Flush and starve plants during flowering??

[RonSmooth]

I usually cut feeding and eventually stop all together because I was under the impression that the plant would do it anyway. It was more to not waste nutrients than "flush" anything.

But, I am a sucker for science.

And the science is on homebrewers side. Its pretty clear.


The notion that you are "flushing chlorophyl" from leaves is ridiculous. Chlorophyl is essential for plants. It is a major component of photosynthesis.

If water "flushed" anything from the plant, it would be detrimental. Water and plants are friends.

What you are doing by flushing is creating a nutrient deficiency. The discoloration is the symptom(s) of the newly deficient nutrient.

In the case of a deficiency, the buds will pull the needed nutrients from the stores (the leaves) into themselves (sinks). So the fan leaves yellow and fall off because the flowers have sucked out all their chlorophyl.

And the white ash test is bogus. It doesn't say anything about the "cleanliness" of the bud, just the nutrients in the medium. Flushing would then seem to be a poor way to achieve a white ash.


If the plants were naturally turning colors and losing leaves, then flushing would be unnecessary. Why would you need to deprive the plant to induce a naturally occurring phenomenon?


I have 6 plants close to harvest and the healthiest looking, green plant looks the best. As much as I love the purples, oranges, blues and reds I can get in late flowering, it really doesn't make sense.

 

[Piff Rhys Jones]

The white ash test may not be the ultimate test of cleanliness, but I know for a fact nasty toxic smelling and tasting bud leaves a black coarse ash, and smooth, flavoursome and natural smelling and tasting bud leaves a fine white ash. These were both from my own grows and the black ash had been overfed where as the white ash hadn't been.

Peace

 

[Piff Rhys Jones]

Oh and thre idea that black ash is related to moisture content is absolute nonsense.

Here I have some bud that is three days off the plant, still quite damp, burning to a clean white ash. Next to it is some commercial bone dry overfed rubbish, that burns black despite zero moisture.

Peace

 

[sourpuss]

Guys!!! The KING of Cannabis himself, my personnal hero and mentor, Arjan and his sidekick Franco said it best!!!

¨we like to flush before the flowering and at the third or fourth week of bloom..."

Now, why do you think they say that in every grow report on their strains....? hmmmm i wonder....

Pls explain why.... im thinking. Keep the ratios in check.... but that just me guessing. Is that the reason?

 

[sourpuss]

Funny I ve gone both ways. Long periods of water only and flushing the medium. Resulting in a yellowing of fans. Also ive done 1 week harvests of using florakleen only. I do believe now that ive been feeding on the high side and need to redo all my tests. My most recent harvest was fed a little lower throughout and used florakleen. Best harvest to date. Too many variables now to be certain. The journey continues.....

 

[ThaiBliss]

The problem with "science", is that people take the tiniest nugget of what may be truth, and extrapolate it off into all kinds of different directions that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Nitrogen is essential for the plant to produce chlorophyll. Chlorophyll is essential for the plant to produce energy for the plant. Does this really mean that for the highest potency of the bud that the plant should have the most chlorophyll that the plant can possibly produce without toxicity from too much nitrogen. This is a wild jump that science does not support.

I just read an article that plants are aware if an insect is munching on it's leaves, it starts producing extra toxins to try and minimize the damage. In fact, if the plant detects an insect, through sound, on a neighboring plant it starts producing toxins in preparation for the possibility that the insect will arrive. In this case, stress or anticipation of stress is causing the plant to alter its chemical composition, which may be good or bad from the perspective of the person who is harvesting the plant for the particular chemicals that are desired.

What science or logic is supporting that the conditions for optimum growth also means optimum growth means optimum potency? None that I know of. In fact, all evidence points to the opposite. Plants respond in a variety of ways to various conditions, including stress, that produce differences in what we harvest from them. Quality wine growing regions are based not only on what the soil and climate can provide, but also what it lacks. If grapes that produce the best wine were grown in conditions that are in optimum for growth and where temperatures were a perfect 70 degrees, then the good regions would only be in river bottom land in mild climates. They are not. The best wines are often grown in harsher soil conditions or excess heat that produce just the right amount of nutrients and nutrient deficient stressors, often where other crops would not grow well.

