Calcium Def

[Guest]

Have you calibrated your ph pen lately? I went for a while on a grow with the ph probe bad. I calibrated it and a month later the plants looked like crap and the pen was still reading a ph. Just not the right ph. Replaced the probe and the grow went on a lot better. The old probe had been off by a whole ph point higher.

But your problem does look like a ph problem.

 

[sproutco]

so N P K Mg Ca is roughly 23.75 53 130 82 27.5

That's too low on the Ca right?
If you say a 4:2:1 of K Cal Mg, I've got a 4.5 - 1 - 3 ratio as far as i can tell.

So, this leads me back to a Calcium deficiency right?

Good job. Cation competion or antagonism between calcium, potassium, and magnesium. They compete. Too much magnesium and not enough potassium and calcium.
Here is some target numbers to shoot for in bloom. Calcium is not listed so use the 4:2:1 ratio I suggested (k,ca,mg)
n 100?
p 100
k 200
mg 60

Be sure to go back and double check all your math.

 

[ShroomDr]

Well i did the math, and i can achieve a N 61 P 80 K 195 Mg 65 Ca 108 (S 37 Fe 3.5).
Yours
100-100-200-60-110
Mine
61-80-195-65-108
Close enough?

That IS including my estimate of Ca 25ppm in my water (its normally at 174 after sitting(@.5 conversion, btw). I'm unsure of how much of the 174 is Ca vs. Fluoride, etc.

It is NOT including Liquid Karma

I figure the lower N will not be harmful 3 weeks from chop, i want the leaves to really yellow out.

I dropped the Silica from the formula too, since i have yet to find numbers for it (i haven't looked yet)

Here's my ratios that i came up with my formula (per gallon)
10ml Cal-Mag+ N 52 P 0 K 0 Mg 31 Ca 83
7.5ml Hydroplex N 9 P 80 K 195 Mg 9 Ca 0
5ml Sweet N0 P 0 K 0 Mg 25 Ca 0

Does that sound right? I'm wondering why they put so much Mg in the sweet; maybe i should look into black strap molasses next run.

I could boost the P & K relatively easy because of the Hydroplex, but i was shooting for K 200, and 195 was pretty close.

Thoughts? I saw your other post in the growers forum, and it was also helpful Sproutco, do you need an apprentice?

 

[ShroomDr]

Pics!

offsite for size






Zinc problem too? The leaf in the mid-upper right, in these last two pictures, is what im looking at.

 

[sproutco]

Zinc problem too? The leaf in the mid-upper right, in these last two pictures, is what im looking at.

Yeah but you dont have the wavy margins like that zn deficiency has. Go back and look. Your nutrient solution, if your math is right, sounds like its getting better!!! Maybe increase potassium over 200 and get the phosphorus to 100. With alot of calcium in your water maybe then you should get potassium at least equal to calcium. They dont compete as much as potassium to magnesium or calcium to magnesium. Flouride in the water would only be 1 ppm or something rediculiously low. Maybe then reduce your cal mag to reduce the mag added with the pk boost back to just 60. This would reduce your calcium a little because its in the water already. K @ 240? Guess you will have to see if that is enough nitrogen your going to use to keep the plants green enough. I am curious how you did the math because I don't use liquids. Give me the numbers you put into the calculator so I can try it myself. I know its alot of trouble. Please?

Edit: so you have the ability to use filtered water with lower calcium and floride etc to start? Run the numbers again based on little to no calcium in the water to start. Looks like you would use less sweet with just mag and more cal mag. This might be better than guessing your calcium rate. End up being perfect (if all the maths right). Does the hydroplex or whatever contain iron, zinc, copper, manganese, boron, and molybdenum? Do you have a source for these?

