MontanaCo2
Active Member
I always ph my feed water around 6.5. I use ro water so that might be why the ph is low.
NFTG. Nectar For The Gods
- Thread starter ProPheT 216
- Start date
MontanaCo2
Active Member
Yea par is for sure not low. Every part of the tent is 800+par. My leds are actually too close to the canopy because I ran out of height in my tent.
I'm guessing it's from underfeeding and ph problems because of ro water having no alkalinity to buffer acids. I only slurried when I started seeing problems so next grow I'll do more slurries and maybe tap water but it's hard water/high ph.
Last edited:
I’ve been using RO water for 3 years never had an issue…. Of course I always have my feed ph ranging from 6.5 -7.0 …. and I’ve been saying this for a while…. Do prevented slurries never wait till something happens to start then you fall behind ….
MontanaCo2
Active Member
Yea I will next grow. I am new to this line of nutrients, been using advanced nutrients for years w/o any of these problems. Do you only use Nectar products or add any other calmag?
I only use nectar… with that said I’m also using fullon , photo plus , cultured teas , fish shit , Bigfoot , self 100 …. Of course teas on tea days …. Now I don’t really follow the feed feed tea or the feed feed herc ….. what I do is what the slurries say so if there hungry I mite do a feed feed feed or if not eating as much and the slurries ppm are above 500 I mite do a tea or herc …..nectar is a good line once you figure out how your plants want to eat and when … this is labor intensive…lol…of course I do amend my own soil with one shot , earthshine ,EWC , ….as long as your ph is in range u shouldn’t have any issues with plant , I had clones starting in soil of 2500 ppm but the ph was in range ….
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
MontanaCo2
Slf 100, aact tea, and a good mycorrhiza tremendously complement the line, but i personalty recommend you don't get to carried away with the add ones until the line is paying back . If you are using distilled as I do or Ro then a little Full on and a few drops mag amped will help mitigate the waters ionic property's. I would add silica if your doing a lot of training. If you are using co2, have you lights close and really optimizing then I would recommend mag amped or a1/2tsp maybe more of Epson salts every 7 days genetic dependent also . Some strains hog whatever element they hog.
Slf 100, aact tea, and a good mycorrhiza tremendously complement the line, but i personalty recommend you don't get to carried away with the add ones until the line is paying back . If you are using distilled as I do or Ro then a little Full on and a few drops mag amped will help mitigate the waters ionic property's. I would add silica if your doing a lot of training. If you are using co2, have you lights close and really optimizing then I would recommend mag amped or a1/2tsp maybe more of Epson salts every 7 days genetic dependent also . Some strains hog whatever element they hog.
Last edited:
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
I think its great that some guys swallow there pride and ask questions, but I can see its so very hard to wrap your head around 1500+2700+ PPms and a ph that will only make food accessible from 6.1-7 and believe it let alone do it, and it is killing you guys time after time after time. The Line is not that hard and alot less expensive than it is if you guys would only 1. make the food available at the range organic chelates are avable at 6.0-7.0 (uasualy in the mid to upper of that over time) and 2. put enough food in that the plant wont run out in 12 hours and can store energy and get ahead in reserves your going to do way fkin better. Just to be clear I am not a NFTG fan boy. I have a growing distaste for the owner who is a great guy with the best program that will help anyone , and for all people in general . I love this line because when it comes to quility and extractions there is no other. Anyone who can even get this line half down and dose extractions knows that there is no throwaway plant materiel with NFTG until after extraction. Don't let my rant seem to lecture like althouh it is , but I want you all you salts and newbs to succeed. If you think the line is way to expensive there are agriculture alternatives to some of the line but I wont share these openly. I tried to help a few people at the hydro store with this Ph ppm info many years ago and the crazy ass people lost there minds a exploded because of pride, now they do things alot like me so please understand I am just trying to help. Don,t really care to be to PC or caring how to play with others. I only come and give never take from the forum because I pride myself on DIY. Im a real if you dont like me kiss my ass kind of Guy lol .So if you don't like me kiss my ass. lol Don't be afraid to still ask me anything I would still love to try to help if i can.
Last edited:
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
In accordance with proper public behavior I perhaps apologize . I accidentally spilled a little too much methamphetamine into my coffee on purpose last week, I could apologize at baseline and not post until 2023 unless I find the rest of my coffee but probably not.
I’m trying to figure out what your getting at ??? You just made it more confusing ….. once people understand the the feed schedule and the feed feed tea and herc is not set in stone …. What’s set in stone is reading your plant and slurries …. The real question is what soil are you working with ? Nectar , fox farm , coco or reusing soil that’s amended …what’s in that soil ? What could be leaching from it what other factors with that ph ? Under water or over watered …..
Lordhooha
Well-Known Member
You realize none of that is needed to grow fantastic bud. My goal is to grow stellar bud and keep my cost per plant low. I've got it to 88 cents per plant and I can go from clone to finish twice before buying nutrients again. No need for all the fancy labels on water bottles to knock it out of the park.
Lordhooha
Well-Known Member
Hell good soil doesn't need to have the feed ph'd. It'll buffer Fine on is own. Keeping the bacteria content high will keep your plant good as well as the soil.
