G
Guest 18340
mullray has a point, this is not the thread to promote Maxibloom.
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
The myth, of the high P myth?
- Thread starter epicseeds
- Start date
lol...my apologies guys, it was very ignorant of me indeed!
I came off wrong with the KISScumbag, was trying to be funny but have terrible sense of humor.
Let the research continue, I will do more of my own, and again, my apologies
I came off wrong with the KISScumbag, was trying to be funny but have terrible sense of humor.
Let the research continue, I will do more of my own, and again, my apologies
dgr
Member
Another great thread I need to subscribe to.
Here's the Maxibloom work up. Not really a low P result
[edit: 7 g/gal]
Nitrogen 92
Phosphorus 121
Potassium 215
Magnesium 65
Sulfur 74
Calcium 92
Here is 4 maxigro and 1 maxibloom. Looks like not a bad way to move towards using dry salts and low P. Works out to 3:1:3.85
Nitrogen 119
Phosphorus 40
Potassium 154
Magnesium 30
Sulfur 69
Calcium 77
Here is 4 gro, 1 bloom, 2 DM silica and 2 calmag+ which seem to be popular additives. I like this break down because it puts in numbers that Cal-mag doesn't seem like a great solution to provide magnesium. Epsom salts look like the better solution to achieve needed magnesium once you have your nitrogen in place.
Nitrogen 129
Phosphorus 40
Potassium 162
Magnesium 37
Sulfur 42
Calcium 94
Here's the Maxibloom work up. Not really a low P result
[edit: 7 g/gal]
Nitrogen 92
Phosphorus 121
Potassium 215
Magnesium 65
Sulfur 74
Calcium 92
Here is 4 maxigro and 1 maxibloom. Looks like not a bad way to move towards using dry salts and low P. Works out to 3:1:3.85
Nitrogen 119
Phosphorus 40
Potassium 154
Magnesium 30
Sulfur 69
Calcium 77
Here is 4 gro, 1 bloom, 2 DM silica and 2 calmag+ which seem to be popular additives. I like this break down because it puts in numbers that Cal-mag doesn't seem like a great solution to provide magnesium. Epsom salts look like the better solution to achieve needed magnesium once you have your nitrogen in place.
Nitrogen 129
Phosphorus 40
Potassium 162
Magnesium 37
Sulfur 42
Calcium 94
Y
YosemiteSam
24 ppm P
24 ppm P
Pakistani Chitral Kush. From seed...never been over 24 ppm P.
24 ppm P
Pakistani Chitral Kush. From seed...never been over 24 ppm P.
the_extremist
Member
I was looking for a simple mix for coir to hit ideal low P numbers in a bottled product and came up with this using Botanicare. Using cannastats for elemental ppm.
10ml/gal CalMag+, 10ml/gal PBP Hydro Bloom, 1.5g of MgSO4/gal
N----P---K---Ca--Mg-S
115-40-126-116-71-47
What do you guys think? Seems simple enough, two bottles and a bag of epsom salt. Plus PBP brings a bit of humic to the table, which I like.
10ml/gal CalMag+, 10ml/gal PBP Hydro Bloom, 1.5g of MgSO4/gal
N----P---K---Ca--Mg-S
115-40-126-116-71-47
What do you guys think? Seems simple enough, two bottles and a bag of epsom salt. Plus PBP brings a bit of humic to the table, which I like.
T
thefatman
That's true but telling someone the dilution and the original concentration and the ppm of each nutrient at that 100x concentration clearly shows the ppm of each nutrient. My initial dilution shows my dilution rate and therefore the ppm.. After that initial filling of the dtw nutrient reservoir an auto water top off system maintains the original nutrient water level. An EC maintains the EC based on the EC established when the reservoir is originally filled. I have keep my reservoir level within an inch of the beginning heights at all time as the reservoirs gravity feed to the air atomization nozzles. Any large change of height of the nutrient level above the nozzles alters the sprayed droplet size and the quantity sprayed. I use gravity feed along with solenoid valves instead of siphon feed as the gravity feed allows for better adjustment of the droplet size and quantity sprayed.
Before I started hp Aero and air atomized aero I do not think many people if any were bothering to calculate ppms as is typically done on this site. Actually this is the only forum site I have seen that bothers to calculate ppms in the manner done on this site. However I must admit this forum sites method does seems like a good way to more accurately share nutrient use data with others. Is this method used through out this sites forum or only in the nutrient section?
