Lose buds/many leaves after PK

[Asentrouw]

I had several mixed grows between regular strains and pure landraces. During flowering I added PK 13/14 or other bloomboosters to all the plants to keep things easy.

I've noticed some landraces (like pure Afghan, Panama, etc.) didn't fill up and got a big ammount of leaves - some small round ones - instead, foxtailed, while the regular strains seem to thrive on it. Others skyrocketed in the air (also Afghan) and developed very small buds.

I guess this is a reaction to the excess PK?

Or is this just how some landraces develop, before they undergo a selection process?

 

[linde]

Genetics are everything. I'm real suspicious on pure landrace strains these days. I've personally found that most landrace stuff bought today is nothing more than unworked mediocre genetics with little in common with the 80s landraces. Once the Dutch made those first hybrids between sativa and indica landraces in the 80s the rest was history. People bred those hybrids with their landraces to shorten flowering and Increase resin no knowing it caring what effect it would cause years down the road. To make a long story short I wouldn't expect much out of today's so called landrace. Unless you've got endless time and patience I would stick with tried and true worked genetics. Just my opinion of course.

 

[Ca++]

I'm not sure adding PK makes things easy. Easy to me, is finding as few bottles as possible, to make it work.
The timing off PK, if there is to be any, is quite critical. The feed charts may have no idea what your plants are doing, at any particular time. This leaves you with a powerful tool, and no idea if you even need it.

It's going to be very difficult to advise anyone on it's use. Personally, I have a bottle of each.

 

[Asentrouw]

Genetics are everything. I'm real suspicious on pure landrace strains these days. I've personally found that most landrace stuff bought today is nothing more than unworked mediocre genetics with little in common with the 80s landraces. Once the Dutch made those first hybrids between sativa and indica landraces in the 80s the rest was history. People bred those hybrids with their landraces to shorten flowering and Increase resin no knowing it caring what effect it would cause years down the road. To make a long story short I wouldn't expect much out of today's so called landrace. Unless you've got endless time and patience I would stick with tried and true worked genetics. Just my opinion of course.

Considering the seller I'm pretty sure these landrace seeds come straight from the source or are a reproduction directly from the sourced seeds.

I did all the tried and true worked genetics and they are great if you need some stash. But in the end they are all pretty much the same, all based on the same set of basis strains (NL/Skunk/Haze).

The whole fun for me is in exploring landraces, but I'm new to that. The problem with leaves, foxtailing and very lose buds occured twice now and it seems to me it start after I add bloomboosters.

Not 100% sure though. So I was wondering it's that as landraces can be quite sensitive for overfeeding or it just comes with the unworked genetics.

 

[Asentrouw]

I'm not sure adding PK makes things easy. Easy to me, is finding as few bottles as possible, to make it work.
The timing off PK, if there is to be any, is quite critical. The feed charts may have no idea what your plants are doing, at any particular time. This leaves you with a powerful tool, and no idea if you even need it.

It's going to be very difficult to advise anyone on it's use. Personally, I have a bottle of each.

Normally I don't have issues with PK. I just use a little around week 5/6 for a week or spread out a few weeks. It does seem to pump up the yield a bit for most worked strains. They do cannabalize a bit earlier on the leaves and seem the plants becomes a bit brittle.

I also use BAC bloombooster sometimes, with simular results.

Just think for some landrace genetics it might backfire, as it reacts in a totally different way?

 

[cfl...KING]

A grandmaster og of the forums gave me advice an it made a huge difference. Instead of running higher dose of pk13/14 run 2ml gal wk 3(when the start budding) thru wk 6. Huge difference in clavx size

 

[Asentrouw]

I didn't make pics, but I found something simular online. Basically it's that shit: shitload of round leaves, calyxes not filling up, hardly any solid swollen buds (or buds at all).

It's only certain landraces who show this problem, while the worked strains look how they should > they all receive the same trwatment.