Last edited:
When using nectar the feed needs to be ph …nectar is design to work at a ph range….. don’t see where you where any help ?
Lordhooha
Well-Known Member
ive used nectar many times never an issue mixing and watering no ph issues the soil and plants were happy with zero issues. ph is only a concern in hydro applications.
Last edited:
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
Thats not what we do here . Go start a .88 cent bud thread. Dont be fkn annoying .
Lordhooha
Well-Known Member
Dude you're missing the point I was commenting on the necessity of running an entire convoluted line when you can get better with less. Especially black bottles that are essentially 97% water. My ro system is more expensive than most peoples cars. There's no reason to spend all that on nutrients given there's much better for alot less on the market. Reduction of overhead in any grow is important. This way you're both efficient and effective. Thus creating top quality bud.
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
Im not a fkn dude stoner .The above is what inexsperence and a mouth of Bs look like . If you put tap or distiled water in NFTG it goes anarobic
Anyways for anyone that actualy beleaves that
5 gallons last years, You only need 5 parts in soil 6 in coco with up to kill it You dont have to use all them all every time. Salts bad for health and worse for inviromental reason but the reason I quit growing produce with them is because know one on this earth can bring out full gentic potential with just salts and soil or salts peirod. If you could a farmer would know how long befor a pot grower and they cant.. I have never grown canabis with salts nore will I. 5 gals of nftg can be had for 120.00 -160.00 . I have even seen some as low as $88.00 for 5 gALS I used to take advice form people on these matters 20 years ago but they acatualy knew what they are talking about.. after 40+ combined years in Aquculture and farming you know whats opinion , farry tale and fact and there is alot more ferry tales around canabiss growing than fact.
The below is Coco tips only
If things have been looking great in your coco for 5-6 weeks on your new strain and next thing you know your crop begins to fade from the top down, a few dots of k Def are showing on your sugar and fan leaves, your plants is slightly dropping but not clawing. So you freak out and flush and drop your Ph because you heard or believe IN def always starts at the lower leaves (not always true at least with cheleates and intense light .) Well you just fukd up, most likely you have been missing your mark on MM-GM and running a little too much DD or add ons for the last week or longer . It's a little late and you're scared to up the MM GM and we're hoping to cut the AA. Well Coco to the rescue. The same thing that kicked your ass your first few tries is why it's a top choice for a clean finish . You can still up all your N sources in coco with no quality issues almost to the flush especially with cheleates . Up your MM and GM a full tbsp each and drop the DD whatever is needed to keep your feeding numbers . You may or may not need to drop the pH just a little but unless your strain demands it do not drop under 6.6 6.7 at this point .I suggest you stay high on weed and your Ph . If you have only just begun to fade and it's not bad you can really up the AA for a few feedings, but you do want it almost fully worked out by a week before you flush ,sooner is better. I can get my plants to still green up very late and under vigorous bud growth with ample AA .You gotta do what you gotta do to get to that flush and ripening at least 75% green and still photosynthesizing . If you're unfamiliar with coco one of the benefits and reasons why it yields better than soil is for the simple fact you can keep feeding heavy right up to flush then you use the cocos accelerated leaching to your advantage to get your plant to consume itself in a hurry, but it will only happen fast and is most effective If the plant still has some vigor at the start. The Inexperienced and even experienced will say some bs like soil yields better but unfortunately science destroys any opinion It's just their denial that they sucked in coco and they couldn't yield better than in soil . Horticulture science and professional growers both can easley prove them wrong without a shadow of a doubt with just a few lifts of your finger .
The same reason it kicks your ass is why most professionals chose it
30-100 meq/100
Coco coir has a CEC range of 30-100 meq/100 g. with 30-40 being most common. Substrates with very low CEC are more likely to develop deficiencies of the major cations, while higher CEC substrates will have less leaching of nutrients.
More likely does not mean all the sudden for no reason coco makes plants deficient. It means that if you don't know wtf you are doing in it you're in trouble, New growers that refuse to accept coco / chelate facts will usually do one of these, maybe even all of them. Underfeed their plant and think it's burnt to a crisp from overfeeding there are reports all over the internet of 800-1200 ppm burn (Sorry It doesn't work like that) , think they have salts build up flush and make things worse then switch nutes and say the line sucks or is unsuited for coco. Run the line in the high 5 low 6 ph, high or low ppms and think once again they burnt their plant but unlike their salts the Chelates were completely unavailable below and even in the low 6's Or lift their lights and end up with big nice looking cotton balls and claim to have it figured out. Growers coming form salts I believe have it the hardest . So many salt growers fail to understand or believe any of this. Also the complete bunk NFTG coco feeding chart amounts and Ph for most genetics doesn't help either, The chart is built off the light lifters because their big airy buds on perfect plants rule instadumb other social dumb down sites .
