I use Canna 5-4-3 as my base nutes, and Westland 5-3-8 (with added Kelp) occasionally, and PK 13/14 weeks 3-5
7-3-3 runs the risk of N toxicity with prolonged use I would think and deffo no good for flower
How do I fertilize?
- Thread starter bobj
- Start date
7-3-3 runs the risk of N toxicity with prolonged use I would think and deffo no good for flower
- Thread starter
- #22
bobj
Well-Known Member
So the 4-4-8 is better for flower?
Too much N will actually impede flowering, so yes
You won't go far wrong around 5-5-5 with CaMg and Micros
No one macro-nutrient or micro-nutrient is responsible for just one aspect of how a plant grows.
Yes, the Nitrogen "...responsible for foliage and overall growth of the leaves..." along with everything green on the plant including those stems, sugar leaves, the green on each and every calyx and on and on. Most importantly it is responsible for the the process of photosynthesis. So the plant will need a sufficient amount of Nitrogen from germination to harvest.
Same thing goes for the Phosphorous and the Potassium. Each of those has more than one use or purpose during the life-cycle of the plant. The amounts might change but they are needed from start to finish.
It just occurred to me that - if what you end up with, as far as the initial nutrient charge in your soil (what comes in it plus whatever you add, if anything) may well last your plant(s) for some time. I keep having the... mentality(?) that you'll be growing a plant of reasonable mass - and, by that, I mean one comparable to an average plant under an intense light source of some sort - so "reasonable mass" is probably not the best term. Hmm. A plant that is healthy might be said to have a reasonable mass, whether that plant is a mighty oak tree or a seedling. So, no, probably not the best.
Er... Anyway, I recalled that some of the plant issues we've seen stemmed from newer growers trying to follow a nutrient schedule (feeding plan?) that was generic. Sort of a "once size fits all strains," yes (it doesn't, BTW, as some strains are known as "picky eaters," for lack of a better term - but I digress). But also ones that assumed the plants would be under strong light every day. So. We - meaning the cannabis gardening scene in general - saw the appearance of a lot of (mostly) new growers "a while back" who were using those mostly low-wattage CFL (compact fluorescent) bulbs.
Some of them were experiencing issues with their plants. They weren't trying to overfeed their plants (as I alluded to earlier, none of us really try to supply what our plants cannot use). Say a person who is gardening using the DWC hydroponic method, basically the plant is living in a tub of nutrient solution (IOW, with its root system constantly in it). Being new - and wanting to do a good job, and have a nice healthy plant - he looks online, finds a recipe for, IDK, General Hydroponics three-part Flora series (Grow/Micro/Bloom) nutrients. Or GH's two-part Maxi series dry nutrients (MaxiGro and MaxiBloom) might be an even better example, because it's simpler. See, a lot of people used it "back in the day" - and still do, because it's one of the cheapest, simplest "synthetic" ones on the market, and it can be used for pretty much any gardening method (I've a quantity at my mother's house, for when her in-ground tomatoes/peppers/etc. look a little hungry). How simple? Comes in a little 2.2-pound/1-kg bag, the smallest size, and it includes a little plastic scoop. Open bag, scoop out some, dump into a container, fill container with water, shake - okay, shakeshakeshakeshakeshake
- and feed plants. For cannabis, and I do not necessarily recommend it, some people even skip the MaxiGrow component and just use the MaxiBloom all the way through the plant's life. Yes, and some kind of "Ca/Mg" (calcium plus magnesium) product if using distilled/RO/pure water, or maybe just a little Epsom salt (great cheap source of magnesium and sulfur) if using tap water and the water contains some available Ca, because cannabis - like many plant species - consumes a good bit of Ca. But, basically, a pretty simple nutrient set. Thing was, they were feeding an accepted thing, at an accepted rate - but observing issues with their plants, while other people were talking about how healthy their plants were.
