Canna Boost V Molasses - side by side comparison.

[*mistress*]

Hi Everyone, well that's 5 weeks gone, about halfway done?, I figured 10 or 11 weeks as the mother was fully finished (50/50 milky/amber) @ 90 days, I normally lose 10 to 20 days off the seed version
I have been looking at the plants very closely, that's the trouble with myopia - bum bum
I hate to say it, and it is premature but the B - Boost sisters are without doubt looking better than any others, the B plants themselves are nice and green although 1 of the pair is showing the same Ca deficit as 2 other plants, despite that the buds are noticeably larger, a man on a flying horse would pick them out, it's THAT obvious. I don't believe these flowers are actually further on, as in any more mature - just bigger, better looking buds all round. On the whole all the buds look to be at the same stage trichome wise, they smell the same now too, a weird smell of tropical fruits and paint solvent, it's a bit much but the solvent part does fade

If I had to list them today - best to worst - then the B's would be in 1st place, no doubt about that, then I would have to say it is a tie between D - Boost AND Molasses and the A - No Boost, No Molasses for second place, then last at the moment is the C Molasses plants, both Molasses plants have shown an N deficit and 1 is showing the Ca problem, the buds are the smallest of the grow, I'm not sure if the deficits are the cause or the diet?, I don't think the Ca has affected anything, too recent, not a serious problem, but of course the slight N def could have a bearing. I am little surprised that the Molasses twins are behind the A plants that receive none of the Boost or Molasses, then again as I mentioned a while ago about this years IC Growers cup, ojd won with plants fed only A&B and B-cuzz and they could not have been lacking much of anything could they?

the n 'deficiency' may be simply the plants acquiring + using stored food, housed in the leaves...

after all, are growing fruit - not leaves. by the time they are done, they should have worked hard & used all internal energy stored to provide fruit... can feed w/ molasses up until end, really. will get white ash & clean flavor...

nice plants on the c group... molasses being able to support a plant full-term should be evident to other gardeners now...

early on, boost seems to deliver what gardeners want out of it... still, no 400-500% visible increase... & the final #'s & tastes/effects are not in...

still have a little while to go in the test... but seems win-win; relevant to experience acquired, q's being a'd, & the fruit itself...

enjoy your garden!

 

[Hazy Lady]

Hi CC BC & *m*, always good to see you

Bonecarver

i think for the fact that something happened to part of the test group, makes it almost not possible to have those in mind any more. i mean they are not going to get a fair run compared to the rest

I can't agree with this point, I am looking at it another way B', I am thinking a repeat of these results in a 2nd, identical test and you would have to re-consider too!.

Bonecarver

i dont think anymore a comparison is really possible to do between the damaged plants and the healthy ones.

These plants, as you know, are all from the same mum, they all started life in an X-stream, rooted within hours of each other and then spent 6 weeks under a 125W cfl, they were all cut back, twice! because I had some squatters in the flower room I had held them back a while, they then spent the 1st week of 12/12 still receiving the same treatment, at the time the diets changed 4 weeks ago, the plants were as close to peas in a pod as can be, all in good health, green, all with the same run-off's etc so each pot was as close as could be, condition wise.
For 7 weeks of their lives they ate the same they looked the same, only when the nutes changed did the plants exhibit any differences, it is/was always a fair comparison imo
So I am looking at the results (we agree by no means decided) so far and I would have to conclude the N problem is the use of Molasses without Boost, certainly that's the obvious difference. It is not because there was any sick or damaged plants among the group, I chose the 8 plants for their similar statures, branching, height etc, all other things were equal to begin with.

Bonecarver

maybe - im saying maybe its an idea to do this run again, but to be a bit more carefull with the levels of the aditives. just trying to go lower to avoid lockouts etc.