These days I spend no more than 1.2 hours every other night, usually a lot less, but seeing that I love what I do , I am often guilty of spending more time than I should at times . I own a landscaping business , custom fishing rod builder, small market produce grower, youth baseball coach, full time dad with no mother or wife , Active outdoorsman . occasional farm hand, I dont own a cell phone, but somehow I still find the time to use Nftg in coco. Could be the lack of a wife and cell phone
. If you can't find time for NFTG then maybe the wife, some of the kids or the cell gots to go. Remember you can put in enough to last a few days. You do not need all the bottles, you only need MM GM, DD, HH , and ZZ in coco and you don't have to run all 4 every time to have the best in your neighborhood. I hate to repeat things in every post but people are something these days. Tired of people saying they don't have time for 17 bottles. Got to have a thinker to use NFTG. Maybe that's the problem
Anyways for anyone that actualy beleaves that
5 gallons last years, You only need 5 parts in soil 6 in coco with up to kill it You dont have to use all them all every time. Salts bad for health and worse for inviromental reason but the reason I quit growing produce with them is because know one on this earth can bring out full gentic potential with just salts and soil or salts peirod. If you could a farmer would know how long befor a pot grower and they cant.. I have never grown canabis with salts nore will I. 5 gals of nftg can be had for 120.00 -160.00 . I have even seen some as low as $88.00 for 5 gALS I used to take advice form people on these matters 20 years ago but they acatualy knew what they are talking about.. after 40+ combined years in Aquculture and farming you know whats opinion , farry tale and fact and there is alot more ferry tales around canabiss growing than fact.
The below is Coco tips only
If things have been looking great in your coco for 5-6 weeks on your new strain and next thing you know your crop begins to fade from the top down, a few dots of k Def are showing on your sugar and fan leaves, your plants is slightly dropping but not clawing. So you freak out and flush and drop your Ph because you heard or believe IN def always starts at the lower leaves (not always true at least with cheleates and intense light .) Well you just fukd up, most likely you have been missing your mark on MM-GM and running a little too much DD or add ons for the last week or longer . It's a little late and you're scared to up the MM GM and we're hoping to cut the AA. Well Coco to the rescue. The same thing that kicked your ass your first few tries is why it's a top choice for a clean finish . You can still up all your N sources in coco with no quality issues almost to the flush especially with cheleates . Up your MM and GM a full tbsp each and drop the DD whatever is needed to keep your feeding numbers . You may or may not need to drop the pH just a little but unless your strain demands it do not drop under 6.6 6.7 at this point .I suggest you stay high on weed and your Ph . If you have only just begun to fade and it's not bad you can really up the AA for a few feedings, but you do want it almost fully worked out by a week before you flush ,sooner is better. I can get my plants to still green up very late and under vigorous bud growth with ample AA .You gotta do what you gotta do to get to that flush and ripening at least 75% green and still photosynthesizing . If you're unfamiliar with coco one of the benefits and reasons why it yields better than soil is for the simple fact you can keep feeding heavy right up to flush then you use the cocos accelerated leaching to your advantage to get your plant to consume itself in a hurry, but it will only happen fast and is most effective If the plant still has some vigor at the start. The Inexperienced and even experienced will say some bs like soil yields better but unfortunately science destroys any opinion It's just their denial that they sucked in coco and they couldn't yield better than in soil . Horticulture science and professional growers both can easley prove them wrong without a shadow of a doubt with just a few lifts of your finger .
The same reason it kicks your ass is why most professionals chose it
30-100 meq/100
Coco coir has a CEC range of 30-100 meq/100 g. with 30-40 being most common. Substrates with very low CEC are more likely to develop deficiencies of the major cations, while higher CEC substrates will have less leaching of nutrients.
More likely does not mean all the sudden for no reason coco makes plants deficient. It means that if you don't know wtf you are doing in it you're in trouble, New growers that refuse to accept coco / chelate facts will usually do one of these, maybe even all of them. Underfeed their plant and think it's burnt to a crisp from overfeeding there are reports all over the internet of 800-1200 ppm burn (Sorry It doesn't work like that) , think they have salts build up flush and make things worse then switch nutes and say the line sucks or is unsuited for coco. Run the line in the high 5 low 6 ph, high or low ppms and think once again they burnt their plant but unlike their salts the Chelates were completely unavailable below and even in the low 6's Or lift their lights and end up with big nice looking cotton balls and claim to have it figured out. Growers coming form salts I believe have it the hardest . So many salt growers fail to understand or believe any of this. Also the complete bunk NFTG coco feeding chart amounts and Ph for most genetics doesn't help either, The chart is built off the light lifters because their big airy buds on perfect plants rule instadumb other social dumb down sites .
These days I spend no more than 1.2 hours every other night, usually a lot less, but seeing that I love what I do , I am often guilty of spending more time than I should at times . I own a landscaping business , custom fishing rod builder, small market produce grower, youth baseball coach, full time dad with no mother or wife , Active outdoorsman . occasional farm hand, I dont own a cell phone, but somehow I still find the time to use Nftg in coco. Could be the lack of a wife and cell phone
. If you can't find time for NFTG then maybe the wife, some of the kids or the cell gots to go. Remember you can put in enough to last a few days. You do not need all the bottles, you only need MM GM, DD, HH , and ZZ in coco and you don't have to run all 4 every time to have the best in your neighborhood. I hate to repeat things in every post but people are something these days. Tired of people saying they don't have time for 17 bottles. Got to have a thinker to use NFTG. Maybe that's the problem
Last edited:
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
ALL NFTG growers old and new soil and coco the below dose not compltly apply to what we do but it can help with some understanding.
