The "I don't starve my plants before harvest" thread

[SirLancelot]

Yeah, let's not have my comment make everyone go soft!!!!!

So after spending 3 days reading this thread I am still utterly confused on what I should do on my first crop. I am half way through week 8 of flower. I have been feeding the FF trio since the very start. I have followed their feeding schedule to the T. I fed for the last time two days ago.

I plan to do a combination of the "flush" technique and the "feed until the end" technique. I will be giving my plants tap water only. Not in any exuberant amounts. Just the normal 1 gallon I give them currently every other day.

It will save nutes and also allow the plant to use up the nutes that I'm positive have been building in the soil over time.

yea no matter what anyone says the best way to find out what to do is try both and see what happens. Who knows you may notice a difference but most likely you won't. Just make sure you cure properly as this makes the difference.

Kushdog really? I mean really buddy, still pushin that lol.

 

[donutpunched]

I dont flush at all... I used to but found no difference at all. My latest crop was super og and people think that shit was flushed and cured.. It was dried one week....

 

[Gastanker]

Yes I wondered about that myself, but I think what most experienced growers do, is find a balanced PPM level, and always do experiments to get the proper levels which don't harm your plants. At least that is what I do myself, and I'm pretty sure I don't have those levels, I think if I did I would be able to see it on my crop
I do agree that the extra 5% gained is not worth the extra nutrients really, unless it's very important for people to gain 100% productivity.

The question there really is how much does flushing affect the plant, how many nutrients are moved around and whereto, if moved at all?
I'd like to see what the productivity % falls to when the flushing is induced, I wonder how low it goes, since it's more than a deficiency, it's a critical deficiency (depends if one flushes with pure RO water or a higher ppm of course).





I would never smoke the stem hehe, nor the leaves, although I do make bubble hash from the leaves.

All bud contains stems and leaf material though - well cept for when you get so stoned you pick it apart with tweezers - each calyx is held together by stem material. Again flushing to the point of causing a deficiency is bad - I don't think anyone would argue that. Flushing without causing a deficiency just means you are removing some of the surplus nutrients in the soil - there's no way you are going to flush all of the nutrients out of soil if you have a decent soil with a decent CEC

 

[k0ijn]

Found the study and it actually applies more than I gave you credit for. The study is regarding the overuse of fertilizer on row crops in the UK.

I guess these guys have heard of these elusive nutrient stores as well:

I'm glad you find it helpful after all

They do say that "growth requirements are generally achieved before high concentrations are attained".
Which is an important point.
And remember, this is about an abundance of nutrients fed, I don't think most Cannabis growers feed their crops with nutrients in abundance.
I for one keep a balanced level around the critical level I'd say, sometimes I get small deficiencies, other times I hit it right on the nail, I hardly ever see overfeeding. My PPM meter helps me a lot though

According to the chart the amount of excess skyrockets when the plants are fed an overabundance. And these stores occur in all organs...

Again you have to remember that this discussion is not about an abundance of nutrients versus a normal level, but a normal level (non flushers) vs. deficiency (flushers)

I agree that overfeeding is bad however.

Oh, and I guess according to them stems don't store much -

But unfortunately we still don't have a solid conclusion.

From this experiment we have gathered that excess nutrients in the soil does lead to excess nutrients in all organs of the plant and that during the vegetative growth cycle rye grass benefits from fertilizer. Great resource. Thank you.

If you read the chart I posted, stems are clearly high in substances, compared to leaves and roots.
I did not say everything was kept in the stem, but I just read the chart and concluded that stems must contain a lot of substances if the chart is scientifically factual (which I believe it is).

Yes I agree, it's a very good read

 

[cues]

The thing about 'Scientifically proven facts' from people researching PhD's etc is that most of them are resourced from the internet. As long as a link is provided for the bibliography, it all counts.
I know what you're saying though. Being in full-time education gives you access to information we can't get to. I only wish that I had taken full advantage of it while I had the chance.

 

[k0ijn]

My initial argument was that all portions of the plant contain surplus. You argued against this. I then mentioned that fruiting bodies in particular were storage units. You refuted this as well...and then changed your mind later when presented with evidence otherwise.

