University of Guelph paper- Flushing is a myth!

[MedFaced]

lol those links I provided describe how nitrogen is washed out of tobacco because it as a combustible mineral adds to combustion which lowers quality of smoking experience

Sure did! But you left out the part where they say the amount of K present assists in purging the N.

The additional studies you provided also go into detail about what elements improve/ruin smoke flavor. For example, certain amounts of P and K might be considered desirable while N is not.

None of them make the claim that Tobacco tastes better because someone flushed it.

 

[Weird]

Sure did! But you left out the part where they say the amount of K present assists in purging the N.

The additional studies you provided also go into detail about what elements improve/ruin smoke flavor. For example, certain amounts of P and K might be considered desirable while N is not.

None of them make the claim that Tobacco tastes better because someone flushed it.

the concept of flushing is to do just that if those trials weren't successful that simply implies they did not replicate a mechanism that achieves the desired results

many farmers here have you can see the difference of nitrogen store in the tissue

arguing someone else's trial versus real life experience is unproductive

if you have something beneficial to add other than doubt have at it

 

[BongFu]

Weird I have to say that using tobacco studies is perhaps flawed. One needs to realize that they long added saltpeter (K Nitrate) to tobacco to help cigarettes stay alight. Other chemicals they add (or did add - perhaps they have banned this process now ??) are ammonium and diammonium phosphate.


So while the tobacco research is saying N is the problem (reduce it with K application) they then add N as NO3 N (and other chemical fertilizers) in manufacturing cigarettes.


Fun read on "crack nicotine" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2424107/

 

[BongFu]

https://catawba.ces.ncsu.edu/2018/11/hemp-production-keeping-thc-levels-low/

We don’t have solid data on the causes of THC spikes but here are some considerations. While excess nitrogen is often blamed for THC spikes, Dr. Angela Post, NC State University Small Grains Specialist, disagrees with this. In one research trial that Dr. Post conducted, nitrogen was applied at rates of 50, 100, 150, 200, 250, and 300 lbs per acre. While there was no advantage at putting out more than 100 lbs of nitrogen per acre there was no spike in THC. In fact, from just this first year of preliminary data, Dr. Post did not see any relationship between nitrogen and THC or CBD. In fact, Dr. Post wonders if nitrogen deficiencies could result in plant stress, thus causing a THC spike. From just this first year of data the nitrogen recommendation would be 100 lbs of N per acre. However, Dr. Edminsten cautions that this is just one season of data. If he were growing hemp right now he would lean towards a higher nitrogen rate (120 lb/N per acre).

Good post. Actually perhaps of some interest to those who want to read the Guelph "paper" is that the actual study was far broader than just flushing. One significant finding was that THC and CBD percentages could be increased through carefully controlled drought stress which also resulted in absolutely no yield losses. I've seen some here say that yield quantity and yield quality are mutually exclusive - strongly disagree and so does the science (now we actually have science in cannabis research - amen to that!).

 

[dank.frank]

November 2011. First post I can find where I specifically openly discuss my method of introducing a drought before harvest.

Thank goodness we have scientists!

Fully amended organic soil, water only during cycle.

I simply STOP watering for 4-5 days before chop...

In a thread about improving taste and potency during post processing, of all things. Imagine that. Guess what else? Weird was there then too, trying to talk common sense and experience over dollars and degrees.



dank.Frank

 

[BongFu]

Oh I thought you priomised to disappear and stop trolling me BTW the fact that you pick a fight, hurl insults and then run off to mods and snitch doesn't surprise me. That said, link to your thread and yes mate hippies in the sixties understood stress increased potency. What science does though is test this theory and arrive at conclusions. Practice often drives science and vice versa. Further, it helps better understand things. So for example hippies in the sixties understood stress increased potency only they also lost massive amounts of yield because often the increased potency came from their plants being brutalized by pests or subjected to horrendous droughts - perhaps where the myth of yield and quality are mutually exclusive comes from. The problem with myths is that they get circulated as fact resulting in widespread stupidity (e.g. anti vaxxers).

