[plantingplants]

....

[slownickel]

Originally Posted by jidoka

https://www.growersmineral.com/about is Tiedjens old company right.

So is "making room for" about leaving stuff other than Ca on the low side so you can add those soluble nutrients...kinda like using Pro Mix in a greenhouse? It is the one concept I am still fuzzy on after talking

One of the biggest hurdles with any grower (including me for more than 20 years), is the testicular clamping and withdrawal when one starts talking about taking away the application of magnesium in the form of dolomite or magnesium sulfate. The only source that is recommended that will NOT contribute to structural collapse is sulpomag. Don't ask me why. Just try it.

The issue with magnesium is another one of those soil science curve balls. The more excess you have, the more you have deficiency in the leaves. This is due to the fact that the roots are dying from too much Mg and they really don't want to pick up any more. TWANG.... no air TWANG..... water logging... TWANG rots... all the problems in the world. And what do people do when these see those color photos of magnesium deficiency on their plants? It would be funny if it wasn't such a sad kick in the ass.

So that is Mg. Now K.

To ideally grow out a plant, you never want to have a K deficiency, which by the way is not very common until the plant kicks into heavy growth, and even then, one should proceed with caution as ideally one would be increasing and increasing quantities throughout the veg cycle. Here is a major issue that needs to be confronted and is critical to understanding how to push growth/flower/fruit.

The plant can never be without potassium. Ideally, if Calcium was high, one could really push potassium heavy and max out production. But not up front. That would be fatal. At the right moment in time, ideally we would push quantities past daily consumption rates to start raising the level or percentage of what is K in the CEC. This is a lot of potassium. Much more than a seedling would ever tolerate. Pushing hard. Why? The more K you can get in, the more you get out. The constraint to K uptake though, is having enough Ca to handle it. If I start with low Ca and I push K, I could never push it to where I could really max out the production of plant mass. Realize that potassium can be taken up from around the soil by osmosis (concentrations) and that the area right around the root can become void of potassium and this is why the potassium has to nearly be constant, in incremental and exponential quantities. However, when you want to flower, you push K down heavily with Ca, so that all the new roots that need to pop below will get what they need and not be short of Ca at this magic moment in time.

Then we work production. The first couple or more weeks, little or no K, heavy Ca, P, metals, B if needed. Then, we start bringing up K slowly, accelerating up until the end, flushing etc if one is into that....

Now the hard kick between the legs.

If you make a wonder soil, all the woowoo in the world and get a CEC of 30. The stradegies laid out to get to full genetic potential for both quality and yield can't be hit. Why? I can't change the CEC to save my life, it would take huge quantities.

So what does this mean? Do your math based on having Ca being 85% using AA@8.2 and aiming for 2000 to 2500 ppm of Ca, which is 10 to 12.5 meq of Ca on your soil analysis (1 meq of Ca is 200.4 ppms of Ca). With that much calcium, we have excellent calcium levels with which to work and yet not too much that makes getting K response with manageable amounts of K.

If you have to deal with what you have, 85% Ca regardless and spend the money on KSO4 and KNO3.

[Hillside Growin]

Originally Posted by slownickel

Glad to hear that folks are getting something out of my rants!

Go juice!

I look forward to your rants is like a daily knowledge bomb. I understand what's going on in my soil on thanks to your posts. This last post helped me since my soils is lacking both K and Mg. You and others seem to explain the common problems and solutions with ease. Keep up the good work there's lots of us lurking in the shadows taking notes.

[slownickel]

Hillside,

Hard to contemplate a soil that is not deficient in Ca. Applying Mg to a soil, unless it is really needed it is the beginning of the end....

[FoothillFarming]

Originally Posted by slownickel

Hillside,

Hard to contemplate a soil that is not deficient in Ca. Applying Mg to a soil, unless it is really needed is the beginning of the end....

So what about the use of molasses in organics? More trouble than it's worth? Is there a sugar that is lower in Mg?

[slownickel]

Molasses is a pretty amazing microbiology stimulator. So is brown sugar.

My organic certification group is balking about the source of molasses as much of the sugar cane that it comes from is nearly always conventionally grown with chemicals and quite often glyphosate is applied to "mature" the cane or knock the leaves off of it, or to simply stop the flowering process. There are several usages. So if you get molasses from that cane, the microbiology will get knocked down and not increased. The first patent by Monsanto on glyphosate was as an antibiotic.

We are planting a small area of sugar cane so we can just press the cane with a small trapiche and get can juice, which is a zillion times better than molasses.

Note the use by AEA and many others of molasses. It is a cheap sugar source and known to be full of nutrients.

[FoothillFarming]

This is the source I use.....
https://www.grandmasmolasses.com/prod...inal-molasses/

Maybe I should search out an organic source next year......Haven't been using any this year, due to high Mg.

[jidoka]

Hey slow...do zn and mn work through the same metabolic pathway or simply compete because they are both cations? All of my mn sprays have led to zn defs and fe on one plant

[slownickel]

Originally Posted by jidoka

Hey slow...do zn and mn work through the same metabolic pathway or simply compete because they are both cations? All of my mn sprays have led to zn defs and fe on one plant

Jidoka,

Cations compete, always. Play with a magnet when you forget this.

Manganese can go toxic. If you remedy the Mn deficiency FOLAIRLY and keep applying it, you will start replacing Zn and Fe sites with Mn. An induced toxicity if you will.

Also realize that applying metals foliarly has very limited results on yields. It is more a paint job. If you want to see yield responses, the literature and experiences are clear, the soil is what makes things happen in a big way. Doing both foliar and soil applications constantly in a BALANCED proportion to what you need is the correct way to go.

As for an iron deficiency.... mmmm

Iron deficiencies and iron toxicities are identical to the eye. You would be amazed how many times the two are confused, resulting in iron applications on top of iron toxicity.

There is also the problem of not having enough Mn and Zn resulting in Fe not be taken up in the correct form of iron ie. Fe3 vs Fe2, especially if the proportions are way out of whack in the soil of Fe/Mn. This is most prevalent when people apply huge quantities of organic material or a mineral amendment with huge Fe or Al levels. Without the proportional Mn, you will see Fe toxicity but only due to the lack of proportion with Mn, not the lack of overall Mn. You can have 50 ppm of Mn which normally would be a good level, but with 400 ppm of Fe and 200 ppm of Al, you will see big time Mn problems, most often with Zn, Cu, Ni issues as well and overall lack of Ca due to the quality of the roots. You have a lot of Mn, but because things are so skewed in the proportions, it is the excess that makes you need more of the contrary metals, not the lack of units.

This is where the majority of soil and leaf analysis recommendations go wrong. Folks like to look at ranges and say, hey, I am in the range, I am fine. What is out of range? Mmmm High Fe. Oh well. High Al, oh well, Mn a bit low but in range, oh well... and do nothing. Can't get their on that road.

[jidoka]

You may have nailed that one bubba.

The soil in question began the year at:
Fe. 151 ppm
Mn. 34 ppm
Al 293 ppm

How does one adress high Al