Turned out that they were simply "overfeeding" their plants. Their plants were receiving less light-energy than usual. So people quickly(+/-) learned to modify things slightly. I don't recall exactly, used five grams of MaxiBloom per gallon instead of seven, or something like that. Plants were healthy, gardeners were happy, and life was good.
What I am getting at, in my verbose rambling, is that... assuming you start out with something that resembles a nutritionally-complete environment for your plant - it'll probably last that plant longer than many of us might (unthinkingly) assume it would. Because it's going to be receiving significantly less light than what we strive for in our gardens and, because of that, grow slower, be smaller in general... and consume less nutrients.
You'll still want to get the ratios in the right ballpark. Some attention to what the plant is doing (in other words, is it in its growth phase? the stretch period (first 40% or so of the flowering phase)? remainder of the flowering phase?) is helpful. And it would be of great benefit to download and print out both one or more of our "nutrient deficiency/toxicity" pictorial threads, so that you can compare the appearance of your plant's leaves to the images, and a copy of the "Mulder's Chart" (shows interactions of the various elements that plants need). If your plant is completely healthy - no problem, smile. If there is an issue, these things will help you spot it at its outset, and you will be able to determine what that issue is - and its cause.
I sometimes think that every new cannabis gardener should start out with one of the more robust strains that has an "average" nutritional requirement - and by using the DWC (deep water culture) hydroponic method. A reservoir of about 20 gallons, and a very actively aerated one. Just a gardener, a plant, and a (relatively) large container of highly-oxygenated water. A high level of DO (dissolved oxygen) in one's nutrient solution enables the plant to feed more efficiently, to thrive in (slightly) higher temperatures, etc. Therefore, it basically comes down to nutrients. Well, it often does, lol. But when an issue arises, the gardener knows about it quite quickly. There's no head-scratching, wondering which of the things that were "recently" done caused the issue - because it'll almost certainly be the thing that was just done within the past 24 hours. There's no wondering, "Hmm... Was it something that was already in the soil?" - because, hey, it's just water. It'll be something that the gardener added. And what that something is will be apparent (more or less).
The gardener being an active participant in deciding what the plant receives, combined with the aforementioned documents... It's like a big red arrow, helping to point out what happened - and why. And with DWC hydroponics, anything the gardener does has an almost immediate effect. Which is to say, fix the problem and see the results (and understand that A caused B). Attempt to fix the problem and NOT see improvement? Well, at least you know - again, quickly - that you were incorrect in your hypothesis as to what the issue actually was. Incorrect solution attempted? No worries - drain and refill the reservoir. Instantaneous reset, basically. That can be very helpful.
Yes, one needs to pay attention to what one is doing. <SHRUGS> That's a good general life strategy, I have found . One really, really should pay attention to pH of the nutrient solution, both initially (IOW, what one "set" it to when mixing it up) and over time. But that is a good thing. Why? Think of a plant like a patient in the ICU. Lots of sensors, constantly monitoring the person's state of health. Okay, considering the things I've read about - and seen - over the years, perhaps that might not be the best example 
. Still, at least in theory, that's better than the medieval time equivalent. (NO, I am not calling soil gardeners primitives!)
If one has a more or less inert medium (water), the only things in it are what the gardener adds. Monitoring the rise and fall (or static non-change) of pH... It helps the gardener understand what the plant is doing - and what it is consuming, because removing certain elements from the nutrient solution is what causes the pH to change. If one is willing to learn... willing to read, and pay attention to one's plant(s), the knowledge thus gained will be useful in the future, regardless of how one chooses to garden (or even what species of plant(s) one grows). Think of it like those "Junior Mad Scientist" kits that children used to get for Christmas
. The point wasn't to build a robot and take over the world - it was meant to be a learning tool, and an aid to thinking logically, reasoning, etc. If I had a $250,000 credit line, I'd try to begin selling a "My First Hydroponic Cannabis Plant Adventure Kit - for the Little Kid In All of Us!" kit.
