And how is alkalinity measured?
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Living organic soil from start through recycling CONTINUED...
- Thread starter gaiusmarius
- Start date
And how is alkalinity measured?
il19z8rn4li1
Member
Nature is the best 
Its NOT REALLY that complicated...
Some people in this thread, seem to make things OVERLY complicated... I used to do this.
Then I read "one straw revolution"
I recommend anyone with the interest of natural gardening, read this book..
Google "one straw revolution PDF" its FREE...
READ IT!! lol
PAy attention to nature and things come clear... no need for science Science just
helps us understand the WHYS AND HOWS.. nature sometimes just says...
"it works because I said so and just because, thats all you need to know"
I like to knwo the WHY lol and WHAT EXACTLY is going on when you mix
Say... pH 6 water with soil... then comparing that to pH 8 water with the same
soil...
OR same pH water... mixed with 2 different soils.. "WHAT HAPPENS on the molecular
scale?" I like to know those things for personal fun
Its NOT REALLY that complicated...
Some people in this thread, seem to make things OVERLY complicated... I used to do this.
Then I read "one straw revolution"
I recommend anyone with the interest of natural gardening, read this book..
Google "one straw revolution PDF" its FREE...
READ IT!! lol
PAy attention to nature and things come clear... no need for science
Science just helps us understand the WHYS AND HOWS.. nature sometimes just says...
"it works because I said so and just because, thats all you need to know"
I like to knwo the WHY lol and WHAT EXACTLY is going on when you mix
Say... pH 6 water with soil... then comparing that to pH 8 water with the same
soil...
OR same pH water... mixed with 2 different soils.. "WHAT HAPPENS on the molecular
scale?" I like to know those things for personal fun
Bearing in mind groundwater alkalinity is mainly a result of CaCO3, I wonder if that has any effect on pH...
Jesus Christ, I think I just blew a brain gasket. What if they're interrelated?
Sometimes I think we should buffer our declarations with 'I think this is why that happened'
My take on pH, being carefully unscientific
pH has a place in organic growing but it is not something we adjust.
If enough organic matter is present in the soil, it holds onto sequestered nutrients (CEC). These are released by organic acids (like carbonic acid, citric acid, malate, oxolate and many others)
excreted by microbes and by the roots of plants. These acids create a certain hydrogen molecule which creates a power of hydrogen or sometimes called potential of hydrogen OR pH. which releases an ionic form nutrient into the soil solution which a plant root can uptake. [cation exchange] It is an exchange because the hydrogen molecular structure is traded for the nutrient molecular structure.
This is sort of like a key and lock scenario which interestingly is not that different from the human nervous and endocrine system. The specific molecular bond structure is the key which fits the lock to release a specific substance.
Generally a high level of fungi creates a more acidic soil and a high bacterial a more alkaline soil. This is mainly due to the type of plant which has evolved to grow in that soil. A balanced vegetable type garden soil usually settles around 6.4 (to 7) pH.
When growing in containers or gardens people often try to mimmick the pH soil type to suit the plant. If growing cannabis, it does well in a range from 5.7 to 6.8 depending on the moisture, etc.
If you have provided sufficient organic matter and minerals, it is very unlikely that your watering medium (water; CT, etc) is going to have a permanent effect on your soil's pH. This is more likely to be adjusted and balanced by the plant and microbes working together. If you try adjusting this, chances are that you may upset this balance.
I cannot count how often I have irrigated soil with a fermented liquid at 3.3 pH but have soil remain stabilized at 6.4. I did not use dolomite.
And just thinking;
I think that if one adjusts the pH then there is an effective release of nutrients into solution. If one ensures sufficient organic matter or provides/ensures diverse, appropriate microbial populations then one allows the set of circumstances or homeostasis for plant initiated pH manipulation in the correct time phase as required by the plant.
My take on pH, being carefully unscientific
pH has a place in organic growing but it is not something we adjust.
If enough organic matter is present in the soil, it holds onto sequestered nutrients (CEC). These are released by organic acids (like carbonic acid, citric acid, malate, oxolate and many others)
excreted by microbes and by the roots of plants. These acids create a certain hydrogen molecule which creates a power of hydrogen or sometimes called potential of hydrogen OR pH. which releases an ionic form nutrient into the soil solution which a plant root can uptake. [cation exchange] It is an exchange because the hydrogen molecular structure is traded for the nutrient molecular structure.