It isn't heat, only thing I can think of that they get stressed because they receive a shitload PK that they can't process or something?

 

[Ca++]

It does seem to pump up the yield a bit for most worked strains. They do cannabalize a bit earlier on the leaves

I'm not seeing your leaves, to know what's happening. However, The PK is raising 2 of your big 3, and non of the small stuff. The other of the big three, is the biggest player in the game. One research teams run at twice what bottle feeds tend to supply.
Pumping up PK actually seems a bit odd to me, and I do wonder if these leaves are showing you the entire feed wanted increasing. Especially as P and K are usually already to high, when judged beside N.

 

[Asentrouw]

I'm not seeing your leaves, to know what's happening. However, The PK is raising 2 of your big 3, and non of the small stuff. The other of the big three, is the biggest player in the game. One research teams run at twice what bottle feeds tend to supply.
Pumping up PK actually seems a bit odd to me, and I do wonder if these leaves are showing you the entire feed wanted increasing. Especially as P and K are usually already to high, when judged beside N.

Maybe I'm misguided by advertisement of the nute sellers. But I ran with and without PK, and the latter does seem to pump up the buds for some reason. The BAC Bloom does contain a lot of N too, but same effects.

However, I don't want to start a discussion about the PK/Bloomboosters > I do think less is usually more and a lot of nutes are unnecessary.

I just want to know if my theory is right, that it is these nutes causing certain landraces (Panama, pure Afghan) to foxtail to the extreme, simular like in this pic:

 

[cfl...KING]

I didn't make pics, but I found something simular online. Basically it's that shit: shitload of round leaves, calyxes not filling up, hardly any solid swollen buds (or buds at all).

It's only certain landraces who show this problem, while the worked strains look how they should > they all receive the same trwatment.

It isn't heat, only thing I can think of that they get stressed because they receive a shitload PK that they can't process or something?

This looks like your lights are on more than 12hrs or you have light leaks. I run my lights 11hr 45min to cover if I have to go in early to check for milky/amber or after the lights go out to spray plant therapy.

Also some strains need 11hrs on 13 off. On some strains I like to drop the lights down to 10hr45min on an 13hr 15min off the last 7-10 days to stop any regrowth pushing past 70 days

 

[Frankenbeanie]

Cannabis wants to collect P in its leaves so it has a usable stockpile and isn't overwhelmed with P assimulation in flower. P is a reproductive nutrient but promotes auxin as does K. Your margin shows Ca is bullied out. Leaf shape shows Zn is bullied out.

Sativa needs a real lighting scheme designed for cannabis: Heavy blue will dial auxin down and cut internode/fox tail. Sativa also needs 13-14 hours of darkness to thicken up. More trace mineral especially boron foliar sprays. Sativa also needs buried deeper and vegged longer to yield big dense buds. The worthy sativa growers of the world have given up on fighting indoor stretch. Fools game. It's just too much problems trying to rebuild nutrient supplies in flower, and these thin plants are yielding massive amounts in small crammed together footprints anyways when the plants are full of nutrition and not eating their pith out. The secret is out. When you grow cannabis taller than a mylar tent the plant actually performs like Cannabis. Tent weed is statutory rape weed. Clandestine grows brought us indica traits. They serve no other value. Legal grow tents, now available in heights up to 6 ft I hear.

 

[Ca++]

A sudden feed increase will

Maybe I'm misguided by advertisement of the nute sellers. But I ran with and without PK, and the latter does seem to pump up the buds for some reason. The BAC Bloom does contain a lot of N too, but same effects.

However, I don't want to start a discussion about the PK/Bloomboosters > I do think less is usually more and a lot of nutes are unnecessary.

I just want to know if my theory is right, that it is these nutes causing certain landraces (Panama, pure Afghan) to foxtail to the extreme, simular like in this pic:

Yeah, you're on the money. A sudden feed increase will do these things.