Er...
Some people, even ones who continue with DWC hydroponics, find that they've stopped being so... They are no longer grabbing the meter(s) as often - because they can look at the plants, and get a pretty good idea. Or they'll check the pH of the nutrient solution and (for example) think, "Yep, it's consuming phosphorous at an elevated rate. Flowering is proceeding nicely. I'll just add some more of {whichever component has it}, which will replace what was consumed - and also bring the pH back to what it should be." Or... "Hmm. EC is rising and water level is falling. I thought it had been hotter than usual. I'll add some water, to make up for the plant's increased transpiration rate as it self-cools - but it still has plenty of nutrients."
Of course, the person can remain willfully ignorant, too. Mix a batch of nutrient solution according to a "recipe," pour it in, top off with plain water until the same quantity has been added, dump reservoir contents on food garden out back - and rinse/lather/repeat until harvest. That works, too, most of the time. But the gardener probably hasn't learned much (and it can be somewhat wasteful, especially if there isn't actually a garden in the backyard that can make use of all the nutrients that were poured out). But some folks are happy with that. Some people buy Milwaukee Instruments pH monitors & adjusters, and even nutrient concentrate pumps, and a big barrel with a pump, along with a float valve (handy if one is a travelling salesman, I suppose) so that they can create a (more or less) automated garden. Some hire a gardener, lol, and others simply buy their bud. People differ, after all.
Apologies for the ramble. I guess what I am getting at is that, for the new cannabis (et cetera) gardener, the bud is only part - and the smaller part, IMHO - of what the gardener should harvest. That bud will soon be gone - but knowledge lasts. So... Maybe don't try so hard to create a "water only" soil, and instead just get something basic and "inoffensive," along with some kind of simple nutrient set (which can be "organic," or not). If all you have to do is plant a seed, add water until harvest, and then chop the plant... you will only harvest some bud.
Er... Anyway, I recalled that some of the plant issues we've seen stemmed from newer growers trying to follow a nutrient schedule (feeding plan?) that was generic. Sort of a "once size fits all strains," yes (it doesn't, BTW, as some strains are known as "picky eaters," for lack of a better term - but I digress). But also ones that assumed the plants would be under strong light every day. So. We - meaning the cannabis gardening scene in general - saw the appearance of a lot of (mostly) new growers "a while back" who were using those mostly low-wattage CFL (compact fluorescent) bulbs.
Some of them were experiencing issues with their plants. They weren't trying to overfeed their plants (as I alluded to earlier, none of us really try to supply what our plants cannot use). Say a person who is gardening using the DWC hydroponic method, basically the plant is living in a tub of nutrient solution (IOW, with its root system constantly in it). Being new - and wanting to do a good job, and have a nice healthy plant - he looks online, finds a recipe for, IDK, General Hydroponics three-part Flora series (Grow/Micro/Bloom) nutrients. Or GH's two-part Maxi series dry nutrients (MaxiGro and MaxiBloom) might be an even better example, because it's simpler. See, a lot of people used it "back in the day" - and still do, because it's one of the cheapest, simplest "synthetic" ones on the market, and it can be used for pretty much any gardening method (I've a quantity at my mother's house, for when her in-ground tomatoes/peppers/etc. look a little hungry). How simple? Comes in a little 2.2-pound/1-kg bag, the smallest size, and it includes a little plastic scoop. Open bag, scoop out some, dump into a container, fill container with water, shake - okay, shakeshakeshakeshakeshake
- and feed plants. For cannabis, and I do not necessarily recommend it, some people even skip the MaxiGrow component and just use the MaxiBloom all the way through the plant's life. Yes, and some kind of "Ca/Mg" (calcium plus magnesium) product if using distilled/RO/pure water, or maybe just a little Epsom salt (great cheap source of magnesium and sulfur) if using tap water and the water contains some available Ca, because cannabis - like many plant species - consumes a good bit of Ca. But, basically, a pretty simple nutrient set. Thing was, they were feeding an accepted thing, at an accepted rate - but observing issues with their plants, while other people were talking about how healthy their plants were. Turned out that they were simply "overfeeding" their plants. Their plants were receiving less light-energy than usual. So people quickly(+/-) learned to modify things slightly. I don't recall exactly, used five grams of MaxiBloom per gallon instead of seven, or something like that. Plants were healthy, gardeners were happy, and life was good.