Understanding and Applying Chelated Fertilizers Effectively Based on Soil pH1
Guodong Liu, Edward Hanlon, and Yuncong Li 2
Plant nutrients are one of the environmental factors essential for crop growth and development. Nutrient management is crucial for optimal productivity in commercial crop production. Those nutrients in concentrations of = 100 parts per million (ppm) in plant tissues are described as micronutrients and include iron (Fe), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), boron (B), chlorine (Cl), molybdenum (Mo), and nickel (Ni). Micronutrients such as Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu are easily oxidized or precipitated in soil, and their utilization is, therefore, not efficient. Chelated fertilizers have been developed to increase micronutrient utilization efficiency. This publication provides an overview of chelated fertilizers and considerations for their use to county Extension faculty, certified crop advisers (CCAs), crop consultants, growers, and students who are interested in commercial crop production.
What is chelated fertilizer?
The word chelate is derived from the Greek word chelé, which refers to a lobster's claw. Hence, chelate refers to the pincer-like way in which a metal nutrient ion is encircled by the larger organic molecule (the claw), usually called a ligand or chelator. Table 1 lists common natural or chemical synthetic ligands (Havlin et al. 2005; Sekhon 2003). Each of the listed ligands, when combined with a micronutrient, can form a chelated fertilizer. Chelated micronutrients are protected from oxidation, precipitation, and immobilization in certain conditions because the organic molecule (the ligand) can combine and form a ring encircling the micronutrient. The pincer-like way the micronutrient is bonded to the ligand changes the micronutrient's surface property and favors the uptake efficiency of foliarly applied micronutrients.
Why is chelated fertilizer needed?
Because soil is heterogeneous and complex, traditional micronutrients are readily oxidized or precipitated. Chelation keeps a micronutrient from undesirable reactions in solution and soil. The chelated fertilizer improves the bioavailability of micronutrients such as Fe, Cu, Mn, and Zn, and in turn contributes to the productivity and profitability of commercial crop production. Chelated fertilizers have a greater potential to increase commercial yield than regular micronutrients if the crop is grown in low-micronutrient stress or soils with a pH greater than 6.5. To grow a good crop, crop nutrient requirements (CNRs), including micronutrients, must be satisfied first from the soil. If the soil cannot meet the CNR, chelated sources need to be used. This approach benefits the plant without increasing the risk of eutrophication.
Several factors reduce the bioavailability of Fe, including high soil pH, high bicarbonate content, plant species (grass species are usually more efficient than other species because they can excrete effective ligands), and abiotic stresses. Plants typically utilize iron as ferrous iron (Fe2+). Ferrous iron can be readily oxidized to the plant-unavailable ferric form (Fe3+) when soil pH is greater than 5.3 (Morgan and Lahav 2007). Iron deficiency often occurs if soil pH is greater than 7.4. Chelated iron can prevent this conversion from Fe2+ to Fe3+.
Applying nutrients such as Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu directly to the soil is inefficient because in soil solution they are present as positively charged metal ions and will readily react with oxygen and/or negatively charged hydroxide ions (OH-). If they react with oxygen or hydroxide ions, they form new compounds that are not bioavailable to plants. Both oxygen and hydroxide ions are abundant in soil and soilless growth media. The ligand can protect the micronutrient from oxidization or precipitation. Figure 1 shows examples of the typical iron deficiency symptoms of lychee grown in Homestead, Florida, in which the lychee trees have yellow leaves and small, abnormal fruits. Applying chelated fertilizers is an easy and practical correction method to avoid this nutrient disorder. For example, the oxidized form of iron is ferric (Fe3+), which is not bioavailable to plants and usually forms brown ferric hydroxide precipitation (Fe(OH)3). Ferrous sulfate, which is not a chelated fertilizer, is often used as the iron source. Its solution should be green. If the solution turns brown, the bioavailable form of iron has been oxidized and Fe is therefore unavailable to plants.
In the soil, plant roots can release exudates that contain natural chelates. The nonprotein amino acid, mugineic acid, is one such natural chelate called phytosiderophore (phyto: plant; siderophore: iron carrier) produced by graminaceous (grassy) plants grown in low-iron stress conditions. The exuded chelate works as a vehicle, helping plants absorb nutrients in the root-solution-soil system (Lindsay 1974). A plant-excreted chelate forms a metal complex (i.e., a coordination compound) with a micronutrient ion in soil solution and approaches a root hair. In turn, the chelated micronutrient near the root hair releases the nutrient to the root hair. The chelate is then free and becomes ready to complex with another micronutrient ion in the adjacent soil solution, restarting the cycle.
Figure 1. Typical iron deficiency symptoms of lychee (Litchi chinensis, the soapberry family).