 

[ShroomDr]

all, my numbers were based on the information given on the Botanicare bottles, i did not use that calculator.

for instance, the hydroplex states that at '5ml per gallon will yeild the following'
N 6.25
P 53.5
K 130
Mg 6
S 6

Too bring the K up to 200ppm, i divided 200/130, which is roughly 1.5. So if i multiply the application rate (5ml) by the ratio needed to bring the K to 200ppm (1.5) i end up with 7.5ml (which is my application rate per gallon)

I did this same process with the other nutrients as well, until i got close to your posted ratios. Ill look into what other micros i got going, maybe ill drop some hydroplex for some PBP Bloom.

 

[ShroomDr]

So i was shooting for this
N 61
P 80
K 195
Mg 65
Ca 108

From this
10ml Cal-Mag+ N 52 P 0 K 0 Mg 31 Ca 83
7.5ml Hydroplex N 9 P 80 K 195 Mg 9 Ca 0
5ml Sweet N0 P 0 K 0 Mg 25 Ca 0
+ the calcium already in my water

So i started to make the mixture

3G h2o ppm 169 pH 7.56
30ml Cal-Mag+ ppm 591
22.5ml Hydroplex ppm 800
15ml Sweet final ppm 890 pH 5.89

But i am lost

The Cal-Mag+ bottle says 10ml per gallon will add

N 52
P 0
K 0
Mg 31
Cal 83
Fe 2.5

That's a total of 168.5ppm

This is the exact ratio i used (30ml for 3 gallons)
but my ppm when up 422, not 168.5, that's 2.5x higher than the bottle says.

My meter is calibrated correctly.

So, out of fear of a fatal overdose, i decided to save the mix for now, and i made another batch, this time using onlyH2O & 45ml Clearex. I'll flush for a day or two, until I get this figured out.

Any thoughts on why what the bottle says is 2.5x less than my reading?

I know the Silica Blast claims to add 105ppm with its recommended dose, but my ppm only raises 15-25.

i understand that not all fertilizers will register on a ppm meter, but i don't get why the Cal-Mag is so much more than the bottle claims. Any thoughts?

The hydroplex does not show up on my ppm pen in as high of level as the bottle claims (registers as +209ppm, but the bottle claims it went up 293), again, i could see one of the fertilizers as not registering)

The sweet registers at +90ppm, but according to the bottle it should have been +63.5ppm.

So trust the bottles, or the meter? 2.5x more than bottle recommended is too sketchy for me to try without reassurance

 

[ShroomDr]

Yeah but you dont have the wavy margins like that zn deficiency has. Go back and look. Your nutrient solution, if your math is right, sounds like its getting better!!! Maybe increase potassium over 200 and get the phosphorus to 100. With alot of calcium in your water maybe then you should get potassium at least equal to calcium. They dont compete as much as potassium to magnesium or calcium to magnesium. Flouride in the water would only be 1 ppm or something rediculiously low. Maybe then reduce your cal mag to reduce the mag added with the pk boost back to just 60. This would reduce your calcium a little because its in the water already. K @ 240? Guess you will have to see if that is enough nitrogen your going to use to keep the plants green enough. I am curious how you did the math because I don't use liquids. Give me the numbers you put into the calculator so I can try it myself. I know its alot of trouble. Please?

Edit: so you have the ability to use filtered water with lower calcium and floride etc to start? Run the numbers again based on little to no calcium in the water to start. Looks like you would use less sweet with just mag and more cal mag. This might be better than guessing your calcium rate. End up being perfect (if all the maths right). Does the hydroplex or whatever contain iron, zinc, copper, manganese, boron, and molybdenum? Do you have a source for these?

Well i was buying 2.5g jugs at the store for, you guessed it $2.50.

Just to be on the safe side i'll buy some more water, but im really baffeled by the cal-mag+ ppm being 2.5X listed.

btw

Sweet™contains magnesium, sulfur, iron, boron, manganese, zinc, copper and molybdenum.

Thats my other trace minerals.
I really need to get her back up and healthy





before I'm ready to killer her

 

[sproutco]

But i am lost

The Cal-Mag+ bottle says 10ml per gallon will add

N 52
P 0
K 0
Mg 31
Cal 83
Fe 2.5

That's a total of 168.5ppm

This is the exact ratio i used (30ml for 3 gallons)
but my ppm when up 422, not 168.5, that's 2.5x higher than the bottle says.

