Shaggy's Guide to Hormones used in Cannabis

[BigBozat]

No Longer a Fan

No Longer a Fan

I personally am not a big fan of the JAZ rose spray, anymore!

I have had good experience with the hormone booster.
You can see the results in my signature.

Pour quoi?

I mean... why? [are u not a big fan of JAZ anymore, that is]

 

[shaggyballs]

It seem to make all strains have a similar smell.
Something they all had in common.
good or bad?

shag

 

[zilants]

yeah the booster is good shit

i burnt many plants at first because its so concentrated

i just ordered some jaz i wonder how it will work

 

[BubbaBear]

What up Shaggy, are you still experimenting with hormones? I bought a bunch of hormones and bio stimulants. I got
Bap6
Brassinol
Triacontanol
Ethephon
Chitosan oligosaccharide
Methyl jasmonate.

Im trying to steer away from all those expense store bought additives and make them myself.
My main objectives are to boost vigor, to help my plants stay as short and stout as possible and to combat stretch at flip (I grow all lanky OG type strains)also to increase yield and boost quality and potency.

I plan on using the triacontanol and bap6 the most, what methods are people using to mix them and make them soluble these days? I have the KoH and Polysorbate 20 but it seems like a lot of people arent having the best results using those? is there something l can use that would mix both of them? Id like to mix them into a stock solution at about 10ppm per ml that l can mix up and add as needed. What ppms per gallon are people using for root and foliar feeds? Im thinking these are going to be my main two hormones used up to about week 4-5 of flower then cut out the bap6 and tapper down on tria and start feeding with the methyl jasmonate and chitosan each once a week for a few weeks a few days apart, mostly as foliar feeds.

Brassinol sounds useful except when trying to avoid stretch, so I was thinking one application every few weeks would be good a couple times in veg, once at flip, once after stretch then again for a last boost during ripening. Whats a good ppm to aid vigor but avoid stretch?

Does this sound like a good regimen?
This is going out to anybody that is schooled in these products not just shag. Thanks.

 

[panick503]

Am I the only one that finds it annoying when someone posts in different font sizes and colors?

 

[Only Ornamental]

...

I plan on using the triacontanol and bap6 the most, what methods are people using to mix them and make them soluble these days? I have the KoH and Polysorbate 20 but it seems like a lot of people arent having the best results using those? is there something l can use that would mix both of them? Id like to mix them into a stock solution at about 10ppm per ml that l can mix up and add as needed. What ppms per gallon are people using for root and foliar feeds?...

Don't mix them in a single stock solution. For one, it is more practical to have them separated because that way you can spray only one or the other and adjust the concentration of just one if need be.
Also, BAP does only dissolve in high or low pH (below ~2 or above ~10) whereas Tria needs a detergent (if you don't produce a microcrystalline suspension). The detergent most often chosen is Tween 20, though it is pH tolerant regarding its emulsifying capacity, it will degrade quickly under harsh pH conditions. Furthermore, you risk to dissolve BAP in the Tria droplets rendering the former less available/active.
Furthermore, you may dilute BAP stock solutions at any concentration whereas Tria/detergent solutions should not be kept below the detergent's CMC (which is at about 60-75 ppm Tween 20). The thing with Tweens is, that people using them have no idea of galenic formulations, emulsions, and the like and that's why they mess it up . Although adding enough Tween 20 to Tria easily gives a seemingly soluble product, it's not that simple. Using the often cited protocol from MBFerts will likely result in too much Tween 20 and hence reduce the effect of Tria and might even harm the plants. I haven't had the time to play around with this that much and can't give you a perfect solution. I have my own mixed micelle formulation but it's not yet sophisticated enough. Besides, using such preparations as stock solutions require additional preservation... Preparing micro-batches you only keep for a few days would be the 'cleanest' way and will work with lower detergent concentrations which aren't stable over time.

Besides, ppm is a concentration! There is no such thing as '10 ppm per ml' or 'ppms per gallon' and ppm is usually the same as mg/l.
The search function will give you plenty of good advice regarding concentrations of BAP and Tria.

 

[BigBozat]

Just re-found some (I'll keep this post updated if I don't forget ):
CLICK ME
AND ME
ME TOO

OO -

Curious:
Got any references/cites/whatever that discuss what particular toxic/mutagenic/carcinogenic/teratogenic degradation products are produced by burning/smoking 5-nitroguaiacolate et al?

I've been trying to run something down, but all I seem to be able to find are the EU's & US EPA's studies/decisions in re: Atonik... and they all:
a) don't really talk about burn degradation products
b) all seem to conclude low/de minimis toxicity/mutagenicity/etc...