Did you miss this? It is the article you brought up and fairly clearly states that all portions of the plant can contain surplus when you over feed and according to the chart it if often in magnitudes of 10x

Flushing = not over feeding so between flush and over feeding the flushed material would have less surplus ion accumulation - if you follow the logic of your own evidence.

Does A + extra ions = A? No... Is it possible that A + extra tastes different than just A? Yes...

Is it possible to taste combusting sulfur and other elements? Yes... What is the fallacy?

I'm very sure I didn't contradict myself, if I did, please quote me so I can see where I went wrong.

What I've said from the beginning is that I don't believe in the surplus nutrients / substances theory regarding normally PPM'ed weed contra flushed weed.
That is the crux of my point and that is what I've tried to point out all the way through the discussion.


You are not taking into account that you are talking about abundance of nutrients versus flushed.
The discussion about abundance versus flushed is not relevant, since none of us who don't flush intently overfeed our crop.
That is a fairly safe assumption I'd say. I certainly haven't see Harrekin or SirLance overfeed.
I myself don't overfeed my crop either, I have regular PPMs as I've explained.

 

[k0ijn]

All bud contains stems and leaf material though - well cept for when you get so stoned you pick it apart with tweezers - each calyx is held together by stem material. Again flushing to the point of causing a deficiency is bad - I don't think anyone would argue that. Flushing without causing a deficiency just means you are removing some of the surplus nutrients in the soil - there's no way you are going to flush all of the nutrients out of soil if you have a decent soil with a decent CEC

Yes I agree, basic Cannabis biology.
I pick out the stems however, I can pick them out of my grinder after I've grinded some bud up, it's very easy to pick them out in the mix, at least for me it is.
I never smoke leaves or stems.

What happens for most flushers who flush 2 weeks of RO water is surely deficiency, when we have already learned earlier in this thread that deficiency can occur with few days after feeding stops.
And from the study I posted, where they specified that "growth requirements are generally achieved before high concentrations are attained" (nutrients, substances) we can also see that even in abundance, plants have ways of reaching requirements for growth before levels of concentrations get (too) high.
I want to specify that I agree that abundance of nutrients is not healthy for plants, and it has never been.
But neither is deficiency, and flushing surely causes deficiency, in the most critical part of growth, late flowering.

And still I don't see any scientific information regarding how the surplus of substances in plants is stored, where it is stored and what it is stored as (ions? broken up minerals?).
And most importantly, if this amount of stored nutrients in a normally PPM'ed crop versus a flushed crop, really can affect taste, harshness etc.
Which I firmly believe is controlled by proper drying & curing (unless you overfeed, which is not the point of our discussion).

 

[Gastanker]

I'm very sure I didn't contradict myself, if I did, please quote me so I can see where I went wrong.

What I've said from the beginning is that I don't believe in the surplus nutrients / substances theory regarding normally PPM'ed weed contra flushed weed.
That is the crux of my point and that is what I've tried to point out all the way through the discussion.


You are not taking into account that you are talking about abundance of nutrients versus flushed.
The discussion about abundance versus flushed is not relevant, since none of us who don't flush intently overfeed our crop.
That is a fairly safe assumption I'd say. I certainly haven't see Harrekin or SirLance overfeed.
I myself don't overfeed my crop either, I have regular PPMs as I've explained.

I think we agree on everything other than what flushing is.
Most growers I know and on this forum shoot for maximum growth - they push 1200ppm with some even reaching as high as 3000ppm. If you maintain 1200ppm through flower you are overfeeding - at least compared to every other industry.

Hydro has no substrate to retain nutrients so lowering ppm late in flower is in my mind flushing - you are immediately not exposing your plants to excess.

In soil if you feed 1200 ppm every other feed your soil will over time accumulate nutrients - simply lowering ppm in the last two weeks often doesn't decrease this maximum level of nutrient feed and your plant will still uptake excess. If you pass just a bit of water through the soil and can wash some of this buildup out of the soil so that your plants are not receiving high levels of accumulated nutrients late into flower.

If you run your plants the entire time at 95% and you have no build up and your plants are not receiving more nutrients than necessary then there is no reason for a flush - it's just hard to run a plant in soil at 100% all the way up to the last two weeks of flower and not run 100% the last two weeks as well without flushing.

