S
secondtry
Here is a good study:
(read: tomatoes = cannabis)
------------------------
Janet F.M. Rippy, Mary M. Peet, Frank J. Louws, Paul V. Nelson, David B. Orr, and Kenneth A. Sorensen. 2004.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/attachment.php?attachmentid=44131&d=1265557035
People may want to download it and read the paper, it's very interesting. The workers used the full line of Earth Juice products (grow, bloom, catalyst) verses another bottle organic verses chemical ferts in a few different soillless mixes. This is relevant to all of us. The researchers discussed CT, etc.
The researchers describe media pH and it's effects upon the nutrient uptake of plant. They discuss adding dolomite lime and the issue of ammonium verses nitrate and nitrite forms of N. The nutrient content of leaf in organic vs. chemical is discussed as is a bunch of other questions which are often asked here. The level of media EC is discussed as is it's effects upon plants.
Two critiques:
1) I would have liked to have read bio-assays of the soil food web. For example as plate counts and soil/media respiration split into two fractions: roots/rhizoshpere respiration and gas (Co2) from decomposition by soil food web.
2) The EC of the organic media mixes using Earth Juice had the highest EC for the first 4 weeks, even higher than chemical ferts**. I assume this is because the soil food web was not fully functional, or even present at that point, and that EJ has a considerable amount of bio-available ions which plants and microbes could use right away. The researchers discussed letting the media sit for 4 weeks after initial watering with EJ, but the researchers apparently neglect to take the plants' role in the soil food web into consideration: without a plant in the media I would assume the EC would have dropped at a different point (later?).
**Calculated using the "PourThru" technique for pH and EC of media. See NCSU for more info, I can upload some great papers which offer a step-by-step how to. However, calculating pHw (from dried media) should be more accurate than calculating the pH from the PourThru method.
A quote from the "Results and Discussion" section of the paper:
My current (untested) soil-less mix:
I have been working on designing and understanding an ideal soilless mix for roots/plants like cannabis and the soil food web. I have updated my soilless mix and it is below (in it's current un-assayed state; NCSU "porometer" here I come). I have been writing a white paper combining relevant issues of soil chemistry, soil physics and soil microbiology (I won't finish the paper for a few weeks I think; and I have TONS of references if anyone is interested).
My current mix which should offer ideal properties of media and my mix should outperform other mixes and the ones listed in the study of this thread.
Here is an edited excerpt from a (working) paper I have been writing for some time:
(to all: this is info is copy-written by me, do not re-distribute this info in a non-free platform (e.g., a book, magazine, etc))
I also supply fertilizer when drench watering with hydrolyzed fish, kelp extract, guano, etc. This media is not supposed to supply all the fertilizers for plant growth, but to provide a base of food for plants and microbes (e.g., to jump-start the N-cycle from guano). To supply extra Ca I foliar spay NOA/OMRI certificated Ca as amino acid chelate.
Below is a soilless media that is very similar to the mix used in work of Rippy, et al, (2004) if mixed with 10-15% vermicast (vol/vol). The media properties are far better than that of any peat or coir based mix I have read porometer assays of, that includes peat-light mixes such as Pro-Mix, Sunshine mix and also coir mixes, 100% coir, etc.
FOF 30:
http://www.fafard.com/index.php?p=158
This mix is a good choice and has pretty ideal properties but it has less than ideal amendments like perlite. FOF 30 can be found all over the US AFAIK.
Contents:
-----------------------------
Here is a list of common acronyms you will read in this thread:
(read: tomatoes = cannabis)
------------------------
Janet F.M. Rippy, Mary M. Peet, Frank J. Louws, Paul V. Nelson, David B. Orr, and Kenneth A. Sorensen. 2004.
Plant Development and Harvest Yields of Greenhouse Tomatoes in Six Orgnaic Growing Systems
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
Here is a link to the full paper I uploaded to ICmag; right-click > open in new tab (or in new window)North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
https://www.icmag.com/ic/attachment.php?attachmentid=44131&d=1265557035
People may want to download it and read the paper, it's very interesting. The workers used the full line of Earth Juice products (grow, bloom, catalyst) verses another bottle organic verses chemical ferts in a few different soillless mixes. This is relevant to all of us. The researchers discussed CT, etc.
The researchers describe media pH and it's effects upon the nutrient uptake of plant. They discuss adding dolomite lime and the issue of ammonium verses nitrate and nitrite forms of N. The nutrient content of leaf in organic vs. chemical is discussed as is a bunch of other questions which are often asked here. The level of media EC is discussed as is it's effects upon plants.
Two critiques:
1) I would have liked to have read bio-assays of the soil food web. For example as plate counts and soil/media respiration split into two fractions: roots/rhizoshpere respiration and gas (Co2) from decomposition by soil food web.
