YOUR GARDEN IS NOT ORGANIC...

[mad librettist]

Ah ok then thanks. Good thing I asked if I was mistaken lol.

And how long dies it persist, and how long before harvest can it be applied?

Do you agree with the entire pasted text? It says IPM is rule 1 and biological control is rule 2.

 

[schizobot]

I, for one, would disagree. If I want a quick jolt of growth (N), I would apply CAN17 (calcium nitrate 17%) which is an immediate form of N. for phosphates, I would apply phosphites, which is easily absorbed by either roots or leaves for a quick shot of P, etc..

An organic approach, from what i am learning, is a more measured approach with a balanced soil and micros that help feed the plant.

From my experience on a more macro scale, I just cannot agree that organics nutrients contain a more available form of anything as compared to synthetic fertilizers. I am trying to do an organic grow (for reason unrelated to snobbery, taste or yield) now and trying to learn from several posters. but if I wanted a quick release immediate reaction from a nutrient, I wouldn't be using organic fertilizers.

what exactly are u disagreeing with me on ? lol
i totally agree with u when u say synthetic fertilizers will have the nutes more readily available than organic ferts.

and how exactly is a soil based organic system a more measured approach than a hydro one , where u have to be precise in your're measurements/readings of what ur giving to the plant ?
In an organic medium u can only estimate what ur plant will need thru trial and error and use ur own preffered recipe and it will more or less suffice for most strains. But in a hydro medium u gotta be right on the fkin money , no guess work is involved.
Im not here to start hydro vs organic debate, but i have stated why i prefer organic over hydro.organic bud will not always mean 'better' bud.but if dialled correctly and with a lil knowhow , u cant go wrong with organic.

 

[Lazyman]

Ah ok then thanks. Good thing I asked if I was mistaken lol.

And how long dies it persist, and how long before harvest can it be applied?

Do you agree with the entire pasted text? It says IPM is rule 1 and biological control is rule 2.

It's all good, honestly it's one of my favorite products, if I could send all of you a bottle you'd probably never have mites again.

"...when TSSM were exposed to residues that were 14, 21 and 28 days old, the mortality was 92, 78 and 61 per cent respectively."

It lasts about a month, I do my last application at about week 4 of flower to it has time to flush out. I try to take each plant out and spray the leaves (mixed 1.2ml/g Floramite with 30ml/g DM Saturator as a spreader/sticker and makes the poison systemic.) No need to spray buds or under leaves this way, very effective control. I hit all new clones and moms with it too and usually manage to keep my garden mite-free.

If bilogical controls ever worked for me I would use them, but Neem and pyrethrins just seem to feed mites out here. I wish there was something more organic that was as effective as Floramite, but there's just not IMHO. Remember it is an ovacide so it kills TSSM eggs as well as adults!

 

[treefrog]

Just a metaphor that works for me....

A factory could produce a, lets say a pill, that has all of the nutrients required to keep my body alive. All of the vitamins, minerals etc. The sources for said vitamins, minerals, are typically the cheapest, most easily accessed. Lets say it takes 8 of these pills a day to keep me alive.

On plate #1 we have those 8 pills. Protein pills... this is ground control to major Tom... anyways..

On plate # 2 we have a salad. I won't call it an 'organic' salad.. lol. In this salad is a mix of Mustard greens, Spinach, shredded Carrots, Red Onion, Avocado, Sprouts, Kalamata Olives, Sunflower Seeds and a good dousing of Bragg's Vinaigrette Dressing...YUM!
This plate also has all of the things needed to sustain life, but it also is ALIVE, has enzymes, good bacteria (microbial life) and it makes fantastic poops!

The metaphor may be over the top, but is apt.

Which plate are you going to choose?

If this was a debate about which approach the plants themselves would choose, it would be a short one..

 

[Lazyman]

Just a metaphor that works for me....

A factory could produce a, lets say a pill, that has all of the nutrients required to keep my body alive. All of the vitamins, minerals etc. The sources for said vitamins, minerals, are typically the cheapest, most easily accessed. Lets say it takes 8 of these pills a day to keep me alive.

On plate #1 we have those 8 pills. Protein pills... this is ground control to major Tom... anyways..

On plate # 2 we have a salad. I won't call it an 'organic' salad.. lol. In this salad is a mix of Mustard greens, Spinach, shredded Carrots, Red Onion, Avocado, Sprouts, Kalamata Olives, Sunflower Seeds and a good dousing of Bragg's Vinaigrette Dressing...YUM!
This plate also has all of the things needed to sustain life, but it also is ALIVE, has enzymes, good bacteria (microbial life) and it makes fantastic poops!

The metaphor may be over the top, but is apt.

Which plate are you going to choose?

If this was a debate about which approach the plants themselves would choose, it would be a short one..

Whereas you have taste buds and an appetite, the plant looks for much simpler things. N, P, K and some trace elements. It will absorb whatever it can, so it makes sense to go with what it has to digest the easiest.

A better analogy might be feeding steaks vs baby food to babies. Though they both have nutrients in them, a baby can eat and digest pablum better than a ribeye. Left to only eat ribeyes, the baby willl not be able to eat and digest as much nutrients compared to a pablum-fed baby, and will probably be weaker and have its growth stunted a bit.

