Methodical, scientific approach to nutrients and nutrient formulations discussion
- Thread starter darkdestruction420
- Start date
fatman7574
New Member
Humus, Humic Acid and Fulvic Acid
Humus
Humus is defined as the organic matter in soil, a mixture of partially and totally humified substances. Compost is an intermediate product consisting of humic substances and partially decomposed organic matter.
The use of numerous names to describe commercially available humic materials has contributed to the confusion. Humates, humic acid, leonardite, browncoal, lignite, slack lignite, oxidized lig- nite, weathered lignite, humalite, fulvic acid, fulvates, ulmic acid, humic shale, carbonaceous shale, colloidal minerals, humin, concentrated humus, soil organic matter, peat, humus acid, humus coal and dead organic matter are some of the terms that are used to describe and/or market humic substances.
Potassium hydroxide is the typical alkali used by manufacturers to extract humic acid from leonardite. Yes, the humic acid used in organic nutrient solutions is actually made tyically from coal. Since the remaining liquid solution is very alkaline, in the range of 8 to 12 pH, it is incompatible with acids. Here lies some of the confusion, the humic acid synthesized by this operation is not actually an acid. Because it can also be described as the product of adding acid to an alkaline solution, it is a salt therefore the word humate may be more appropriate.
Some manufacturers follow the traditional method described above by treating the alkaline extract with acid, precipitating out the humic acid portion, leaving behind the so-called fulvic acid fraction in solution. The fulvic fraction is acidic, with a distinctive yellowish tint. Note, however, that the operation is vague. There is no definite pH at which the precipitate and acid are separated.
As various fractions of humic substances are soluble in a wide pH range, it makes sense that some fractions must be soluble at neutral pH. Some manufacturers treat humic materials with water, extracting the water-soluble fraction, calling that fraction either fulvic acid or colloidal minerals, which are promoted in human neutraceutical markets. Fulvic acid can be operationally defined as the fraction of humic substances that is soluble in water under all pH conditions.
The marketing of humic substances is interesting in that there is a lack of standardized analysis within the industry for fulvic acid and humic acid. For example, if liquidized humic materials are subjected to analysis, it is difficult to determinewhat the analysis reveals because of the infinite number of reassociations of free radicals that are possible during the extraction process. Some scientists argue that the reaction products are substances created by alkali treatment as complex degradation products, stripped of many of the original functional groups and recombined into an indescribable material. This may seem to be a nit pick, but some scientists like to argue about it.
The humin fraction gets very little attention. It may seem somewhat inert, but it has been described as acting like a sponge, soaking up nutrients. M.H.B. Hayes and C.L. Graham report in Procedures for the Isolation and Fractation of Humic Substances that the composition of humin is the same as humic acid and fulvic acid. They say that humin may be a humic substance in association with mineral oxides or hydroxides (from the reaction), or that humin may be coated with hydrocarbons or lipids (fats) stripped during the reaction, making them insoluble to aqueous solvents. Nobody really knows for sure.
Some people think that fulvic acid is more biologically active than humic acid because of its smaller molecular size. There is some truth in these representations as there is evidence that the lower molecular weight fractions have the ability to cross plant membranes and improve permeability of cell walls. It is true that fulvic acids have a higher total aciditythan humic acids, but the chemical reactivity and chelating ability of humic acids is equal to or greater than fulvic acid, making them very bioactive substances. The humic acid fraction may be more effective than fulvic acid at solubilizing extremely stable aluminum and iron phosphates.
Thirteen carbon nuclear magnetic resonance and mass spectrometric analyses have revealed that the main structural features of humic acid, fulvic acid and humin are nearly identical. To scientists whostudy humic substances, the names have no meaning chemically. Some scientists say that humic substances from different sources are essentially the same.
Reported variations in plant response to different sources of humic substances are rare. In one case reviewed by Y Chen and T. Aviad in Effects of Humic Substances on Plant Growth, the young age of the humic materials were suspect, because humification is a time-dependent process. As the material ages, more bioactive ingredients become incorporated into the humic complex.
COMPLEX GEOBIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
The lower molecular weight (the mass of a substance expressed in gram equivalents of its atomic mass) of fulvic acid is sometimes said to account for its greater biological availability. That is somewhat correct, but vague the industry has not agreed on standardized molecular weights for fulvic acid. Defining humic acid, fulvic acid and humin by their molecular weights is a controversial concept.
Humic substances change their structure depending on pH and the type of metals present. High pH (or the presence of multivalent ions, such as calcium Ca +) makes humic substances open up their long-chain polymers, whereas low pH makes them close. In the presence of toxic metals, humic substances remove the metals from the surrounding environment by forming insoluble aggregated spheres around them.
Humic substances are polymer-like molecules that demonstrate self-organization. The bi-layers formed by humic substances to surround otherwise insoluble minerals are reminiscent of the way allliving things utilize biochemical reactions. The self-organized (micellular) colloidal phases act like biological molecules in cellular systems, showing a strong resemblance to the biological mechanisms of living membranes, as described in college textbooks. Humic substances are more like living creatures than chemical entities, but they dont reproduce.