My meter is calibrated correctly.

So, out of fear of a fatal overdose, i decided to save the mix for now, and i made another batch, this time using onlyH2O & 45ml Clearex. I'll flush for a day or two, until I get this figured out.

Any thoughts on why what the bottle says is 2.5x less than my reading?

I know the Silica Blast claims to add 105ppm with its recommended dose, but my ppm only raises 15-25.

i understand that not all fertilizers will register on a ppm meter, but i don't get why the Cal-Mag is so much more than the bottle claims. Any thoughts?

The hydroplex does not show up on my ppm pen in as high of level as the bottle claims (registers as +209ppm, but the bottle claims it went up 293), again, i could see one of the fertilizers as not registering)

The sweet registers at +90ppm, but according to the bottle it should have been +63.5ppm.

So trust the bottles, or the meter? 2.5x more than bottle recommended is too sketchy for me to try without reassurance

Your doing everything right. Disregard the ppm meter reading since you know the ppm's exactly of what is going in there. Figure your solution again but using the really pure water. I am curious to see what you get. Try the nutrient calculator with the bottle weights and ml used with % of each element and see what you get too. By the way, your doing a great job. I bet others are learning from you right now.

I found this article that explains why the meter and math your doing with the ppms are different:

Conversion and Calculation Tables—and Some Explanation

In order to help make communication and conversions between different growers in different countries easier, we felt that a conversion page would be useful. Now, growers can simply plug in the figures they have in order to convert between metric and U.S. measurements, or vice versa. Also, a handy calculation tool is included that will help growers figure generally how much their electricity usage will cost for different wattage lamps.

This page also provides a suitable space to explain the general differences between quantifiable terms used to evaluate nutrient solution. When people, books, and articles describe measuring the overall parts per million (ppm) content of a nutrient solution, the figure they supply can be misleading. The salts used in nutrient solutions can be stated in terms of ppm--that is, a ratio of one part to one million of another. The ppm of a solution has routinely been determined by a ppm meter. This device initially takes an electrical conductivity (EC, measured in mS/cm, milliSiemens per centimeter) reading. (In some parts of the world, this measurement is called conductivity factor, or CF; the EC to CF ratio is 1:10.) Then the ppm meter uses a conversion factor (usually 1 mS/cm EC=700 ppm at 68°F) to provide a ppm reading. However, different nutrient solutions are made up of different ratios and forms of nutrient salts, each of which conducts electricity at a different rate. Therefore, similar solutions could yield different ppm readings. Also, different solutions that are made up of different proportions of mineral salts could yield similar ppm readings. The true ppm of your particular solution at any given time can only be found by a chemical analysis by a laboratory, which is usually prohibitively expensive.

It is the electrical conductivity of a nutrient solution that plant responds to in order to transport minerals. Nowadays, most recommendations and all scientific literature on hydroponic nutrient solutions use EC readings--this will eventually become a universal standard. Temperature levels alter EC readings approximately 2 percent for every degree of difference. However, most quality EC meters automatically compensate the reading according to the nutrient solution's temperature. In general, it's best to trust listed EC levels over ppm.

http://www.growingedge.com/community/calc_conv.html

 

[sproutco]

Just for interest, Hoaglands nutrient solution, developed in the 1950's at the university of California, has a ec (electrical conductivity) of 2.7 mmhos/cm. It is as follows in ppm:
210 n
31 p
234 k
200 ca
48 mg

If you total those up you get = 723 total ppm's

If you convert 2.7 mmhos/cm ec x 700 like that last article suggests = 1890 ppms (By the way, ds/m = ms/cm = mmhos/cm)

So you can see what an ec meter says and the actual ppm's added dont come out equal.