This is sort of like a key and lock scenario which interestingly is not that different from the human nervous and endocrine system. The specific molecular bond structure is the key which fits the lock to release a specific substance.
Generally a high level of fungi creates a more acidic soil and a high bacterial a more alkaline soil. This is mainly due to the type of plant which has evolved to grow in that soil. A balanced vegetable type garden soil usually settles around 6.4 (to 7) pH.
When growing in containers or gardens people often try to mimmick the pH soil type to suit the plant. If growing cannabis, it does well in a range from 5.7 to 6.8 depending on the moisture, etc.
If you have provided sufficient organic matter and minerals, it is very unlikely that your watering medium (water; CT, etc) is going to have a permanent effect on your soil's pH. This is more likely to be adjusted and balanced by the plant and microbes working together. If you try adjusting this, chances are that you may upset this balance.
I cannot count how often I have irrigated soil with a fermented liquid at 3.3 pH but have soil remain stabilized at 6.4. I did not use dolomite.
And just thinking;
I think that if one adjusts the pH then there is an effective release of nutrients into solution. If one ensures sufficient organic matter or provides/ensures diverse, appropriate microbial populations then one allows the set of circumstances or homeostasis for plant initiated pH manipulation in the correct time phase as required by the plant.
I think low pH is not what I was talking about...that will behav e exactly like you say. In fact I think if you acidify to a pH of 4.5 you have effectively eliminated alkalinity.
I think your water is not alkaline. I think if you had to deal with alkalinity you would have an entirely different opinion.
I think I don't belong in this thread.
I think your water is not alkaline. I think if you had to deal with alkalinity you would have an entirely different opinion.
I think I don't belong in this thread.
I think alkaline and alkalinity are two different terms.
I think it's good that MM leaving was a hollow threat.
Do you mean often as in over the years or frequently during one growing season?
I think I should make another batch of liquified used diapers.
I think it's good that MM leaving was a hollow threat.
Do you mean often as in over the years or frequently during one growing season?
I think I should make another batch of liquified used diapers.
I think I don't know who you are addressing. I think you might think I was addressing you. I was not.
In the event you are talking of my water, you would be not making a point because I spoke in terms (also) of the myriad of farms I have consulted that have many differing types of water.
I think some people forget what was sent via PM.
MJtheIndicator
Member
If living organic soil is the solution, how is it addressing the diversity of genetic among cannabis? Is LOS able to take modern hybrids which are acclimated to indoor conditions in standard mixes and make pot better? I'm grateful some are convinced it will, but it still does not address the diversity of genetic or any deference to their unique qualities. I agree to its sustainable and safer approach, but science seeks standards something organic communities might reject since we exhibit placebos more aften than not, we assume organically there is always something greener on the other side of the fence, hill, bio-dome etc.
B
Baked Alaskan
In a los the plant works with the soil microbes/fungi to give the plant what it asks for. In return the plant gives the microbes/fungi what they ask for.
In this way of growing any plant has the ability to maximize growth.
In this way of growing any plant has the ability to maximize growth.
MJtheIndicator
Member
If I have a living organic soil that has sustained a wheat crop for generations or a vineyard which has produced the finest wines for aeons, then by the catchall logic of LOS my Cypripedioideae and Saintpaulia will be equally robust. To be fair and generous even in the best conditions, 50% of those orchids and violets will fail if not more or maybe all. Screw the hypothesis though, I should just prove it with a control test ala science. Incidentally, I enjoy when the regulars discuss companion planting, citing Payaso and tarragon of the Artemisia genus which includes wormwood.
I'm not attempting to stir or belittle the organic movement because my heart and love for organic efforts and motivation is in the right place. I'm just highlighting biodiversity, genetic/ecosystem/species variations and biome in an effort to broaden outlook and foster robust dialogue.
B
Baked Alaskan
I was answering your question about the new genetics in cannabis, I wish I knew more about field crops or those other plants you mentioned.
I use a hybrid. I feed the soil with a low nutrient los and feed the plant with fertilizer trenches of granular organic ferts. Since I started los I've had no nutrient deficiencies or pests problems. Before I started a los I had nutrient and pest problems, not every grow but most at some point.