Slight changes in pH will actually cause the humic polymers to fracture, breaking up the original molecules. The fractured molecules are then free to associate with numerous other free radicals, metals or impurities. Humic substances are made up of hundreds of different molecules of many different sizes (polydispersity) with many ways to orient them-selves by twisting, bending, compressing, and expanding (conformational changes). They are held together loosely by weak forces in a colloidal state.
Any change in solution pH, concentration or the presence of metal ions especially calcium ions will cause huge changes in the physical makeup of the humic molecules. Even slight changes cause the molecules to change in orders of magnitude. Rapid changes in molecular structures are not unique to humic sub- stances water molecules, for example, change their structure 10 trillion times a second. Although water is an extremely simple molecule, the determination of its structure at any given instant is still not fully known. The amazing complexity of humic substances may forever keep their structures a secret.
FULVIC ACID
The primary reason why there is so much confusion about humic substances is the fact that the procedures used to describe them are based on classical aqueous extraction. If minerals are present in the parent material, they become complexed by humic substances. This allows more humic and non-humic material to be solubilized during extraction by breaking down ion bridges that would normally hold the molecules together in higher-purity materials. Unless the super- natant is separated by special procedures (such as passing over an XAD-8 resin) to isolate the fulvic portion, the extracted substances may contain amino acids, proteins, sugars or fatty acids in addition to the fulvic acid.
In biological molecules, it is an established fact that the presence of functional
groups such as carboxyl, phenol, quinone and hydroxyl are responsible for the activity of these molecules. There is some evidence that there are more functional groups in fulvic than in humic acid. The effectiveness of fulvic extracts may be influenced by the way they are synthesized during chemical processing. The fulvic fraction of humic substances is undoubtedly a beneficial part of oxidied lignites.
Content in part from ACRES U.S.A. Jan-Feb 2004 Vol. 34, No. 1&2
Humus
Humus is defined as the organic matter in soil, a mixture of partially and totally humified substances. Compost is an intermediate product consisting of humic substances and partially decomposed organic matter.
The use of numerous names to describe commercially available humic materials has contributed to the confusion. Humates, humic acid, leonardite, browncoal, lignite, slack lignite, oxidized lig- nite, weathered lignite, humalite, fulvic acid, fulvates, ulmic acid, humic shale, carbonaceous shale, colloidal minerals, humin, concentrated humus, soil organic matter, peat, humus acid, humus coal and dead organic matter are some of the terms that are used to describe and/or market humic substances.
Potassium hydroxide is the typical alkali used by manufacturers to extract humic acid from leonardite. Yes, the humic acid used in organic nutrient solutions is actually made tyically from coal. Since the remaining liquid solution is very alkaline, in the range of 8 to 12 pH, it is incompatible with acids. Here lies some of the confusion, the humic acid synthesized by this operation is not actually an acid. Because it can also be described as the product of adding acid to an alkaline solution, it is a salt therefore the word humate may be more appropriate.
Some manufacturers follow the traditional method described above by treating the alkaline extract with acid, precipitating out the humic acid portion, leaving behind the so-called fulvic acid fraction in solution. The fulvic fraction is acidic, with a distinctive yellowish tint. Note, however, that the operation is vague. There is no definite pH at which the precipitate and acid are separated.
As various fractions of humic substances are soluble in a wide pH range, it makes sense that some fractions must be soluble at neutral pH. Some manufacturers treat humic materials with water, extracting the water-soluble fraction, calling that fraction either fulvic acid or colloidal minerals, which are promoted in human neutraceutical markets. Fulvic acid can be operationally defined as the fraction of humic substances that is soluble in water under all pH conditions.
The marketing of humic substances is interesting in that there is a lack of standardized analysis within the industry for fulvic acid and humic acid. For example, if liquidized humic materials are subjected to analysis, it is difficult to determinewhat the analysis reveals because of the infinite number of reassociations of free radicals that are possible during the extraction process. Some scientists argue that the reaction products are substances created by alkali treatment as complex degradation products, stripped of many of the original functional groups and recombined into an indescribable material. This may seem to be a nit pick, but some scientists like to argue about it.
The humin fraction gets very little attention. It may seem somewhat inert, but it has been described as acting like a sponge, soaking up nutrients. M.H.B. Hayes and C.L. Graham report in Procedures for the Isolation and Fractation of Humic Substances that the composition of humin is the same as humic acid and fulvic acid. They say that humin may be a humic substance in association with mineral oxides or hydroxides (from the reaction), or that humin may be coated with hydrocarbons or lipids (fats) stripped during the reaction, making them insoluble to aqueous solvents. Nobody really knows for sure.
Some people think that fulvic acid is more biologically active than humic acid because of its smaller molecular size. There is some truth in these representations as there is evidence that the lower molecular weight fractions have the ability to cross plant membranes and improve permeability of cell walls. It is true that fulvic acids have a higher total aciditythan humic acids, but the chemical reactivity and chelating ability of humic acids is equal to or greater than fulvic acid, making them very bioactive substances. The humic acid fraction may be more effective than fulvic acid at solubilizing extremely stable aluminum and iron phosphates.
Thirteen carbon nuclear magnetic resonance and mass spectrometric analyses have revealed that the main structural features of humic acid, fulvic acid and humin are nearly identical. To scientists whostudy humic substances, the names have no meaning chemically. Some scientists say that humic substances from different sources are essentially the same.