I know many many growers that aim for the 100% and over feed, many fewer that aim for the 95% growth and properly fed plants. How many cases of nute burn have you seen on this site? If they stop right before nute burn they are likely running higher than the abundance level.

 

[Harrekin]

Hell no I don't overfeed either, I just make sure there's no deficiencies and try keep on top of the plants requirements. Balance is key, more nutes don't mean more bud...but starving a plant for a week to two weeks when it's ripening up is a definate way to reduce yield.

Anyone wanna tell me how you flush organic soil? Organics are the same ions and metsbolites as synthetics once uptaken by the plant, why does it not require flushing?

 

[SirLancelot]

Hell no I don't overfeed either, I just make sure there's no deficiencies and try keep on top of the plants requirements. Balance is key, more nutes don't mean more bud...but starving a plant for a week to two weeks when it's ripening up is a definate way to reduce yield.

Anyone wanna tell me how you flush organic soil? Organics are the same ions and metsbolites as synthetics once uptaken by the plant, why does it not require flushing?

I was just thinking this last night but forgot... good call. Im not sure on this part, and hopefully someone can clear that up but I was under the impression that once the roots and plant broke the nutrients down into food it's the same regardless if the Nitrogen came from bat shit or a bottle of synth.

 

[Harrekin]

I think we agree on everything other than what flushing is.
Most growers I know and on this forum shoot for maximum growth - they push 1200ppm with some even reaching as high as 3000ppm. If you maintain 1200ppm through flower you are overfeeding - at least compared to every other industry.

Hydro has no substrate to retain nutrients so lowering ppm late in flower is in my mind flushing - you are immediately not exposing your plants to excess.

In soil if you feed 1200 ppm every other feed your soil will over time accumulate nutrients - simply lowering ppm in the last two weeks often doesn't decrease this maximum level of nutrient feed and your plant will still uptake excess. If you pass just a bit of water through the soil and can wash some of this buildup out of the soil so that your plants are not receiving high levels of accumulated nutrients late into flower.

If you run your plants the entire time at 95% and you have no build up and your plants are not receiving more nutrients than necessary then there is no reason for a flush - it's just hard to run a plant in soil at 100% all the way up to the last two weeks of flower and not run 100% the last two weeks as well without flushing.

What you're referring to is properly called "leaching". It's the process of "flushing" all the excess salts out of a medium and is excellent for correcting feeding mistakes or clearing out built up salts.

What we are stating is that pre-harvest flushing has no outcome on taste, smell, smoothness or burning.

If you feel so strongly about smooth bud I'd advise you read-up on Riddlem3's Preharvest fermentation guide. It's what some hippy heard/read wrong the invented flushing

 

[k0ijn]

I think we agree on everything other than what flushing is.
Most growers I know and on this forum shoot for maximum growth - they push 1200ppm with some even reaching as high as 3000ppm. If you maintain 1200ppm through flower you are overfeeding - at least compared to every other industry.

Hydro has no substrate to retain nutrients so lowering ppm late in flower is in my mind flushing - you are immediately not exposing your plants to excess.

In soil if you feed 1200 ppm every other feed your soil will over time accumulate nutrients - simply lowering ppm in the last two weeks often doesn't decrease this maximum level of nutrient feed and your plant will still uptake excess. If you pass just a bit of water through the soil and can wash some of this buildup out of the soil so that your plants are not receiving high levels of accumulated nutrients late into flower.

If you run your plants the entire time at 95% and you have no build up and your plants are not receiving more nutrients than necessary then there is no reason for a flush - it's just hard to run a plant in soil at 100% all the way up to the last two weeks of flower and not run 100% the last two weeks as well without flushing.

Good to know

3000 PPM? The highest PPM I've seen was on another forum and he reached about 2000 or just under. He had problems with overfeeding.

1200 PPM might be overfeeding compared to every other industry, but if it doesn't cause overfeeding and the levels aren't too high, and you can't spot any fault or harm to your plants, I wouldn't call it overfeeding.
This is variable for each grow, and depends on a lot of other variables. But I wouldn't call 1200 PPM overfeeding (I assume EC).