The best conditions are found through testing of the individual strain in unique conditions for that strain. The results have to match what the grower prefers, which is also quite unique from consumer to consumer. There is no where near enough "science" to point us in the perfect direction. That is why growing is a science and an art.

ThaiBliss

 

[Piff Rhys Jones]

Practice and experience trumps theory.

Couldn't have worded it better myself ThaiBliss. An art that can only be mastered through one's own experiences and preferences.

Peace

 

[RonSmooth]

The white ash test may not be the ultimate test of cleanliness, but I know for a fact nasty toxic smelling and tasting bud leaves a black coarse ash, and smooth, flavoursome and natural smelling and tasting bud leaves a fine white ash. These were both from my own grows and the black ash had been overfed where as the white ash hadn't been.

Peace

I think you are using the phrase "I know for a fact" very loosely. You don't know anything for a fact.

Apparently you are ignoring all of the actual facts in the thread so they don't contradict your personal experience.

We use the scientific method to remove personal bias and cut through the conjecture. Science doesn't take sides.


White ash is caused by magnesium in the medium. Different levels of nutrients in the medium affect ash color. Go back and read the excerpt from the cigar website.

Your example proves nothing. Maybe that overfed plants do not reach full potential. Did you dry both examples under the exact same conditions for the same time to ensure equal moisture content?


Sorry to be a dick but not knowing something is fine. Refusing to accept reality in the face of scientific evidence is not.

If I sprinkled skittles around my grow room and ended up with record breaking harvests, I would sprinkle them around next time too. I wouldn't care if it was unscientific or anecdotal.

However I wouldn't go around talking about the "fact" the Skittles increase yields.



I believed in this flushing stuff when I first started growing. Now I only change my opinion in the face of compelling evidence to the contrary. I'd love to see some compelling research or evidence of flushing and the white ash test. Or some info on cannabis plants in the wild turning autmn colors and dropping all leaves before dying.

Or on molasses's effectiveness with indoor potted plants
Or any of the other canna-myths that lack a basis in science.

 

[vapor]

I think you are using the phrase "I know for a fact" very loosely. You don't know anything for a fact.

Apparently you are ignoring all of the actual facts in the thread so they don't contradict your personal experience.

We use the scientific method to remove personal bias and cut through the conjecture. Science doesn't take sides.


White ash is caused by magnesium in the medium. Different levels of nutrients in the medium affect ash color. Go back and read the excerpt from the cigar website.

Your example proves nothing. Maybe that overfed plants do not reach full potential. Did you dry both examples under the exact same conditions for the same time to ensure equal moisture content?


Sorry to be a dick but not knowing something is fine. Refusing to accept reality in the face of scientific evidence is not.

If I sprinkled skittles around my grow room and ended up with record breaking harvests, I would sprinkle them around next time too. I wouldn't care if it was unscientific or anecdotal.

However I wouldn't go around talking about the "fact" the Skittles increase yields.



I believed in this flushing stuff when I first started growing. Now I only change my opinion in the face of compelling evidence to the contrary. I'd love to see some compelling research or evidence of flushing and the white ash test. Or some info on cannabis plants in the wild turning autmn colors and dropping all leaves before dying.

Or on molasses's effectiveness with indoor potted plants
Or any of the other canna-myths that lack a basis in science.