Reported variations in plant response to different sources of humic substances are rare. In one case reviewed by Y Chen and T. Aviad in Effects of Humic Substances on Plant Growth, the young age of the humic materials were suspect, because humification is a time-dependent process. As the material ages, more bioactive ingredients become incorporated into the humic complex.
COMPLEX GEOBIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
The lower molecular weight (the mass of a substance expressed in gram equivalents of its atomic mass) of fulvic acid is sometimes said to account for its greater biological availability. That is somewhat correct, but vague the industry has not agreed on standardized molecular weights for fulvic acid. Defining humic acid, fulvic acid and humin by their molecular weights is a controversial concept.
Humic substances change their structure depending on pH and the type of metals present. High pH (or the presence of multivalent ions, such as calcium Ca +) makes humic substances open up their long-chain polymers, whereas low pH makes them close. In the presence of toxic metals, humic substances remove the metals from the surrounding environment by forming insoluble aggregated spheres around them.
Humic substances are polymer-like molecules that demonstrate self-organization. The bi-layers formed by humic substances to surround otherwise insoluble minerals are reminiscent of the way allliving things utilize biochemical reactions. The self-organized (micellular) colloidal phases act like biological molecules in cellular systems, showing a strong resemblance to the biological mechanisms of living membranes, as described in college textbooks. Humic substances are more like living creatures than chemical entities, but they dont reproduce.
Slight changes in pH will actually cause the humic polymers to fracture, breaking up the original molecules. The fractured molecules are then free to associate with numerous other free radicals, metals or impurities. Humic substances are made up of hundreds of different molecules of many different sizes (polydispersity) with many ways to orient them-selves by twisting, bending, compressing, and expanding (conformational changes). They are held together loosely by weak forces in a colloidal state.
Any change in solution pH, concentration or the presence of metal ions especially calcium ions will cause huge changes in the physical makeup of the humic molecules. Even slight changes cause the molecules to change in orders of magnitude. Rapid changes in molecular structures are not unique to humic sub- stances water molecules, for example, change their structure 10 trillion times a second. Although water is an extremely simple molecule, the determination of its structure at any given instant is still not fully known. The amazing complexity of humic substances may forever keep their structures a secret.
FULVIC ACID
The primary reason why there is so much confusion about humic substances is the fact that the procedures used to describe them are based on classical aqueous extraction. If minerals are present in the parent material, they become complexed by humic substances. This allows more humic and non-humic material to be solubilized during extraction by breaking down ion bridges that would normally hold the molecules together in higher-purity materials. Unless the super- natant is separated by special procedures (such as passing over an XAD-8 resin) to isolate the fulvic portion, the extracted substances may contain amino acids, proteins, sugars or fatty acids in addition to the fulvic acid.
In biological molecules, it is an established fact that the presence of functional
groups such as carboxyl, phenol, quinone and hydroxyl are responsible for the activity of these molecules. There is some evidence that there are more functional groups in fulvic than in humic acid. The effectiveness of fulvic extracts may be influenced by the way they are synthesized during chemical processing. The fulvic fraction of humic substances is undoubtedly a beneficial part of oxidied lignites.
Content in part from ACRES U.S.A. Jan-Feb 2004 Vol. 34, No. 1&2
fatman7574
New Member
The closet formulation studies studies to to a medicinal MJ plant is the "hemp" plants grown through out the U.S.. during WW II and just after that time. They found that the plants grow best when fertilized as if they were tobacco, corn silage or fodder when field grown and as foliage plants when green house grown. One does have to consider all the early research geared mainly around growing plant in the vegetative state until the plants started diverting its energy into reproduction. After all it was a government subsidized growing program geared towards growing natural fibers for making rope, not pot. Then the testing went into importing ruderalis and hash strains so as to shorten and bush out the plants. It was't until the 60's that much research was geared towards improving its possible medicinal qualities.
Consider Green peppers or chiles are 3:1:3, fodder is 3:1:3, spinach is 3:1:4, herbs are 2:1:1.5 while tomatoes are 4:1:5 and very high in calcium. The hydroponic grows in the 50's and 60's showed that MJ responded best to the simple 3:1:2 ratios used for green house foliage type plants. Even AN, low and be hold, who say they are at the forefront of the MJ nutrient field are now putting out Sensi formulas that are nearing the old traditional 3:1:2 formulas of old. Why do I use a near 3:1:2 ratio etc, because over the years I have found it to work the best and have mixed and sold it to dozens of large growers who also swear by it. I also know many commercial growers who mix their own fertilizers and in general they always seem to return to a formula near the standard old 3:1:2 ratio. Recently (the last year or a bit more) has brought about better nutrient delivery systems and therefore allowing increases in the other parameters meaning a k higher potash than from the 3:1:2 ratio.