 

[treefrog]

I would never assume they have no taste/appetite.
Plants have been scientifically proven to respond to stimulus more complex than taste..

Check out "The Secret Life Of plants" and "The intention Experiment"

I wish someone with the equipment would do a study where they ask the plants which food they preferred.. That would be a good study.

 

[mad librettist]

Lol no thanks I find mites to be easy.

My dad just uses dish soap.

The trick is to determine the life cycle and set a spray schedule to take out the adults and crash the population.

It is pretty damn easy.

 

[schizobot]

every living thing on this planet has an 'appetite'.
if it didnt , it wouldnt grow and be able to carry it out its normal function.
and a better analogy would be , rather than spoon feeding the roots whatever they need , u let them search for their own food.You will always most certainly get a more complex product in the finishing , imo , since the roots r actually interacting with the active medium , that will eventually help it express itself better.
im just speaking frm experience , i have not smoked too many hydro chemmy buds that i have been impressed with , frm a therapeutic perspective.it will do the job nonetheless, the high will be strong as fuck , but in the smell and taste department it will lack the complexity , not intensity ! , but complexity.also the hydro buds the high usually dont seem to wear off as smoothly.But im speakin frm my own personal experience.
There might be ppl who can really dial in their skills with hydro systems much better than others .. and prove me wrong ....but i will stick to organics soil mediums.
i personally fucking hate pumps and all tht other mechanical shit involved in supplying roots with the nutrition and the tediousness involved with chemicals. I rather team up with microbes and grow some fine ass erb , without stressing myself too much.
But thts just me !!!

 

[kannubis]

steak, rare
and a coke please

 

[NUG-JUG]

=schizobot;3354600
i personally fucking hate pumps and all tht other mechanical shit involved in supplying roots with the nutrition and the tediousness involved with chemicals. I rather team up with microbes and grow some fine ass erb , without stressing myself too much.
But thts just me !!!

 

[uglybunny]

Carbon has nothing to do with whether a practice belongs in organic gardening (example: watering)

Which is why I think the term organic gardening is a misnomer. Gardening more in line with the natural processes that occur in your plot is what I call sustainable gardening. But that is just the way I feel, call your methods whatever you want.

 

[pray4pistils]

Just a metaphor that works for me....

A factory could produce a, lets say a pill, that has all of the nutrients required to keep my body alive... On plate #1 we have those 8 pills... On plate # 2 we have a salad... This plate also has all of the things needed to sustain life, but it also is ALIVE, has enzymes, good bacteria (microbial life) and it makes fantastic poops!

The metaphor may be over the top, but is apt... Which plate are you going to choose?

This is a GREAT point, actually. I, like most anybody else, would choose the healthy plate of delicious whole foods. Only nature can deliver a full bounty of goodness that humans in laboratories could only dream of synthesizing. Poetically speaking, God is greater than Man and this carries right over to feeding plants.

HOWEVER, real life is not so binary. This simplistic model is insufficient. While I'd absolutely go for the plate of delicious salad, I'd also pick up a pill or three and down'm when my fridge is empty. Or, when I've over exerted myself I might take one as a supplement.

If this was a debate about which approach the plants themselves would choose, it would be a short one..

Correct! They know exactly what they need and will reach for whatever's closest or otherwise most readily available. That's whether it's synthetic ammonium nitrate or ammonium nitrate that some protozoa or bacteria poop out in an organic soil. Chemicals are chemicals are chemicals.

A better analogy might be feeding steaks vs baby food to babies. Though they both have nutrients in them, a baby can eat and digest pablum better than a ribeye. Left to only eat ribeyes, the baby willl not be able to eat and digest as much nutrients compared to a pablum-fed baby, and will probably be weaker and have its growth stunted a bit.

What makes you think that synthetic nutes are equivalent to that ribeye steak? Pablum and steak do not contain the same nutrients in the same chemical form. On the other hand, as I said, ammonium nitrate is ammonium nitrate. The difference is that the organic system will deliver more than only the NPK + trace elements. Meanwhile, synthetics can be supplied with greater precision and in real time (which promotes growth and reduces stress by eliminating temporary starvation episodes). Both organics and synthetics can be abused, misused, or done "right" or effectively.

As far as I'm concerned it's all about sustainability (as a few others have agreed). Bombarding nature with refined nutrients is clearly unethical, irresponsible, and counter-productive in the long run (even though short term gain can't be denied). It's just as clear that pure "organic" growing isn't for everybody in every instance around the globe at all times. I maintain that a strategically-managed base of organics + limited application synthetics is the most practical way to go on average most of the time for most growers.

 

[mad librettist]

Correct! They know exactly what they need and will reach for whatever's closest or otherwise most readily available. That's whether it's synthetic ammonium nitrate or ammonium nitrate that some protozoa or bacteria poop out in an organic soil. Chemicals are chemicals are chemicals.

not quite right. Just take N. It can be taken up as NO3 or NH4. There is difference, and there is preference.

 

[pray4pistils]

not quite right. Just take N. It can be taken up as NO3 or NH4. There is difference, and there is preference.

