The Lounge : Growers Round Table Discussion Thread

growingcrazy said:

You most likely don't need any Mg in your feeds.

You could feed every couple weeks with Mg in the mix and be fine. Foliar in veg to build Mg reserves. Most soils already have enough Mg that you don't need more for a couple of runs and then it is still strain dependent.

Arnold, Jidoka probably runs something like 30 ppm S and 110 P, or similar but still carrying that ratio. Anions compete with other Anions. Really the limit on your S is only relevant if you see a deficiency in P. Remember, numbers are just numbers.
Picked up a new laptop, Shoot me a PM Arnold.

I wanted to make a note concerning the Sample that Jidoka mentioned High Ec and lookouts ETC on...

Those EC numbers from Spectrum are pure bullshit. 3 meters later, a new Hannah from Avenger and I confirmed my thoughts. I thought I had a bunch of junk meters from sitting...nope just junk numbers from Spectrum on EC.

I had quite a few PM's about mixes and asking to post here...

I can't say this enough...If anybody wants to learn, do it here. You have a simple question that's just eating at you or a tough question that just isn't in your grasp, post it!
Doesn't matter what it's about, teas, mixes, irrigation, coco, peat...don't care. This is a thread for learning.


I have had starts going from seed since February...looking forward to outdoor this year! How are your big girls doing Jidoka? ( I am assuming they are already)

Click to expand...

I wonder if someone walked into any said lab and saw what was going on if they would rely / trust more on those results than what they feel.....

a while back I was hinting really hard at the limitations of soil testing, labs (any one in particular), how they are collected (us) and so on...... Pissed out of the convo - I expect people know they are just like a Ho, a tool, one of many

Thanks for sharing! I'm not yet through reading this thread but already got a question:

growingcrazy said:

...
P 100 (227 p205)
...
P 106 (241 p205)
...
P 100 (227 p205)
...

Click to expand...

Why that much P especially cause N is kept on the lower end of the spectrum?

We are fans of dr reams

http://www.cantonmills.com/uploads/PHOSPHATE__Reams_.pdf

Embarrassingly, I can't open up the link with my very slow connection, especially with the 1st tab open to the IC forum... No matter how may times I refresh the 'Page Cannot be Displayed' page.

One day I'll live in the 21st Century. Until then, most docs will probably come via carrier pigeon, if at all! ;^>)

Is there a concise lay-description of the contents of dr reams' page linked above w/ key points?

Thanks.

Teams taught, and most of us now also believe, that p ought to equal k in the soil (or p2o5 should equal 2x k2o). We also believe that top dresses or fertigation ought to be 1-1-1 npk.

Modern teaching has way lower p

The paper I linked to is how Reams got p in the soil...cliff note version he liked soft rock

Tainio goes about it a different way but came to the same conclusion that a soil ph of 6.4 is ideal

Tried again to open the link, by following an idea sent by another poster, and still got no where, other than this time it went to an 'Error 404' "Page not found."

Oh well...

jidoka said:

Teams taught, and most of us now also believe, that p ought to equal k in the soil (or p2o5 should equal 2x k2o). We also believe that top dresses or fertigation ought to be 1-1-1 npk.

Modern teaching has way lower p

The paper I linked to is how Reams got p in the soil...cliff note version he liked soft rock

Tainio goes about it a different way but came to the same conclusion that a soil ph of 6.4 is ideal

Click to expand...

Thanks. I suspect our posts nearly came at identical timing.

I've seen excess green in plants near harvest time when what I considered too much N was present. Does he address the decrease of presence of N at harvest, or does he see it as a non-issue?

On the bright side, I've probably ended up near his stated ideal ph, without knowing it. I'd been down near 6.0, after years at 6.8-7, and was headed back up a bit, stopping recently between 6.2 and 6.4. Still uncertain though. Time will tell me some of this.

I've only minimally used any soft-rock phosphate, though recently picked up a small bag or 2 to use in someone else's top-dressing recipe I'd stolen on-line.