Lucas is not really a good mix, it is just a fair and simple mix that works. It is a 0.42, 0.83, 1.0 ratio. Nothing like what is really recommended. I really do not know why it made it to the Fad level. I really find it hard to believe that GH even came up with the Flora Bloom formula which is Lucas with humus. It is simply a matter of a manufacturer providing what people want even when it is not a better product. If you actually look at the analysis of GH FloraBloom and Flora micro you would see that Lucas was back ass back wards when he came up with his formula. He advised two parts Bloom to one part Micro. If he would have gone with two parts micro and one part bloom he would have gotten a ratio of 3.3, 1.6, 2 but it would have a mess of calcium at 333 ppm. That high calcium would mean that the reservoir s would likely have to be changed out weekly rather than going for weeks or a full grow by just adding water and more nutrients.
IMHO neither GH or AN make a really good mj nutrient product for hydroponics, especially not for a good aero system with large tubes or chambers. I really doubt they will ever make a good formulation for good intermittent mists systems such as high pressure chamber or atomized chamber. They do not make formulations for commercial growers just hobbyists and it is doubtful enough hobbyists will ever spend the energy, time or money to move up to the better more expensive systems. The more efficient the system is the greater the difference ratios, and balanced pH's mean. Carbonate chemistry is much harder to deal with when TDS levels low right from the beginning as they are with efficient systems. Consider this: the actual recommended calcium to nitrogen ratio for MJ is 0.8-1. How many retailed nutrients out there do you see where the calcium to nitrogen ratio is that high unless the nitrogen level is very low. That is why the retail manufacturers are selling low nitrogen formulas. They sell low nitrogen so they can use lower levels of calcium. Low level calcium formulations make growers happy as they can go longer times between reservoir change outs and so they have to adjust the pH less and worry about magnesium deficiency less.
Basically it means poorer quality nutrients, potency and yields for a given growing time in order to allow for easier maintenance and less grower knowledge. It has become quiet common in the last few years for people to say the use plain tap water without problems. That says a lot about too low calcium levels supplied by manufacturers and that is usually an indication that their Nitrogen levels are really low also. Lately the trends has been high phosphorus and high potash, then throw in high calcium and magnesium at blooming. That is strange as balanced nutrients near or about 3:1:2, calcium of at least half to 1.5 to 3 and magnesium about half on the nitrogen or calcium through out still produce the best results. Calcium is really a very good way to control nutrient up take in efficient systems. As long as the ratio of calcium to magnesium is about 2:1 the calciums high EC means it has a lot of control over the amount of other nutrients that are available.
It is easy to experiment and see that increasing the ratio of calcium lowers uptake and lowering the ratio increases uptake when feeding low ppm nutrients. Kinda mind boggling though. With a captured drain to waste nutrient system allowing tds measurement you would find something like input TDS 600 ppm (with high calcium), drain at 450 ppm. 650 ppm input (low calcium), drain at 350 ppm. That means not only did the plants take up a higher ppm of nutrients but the percentage was also higher in nutrients other than calcium. To gain by this you have to be able to bring your self to almost daily read a nutrient deficiency and antagonist chart though.
I just checked out an add for FloraNova grow and it is 1.75 to 1 to 2.5. So it is swinging closer to 3:1:2 than the original Micro and grow mixed to 3.5:0.5:3.5. The FloraNovaBloom is 4:8:7, and there old Micro and bloom was 2.5:2.5:2.5. Sure seems strange that they only added humic and fulvic acids made from lenoraddite coal but now list the products as organic. I just in the last day or so added humus to the nutrient thread. For those curious, leonardite coal is the brown coal often found mixed in with soft black lignite coal. Some say it is almost coal and almost peat moss. They dissolve the coal with potassium hydroxide, they then add a little phosphoric acid. This form s mushy mass (humic substance) and fulvic acids (the solution). If the just want the humic acid, they pour off the fulvic acid and add water. The water contains humic acids. Usually most manufacturers use/combine the fulvic and humic acids and just call it humus. The new Fad.
For what it is worth for the set ups I use I run formulations of veg 3.26, 1, 3.55 and Bloom of 2.81, 1, 4.4 I am running closer to 3:1:4 rather than 3:1:2. My use of higher potassium is due to the use of tight SOG grows with growing temps around 88 to 92 degrees, very high transpiration due to low ppm nutrients and dehumidification down to around 35 to 40 during veg and 25 to 30 during budding, and lots of CO2.
The general horticultural description of potash as a nutrient: Potassium is a key activator of many enzymes, especially those involved with carbohydrate metabolism. Potassium is also responsible for the control of ion movement through membranes and water status of stomatal apertures. Potassium therefore has a role in controlling plant transpiration and turgor. It is generally associated with plant 'quality' and is necessary for successful initiation of flower buds. As a result the levels of potassium in nutrient solutions are increased as plants enter a 'reproductive' phase, and as crops grow into lower light levels, in order to maintain nutrient balance in solution.
So is the 3:1:2 ratio perfect. No it just seems to be one of the better choices of those nutrient formulas that are available for those who are growing at more common temperatures and humidities. Would added potassium make the formulation better. If you growing parameters are above average, then yes increasing the potash ppm would likely be helpful. If not you will very likely just be adding potassium hydroxide every day anyway so you might as well add it initially instead of adding so much every day by using pH up during budding.
