fwiw, saw this paper today:
I have my copy of that paper. Thanks for posting an open copy for the membership!
I haven't jumped at the bio stimulant yet. I do Intend to try it
BUT, I have my doubts....questions anyway. Doing some testing myself will answer them...
Look at the paper again. The subject plants and the control plants were harvested at 7 weeks....
I know that the chances are that the plant was not fully finished to my standards for what I think "done" is. I mean as far as growing and harvesting for potentials - THC content specifically. They were early.
With that in mind....What would they have been at 9 weeks? How much more would those "control" plants have caught back up. They state that the controls did catch a lot back in their final 3 weeks...
In the end. Did the subject plants grow faster, simply due to more effective up-take from the bio stimulant?
Would the control plants have reached the same if run longer?
This brings the question then. Did it simply make the plant grow faster?
That in it's self would be great. Less run time = More profit by less material and utility cost!
I'm kind of on the fence till I get some and try it....
CSU - Good AG school.
Nice paper too! Worth the try anyway!