You don't need more P in flower. It's bad for your plants and the environment

Dubstin

Well-Known Member
You don't need more P in flower.
Its an old myth that's bad for your plants and the environment.

This myth isn't just contained to cannabis, it's all over fruiting/flowering plants and the vast majority of bloom nutes are giving you the wrong NPK for your plants to thrive.

First here's Dr Bruce Bugbee, possibly the most knowledgeable cannabis focused scientist in the world. He recommends a 20-10-20 break down from start to finish. He was hired by nasa to design grows in space.

"The general scientific consensus is that high P does not improve flowering. I am not aware of any evidence that it helps flowering, especially in tomatoes. I have never studied Figs, but I do not expect they would be different.

The problem is that P is a serious environmental pollutant; so applying excess P is irresponsible. Agricultural researchers have been trying to get grower to apply less P for many decades. Responsible growers should start marketing their products as being grown without excess phosphorous.

For most crops 15-20 ppm P is adequate. In cannabis, our studies show a potential benefit of increasing to as much as 50 ppm P during the late flowering stage."

Big Mike from advanced nutrients also did some advanced leaf analysis and found the same to be true, plants never need more P than N/K.


Heres a link talking about the myths surrounding phosphorous and even a test where they showed with marigolds that higher P not only didn't help but actually hindered the flowering process


An article from MSU talking about the phosphorous myth


Screenshot_20220422-122840_Chrome.jpgScreenshot_20220428-134251_YouTube.jpg

The pics at the end are a few of my own grows using low P high Nk throughout flower. I personally use megacrop 1 part.

Screenshot_20220411-022847_Photos~2.jpgreceived_487711032561470.jpegScreenshot_20211208-181735.png20220425_111719.jpgIMG_20220416_153429_274.jpgreceived_412789097314313.jpeg20220425_193200.jpg
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Billy the Mountain

Well-Known Member
You don't need more P in flower.
Its an old myth that's bad for your plants and the environment.

This myth isn't just contained to cannabis, it's all over fruiting/flowering plants and the vast majority of bloom nutes are giving you the wrong NPK for your plants to thrive.

First here's Dr Bruce Bugbee, possibly the most knowledgeable cannabis focused scientist in the world. He recommends a 20-10-20 break down from start to finish. He was hired by nasa to design grows in space.

"The general scientific consensus is that high P does not improve flowering. I am not aware of any evidence that it helps flowering, especially in tomatoes. I have never studied Figs, but I do not expect they would be different.

The problem is that P is a serious environmental pollutant; so applying excess P is irresponsible. Agricultural researchers have been trying to get grower to apply less P for many decades. Responsible growers should start marketing their products as being grown without excess phosphorous.

For most crops 15-20 ppm P is adequate. In cannabis, our studies show a potential benefit of increasing to as much as 50 ppm P during the late flowering stage."

Big Mike from advanced nutrients also did some advanced leaf analysis and found the same to be true, plants never need more P than N/K.


Heres a link talking about the myths surrounding phosphorous and even a test where they showed with marigolds that higher P not only didn't help but actually hindered the flowering process


An article from MSU talking about the phosphorous myth

I agree 100%
I also recall reading that P > ~50ppm is unnecessary

Just posted this graph in another thread, P uptake is relatively low the entire growth cycle; a tomato in this case, but P uptake is both moderate and never dramatically rises. There's no reason to believe cannabis would be much different.

Another bro-science myth that needs to be squashed.

Tomato_nutes.png
 

Dubstin

Well-Known Member
I agree 100%
I also recall reading that P > ~50ppm is unnecessary

Just posted this graph in another thread, P uptake is relatively low the entire growth cycle; a tomato in this case, but P uptake is both moderate and never dramatically rises. There's no reason to believe cannabis would be much different.

Another bro-science myth that needs to be squashed.

View attachment 5125597
Nice graph thanks!!