What I am getting at, in my verbose rambling, is that... assuming you start out with something that resembles a nutritionally-complete environment for your plant - it'll probably last that plant longer than many of us might (unthinkingly) assume it would. Because it's going to be receiving significantly less light than what we strive for in our gardens and, because of that, grow slower, be smaller in general... and consume less nutrients.
You'll still want to get the ratios in the right ballpark. Some attention to what the plant is doing (in other words, is it in its growth phase? the stretch period (first 40% or so of the flowering phase)? remainder of the flowering phase?) is helpful. And it would be of great benefit to download and print out both one or more of our "nutrient deficiency/toxicity" pictorial threads, so that you can compare the appearance of your plant's leaves to the images, and a copy of the "Mulder's Chart" (shows interactions of the various elements that plants need). If your plant is completely healthy - no problem, smile. If there is an issue, these things will help you spot it at its outset, and you will be able to determine what that issue is - and its cause.
I sometimes think that every new cannabis gardener should start out with one of the more robust strains that has an "average" nutritional requirement - and by using the DWC (deep water culture) hydroponic method. A reservoir of about 20 gallons, and a very actively aerated one. Just a gardener, a plant, and a (relatively) large container of highly-oxygenated water. A high level of DO (dissolved oxygen) in one's nutrient solution enables the plant to feed more efficiently, to thrive in (slightly) higher temperatures, etc. Therefore, it basically comes down to nutrients. Well, it often does, lol. But when an issue arises, the gardener knows about it quite quickly. There's no head-scratching, wondering which of the things that were "recently" done caused the issue - because it'll almost certainly be the thing that was just done within the past 24 hours. There's no wondering, "Hmm... Was it something that was already in the soil?" - because, hey, it's just water. It'll be something that the gardener added. And what that something is will be apparent (more or less).
The gardener being an active participant in deciding what the plant receives, combined with the aforementioned documents... It's like a big red arrow, helping to point out what happened - and why. And with DWC hydroponics, anything the gardener does has an almost immediate effect. Which is to say, fix the problem and see the results (and understand that A caused B). Attempt to fix the problem and NOT see improvement? Well, at least you know - again, quickly - that you were incorrect in your hypothesis as to what the issue actually was. Incorrect solution attempted? No worries - drain and refill the reservoir. Instantaneous reset, basically. That can be very helpful.
Yes, one needs to pay attention to what one is doing. <SHRUGS> That's a good general life strategy, I have found
. One really, really should pay attention to pH of the nutrient solution, both initially (IOW, what one "set" it to when mixing it up) and over time. But that is a good thing. Why? Think of a plant like a patient in the ICU. Lots of sensors, constantly monitoring the person's state of health. Okay, considering the things I've read about - and seen - over the years, perhaps that might not be the best example . Still, at least in theory, that's better than the medieval time equivalent. (NO, I am not calling soil gardeners primitives!) If one has a more or less inert medium (water), the only things in it are what the gardener adds. Monitoring the rise and fall (or static non-change) of pH... It helps the gardener understand what the plant is doing - and what it is consuming, because removing certain elements from the nutrient solution is what causes the pH to change. If one is willing to learn... willing to read, and pay attention to one's plant(s), the knowledge thus gained will be useful in the future, regardless of how one chooses to garden (or even what species of plant(s) one grows). Think of it like those "Junior Mad Scientist" kits that children used to get for Christmas
. The point wasn't to build a robot and take over the world - it was meant to be a learning tool, and an aid to thinking logically, reasoning, etc. If I had a $250,000 credit line, I'd try to begin selling a "My First Hydroponic Cannabis Plant Adventure Kit - for the Little Kid In All of Us!" kit.Er...