Folks who have experience all say the same thing. clean ash is better quality all around. science or not there is still lots we do not understand about this plant. The only way i have found to get a clean ash is to time the nutrients out over many grows and adjust till i have it dialed. All the books and science will not=real life experience.{best book i have read that helped me with soil is Ideal soil by Michael astara and agricola}
funny how the older growers i meet that grow dank,{ i have met guys with 30 years experience and still grow black ash harsh bud} say the same thing but the young guns argue blue in the face till they sit down and have some time with old fellers bud{more please sir}, so show us your ash? Liamba puff puff pass that's a liamba joint tester been chopped 4 daze and is still wet{checking the burn on my crop it changes as the plants fade hard from black and gross to tasting like the plant and white}....

 

[Snow Crash]

Guys!!! The KING of Cannabis himself, my personnal hero and mentor, Arjan and his sidekick Franco said it best!!!

¨we like to flush before the flowering and at the third or fourth week of bloom..."

Now, why do you think they say that in every grow report on their strains....? hmmmm i wonder....

Something I've been tinkering with for the last few grows, and something I'm finally starting to feel comfortable talking about as a "method" are variable feed levels.

The supply of nutrients is inconsistent in nature. All plants have evolved to utilize this inconsistency. Some days are just wetter or colder than others - impacting organic activity in the soil and the availability of elements to the root system. Take a look at the rings of a tree and it becomes easy to see the impact that variable feed levels have on growth year by year.

I think this is why regular flush cycles, 1/2 strength feedings, and continuously evolving EC levels have such impact on the growth of our annual plants. I notice that when I float in the acceptable nutrient range, feeding a little heavier on some days and a little lighter on others, that my yields and quality have been getting much better.

As I talk to other growers about this phenomenon they all seem to relate a story from their own garden about how they use variation. Some people gravitate towards this kind of feeding program over time through observation without really pinning down just "why" they flush when they flush.
"Plants do better. That's why.
End.
Of.
Story."

Even with some constant supply programs (like Lucas) the inventors themselves will reduce runoff to encourage a little charge in the media, then flush at regular intervals. Some others include bloom boosters to alter the ratio of elements and increase the EC to help the plant reach its genetic potential. All different methods to reach essentially the same goal, inconsistency.

I think where this conversation is going is not so much how to flush plants as much as it is about how to feed plants so that the flush is accomplishing what is expected of it. Playing right into the natural evolution of the plants who anticipate decreased organic activity and less nutrition from the a cold, wet, soil in the fall by upping their intake at the peak of their flowering.

 

[Homebrewer]

The problem with "science", is that people take the tiniest nugget of what may be truth, and extrapolate it off into all kinds of different directions that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Nitrogen is essential for the plant to produce chlorophyll. Chlorophyll is essential for the plant to produce energy for the plant. Does this really mean that for the highest potency of the bud that the plant should have the most chlorophyll that the plant can possibly produce without toxicity from too much nitrogen. This is a wild jump that science does not support.

I don't think anyone is talking about maximizing the chlorophyll content, but rather retaining healthy, deficiency-free leaves all the way until harvest. What science does support is the various ways to do that.

I just read an article that plants are aware if an insect is munching on it's leaves, it starts producing extra toxins to try and minimize the damage. In fact, if the plant detects an insect, through sound, on a neighboring plant it starts producing toxins in preparation for the possibility that the insect will arrive. In this case, stress or anticipation of stress is causing the plant to alter its chemical composition, which may be good or bad from the perspective of the person who is harvesting the plant for the particular chemicals that are desired.

What science or logic is supporting that the conditions for optimum growth also means optimum growth means optimum potency? None that I know of. In fact, all evidence points to the opposite. Plants respond in a variety of ways to various conditions, including stress, that produce differences in what we harvest from them. Quality wine growing regions are based not only on what the soil and climate can provide, but also what it lacks. If grapes that produce the best wine were grown in conditions that are in optimum for growth and where temperatures were a perfect 70 degrees, then the good regions would only be in river bottom land in mild climates. They are not. The best wines are often grown in harsher soil conditions or excess heat that produce just the right amount of nutrients and nutrient deficient stressors, often where other crops would not grow well.

