Thanks porky, lots of fun working this room. Really looking forward to the new genetics were sorting through.
10 - Agrobar 720s over 6 - 4x8.5 ft rolling benches. F & D FTW
- Thread starter Crooked8
- Start date
Porky82
Well-known member
I'll be here watching mate. Good luck with finding something special!
Rocket Soul
Well-known member
Cant agree more full heartedly. Bugbee does some good research but some is flawed, especially his UV paper. He brings in his own bio-uv-dose-equivalent measure into his paper, from all i can understand he just uses an actionspectrum for suntan to get his measure and states that this is a "scientific consensus measure". Not realizing that what he does will screw with the results.
I hate the phrase but "do your own research" is the best idea . Start small. If you can start with a base spectrum low in green. If youre worried about pushing uv to hard and that it will cause yield loss then add your UV together with some red; weve had nice results with this type of supplement though we havent had a chance to measure it by canabinoids.
Check out the close ups Piecho did of our latest pheno run (which we f-cked up somewhat):
I know photos doesnt prove a thing but there should be enough on those to get peeps thinking beyond Bugbee. But i think we may have even overdone them, some places have nothing but amber heads and cloudy stalks.
Another point with Bugbees studies is that they dont exactly follow the natural progression of a grow. As a grower you see the plants react, and then you act on that accordingly. Bugbees studies are made to perfectly maintain all variables for later on doing statistic tests, though the approach (test scores made to mean and standard deviation and apply T-test) is only one of many statistic tools you can use.
If i can get our grow sorted out with one new light ill make some adjustments so that we can grow the same cuts using our horticentric, HE (4k +660) and plain white 3k over the same samples - this should give us the material for doing ranking type statistic approach: just have people test the samples for smell and see if they can smell the difference reliably. This to me is a better approach for going forward, in the end we are not talking about thc levels as much as perceived quality as most of this crop later goes to market. And if you have 3 different conditions (great/good/plain light) over say 5 different cuts its much easier to filter out noise in the numbers. Its also a clever way of wrestling the power of research out of moneyed institutions: doing it bugbees way is really only an option if you have access to unlimited and reliable thc testing. As in 2 tests per plant which is generally not available unless you have full funding which may come with strings attached.
Bugbees uv paper only really proved it wasnt good enough experiment to find the answers asked: iirc correct there was some effect (+thc) but no statistical significance. People touting this paper have not ever done science on their own: effects plus no statistical significance is a sign of doing more research, not closing the book saying nothing happened, and argue forever online.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ca++
Well-known member
You pay a lot for sampling. My first search result was $30, and I pay $40 in the UK for feed analysis. Not the $200 you speak of. I wonder if you should find another lab.
I think it was star labs, though I might be confused.
Here is Manganese and Boron toxicity pics, as you may need them
I wouldn't take too much notice of the lab guy. He can only see your top leaves, and may not even have a horticultural background. For example, he has no idea that the N is good, while the plant is relocating it from lower leaves.
I'm not sure about Boron, but Manganese can be from plastics. All plastics contain metals. We don't want lead, but must compromise. Don't be surprised if you can't find it in your water or feed. While Boric acid doesn't have a great rejection rate with RO. So if you send a tank sample, you don't quite know where the Boron is from. A local water report is useful, and presume a 50% rejection rate by the filter. Though it really could be wildly different.
I think it was star labs, though I might be confused.
$32 at Ward. It's why I can't understand more people not getting it done. Which would give us all a push to really interpret them results.
Here is Manganese and Boron toxicity pics, as you may need them
I wouldn't take too much notice of the lab guy. He can only see your top leaves, and may not even have a horticultural background. For example, he has no idea that the N is good, while the plant is relocating it from lower leaves.
I'm not sure about Boron, but Manganese can be from plastics. All plastics contain metals. We don't want lead, but must compromise. Don't be surprised if you can't find it in your water or feed. While Boric acid doesn't have a great rejection rate with RO. So if you send a tank sample, you don't quite know where the Boron is from. A local water report is useful, and presume a 50% rejection rate by the filter. Though it really could be wildly different.