Not doubting (I know that you know a lot more on this stuff than I, and I've always valued your insights). Just really want to know what the degradation products are.

 

[Only Ornamental]

...
Got any references/cites/whatever that discuss what particular toxic/mutagenic/carcinogenic/teratogenic degradation products are produced by burning/smoking 5-nitroguaiacolate et al?

I've been trying to run something down, but all I seem to be able to find are the EU's & US EPA's studies/decisions in re: Atonik... and they all:
a) don't really talk about burn degradation products
b) all seem to conclude low/de minimis toxicity/mutagenicity/etc...

Hey Bozzy
AFAIK you won't find any references regarding burning residues of whatever substance there is (except tobacco and a few food products regarding for example deep frying). One problem is the non-defined conditions and hence a plethora of products depending on how you burn something. Nitroaromates are simply known to be more often than not inherently toxic and to result in toxic degradation products (though in truth, burning a mix of sugar and amino acids at the right temp will do the same).
Atonik by itself is IMHO 'risky' enough, burning it will likely not result in anything more dangerous other than nitric oxide and the like.
According to the data I found (mainly EPA, EMEA, EFSA etc.), plants metabolise Atonik rapidly into amino-derivatives which are less toxic but will result in the same or similar burning products.
I don't know what the plants do with the amino-derivatives; some should be metabolised further but... And this but is exactly my point: I don't like applying unknowns to my plants especially when there is an increased potential risk. The way we grow indoor plants isn't even close to any other crop there is and has seldom anything in common with farming. What's being degraded by microbes and sunlight, flushed away by rain, or metabolised by plants over the course of weeks or even months does seldom happen in a 12 week plant grown under artificial light and in hydroponics.
I simply advise against the use of Atonik (in general but especially indoors) due lacking data on one hand and an increased theoretical health hazard on the other. I like to play safe and maybe it's nothing but I guess that the gain compared to the risk justifies a voluntary ban of Atonik in our plants feeding regime... I may be a minority (a slightly paranoid one, I admit =) ) and I also advise, for similar reasons, against the use of naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA), neem oil, and a few other products. These are in common use and so far, we have not too many official reports on health incidents but this was similar with 'butter yellow' (methyl yellow) where the chemical structure alone should have risen questions regarding its safety. I really have no intention of playing my own lab rat, so to speak. I see no need to try/use stuff which probably results in a 5-10% increased yield especially when there are many (at least seemingly safe) alternatives which do the same.

 

[BigBozat]

Hey Bozzy
AFAIK you won't find any references regarding burning residues of whatever substance there is (except tobacco and a few food products regarding for example deep frying). One problem is the non-defined conditions and hence a plethora of products depending on how you burn something. Nitroaromates are simply known to be more often than not inherently toxic and to result in toxic degradation products (though in truth, burning a mix of sugar and amino acids at the right temp will do the same).
Atonik by itself is IMHO 'risky' enough, burning it will likely not result in anything more dangerous other than nitric oxide and the like.
According to the data I found (mainly EPA, EMEA, EFSA etc.), plants metabolise Atonik rapidly into amino-derivatives which are less toxic but will result in the same or similar burning products.
I don't know what the plants do with the amino-derivatives; some should be metabolised further but... And this but is exactly my point: I don't like applying unknowns to my plants especially when there is an increased potential risk. The way we grow indoor plants isn't even close to any other crop there is and has seldom anything in common with farming. What's being degraded by microbes and sunlight, flushed away by rain, or metabolised by plants over the course of weeks or even months does seldom happen in a 12 week plant grown under artificial light and in hydroponics.
I simply advise against the use of Atonik (in general but especially indoors) due lacking data on one hand and an increased theoretical health hazard on the other. I like to play safe and maybe it's nothing but I guess that the gain compared to the risk justifies a voluntary ban of Atonik in our plants feeding regime... I may be a minority (a slightly paranoid one, I admit =) ) and I also advise, for similar reasons, against the use of naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA), neem oil, and a few other products. These are in common use and so far, we have not too many official reports on health incidents but this was similar with 'butter yellow' (methyl yellow) where the chemical structure alone should have risen questions regarding its safety. I really have no intention of playing my own lab rat, so to speak. I see no need to try/use stuff which probably results in a 5-10% increased yield especially when there are many (at least seemingly safe) alternatives which do the same.