The best conditions are found through testing of the individual strain in unique conditions for that strain. The results have to match what the grower prefers, which is also quite unique from consumer to consumer. There is no where near enough "science" to point us in the perfect direction. That is why growing is a science and an art.

ThaiBliss

Wine is an outdoor crop whose quality fluctuates year-to-year based on the weather conditions for said year. The best grapes in any given year will come from regions that avoided extremes (read: stress).


http://www.earthmagazine.org/article/climate-terroir-and-wine-what-matters-most-producing-great-wine

Are there ideal weather conditions for growing winegrapes? Although no two vintages in any region are exactly alike, growers everywhere would be ecstatic with adequate precipitation and warmth to grow the vine and ripen the fruit, with no weather extremes (like frost, hail and heat waves) and disease. During the dormant period, this would equate to enough soil-replenishing rainfall and a cool to cold winter, without vine-killing low temperatures but with enough chilling to ensure bud fruitfulness the following year. The spring would be free from wide temperature swings and frost, and have enough precipitation to feed vegetative growth. During flowering, the weather would be cloud-free with moderately high temperatures and high photosynthetic potential to allow the flowers to fully set into fruit. The summer growth stage would be dry, with heat accumulation to meet the needs of the variety and few heat stress events. The ripening period would be dry with a slow truncation of the season toward fall, with moderately high daytime temperatures and progressively cooler nights.


Although conditions like these may happen in a given vintage, it’s more likely that variation in one or more weather aspect will deviate from an ideal vintage, often changing the overall wine style, influencing one or more flavor and aroma nuance of the wine, or limiting yields and quality. The result is that no two vintages are exactly the same, either in their weather or wine.

In regards to nutritional stresses, those should and can be avoided with a simple soil analysis.

http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/soil_s...idelines_for_interpreting_the_soil_test_resul

 

[RonSmooth]

The problem with "science", is that people take the tiniest nugget of what may be truth, and extrapolate it off into all kinds of different directions that have nothing to do with the subject at hand.

Nitrogen is essential for the plant to produce chlorophyll. Chlorophyll is essential for the plant to produce energy for the plant. Does this really mean that for the highest potency of the bud that the plant should have the most chlorophyll that the plant can possibly produce without toxicity from too much nitrogen. This is a wild jump that science does not support.

I just read an article that plants are aware if an insect is munching on it's leaves, it starts producing extra toxins to try and minimize the damage. In fact, if the plant detects an insect, through sound, on a neighboring plant it starts producing toxins in preparation for the possibility that the insect will arrive. In this case, stress or anticipation of stress is causing the plant to alter its chemical composition, which may be good or bad from the perspective of the person who is harvesting the plant for the particular chemicals that are desired.

What science or logic is supporting that the conditions for optimum growth also means optimum growth means optimum potency? None that I know of. In fact, all evidence points to the opposite. Plants respond in a variety of ways to various conditions, including stress, that produce differences in what we harvest from them. Quality wine growing regions are based not only on what the soil and climate can provide, but also what it lacks. If grapes that produce the best wine were grown in conditions that are in optimum for growth and where temperatures were a perfect 70 degrees, then the good regions would only be in river bottom land in mild climates. They are not. The best wines are often grown in harsher soil conditions or excess heat that produce just the right amount of nutrients and nutrient deficient stressors, often where other crops would not grow well.

The best conditions are found through testing of the individual strain in unique conditions for that strain. The results have to match what the grower prefers, which is also quite unique from consumer to consumer. There is no where near enough "science" to point us in the perfect direction. That is why growing is a science and an art.

ThaiBliss

Who is taking a tiny bit of science and extrapolating on it? What bit of science are you speaking of? Plant biology? Id hardly call that a "tiny nugget of science"

Please be specific and include examples/quotes when saying things like "You said" or "people do".


Why do you assume that the only other alternative to starving plants is overfeeding them? Nobody said that. You said that so it would be easy to defend your position.

What about just keeping them healthy?

