I may be misremembering, but I think I recall reading that the plant has no idea whether the ions of elements it takes up are organic or synthetic.
Final Flush: Myth Or Fact?
- Thread starter Drivejunky95
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #82
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
By all means!
TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
Right, but what happened when depriving them of those only the last two weeks of flower as happens with a flush? That's more of a rhetorical question because we don't know, but I would say it represents enough of a difference in the biochemical condition of the plant that it could impart flavor differences down the line. A lot focus has been put on whether the residual elemental nutrients can be removed from the buds, but what if A) There is a definite improvement in taste from flushing and B) It had something more to do with how an abundance of nutrients makes the bud develop, versus it leaves residual elemental nutrients behind.Sorry, right. I misread that as mobile nutrients! Immobile nutrients must come from the soil/water. Nothing comes from the flowers either way.
Deprived of immobile nutrients at the soil/water level, the plant would grow poorly developed flowers and eventually starve.
- Thread starter
- #84
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
Elements in their true forms would be identical, then, synthetically derived or organically.
It's probably near impossible to tell the difference in synthetic orange-flavored terpenes vs actual oranges.
Ben and Jerries has an official ice cream taster. Think about that one for a moment...
It's probably near impossible to tell the difference in synthetic orange-flavored terpenes vs actual oranges.
Ben and Jerries has an official ice cream taster. Think about that one for a moment...
To be clear, you're wondering if taking away an immobile nutrient toward the end of the bud's life would make it taste better than if it the plant had had that nutrient available?
TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
Yep. Which I know sounds counter intuitive because we are trained to think that the more a plant can grow the better right... But what if not everything the plant grows is desireable.
I can only speculate what the actual differences could be, so instead I think an apples to oranges kind of comparison might be suitable: What if cutting down the nutrients at the last parts of life is giving us a leaner cut of meat.
- Thread starter
- #87
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
Plant senescence was mentioned as being a reason to feed only RO water +/- molasses. It'd be optimal in soil because the medium retains nutrients better than coco.
But what isnt known is if the nutrients held in the soil in the final weeks is enough to promote healthy growth, not just growth.
The plants I've seen in comparison videos, when fed purely tap or RO water in soil, they are by far the smallest of the bunch.
Which to me says it's impossible to know without seeing signs of deficiencies or excess, whether or not the plant during its final weeks in senescence could have still done better being fed regularly vs RO water and the nutrients still held in the soil.
But what isnt known is if the nutrients held in the soil in the final weeks is enough to promote healthy growth, not just growth.
The plants I've seen in comparison videos, when fed purely tap or RO water in soil, they are by far the smallest of the bunch.
Which to me says it's impossible to know without seeing signs of deficiencies or excess, whether or not the plant during its final weeks in senescence could have still done better being fed regularly vs RO water and the nutrients still held in the soil.
Feel free to do a large number of hydro clone grows where you feed one plant full nutes until the end, and each of the others you remove a single different immobile nutrient from each bucket, and then run blind taste tests on the harvests (all taken on the same day).
Then run every possible combination of those immobile nutrients. Then run them removed at different times before the harvest.
Let us know!
- Thread starter
- #89
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
Get what's being said...
Is the reduction in immobile nutrients what causes a difference in flavor and aroma.
Have to think though how long the plant has been flowering for, and does the plant's production of buds during the final weeks (of flushing) produce more desirable terpenes.
In comparison to the larger amount of buds produced during earlier bloom stages, I'd say no. The majority of a harvest was grown in un-flushed conditions.
Is the reduction in immobile nutrients what causes a difference in flavor and aroma.
Have to think though how long the plant has been flowering for, and does the plant's production of buds during the final weeks (of flushing) produce more desirable terpenes.
In comparison to the larger amount of buds produced during earlier bloom stages, I'd say no. The majority of a harvest was grown in un-flushed conditions.
- Thread starter
- #90
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
BUT... that's a really good experiment to try.
Cut the very tips off the buds and dry and cure those separately.
If truly there's a difference, which I doubt, the plant wants all nutes to grow, that'd be some very scientific evidence as to whether or not reducing immobile nutrients (flushing) results in more desirable flavors.
BAM I'm gonna have another homebrew.