Beautiful!
Clear, succinct, balanced, informed, insightful/informative, honest...
Just what I needed to know... and exactly what I've come to expect from your posts

As always, thank you for taking the time to reply thoughtfully, sir!
And now I have to go further my chemistry education some more to better understand your points about nitroaromates...

FWIW, I tend to agree w/ you about the balance of risks & rewards... given the relatively limited upside [genetics & enviro having way more influence on yield/quality outcomes than some marginal PGR/co-factor], the potential downside - esp given the 'red flag' generally in re: nitroaromates' inherent toxicity tendency - warrants an abundance of caution.

Hi ho!

-----

Side Q:
I haven't looked back hereabouts [yet] to see if you maybe had already mentioned elsewhere, so... now I'm also wondering: Any similar kinds of reservations (or any other particular insights) in re: Harpin proteins?

 

[Organabis]

Plants produce indole 3 acid, would adding more of it to the nutrient feed be of use?

 

[mrrangz]

Plants produce indole 3 acid, would adding more of it to the nutrient feed be of use?

yes but dose dependent. more is not better.

apply to roots for root growth

foliar on top for increased vigor.

at high doses (500-1000ppm) you get stacked internodes, but thats a negative side effect IAA brings resulting in the stack.

IAA is also light sensitive.

 

[Lemon King]

Anyone still her??

 

[highsociety420]

Ok, but i think those hormone ferts would only work as a foliar. Throw then into the midium would be useless, the membrane of the root cells wont let organic molecules pass, only ions. Right?

 

[Only Ornamental]

Nope, not really .

I meant to say: there are hormones which even only work they way they're supposed to work when applied to the roots. And roots let more stuff enter than leaves.

 

[highsociety420]

Thanks for the reply, OO. But i dont get it, how would it work if it cant even get in the plant?

 

[MRsistatumbleweed]

chiming in for the read.. great thread.. cheers.

 

[Only Ornamental]

Thanks for the reply, OO. But i dont get it, how would it work if it cant even get in the plant?

It does get into the plant, that's why . Roots aren't impermeable. Though bigger molecules only enter in trace amounts, the high potency of plant hormones doesn't require huge amounts. Besides auxins for example are small, the size of amino acids, and hence enter readily. In addition to that, the surface of plant roots is large, a lot larger than the aboveground (leaf) surface. In addition to that, roots are made to take up stuff, leaves are made to keep stuff the stuff inside the plant inside and things from outside out. There's stomata as one entry way but that's like squeezing a camel through a pinhole and diffusion through the cuticle which only works for lipophilic compounds (which usually get stuck in the cuticle instead of passing through).

 

[highsociety420]

It does get into the plant, that's why . Roots aren't impermeable. Though bigger molecules only enter in trace amounts, the high potency of plant hormones doesn't require huge amounts. Besides auxins for example are small, the size of amino acids, and hence enter readily. In addition to that, the surface of plant roots is large, a lot larger than the aboveground (leaf) surface. In addition to that, roots are made to take up stuff, leaves are made to keep stuff the stuff inside the plant inside and things from outside out. There's stomata as one entry way but that's like squeezing a camel through a pinhole and diffusion through the cuticle which only works for lipophilic compounds (which usually get stuck in the cuticle instead of passing through).

I dont know, man. What i learned from my biology class is that root cell wall will only let water and the disolved ions passes thru it. Anything bigger than an ions cant...

 

[Only Ornamental]

Indoleacetic acid in solution dissociates to form the ion indoleacetate. Also, dissolved ions can be really big. Besides, what's written in a standard teaching book is just the basic rule and only applies to the majority of the cases. We're talking biology, not mathematics here.
Gotto go, TTYL

 

[highsociety420]

Indoleacetic acid in solution dissociates to form the ion indoleacetate. Also, dissolved ions can be really big. Besides, what's written in a standard teaching book is just the basic rule and only applies to the majority of the cases. We're talking biology, not mathematics here.
Gotto go, TTYL

You opened my mind bro. I had the notion from size of the ion, but i have never thought from a organic molecules size perspective. Actually molibdenium is the bigger one that plant require, right? Even bigger than the hormone ethilene. I just wouldnt imagine an organic complex molecule could be as small as a Mo ion. And i dont think this indoleacetate ion is small enough, actually it looks to have a pretty big molecular weight. But i dont know too if it can be carried in by active difussion. I dont believe much.

You look to be a very scientific kind of grower, i appreciate that bro, would be a pleasure to learn from you
And i have to study a little more too, theres a lot of things i delayed
And man i havent learned from books, i have learned from some brilliant masters