Thanks jidoka.

led05 said:

if people would create a simple excel spreadsheet breaking out Anions, Cations and perhaps color it say yellow and blue (maybe purple for the swingers, N for example), and make it columnar, maybe add each of their favorite fertilizers and their contents for the top 15-16 minerals (columns) and fertilizers (rows) they use.....

I imagine it would be an hour or two of work for days of if not weeks of problems solved

Click to expand...

Try a lifetime of problems solved.


This is what separates the consultants from the hobbists lol.


Can you use excell? Hahah

Reams considered no3 a veg energy and nh4 a flower energy. You can make that switch

However time marches on. My preference is to use an amino based foliar in flower

I want my plants to finish green. Bud weight is adding in what seems like an exponential way at that pt. I ain’t gonna end that by starving the plant

Have you tried the adherence to the 1-1-1 model and noted any decrease or increase in flower size, resin/oil production, or changes in flavor that were better or worse?

Any more, my first reaction to all things new, is skepticism. But as I wrote elsewhere, "The more I learn, the less I know." ;^>)

I have a few hundred lbs a week close to those ratios.thc goes up, pest/disease pressure goes down. Taste idk, that is subjective

I finish this green



And I damn sure don’t defoliate

Thanks. That's helpful. Where theories turn into valid and verified personal experience and practice, is where my eyes open up a bit wider, and my ears get a bit bent more forward.

Unlearning old 'truths' can be hard sometimes.

What Jidoka said in the last few posts really sums up the nutritional side of how feed a plant.


Start with a balanced medium in regards to CEC, feed with a 1-2-1 (1-1-1) and your plants will respond accordingly. This not only grows exceptional product, it lowers the bills considerably.


I like the looks of that last greenhouse Jidoka. Really have been considering some corrugated panels for winter months.

moose eater said:

Thanks, GC.

I consciously tried to cut back on the amount of immediately available K. (Kelp meal being a moderate release, and Green Sand being a very slow release). The langbeinite was the exception, but I went back and forth on the amount of it, deciding on 1 TBSP, after having had it at 2 tsp; in one stressed round with a similar mix, I had attributed a good bit of that round's trouble to excess langbeinite, and not just due to the K.).

It was I think Slow who had mentioned that top-dressed or even tilled Sup-Po-Mag/Langbeinite didn't further contribute to the mag or N lock-outs the way that other sources of K did, and acknowledged it was a mystery as to why.

Any recycling avoidance was, in part, an effort at fresh start each time, as well as concerns re. salts.

In my own calculations, I took similarly rated sources, and added them up in total aggregate/volume/etc., and tried to make them fit into the ratios presented, but the EWC, etc., are all wild cards until tested.

Really, even those things with supposedly 'known' values, as stated, in my opinion, is a matter of trust that the quality control and analysis at any given source of an amendment is accurate and consistent.

That was the additional cause for such diversity in sources of specific nutes; while it's likely there's some inaccuracy in at least one amendment from a commercial source, the likelihood that ALL are equally inaccurate is less.. was my hypothesis. Just thinking my process out loud to demonstrate how I got there.

Will Spectrum be able to discern proper values on a mix with such an elevated presence of peat-based products in it? I'd read some place (maybe in this thread) re. concerns for peat-based soilless mixes and the [presence of peat skewing results.

Thanks again.

Click to expand...

For the reasons you mention, that is why I like to have a quality amendment that I know what it contains, and when/how long it will be available. Learn that amendments cycle and work it into your program, repeat with all amendments.



When you make calculations do you track the PPM of the amendments going in per cuft? That will give you the best perspective on what your doing, especially with so many unknowns like the EWC (notorious for high Mg and K).


In regards to Spectrum, they are weighing samples. That is about all we can say.

In coco. Another one of those coco bro scientist definitely don’t do this laws. Sacred cows make the tastiest burgers

But don’t do it with an unbalanced formula

jidoka said:

View attachment 456012

In coco. Another one of those coco bro scientist definitely don’t do this laws. Sacred cows make the tastiest burgers

But don’t do it with an unbalanced formula

Click to expand...

And this is why P.

