Slownickel lounge, pull up a chair. CEC interpretation

[Hermen_eutics]

I have been thinking about a pack of Sin Mints, Have you ran those before or this is the first?

1 year ago:








​

 

[bsgospel]

I've run into a "Chem 4" a couple times around town that hated being directly in the light. We ran them on the periphery of squads and the weight was better every time. Actually finished up/faded decently but I would have run them to 9/beyond if I could have. Got a legit Jack that I have to pull at 8 every time (that's fucking sick.)

 

[slownickel]

Mix looks fairly good just looking at numbers without calculations. You need more P and your going to be in need of some more K. Nice work Herman!

I have been thinking about a pack of Sin Mints, Have you ran those before or this is the first?

Why do you think he is going to need more K?

 

[growingcrazy]

Why do you think he is going to need more K?

That soil is still under 4% K. I would give it 2-3 weeks and K deficiency will be visible, or is it already?

I haven't found a strain that enjoys less than ~4.5%k, even with balanced feeds.

My theory on why... In this instance K is the only thing that would limit growth in his mix. Finding the proper starting level of K for optimum root growth and overall plant vigor is the goal. Coming up short will be evident quite quickly.

Would you say that K is at a good level? Do you have any field soils that you are working with that high of Ca ppm?

Jidoka, that scrog is packed. You sure do like your chems...
My photo contribution from Mystics thread. A BubbaDub @ 36. EC might have been pushed this run...

 

[slownickel]

That soil is still under 4% K. I would give it 2-3 weeks and K deficiency will be visible, or is it already?

I haven't found a strain that enjoys less than ~4.5%k, even with balanced feeds.

My theory on why... In this instance K is the only thing that would limit growth in his mix. Finding the proper starting level of K for optimum root growth and overall plant vigor is the goal. Coming up short will be evident quite quickly.

Would you say that K is at a good level? Do you have any field soils that you are working with that high of Ca ppm?

Jidoka, that scrog is packed. You sure do like your chems...
My photo contribution from Mystics thread. A BubbaDub @ 36. EC might have been pushed this run...

View Image

That Ca number isn't real. Look at the sulfur in the same sample. He got a mouthful of gypsum in that sample. Happens alot.

Can't just run the numbers without looking at the bigger picture.

 

[led05]

That Ca number isn't real. Look at the sulfur in the same sample. He got a mouthful of gypsum in that sample. Happens alot.

Can't just run the numbers without looking at the bigger picture.

this post should be read over and over again... !

 

[led05]

That soil is still under 4% K. I would give it 2-3 weeks and K deficiency will be visible, or is it already?

I haven't found a strain that enjoys less than ~4.5%k, even with balanced feeds.

My theory on why... In this instance K is the only thing that would limit growth in his mix. Finding the proper starting level of K for optimum root growth and overall plant vigor is the goal. Coming up short will be evident quite quickly.

Would you say that K is at a good level? Do you have any field soils that you are working with that high of Ca ppm?

Jidoka, that scrog is packed. You sure do like your chems...
My photo contribution from Mystics thread. A BubbaDub @ 36. EC might have been pushed this run...

View Image

your photo shows the minor K def I like to skate the thin line with in flower, especially earlier on - again, most of what I play with flowers 3-4 months or longer, so a little diff than those running 7-8 week strains pushed very hard... agreed photo in pic is pushed too hard IMO, N too high I'd say

 

[EasyGoing]

View attachment 449291

So real deal certified chem 4. This is the shame of commercial grows in Denver. This is the same age as the last one. That last one 9 weeks, this one 11, ain’t gonna happen.

But in the proper hands at 11 weeks straight up knocks your dick in the dirt. They will mix it with the white to get it down to 9 weeks...and water it the fuck down

Makes me a little sick I admit

Just send her this way, I promise to flower her for 11 weeks every time.

 

[growingcrazy]

That Ca number isn't real. Look at the sulfur in the same sample. He got a mouthful of gypsum in that sample. Happens alot.

Can't just run the numbers without looking at the bigger picture.

What happens when it is real?

Does the Sample from my bed posted a few days ago have a "handful" of gypsum in the sample? If it does then the gypsum found its way back to itself for a congregation after being mixed.

Field soil, I agree. In a mix it isn't as likely. Unless the mixing was done half assed. I have pulled multiple samples to confirm my thoughts. I understand where your coming from though. I can't speak for herman and what he used and how he mixed. Just from my experiences.

Slow, can you go through the 3 photos herman posted and tell us what you see?

 

[Hermen_eutics]

That Ca number isn't real. Look at the sulfur in the same sample. He got a mouthful of gypsum in that sample. Happens alot.

Can't just run the numbers without looking at the bigger picture.

Im finding it improbable that i pulled samples from gypsum rich veins in the soil on both occasions

That soil was measured 2x. In first analysis the S number is 5k+. Next measurement, 5-6 weeks later is close to 3900. While it was the same batch of soil it wasn't the same pot.

In post #4045 growingcrazy's m3 S value is 9115.