2) The EC of the organic media mixes using Earth Juice had the highest EC for the first 4 weeks, even higher than chemical ferts**. I assume this is because the soil food web was not fully functional, or even present at that point, and that EJ has a considerable amount of bio-available ions which plants and microbes could use right away. The researchers discussed letting the media sit for 4 weeks after initial watering with EJ, but the researchers apparently neglect to take the plants' role in the soil food web into consideration: without a plant in the media I would assume the EC would have dropped at a different point (later?).
**Calculated using the "PourThru" technique for pH and EC of media. See NCSU for more info, I can upload some great papers which offer a step-by-step how to. However, calculating pHw (from dried media) should be more accurate than calculating the pH from the PourThru method.
A quote from the "Results and Discussion" section of the paper:
------------------------Since organic and conventional growing systems are inherently different it was impossible to control experiments for all but one variable. Nevertheless, when the growing systems are considered as a whole, our experience suggests that greenhouse tomatoes produced organically are comparable to those produced conventionally in regards to nutritional status, plant development, and harvest yields.
My current (untested) soil-less mix:
I have been working on designing and understanding an ideal soilless mix for roots/plants like cannabis and the soil food web. I have updated my soilless mix and it is below (in it's current un-assayed state; NCSU "porometer" here I come). I have been writing a white paper combining relevant issues of soil chemistry, soil physics and soil microbiology (I won't finish the paper for a few weeks I think; and I have TONS of references if anyone is interested).
My current mix which should offer ideal properties of media and my mix should outperform other mixes and the ones listed in the study of this thread.
Here is an edited excerpt from a (working) paper I have been writing for some time:
(to all: this is info is copy-written by me, do not re-distribute this info in a non-free platform (e.g., a book, magazine, etc))
I also supply fertilizer when drench watering with hydrolyzed fish, kelp extract, guano, etc. This media is not supposed to supply all the fertilizers for plant growth, but to provide a base of food for plants and microbes (e.g., to jump-start the N-cycle from guano). To supply extra Ca I foliar spay NOA/OMRI certificated Ca as amino acid chelate.
-------------------------------------------------------My current (untested) soil-less mix:
In containers at least 12 inches tall, and no "drainage layer", the following soil-less mix should provide ideal properties to plants and microbes.
(vol/vol)
- 7 parts APBF; screen from 4 mm to 2 mm; pre-moisten with hydrolyzed fish, humic acid, H20 and polysorbate 80 as surfactant
- 1.5 part peat; screen over 2 mm; add polysorbate 80 as surfactant to initial drench water only
- 0.5 part high quality compost; screen under 4 mm; humus rich and mature
- 0.5 part high quality vermicast (aka vermicompost and EWC); screen under 4 mm
- 0.5 part biochar (pyrolyzed) rice hulls; screen under 4 mm; pre-moisten with hydrolyzed fish, humic acid, H20 and polysorbate 80 as surfactant
- 3 – 10 lb of powdered lime (50/50 mix of calcidic/dolomitic) per yd3 of media; ideal pHw is 5.5 to 6.5 (too much Mg can make media crusty)
(weight/weight)
- Tween80 (as surfactant mix only with peat, APBF and rice hulls)
- 4 – 6% azomite powder
- 4 – 6% zeolite powder
- 1% high N bat or seabird guano or preferably add high quality hydrolyzed fish to drench H2o
- 1 – 2% kelp extract powder or preferably add high quality kelp extract
- 1 – 2% un-refined dark molasses crystals or preferably add unsulfured black strap molasses (ideally ≥ 80 brix) to drench H2o
- 1 – 2% humic acid powder or add humic acid liquid extract to drench H2o
- 1 – 2% colloidal phosphate powder or soft-rock phosphate, etc
Below is a soilless media that is very similar to the mix used in work of Rippy, et al, (2004) if mixed with 10-15% vermicast (vol/vol). The media properties are far better than that of any peat or coir based mix I have read porometer assays of, that includes peat-light mixes such as Pro-Mix, Sunshine mix and also coir mixes, 100% coir, etc.
FOF 30:
http://www.fafard.com/index.php?p=158
This mix is a good choice and has pretty ideal properties but it has less than ideal amendments like perlite. FOF 30 can be found all over the US AFAIK.
Contents:
- Canadian sphagnum peat moss (55% vol/vol)
- Aged pine bark
- Perlite
- Vermiculite
- Dolomitic limestone
- pH range = 5.5-6.5
- Gypsum
- Perdue-AgriRecycle MicroStart60 (3-2-3)
- TP = 81-90%
- CC = 65-70%
- AP = 16-20%
- BD = 0.24-0.29 g/cm^3
- Pore Tortuosity = med-high (lower is better)
- with yucca based surfactant (?)
