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"!

The Lounge : Growers Round Table Discussion Thread

growingcrazy

growingcrazy

Well-known member
slownickel said:
The mix is an old organic hodgepodge of chunky coco, peat, worm castings, compost, etc.. had to wash the hell out of it and balance it out. Quite the chore.

After washing, it was amended correctly and we have been chasing high K and Na from the get go. Chemically free yet has some synthetic ferts like MAP, CaN, KN and P acid.

Mainly used a good fish amino acid product for N though, this allows no more than 30% synthetic N at any given time. Fish Fertilizer 12.2-1.5-1.3 on Amazon.
Click to expand...


How many samples were taken from beginning to end of this mix? Did you sample to start, then wash, resample, amend, resample or something along those lines?
 
J

jidoka

Active member
Two questions. My S is in ppm, not %. Divide by 10,000 to convert to % and compare to Slow

How much Mg do you think I am pushing? If you look at my third leaf down is it higher than Slow? I know it is high because the bottom leaf is storing more than 15% more than the top.

I am trying to grow the entire plant though. So I want bottom leaf close to top
 
growingcrazy

growingcrazy

Well-known member
He is using more Mg and S because he is getting more Ca and P into the plant. Look at the ratios between those 4 elements in the samples posted.


EDIT: Your Ca:p ratio is slightly better than Slows, you just don't have nearly the quantity. At this point I would spend more money on square footage instead of chasing grams from nutrient profile changes. It seems easier for coco.
 
J

jidoka

Active member
Is quantity more important than ratio? Plus we aren’t talking grams. We have the accounting pretty well figured out

The building is full. Inventory turns are maxed for the quality we run. That leaves yield. From environment or formula you might be surprised what it does to cost
 
growingcrazy

growingcrazy

Well-known member
What are the differences in something like Chem D for example...With Ca at 9% vs 3% in tissue, all with the same ratios to follow those numbers... I would think yield increase and much closer to genetic potential.


I know you have it all figured out and have a set target... I was coming from the standpoint of already hitting 90%+ of potential yield and that being a nearly limiting factor. IF more is left to be had...fill er up.
 
led05

led05

Chasing The Present
slownickel said:
No woo woo here folks... day 21.
Click to expand...




I wish this was a wider shot, the leaves kind of look like over-fertilized strawberries , 3 in all



:)


If I had read prior posts like I did now I wouldn’t have joked around.... it’s really too bad some are the way they are and simply ruin, everything
 
Last edited:
S

slownickel

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
jidoka said:
So 1st column is a repeat...2nd column is half the yield

Nitrate. 0.016. 0.340%
P 0.41. 0.50
K. 2.88. 2.72
Ca. 3.41. 2.72
Mg. 0.55. 0.48

B. 52. 41 ppm
Cu 5. 4
Fe. 73. 62
Mn. 178. 122
Si. 1523. 803
S. 1588. 1667
Zn. 69. 55
Mo. <1. <1
Al 22 14

The true devil is the bottom leaf and the full grow trends
Click to expand...

What lab are you using?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top