Credit: Yuncong Li, UF/IFAS
Understanding and Applying Chelated Fertilizers Effectively Based on Soil pH1
Guodong Liu, Edward Hanlon, and Yuncong Li 2
Plant nutrients are one of the environmental factors essential for crop growth and development. Nutrient management is crucial for optimal productivity in commercial crop production. Those nutrients in concentrations of = 100 parts per million (ppm) in plant tissues are described as micronutrients and include iron (Fe), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), boron (B), chlorine (Cl), molybdenum (Mo), and nickel (Ni). Micronutrients such as Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu are easily oxidized or precipitated in soil, and their utilization is, therefore, not efficient. Chelated fertilizers have been developed to increase micronutrient utilization efficiency. This publication provides an overview of chelated fertilizers and considerations for their use to county Extension faculty, certified crop advisers (CCAs), crop consultants, growers, and students who are interested in commercial crop production.
What is chelated fertilizer?
The word chelate is derived from the Greek word chelé, which refers to a lobster's claw. Hence, chelate refers to the pincer-like way in which a metal nutrient ion is encircled by the larger organic molecule (the claw), usually called a ligand or chelator. Table 1 lists common natural or chemical synthetic ligands (Havlin et al. 2005; Sekhon 2003). Each of the listed ligands, when combined with a micronutrient, can form a chelated fertilizer. Chelated micronutrients are protected from oxidation, precipitation, and immobilization in certain conditions because the organic molecule (the ligand) can combine and form a ring encircling the micronutrient. The pincer-like way the micronutrient is bonded to the ligand changes the micronutrient's surface property and favors the uptake efficiency of foliarly applied micronutrients.
Why is chelated fertilizer needed?
Because soil is heterogeneous and complex, traditional micronutrients are readily oxidized or precipitated. Chelation keeps a micronutrient from undesirable reactions in solution and soil. The chelated fertilizer improves the bioavailability of micronutrients such as Fe, Cu, Mn, and Zn, and in turn contributes to the productivity and profitability of commercial crop production. Chelated fertilizers have a greater potential to increase commercial yield than regular micronutrients if the crop is grown in low-micronutrient stress or soils with a pH greater than 6.5. To grow a good crop, crop nutrient requirements (CNRs), including micronutrients, must be satisfied first from the soil. If the soil cannot meet the CNR, chelated sources need to be used. This approach benefits the plant without increasing the risk of eutrophication.
Several factors reduce the bioavailability of Fe, including high soil pH, high bicarbonate content, plant species (grass species are usually more efficient than other species because they can excrete effective ligands), and abiotic stresses. Plants typically utilize iron as ferrous iron (Fe2+). Ferrous iron can be readily oxidized to the plant-unavailable ferric form (Fe3+) when soil pH is greater than 5.3 (Morgan and Lahav 2007). Iron deficiency often occurs if soil pH is greater than 7.4. Chelated iron can prevent this conversion from Fe2+ to Fe3+.
Applying nutrients such as Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu directly to the soil is inefficient because in soil solution they are present as positively charged metal ions and will readily react with oxygen and/or negatively charged hydroxide ions (OH-). If they react with oxygen or hydroxide ions, they form new compounds that are not bioavailable to plants. Both oxygen and hydroxide ions are abundant in soil and soilless growth media. The ligand can protect the micronutrient from oxidization or precipitation. Figure 1 shows examples of the typical iron deficiency symptoms of lychee grown in Homestead, Florida, in which the lychee trees have yellow leaves and small, abnormal fruits. Applying chelated fertilizers is an easy and practical correction method to avoid this nutrient disorder. For example, the oxidized form of iron is ferric (Fe3+), which is not bioavailable to plants and usually forms brown ferric hydroxide precipitation (Fe(OH)3). Ferrous sulfate, which is not a chelated fertilizer, is often used as the iron source. Its solution should be green. If the solution turns brown, the bioavailable form of iron has been oxidized and Fe is therefore unavailable to plants.
In the soil, plant roots can release exudates that contain natural chelates. The nonprotein amino acid, mugineic acid, is one such natural chelate called phytosiderophore (phyto: plant; siderophore: iron carrier) produced by graminaceous (grassy) plants grown in low-iron stress conditions. The exuded chelate works as a vehicle, helping plants absorb nutrients in the root-solution-soil system (Lindsay 1974). A plant-excreted chelate forms a metal complex (i.e., a coordination compound) with a micronutrient ion in soil solution and approaches a root hair. In turn, the chelated micronutrient near the root hair releases the nutrient to the root hair. The chelate is then free and becomes ready to complex with another micronutrient ion in the adjacent soil solution, restarting the cycle.
Credit: Yuncong Li, UF/IFAS
SmokeyMcscrogin
Active Member
Chemical reactions between micronutrient chelates and soil can be avoided by using a foliar application. Chelated nutrients also facilitate nutrient uptake efficiency for foliar application because crop leaves are naturally coated with wax that repels water and charged substances, such as ferrous ions. The organic ligand around the chelated micronutrient can penetrate the wax layer, thus increasing iron uptake (Figure 2). Compared to traditional iron fertilization, chelated iron fertilization is significantly more effective and efficient (Figure 3) than non-chelated fertilizer sources.