Consider Green peppers or chiles are 3:1:3, fodder is 3:1:3, spinach is 3:1:4, herbs are 2:1:1.5 while tomatoes are 4:1:5 and very high in calcium. The hydroponic grows in the 50's and 60's showed that MJ responded best to the simple 3:1:2 ratios used for green house foliage type plants. Even AN, low and be hold, who say they are at the forefront of the MJ nutrient field are now putting out Sensi formulas that are nearing the old traditional 3:1:2 formulas of old. Why do I use a near 3:1:2 ratio etc, because over the years I have found it to work the best and have mixed and sold it to dozens of large growers who also swear by it. I also know many commercial growers who mix their own fertilizers and in general they always seem to return to a formula near the standard old 3:1:2 ratio. Recently (the last year or a bit more) has brought about better nutrient delivery systems and therefore allowing increases in the other parameters meaning a k higher potash than from the 3:1:2 ratio.
Lucas is not really a good mix, it is just a fair and simple mix that works. It is a 0.42, 0.83, 1.0 ratio. Nothing like what is really recommended. I really do not know why it made it to the Fad level. I really find it hard to believe that GH even came up with the Flora Bloom formula which is Lucas with humus. It is simply a matter of a manufacturer providing what people want even when it is not a better product. If you actually look at the analysis of GH FloraBloom and Flora micro you would see that Lucas was back ass back wards when he came up with his formula. He advised two parts Bloom to one part Micro. If he would have gone with two parts micro and one part bloom he would have gotten a ratio of 3.3, 1.6, 2 but it would have a mess of calcium at 333 ppm. That high calcium would mean that the reservoir s would likely have to be changed out weekly rather than going for weeks or a full grow by just adding water and more nutrients.
IMHO neither GH or AN make a really good mj nutrient product for hydroponics, especially not for a good aero system with large tubes or chambers. I really doubt they will ever make a good formulation for good intermittent mists systems such as high pressure chamber or atomized chamber. They do not make formulations for commercial growers just hobbyists and it is doubtful enough hobbyists will ever spend the energy, time or money to move up to the better more expensive systems. The more efficient the system is the greater the difference ratios, and balanced pH's mean. Carbonate chemistry is much harder to deal with when TDS levels low right from the beginning as they are with efficient systems. Consider this: the actual recommended calcium to nitrogen ratio for MJ is 0.8-1. How many retailed nutrients out there do you see where the calcium to nitrogen ratio is that high unless the nitrogen level is very low. That is why the retail manufacturers are selling low nitrogen formulas. They sell low nitrogen so they can use lower levels of calcium. Low level calcium formulations make growers happy as they can go longer times between reservoir change outs and so they have to adjust the pH less and worry about magnesium deficiency less.
Basically it means poorer quality nutrients, potency and yields for a given growing time in order to allow for easier maintenance and less grower knowledge. It has become quiet common in the last few years for people to say the use plain tap water without problems. That says a lot about too low calcium levels supplied by manufacturers and that is usually an indication that their Nitrogen levels are really low also. Lately the trends has been high phosphorus and high potash, then throw in high calcium and magnesium at blooming. That is strange as balanced nutrients near or about 3:1:2, calcium of at least half to 1.5 to 3 and magnesium about half on the nitrogen or calcium through out still produce the best results. Calcium is really a very good way to control nutrient up take in efficient systems. As long as the ratio of calcium to magnesium is about 2:1 the calciums high EC means it has a lot of control over the amount of other nutrients that are available.
It is easy to experiment and see that increasing the ratio of calcium lowers uptake and lowering the ratio increases uptake when feeding low ppm nutrients. Kinda mind boggling though. With a captured drain to waste nutrient system allowing tds measurement you would find something like input TDS 600 ppm (with high calcium), drain at 450 ppm. 650 ppm input (low calcium), drain at 350 ppm. That means not only did the plants take up a higher ppm of nutrients but the percentage was also higher in nutrients other than calcium. To gain by this you have to be able to bring your self to almost daily read a nutrient deficiency and antagonist chart though.
I just checked out an add for FloraNova grow and it is 1.75 to 1 to 2.5. So it is swinging closer to 3:1:2 than the original Micro and grow mixed to 3.5:0.5:3.5. The FloraNovaBloom is 4:8:7, and there old Micro and bloom was 2.5:2.5:2.5. Sure seems strange that they only added humic and fulvic acids made from lenoraddite coal but now list the products as organic. I just in the last day or so added humus to the nutrient thread. For those curious, leonardite coal is the brown coal often found mixed in with soft black lignite coal. Some say it is almost coal and almost peat moss. They dissolve the coal with potassium hydroxide, they then add a little phosphoric acid. This form s mushy mass (humic substance) and fulvic acids (the solution). If the just want the humic acid, they pour off the fulvic acid and add water. The water contains humic acids. Usually most manufacturers use/combine the fulvic and humic acids and just call it humus. The new Fad.
For what it is worth for the set ups I use I run formulations of veg 3.26, 1, 3.55 and Bloom of 2.81, 1, 4.4 I am running closer to 3:1:4 rather than 3:1:2. My use of higher potassium is due to the use of tight SOG grows with growing temps around 88 to 92 degrees, very high transpiration due to low ppm nutrients and dehumidification down to around 35 to 40 during veg and 25 to 30 during budding, and lots of CO2.
