinesstimes.com/article/grow-bigger-fatter-plants/
 
Lyfespan

Lyfespan

Active member
Lyfespan

Lyfespan

Active member
bloom weeks 1-2
N : 161
Ca : 156
Fe : 3.24
Mn : 0.54
P : 101
Mg : 82
Mo : 0.06
Cu : 0.06
K : 291
S : 90
Zn : 0.20
B : 0.24

weeks 3-6

N : 162
Ca : 153
Fe : 3.61
Mn : 0.60
P : 120
Mg : 83
Mo : 0.07
Cu : 0.07
K : 340
S : 90
Zn : 0.23
B : 0.27
 
H

Hwmpunk

New member
Lyfespan said:
bloom weeks 1-2
N : 161
Ca : 156
Fe : 3.24
Mn : 0.54
P : 101
Mg : 82
Mo : 0.06
Cu : 0.06
K : 291
S : 90
Zn : 0.20
B : 0.24

weeks 3-6

N : 162
Ca : 153
Fe : 3.61
Mn : 0.60
P : 120
Mg : 83
Mo : 0.07
Cu : 0.07
K : 340
S : 90
Zn : 0.23
B : 0.27
Click to expand...

What do you mean dropping to boost p and k? I don't see anything being dropped. How far have you tried pushing p and k, especially with elevated N and Ca? The article shows N at 175 and Ca at 250 in order to support massive P and k levels
 
B

BongFu

Member
The dude behind this article is one of the biggest morons I have had the displeasure of speaking to in over 30 years in the Canna game. At least he is consistent.
 
MJPassion

MJPassion

Observer
ICMag Donor
Veteran
BongFu said:
The dude behind this article is one of the biggest morons I have had the displeasure of speaking to in over 30 years in the Canna game. At least he is consistent.
Click to expand...


Moron?... Maybe... IDK...


But is the method good or is it madness?


WTF is with folks shooting the messenger?
 
MJPassion

MJPassion

Observer
ICMag Donor
Veteran
To those that choose to shoot messengers...


The request for surrender was dropped in the mud and is now illegible.
You are now doomed to a genocidal war over pancakes and eggs while attempting to cultivate life saving medicine for friend and enemy alike.
 
B

BongFu

Member
MJPassion said:
Moron?... Maybe... IDK...


But is the method good or is it madness?


WTF is with folks shooting the messenger?
Click to expand...

Even with the most basic understanding of plant science its sheer stupidity. All we are talking about here is massively overloading K resulting in among others Ca and Mg lockout. So then boost Ca and Mg to correct what amounts to a purposely induced Ca and Mg deficiency duh �� lets not even begin discussing osmotic potential and mass flow being negatively impacted because of stupid amounts of nutrients ... oh and attacking the messenger is a time honoured tradition on forums lol
 
J

jackspratt61

Active member
BongFu said:
Even with the most basic understanding of plant science its sheer stupidity. All we are talking about here is massively overloading K resulting in among others Ca and Mg lockout. So then boost Ca and Mg to correct what amounts to a purposely induced Ca and Mg deficiency duh �� lets not even begin discussing osmotic potential and mass flow being negatively impacted because of stupid amounts of nutrients ... oh and attacking the messenger is a time honoured tradition on forums lol
Click to expand...

I have heard of some pushing 3.2ec total...with 5gms per gallon kso4
 
Lyfespan

Lyfespan

Active member
BongFu said:
Even with the most basic understanding of plant science its sheer stupidity. All we are talking about here is massively overloading K resulting in among others Ca and Mg lockout. So then boost Ca and Mg to correct what amounts to a purposely induced Ca and Mg deficiency duh �� lets not even begin discussing osmotic potential and mass flow being negatively impacted because of stupid amounts of nutrients ... oh and attacking the messenger is a time honoured tradition on forums lol
Click to expand...

lets see why this is not possible? why cant you wrap your head around something as simple as boosting a plant?:biggrin:
 
B

BongFu

Member
jackspratt61 said:
I have heard of some pushing 3.2ec total...with 5gms per gallon kso4
Click to expand...


I've seen people pulling massive yields with 1.2 EC under high fertigation frequency. What does that prove?:) Ca ++, Mg++, K+ at 800ppm. Hmmm. What do you think the EC would equate to once you have all those ++++++++++++. ? So fundamentally there is no science behind running 800 ppm of K. Don't believe me - run off and ask a scientist...
 
J

jackspratt61

Active member
BongFu said:
I've seen people pulling massive yields with 1.2 EC under high fertigation frequency. What does that prove?:) Ca ++, Mg++, K+ at 800ppm. Hmmm. What do you think the EC would equate to once you have all those ++++++++++++. ? So fundamentally there is no science behind running 800 ppm of K. Don't believe me - run off and ask a scientist...
Click to expand...

An experienced agronomist didn't think it possible a couple years ago to have quality and run these #'s. More details would be helpful for the discussion but,mostly sure it was run in a 'soil mix'. I've seen this plant once balanced with high calcium become extremely hungry to the point you can almost feed with abandon. Production is increased obviously. The more K you get in the plant properly,the higher the quality and yield.

It is being done...and very well! Science may just have to catch up,huh?
 
B

BongFu

Member
jackspratt61 said:
An experienced agronomist didn't think it possible a couple years ago to have quality and run these #'s. More details would be helpful for the discussion but,mostly sure it was run in a 'soil mix'. I've seen this plant once balanced with high calcium become extremely hungry to the point you can almost feed with abandon. Production is increased obviously. The more K you get in the plant properly,the higher the quality and yield.

It is being done...and very well! Science may just have to catch up,huh?
Click to expand...


Now that science is investigating Canna specific dribble spread by generations of stoner growers many myths are already unraveling. Now, in this day and age, we still have know nothing clowns spewing more myths. This one is actually dead simple though - where it comes to the nutrient requirements of the higher plant more does not mean more - this has been demonstrated over and over and over. Among some examples of findings from Canna specific scientific studies are 1) high/excessive EC in cannabis growing reduces quality. 2) Increasing EC results in increased yield but eventually you hit a threshold (i.e. further nutrients will not result in further growth) - moving past this threshold you begin to see yield losses. But then some would swear the Earth was flat so enjoy your 800 ppm pf K because your plants won't :biggrin:
 
bsgospel

bsgospel

Bat Macumba
Veteran
But... At a certain point you have to spend double to get a tenth of an increase. The balance of calcium is important but the limiting factors case to case are only telling so much. The ceiling is real for each element. I thought we were looking for minimums in each case while attaining better yield so as to minimize our budget and impact...
 
J

jackspratt61

Active member
Yes,you are correct in that there are limiting factors. But most all of it revolves around Calcium as the base,which is cheap and good humus. Playing with a cuft, or yard or two of mix won't hurt anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top