You said plants need chlorophyl. So why flush it out?

If your leaves are yellowing and falling off, you are nitrogen deficient.

If you remove protein from a persons diet, do you think they are going to reach their potential in a sport like body building?

And please post a link to the paper about plants producing toxins and warning other plants of insects. I have seen similar stories but havent read them comprehensively.

I find it hard to believe plants that dont produce toxins normally can produce poison if threatened.

Everytime you mention a "study" or paper and use it in your argument, please link it. Without a link, it is meaningless. I like to read stuff like that as well.

 

[Piff Rhys Jones]

I think you are using the phrase "I know for a fact" very loosely. You don't know anything for a fact.

Hmmm.. really? So it isn't a fact that this bud in front of me that tastes nasty burns black smelling of phosphorus and this bud in front of me that tastes nice burns white with a clean natural smell?

I must have just imagined it then. It can't have been true because it wouldn't have been a fact if it didn't happen, and as you say, I don't know anything for a fact...

Peace

 

[ThaiBliss]

Who is taking a tiny bit of science and extrapolating on it? What bit of science are you speaking of? Plant biology? Id hardly call that a "tiny nugget of science"

Please be specific and include examples/quotes when saying things like "You said" or "people do".

This is what I am addressing:

But, I am a sucker for science...

The notion that you are "flushing chlorophyl" from leaves is ridiculous. Chlorophyl is essential for plants. It is a major component of photosynthesis.

If water "flushed" anything from the plant, it would be detrimental. Water and plants are friends.

What you are doing by flushing is creating a nutrient deficiency. The discoloration is the symptom(s) of the newly deficient nutrient.

I'll try to address a portion of these assertions. I thought you were using "Chlorophyll is essential for plants" and "It is a major component of photosynthesis" to support your belief that the yellowing at ripening time is the result of a deficient nutrient. This may seem like an obvious logical conclusion based on science, but it is not. This is not a scientifically rigorous conclusion. In fact, I'd be hard pressed to find anyone on this thread using science to support their beliefs, only anecdotal observations, even if they are repeatedly observed.

I don't believe that my interpretation of your statements is the case. I have observed that it is excessive fertilization that keeps the plants green at the end of their flowering cycle. Way more nitrogen than you would ever see in nature unless an animal died at the foot of the plant in springtime, or a cow took a huge dump at the foot of the plant during the onset of flowering.


I don't have scientific evidence to back it up, but neither do you. Those statements of scientific fact that I have quoted from you are completely divorced from what happens to the plant as it ripens.

Why do you assume that the only other alternative to starving plants is overfeeding them? Nobody said that. You said that so it would be easy to defend your position.

Actually, I said that because I see people post pictures of their plants, the majority which look over fertilized to me. Even my picture of my plant in June looks excessively fertilized:

What about just keeping them healthy?

I agree. In fact, I alluded to this in an earlier post:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6438212&postcount=175

"I have been trying less nitrogen for the entire lifespan of the plant, and slowly tapering for a longer period of time."

As the extremely fast growing Cannabis plant grows, I believe a relative nitrogen deficit, compared to the soil at the start of the season (but not a pathogenic deficit), is created as the plant uses it up, similar to corn or other fast growing crops.


Here is a link to a thread from a grower who uses compost but not too much fertilizer. It is from a cat named Snow or Snow High. I consider most of the plants in this thread have been grown in somewhat natural conditions without over fertilization:

http://www.mrnice.nl/forum/12-outdoor/4399-snows-outdoor.html

These are what plants look like when grown "healthy", in my opinion. I don't think they are not starved or over-fertilized. Some of them are huge.

When I was young, a common belief was that grower should pick off the big fan leaves during flowering. I have tried this some 30+ years ago and found it to be bogus in my opinion. It only made the buds leafy, and reduced the potency. But, I think it came from observations of traditionally grown Cannabis crops from inexperienced growers. The fan leaves turned yellow and fell off as full maturity neared, and this was misinterpreted as the traditionalists, from other countries, having picked them off. This was at the time that homegrowing was first becoming popular in the States.

