taged.
I would say that the OF i've been getting runs between 27 and 35 percent perlite, depending on exact composition of that batch, it definitely isn't turning into mud as you fellas have been describing, my pots end up almost as saturated with roots as the plants grown in Royal Gold Tupur, perhaps just slightly less so, but that Tupur is some amazing stuff.+1 for fox farm being to Heavy ..Idk if they changed the formula but a few yrs ago it was pretty light and airy ..still heavy tho ..after my last run ..I practically had mud leftover ..I like my soil airy so 30% perlite is a must for me ..maybe 40% depending on how big the plant might get and how many waterings it's gonna get ..
My main gripe with the Fox Farm lies in consistency also, far more unprocessed wood chips and unmixed clumps than I like to see in premium potting soil.
Amazon Bloom also has a nicer consistency than Ocean Forest, but it contains no perlite at all.
[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=41766&pictureid=987515&thumb=1]View Image[/URL]
It has little to no unprocessed bits, and has that rich loamy smell you associate with soil that has been thoroughly composted, whereas the Black Gold smells mostly like Peat Moss and little else.
Black Gold is a bit softer to the touch than Ocean Forest, probably because of the extra peat moss, it also has a much lower amount of perlite, i'd describe the level as the same as miracle gro soils which feature perlite, not quite where i'd want it for proper aeration and drainage.
[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=41766&pictureid=987516&thumb=1]View Image[/URL]
It shares the problem with Ocean Forest of a few too many pieces of unprocessed wood in the mix.
I'll need to add some perlite to both mixes in order to make the experiment fair, just to the same level as present in Ocean Forest out of the bag, shown here:
[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=41766&pictureid=987518&thumb=1]View Image[/URL]
Perlite is a universal factor, and growing a plant in a medium which has 0% perlite, or just 15% perlite like the Black Gold, would be an definite recipe for failure and not provide any kind of true comparison in performance.SS;
Risking the exposure of my ignorance.... why are you adjusting the mix of the soils, when doing a comparison?
It seems almost as crazy (to me), as doing a feeding program, while testing organically proportioned mixes?
I'm liking what you are doing in this experiment..... just trying to understand what it is exactly you are 'testing'.
Give me some help in understanding what the testing parameters are. I don't want to seem trollish here... just don't get it.
thx
2lc
Perlite is a universal factor, and growing a plant in a medium which has 0% perlite, or just 15% perlite like the Black Gold, would be an definite recipe for failure and not provide any kind of true comparison in performance.
All three are soils, Ocean Forest is ready to use out of the bag for the purposes of this experiment, while BG and AB both required additional perlite. Not sure why you find this offputting, unless you simply wanted these plants to die in wet mud?
I don't have problems putting a "ready to use" side by side with something that only needs perlite amendment, considering that, as stated by posters here, some people even add perlite to Ocean Forest and other mixes I consider "ready to use".
By adding perlite to a level that achieved consistency between the three soil brands, we're able to judge the soils based on factors like their ph stability, how they respond to the feeding schedule, how well they retain water now that drainage is equalized, etc
As far as the feeding schedule, the plants receive mostly water throughout Veg, and then they start receiving larger amounts of nutrients in flower, attempts along the lines of what you suggested have often resulted in deficiencies too extensive to be reversed, so we came up with this feeding program as a response.
This soil trial was not entirely my doing, if I had my way i'd be growing in lovely clean coco right now, but will from above is what it is.
Day 10 of 12/12, too late?
but the matter is not resolved, and new debate emerges daily. On Paclo: the data being used to push for laws against this substance is not particularly scientific or helpful, test animals were directly fed many (if not hundreds of) times the amount you would give to a plant, so, imagine what happened? They got cancer.Retailer said:A short time ago, three of the most popular flower hardeners available were pulled from the market. As far as we can tell, Phosphoload, Flower Dragon and Gravity were all recalled due to their use of Coal Derived Humates or Paclobutrazol as plant growth regulators. Only permitted for ornamental plants, these products are presently unable to be sold as labeled. This began with a labeling dispute with the California Department of Agriculture and grew to a nationwide recall.