So Bruce bugbee says most strains won't benefit from any more than 20ppm P but "some" cultivars benefited all the way up to 50ppm.
 

xtsho

Well-Known Member
Many of us have been saying the same thing for years. I've been telling people to skip the high P boosters for a long time. It didn't take Bruce Bugbee to tell anyone with any understanding of plant nutrition that you don't need to dump excessive amounts of P on you plants in flower. Too much of anything is bad.

One of the reasons you see so many newer growers developing issues in flower is because they add too much of something quite often it's P. They'll make a post asking why their plants look like crap with yellow and dying leaves midway through flower. Then you find out they cut out all N and bumped up the P/K. They can't tell you why they did it just that they heard you don't want N in flower and you want more P. They don't understand that N is required by the plant for flower production. It also doesn't help that you have a bunch of people incorrectly telling them that the yellowing is normal, that it's the fade or some other nonsense and is desirable.

One reason so many think they need high P in flower is because the cannabis specific nutrient companies push it so hard. It's a big moneymaker for them selling flower additives that are high in P. MKP "monopotassium phosphate is dirt cheap. It's 0-52-34. There's also TSP "triple super phosphate" 0-46-0 and cheaper than MKP. Diluting either with water, putting it in a shiny bottle, and marketing it as a flower enhancer is pure profit.

Bottom line, you don't need excessive amounts of P in flower. If you think you do and still want to add it just get yourself some MKP instead of getting ripped off paying $25 for a liter bottle of the same stuff diluted in water that comes in a shiny bottle with a cool sounding name.
 

PopAndSonGrows

Well-Known Member
PXL_20220428_165211054.jpg
Sooooo what ur saying is these are bad. :hug::lol: lol jk.

I actually did have poor success with these with the FF trio in coco, but, I'm pretty sure I used them too soon and too frequently. But, the values freak me out, so I'm gona use these on the tomatoes outside instead.


So should we still keep potassium values high in late flower??
 

xtsho

Well-Known Member
View attachment 5125611
Sooooo what ur saying is these are bad. :hug::lol: lol jk.

I actually did have poor success with these with the FF trio in coco, but, I'm pretty sure I used them too soon and too frequently. But, the values freak me out, so I'm gona use these on the tomatoes outside instead.


So should we still keep potassium values high in late flower??
Monopotassium phosphate is the second ingredient in Cha Ching. Ammonium phosphate is the first. Monopotassium phosphate is the first ingredient in Beastie Bloomz. Both are overpriced inexpensive fertilizer salts repackaged in fancy packaging with cool sounding names. Marked up 1000% or more. Neither is needed. Any decent base nutrient, 1,2, or 3 part will contain all the plant needs.
 

xtsho

Well-Known Member
View attachment 5125611
Sooooo what ur saying is these are bad. :hug::lol: lol jk.

I actually did have poor success with these with the FF trio in coco, but, I'm pretty sure I used them too soon and too frequently. But, the values freak me out, so I'm gona use these on the tomatoes outside instead.


So should we still keep potassium values high in late flower??
It's not that they're bad it that the same ingredients are already present in most nutrients in amounts that are more than adequate for healthy plant growth. Using more doesn't mean it's beneficial.
 

HydroKid239

Well-Known Member
View attachment 5125611
Sooooo what ur saying is these are bad. :hug::lol: lol jk.

I actually did have poor success with these with the FF trio in coco, but, I'm pretty sure I used them too soon and too frequently. But, the values freak me out, so I'm gona use these on the tomatoes outside instead.


So should we still keep potassium values high in late flower??
I use those, but I don’t go nuts. When I give them that it’s just that. No other feed with it. My plants leaves look like they’ve seen a ghost.. but the bud looks ok to me. I think some ppl just over do it (not exactly excluding myself from that statistic)
04C988C7-409D-4B71-8212-E5288EBAE6E2.jpeg1A262878-2E1C-46C6-A4C0-C54C0FE0BBDC.jpeg

You don't need more P in flower.
Its an old myth that's bad for your plants and the environment.