However, with my growing methods I know that continuously my plants are constantly receiving the same nutrient ppms as intended as I grow drain to waste. Even using this sites method of stating what ppm of nutrients you are supplying it would still just be an unsure measurement or calculation of what the plants are actually receiving when growing with soil or other absorbent media or with a recirculating reservoir. In theory it is a logical approach to trying to share with others the nutrients you are supplying conceptually. With growing methods other than aeroponic media less dtw it still is not a true method of actually stating what your plants are actually receiving beyond the initial application or origianal mixing with a recirculating system so actually the whole methodolgy is sorta moot.
dgr
Member
True enough. However, we do get to see what "works" and take that beyond the base commercial nutrients that poster "X" has used. Someone can post what they use, 100 or 1000 people can use it and post back their results. With having delivered PPM, we can break down that recipe into base salts or alternative nutrient lines and, at least, have a starting point. Without that, everyone would be running 100:100:200.
More importantly, they know the PPMs/ratios that work in a system they are likely to use. HP aero is cutting edge; or at least, not as well represented here as most other methods of fertigation. So, to play the devil's advocate, I don't care what thefatman runs in his aero system. It doesn't apply to my reality. Of course, I'm interested in what the people on here that seem to have a technical grasp on nutrient profiles have to say but I hope you see the point.
I think that anyone that looks beyond 5 ml of super duper w33d b8ron enhancer per gallon will find enough information to realize that plants uptake nutrients at different rates and thus deplete the nutrients from the system at different rates.. Therefore, we have to "best guess" what the nutrient solution is going to contain after it's first cycle through the system. Or even what is going to be provided to the plant by the nutrient solution + what is still in the media from the last delivery. This will change on each delivery to the plants if 1) the plants are being fed a recirculating sol'n or 2) There is any sort of absorbent media or pooling capacity in the system. Short of spending a lot of $$$ on analysis of each and every delivery cycle, having a known working ratio seems like a pretty good starting place. PPM of ingredients seems like the most basic and universal way to pass that information around. IOW, I don't care if you use 5ml of AN bongalicious. I care what PPMs you provided because I'm not going to use AN. If the only information I have is 5ml of bongalicious and I can't convert that value to my goals, the information is useless to me.
T
thefatman
True enough would have sufficed: Ditto I do not care what you dgr run for a system if it is not a drain to waste media less system but I do not mind you posting what you do so as to help others benefit from your experience, however without your saying what type of system your using the information means very little.
Or as I already mentioned one can just post the guaranteed analysis of the product at a designated concentration (such as 100x) and inform others of the dilution factor and if they are interested they can use a little basic math and calculate on their own the ppm strength of the diluted nutrient preparation instead of expecting someone else to do their work for them.
It is a matter of simply a matter of learning a important aspect of growing rather than simply copying the work of others and learning nothing in the process but how to benefit from the work of others. I do not mind teaching as that is what a forum should be about not just bragging and giving information for others to copy. Besides when it seems all anyone is doing is simply punching the data into an online calculator I fail to see the importance of someone doing the work for them.
Or as I already mentioned one can just post the guaranteed analysis of the product at a designated concentration (such as 100x) and inform others of the dilution factor and if they are interested they can use a little basic math and calculate on their own the ppm strength of the diluted nutrient preparation instead of expecting someone else to do their work for them.
It is a matter of simply a matter of learning a important aspect of growing rather than simply copying the work of others and learning nothing in the process but how to benefit from the work of others. I do not mind teaching as that is what a forum should be about not just bragging and giving information for others to copy. Besides when it seems all anyone is doing is simply punching the data into an online calculator I fail to see the importance of someone doing the work for them.
T
thefatman
Sure look good to me. Look healthier then the many sorry high P plants typically seen in the Forums.
T
thefatman
I prefer potassium Sulfate to kick up the potassium beyond that supplied by the Monopotassium Phosphate but some growers fear high sulfate levels. I use less Monopotassium sulfate so as to lower the phosphorus. If mixing your own fertilizer for use in soil and Coco I would instead use langbeinite (K2SO4•2MgSO4, 22% K2O + 18% MgO + 22% S also known as potassium magnesium sulfate or double sulfate of potassium and magnesium, and commercially as K-Mag® or Sul-Po-Mag®), which is commonly used in organic agriculture. They are water soluble. Although in the US they are not as widely available as Potassium Sulfate.
Fatman, I use Sul-Po-Mag, but for an odd reason it doesn't increase my E.C. levels at all when added to my reservoir. I did buy it off ebay, so maybe I got something entirely different.
Does anyone think I got taken?
They look great. Ive vegged beautiful plants at 19 ppm P, and finished it all the way through flower, but soil test results came back on the low end of P, and had visible symptoms late in flowering. Do you plan to up it any during flowering?