Some people, even ones who continue with DWC hydroponics, find that they've stopped being so... They are no longer grabbing the meter(s) as often - because they can look at the plants, and get a pretty good idea. Or they'll check the pH of the nutrient solution and (for example) think, "Yep, it's consuming phosphorous at an elevated rate. Flowering is proceeding nicely. I'll just add some more of {whichever component has it}, which will replace what was consumed - and also bring the pH back to what it should be." Or... "Hmm. EC is rising and water level is falling. I thought it had been hotter than usual. I'll add some water, to make up for the plant's increased transpiration rate as it self-cools - but it still has plenty of nutrients."
Of course, the person can remain willfully ignorant, too. Mix a batch of nutrient solution according to a "recipe," pour it in, top off with plain water until the same quantity has been added, dump reservoir contents on food garden out back - and rinse/lather/repeat until harvest. That works, too, most of the time. But the gardener probably hasn't learned much (and it can be somewhat wasteful, especially if there isn't actually a garden in the backyard that can make use of all the nutrients that were poured out). But some folks are happy with that. Some people buy Milwaukee Instruments pH monitors & adjusters, and even nutrient concentrate pumps, and a big barrel with a pump, along with a float valve (handy if one is a travelling salesman, I suppose) so that they can create a (more or less) automated garden. Some hire a gardener, lol, and others simply buy their bud. People differ, after all.
Apologies for the ramble. I guess what I am getting at is that, for the new cannabis (et cetera) gardener, the bud is only part - and the smaller part, IMHO - of what the gardener should harvest. That bud will soon be gone - but knowledge lasts. So... Maybe don't try so hard to create a "water only" soil, and instead just get something basic and "inoffensive," along with some kind of simple nutrient set (which can be "organic," or not). If all you have to do is plant a seed, add water until harvest, and then chop the plant... you will only harvest some bud.
- Thread starter
- #26
bobj
Well-Known Member
In my ideal grow world setup, I'd have a $500+ grow tent with all the bells and whistles and a $1500 grow light hanging from it. I'd have a soil comprised of $500 (or more) all Gaia Green ingredients and the finest compost teas brewed to nourish the soil. But alas I do not have anything close to what I want.It just occurred to me that - if what you end up with, as far as the initial nutrient charge in your soil (what comes in it plus whatever you add, if anything) may well last your plant(s) for some time. I keep having the... mentality(?) that you'll be growing a plant of reasonable mass - and, by that, I mean one comparable to an average plant under an intense light source of some sort - so "reasonable mass" is probably not the best term. Hmm. A plant that is healthy might be said to have a reasonable mass, whether that plant is a mighty oak tree or a seedling. So, no, probably not the best.
Er... Anyway, I recalled that some of the plant issues we've seen stemmed from newer growers trying to follow a nutrient schedule (feeding plan?) that was generic. Sort of a "once size fits all strains," yes (it doesn't, BTW, as some strains are known as "picky eaters," for lack of a better term - but I digress). But also ones that assumed the plants would be under strong light every day. So. We - meaning the cannabis gardening scene in general - saw the appearance of a lot of (mostly) new growers "a while back" who were using those mostly low-wattage CFL (compact fluorescent) bulbs.