-----------------------------
Here is a list of common acronyms you will read in this thread:
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Acronyms taken from:[/FONT]
- [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]William C. Fonteno[/FONT]
“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Problems & Considerations in Determining Physical Properties of Horticultural Substrates”[/FONT]
- [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Fonteno, et al.[/FONT]
“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Procedures for Determining Physical Properties of Horticultural Substrates Using the NCSU Porometer”[/FONT]
- [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Drzal, et al.[/FONT]
“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Pore Fraction Analysis: A New Tool for Substrate Testing” [/FONT]
- [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Gojo, a.k.a, Ganja Din, a.ka., Secondtry[/FONT]
“[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Soil Science Multi-Disciplinary Integration: Review, Identification and Development of an Ideal Substrate for Higher Plants and SFW”[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]MC = “Moisture Content”, reported as a wet weight gravimetric unit, not volumetric, defined as WFP and used for CC, PWP, etc.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]TP = “Total Porosity”, the sum of water filled and air filled porosity, dependent upon bulk density.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]CC = “Container Capacity”, reported as moisture content by % wet weight (gravimetric basis). Known as “field capacity” for soil, that is, the MC of media after saturation and natural drainage of water from large pores.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]AS = “Air Space” (aka AP, “Air Porosity”) , the pores filled with air. According to Cornell U. if a media has less than 12% AS the plant will be hindered. For example, with TP at 50% the CC which will anaerobically hinder plants (calculated from 12% AS) is 38%. Both coco-coir and peat mixes have AS at or below 12%. Other reserachers (cite anmes) find 10% AS to be the the lowest limit. Pores lager than 416 microns are “macropores” and hold mostly air. AP is found as TP – CC.
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]BD = “Bulk Destiny”, as g/cm^3 and is dependent upon TP.[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]WS = “Water Space” (aka WFP, “Water Filled Porosity” and WHC, “Water Holding Capacity”), pores filled with water are known as “capillary” pores and range from ≈ 416 to < 0.1 micron and have a water tension of 1 to > 1,500 kPa.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]AW = “Available Water” (aka, AWC, “AW Content”), water the plant can easily use and is less in quantity than AW for microbes. Pore range is ≈ 416 to 10 microns and water tension is 1-30 kPa. These pores are termed “mesopores” and hold water easily available to the roots. Traditionally AW is defined as 1-1,500 kPa and is found as so: CC - PWP; however, I propose we define AW as 1-30 kPa and calculate said AW as I describe below.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]BW = “Buffer Water”, plants can use water within this water tension range although it requires them to work harder for it and they do so under water stress. Pore range is 10-0.2 microns and water tension is about 30-1,500 kPa. These pores are termed “micropores” and hold water easily available to microbes, but not to plants. Traditionally there is no quantitation of BW, only AW as 1-1,500 kPa, thus I propose we define BW as 30-1,500 kPa and calculate said BW as I describe below.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]tABW = “Total Available and Buffer Water”, the sum of AW and BW and can be found by CC – PWP; traditionally defined as AW (1-1,500 kPa)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]UW = “Unavailable Water”, that which is not available to the plant. Pore range is < 0.2 microns and the water tension of > 1,500 kPa. These pores are termed “ultramicropores”.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]HI = “Hydration Index”, the value given to media that reflects the wettability of media. A higher figure means easier wettability. HI compares initial wettability with CC. An HI value of ≥ 0.80 means that the soil-less media should (re)hydrate sufficiently. Media with surfactant generally have high HI of > 0.90.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]
[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]MW = “Mass Wetness”, the weight of water per weight of media on a gravimetric dry-weight basis (g/g)[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PAP[FONT=Times New Roman, serif] = “Persistent [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]A[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]nhydrobiotic Point”, the point at which activity of most bacteria, protozoa and nematodes ceases and the microbes enter a state of anhydrobiosis due to excessive water tension. It is defined as media at 1,500 kPa (e.g. 1.5 MPa).[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]FPAP = “Fungi Persistent Anhydrobiotic Point”, the point at which activity of most fungi ceases and the microbes enter a state of anhydrobiosis due to excessive water tension. It is defined as media at 6,000 to 8,000 kPa (e.g. 6 – 8 MPa).[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]PWP = “Persistent Wilting Point”, the MC at which plant growth is not supported, when the plant will always wilt. It is defined as MC at 1,500 kPa.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]MCmin = The MC at which plant and most soil food web functions being to be hindered, along with reducing the rewettability of some medias such as APBF and peat.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]MOM = “Media Organic Matter”, the fraction of soil-less media that is organic matter (OM).[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]EC = “Electrical Conductivity”, the relative amount of ions in a solution or slurry.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]pHw = The pH score for media.[/FONT]