Would anyone care to share with me what they feed their plants the last 2-3 weeks of flowering? Ive been doing lots of EC checks of the media throughout flowering, and flushed when appropriate, and now my ladies are clearly eating much less now when fed at a constant rate of 150 ppm N via Blumats for the last 5 days. Ive reduced strength of feed down to 50 ppm N, but still supplementing extra P & K for now.
New floral growth has waned to very little, and calyxes are swelling and pistils turning brown/shriveling. During profuse growth, I was feeding at up to 200 ppm N to stave off an N deficiency.
The most likely reason for EC of the media to raise so much is either too much N or K. Should I cut both in half, or cut N, and maintain high K levels?
Anyone have any thoughts?
Thanks.
New floral growth has waned to very little, and calyxes are swelling and pistils turning brown/shriveling. During profuse growth, I was feeding at up to 200 ppm N to stave off an N deficiency.
The most likely reason for EC of the media to raise so much is either too much N or K. Should I cut both in half, or cut N, and maintain high K levels?
Anyone have any thoughts?
Thanks.
Attachments
dgr
Member
fatman,
Is the highlighted a typo? I think you're saying to cut MPK and replace the potassium via Potassium Sulfate. Regarding Sulfates, what do you think would be the upper limit on high CEC media such as soil or coco?
thank you
These post caught my attention when I was reviewing the thread and reminded me when I first called a commercial fertilizer chemist. Right at beginning of talking ratios, he said to consider N=100ppm. With that as a constant, it was easier to mentally do many of the calcs and percentages when changing things up. So the next guy I talk to at a different company, I say "so, we assume N=100ppm?" He's like WTF, why would we do that? Point being, the industry itself doesn't seem to have a standard. But by listing the calculated ppms, it seems to keep everyone here on the same page. Adding what salt it is derived from is a great help too. Anyone can then use the results as they see fit for their app. I appreciate all the education.
T
thefatman
Yes it is a typo it should have been written as monopotassium phosphate.
The acceptable range is quiet broad at about 20 to 250 ppm in 100x concentration. As a high CEC media attracts cations not anions sulfur would be easily leached so high levels can be used. Therefore one needs to consider the amount of water typically held in the media and whether the media is water to the point of water drainage with each watering. Also you must consider that sulfur lowers the pH. All in all their are more issues with low sulfur than high sulfur.
I am not a grower that uses soil or Coco media so I am not the best person to be giving advice about just how much sulfute it takes to cause problems in a Coco grow. It has been over 25 years since I have grown with soil and I have never bothered to use Coco as it did not become widely used before I switched to hydroponics using only inert non absorbing media.
I can say I use sulfate levels of up to about 45 ppm after dilution in HP and air atomized aero without any negative effects. That is about twice the ppm of my magnesium.
Potassium Sulfate is about 25 percent higher in sulfate than Magnesium Sulfate. i.e. 18% versus 13%.
I normally do not include magnesium sulfate in my formulations as I use Magnesium Nitrate to boost my nitrogen so that supplies adequate magnesium I also use ammonium sulfate in many of my formulations to supply the sulfate as I limit my calcium nitrate usage to keep my calcium lower than if using calcium nitrate as my major source of nitrogen.
T
thefatman
You were quiet lucky to get a commercial fertilizer chemist (what ever that is) to give you any usable information. Most formulators of nutrients are not chemists but are instead horticulturalists. My bachelors degree in chemistry is really not of much use when it comes to formulating nutrients other than to calculate the likely pH and EC of a concentrated nutrient formula after it is diluted and I seldom do that but instead most often depend on software to do the calculations.
There are many different approaches by retail industry officials depending on whether they are making suggestion based upon mixed concentrated liquid nutrients for small users or for large users. Most do not suggest that small users mix there own nutrients so they typically base there suggestions upon commercially available premixed nutrients so many just make dilution suggestions or EC suggestions based upon the guaranteed analysis and concentration of the liquid fertilizer you choose to purchase. Most do not explain the why of their recommendations.
Large users of liquid nutrients generally mix their nutrients in house and are not apt to share any information with others. I have never tlked to a commercial fertilizers chemist that was employed my a fertilzer nutrient manufacturer that has ever supplied much useful information.
I stick to talking to university researchers and professors as most advances in nutrient knowledge comes from university research not from hack chemists such as are hired by manufacturers of bottled nutrients such as AN. University staff generally love to talk to interested parties that are not employed by nutrient manufacturers. Most research is paid for my the feds not commercial enterprises so discussing the research with interested members of the public is not often restricted.