If your leaves are yellowing and falling off, you are nitrogen deficient.

I believe that truly nitrogen deficient plants looks unhealthy. The leaves get small and slightly shriveled and the veins are a different color than the rest of the leaf. The yellowing in late ripening looks relatively even without affecting growth or swelling of the buds. They still have a healthy look to them.

And please post a link to the paper about plants producing toxins and warning other plants of insects. I have seen similar stories but havent read them comprehensively.

Here you go. This is a link to a whole slew of links of news publications who carried the story. Sorry it is not a scientific journal, but I bet you can find it with a browser search:

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=plants+hear+vibrations&tbm=nws

I find it hard to believe plants that dont produce toxins normally can produce poison if threatened.

I believe the plants already produce the toxins, but can increase them in response to a perceived threat.

Thanks for the lively conversation in this thread. This address a belief, based on my personal observations, that I have had for quite a while. As evident in this thread, this belief certainly bucks the prevailing wisdom of "modern" Cannabis cultivators.

I'll try and find one more link about traditional Cannabis growers of Zamal in la Reunion island. Something to the effect of: The best Zamal is the one that has never been touched by human hands. When I told them of hydroponics and halide lamps, they laughed a lot.

All the Best,

ThaiBliss

 

[Ras Mason]

To many people check their runoff but don't check their medium stats.
And you science idol worshippers should know that science is an Oroboros.
Nuff said.
guess we set here.
peace.

 

[ThaiBliss]

Holy crap! Look what I found:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=251621

A blast from the past. People are still experimenting with picking off fan leaves. I thought that died out 30 years ago.

 

[mojave green]

i picked a leaf off my mother and ate it. no fert/chemical taste that's fer sure. just tasted like a green leaf. not bad at all actually.

 

[ThaiBliss]

I'll try and find one more link about traditional Cannabis growers of Zamal in la Reunion island. Something to the effect of: The best Zamal is the one that has never been touched by human hands. When I told them of hydroponics and halide lamps, they laughed a lot.

I did not find that old post, yet, but another vaguely along a similar vein:

Quoted by Rinse:

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6446855&postcount=9056

"Bob Marley: "Y’know what happen to dat herb? I tell ya where dat herb go now. Just like ya ‘ave some apple trees, an’ dis year something happen to dat apple tree dere, an’ dis year dat tree taste better den dat tree. Ya find dat a seed planted de right day, de right minute, den dere’s tree, ya find it, nobody plant it. A seed show, an’ it grow, an’ ya start nurse it, an’ it become the best tree. Well, ya can get plenty a dat – de best herb dere. Jus’ one tree, sometime a guy have. Ya might pass bye an’ get a spliff. Ya say, “Where ya get dis?” Him say, “Dis come from St. Ann.” So ya go down to St. Ann’s an ya don’t find it again." "

I know it does not support precisely what my point is, but it has the same spirit.

T.B.

 

[J_hoover]

Too many experts on icmag lmfao

 

[DrFever]

Got to tell you guys maintaining a healthy plant in all stages is key and that means keeping her green , Flushing should only be used when you have salt build up or potential issues and that is to clean out your medium with a mild nutrient and start corrections from there, letting your plant yellow off is not normal most yellowing in nature is do to the fact of seasonal weather and sun duration fall etc , frost , rain falls are less in fall so in nature it does not leach out you ever here the terms april showers ????
so with that said can anyone tell me what Nitrogen , phos tastes like ??? I really would like to know last time i checked plants break down the nutrients before they uptake
like many good growers will do is lower there Ec / ppm not cut plant food right off
Why would anyone cut off plant food force yellowing . starve a plant when plant is at part of its life packing on weight like being a professional hockey player and not eating 2 days before a game you think your going to play good ???