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of chelated fertilizers facilitating nutrient uptake for foliar application. Without chelation (aqua), micronutrients stay on the leaf surface. With chelation (aqua surrounded by blue), micronutrients first move into the mesophyll and then release micronutrients. Color key: aqua = a micronutrient ion; blue = organic ligand; dark green = wax layer on leaves; light green = mesophyll.
Credit: Fullerton (2004)
Figure 3. Comparison of foliar applications of chelated Fe, regular iron fertilizers, and no iron fertilization for correcting iron deficiency of lychee (Litchi chinensis, the soapberry family).
Credit: Yuncong Li, UF/IFAS
Therefore, chelated fertilization can improve micronutrient use efficiency and make micronutrient fertilization more cost effective. The images in Figure 3 show the difference in three treatments with lychee: chelated Fe(II) is greener than FeSO4 plus sulfuric acid, and FeSO4 plus sulfuric acid is greener than no iron fertilization (Schaffer et al. 2011).
Which crops often need chelated fertilizers?
Vegetable and fruit crop susceptibility to micronutrients differs significantly (Table 2). For those in the highly or moderately susceptible categories, chelated fertilizers are often needed. For those with low susceptibility, no chelated fertilizers are needed unless the soil is low in micronutrient bioavailability, as demonstrated by a soil test. Soil pH is a major factor influencing micronutrient bioavailability; therefore, if soil pH is greater than 6.5, then the soil may have limited micronutrient bioavailability (Poh et al. 2009), and chelated fertilizers may be needed.
Which chelated fertilizer should be used?
Each of the ligands (Table 1) can form a chelated fertilizer with one or more micronutrients. The effectiveness and efficiency of a particular chelated fertilizer depends on the pH of the plant growth medium.
Figure 4. Effects of pH and chelate species, including EDTA, OTPA, and EDDHA, on chelated iron stability (A) and on crop yield (B).
Credit: (A) Havlin et al. (2005), Norvell (1972); (B) Havlin et al. (2005), Lindsay (1974)
The ligands EDTA, DTPA, and EDDHA are often used in chelated fertilizers (Table 4). Their effectiveness differs significantly. EDDHA chelated Fe is most stable at soil pH greater than 7 (Figure 4, A and B). Chelated fertilizer stability is desired because it means the chelated micronutrient will remain in a bioavailable form for a much longer time period, thus increasing micronutrient use efficiency in vegetable and fruit production. The stability of three typical chelated Fe fertilizers varies at different pH conditions (Figure 4, A). The Y-axis represents the ratio of chelated Fe to total chelate and ranges from 0 to 1.0. A value of 1.0 means the chelate is stable. The X-axis represents soil pH. At 6.0, the ratios for all three chelated Fe fertilizers are 1.0 (stable), but at pH 7.5, only the ratio of EDDTA chelated Fe is 1.0. That of DTPA chelated Fe is only 0.5, and that of EDTA chelated Fe is only 0.025. So, in practice, EDDTA chelated Fe fertilizer is most effective when pH is greater than 7 but most costly. Accordingly, crop yields of these three chelated fertilizers are in this order: FeEDDHA > FeDTPA > FeEDTA (Figure 4, B). See Micronutrient Deficiencies in Citrus: Iron, Zinc, and Manganese (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss423) for effective pH ranges of iron chelates. Table 3 shows the relationship between soil pH and chelated fertilizer requirement.
Correction of Fe deficiency depends on individual crop response and many other factors. For instance, for vegetables, the rate is usually 0.4–1 lb. chelated Fe in 100 gal. of water per acre. Deciduous fruits need 0.1–0.2 lb. chelated Fe in 25 gal. of water per acre (Table 5). Foliar application is more effective than soil application. For foliar application, either inorganic or chelated Fe is effective, but for fertigation, chelated Fe should be used. In high pH soil, crops are also vulnerable to Cu deficiency stresses. Chelated Cu is significantly more effective than inorganic Cu. A commonly used copper chelate is Na2CuEDTA, which contains 13% Cu. Natural organic materials have approximately 0.5% Cu (Table 5).
In addition to soil pH, Mn is also influenced by aeration, moisture, and organic matter content. Chelated Mn can improve Mn bioavailability. Mn deficiency occurs more often in high pH and dry soil. Similar to other micronutrients, foliar spray is much more effective than soil application. For commercial vegetable production, 0.2–0.5 lb. MnEDTA in 200 gal. of water per acre can effectively correct Mn deficiency (Table 5). Zinc is another micronutrient whose bioavailability is closely associated with soil pH. Crops may be susceptible to Zn deficiency in soil with pH > 7.3. Spraying 0.10–0.14 lb. chelated Zn in 100 gal. of water per acre is effective (Poh et al. 2009). Animal waste and municipal waste also contain Cu, Mn, and Zn micronutrients (Table 5). For more information about micronutrient deficiency in crops, see Plant Tissue Analysis and Interpretation for Vegetable Crops in Florida (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ep081), Micronutrient Deficiencies in Citrus: Iron, Zinc, and Manganese (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss423), and Iron (Fe) Nutrition of Plants (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss555).