Some of them were experiencing issues with their plants. They weren't trying to overfeed their plants (as I alluded to earlier, none of us really try to supply what our plants cannot use). Say a person who is gardening using the DWC hydroponic method, basically the plant is living in a tub of nutrient solution (IOW, with its root system constantly in it). Being new - and wanting to do a good job, and have a nice healthy plant - he looks online, finds a recipe for, IDK, General Hydroponics three-part Flora series (Grow/Micro/Bloom) nutrients. Or GH's two-part Maxi series dry nutrients (MaxiGro and MaxiBloom) might be an even better example, because it's simpler. See, a lot of people used it "back in the day" - and still do, because it's one of the cheapest, simplest "synthetic" ones on the market, and it can be used for pretty much any gardening method (I've a quantity at my mother's house, for when her in-ground tomatoes/peppers/etc. look a little hungry). How simple? Comes in a little 2.2-pound/1-kg bag, the smallest size, and it includes a little plastic scoop. Open bag, scoop out some, dump into a container, fill container with water, shake - okay, shakeshakeshakeshakeshake
Turned out that they were simply "overfeeding" their plants. Their plants were receiving less light-energy than usual. So people quickly(+/-) learned to modify things slightly. I don't recall exactly, used five grams of MaxiBloom per gallon instead of seven, or something like that. Plants were healthy, gardeners were happy, and life was good.
What I am getting at, in my verbose rambling, is that... assuming you start out with something that resembles a nutritionally-complete environment for your plant - it'll probably last that plant longer than many of us might (unthinkingly) assume it would. Because it's going to be receiving significantly less light than what we strive for in our gardens and, because of that, grow slower, be smaller in general... and consume less nutrients.
You'll still want to get the ratios in the right ballpark. Some attention to what the plant is doing (in other words, is it in its growth phase? the stretch period (first 40% or so of the flowering phase)? remainder of the flowering phase?) is helpful. And it would be of great benefit to download and print out both one or more of our "nutrient deficiency/toxicity" pictorial threads, so that you can compare the appearance of your plant's leaves to the images, and a copy of the "Mulder's Chart" (shows interactions of the various elements that plants need). If your plant is completely healthy - no problem, smile. If there is an issue, these things will help you spot it at its outset, and you will be able to determine what that issue is - and its cause.
I sometimes think that every new cannabis gardener should start out with one of the more robust strains that has an "average" nutritional requirement - and by using the DWC (deep water culture) hydroponic method. A reservoir of about 20 gallons, and a very actively aerated one. Just a gardener, a plant, and a (relatively) large container of highly-oxygenated water. A high level of DO (dissolved oxygen) in one's nutrient solution enables the plant to feed more efficiently, to thrive in (slightly) higher temperatures, etc. Therefore, it basically comes down to nutrients. Well, it often does, lol. But when an issue arises, the gardener knows about it quite quickly. There's no head-scratching, wondering which of the things that were "recently" done caused the issue - because it'll almost certainly be the thing that was just done within the past 24 hours. There's no wondering, "Hmm... Was it something that was already in the soil?" - because, hey, it's just water. It'll be something that the gardener added. And what that something is will be apparent (more or less).
The gardener being an active participant in deciding what the plant receives, combined with the aforementioned documents... It's like a big red arrow, helping to point out what happened - and why. And with DWC hydroponics, anything the gardener does has an almost immediate effect. Which is to say, fix the problem and see the results (and understand that A caused B). Attempt to fix the problem and NOT see improvement? Well, at least you know - again, quickly - that you were incorrect in your hypothesis as to what the issue actually was. Incorrect solution attempted? No worries - drain and refill the reservoir. Instantaneous reset, basically. That can be very helpful.
Yes, one needs to pay attention to what one is doing. <SHRUGS> That's a good general life strategy, I have found
If one has a more or less inert medium (water), the only things in it are what the gardener adds. Monitoring the rise and fall (or static non-change) of pH... It helps the gardener understand what the plant is doing - and what it is consuming, because removing certain elements from the nutrient solution is what causes the pH to change. If one is willing to learn... willing to read, and pay attention to one's plant(s), the knowledge thus gained will be useful in the future, regardless of how one chooses to garden (or even what species of plant(s) one grows). Think of it like those "Junior Mad Scientist" kits that children used to get for Christmas
Er...