The general horticultural description of potash as a nutrient: Potassium is a key activator of many enzymes, especially those involved with carbohydrate metabolism. Potassium is also responsible for the control of ion movement through membranes and water status of stomatal apertures. Potassium therefore has a role in controlling plant transpiration and turgor. It is generally associated with plant 'quality' and is necessary for successful initiation of flower buds. As a result the levels of potassium in nutrient solutions are increased as plants enter a 'reproductive' phase, and as crops grow into lower light levels, in order to maintain nutrient balance in solution.
So is the 3:1:2 ratio perfect. No it just seems to be one of the better choices of those nutrient formulas that are available for those who are growing at more common temperatures and humidities. Would added potassium make the formulation better. If you growing parameters are above average, then yes increasing the potash ppm would likely be helpful. If not you will very likely just be adding potassium hydroxide every day anyway so you might as well add it initially instead of adding so much every day by using pH up during budding.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Yep, as I've said a million times, cannabis is nothing more than a flowering foliage plant, reason why I also recommend (again at least a million times) the 3-1-2 ratio, which is what Dyna-Gro has been producing long before Big Mike was messin' in his drawers. It's called their Foliage Pro, 9-3-6. The beauty of Dyna-Gro unlike most is they are complete. It's a one stop shopping experience without the confusion.
Well, maybe that cheesedick is finally getting it. What I don't understand is why 90% of "the others" are still touting a 2-1-5 as a "grow" food?
Why would you want a higher K than N? That's my question.
It's not only not a correct NPK, it's not complete.
A history lesson is in order regarding Lucas and the boyz. About 14 years or so there was a "pioneer" group of pot growers that were posting to a bulletin board using crude encryption, PGP, etc. This was before the days of Vbulletin forums like RIU, OG, CW, IC Mag..... Most of that group had a strong following to a guy named pH who self annointed himself as The Guru of pot and did his best to tout hydro as being super to soil, etc. To make a long story short, there were alot of heated arguments between the Brits and the Americans, between me and pH, between a guy named "Ratchet" who started the ill advised fad of "you can't give a plant too much light", etc. and me, etc. You get the picture. Enter Lucas, back then going by the name of "Newbie". Newbie aka Lucas became an asshole buddy with his mentor, pH. pH was a GH hawker, Lucas decides that he's gonna script this wonderful "formula" and call it his own, peeps buy into it like they do, and the rest is history.
Oh....you're the wise one.
That was some incredible info BTW.
Regards,
Uncle Ben
GrowingfortheGold
New Member
Damn this is a good thread ha. 
And Dyna-Gro doesn't have inflated prices either because they try and target everyone ^^. Almost a third of the price compared to the other MJ specific lineups.
And Dyna-Gro doesn't have inflated prices either because they try and target everyone ^^. Almost a third of the price compared to the other MJ specific lineups.
wow
im obviously in over my head.
so i just built a bubbleponics system. wanted some advice on a cheap nut system to use. it is a small indoor grow (10 plants or less) in a small apartment.
wanted to know where i can find an a-z on what nuts to use and when. I am not too bright so i am looking for some barny style 101 nut info.
thanks for the help
hopefully one day ill understand some of yalls posts that i just read
thanks again
the newest of the new
Newbie bob
im obviously in over my head.
so i just built a bubbleponics system. wanted some advice on a cheap nut system to use. it is a small indoor grow (10 plants or less) in a small apartment.
wanted to know where i can find an a-z on what nuts to use and when. I am not too bright so i am looking for some barny style 101 nut info.
thanks for the help
hopefully one day ill understand some of yalls posts that i just read
thanks again
the newest of the new
Newbie bob
fatman7574
New Member
The Dyna-grow Foliage-Pro would work fine.
Mcgician
Well-Known Member
Wow, I actually took the time to read through this entire thread so far, and while at times, my head's still spinning with confusion in some parts, it's become wildly clear that there are many misconceptions being capitalized on by most of the big name nutrient manufacturers. Even though I've not completely gone over to the side of AN, I appreciate the personal story behind Big Mike's struggle to become what they have. Currently, I use Dutch Master's nutes and a hodge-podge of additives from a few different manufacturers. So far, things have worked out pretty well, but like many others, I continue to strive for "perfection". I'll be paying close attention to this thread and will continue to soak up the years of wisdom from guys like you fatman and Uncle Ben. Big props for putting forth the amount of effort and detail you both have so far.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Don't allow yourself to be manipulated by the cannabis companies and their sales pitches, or by the noobs that buy into their hype. This thread will teach you everything you need to know about plant nutrition.
Here's another excellent source for info. Every grower should spend an hour on this site, it was referred to me by Dave Collier.
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Chalker-Scott/Horticultural%20Myths_files/index.html
Here's a great read on epsom salts: http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda Chalker-Scott/Horticultural Myths_files/Myths/magazine pdfs/EpsomSalts.pdf
Good luck,
UB
GrowingfortheGold
New Member
Damn UB that is a great website. A minute on there and I was able to verify my thoughts on wind stress impacting trunk width and root development.
Oh and B1 (thiamine) for transplant shock and root growth is all myth. That was a good one =)
Oh and B1 (thiamine) for transplant shock and root growth is all myth. That was a good one =)
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Yeah, like I said, you can thank Dave for that one.
