He invented the hempy bucket. He grows baseball bats... intelligent old gruff reticent hippie.. I won't put words into his mouth.. worth looking up if wanting to learn or expand knowledge/growing techniques..
How To Use Progressive Web App aka PWA On 420 Magazine Forum
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Going out on a limb, I have a gut feeling marijuana plants can only take what they need given their circumstances. Any higher, like force feeding synthetic nutes, and you see signs of excess and toxicity.
It's when you introduce other outside environmental variables like high CO2 content, perfect lumens and light spectrum, the (safe) natural growth hormones like triacontanol, amendments that boost chlorophyll numbers and photosynthesis, that they then will uptake higher NPK numbers to compensate for their new growth rates.
Jorge Cervantes advocates that method be referred to as "leeching" rather than flushing. It does help minimize confusion. But even that method is a bit scientifically unfounded, as there's a lot of chemical science that shows water shouldn't be able to remove a lot of those nutrients from soil. @bobrown14 and @conradino23 know more of the specifics than I.You never going to flush anymore.. lmfao.... so how will you get over any lockouts when they occur?
Are you saying feeding water only for last couple weeks is flushing? Lmfao.. outta here, dudes been growing shit longer and hell lot better than all us, I'd say read some things from their bro science tips and reap the benefits.. 'hempy' is the one I suggest to follow, read what he says not how he says it... like some of you want to reinvent the wheel, make it rounder lmfao
The study is at the bottom of page.
Goodbye from Maximum Yield
In print and online, Maximum Yield is your source for cannabis and cultivation knowledge, with informative grow articles and tips to enhance your life with mmj.www.maximumyield.com
Mycorrhizae dont cultivate well with synthetic nutes, which is unfortunate because they're the only fungi I'm aware of that creates a symbiotic bond with plant roots to promote nutrient and water uptake, when the plant calls for it.
Bacterias can withstand the high NPK concentrations, but only benefit of that afaik is it means less nutes are required. And downside is less control and knowledge over actual ppm uptake.
Really comes down to environment.
I found a study that claimed keeping the shoots colder than the roots grows a larger plant.
His test group isnt large enough imo, although the claims in size and dry weight difference are so drastic that it suggests there really is an impact on growth.
Photosynthesis usually becomes bottle-necked by CO2 fixation rates, which is why CO2 supplementation helps to boost it a little bit. Even then however, at a certain point, there becomes a point wherein photosynthesis isn't driving enough growth to need to uptake that many nutrients, and more addition of them to the soil will just be increasing the salt content of the solution at the root zone.
Also, people don't really think about "salts" in the right way. It's not like table salts or sodium, it just means that the water is impure with solids. The biggest way salts interfere with water uptake is because roots work through osmosis and absorbing through a membrane. When you have two bodies of water separated by a membrane, the direction of flow is determined by which has a higher concentration of salts in it. So if the water in your soil is saltier than that inside of the plant, it will have trouble taking up water through its roots.
Jorge Cervantes advocates that method be referred to as "leeching" rather than flushing. It does help minimize confusion. But even that method is a bit scientifically unfounded, as there's a lot of chemical science that shows water shouldn't be able to remove a lot of those nutrients from soil. @bobrown14 and @conradino23 know more of the specifics than I.
There's actually a few other bacteria that do that. There's one that helps fix nitrogen, but I forget the name of it. Xtreme Gardening sells it as "Azos".
In most living soil enthusiast circles I've followed, they usually stress the importance of diversity. I wonder if there is evidence of just how much life it wipes out and not just the study done on mycorrhizae. I expect this might be where the argument comes from though, because it seems reasonable to conclude that if they would kill mycorrhizae, they could kill more than just that. It certainly doesn't seem to be the high-orbit-nuclear-death that it's purported as in some circles though.
Jorge Cervantes advocates that method be referred to as "leeching" rather than flushing. It does help minimize confusion. But even that method is a bit scientifically unfounded, as there's a lot of chemical science that shows water shouldn't be able to remove a lot of those nutrients from soil. @bobrown14 and @conradino23 know more of the specifics than I.
Photosynthesis usually becomes bottle-necked by CO2 fixation rates, which is why CO2 supplementation helps to boost it a little bit. Even then however, at a certain point, there becomes a point wherein photosynthesis isn't driving enough growth to need to uptake that many nutrients, and more addition of them to the soil will just be increasing the salt content of the solution at the root zone.
Also, people don't really think about "salts" in the right way. It's not like table salts or sodium, it just means that the water is impure with solids. The biggest way salts interfere with water uptake is because roots work through osmosis and absorbing through a membrane. When you have two bodies of water separated by a membrane, the direction of flow is determined by which has a higher concentration of salts in it. So if the water in your soil is saltier than that inside of the plant, it will have trouble taking up water through its roots.
Jorge Cervantes advocates that method be referred to as "leeching" rather than flushing. It does help minimize confusion. But even that method is a bit scientifically unfounded, as there's a lot of chemical science that shows water shouldn't be able to remove a lot of those nutrients from soil. @bobrown14 and @conradino23 know more of the specifics than I.
There's actually a few other bacteria that do that. There's one that helps fix nitrogen, but I forget the name of it. Xtreme Gardening sells it as "Azos".
In most living soil enthusiast circles I've followed, they usually stress the importance of diversity. I wonder if there is evidence of just how much life it wipes out and not just the study done on mycorrhizae. I expect this might be where the argument comes from though, because it seems reasonable to conclude that if they would kill mycorrhizae, they could kill more than just that. It certainly doesn't seem to be the high-orbit-nuclear-death that it's purported as in some circles though.
That's pretty much what's in question.It might not be removing anything, could be diluting, whatever, it's not important unless to feel educated or superior, it's the act of what it achieves, is the relevance to home hobby growers..
I may have misunderstood what you're trying to say...You saying I'm not seeing a difference when doing abc but merely if had continued same samecand waited I'd see same results?