The problems are not caused by lock-out, I am certain of that, I flush 2 days of 7, I flush with as much water as it takes to raise the PH back to the same 5.8 going in. ( It is 6.0 now I upped it a couple of days ago) If I put the meter on the run off after 5 days of feeding it is around 2.60 EC, hardly high to start but after the flush it is around 1.00 EC, If anything it is too little A & B but only a touch too little.
I am of the belief that both C's though looking a bit light, and the Ca problem have had very little effect on the plants, I say this because 1, the N is contained to 2 plants, is/was very slight and by the way has got no worse since discovered, and 2, the Ca issue is brand new, it hasn't had time to!, within 24 hours of finding it was treated, ( some know-all off IC helped me diagnose it ) again, it has gone no farther than the same 5 heads (of around 26 heads in test) on 3 different plants, in fact, 1 of the best 2 plants has 3 of the 5 sick itself, and all 3 heads are lovely, equal in every way to its twin Boost plant that is not showing any def's, so I really don't believe these slight issues will have had much effect by harvest time, we shall see.
Bonecarver

im not dissing the test, you know - im just saying crap happens and sometimes better do things again to get it done properly.

Don't be silly, I know you are not 'dissing' anything B', I welcome all your posts, even if we don't agree you have added tons to this thread along with our *mistress* darookie and the other regulars.

 

[Hazy Lady]

Lets have a look-see!

Lets have a look-see!

Just going to post the C plants in between some other to see if it shows how slight the N problem really is?

I think you would have to agree they look pretty similar health wise, or maybe you don't?, It looks like the D plants are behind the C's but if you use the finger-plate on the door as a measure you see the C - Molasses girls are shorter than all the rest.

I tell you what, if you want a grow-time to fly?, do one of these threads where you have to pull 8 plants out & up a flight of stairs every week for pics, it feels like I am doing it every 3 days and as a result seems only about 2 weeks ago I started. I am rambling, dinner time, bye for now.

 

[bonecarver_OG]

darn they dont look as bad as in the former close ups?

for a while u got me worried!

 

[daihashi]

I tell you what, if you want a grow-time to fly?, do one of these threads where you have to pull 8 plants out & up a flight of stairs every week for pics, it feels like I am doing it every 3 days and as a result seems only about 2 weeks ago I started. I am rambling, dinner time, bye for now.

This is exactly why I stopped doing logs.. well that and personal reason. It's a lot of work to take huge plants out for pics.. lol.

Plants look great by the way. The shorter molasses plants may be due to Molasses being an excellent source of P... could be acting like mini P/K booster without the K, resulting in plants that bud more and stretch less.. This is just a hypothesis.

 

[Hazy Lady]

Don't worry B' - happy

Don't worry B' - happy

darn they dont look as bad as in the former close ups?

for a while u got me worried!

HI B', I am pleased to read this, I had written that the N prob' had got no worse, to be honest I think they have really picked up and are actually in better nick now, luckily with just a tweak here and there rather than a huge shot of N. I forgot to mention it but apart from a little more A&B I have swapped my Phos' PH down for my Nitrogen version, I figured I could afford to lose that touch of P as I am up to 15mls PK 13/14 (per 10 lts) for 2 weeks, beyond that I will feed only 1, 2 weeks tops and I won't want them too green by the time the flush starts.

 

[bonecarver_OG]

its a VERY good idea - and also CANNA states it in numerous news letters - when aplying PK its better to switch to nitric acid.

i stopped using either a while ago. now i use a alternative that doesnt affect the EC almost at all, and i think the results i get now are better than when i was using the traditional nitric and phosforous acid. but thats a differnt story

keep it up

peace

 

[habeeb]

HAZY LADY

I didn't hear back form the testing lab yet as my hushmail account got deleted... so I have to try them again I guess, also had a lot going on lately ...

also I notice in organics we use molasses to stimulate the microbes, what microbes can you have in chemical. not sure what it serves in chemical, I'm not even sure if molasses is water soluable ?

also why molasses vs. boost ? they seem to be in a different category. being boost is more of a stimulant, and molasses being more of a nutrient.

 

[daihashi]

HAZY LADY


also why molasses vs. boost ? they seem to be in a different category. being boost is more of a stimulant, and molasses being more of a nutrient.

lol I went through this with them also a few pages back and posted what I thought would be more comparable products. I still don't understand the reasoning either but I'm always up for any kind of controlled tests comparing products. If anything you can use the molasses fed plants as the control (kind of) to see if Canna boost really lives up to it's claims or comes close. That is mostly what I am watching this thread for.