N = elemental nitrogen (which isn't present in ANY nutrient formula). NH4NO2 is ammonium nitrite. NH4NO3 is ammonium nitrate (which cannabis and most other annuals prefer). This reality does not contradict my point. Nitrite delivered in synthetic form is the same compound that is excreted by a microbe that originally ate some ammonium (NH+4). Nitrite is nitrite. Nitrate is nitrate. The plants don't know the difference or care how the substance was derived. Compounds are compounds. Do you have any evidence that contests or clarifies my position?

 

[mad librettist]

N = elemental nitrogen (which isn't present in ANY nutrient formula). NO3 is ammonium nitrite. NO4 is ammonium nitrate (which cannabis and most other annuals prefer). This reality does not contradict my point. Nitrite delivered in synthetic form is the same compound that is excreted by a microbe that originally ate some ammonium (NH+4). Nitrite is nitrite. Nitrate is nitrate. The plants don't know the difference or care how the substance was derived. Compounds are compounds. Do you have any evidence that contests or clarifies my position?

Please check your chemistry. It is mostly wrong.

Definitions-
nitrate - NO3
ammonium - NH4 (this is not ammonium nitrate)

now let's see ammonia, nitrite, and any other terms we need to discuss this.
plants use no3 or nh4 but to be healthy need those in the right proportions. They do not get that from chem growing.

 

[pray4pistils]

Please check your chemistry. It is mostly wrong.

I'm not a chemist. My ego isn't involved. State and elaborate on the errors, please. My information flows mostly from Dr. Laura Ingraham of soil/food web fame.

Edit: You expanded your points, so I stand corrected on the chemistry notation. I listed the cation -not the full compound (NH4NO3). (My previous post has been adjusted.) The point, however, still stands in full. The compounds are the same whether they're delivered by an organic system or via a dose from a bottle.

plants use no3 or nh4 but to be healthy need those in the right proportions. They do not get that from chem growing.

You're saying that it's impossible to vary proportions with synthetic fertilizers? You're saying that there is more control over proportions and such with organics? I have a bridge for sale. It's in Brooklyn. It's nice. Btw, if you read my posts you'll see that I'm a big fan of organics. I fully appreciate that it delivers benefits that synthetics can't match. However, the reverse is also true. My argument is that a blend of the two is reasonable to consider. Done correctly this delivers results that won't be matched (on average) by purely synthetic or purely organic methods. The absolutists around here believe that organics and synthetics can't work together. I say that their rigid thinking leads them to ignore the blatantly obvious.

 

[mad librettist]

I'm not a chemist. My ego isn't involved. State and elaborate on the errors, please. My information flows mostly from Dr. Laura Ingraham of soil/food web fame.

Edit: You expanded your points, so I'll stand corrected on the ammonium bit. I listed the cation -not the full compound (NH4NO3). (Notation in my previous post has been fixed.) My point, however, is that the compounds are the same whether they're delivered by an organic system or via a dose from a bottle.



You're saying that it's impossible to vary proportions with synthetic fertilizers? You're saying that there is more control over proportions and such with organics? I have a bridge for sale. It's in Brooklyn. It's nice. Btw, if you read my posts you'll see that I'm a big fan of organics. I fully appreciate that it delivers benefits that synthetics can't match. However, the reverse is also true. My argument is that a blend of the two is reasonable and delivers results that won't be matched (on average) by purely synthetic or purely organic methods. The absolutists around here believe that organics and synthetics can't work together. I say that their rigid thinking leads them to ignore the very obvious.

I don't believe you digested dr inghams site.

I am no chemist either. So I try to look things up before I post, and also not expound too much on things I know nothing about.

Ammonium nitrate as far as I know is man made. And pouring it on your grow does not give a proper balance. To get that, you give your soil food, the bacteria eat it, are preyed upon, and nh4 is released. If the plant wants nitrate or of the pH is narurally 7 or more (in a given area, not throughout the soil) then nitrifying bacteria convert nh4 to no3.

How much of that goes on is -get this- largely determined by the plant! Crazy no? To learn how this happens in an easy format without too much jargon, check out "teaming with microbes". No one is saying you can't vary your feeding with conventional growing. But I am saying it's like peeing in the dark. You might hit the bowl - if you are lucky. The floor is more likely.

Bottled nutes are not my thing, but there is tons of N. Not sure what you mean by elemental N not being present. Do you mean N2 - diatomic N? That is in the air we breathe. But the N in bottled nutes tends to be organic compounds like proteins. They are quickly digested by soil life and cycled into ionic form.

Sorry about my editing. It's a bad habit.

 

[Rakkasan]

.

 

[slackx]

If you use products like LIQUID KARMA or other bottled nutrients that are not certified so please stop saying your end product is so...

thanks y"all and i hope everyone is having an awesome day!!!

Well thank you captain obvious!

 

[Microbeman]

Tell me what is biologically different about Persimilis (sp?) and two spotted mites, that it would be logical that the nervous system of P would not be effected in the same fashion, yet on the oher hand it kills bees. Completely illogical. I say someone cooked the books. What is the source of your info?