Cut the very tips off the buds and dry and cure those separately.
If truly there's a difference, which I doubt, the plant wants all nutes to grow, that'd be some very scientific evidence as to whether or not reducing immobile nutrients (flushing) results in more desirable flavors.
BAM I'm gonna have another homebrew.
TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
I would love to have the space and plant allowance to run side by side tests like this and also supply my meds.
There's always the possibility though that there is something happening specifically at the end of flower that could be different. I know that people often caution not to harvest too soon because a lot of the terpenes development near the end of flower...
Then again that could be more bro-science. People usually say that happens during the "swell", which is something else not everyone can agree actually happens.
I am personally in the camp that it doesn't matter, because I have cut bud fresh off the plant a day or two after feeding nutrient solution, and didn't notice much of a difference outside of it being very hay like from the chlorophyll.
Plus with soil I think my argument can't apply because there's no way to actually deprive it of those nutrients like in a hydro or soil-less medium. Ironically people usually say soil tastes better than hydro, so that would seem kind of paradoxical to the whole theory too.
But if we're going to give benefit of the doubt that there's a genuine taste difference, proposing new theories for what that may be can't hurt.
That's true but that's for the horticultural community working in labs. The problem is that folks seem to push the blanket belief that unflushed flowers taste worse than flushed ones. And that seems scientifically impossible.
TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
I would say their theory seems scientifically impossible, but if we give them the benefit of the doubt, how can we explain their observations scientifically?
- Thread starter
- #95
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
Haha, I can only think the plant continuing to do what it did all it's life will still produce buds that taste the same, flushed or unflushed.
This would make a really good episode of myth busters. I just hope they'd still be awake before they finished shooting.
This would make a really good episode of myth busters. I just hope they'd still be awake before they finished shooting.
TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
I doubt you're going to convert many flushers then lol
Only by posting the science and letting them decide how much magic they want to believe in 
.
.
TheFertilizer
Well-Known Member
I just think you're kinda trying to infer more fact than the scope of the research is actually covering. The studies cited have been regarding a very specific theory, and haven't addressed the observations themselves. To scientifically disprove the practice of flushing as meritless, you'd need to disprove the observations as genuine. Otherwise every flusher who imagined it tastes better is just going to theorize some other explanation.Only by posting the science and letting them decide how much magic they want to believe in
I have never been one of the crowd that insists a flush is necessary, but if I had a crop that tasted bad and came upon that belief, I don't think I would accept the evidence that's available so far as evidence it does nothing. Just that the current theories about why it works were wrong.
Long story short, you need a double-blind taste trial to say the taste improvement is a placebo effect of some kind, like you were saying before. Otherwise it's kind of just trying to answer "Why does this happen?" when it's pretty dubious that it's even happening at all. That's the only way to put the nail in the coffin, in my opinion.
What about the fact that the buds don't take up any nutrients from the soil at all? Are you saying a plant starved of immobile nutrients might build buds that taste better than one that is fed?
- Thread starter
- #100
Drivejunky95
Well-Known Member
Hate to be cliche, but gotta interject something. Haven't even finished my first grow yet LOL..
Some people believe, some people dont.
Science says he doesnt exist, faith says he does.
As long as there are believers, the cycle will continue.
The folks who posted dont know if flushing "actually" does anything, only subjective opinions and just that's what they've been taught.
Why do you buy Heinz Ketchup or Booth Brothers milk? Cause that's what you were taught....
Little point in chasing rabbits when there's evidence it does nothing. Not a single scientific post that it does. Just, "that's what I was taught." "I believe it tastes better."
Does the agricultural industry flush their corn, tomatoes or peas? Now there's a good question.....
Some people believe, some people dont.
Science says he doesnt exist, faith says he does.
As long as there are believers, the cycle will continue.
The folks who posted dont know if flushing "actually" does anything, only subjective opinions and just that's what they've been taught.
Why do you buy Heinz Ketchup or Booth Brothers milk? Cause that's what you were taught....
Little point in chasing rabbits when there's evidence it does nothing. Not a single scientific post that it does. Just, "that's what I was taught." "I believe it tastes better."
Does the agricultural industry flush their corn, tomatoes or peas? Now there's a good question.....