 

[*mistress*]

also I notice in organics we use molasses to stimulate the microbes, what microbes can you have in chemical. not sure what it serves in chemical, I'm not even sure if molasses is water soluable ?

also why molasses vs. boost ? they seem to be in a different category. being boost is more of a stimulant, and molasses being more of a nutrient.

molasses stimulates microbes in organic or chemical medium/solutions. microbes dont just die in chemical solutions, & especially not in/on the collidial surfaces of coco medium.

may want to look into bioremediation... & mycoremediation... can be argued that higher levels of salts actually stimulate the activity of myco, fungi, microbes...

yes, molasses is very water soluble. calculating npk/nutrient profile discusses the general npk, & other properties of molasses; food grade, feed grade, horticultural molasses, etc...

seems molasses can be nutrient, stimulant, and/or food (carbohydrates) for microbes. depends on rate/volume/time of application.

enjoy your garden!

 

[Hazy Lady]

????????

????????

HAZY LADY

I didn't hear back form the testing lab yet as my hushmail account got deleted... so I have to try them again I guess, also had a lot going on lately ...

also I notice in organics we use molasses to stimulate the microbes, what microbes can you have in chemical. not sure what it serves in chemical, I'm not even sure if molasses is water soluable ?

also why molasses vs. boost ? they seem to be in a different category. being boost is more of a stimulant, and molasses being more of a nutrient.

No problem habeeb.
I understand you, I believe Molasses is a super additive for EM colonies, which of course we are not as concerned with in coco, although there is a beneficial fungus in coir that could benefit from Molasses? something else to look at. I, and I guess a lot of others, use Molasses more for the carb/sugar and nutrient side, I reason if the plant has a supply of sugars it doesn't need to produce itself it can get on with the actual business of growing more?, I am by no means an expert on Molasses but am in no doubt it has a use in our grows in or out and whichever medium is used. *mistress* may be better able to answer specific q's regarding Molasses?.
Why Boost V Molasses, well again I and many others were using Molasses, actually it was my husband started it not me, using it as a cheap 'sweetener' and he claimed it affected/ improved taste, yes it did, but more, he and many others swore it increased yields, potency, all sorts of claims, still do!. It seemed to do what expensive bud-boosters of the day did for a fraction of the cost, then Canna brought Boost out a year or two back and lots of Molasses users tried Boost and stuck with it, claimed it was a better booster than Molasses, some said Molasses was just as good for less bread and it was sort of stuck like that, rightly or wrongly it became a 'known' fact, Molasses was a cheap Boost-, again, certainly to me and others I read or know of. But was it? When I took over my garden I just used both of them, out of habit really, I have wondered for a while what my plants really need & not what I think they need, so came this 1st test.
I hope this helps answer you habeeb? good to see you back here.

Edit, missed a bit, it IS water soluble habeeb, especially warm water

 

[Hazy Lady]

Thanks *mistress*

Thanks *mistress*

molasses stimulates microbes in organic or chemical medium/solutions. microbes dont just die in chemical solutions, & especially not in/on the collidial surfaces of coco medium.

may want to look into bioremediation... & mycoremediation... can be argued that higher levels of salts actually stimulate the activity of myco, fungi, microbes...

yes, molasses is very water soluble. calculating npk/nutrient profile discusses the general npk, & other properties of molasses; food grade, feed grade, horticultural molasses, etc...

seems molasses can be nutrient, stimulant, and/or food (carbohydrates) for microbes. depends on rate/volume/time of application.

enjoy your garden!

Ha, I should have read all posts before I started answering habeeb, thank-you *mistress*, invaluable info as always, there you fellas, you can decipher my rambling or just read *m*'s for a succinct answer

 

[Hazy Lady]

THEY just won't listen

THEY just won't listen

lol I went through this with them also a few pages back and posted what I thought would be more comparable products. I still don't understand the reasoning either but I'm always up for any kind of controlled tests comparing products. If anything you can use the molasses fed plants as the control (kind of) to see if Canna boost really lives up to it's claims or comes close. That is mostly what I am watching this thread for.

