[mushroombrew]

I like no till gardens. I have seen great results too.

But a little Magnesium sulphate will remove all red pigment @ the correct pH in any setup.

I am curious if nutrients affect phenotype. From I or IO.

I get extreme phenotypic differences in rockwool vs LIM vs DWC with the same strain.

Side by side you would have a hard time distinguishing the same plant.

Same nutrients, same environment, same reservoir everything but different media.

The media or lack of it causes different types of growth.

Why is that?

So is the I vs IO insignificant? Is media the real debate? Opinions?

[Weird]

Originally Posted by mushroombrew

I like you point of view. I am at the opposite end in chem Hydro. But I enjoy hearing your experience as I am not done learning.

I would think in a natural scenario a plant would take up most of its nitrogen as NH4 as that is the most readily available and plentiful form near the surface.

We feed primarily NO3 as it does not cause acidification.

Do you think it has any effect? The type of nitrogen?

type of N is irrelevant as long as it is readily available to the plant and depleted by maturation

[mushroombrew]

All plants the same pheno and the same "age"

Left is Organic soil just water. Middle is LIM chem hydro. Right is DWC chem Hydro.

So middle and right get the exact same nutrients. Far right is media free.

I can understand the differences in speed of growth by why the pheno shift? I haven't seen many other plant species change this radically.

[mushroombrew]

Originally Posted by Weird

type of N is irrelevant as long as it is readily available to the plant and depleted by maturation

Thanks for that.

Do you think IO chems are any easier or harder to flush? In the plant they are the same right? Will need to look into the different media salts formed in O or IO and check solubility.

So you know I said about the tea tainted weed. Obviously something they use isnt flushing?

I don't make teas so maybe you know?

[DocTim420]

If one assumes the term "organic" is dependent on the rules/definitions as promulgated by the criteria at U.S. Code § 6518(m)(1-7) - National Organic Standards Board, then lets read those verses from that "bible":

(m) Evaluation. In evaluating substances considered for inclusion in the proposed National List or proposed amendment to the National List, the Board shall consider—
(1) the potential of such substances for detrimental chemical interactions with other materials used in organic farming systems;
(2) the toxicity and mode of action of the substance and of its breakdown products or any contaminants, and their persistence and areas of concentration in the environment;
(3) the probability of environmental contamination during manufacture, use, misuse or disposal of such substance;
(4) the effect of the substance on human health;
(5) the effects of the substance on biological and chemical interactions in the agroecosystem, including the physiological effects of the substance on soil organisms (including the salt index and solubility of the soil), crops and livestock;
(6) the alternatives to using the substance in terms of practices or other available materials; and
(7) its compatibility with a system of sustainable agriculture

Imo, there is this constant tension between "good farming" and "protect the environment", sometimes the "protect the environment" takes the backseat to "good farming". Example, Potassium Silicate it is approved for organic use for 2 out of 3 conditions: "pesticide" and "plant disease control" only--not for "plant nutrition".

Why? Criteria #3 (manufacturing process) is the reason why Potassium Silicate (aka AgSil, Pro-tekt, etc) is classified as a "synthetic". But because of Criteria #6 (other available products) Potassium Silicate is verbotten for "plant nutrition"...but OK for "pesticide" and "plant disease control".

Why? Because of this constant tension between "good farming" and "protect the environment". Synthetics OK sometimes...but not other times...fucking dogma!

Some people are good disciples of the faith and will obey all edicts commanded from above...then there are some of us that say "fuck that" and use our common sense to conduct "good farming" practices.

And then I was told by a guy wearing a white lab coat that processing phosphate rock for organic use--does not remove all of the natural radioactive material. Hmmm, anyone have a spare Geiger Counter?

[mushroombrew]

Thanks for that info. USDA Organic is all a bit messy.

When I think of O i think blood and bone meal, fish meal, kelp guano etc.

I do not think of Magnesium sulphate!!? But is is rock derived.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium_sulfate

Does the above manufacturing look organic to you guys?

And you can use Epsom if you can show soil deficiencies.

Here is the USDA list. Gray? yes very Gray... Check out this bullshit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnesium_sulfate

Seems there may be a fair amount of IO nutes in O production to me...

[dank.frank]

Originally Posted by mushroombrew

And yes soil is complicated. But the microbial competition may be off topic?

Maybe we ought to assume an inert media?