The lab manager sees the leaves i send, nothing else. They arent seeing photos of my room. I purposefully send the ones that look the most suspicious, but it needs to be mrml(most recently mature leaves). This run looks great. Ive looked into the boron tox quite a bit back when I did my last tissue test. I dont see anything that clearly resembles the sample photos. Same for mang tox. Ive talked with some other labs and they arent even close to as cheap as you mentioned. You can send leaves to a lab for tissue testing for 40$? Id love to have that option. They literally just raised their prices at perry labs its like 160$ per or something now. Are you suggesting the boron could be from….the trays? Im not sure how plastics would be incorporated otherwise unless its literally the nutrient containers themselves which seems absurd. And you really think the lab manager who does this all day should be ignored? I dunno about that, feels almost like saying dont take a doctors advice or a golf pros advice on your swing. Just because he doesnt have his own tent or grow(assuming he doesnt), doesnt mean he has no understanding, i mean he manages the lab in one of the most prime areas for cannabis cultivation in the world. The lab came highly recommended, which is why i use them bc i want the best, i do not want some budget possibly fake results like cannabinoid tests ive seen. People literally paying labs off for higher cannaninoids etc its all bullshit. Either way, since this last run was our best yield and quality weve had a surge in demand. Cant get it trimmed fast enough. Meanwhile most are struggling to move their product at the moment. Something is certainly going well, the smoke is fantastic(pardon my nagging ego speaking here…….lets see everyone elses fuckin tissue tests!!! Achem, excuse me). Ill look again into some other labs, and ive already dialed back our feed plan for next run. The only real explanation for the micros accumulation again is the slabs being too wet. Well have to get this done again soon. Im also not quite understanding how boron gets through an RO membrane. It wouldnt show up? After we ro and uv sterilize the water is literally 0 ppm. I guess theres always next run but tbh the quality looks exciting on this one too.
Last edited:
Ca++
Well-known member
$32 at Ward
www.wardlab.com
It's just $20 if they don't check for N.
I can't say I have used them, as I'm in the UK. I'm paying £30 ($37) for water analysis though. These advertised prices look right to me. The $37 includes them sending me sterile collection bottles, and printed results. Soil sampling was a similar price, but I don't quite remember what. I could tell them what I was growing, and what level of success I wanted. Then their computer would tell me how much of what amendments I should use. This doesn't mean they know anything about growing though. They might see a lot of results, but they are lab technicians. Running a lab is a very different skill set.
Most of the time, it's leaves from the top that are 2-3" long of interest. The actively expanding ones. Made of that weeks feed, with no longer term accumulation. Picking suspect one's obviously tilts your results, towards results of suspect looking leaves. This is why even a lab guy that happens to also know plants, still doesn't really know your crop. Though what they say can still be of interest.
Your RO filter sounds good. Removal of boron from water is difficult, and one of the main challenges of desalination plants. Often they will increase the pH before filtration, to encourage the boron to form a larger ionic compound that the filters are better with. Then 75-90% removal is possible. I'm not an expert on this, I just know it's a weakness of most filters. I'm not sure how boric acid of a meaningful level would effect EC, or how the acid is related to Boron. I just have a rough sketch of an idea, but recognise the weakness of RO filters, in this area.
A quick google finds half our use of boron, is in things like fibreglass. It has a fibre like appearance, so is in structural plastics. So both your Mn and B could be from the system. Tanks/trays/pipes. We seem to get most problems from pipes, as it's softer, I guess. These problems usually effect the mass balance guys, who don't want to do tank changes. It's actually what keeps me away from such systems. I have enough problems
Ward Lab are well known. Soon only approved labs will be allowed to do cannabinoid testing for commercial reasons. I expect Ward will be on the allowed list. Meaning tighter control of the methods used in testing, and less tollerance towards getting it wrong. Or it's bye bye licence. That should make cannabinoid testing worthwhile in the future. Right now, it's just paying to be lied to.