Imo anytime you single out one element you are wrong. It is the balance of all elements that matter

I've got minimal coco in my mix, simply as a result of incorporating others' mixes into my older mixes, and looking for alternatives to help decrease my peat without inherently incorporating nutrients.

Side detour here, jidoka, can you post a good pic, up close, of a nice finished and cured bud from the 1-1-1 process.

Taste-wise, I've long preferred the finished, more pale green, resulting from lower feeding of N toward the end. I've found that if there's discernible elevated N in finish, with a darker green, it lends to the chlorophyll taste.

In terms of differentiating between types of N, referenced above in your post, for growth, versus for bloom, I have no clue. Consider me a newbie in those regards.

I've seen Growing Crazy reference fish hydrosylate (spelling?), and don't know if this is inherently included in my 5-1-1 Alaska Fish Emulsion I sometimes use during veg, or in tea. I've seen the product you've referred to elsewhere.

I'm one of those people who did this a long time, based on beliefs and variety of information, accurate or not, which worked -very- well at times, excellent at others, and at least moderately in a minor # of cases.

I've hit close to 1.5 grams/watt with 400 hps numerous times in 4'x4' with no additional lighting, specifically with my oldest mother (Dronkers' California Indica I acquired in about 1997) but as stated the overwhelming sticky oil from the earlier guano tea years dissipated to real good weed, but not the same. (Once nearly filled a koda-chrome canister with nice scissor hash in those days, trimming a mere half-lb. No exaggeration; way more oily then than what came later.. even with replication of process, etc.).

Probably need to diversify my lighting now that I'm into the 315s. Thinking a 3,000k to 4,200k in LED PAR 30-38 with an equivalent output of 100 to 120 watt incandescent floods, x4, mounted in corners; would still keep me under the older 400 digital ballast draw, though not by much..

As far as ppm per cu. ft, I'm a long ways from that at the moment, though if soil tests were to be done (hopefully soon) then I could probably calculate for that.

Right now I use the amendments that I've been most familiar with, going from bulk purchases of 50-lb.bags of things like blood meal, kelp meal, steamed bone meal, langbeinite, etc., at the feed store on occasion (specifically this time of year when we're planting veggies & spuds), to, more often, when the larger bulk bags' dregs run out, with the remnants of them sometimes getting used in my shop on the cannabis, going back to the typical, more frequent, Down to Earth products.

As stated before, there's no doubt in my mind that the DTE guanos changed 15 or so years back, and I've found another person or 2 here that believed they witnessed similar changes as well.

Same for the quality and content of the dolomite lime I get. That's changed several times, from the same label. Thus my skepticism where such amendments are concerned.

I intend to submit samples of the EWC I have on hand here (3 brands, 2 of them premium, at least by cost factor, with both of those being $50 to $60 /cu. ft.) to assess whether or not they're better than the ones that are half their cost. Also to see if they're packing the questionably high levels of iron and K that seems to be prevalent in EWCs.

Can Spectrum give analysis for such things?

Anyway, this post is probably long enough, and then some. Thanks for the help, any and all.

I'm in the midst of mixing up what I posted earlier, and diluting a portion of it with some extra peat and perlite to reduce the punch in it, as some cuttings are telling me I've procrastinated too long. "Use 'em or lose 'em!!" ;^>)

Thanks again.

jidoka, I looked at the enlarged version of the image you posted above, and don't see what I'd typically consider to be a too-heavy-on-N presence; more of a neutral to mid-range 'green.'

Thanks again.

Back to work, whether my back agrees or not!! It's time!! ;^>)

jidoka, I didn't get the references in the post with the picof the meter.

I use LaMotte's soil test kits on occasion for NPK assessment, etc., and their reagent 2221 with a test tray for ph. but typically reserve much of that for the veggies and spud plot.

I hope nothing was misinterpreted in my post re. the photo of the greenhouse; the green looks right, is what I was trying to say. not as though too heavy on N.

Playing with an unopened old stash of DTE crab meal today. 4-3-0 with 14% calcium; seems to be something that would be applicable to the 1-1-1 or 1-2-1 regimen. I need more information on the release time, and the presence of reasonably stout calcium says it may not be suitable for late flower top-dressing? Ideas?