Practical Take-Home Message
Credit: Fullerton (2004)
Credit: Yuncong Li, UF/IFAS
Therefore, chelated fertilization can improve micronutrient use efficiency and make micronutrient fertilization more cost effective. The images in Figure 3 show the difference in three treatments with lychee: chelated Fe(II) is greener than FeSO4 plus sulfuric acid, and FeSO4 plus sulfuric acid is greener than no iron fertilization (Schaffer et al. 2011).
Which crops often need chelated fertilizers?
Vegetable and fruit crop susceptibility to micronutrients differs significantly (Table 2). For those in the highly or moderately susceptible categories, chelated fertilizers are often needed. For those with low susceptibility, no chelated fertilizers are needed unless the soil is low in micronutrient bioavailability, as demonstrated by a soil test. Soil pH is a major factor influencing micronutrient bioavailability; therefore, if soil pH is greater than 6.5, then the soil may have limited micronutrient bioavailability (Poh et al. 2009), and chelated fertilizers may be needed.
Which chelated fertilizer should be used?
Each of the ligands (Table 1) can form a chelated fertilizer with one or more micronutrients. The effectiveness and efficiency of a particular chelated fertilizer depends on the pH of the plant growth medium.
Credit: (A) Havlin et al. (2005), Norvell (1972); (B) Havlin et al. (2005), Lindsay (1974)
The ligands EDTA, DTPA, and EDDHA are often used in chelated fertilizers (Table 4). Their effectiveness differs significantly. EDDHA chelated Fe is most stable at soil pH greater than 7 (Figure 4, A and B). Chelated fertilizer stability is desired because it means the chelated micronutrient will remain in a bioavailable form for a much longer time period, thus increasing micronutrient use efficiency in vegetable and fruit production. The stability of three typical chelated Fe fertilizers varies at different pH conditions (Figure 4, A). The Y-axis represents the ratio of chelated Fe to total chelate and ranges from 0 to 1.0. A value of 1.0 means the chelate is stable. The X-axis represents soil pH. At 6.0, the ratios for all three chelated Fe fertilizers are 1.0 (stable), but at pH 7.5, only the ratio of EDDTA chelated Fe is 1.0. That of DTPA chelated Fe is only 0.5, and that of EDTA chelated Fe is only 0.025. So, in practice, EDDTA chelated Fe fertilizer is most effective when pH is greater than 7 but most costly. Accordingly, crop yields of these three chelated fertilizers are in this order: FeEDDHA > FeDTPA > FeEDTA (Figure 4, B). See Micronutrient Deficiencies in Citrus: Iron, Zinc, and Manganese (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss423) for effective pH ranges of iron chelates. Table 3 shows the relationship between soil pH and chelated fertilizer requirement.
Correction of Fe deficiency depends on individual crop response and many other factors. For instance, for vegetables, the rate is usually 0.4–1 lb. chelated Fe in 100 gal. of water per acre. Deciduous fruits need 0.1–0.2 lb. chelated Fe in 25 gal. of water per acre (Table 5). Foliar application is more effective than soil application. For foliar application, either inorganic or chelated Fe is effective, but for fertigation, chelated Fe should be used. In high pH soil, crops are also vulnerable to Cu deficiency stresses. Chelated Cu is significantly more effective than inorganic Cu. A commonly used copper chelate is Na2CuEDTA, which contains 13% Cu. Natural organic materials have approximately 0.5% Cu (Table 5).
In addition to soil pH, Mn is also influenced by aeration, moisture, and organic matter content. Chelated Mn can improve Mn bioavailability. Mn deficiency occurs more often in high pH and dry soil. Similar to other micronutrients, foliar spray is much more effective than soil application. For commercial vegetable production, 0.2–0.5 lb. MnEDTA in 200 gal. of water per acre can effectively correct Mn deficiency (Table 5). Zinc is another micronutrient whose bioavailability is closely associated with soil pH. Crops may be susceptible to Zn deficiency in soil with pH > 7.3. Spraying 0.10–0.14 lb. chelated Zn in 100 gal. of water per acre is effective (Poh et al. 2009). Animal waste and municipal waste also contain Cu, Mn, and Zn micronutrients (Table 5). For more information about micronutrient deficiency in crops, see Plant Tissue Analysis and Interpretation for Vegetable Crops in Florida (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ep081), Micronutrient Deficiencies in Citrus: Iron, Zinc, and Manganese (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss423), and Iron (Fe) Nutrition of Plants (https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/ss555).
Practical Take-Home Message
- High pH soil (pH > 6.5) often has low bioavailability in micronutrients such as Fe, Mn, Zn, and Cu, and micronutrient fertilizers are needed for commercial crop production.
- Crop susceptibility to the above micronutrient deficiencies depends on the plant species and cultivar. Commercial crops can be categorized into three susceptibility groups: high, medium, and low. The first two groups often need chelated fertilizers.
- Inorganic water-soluble micronutrient application to the soil is often ineffective for correcting micronutrient disorders.
- Chelated fertilizers are less reactive to soil conditions and can significantly enhance nutrient uptake and utilization efficiencies.