Plant Analysis - Ward Laboratories, Inc.
www.wardlab.com
I can't say I have used them, as I'm in the UK. I'm paying £30 ($37) for water analysis though. These advertised prices look right to me. The $37 includes them sending me sterile collection bottles, and printed results. Soil sampling was a similar price, but I don't quite remember what. I could tell them what I was growing, and what level of success I wanted. Then their computer would tell me how much of what amendments I should use. This doesn't mean they know anything about growing though. They might see a lot of results, but they are lab technicians. Running a lab is a very different skill set.
Most of the time, it's leaves from the top that are 2-3" long of interest. The actively expanding ones. Made of that weeks feed, with no longer term accumulation. Picking suspect one's obviously tilts your results, towards results of suspect looking leaves. This is why even a lab guy that happens to also know plants, still doesn't really know your crop. Though what they say can still be of interest.
Your RO filter sounds good. Removal of boron from water is difficult, and one of the main challenges of desalination plants. Often they will increase the pH before filtration, to encourage the boron to form a larger ionic compound that the filters are better with. Then 75-90% removal is possible. I'm not an expert on this, I just know it's a weakness of most filters. I'm not sure how boric acid of a meaningful level would effect EC, or how the acid is related to Boron. I just have a rough sketch of an idea, but recognise the weakness of RO filters, in this area.
A quick google finds half our use of boron, is in things like fibreglass. It has a fibre like appearance, so is in structural plastics. So both your Mn and B could be from the system. Tanks/trays/pipes. We seem to get most problems from pipes, as it's softer, I guess. These problems usually effect the mass balance guys, who don't want to do tank changes. It's actually what keeps me away from such systems. I have enough problems
Ward Lab are well known. Soon only approved labs will be allowed to do cannabinoid testing for commercial reasons. I expect Ward will be on the allowed list. Meaning tighter control of the methods used in testing, and less tollerance towards getting it wrong. Or it's bye bye licence. That should make cannabinoid testing worthwhile in the future. Right now, it's just paying to be lied to.
Well id be fearful to send them a sample as cannabis is not listed as something they test for. Perry specifically has their testing for cannabis. A feed solution sample might make more sense from them. Maybe ill call and ask? The price is certainly attractive but they list what they test for and how to submit a sample and cannabis isnt there.$32 at Ward
It's just $20 if they don't check for N.Plant Analysis - Ward Laboratories, Inc.
I can't say I have used them, as I'm in the UK. I'm paying £30 ($37) for water analysis though. These advertised prices look right to me. The $37 includes them sending me sterile collection bottles, and printed results. Soil sampling was a similar price, but I don't quite remember what. I could tell them what I was growing, and what level of success I wanted. Then their computer would tell me how much of what amendments I should use. This doesn't mean they know anything about growing though. They might see a lot of results, but they are lab technicians. Running a lab is a very different skill set.
Most of the time, it's leaves from the top that are 2-3" long of interest. The actively expanding ones. Made of that weeks feed, with no longer term accumulation. Picking suspect one's obviously tilts your results, towards results of suspect looking leaves. This is why even a lab guy that happens to also know plants, still doesn't really know your crop. Though what they say can still be of interest.
Your RO filter sounds good. Removal of boron from water is difficult, and one of the main challenges of desalination plants. Often they will increase the pH before filtration, to encourage the boron to form a larger ionic compound that the filters are better with. Then 75-90% removal is possible. I'm not an expert on this, I just know it's a weakness of most filters. I'm not sure how boric acid of a meaningful level would effect EC, or how the acid is related to Boron. I just have a rough sketch of an idea, but recognise the weakness of RO filters, in this area.