I don't use an ec meter or tds (total disolved salts) meter. I rely on the actual ppm's added in making a nutrient solution. You could then measure the total ppms or ec with a meter. Then when you top off the rez with nutrients from water loss, you know how much salts to add back to get it to your original solutions level.

 

[ShroomDr]

good shot again sproutco, I hope my posts will help those following me. I try to give enough details to make it easy follow.
The lights come on in about 90minutes, I will change to the 0ppm water then add the nutrients from there. Thanks for the above example

 

[sproutco]

Aim for the 4:2:1 ratio k, ca, mg with the pure water. Mg @ 50-60, ca @ 100-120, and k @ 200-240. Keep your phosphorus @ 100. This is alot since 30-50 is normal hydro range. Let's see what numbers you come up with and amount of each nutrient. Its getting interesting!

 

[ShroomDr]

i'll redo the math again, and post what i come up with.

Damn it, i needed to spend today (my only off day) building another cabinet. I'm gonna be busy today.

 

[ShroomDr]

I posted most of my math in my growlog
Here

If you want all the math, ill post it up for you sproutco, im trying to find out whats exactly in everything.

 

[sproutco]

Sounds like everything is close to perfect now. We will say the diagnosis was too much magnesium causing a cation (positively charged atom) antagonism with potassium and calcium. Looks like we can close this case in the cannabis infirmary and move over to your regular grow thread.

 

[ShroomDr]

Im losing confidence in my adding of different Nutrients ppms to get to a certain level

Were my calculations correct sproutco? Can you add, for instance, N 50ppm with another source of N @ 80ppm and get 130ppm, or is it more complicated (maybe made more complicated by different sources of N).

My math is correct, but im not sure if i did not dumb it down too much (like im trying to add apples to oranges)

My #'s to get close to Ca 110ppm were mathematically correct, but i can't find anybody recommending 13ml/gal of Cal-Mag Plus to RO water.
---------------------------------------
I'm not sure my girl is liking her new bath.

I think the leaves are starting to curl upwards, but maybe i'm just being paranoid.

btw. it was mentioned that pH5.67 was too low, and i stated it was not actually this low. It was 5.9 a few hours later, and about 14 hour after that (moments ago, when the lights came on) it was at 5.98.

so i dont think this is a ph Problem

Here are lots of pictures

 

[sproutco]

Your doing the math right. Its easy. Say you got 10 ml cal mag with 50 ppm nitrogen and then add 5 ml bloom with 25 nitrogen = 75 ppm nitrogen. See? No problem. Only thing wrong is you have to convert k2o and p2o5 to k and p. Pure.

See your regular grow thread for complete explanation of what is going on with your nutes. All figured out now after I checked some stuff last night.

The bottles did most of the math and calculations for you anyway.

So what if you can not find someone using 13ml cal mag. Your right so you are a pioneer at icmag. Why are you worried? Your previous solution before you started fixing it had 80 mag and only 25 ca.

Your going to be using more cal mag from the bottle than others because your almost solely depending on it for cal mag. They already have cal mag in their regular ferts.

Anyone following this nutrient solution drama :smile: can find the answer in his regular thread: http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=638764#post638764

 

[ShroomDr]

I just not overly thrilled blazing a new trail, with my ONE plant 5 weeks deep into flowering.

one plant, for my own comsuption, all my eggs in one basket, THEN i go and completely rework my feeding schedule.

A gamble, even if a small one.


how did those pics look? would it be to early to see problems?

i'll get back to you about the p & K thing

 

[sproutco]

Read the last posts I made in your regular thread. Raise pure k to 300. You don't trust me? :smile:

 

[ShroomDr]

i did not trust myself.

This plant is for personal use, and up and changing the feeding schedule 5 weeks deep into flowering is not the type of gamble im normally comfortable with.

Also, your questioning of my p & K sources was adding more questions then answers before i did the math up.

Check my grow thread for the Hydroplex info, Im pretty sure Botanicare did all the math for me.

I think i have everything correct now.

Thanks 1000X more