Then we are not talking at all about soil. Soil is not an inert substance. It is not just a blank media. It's a living, functioning ecosystem. Microbial competition is EVERYTHING in terms of nutrient provision. If it wasn't for the consumption of bacteria and fungi by higher order species there would be very little conversion of those raw organic materials into proper ionic forms for plant uptake.

When I first started growing, it was with organic bottled nutrients in homemade aeroponic tubes. I kept the same bottled nutrient line and moved over to cheap soil. Then learned what REAL organics is about. There is no organic without the inclusion of soil. Based on current NOP standards, hydroponic anything is not considered organic, regardless the inputs sources.

My point being, I've experience both sides of the equation and even though I am ridiculed for this opinion, I stand by it.

Different hydroponic nutrient lines produce different flavors than others. Organic soil produces a different flavor than hydro does. I prefer the flavor of organic soil grown flowers. It's better.

We hardly understand the mechanisms in play when we start talking soil microbiology. We've barely scratched the surface. We can't effectively replicate the biochemical process of photosynthesis. I'm not one to take a currently accepted understanding of science and assert it as fact, above that of my own experiences. I think as we continue to learn and assimilate more information for data comparison, we will start to discover there are in fact measurable differences between the two.

Long story short = Organic Soil > Hydro. Every time.



dank.Frank

[mushroombrew]

I realize O and "soil" go together 99% of the time.

I know many organic growers who use Promix and sunshine etc.
That is not really "Soil" though is it.

So I have to keep soil biology out of the conversation somewhat.

I am interested in the nutrients as they enter the plants root system. And if there is any difference between O and I nutrient ions/molecules.

How the microbes came to break down those minerals is the cycle of life in soil.

I am looking at the end nutes not how they came to exist.

O vs IO fertilizer is what I am getting at. When the mineral/ion is solute.

Not how the mineral was formed by biology. That is a massive topic.

The organic commercial flower around here tastes "dirty" for lack of a better word. Great terps but when burned not so much. I am not saying O cannot taste good far from it. I have grown great flower in an O super soil mix.
I know its in the teas here. You can smell it in the facilities, rec stores etc. I just do not know what component is causing that taste.

[Drewsif]

OP, corporate science is bullshit. Its lies and gatekeeping.. Organic vs inorganic, there is no debate. We know nitrates are bad. Big Mike won't tell you that, if that's what you're waiting for? Science in general is not based on reality, its based on paper. Science says all farts smell the same and all pussy taste the same. Science says there are no strains. Fuck science. Fuck anyone who says nitrates are healthy to smoke.

Organic is just a word thrown around. It has a meaning. Nothing to do with gov permits..Organic is a plant with a digestive system, as nature intended.

Organic (natural, real) uses a digestive system, the soil. The end result is nutrition and flavor (Brix) in the plant. Inorganic can never be medical grade because it's largely these solids, not Thc, that provides healing. Natural oils and sugars IMPOSSIBLE to achieve without complex microbial waste digestion at the root zone.

Inorganic bypasses the stomach (root zone) and fills the body with chemicals directly. Iv bag and Flintstones vitamins = inorganic.

Have you ever wondered why people who grew up on twinkies and baloney can't hold an intelligent conversation? Shoving some vitamins down your throat as an adult to counter the fact you've never eaten nutritional food as a child, creates an artifical type of growth, an unnatural body and an unnatural mind.


The entire charade of "hydroponics" is that you can put the Brix levels in (fake them) by contaminating the plant with single molecule sugars and non-cannabis plant oils. This is fraud, a con, a sham. Hydroponic (Inorganic/soiless/direct injection) cannot hold natural Brix levels. The nutrion/flavor/medicinal levels are directly related to microbial waste digestion. Not from a plastic bottle. Unless it's bennies .

You cant have living soil with no soil. You cant grow natural (real, authentic) plants without microbial soil. Its fake produce. Not really an opinion here.. Food has to have nutrition to count as food. No one is spending 300 for an ounce of lettuce. Why would somone spend 300 on weed that has only reached the potential of lettuce? Cannabis needs to be what it is intended to be naturally; a flavorful healing spiritual craft produce crop. Not something that smells like boat seats and tastes like tanning lotion and upsets your stomach.

[ADHDGrower]

Originally Posted by Weird

type of N is irrelevant as long as it is readily available to the plant and depleted by maturation

Theres a few Sources that state otherwise. I whonder how you came to that Conclusion.