This myth isn't just contained to cannabis, it's all over fruiting/flowering plants and the vast majority of bloom nutes are giving you the wrong NPK for your plants to thrive.

First here's Dr Bruce Bugbee, possibly the most knowledgeable cannabis focused scientist in the world. He recommends a 20-10-20 break down from start to finish. He was hired by nasa to design grows in space.

"The general scientific consensus is that high P does not improve flowering. I am not aware of any evidence that it helps flowering, especially in tomatoes. I have never studied Figs, but I do not expect they would be different.

The problem is that P is a serious environmental pollutant; so applying excess P is irresponsible. Agricultural researchers have been trying to get grower to apply less P for many decades. Responsible growers should start marketing their products as being grown without excess phosphorous.

For most crops 15-20 ppm P is adequate. In cannabis, our studies show a potential benefit of increasing to as much as 50 ppm P during the late flowering stage."

Big Mike from advanced nutrients also did some advanced leaf analysis and found the same to be true, plants never need more P than N/K.


Heres a link talking about the myths surrounding phosphorous and even a test where they showed with marigolds that higher P not only didn't help but actually hindered the flowering process


An article from MSU talking about the phosphorous myth


View attachment 5125574View attachment 5125575
This seems like great info by just skimming over it. Going to take my time with it as I’m still trying to find a better way to get the job done. Thanks for the post :joint: :peace:
 

VincenzioVonHook

Well-Known Member
I've ways used 2:1:3, 3:1:4 or 11:2:13 so I've never been one to load up on P as I never bought into the "marijuana specific" flower fertilisers. Luckily it looks like I made the right choice, or a choice that didn't hinder me, considering 90% of people claimed those ratios were terrible for flower. These crazy PK boosters always struck me as bizarre.

If you can't grow a plant with a well rounded base nutrient like a 2:1:3:1 or 3:1:4:1 I've always wondered what was up.
 

DreHaze

Well-Known Member
I did my own experiment using megacrop 1 part. Both plants were grown in the same room at same time except one plant had a bit of booster added the other didn't. It made a huge difference in my experience. But don't take my word for it, here are the pics to prove it.
IMG_20210319_192637.jpg
IMG_20210319_192651.jpg
I used about 1gram of booster for every 12grams of megracrop for this plant.
 

PopAndSonGrows

Well-Known Member
I did my own experiment using megacrop 1 part. Both plants were grown in the same room at same time except one plant had a bit of booster added the other didn't. It made a huge difference in my experience. But don't take my word for it, here are the pics to prove it.
View attachment 5126141
View attachment 5126142
I used about 1gram of booster for every 12grams of megracrop for this plant.
Were these clones of the same plant?
 

newguy41410

Well-Known Member
I did my own experiment using megacrop 1 part. Both plants were grown in the same room at same time except one plant had a bit of booster added the other didn't. It made a huge difference in my experience. But don't take my word for it, here are the pics to prove it.
View attachment 5126141
View attachment 5126142
I used about 1gram of booster for every 12grams of megracrop for this plant.
So you're saying booster is better for you??
 

HydroKid239

Well-Known Member
I did my own experiment using megacrop 1 part. Both plants were grown in the same room at same time except one plant had a bit of booster added the other didn't. It made a huge difference in my experience. But don't take my word for it, here are the pics to prove it.
View attachment 5126141
View attachment 5126142
I used about 1gram of booster for every 12grams of megracrop for this plant.
What’s the NPK of the booster used?
 

Rufus T. Firefly

Well-Known Member
View attachment 5125611
Sooooo what ur saying is these are bad. :hug::lol: lol jk.

I actually did have poor success with these with the FF trio in coco, but, I'm pretty sure I used them too soon and too frequently. But, the values freak me out, so I'm gona use these on the tomatoes outside instead.


So should we still keep potassium values high in late flower??
They have cartoons on the labels, how could they be bad?
 
Top