Mcgician
Well-Known Member
So after reviewing the nutrients I use, the base "gold nutrient line" from Dutch Master, not including the Silica additive has an NPK of 4-3-9. The base two part nutrient calls for a dilution rate of 50ml/10 liters, but I've never used that much-usually closer to two thirds what is calls for. After adding the Silica, the ratio gets thrown off and makes it more difficult to figure out, because of different dilution rates. The Silica additive (which is called for by the Dutch Master nutrient calclulator) has an NPK of 0-0-2, but only at 10ml/20 liters. The other additive Dutch Master calls for if you're going to use their line is called ADD .27. It's supposed to add amino acids, plus unknown other things claiming to speed up "cytoplasmic streaming". This formula has a dilution rate of 30ml/10 liters and an NPK of 0-2-2. Can someone help me figure out what my final NPK ratio is after final mixing and dilution?
Btw, after reading this thread I'm getting really nervous that I may be short on calcium, although the plants show no signs of it. Should I be supplementing with additional Calcim and Magnesium in order to keep the ratios more in line?
Btw, after reading this thread I'm getting really nervous that I may be short on calcium, although the plants show no signs of it. Should I be supplementing with additional Calcim and Magnesium in order to keep the ratios more in line?
fatman7574
New Member
IMHO
With Hydroponic grows: For clones:::low lighting, sea weed extracts and auxins, ph balanced RO water. Once roots appear, medium lighting add humic/fulvic acids and a little ammonnium nitrate and trace elements, low ppm/EC. Then with HID lighting slightly disrtanced go to a weak nutrient formula of say 500 ppm that is a complete balanced formula. Finally full lighting and fully balanced nutrients plus sodium silicate if drain to waste or using frequent water cahnges. silica phosphate if not doing water changes or seldom doing water changes. Ugh
Rooting Auxin Treatments:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkwgHUGZL8jMB9l5XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzZmMyajY4BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNARjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA0Y4MjNfMTAz/SIG=12trvg1t6/EXP=1265082759/**http%3a//www.rooting-hormones.com/IPPS1009/IPPS_Presentation1009_VERBAL.pdf
Bulk auxin (Indole Butyric Acid 98.5%) for preparing your own powders solutions or gels. Also bulk Fulvic acids and kelp extracts etc.
http://www.super-grow.biz/IBASolvent.
With Hydroponic grows: For clones:::low lighting, sea weed extracts and auxins, ph balanced RO water. Once roots appear, medium lighting add humic/fulvic acids and a little ammonnium nitrate and trace elements, low ppm/EC. Then with HID lighting slightly disrtanced go to a weak nutrient formula of say 500 ppm that is a complete balanced formula. Finally full lighting and fully balanced nutrients plus sodium silicate if drain to waste or using frequent water cahnges. silica phosphate if not doing water changes or seldom doing water changes. Ugh
Rooting Auxin Treatments:
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGkwgHUGZL8jMB9l5XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzZmMyajY4BHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDNARjb2xvA3NrMQR2dGlkA0Y4MjNfMTAz/SIG=12trvg1t6/EXP=1265082759/**http%3a//www.rooting-hormones.com/IPPS1009/IPPS_Presentation1009_VERBAL.pdf
Bulk auxin (Indole Butyric Acid 98.5%) for preparing your own powders solutions or gels. Also bulk Fulvic acids and kelp extracts etc.
http://www.super-grow.biz/IBASolvent.
fatman7574
New Member
AN is touted as now having the best MJ formula as it now has Sensi formula's and Big Bud which contains Amino acids. The Sensi formulas are not as bad as most of his products but still far from the best avilable and far from being fair priced. I think in talikng about Dyna-Gro g Foliage-Pro we have shown there is no need to waste money oh AN Sensi formulations.
Now the Big Bud formulations. A 100X concentration would contain about 51 grams of amino acids. At typical recomended level would take about 75 grams per gallon of the amino acids (sold at the lower link) per a 1 gallon jushg of 100X concentrate fertilizers That is about $7.50 worth of amino acids. AN charges about $120 U.S. for 4 liters of Big Bud fertilizer I can mix for about $16. Go Figure.
Rememember this next time Fat Mikie drones on about his grossly over priced nutrients being the best. Remember Yyou can also take a Formulation such as Dyna-Gro foliage-pro and and with about 3 minutes work add the amino acids at a cost of $7.50 and have better than any AN nutrient formulation and for about 40% to 50% of the AN price. Or make it from scratch for about 10% to 15% of the AN price.
http://www.super-grow.biz/Amino.jsp
Mikie's new rant is on his video marketing site where he drones on about his being caught out and now about House and Garden Roots excelerator. Ie *Roots excelerator is a combination of: * Seaweed extract * B vitamins * Beneficial bacteria. Seaweed extract is dirt cheap. B vitamins not used in conjuction with auxins have been repeatedly shown to provibe no increase in rooting. The beneficial bacteria are merely compost extracts and one spore that has found to be "slighly" beneficaial in soils grows and when used with organic fertilizers. In reality the reason it is being used my manfacturers is chifly based upon its shelf life not its benefits as it is not anymore benefits tham what is found in any unsterilized dir/or compost cultures. It can just go for long periods without food so it has a long shelf life. Basically the sea weed extract is beneficial in hydroponic rooting, but less beneficial than auxins. They can be used in conjunction with auxins. Sea Weed Extract is very cheap and is sold at the above link.