Flushing is generally done with RO water or as a replacement tap water sat out for several days.
I have very rarely read about flushers just lowering their PPM, and I wouldn't call lowering PPM flushing, except if you lowered PPM 90+% or the like (which is equivalent to flushing or very closely so).

Yes I agree, in soil nutrients accumulate, but the discussion about flushing soil is entirely different than hydro, and one I think we agree on.
What you say about soil flushing is what I would call leaching, it's an 'error correcting measure', in this case the "error" is the accumulation of nutrients in the soil.
And I would advice people who grow in soil to flush every other or every third feeding (watering) to also flush to get the soil to a better nutrient level and reduce accumulation.

I have not had any issues running my plants as close to 100% as possible in the last weeks, without flushing.
Maybe some people do have those issues, but I still think flushing in hydro is overrated and unsubstantiated to some degree.

 

[Gastanker]

Hell no I don't overfeed either, I just make sure there's no deficiencies and try keep on top of the plants requirements. Balance is key, more nutes don't mean more bud...but starving a plant for a week to two weeks when it's ripening up is a definate way to reduce yield.

Anyone wanna tell me how you flush organic soil? Organics are the same ions and metsbolites as synthetics once uptaken by the plant, why does it not require flushing?

Organic amendments are not soluble by water. An example of an organic amendment would be alfalfa meal - picture a piece of alfalfa in the dirt in your pot, if you run water over it will it dissolve and run out the bottom of the pot? No. Organic amendments slowly feed your plants as they break down into their constituents and are used almost as soon as they become available.

 

[Gastanker]

Good to know

3000 PPM? The highest PPM I've seen was on another forum and he reached about 2000 or just under. He had problems with overfeeding.

1200 PPM might be overfeeding compared to every other industry, but if it doesn't cause overfeeding and the levels aren't too high, and you can't spot any fault or harm to your plants, I wouldn't call it overfeeding.
This is variable for each grow, and depends on a lot of other variables. But I wouldn't call 1200 PPM overfeeding (I assume EC).

Flushing is generally done with RO water or as a replacement tap water sat out for several days.
I have very rarely read about flushers just lowering their PPM, and I wouldn't call lowering PPM flushing, except if you lowered PPM 90+% or the like (which is equivalent to flushing or very closely so).

Yes I agree, in soil nutrients accumulate, but the discussion about flushing soil is entirely different than hydro, and one I think we agree on.
What you say about soil flushing is what I would call leaching, it's an 'error correcting measure', in this case the "error" is the accumulation of nutrients in the soil.
And I would advice people who grow in soil to flush every other or every third feeding (watering) to also flush to get the soil to a better nutrient level and reduce accumulation.

I have not had any issues running my plants as close to 100% as possible in the last weeks, without flushing.
Maybe some people do have those issues, but I still think flushing in hydro is overrated and unsubstantiated to some degree.

We are only talking about hydro? I thought this was a soil flushing discussion. You recommend flushing in soil? Yes flushing is the forum term for leeching when it comes to soil.

 

[Gastanker]

What you're referring to is properly called "leaching". It's the process of "flushing" all the excess salts out of a medium and is excellent for correcting feeding mistakes or clearing out built up salts.

What we are stating is that pre-harvest flushing has no outcome on taste, smell, smoothness or burning.

If you feel so strongly about smooth bud I'd advise you read-up on Riddlem3's Preharvest fermentation guide. It's what some hippy heard/read wrong the invented flushing

I'm saying that if you have a strong accumulation of nutrients in soil, like you would have if driving your plants at 100%, and do not get rid of this accumulation, then the plant can and will absorb a surplus of nutrients, and in that case there can be an outcome on taste and smell.

Likewise will happen if you run your hydro plants at a super high rate of nutrients late into flower.

 

[k0ijn]

We are only talking about hydro? I thought this was a soil flushing discussion. You recommend flushing in soil? Yes flushing is the forum term for leeching when it comes to soil.