 

[Asentrouw]

Cannabis wants to collect P in its leaves so it has a usable stockpile and isn't overwhelmed with P assimulation in flower. P is a reproductive nutrient but promotes auxin as does K. Your margin shows Ca is bullied out. Leaf shape shows Zn is bullied out.

Sativa needs a real lighting scheme designed for cannabis: Heavy blue will dial auxin down and cut internode/fox tail. Sativa also needs 13-14 hours of darkness to thicken up. More trace mineral especially boron foliar sprays. Sativa also needs buried deeper and vegged longer to yield big dense buds. The worthy sativa growers of the world have given up on fighting indoor stretch. Fools game. It's just too much problems trying to rebuild nutrient supplies in flower, and these thin plants are yielding massive amounts in small crammed together footprints anyways when the plants are full of nutrition and not eating their pith out. The secret is out. When you grow cannabis taller than a mylar tent the plant actually performs like Cannabis. Tent weed is statutory rape weed. Clandestine grows brought us indica traits. They serve no other value. Legal grow tents, now available in heights up to 6 ft I hear.

Only problem is these pure Afghans are not sativa, but show the same issues. Panama is ofcourse.

Some bondage will take care of stretch and worked sativa's usually don't show any of these issues. I've grown Nevilles Haze, Malawi, Thai, Zamaldelica and so forth in the past without any issues.

It was not before playing around with pure landraces I see this issue. I'm 99% sure the foxtailing is related to the feeding.

 

[Creeperpark]

That's why I never use additives because they can knock the nutrient sequence off. Causing disruption in the uptake of the macro and micronutrients. Keeping it simple with just a complete fertilizer has been my best and only choice for years.

 

[Asentrouw]

That's why I never use additives because they can knock the nutrient sequence off. Causing disruption in the uptake of the macro and micronutrients. Keeping it simple with just a complete fertilizer has been my best and only choice for years.

I agree. But I also like to experiment around with these things during different grows. So I did both.

In my experience the PK or bloomboosters high in PK do seem to pump up the buds. But the buds and leaves get a bit brittle and it cannabilizes faster. I think this is a reaction on the PK shock. Most worked strains seem to take it without any issues.

Outdoors I wouldn't recommened it as it's a sure recipe for mold and weakened plants. But indoors I think it can have its uses, if you want to increase yield a bit.

However, not for pure sativas or landraces as I need to conclude now.

 

[Ca++]

Some of this sequence talk, seems illogical to the point of irrelevance.
You can do a grow in compost, without ever feeding. The compost doesn't alter composition from veg to bloom. There is no conveyor belt like maintenance, where things need to be applied in order, with no over or under abundance. Not everything fed today, and taken today, will be used today. There is a suggestion given by this sequence talk, that just isn't what some of us (like myself) are hearing. Not specifically here, but in the many times this has been spoken of.
Yes these building blocks in that chain need to be present, but adding PK doesn't seem like it would disrupt the process as presented. Antagonisms could present themselves, but there could also be excess already in a plant, that the PK addition will allow to be processed. No feed is actually going to fit that presentation like a jigsaw piece. The presentation has no values to suggest it could. Nor are our reasons to feed a plant fixed. The presentation is nice to look at though, and could help with problem solving. I do like it.

On Topic, as I'm not sure we were:
I recently did a run where I had no single feed that would last a week. I was mixing lots of things, but a couple of weeks from the end, I was under the sink, pulling out the 24-8-16 miracle gro. It's all I had left, and I had lots of it. The need to be thrifty was gone, and I slammed in what was basically more N than before. The 'all directions' explosion at my bud tops wasn't welcome, but the fresh growth in general, turned my last 2 weeks, into 3.
Our plants are aware of a few things that set there expectations. What was seen increasing the EC with one thing, can be seen increasing the EC with another. With the EC being the factor here, not the actual addition. What I did with N, I could of done with PK. No problem.