We (them) believe our two ARE comparable, d, well I certainly do and a few others who think the same told me they are prepared to fight you to the death over this!, but seriously, *m* has summed it up nicely
*mistress*

seems molasses can be nutrient, stimulant, and/or food (carbohydrates) for microbes. depends on rate/volume/time of application.

So, all you gotta do is dial it in!

 

[Hazy Lady]

its a VERY good idea - and also CANNA states it in numerous news letters - when aplying PK its better to switch to nitric acid.

i stopped using either a while ago. now i use a alternative that doesnt affect the EC almost at all, and i think the results i get now are better than when i was using the traditional nitric and phosforous acid. but thats a differnt story

keep it up

peace

Sorry, skipped over you somehow B'. I always thought it was a bit hit and miss, not really knowing how much P is used this way I figured you would do less damage too with an N over dose. Do you mean you're using a manufactured alternative 'down' or like a vinegar type substitute found in the kitchen?

 

[bonecarver_OG]

plants use a lot more "plant-sugars" from the second month on in flowering. its proven that thru the roots even systematic complex molecles can get sucked up. this means the comlpex sugar molecules in molasses also reach into the plant and help it to produce more.

in other words, molasses is also a BOOST in it self.

the secondary benefit of molasses is the minerals its has, the "nute" part of it.

also panela - the crystalized sugarcane juice contains a wide variety of vitamines. that obviously is not part of nutricion regime.

to say molasses and panella are nutes is to simplify the way plants really works.

 

[bonecarver_OG]

i use this for ph-down

the brand is Organik. i like this product a lot.....

 

[*mistress*]

this may be helpful:

how brix meters work
It is important to monitor regularly the health of the soil as well as the plants that grow on it. Good soil nutrition helps plants resist disease and insect infestation, leading to better ‘keeping' qualities, nutritional values, and flavour characteristics. The practice helps to assure high quality produce which attract the best prices.

Exhaustive soil analysis is certainly necessary, but this is tedious laboratory work. To have a portable, easy-to-maintain system of tracking the progress of the crop, the farmer needs a handy tool. There is one such instrument -- the refractometer, also called a Brix meter, because it reads the Brix value of a liquid.

The Brix value indicates the level of total dissolved solids -- vitamins, minerals, and other soluble compounds but mostly sugars -- in a liquid such as the sap from the leaves and other plant parts. The Brix can also be interpreted as an indication of the nutrient uptake and therefore the health of the plant.

Within the same plant species, the crop with a higher Brix value will contain more sugars, minerals and proteins, and less water. This means the crop will taste sweeter and be more mineral-nutritious. Harvested crops with high sugar content lose less water in storage and better resist frost damage and post-harvest disease.

Using Brix meters

To text Brix content, squeeze some juice from a chosen part of the plant. Drip the fresh liquid on the inclined glass plane of the Brix meter. Hold the instrument against the light and look through the viewfinder for the number (between 0 and 32) indicating the sugar content reading. The higher the reading the higher the sugar content; this is good for the plant.

Between varieties and species of plants, Brix readings can be very different. Some varieties consistently give low Brix values, regardless of how they are grown. Such varieties are likely to be the most vulnerable to disease and insects.

When taking samples of the crop area, it is vital to compare data from the healthy (normal), weak and super-growing plants. Data from disease-affected or pest-infested areas should also be compared with data from non-affected areas.

In a single plant, Brix values will vary considerably depending on the source of the sample -- mature or young leaves, mature or immature fruit, growing points, petioles, etc. Some organic farming technicians choose petioles (newly mature leaves) since they exude plenty of sap and do not have wide swings in Brix.

Once a plant part has been chosen, all sampling should be taken from that portion. Since sunlight affects photosynthetic activity, sampling should be done always from the same side of the plant.

Other things to watch for are the following:

Samples should be taken from at least 20 plants, all of identical physiological age. On each sampling date, the samples should come from the same plants.

