Uncle Ben's Gardening Tweeks and Pointers
- Thread starter Uncle Ben
- Start date
UB, I started my first grow in mid august and am approaching harvest (8 wks since flip) with my indie (the sativa may be a while). I was very fortunate to discover this and the other threads you've posted and have spent countless hours reading them. I just wanted to thank you. My plants have nice green lush foilage and i think the yield will be decent given its a cfl grow. I always post this link as advice for new growers like myself in an effort to help combat the barrage of misinformation and bad avdice floating around these forums (ie: PH, flushing, cannabis specific nutes, ect.) heres an example http://forum.grasscity.com/indoor-marijuana-growing/1141987-having-trouble-help-2.html most of these people don't listen but i try. BTW i just used mg soil and a cheap 20-20-20 fert (veg) and jacks classic bloom for flower for this grow. Switched to Dyna-Gro Foliage Pro for my current veg. and will continue with the jacks for flower 
Again thank you for providing such a valuable tool for us 1st time growers.
Again thank you for providing such a valuable tool for us 1st time growers.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Gonna take the time to repeat a discussion we're having on plant nutrition at another site, something which I've been preaching for years. Here are the posts:
UB opines:
- "Found the same experience HB, that every time I hit them with a high P food during flower, bang, there goes the leaves. I stopped that practice a long time ago."
REJ opines:
- "i just have to re post this one more time: from http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/contain/msg0412411532471.html
Some of you may recall that I have long maintained that high phosphorus(P) fertilizers are pointless.
I also am a fan of Dyna-Gro fertilizers for container usage.
I was asked recently 'If high P fertilizers are so useless then why does Dyna-Gro make and market them?'
My answer was simply to have a product that people wanted, but that was just my opinion. I decided to ask the company (Dyna-Gro) about this. At first I got a very brief response from a representative that wasn't at all satisfying so I asked that rep to forward my question to someone responsible for deciding what their formulations would be. I ended up getting a response from the CEO. Here it is, I think you will find it interesting.
*******************
You are correct. We market a high P (Liquid Bloom) "believe" they need this. As you have noted, our Foliage-Pro does a great job start to finish. However, it is simpler to give the market what they think they need than to try to reeducate it. There is some evidence to believe that low N helps to convince a plant to stop its vegetative growth and move into its reproductive phase (flowering), but environmental factors are probably more important. P is typically 5th or 6th in order of importance of the six macronutrients. There is little scientific justification for higher P formulas, but marketing does come into play for the vast majority of users who lack any real understanding of plant nutritional requirements. Therefore, the market is flooded with a plethora of snake oil products that provide little benefit and can actually do harm. For example, one exhibitor at a hydroponic trade show had a calcium supplement with 2% calcium derived from calcium chloride. Can you guess what continued application of 2% chloride would do to plants?'
I hope this answers your question and am sorry for Zina's inaccurate response.
Cordially,
Dave Neal, CEO
Dyna-Gro Nutrition Solutions
2775 Giant Rd.
Richmond, CA 94806
800-Dyna-Gro, Fax: 510-233-0198
[email protected]
www.dyna-gro.com"
Editorial comment - I've been trying to educate the cannabis forum community going on 15 years, and with every new crop of noobs, they fall for the same old snake oil crap....with such low N products ironically working against the grower because they WILL induce leaf necrosis, not maintenance.
Discussion continues........
Lumi opines:
"Sounds just like UB AND RM3. They have been saying this repeatedly. And most of the dumbasses argued on and on without ONE SHRED of evidence to support high P. now I did find good response from P-K boost last week to two weeks of flower. But one needs to keep in mind that it is a stress response not a health response
Also I feel it is the added mag and sulfur that helps in flower from mag pro not the increased P"
HB opines:
"There is a table on the second page of this paper that shows mineral elements in crop plants and their concentration levels on a dry weight basis. Sure enough, P is basically last out of the big 6.
http://www.pnas.org/content/91/1/11.full.pdf "
UB opines:
I had this same discussion with Jack Peters a while back. He admitted that the <30> in their bloom food, the 10-30-20, was functionally too high....just wasn't required by the plant, but it's what people perceive plants needing.
UB"
UB opines:
"Nice job. If one was to analyze the dry matter in that PDF chart, on the low end of macro nutrients (and playing games with the decimal point on all 3 macros) you'd have a 5-1.5-8. At the high end of that range you'd have a 6-.5-8"
UB opines:
- "Found the same experience HB, that every time I hit them with a high P food during flower, bang, there goes the leaves. I stopped that practice a long time ago."