A quick google finds half our use of boron, is in things like fibreglass. It has a fibre like appearance, so is in structural plastics. So both your Mn and B could be from the system. Tanks/trays/pipes. We seem to get most problems from pipes, as it's softer, I guess. These problems usually effect the mass balance guys, who don't want to do tank changes. It's actually what keeps me away from such systems. I have enough problems
Ward Lab are well known. Soon only approved labs will be allowed to do cannabinoid testing for commercial reasons. I expect Ward will be on the allowed list. Meaning tighter control of the methods used in testing, and less tollerance towards getting it wrong. Or it's bye bye licence. That should make cannabinoid testing worthwhile in the future. Right now, it's just paying to be lied to.
As for the boron, its much lower across the board on this result than the first. So maybe it is the trays? Id expect this issue to be quite common then, imagine how much tube exposure feed has in the common top feed situation? Im not sending my feed through much tubing at all. Its like a 2 ft hose on each reservoir of 1/2in and 3/4in and that seems pretty crazy but who knows. I do send my water to 4 - 100gallon tanks but they are meant to hold water and water only. I never put feed in them. I only put feed in our teflon reservoirs and then the trays of course come in contact with it. Not sure how i would remedy this.
As for the mang, looking back at the last sample test when we were underfed, it was in perfect range. It has to be accumulation in an oversaturated slab. Nothing else makes sense. I was drying back much harder then when we did that first sample. Bugbees did cannabinoid testing on plants that were dried back heavily vs not, the plants that didnt see drybacks with high WC had much MUCH higher levels. So thats why i tried to keep them wetter for a higher quality tradeoff. Trying to get this all dialed certainly can make ones head spin. Dryback to avoid mang accumulation and possibly have an inferior product? Or keep them wetter for superior product but maybe there are other impacts from the mang i cant see? Fun stuff
Edit: ward labs does NOT test cannabis. They are really for big AG. They are in Nebraska which has no medical or rec cannabis whatsoever. Well have to look for another lab that can actually test cannabis. I obviously only want to have a lab test where they specifically list cannabis. Hemp is offered in some cases but not drug type cannabis. Even at week 3 some fans have trichomes. Ive now contacted 3 other labs and either their pricing was slightly cheaper for a way further distance, like OH or FL or they were about the same. I did find one with promise but cant even call, can only submit a request online. Whoever i called could not give me pricing which is annoying and not very transparent.
Last edited:
Ca++
Well-known member
Perhaps play your lab off against Ward. Tell them what you have been paying, and tell them what Ward are offering. Then ask if they have a product like Wards, as that is all you need.
You could try a similar approach with other labs. Just link them to what Ward have, and ask if they do that. They will know you know, from your link. Otherwise they will have you bent over. Most 'cannabis' approved labs in state lists, literally set up to do cannabis. With names like the thc testing company, and equally niche pricing. They will just be outsourcing your tissue samples. You could also think about plant sap analysis. Do the squeezing for them.
Another alternative is University based labs. Where Bugbee works, charge $50. As a learning institution, they must provide rates to learn from. Other Uni's might be more appropriate, but his is the only one I know.
Stick with it, and let them know that you know what this costs. I'm struggling to find anything expensive, so we are searching for different things somehow.
You could try a similar approach with other labs. Just link them to what Ward have, and ask if they do that. They will know you know, from your link. Otherwise they will have you bent over. Most 'cannabis' approved labs in state lists, literally set up to do cannabis. With names like the thc testing company, and equally niche pricing. They will just be outsourcing your tissue samples. You could also think about plant sap analysis. Do the squeezing for them.
Another alternative is University based labs. Where Bugbee works, charge $50. As a learning institution, they must provide rates to learn from. Other Uni's might be more appropriate, but his is the only one I know.
Stick with it, and let them know that you know what this costs. I'm struggling to find anything expensive, so we are searching for different things somehow.
Not a terrible idea, but if they look and see they are in Nebraska they will know. Id love for bugbees team to do our labs, where did you see that option offered? One issue, is the drug type thing again though as they only test cbd/hemp varieties. I would like to find an alternative the 160$ per is fucked.