Some people, even ones who continue with DWC hydroponics, find that they've stopped being so... They are no longer grabbing the meter(s) as often - because they can look at the plants, and get a pretty good idea. Or they'll check the pH of the nutrient solution and (for example) think, "Yep, it's consuming phosphorous at an elevated rate. Flowering is proceeding nicely. I'll just add some more of {whichever component has it}, which will replace what was consumed - and also bring the pH back to what it should be." Or... "Hmm. EC is rising and water level is falling. I thought it had been hotter than usual. I'll add some water, to make up for the plant's increased transpiration rate as it self-cools - but it still has plenty of nutrients."
Of course, the person can remain willfully ignorant, too. Mix a batch of nutrient solution according to a "recipe," pour it in, top off with plain water until the same quantity has been added, dump reservoir contents on food garden out back - and rinse/lather/repeat until harvest. That works, too, most of the time. But the gardener probably hasn't learned much (and it can be somewhat wasteful, especially if there isn't actually a garden in the backyard that can make use of all the nutrients that were poured out). But some folks are happy with that. Some people buy Milwaukee Instruments pH monitors & adjusters, and even nutrient concentrate pumps, and a big barrel with a pump, along with a float valve (handy if one is a travelling salesman, I suppose) so that they can create a (more or less) automated garden. Some hire a gardener, lol, and others simply buy their bud. People differ, after all.
Apologies for the ramble. I guess what I am getting at is that, for the new cannabis (et cetera) gardener, the bud is only part - and the smaller part, IMHO - of what the gardener should harvest. That bud will soon be gone - but knowledge lasts. So... Maybe don't try so hard to create a "water only" soil, and instead just get something basic and "inoffensive," along with some kind of simple nutrient set (which can be "organic," or not). If all you have to do is plant a seed, add water until harvest, and then chop the plant... you will only harvest some bud.
That said, one of the things I am considering is a foliar spray, for when I get to that level of growing. Can you tell me if you've ever used this product, and whether or not it'd be good sprayed onto weed? What would it do for the buds if it was sprayed on either just before or during flower? Would it fatten them up? Or just what would this product do with it's potassium ratio of 17?
If I had $2,500, I'd spend it on a beater and stop walking everywhere. I'm a low-budget sort of gardener. I have a tent, but it was less than $100, and I mostly got it because I didn't feel like stripping wallpaper out of a closet and then cleaning/prepping/priming/painting it. If I found a winning lottery ticket, I could imagine buying a Scorpion Diablo light - but, really, if I had a grand or more and suddenly found myself with no bills, a vehicle, fridge, new shoes, blah blah blah... I'd either give $800 of it to my mother, or give her $400 and drop $400 off at the local food pantry, then spend $200 on my grow "toys."
I cannot honestly give a recommendation about foliar feeding. I only ever sprayed a dilute Epsom salt solution on my plants (and rarely that), except for when I had a diatomaceous earth oops ("oh, I'm supposed to turn the fans off before opening the bag of dust?" ). And dragging them into the kitchen to spray off spider mites, before grabbing the Safer's soap. Hopefully, someone who has used that will chime in.
Or maybe one of the people who do natural type soil grows, and who knows well what they're doing will offer some advice, if not specific in regards to the product you posted the link to, at least some good general recommendations. There are lots of such people here. A couple that I can think of without trying are @Emilya and @bobrown14 .
I cannot honestly give a recommendation about foliar feeding. I only ever sprayed a dilute Epsom salt solution on my plants (and rarely that), except for when I had a diatomaceous earth oops ("oh, I'm supposed to turn the fans off before opening the bag of dust?"
). And dragging them into the kitchen to spray off spider mites, before grabbing the Safer's soap. Hopefully, someone who has used that will chime in.Or maybe one of the people who do natural type soil grows, and who knows well what they're doing will offer some advice, if not specific in regards to the product you posted the link to, at least some good general recommendations. There are lots of such people here. A couple that I can think of without trying are @Emilya and @bobrown14 .