&

http://www.tandjenterprises.com/brix_equals_quality.htm
USING A REFRACTOMETER TO TEST THE QUALITY OF FRUITS & VEGETABLES,
(excerpt, in part):

THE ORIGIN OF THE WORD BRIX
Professor A. F. W. Brix was a 19th Century German chemist (b.1798, d.1890). He was the first to measure the density of plant juices by floating a hydrometer in them. The winemakers of Europe were concerned that they could not predict which of various grape juices would make the best wine. Being able to judge quality ahead of actual bottling was of immense importance in an industry where a bottle of the best wine might sell for hundreds of times more than a bottle of everyday wine. Professor Brix was greeted as a great hero when he emerged from his laboratory to claim his most generous prize. He was also honored by having the measuring process named after him.

* BRIX is a measure of the percent solids (TSS) in a given weight of plant juice---nothing more---and nothing less.
* BRIX is often expressed another way: BRIX equals the percentage of sucrose. However, if you study the contents of this book, you will soon enough understand that the "sucrose" can vary widely. For, indeed, the BRIX is actually a summation of the pounds of sucrose, fructose, vitamins, minerals, amino acids, proteins, hormones, and other solids in one hundred pounds of any particular plant juice.
* BRIX varies directly with plant QUALITY. For instance, a poor, sour tasting grape from worn out land can test 8 or less BRIX. On the other hand, a full flavored, delicious grape, grown on rich, fertile soil can test 24 or better BRIX.

hope this helps. enjoy your garden!

 

[daihashi]

We (them) believe our two ARE comparable, d, well I certainly do and a few others who think the same told me they are prepared to fight you to the death over this!, but seriously, *m* has summed it up nicely
*mistress* So, all you gotta do is dial it in!

Then we agree to disagree (and everyone else who agrees with you, like them I have an opinion). Besides I didn't say there wasn't any value at allin this comparison; after all I am still following the thread. I simply feel in terms of products they are not the similar and it is hard to say if one product was better than the other since they do different things.. one is related to increasing photosynthesis (as claimed by canna) and the other to providing P, Ca, Mg (and trace elements), sugars, chelates and feeding the micro organisms.

ie: comparing Molasses to something like Sweet or maybe to a P/K booster since molasses is a carb product and contains P. I just don't see in what aspects Molasses and boost are similar to where you can compare the products.


shrug


btw don't take this post as rude. I'm just stoned and tired so I type very direct and to the point, I really do follow your thread closely.

 

[*mistress*]

Then we agree to disagree (and everyone else who agrees with you, like them I have an opinion). Besides I didn't say there wasn't any value at allin this comparison; after all I am still following the thread. I simply feel in terms of products they are not the similar and it is hard to say if one product was better than the other since they do different things.. one is related to increasing photosynthesis (as claimed by canna) and the other to providing P, Ca, Mg (and trace elements), sugars, chelates and feeding the micro organisms.

ie: comparing Molasses to something like Sweet or maybe to a P/K booster since molasses is a carb product and contains P. I just don't see in what aspects Molasses and boost are similar to where you can compare the products.


shrug


btw don't take this post as rude. I'm just stoned and tired so I type very direct and to the point, I really do follow your thread closely.

so, in your opinion, what product on the market is, or can be, comparable to boosts'? or, @ least the claims of boost to increase photosynthesis?

or, better yet, can the ingredients in boost be readily obtained thru primary or secondary sources - by-passing the exorbitant cost of the finished/packaged product?

and how is an increase in photosynthesis supposed to be measured by the gardener? only in terms of the result of using the product?

this is why posted info on brix & brix meters. theoretically, if photosynthesis is increasing (in rate, etc) the total sugar production & content (& other solids) should increase... markedly...

With CANNABOOST you are guaranteed both a higher yield and an exceptional taste. Increasing the speed of photosynthesis greatly increases the sugar production in the fruits. This makes the taste sweeter and the natural flavours in the fruits will be produced in higher concentrations. The stronger smell of the essential oils in the fruits speaks volumes. [emphasis added]

they 'guarantee' more 'yield' & 'exceptional taste'. if greater sugar content is the key to beeter tasting fruit, why not just add sugar (carbohydrates; i.e.g., molasses)? the yield part is a little trickier...

the below link describes photosynthesis relatively in depth... the study guide presents a list of learning objectives.

