Originally Posted by YosemiteSam

your English is fine willi and your point is interesting.

no question water quality plays a huge part of the equation. and also no question it does not get discussed near enough.

I do my best

Quite honestly, water quality is no issue for the fertilizer manufacturers for hemp. They tell us to adjust the water for the fertilizer, while a pro do this the other way around. No need for RO water if you have the right fertilizer, but the fertilizer manufacturers for hemp mainly sell only one fertilizer.

We finally need the knowledge of the community so that everyone gets the right fertilizer he needs, rather than one must try what ever works for a fertilizer.

But to return to the subject of calcium in the fertilizer

The amount of calcium in the tap water, in the fertilizer and in the medium (lime in the soil) add up. Therefore fertilizers specifically designed for soil rarely contain calcium, because the quantity of calcium in the soil is sufficiently for the plant. In hydroponics it depends on water hardness if calcium have to be added.

The amount of calcium hemp needed in the growth and bloom should be somewhere in between 100-200 ppm. I have often read the number of 150 ppm, eg with Ed Rosenthal, but whether this figure is correct is questionable.

[ShroomDr]

[Tangent]
Root66 is the only rooting product ive seen list B. Some site veterans may remember a 'Stump Remover' thread, (stump removal = a Boron overdose) this shit makes me laugh every time.

Technaflora seems to think B is as important as Fe.

Technaflora Root66 (1-1-1) (NH4)1% Fe0.05% B0.05%
237g/250mL = 0.948g/mL
@10mL/Gal
N 25
P 11
K 21
Fe 1.25
B 1.25
Derived from: Ascophyllium Kelp, Iron EDTA, Boric Acid. 0.5% Cane Sugar.

They list an application rate of up to 40mL/Gal (for transplants), thats 5ppm of Fe and B


[/Tangent]

Originally Posted by ShroomDr

They list an application rate of up to 40mL/Gal (for transplants), thats 5ppm of Fe and B

Seedlings / cuttings like indeed not too much Fe and therefor more B, but not really in that concentration.

This is murder * LOL *

[kiwiboy]

Stump Removal = Potassium Nitrate
Kill Ant = Boric Acid

[ShroomDr]

Originally Posted by kiwiboy

Stump Removal = Potassium Nitrate
Kill Ant = Boric Acid

You are correct. I could have swarn there was B on stump remover, but every reference i find now is KNO3, or sodium pyrosulfite


Either way, im pretty sure you are killing the stump by overdosing it. N, B, Na, S, you pick the poison.

[tester]

Is it certain, that the Weight% is listed on the fertilizer solutions, rather than the Weight/Volume%?
Is there any kind of regulations controlling which one has to be listed on the label?

According to Cann@-UK, it can be expressed in both ways:
https://www.fluidsensoronline.com/201...k-by-canna-uk/

If this is true, and all the calculations here are based on w/w instead of w/v, the numbers can be 15-25% more than they actually are.

[ShroomDr]

That article sucks balls, but since its written by a manufacturer, i wouldnt expect much. As a matter of fact, i cant believe how confusing they are trying to make things, it should be criminal.


(Why would someone care how many mg/L of N they have, when they could simply look at the elemental NPK level.) Mg/L would be useful information from a tissue sample serum level; an output reading, not input unit of measure.

Think of a 200lb diabetic man ordering 0.08oz of cola per pound. Knowing what .08oz/lb of cola will do to him is important, but what is easier for him to grasp? Drinking a 16oz cola or .08oz/lb?


If they werent factoring in water weight, the numbers would be off by more than 15-25%. The product densities are listed (g/mL)

Originally Posted by ShroomDr

...Think of a 200lb diabetic man ordering 0.08oz of cola per pound. Knowing what .08oz/lb of cola will do to him is important, but what is easier for him to grasp? Drinking a 16oz cola or .08oz/lb?...

This is really a good comparison

I think the whole secrecy is due to the fact that fertilizer manufacturers are subsidiaries of chemical and pharmaceutical companies. They also make vast sums of money by pissing the people. The Manufacturers of hemp fertilizer only imitate the big players ....

[tester]

I don't see your point, or maybe I just misunderstand it, but IMO mg/l is better when we talk about fertilizers, especially fert solutions, because we measure liquids by volume.

For example when following a fert schedule, amounts are listed in mls.
When we fertilize (fertigate) the plants, the nutrient solution is measured by liters, and all we need to know is how much nutrients are in 1 liter of water (w/v), we don't measure it with a scale.

When you multiply w/w with the density, you get mg/l anyway, so all those numbers coming from that nutrient calculator are in mg/l..
But again, maybe this is just a misunderstanding on my side.


Just found that there might be companys who lists nutrient contents in v/w.
Metrop lists NPK on the label by w/v%, so there is no need to multiply it with the density to get the final mg/l.
If someone does, results will be 50% more than they actually are.
https://metrop.nl/1_ned/3_pr_nl_mr1.html