Yes I'm pretty sure we're talking about hydro, since most of us agree that leaching in soil is sometimes necessary as an error correcting measure or to clear salt buildup.
Since SirLancelot, Harrekin and myself have mentioned in this and other threads that leaching in soil is sometimes necessary as an error correcting measure or to clear a salt buildup.
In hydro it's a different story, this has been mentioned several times in this thread.
And most of the people who start flushing threads are talking about hydro, the few who ment soil have not gotten the same responses as the hydro + flushing questions.

 

[thechemist310]

Anyone wanna tell me how you flush organic soil? Organics are the same ions and metsbolites as synthetics once uptaken by the plant, why does it not require flushing?

This why I giggle at some of the "organic" things I hear. Synthetic chemicals??? BRING IT ON!!!!

The guy I usually score a sack off of had some funky looking dope a few weeks ago. He said, "It looks that way because it's grown with only organic fertilizers." He was told it by someone who was told it by someone.... ha ha

I'm starting my "flush" tonight!!!!

I'm nearing the end of week 8. I have 5 different strains going and all have "medium" to "long" (whatever that means from the attitude website) flowering periods. I treat all of them exactly the same and they all look vibrant and healthy except one. I have one Orange Bud plant. For the last week this plant has been having yellowing fan leaves that also turn orangish red. The rest of the plant and the leaves directly around the buds look nice and green. I have been chalking it up to fall time coming in the plants life.

Is this normal? Do I feed some N? This is what the leaves look like. The buds look great and still have clear/milky trichs.

 

[k0ijn]

I'm saying that if you have a strong accumulation of nutrients in soil, like you would have if driving your plants at 100%, and do not get rid of this accumulation, then the plant can and will absorb a surplus of nutrients, and in that case there can be an outcome on taste and smell.

Likewise will happen if you run your hydro plants at a super high rate of nutrients late into flower.

I agree, but since we who don't flush our hydro grown plants are running normally balanced PPMs we do not see any reason to flush, and this is the entire discussion in a sentence.
People keep saying, flush last 2 weeks in flowering, even in hydro, you get better tasting weed and it burns better and is less harsh on the throat.
We say, bullshit, not proven, at least Harrekin and I have done experiments with leaching and have seen no improvements, except a lot of extra hassle.

Since we aren't overfeeding, we don't need to correct anything.
A lot of people claim it's still necessary, regardless of how our PPMs are, they just do it because they believe it will somehow improve taste, be less harsh on the throat and burn 'cleaner'.


I would like to stress that I do not recommend or believe in pre-harvest flushing but I do believe in error correction with regards to flushing.

 

[Harrekin]

Organic amendments are not soluble by water. An example of an organic amendment would be alfalfa meal - picture a piece of alfalfa in the dirt in your pot, if you run water over it will it dissolve and run out the bottom of the pot? No. Organic amendments slowly feed your plants as they break down into their constituents and are used almost as soon as they become available.

So organically fed plants have no store of mineral ions? I think with all due respect you're misunderstanding how it works. With organics microorganisms break large organic molecules down into their constitutent elements which are then taken up by the plant in the same manner as synthetic/chemical nutrients (as on a molecular scale they are the same chemicals). The only difference between the two is the speed of delivery...so how is it that accumulations in tissues as youve said before doesn't occur with organics?

And by saying "used up" immediately can you elaborate on that statement? How exactly does the plant "use it up" and how does this differ between organics and chemical nutes?

 

[k0ijn]

Lancelot is a soil grower... And in his first post directly compares growing MJ in soil to row crops in soil.

So everyone agrees that flushing is necessary in soil if you run your nutes hot while late in flower and that lowering ppm towards the end of hydro is good... lol. Too funny.

So how is flushing a myth?

The crux of my point still applies mate.

I do not believe in pre harvest flushing, not in soil nor in hydro.
When I said I believe in leaching soil, I specified I ment as an error correcting measure, not as a pre harvest flush.
No, I have not said lowering PPMs is good, and I do not lower them myself.



Pre harvest flushing _is_ a myth.
You can leach to error correct some mistakes or to clear a salt buildup.
This is doable in both soil and hydro.

I do not believe that pre harvest flushing helps anything, I think it starves the plant in it's most critical hour.

You have overanalyzed my words again, I did not say I believe in flushing (what most people think of as pre harvest flushing).
I do not believe in it.