Now the Big Bud formulations. A 100X concentration would contain about 51 grams of amino acids. At typical recomended level would take about 75 grams per gallon of the amino acids (sold at the lower link) per a 1 gallon jushg of 100X concentrate fertilizers That is about $7.50 worth of amino acids. AN charges about $120 U.S. for 4 liters of Big Bud fertilizer I can mix for about $16. Go Figure.
Rememember this next time Fat Mikie drones on about his grossly over priced nutrients being the best. Remember Yyou can also take a Formulation such as Dyna-Gro foliage-pro and and with about 3 minutes work add the amino acids at a cost of $7.50 and have better than any AN nutrient formulation and for about 40% to 50% of the AN price. Or make it from scratch for about 10% to 15% of the AN price.
http://www.super-grow.biz/Amino.jsp
Mikie's new rant is on his video marketing site where he drones on about his being caught out and now about House and Garden Roots excelerator. Ie *Roots excelerator is a combination of: * Seaweed extract * B vitamins * Beneficial bacteria. Seaweed extract is dirt cheap. B vitamins not used in conjuction with auxins have been repeatedly shown to provibe no increase in rooting. The beneficial bacteria are merely compost extracts and one spore that has found to be "slighly" beneficaial in soils grows and when used with organic fertilizers. In reality the reason it is being used my manfacturers is chifly based upon its shelf life not its benefits as it is not anymore benefits tham what is found in any unsterilized dir/or compost cultures. It can just go for long periods without food so it has a long shelf life. Basically the sea weed extract is beneficial in hydroponic rooting, but less beneficial than auxins. They can be used in conjunction with auxins. Sea Weed Extract is very cheap and is sold at the above link.
Mcgician
Well-Known Member
This is some seriously great info, thanks man. I'll definitely be checking into this. I'd rep you if I could, but it says I need to spread it around first. Thanks again.
hymem
Well-Known Member
UB & Fatman: Great info on NPK ratios. Appreciate the time and energy you are spending helping those with less experience.
If I were to run something like Dyna grows foliage pro(9-3-6) which has 2% calcium then how could I increase my calcium to get my N:C ratio closer to 1? It seems like all the calcium additives on the market also increase my N.
If I were to run something like Dyna grows foliage pro(9-3-6) which has 2% calcium then how could I increase my calcium to get my N:C ratio closer to 1? It seems like all the calcium additives on the market also increase my N.
fatman7574
New Member
While calcium could be run at that high of a level I would not do so unless runing drain to waste. That would have your calciums so high that you would have a vert high EC in relationship to the other nutrients. This would mean that you could not top your resrvoir off with nutrients as beisded adding more of the other nutrients you would also be adding more calcium. At max I would consider calcium is about calcium at The best way is not necessarily the easiest way. In the reef aquarium field they have to supply huge amounts of soluble calcium to the point of adding it daily. The old traditonalmethod is to add what is called Kalkwasser. This is cold RO water that has two teaspoons of Calcium Hydroxide added per gallon of water. The powder is added to the water. It is slowly and gently stirred so as to not introduce a lot of CO2 by mixing in room air. Let sit over night. Either with a tube sipon off all but bottom 1/2 inch or so (sediments) or slowly pour off the top excluding the sediments. This is added drop wise (slowly) to water that is being aerated (circulated with a pump) until you achieved the desired rise in ppm. It would take approx 1.25 gallons ( approx 2.5 teaspoons of Calcium Hydroxide powder) of saturated water to raise the calcium level of 10 gallons of water 100 ppm. The calcium hydroxide is sold at any pet store that sells reef fish and live coral. Or simply buy Mrs. Wage's Pickling Lime http://store.mrswagesstore.com/mrswagpiclim.html or Mother's Pickling Lime at the Grocery store. Quite a bit cheaper. The cost is about $5 to raise calcium level of about 10000 gallons of water 100 ppm. If you know ahead of time how much you want to raise the calcium just add the powder to a storage container holding a full reservoir worth of water. Just make sure you filter out the sediments (calcium carbonates) at the bottom instead of pouring them in your reservoir. The trace amount of iron that is in the solution for the lime will be part of the precipitate. Then add your nutrients formulation.
hymem
Well-Known Member
Thanks. Perhaps my problem is not a Ca deficiency. Here is a few pics. What do you think the problem is?
Attachments
fatman7574
New Member
Please ignore that the following link is to a competing seed site. The link is due to the fact it is that the deficiency chart actually has photos rather than drawings or just word descriptions. Perhaps one day someone will make such a photo equipped deficiency chart for this site.
http://www.marijuana-seeds.net/Thanks-ThankYou.htm
http://www.marijuana-seeds.net/Thanks-ThankYou.htm
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
I think you're getting caught up in theory and not real world application. Foliage Pro is a good product, use it as is. I've use 30-10-10 with no Ca all the time with excellent results. Of course hydro is different than soil. My well water is high in Ca and Mg so I take that into consideration.
Your rust colored dots in the leaves are probably due to too high PPM.
That is a credible link fatman.