I 'm growing in soil in large pots and wonder if as a general rule the lowest branches of a plant are served by the uppermost roots?

I ask because the lower branches of a plant of mine stressed immediately above the area of soil I applied nutrient to (I hadn't noticed the soil was dry and needed to be watered before I fed).

hope that's clear. cheers from Oz!

[joe fresh]

to answer your question directly, no...but to help with your problem i would need to see some pics...

[FRIENDinDEED]

its a valid question and i hope this thread gains some steam with those who have experienced it.

most growers have had experience with either a little burn or alot of burn and at times it will affect either specific areas of the plant or the entire plant altogether.

maybe theres a way to map the plant via the root zone somehow, maybe taking cuts from one area of the plant would root faster/stronger than if they were from another area? its a scientific method type of issue where tests would have to be conducted but the information and data would maybe hint to something of value imo.

like when a plant has necrotic leaves, why is it that some of the leaves get that way and not the entire plant?

[Payaso]

That is a very interesting theory about various root zones correlating to various plant parts above ground. Anyone else with thoughts on this? I only know what I have seen myself...and would like to learn more.

[mad librettist]

hmmm it doesn't square with what I know about roots.

all the action in a root mass is going on in the new tissue, while the older tissue is hard and unable to absorb anything.

Also, when a plant has to cannibalize growth, it starts with the bottom where light is less intense.

I think you stressed your plant by overdoing the ferts, and it responded by retreating to a more defensible position.

yes. thanks all.

it's taken me a while to work out exactly what I did and it has nothing to do with my soil or roots.

I asked because understanding possible root/branch correlation was part of my problem analysis.

I fed the plant per soil and at the same time I foliar fed it.

the foliar spray does not break down in the container and it was about two weeks old. however during the time it sat in the sprayer old herbicide salts from the innards of the sprayer leached into the mix!!!

these salts were concentrated in the handpiece of the sprayer so the initial burst of spray damaged the plant where I began spraying it. the position I began spraying and the position I fed the soil was the same. the damaged tips are not recoverable but the branches themselves do not appear to have suffered and flowering continues.

thanks again and yes I no longer use that particular sprayer! and yes I am a dunderhead!

[Payaso]

Well Wilbur, I hope the recent rains haven't flooded you or yours... but I am happy to hear that you figured out what the problem was...guess the answer here is to make sure you don't have contaminated sprayers.

You sure had me going there for a minute!

Happy growing, stay safe and dry - especially watch out for mold now!

I think my proposition has some merit tho'. please read on and tell me if I 'm wrong.

I know from observations in my home garden (not my dope garden) that there IS a direct spatial correlation between roots and branches in plants that have an adventitious root system. I am proposing here that this correlation applies with slight variation to Cannabis, said variation being due to Cannabis having both an adventitious AND a tap root system.

This is how I arrived at my thinking:

I spilled an amount of neat Kelp near a young Mango tree in my garden. The branches adjacent to the spill died and no further growth occurred until the kelp concentrate (presumably) dissolved. All the while the rest of the tree grew on with health and vigour.

Similarly, I have a custard apple tree (Cherimoya spp.) which has grown its longest, largest and most leafy branches by far, right over the garden area I often wander down from my verandah to take a piss on! Piss is mostly Urea, right?

Now the root systems of these fruit trees are adventitious and Cannabis is not altogether like that. Whenever I 've dug/pulled up a big Cannabis plant they appear to have adventitious roots AND a tap root both.

And the above-ground parts of cannabis can be seen to mirror this combination of root systems. I mean, Cannabis has an upright central stem which is like an inverse image of its tap root (altho the tap root is never as deep as the stem is high) and the branches coming from this central stem radiate outwards above-ground in the same way adventitious roots do below ground.

So altho Cannabis has more parts, root-wise, than my fruit trees I can't think of a reason why damage to the adventitious part of a Cannabis plant's root system would not show as corollary damage to the above-ground part of the plant in the same way the spilled kelp did to my Mango tree. Given the vertical growth habit of Cannabis it seems to me the only unknown is how many tiers of branches might mirror the root damage.

Agreed, my observation-based intuitions are hardly Science and the issue is made opaque, probably insolubly so, when Cannabis is grown in pots. Then the roots must necessarily jumble and tangle together with no room for a tap root to do its vertical thing, and no way to know which root started where.

However bearing such spatial corollaries in mind may help diagnose plant stress at least for large plants.

Thanks All. Happy growing!

[FRIENDinDEED]

Originally Posted by wilbur

I think my proposition has some merit tho'. please read on and tell me if I 'm wrong.

I know from observations in my home garden (not my dope garden) that there IS a direct spatial correlation between roots and branches in plants that have an adventitious root system. I am proposing here that this correlation applies with slight variation to Cannabis, said variation being due to Cannabis having both an adventitious AND a tap root system.

This is how I arrived at my thinking:

I spilled an amount of neat Kelp near a young Mango tree in my garden. The branches adjacent to the spill died and no further growth occurred until the kelp concentrate (presumably) dissolved. All the while the rest of the tree grew on with health and vigour.

Similarly, I have a custard apple tree (Cherimoya spp.) which has grown its longest, largest and most leafy branches by far, right over the garden area I often wander down from my verandah to take a piss on! Piss is mostly Urea, right?

Now the root systems of these fruit trees are adventitious and Cannabis is not altogether like that. Whenever I 've dug/pulled up a big Cannabis plant they appear to have adventitious roots AND a tap root both.

And the above-ground parts of cannabis can be seen to mirror this combination of root systems. I mean, Cannabis has an upright central stem which is like an inverse image of its tap root (altho the tap root is never as deep as the stem is high) and the branches coming from this central stem radiate outwards above-ground in the same way adventitious roots do below ground.

So altho Cannabis has more parts, root-wise, than my fruit trees I can't think of a reason why damage to the adventitious part of a Cannabis plant's root system would not show as corollary damage to the above-ground part of the plant in the same way the spilled kelp did to my Mango tree. Given the vertical growth habit of Cannabis it seems to me the only unknown is how many tiers of branches might mirror the root damage.

Agreed, my observation-based intuitions are hardly Science and the issue is made opaque, probably insolubly so, when Cannabis is grown in pots. Then the roots must necessarily jumble and tangle together with no room for a tap root to do its vertical thing, and no way to know which root started where.

However bearing such spatial corollaries in mind may help diagnose plant stress at least for large plants.

Thanks All. Happy growing!

cant read it right now but just wanted to show respect and say that when im back i will get to reading it right away