The last industry official I talked to about recommended ppms of nitrogen stated 100 to 450 ppm. Not of much help.
YS. FYI re calcium and coco - On the subject of calcium and coco requiring more due to Ca lock in the media.This explains why your experiments are getting better as you increase Ca.
Cucumber Cultivation in Energy-Saving Hydroponic System Using Coconut Coir as Growing Media
Author; URAYAMA HISASHI (Nihonkokusaikyoryokuse Tsukubashisho) MATTHEWS LORATO J. (Nootigedacht Adc, Ermelo, Zaf) COETZEE VINAL J. (Dept. Agriculture, Zaf) YAMASHITA TADAAKI (Japan International Cooperation Agency, JPN)
Coconut coir, an organic fiber, is readily available in tropical areas as a medium to replace rockwool for vegetable cultivation. We investigated the productivity of cucumber and compared the changes in the nutrient concentrations of coconut coir and rockwool used as growth media. Higher yields (16%) with a higher proportion of marketable fruits were obtained in cucumber plants grown in the coconut coir medium. The concentrations of nitrate, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus increased in both media during the growing period. Potassium and phosphorus concentrations in coconut coir were two and eight times higher than those in rockwool. The electrical conductivity, potassium and phosphorus concentrations in coconut coir increased 2.3, 4 and 17 times, respectively compared with those in the nutrient culture solution, while the calcium concentration decreased by one-fifth in the coconut coir medium. The amount of exchangeable calcium was also reduced by more than half in the coconut coir medium through exposure to the nutrient solution. These results suggest that calcium ion was immobilized in coconut coir.
Re Phosphorous and Potassium and other
COCONUT COIR WASTE, A NEW AND VIABLE ECOLOGICALLY-FRIENDLY PEAT SUBSTITUTE
Authors: P. Noguera, M. Abad, V. Noguera, R. Puchades, A. Maquieira
Keywords: Cocos nucifera L., coir waste, containerised plants, growing media, sustainable agriculture, waste reclamation
Abstract:
Selected physical and chemical properties of thirteen coconut coir wastes (pith plus short-to medium-length fibres) commercially produced in six countries from Africa, America and Asia, were evaluated as growing media or growing media constituents for containerised plants. Coir waste was evaluated as a lightweight material and showed a high total porosity, over 94 % (vol). It exhibited a very high air content together with fairly low easily-available water. Total water-holding capacity in coir waste was lower than peat. pH was slightly acidic and salinity varied between 0.4 and 6.0 dS m-1. Cation exchange capacity ranged from 32 to 95 m.e./100 g and C/N ratios averaged 117. Coir waste contained more lignin and cellulose, but less hemicellulose when compared with peat. The amount of naturally-occurring available nutrients was low, especially mineral nitrogen, calcium and magnesium. On the other hand, indigenous phosphorus and potassium contents in coir waste were extremely high. Remarkable differences were observed between sources with respect to physical and chemical properties. Two individual coir waste samples from Mexico and Sri Lanka were manipulated in order to prepare suitable coir waste-based container media for growing Calendula officinalis and Coleus blumei. The removal of excess salts by controlled leaching did not improve plant growth and development in comparison with unleached coir waste. No N immobilisation was found in coir waste-based media with a conventional fertilisation programme. As a consequence of the particular chemical properties of coir waste, nutritional regimes may need to be adjusted on a crop-by-crop basis. The two plant species tested grew equally well or better in the best coir waste media than in the control mix composed of 3:1 (vol:vol) Sphagnum peat and vermiculite.
Analysis of a very good quality flushed and buffered coir.
COLOUR : BROWN
TEXTURE : COCO
pH(1:5 Water) 5.6
pH(1:5 0.01M CaCl2) 5
Electrical Conductivity EC μS/cm 774
TOTAL SOLUBLE SALT TSS ppm 2554.2
AVAILABLE CALCIUM Ca ppm 7216
AVAILABLE MAGNESIUM Mg ppm 818.4
AVAILABLE SODIUM Na ppm 568.1
AVAILABLE NITROGEN N ppm 1.8
AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS P ppm 12.2
AVAILABLE POTASSIUM K ppm 1068.6
AVAILABLE SULPHUR S ppm 4.9
So if you were using 24ppm of P in solution with this product you would have 36.2ppm of P.
http://www.nutrifield.com.au/mediums/nf-coco-premium-bags/
BTW - each coir sample even from the same provider changes with respect to P and K levels. The above sample is actually very low in P - I have seen samples way higher.