- Chelate fertilization rates range from 0.2 to 1 lb. micronutrient per acre for vegetable production and 0.1–0.5 lb. micronutrient per acre for fruit production.
- Foliar application of chelated fertilizers is often more effective than soil application.
7L!fTeD24
Well-Known Member
Im not a fkn dude stoner .The above is what inexsperence and a mouth of Bs look like . If you put tap or distiled water in NFTG it goes anarobic
Anyways for anyone that actualy beleaves that
5 gallons last years, You only need 5 parts in soil 6 in coco with up to kill it You dont have to use all them all every time. Salts bad for health and worse for inviromental reason but the reason I quit growing produce with them is because know one on this earth can bring out full gentic potential with just salts and soil or salts peirod. If you could a farmer would know how long befor a pot grower and they cant.. I have never grown canabis with salts nore will I. 5 gals of nftg can be had for 120.00 -160.00 . I have even seen some as low as $88.00 for 5 gALS I used to take advice form people on these matters 20 years ago but they acatualy knew what they are talking about.. after 40+ combined years in Aquculture and farming you know whats opinion , farry tale and fact and there is alot more ferry tales around canabiss growing than fact.
The below is Coco tips only
If things have been looking great in your coco for 5-6 weeks on your new strain and next thing you know your crop begins to fade from the top down, a few dots of k Def are showing on your sugar and fan leaves, your plants is slightly dropping but not clawing. So you freak out and flush and drop your Ph because you heard or believe IN def always starts at the lower leaves (not always true at least with cheleates and intense light .) Well you just fukd up, most likely you have been missing your mark on MM-GM and running a little too much DD or add ons for the last week or longer . It's a little late and you're scared to up the MM GM and we're hoping to cut the AA. Well Coco to the rescue. The same thing that kicked your ass your first few tries is why it's a top choice for a clean finish . You can still up all your N sources in coco with no quality issues almost to the flush especially with cheleates . Up your MM and GM a full tbsp each and drop the DD whatever is needed to keep your feeding numbers . You may or may not need to drop the pH just a little but unless your strain demands it do not drop under 6.6 6.7 at this point .I suggest you stay high on weed and your Ph . If you have only just begun to fade and it's not bad you can really up the AA for a few feedings, but you do want it almost fully worked out by a week before you flush ,sooner is better. I can get my plants to still green up very late and under vigorous bud growth with ample AA .You gotta do what you gotta do to get to that flush and ripening at least 75% green and still photosynthesizing . If you're unfamiliar with coco one of the benefits and reasons why it yields better than soil is for the simple fact you can keep feeding heavy right up to flush then you use the cocos accelerated leaching to your advantage to get your plant to consume itself in a hurry, but it will only happen fast and is most effective If the plant still has some vigor at the start. The Inexperienced and even experienced will say some bs like soil yields better but unfortunately science destroys any opinion It's just their denial that they sucked in coco and they couldn't yield better than in soil . Horticulture science and professional growers both can easley prove them wrong without a shadow of a doubt with just a few lifts of your finger .
The same reason it kicks your ass is why most professionals chose it
30-100 meq/100
Coco coir has a CEC range of 30-100 meq/100 g. with 30-40 being most common. Substrates with very low CEC are more likely to develop deficiencies of the major cations, while higher CEC substrates will have less leaching of nutrients.
More likely does not mean all the sudden for no reason coco makes plants deficient. It means that if you don't know wtf you are doing in it you're in trouble, New growers that refuse to accept coco / chelate facts will usually do one of these, maybe even all of them. Underfeed their plant and think it's burnt to a crisp from overfeeding there are reports all over the internet of 800-1200 ppm burn (Sorry It doesn't work like that) , think they have salts build up flush and make things worse then switch nutes and say the line sucks or is unsuited for coco. Run the line in the high 5 low 6 ph, high or low ppms and think once again they burnt their plant but unlike their salts the Chelates were completely unavailable below and even in the low 6's Or lift their lights and end up with big nice looking cotton balls and claim to have it figured out. Growers coming form salts I believe have it the hardest . So many salt growers fail to understand or believe any of this. Also the complete bunk NFTG coco feeding chart amounts and Ph for most genetics doesn't help either, The chart is built off the light lifters because their big airy buds on perfect plants rule instadumb other social dumb down sites .
These days I spend no more than 1.2 hours every other night, usually a lot less, but seeing that I love what I do , I am often guilty of spending more time than I should at times . I own a landscaping business , custom fishing rod builder, small market produce grower, youth baseball coach, full time dad with no mother or wife , Active outdoorsman . occasional farm hand, I dont own a cell phone, but somehow I still find the time to use Nftg in coco. Could be the lack of a wife and cell phone
7L!fTeD24
Well-Known Member
I really like alot of the things you've said and sound very much alike,this is my 1st time using the line idk just got reeled in watching the show. My seedlings are going into coco loco in a week and im scrambling to figure out my base water, theres so much info and i feel like its so much different than the ff line my minds boggled. U seem like a really busy guy just looking for some simple answers. My well water has 330 ppm and 7.3 ph. Was wondering if bottled spring water would be a better option. I do have the city coming to test it in a couple weeks. Anyones input would be very much appreciated.