#1 on the list of learning objectives is:
http://www.emc.maricopa.edu/faculty/farabee/BIOBK/BioBookPS.html
photosynthesis

Study the general equation for photosynthesis and be able to indicate in which process each reactant is used and each product is produced.

if purchasing a 100 coins-a-bottle product, the company should be able to provide @ least a cursory chemical-reaction flow chart describing how their product influences the standard photosynthesis formula & process... especially if the product is 'guaranteed'... you have already paid for the research by purchasing the product; full disclosure of chem reactions should accompany, if you ask them...

in simple words, either the company, or gardeners, should be able to ascertain, understand & state the simple objectives of a community college course, relevant to nearly any product purchased:

be able to indicate in which process each reactant is used and each product is produced.

if, the company cannot or will not provide these data sets, the members of this community should be able to find the chemicals & reproduce the solution & detail the processes. in same way a stock fertilizer solution can be made using steiner folmula, using chem salts.

not knocking canna boost or the gardeners that use it. just not jumping thru loops for a 'new' product. there was a new product called messenger (harpin protein) that many were enthusiastic about few yrs ago... nobody discusses now, though relatively inexpensive...

so, again, what products would be considered similar to boost, to compare?

or is boost the only product that claims to increase yield & taste? no... any isle in the garden store will contain a few products that claim this...

enjoy your garden!

 

[Hazy Lady]

Then we agree to disagree (and everyone else who agrees with you, like them I have an opinion). Besides I didn't say there wasn't any value at allin this comparison; after all I am still following the thread. I simply feel in terms of products they are not the similar and it is hard to say if one product was better than the other since they do different things.. one is related to increasing photosynthesis (as claimed by canna) and the other to providing P, Ca, Mg (and trace elements), sugars, chelates and feeding the micro organisms.

ie: comparing Molasses to something like Sweet or maybe to a P/K booster since molasses is a carb product and contains P. I just don't see in what aspects Molasses and boost are similar to where you can compare the products.


shrug


btw don't take this post as rude. I'm just stoned and tired so I type very direct and to the point, I really do follow your thread closely.

Hi d, I am very sorry, I feel have taken my post the wrong way, I like you was stoned when I read yours and was very amused, and still am (and still stoned too) NOT at your point, thats valid! and of course you're entitled to an opinion whatever side you're on, I am sorry if I made you feel your view somehow wasn't welcome, I was amused at the way it made us sound like naughty girls and boys who would not behave or listen to the grown up,
daihashi

lol I went through this with them also a few pages back and posted what I thought would be more comparable products. I still don't understand the reasoning either but I'm always up for any kind of controlled tests comparing products

it amuses me because I have children in their 20's and I am supposed to be the adult, I really hope this clears things up, I NEVER meant you to think you were not entitled to your opinion, I truly welcome your posts, I am sure I have thanked you in the rep box thing?, I may be wrong, if so sorry, I do thank you anyway,Listen, I was married to a wonderful man for 20 odd years, he was from a city in the North of England so I understand 'direct and to the point' believe me, I call it blunt!, maybe that's why blunts are called blunts?.
So to conclude, I do think your point is valid but I think there IS a side of Molasses you are not considering, I am not alone in my belief, see below from Brother Bone', like our *mistress* yesterday he has summed up what I am also trying to say rather well.

Bonecarver

plants use a lot more "plant-sugars" from the second month on in flowering. its proven that thru the roots even systematic complex molecles can get sucked up. this means the comlpex sugar molecules in molasses also reach into the plant and help it to produce more.

in other words, molasses is also a BOOST in it self.

the secondary benefit of molasses is the minerals its has, the "nute" part of it.

also panela - the crystalized sugarcane juice contains a wide variety of vitamines. that obviously is not part of nutricion regime.

to say molasses and panella are nutes is to simplify the way plants really works.

I hope we are ok now?, if not