Go well guys. Great talking to you all
Cucumber Cultivation in Energy-Saving Hydroponic System Using Coconut Coir as Growing Media
Author; URAYAMA HISASHI (Nihonkokusaikyoryokuse Tsukubashisho) MATTHEWS LORATO J. (Nootigedacht Adc, Ermelo, Zaf) COETZEE VINAL J. (Dept. Agriculture, Zaf) YAMASHITA TADAAKI (Japan International Cooperation Agency, JPN)
Coconut coir, an organic fiber, is readily available in tropical areas as a medium to replace rockwool for vegetable cultivation. We investigated the productivity of cucumber and compared the changes in the nutrient concentrations of coconut coir and rockwool used as growth media. Higher yields (16%) with a higher proportion of marketable fruits were obtained in cucumber plants grown in the coconut coir medium. The concentrations of nitrate, potassium, magnesium and phosphorus increased in both media during the growing period. Potassium and phosphorus concentrations in coconut coir were two and eight times higher than those in rockwool. The electrical conductivity, potassium and phosphorus concentrations in coconut coir increased 2.3, 4 and 17 times, respectively compared with those in the nutrient culture solution, while the calcium concentration decreased by one-fifth in the coconut coir medium. The amount of exchangeable calcium was also reduced by more than half in the coconut coir medium through exposure to the nutrient solution. These results suggest that calcium ion was immobilized in coconut coir.
Re Phosphorous and Potassium and other
COCONUT COIR WASTE, A NEW AND VIABLE ECOLOGICALLY-FRIENDLY PEAT SUBSTITUTE
Authors: P. Noguera, M. Abad, V. Noguera, R. Puchades, A. Maquieira
Keywords: Cocos nucifera L., coir waste, containerised plants, growing media, sustainable agriculture, waste reclamation
Abstract:
Selected physical and chemical properties of thirteen coconut coir wastes (pith plus short-to medium-length fibres) commercially produced in six countries from Africa, America and Asia, were evaluated as growing media or growing media constituents for containerised plants. Coir waste was evaluated as a lightweight material and showed a high total porosity, over 94 % (vol). It exhibited a very high air content together with fairly low easily-available water. Total water-holding capacity in coir waste was lower than peat. pH was slightly acidic and salinity varied between 0.4 and 6.0 dS m-1. Cation exchange capacity ranged from 32 to 95 m.e./100 g and C/N ratios averaged 117. Coir waste contained more lignin and cellulose, but less hemicellulose when compared with peat. The amount of naturally-occurring available nutrients was low, especially mineral nitrogen, calcium and magnesium. On the other hand, indigenous phosphorus and potassium contents in coir waste were extremely high. Remarkable differences were observed between sources with respect to physical and chemical properties. Two individual coir waste samples from Mexico and Sri Lanka were manipulated in order to prepare suitable coir waste-based container media for growing Calendula officinalis and Coleus blumei. The removal of excess salts by controlled leaching did not improve plant growth and development in comparison with unleached coir waste. No N immobilisation was found in coir waste-based media with a conventional fertilisation programme. As a consequence of the particular chemical properties of coir waste, nutritional regimes may need to be adjusted on a crop-by-crop basis. The two plant species tested grew equally well or better in the best coir waste media than in the control mix composed of 3:1 (vol:vol) Sphagnum peat and vermiculite.
Analysis of a very good quality flushed and buffered coir.
COLOUR : BROWN
TEXTURE : COCO
pH(1:5 Water) 5.6
pH(1:5 0.01M CaCl2) 5
Electrical Conductivity EC μS/cm 774
TOTAL SOLUBLE SALT TSS ppm 2554.2
AVAILABLE CALCIUM Ca ppm 7216
AVAILABLE MAGNESIUM Mg ppm 818.4
AVAILABLE SODIUM Na ppm 568.1
AVAILABLE NITROGEN N ppm 1.8
AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS P ppm 12.2
AVAILABLE POTASSIUM K ppm 1068.6
AVAILABLE SULPHUR S ppm 4.9
So if you were using 24ppm of P in solution with this product you would have 36.2ppm of P.
http://www.nutrifield.com.au/mediums/nf-coco-premium-bags/
BTW - each coir sample even from the same provider changes with respect to P and K levels. The above sample is actually very low in P - I have seen samples way higher.
Go well guys. Great talking to you all
Y
YosemiteSam
That looks pretty good to me. A K boost in flower may be an improvement. Also the Mg looks a little high...I would drop it down to 60 or so but that is easy enough given you are using epsom.
Maybe consider adding a little K sulfate for flower...bump your K and S some. http://customhydronutrients.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=1_46
Or possibly consider some K Silicate.