REJ opines:
- "i just have to re post this one more time: from http://forums2.gardenweb.com/forums/load/contain/msg0412411532471.html
Some of you may recall that I have long maintained that high phosphorus(P) fertilizers are pointless.
I also am a fan of Dyna-Gro fertilizers for container usage.
I was asked recently 'If high P fertilizers are so useless then why does Dyna-Gro make and market them?'
My answer was simply to have a product that people wanted, but that was just my opinion. I decided to ask the company (Dyna-Gro) about this. At first I got a very brief response from a representative that wasn't at all satisfying so I asked that rep to forward my question to someone responsible for deciding what their formulations would be. I ended up getting a response from the CEO. Here it is, I think you will find it interesting.
*******************
You are correct. We market a high P (Liquid Bloom) "believe" they need this. As you have noted, our Foliage-Pro does a great job start to finish. However, it is simpler to give the market what they think they need than to try to reeducate it. There is some evidence to believe that low N helps to convince a plant to stop its vegetative growth and move into its reproductive phase (flowering), but environmental factors are probably more important. P is typically 5th or 6th in order of importance of the six macronutrients. There is little scientific justification for higher P formulas, but marketing does come into play for the vast majority of users who lack any real understanding of plant nutritional requirements. Therefore, the market is flooded with a plethora of snake oil products that provide little benefit and can actually do harm. For example, one exhibitor at a hydroponic trade show had a calcium supplement with 2% calcium derived from calcium chloride. Can you guess what continued application of 2% chloride would do to plants?'
I hope this answers your question and am sorry for Zina's inaccurate response.
Cordially,
Dave Neal, CEO
Dyna-Gro Nutrition Solutions
2775 Giant Rd.
Richmond, CA 94806
800-Dyna-Gro, Fax: 510-233-0198
[email protected]
www.dyna-gro.com"
Editorial comment - I've been trying to educate the cannabis forum community going on 15 years, and with every new crop of noobs, they fall for the same old snake oil crap....with such low N products ironically working against the grower because they WILL induce leaf necrosis, not maintenance.
Discussion continues........
Lumi opines:
"Sounds just like UB AND RM3. They have been saying this repeatedly. And most of the dumbasses argued on and on without ONE SHRED of evidence to support high P. now I did find good response from P-K boost last week to two weeks of flower. But one needs to keep in mind that it is a stress response not a health response
Also I feel it is the added mag and sulfur that helps in flower from mag pro not the increased P"
HB opines:
"There is a table on the second page of this paper that shows mineral elements in crop plants and their concentration levels on a dry weight basis. Sure enough, P is basically last out of the big 6.
http://www.pnas.org/content/91/1/11.full.pdf "
UB opines:
".....and so goes the cannabis growing community. Been saying it for years. It's refreshing to hear it come from the manufacturer themselves.
I had this same discussion with Jack Peters a while back. He admitted that the <30> in their bloom food, the 10-30-20, was functionally too high....just wasn't required by the plant, but it's what people perceive plants needing.
UB"
UB opines:
"Nice job. If one was to analyze the dry matter in that PDF chart, on the low end of macro nutrients (and playing games with the decimal point on all 3 macros) you'd have a 5-1.5-8. At the high end of that range you'd have a 6-.5-8"
jpeg666
Well-Known Member
Aren't the words derived from supposed to mean it that is where the calcium came form meaning there is no chloride in the solution! Don't they take out the chlorine ?
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Nice job, and happy harvest!
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
You should continue to use that food which supports, maintains, healthy green leaves. If 10-30-20 is doing it, fine. If it induces leaf drop, then change to a high N food like a 9-3-6.
I used a 18-4-9 during my entire grow because that is what the plants required to keep them green.