I use a hybrid. I feed the soil with a low nutrient los and feed the plant with fertilizer trenches of granular organic ferts. Since I started los I've had no nutrient deficiencies or pests problems. Before I started a los I had nutrient and pest problems, not every grow but most at some point.
MJtheIndicator
Member
I am delighted for your success and can only imagine how good your results are, I bet they just keep getting better.
If you compare it to the successor, basic NPK nutrient profiles, then how is it not addressing diversity?
As for making pot better, we can use the same basic NPK comparisons, but reality is if you haven't run those indoor hybrid for multiple seasons you can only guess to the efficiency.
Me, I continue to do as I do because of the anecdotal value.
I guess having someone related to the original ROLS crew come to me for work because of the superiority is another story, I am sure at some point it comes down to more than the soil, but with all the scientists in the game, I think I will wait till their good works actually have an impact on my own.
So far, they haven't
MJtheIndicator
Member
I don't see any harm in running a control test on stable strains indoor and out rols vs. inert soil then see where living organics shows most promise and adjust accordingly with the inert to see if it can even compete or prove to be on par. Soil test, sap test no big whoop. With a baseline established then you can turn to geographical variants. The point being if you have to adjust rols to suit genetic and biome then we're talking less about superiors and more about technique regardless of substrate. Just how much one might have to adjust living organic is my foundational curiosity, if it all moves forward so be it, just tests to me I'm not motivated by proving anything. Earth is fun.
what is keeping you from doing so and sharing the results?
I don't see how the objectives indoors and outdoors differ so much, methodology does a bit. I don't grow the same cultivar indoors and out but I do grow no till and have for some time, and did many till grows before hand so there are those distinctions only that I work within. Still growing no til so I guess it works well enough for me.
I don't see how the objectives indoors and outdoors differ so much, methodology does a bit. I don't grow the same cultivar indoors and out but I do grow no till and have for some time, and did many till grows before hand so there are those distinctions only that I work within. Still growing no til so I guess it works well enough for me.
Putting so much focus on the science of it, I think people lose sight of the over all picture, and I think people try to figure out the granular science to hedge their bets, guarantee results.
If genetics all produce optimally in a certain array of environmental inputs do you think you will reverse engineer it faster by measuring sap and other core nutritional variables?
That only works if both primary and secondary metabolites respond to those cues AND ONLY THOSE CUES.
What I am saying is if you can't take a cannabis plant without knowing its genes and pop it in LOS and get good primary metabolite production you need more than science you need more experience. The cues that exploit its secondary metabolite production may lie outside and/or in addition too those parameters.
I suggest the differences are subtle but more discernible in a system (complete environment) where the plant is dialed to PREFERENCE (Gets subjective here).
science isn't going to shed light on those other cues that exploit secondary metabolite production outside of those measurements so at some point you pigeon hole your perception into basic tenants of nutrition.
Visual cues work well enough to diagnose problems why can't they be used to qualify primary metabolite growth?
If they can be what science are you using to measure effects on secondaries?
If genetics all produce optimally in a certain array of environmental inputs do you think you will reverse engineer it faster by measuring sap and other core nutritional variables?
That only works if both primary and secondary metabolites respond to those cues AND ONLY THOSE CUES.
What I am saying is if you can't take a cannabis plant without knowing its genes and pop it in LOS and get good primary metabolite production you need more than science you need more experience. The cues that exploit its secondary metabolite production may lie outside and/or in addition too those parameters.
I suggest the differences are subtle but more discernible in a system (complete environment) where the plant is dialed to PREFERENCE (Gets subjective here).
science isn't going to shed light on those other cues that exploit secondary metabolite production outside of those measurements so at some point you pigeon hole your perception into basic tenants of nutrition.
Visual cues work well enough to diagnose problems why can't they be used to qualify primary metabolite growth?
If they can be what science are you using to measure effects on secondaries?
@ Weird
Often times I think, it is like you describe it.
Overfeeding is the fall of high quality cannabis.
Even when I started, I always underfed. And the quality of the secondary metabolite production (read: Smell, taste, potency) of my cannabis has always been very high.
My yields are maybe not where they should be, but the quality has always been there.
Often times I think, it is like you describe it.
Overfeeding is the fall of high quality cannabis.
Even when I started, I always underfed. And the quality of the secondary metabolite production (read: Smell, taste, potency) of my cannabis has always been very high.
My yields are maybe not where they should be, but the quality has always been there.