 

[growingcrazy]

your photo shows the minor K def I like to skate the thin line with in flower, especially earlier on - again, most of what I play with flowers 3-4 months or longer, so a little diff than those running 7-8 week strains pushed very hard... agreed photo in pic is pushed too hard IMO, N too high I'd say

I am also a fan of being on the edge of K at the start of flowering. This is why I know that 4% isn't going to fly.

We knew the N was to much. Still riding a 1.9EC. This will be a "good" run for a first in this bed... I have plants ranging from heavy indica to sativa, all in the same bed, same nutrition. Not too bad...

 

[growingcrazy]

Im finding it improbable that i pulled samples from gypsum rich veins in the soil on both occasions

That soil was measured 2x. In first analysis the S number is 5k+. Next measurement, 5-6 weeks later is close to 3900. While it was the same batch of soil it wasn't the same pot.

In post #4045 growingcrazy's m3 S value is 9115.

 

[led05]

I am also a fan of being on the edge of K at the start of flowering. This is why I know that 4% isn't going to fly.

We knew the N was to much. Still riding a 1.9EC. This will be a "good" run for a first in this bed... I have plants ranging from heavy indica to sativa, all in the same bed, same nutrition. Not to bad...

it's fun running many strains, more difficult but if for personal, only way to do it.... Add a handful of different species all with the same mix and it becomes even more fun to try and make everything happy without too much effort - balance beam

we have our third Neaster in past 15 or so days coming.... Another foot or two on it's way, plus the wrap around lake effect, awesome.... meanwhile in the unheated GH, BokChoy, Spinach, Onions, Carrots, Lettuce, Beets are up and are racing along for what little sun we're getting. Love this time of year

 

[PaulieWaulie]

I am also a fan of being on the edge of K at the start of flowering. This is why I know that 4% isn't going to fly.

We knew the N was to much. Still riding a 1.9EC. This will be a "good" run for a first in this bed... I have plants ranging from heavy indica to sativa, all in the same bed, same nutrition. Not too bad...

Just been following along this thread the last few days, just wondering, how do you measure the ec of your soil?

 

[growingcrazy]

I use 2 methods.

1. An EC meter with probe. A Hannah like Jidoka pictured, field scout or something similar. The PET2000 from Germany was going to be the next one I tested but I am over trying to get one.

2. I like the old 1:2 (soil:water) method as a means to log information. I use a simple Hannah EC nutrient meter for these. I take a TDS and EC reading and just log them. Seeing if they correlate to direct probe results and how those numbers impact plant growth.

The only meters I own are pH, EC (soil and water) TDS and brix.

Procedure is that of soil sampling...same depth each time, the operator is the unknown in the equation.

Hope that answers your questions paulie!

 

[EasyGoing]

That Ca number isn't real. Look at the sulfur in the same sample. He got a mouthful of gypsum in that sample. Happens alot.

Can't just run the numbers without looking at the bigger picture.

This is something this thread needs to explore. I always error on the side of Slown Being right, however I have now tried a handful of tests without getting high S readings, yet it has proved to be impossible. I believe the answer might be, we actually have that high of S levels in the soil.

My last test, I didn't add gypsum for 1 month before harvest, and watered heavy from there out. This was my dep beds, and it was HOT. So lots of water since that last gypsum feed. Then before I took new soil samples, I tilled the bed heavy, and irrigated heavy. I still ended up with redonk S levels.

 

[EasyGoing]

I use 2 methods.

1. An EC meter with probe. A Hannah like Jidoka pictured, field scout or something similar. The PET2000 from Germany was going to be the next one I tested but I am over trying to get one.

That company really has some useless employees huh? Lazy, entitled pieces of crap. I love the meter, but wow they were pieces of work.

 

[jidoka]

An easy way to tell on the gypsum is do the math backwards. Calculate the cec from the ppms. If that is way high something be wrong

 

[Hermen_eutics]

This is something this thread needs to explore. I always error on the side of Slown Being right, however I have now tried a handful of tests without getting high S readings, yet it has proved to be impossible. I believe the answer might be, we actually have that high of S levels in the soil.

My last test, I didn't add gypsum for 1 month before harvest, and watered heavy from there out. This was my dep beds, and it was HOT. So lots of water since that last gypsum feed. Then before I took new soil samples, I tilled the bed heavy, and irrigated heavy. I still ended up with redonk S levels.

Im wondering same. There was no gypsum interventions in my soil since Oct-Nov. The reading of ~3900 was after 2 months of resting and moderate flushing and close to 4 months of no gypsum application.

 

[growingcrazy]

This is something this thread needs to explore. I always error on the side of Slown Being right, however I have now tried a handful of tests without getting high S readings, yet it has proved to be impossible. I believe the answer might be, we actually have that high of S levels in the soil.

My last test, I didn't add gypsum for 1 month before harvest, and watered heavy from there out. This was my dep beds, and it was HOT. So lots of water since that last gypsum feed. Then before I took new soil samples, I tilled the bed heavy, and irrigated heavy. I still ended up with redonk S levels.

The S is real. I take samples being very systematic. No way I am pulling a handful of gypsum from each core sample. Not happenin...

That company really has some useless employees huh? Lazy, entitled pieces of crap. I love the meter, but wow they were pieces of work.

Sad isn't it? They must have the market cornered somewhere.