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Because I mentioned the site in a PM, Potroast cut off my PM privileges. Pretty shallow shit, eh? It's Riddlem3, membership by referral only.
mantiszn
Well-Known Member
That's what I'm looking for at the moment. Think I read it on some Ed Rosenthal Article or some other BS
Thought you might know. Struggling to test with only 1 room at the moment.
if I find anything I will drop a link.
looking for the original paper on DIF technique
http://extension.umass.edu/floriculture/fact-sheets/controlling-plant-height-without-chemicals
http://www.greenhousemanagementonline.com/gmpro-0410-preventing-plant-stretch.aspx
http://www.ggspro.com/new/pdfs/Controlling Plant Stretch Through the Morning Temperature Dip.pdf
Thought you might know. Struggling to test with only 1 room at the moment.
if I find anything I will drop a link.
looking for the original paper on DIF technique
http://extension.umass.edu/floriculture/fact-sheets/controlling-plant-height-without-chemicals
http://www.greenhousemanagementonline.com/gmpro-0410-preventing-plant-stretch.aspx
http://www.ggspro.com/new/pdfs/Controlling Plant Stretch Through the Morning Temperature Dip.pdf
ru4r34l
Well-Known Member
So like every other nutrient manafacturer/company they too practicse deceit to the customer and sell them something they do not require
Either the email is missing some pieces or Dyna-Gro needs to invest in a consumer corespondence proffesional because the email makes no sense, what the hell does this mean?
For someone who is so opinionated about giving plants what they require not what NOOBS think they require, I am quite suprised you simply accept the rhetoric stated below.Dave Neal said:
I think Dave Neal meant to say "more profitable" than "simpler"Dave Neal said:
regards,
KUShSOurSMOKEr
Well-Known Member
Ub thanks so much all ur info is priceless n got me growin dankkkkk
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Just got my Peters order in - Blossom Booster and Citrus FeED. FWIW, I think I found the Holy Grail for a complete, start to finish fertilizer. It's Jack's Classic Peters Citrus FeeD, a new 20-10-20 product. Compared to their popular Blossom Booster it has more Mg, 1% versus .50%; more Fe which is tripled chelated (EDTA, EDDHA, DTPA) to take into account any kind of soil chemistry/profile, .15% versus .10%; 4.9% sulfur where the Blossom Booster has none, and more of an acidifying affect. 11 elements in all which I could recommend for coco and perhaps soil-less.
Caveat - more does not necessarily mean better. It's all about the balance. For example, this 20-10-20 will produce more yield versus someone hitting their plants with a low N, high K or P food during flowering. Soil growers should check it out. What that formula is designed for (based on my knowledge of cannabis nutrition and soil chemistry) is a greener and healthier plant (think Fe, S, Mg) with less stretch (low P) and an excellent NPK balance to support foliage, roots, and flowers.....a perfect one shot nutrition solution. No Weight Watchers program for this bendejo!
The N profile is 2% ammoniacal N, 3% nitrate N, 15% urea, which induces an acidifying affect at 664lbs. CaCO3 per ton versus the Booster at 417.
Uncle Ben
Caveat - more does not necessarily mean better. It's all about the balance. For example, this 20-10-20 will produce more yield versus someone hitting their plants with a low N, high K or P food during flowering. Soil growers should check it out. What that formula is designed for (based on my knowledge of cannabis nutrition and soil chemistry) is a greener and healthier plant (think Fe, S, Mg) with less stretch (low P) and an excellent NPK balance to support foliage, roots, and flowers.....a perfect one shot nutrition solution. No Weight Watchers program for this bendejo!
The N profile is 2% ammoniacal N, 3% nitrate N, 15% urea, which induces an acidifying affect at 664lbs. CaCO3 per ton versus the Booster at 417.
Uncle Ben
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
They are saying that you can't change stupid, so, you sell them "what they think they need". Cannabis forums are a perfect example. Hydro vendors and snake oil companies like AN and Humboldt know that, and play on it. In the end, it is the consumer, NOT the vendor and manufacturer who is responsible for their choices.So like every other nutrient manafacturer/company they too practicse deceit to the customer and sell them something they do not require
Either the email is missing some pieces or Dyna-Gro needs to invest in a consumer corespondence proffesional because the email makes no sense, what the hell does this mean?
For someone who is so opinionated about giving plants what they require not what NOOBS think they require, I am quite suprised you simply accept the rhetoric stated below.
I think Dave Neal meant to say "more profitable" than "simpler"
regards,
UB
ilikecheetoes
Well-Known Member
what amounts of the peters are you using? Are you just suggesting this for soil growers? What about hydro?
kinetic
Well-Known Member
just a 20-10-20 throughout the grow correct?
Uncle Ben
Well-Known Member
Of course. You're not thinking you need a so called 'bloom' food?
kinetic
Well-Known Member
No, no bloom foods. Thanks UB.
ilikecheetoes
Well-Known Member
sorry to be dense but I thought you said blossum booster and citrus feed? so just citrus at 1tsp/g or a tsp of each per gallon?
Anything you would do different soilless?
Anything you would do different soilless?