 

[TychoMonolyth]

I believe flushing only deprives the plant of nitrogen. It's possible that this would create a little stress, but honestly, I think the extra water would create more stress than the lack of N. Grower have long been know to create stress, but not with the intention of increasing THC, but to make it more convenient to harvest. Take Colombian Gold as an example. Growers would ring the plant at the bottom, let them die and dry to a good point while standing. The sun would bleach the plant and the buds would turn gold. Did the stress make the THC increase? It's possible, but I don't think it would be measurable. I don't believe it would make or force the plant to finish faster. Again, it's possible, but not in that case. Death would be too quick.

There are other methods growers have used to try to stress the plants into giving it one last push for both THC and to speed finishing. I think you can speed it up, but by how much? A week? And would that make a difference? I'm talking about stem splitting here. Maybe if you did it 2-3 weeks before you harvest.

From another site: (I think this would have the same effect as flushing)
"This procedure has the effect of disturbing the upward flow of sap in the plant. This does not kill the plant, but it does mean that fewer nutrients and water are carried to the buds. As a result of this the vegetative growth is halted, in place of which the glands now secrete extra THC to prevent stronger dehydration."

Apparently it originated in Asia, but I doubt it.



I love experimenting on a hunch or to confirm or disprove a myth. I have a spare plant I can try stem splitting this year. I grew sibling Swazi last year, so I'll see how it plays out.

This is the outdoor target.

Just a side note: Relating to ringing Colombian Gold. Last year I forgot about bud (~1/2 lb) sitting on a screen on my deck. It was in the blazing sun, had dried, re-hydrated in the rain and dried a few more times. By the time I remembered it, it had turned the most beautiful golden color. I was in full harvest mode and in a rush so I just dumped it overboard. I should have kept a couple buds to test.

 

[Gauss]

So has anyone picked up on the difference between real-world experience and laboratory experiments, because that's literally all it takes to figure this out for yourselves. Nobody here cares how smart you guys think you are, your capacity for being wrong is still immense and you should be aware of that if you're so keen. I can laboratory test race gas to see how much horsepower it'll put down, but that doesn't mean by computing that alone I can calculate 0-60 times at Laguna Seca on a perfect day OR a 60F day with a fat rider and half bald tires.

 

[BongFu]

So has anyone picked up on the difference between real-world experience and laboratory experiments, because that's literally all it takes to figure this out for yourselves. Nobody here cares how smart you guys think you are, your capacity for being wrong is still immense and you should be aware of that if you're so keen. I can laboratory test race gas to see how much horsepower it'll put down, but that doesn't mean by computing that alone I can calculate 0-60 times at Laguna Seca on a perfect day OR a 60F day with a fat rider and half bald tires.

Have you read the research? It was real world (conducted in green houses by trained and qualified Ag experts with multiple crops)and not conducted in a lab. What the lab did was look at what occurs in the leaf tissue only after the real world growing trials.

 

[Gauss]

Sure, but it's not the paper's fault that laypeople misinterpret it and draw false conclusions. It's more fair to to say that the interpretation of readers* is bunk. I have to add that your statements are very loaded. The onus is now on you to show how the part about flushing is shoddy science. The things we all want to know are simply not being published yet.

* most of the people talking about this probably haven't even read the entire thing

I agree with the first part. Although I accept no burden of proof by encouraging people to enlighten themselves. Plants ain't gonna die if I don't help anyone on this. If you feel like it's a red herring then it's no fur off my beaver. I put the work in because I wanted to know for myself, I don't have a trumped-up paper for people to wave around like it's a lotto ticket for the perfect grow in any case.

 

[Gauss]

Have you read the research? It was real world (conducted in green houses by trained and qualified Ag experts with multiple crops)and not conducted in a lab. What the lab did was look at what occurs in the leaf tissue only after the real world growing trials.

Yea, the part where they got high from it by smoking it. The reason we grow and literally where all of my statements reside.

 

[BongFu]

lol yeah people on drugs come to some odd conclusions for sure, hence why so many myths abound

 

[TychoMonolyth]

So has anyone picked up on the difference between real-world experience and laboratory experiments, because that's literally all it takes to figure this out for yourselves. Nobody here cares how smart you guys think you are, your capacity for being wrong is still immense and you should be aware of that if you're so keen. I can laboratory test race gas to see how much horsepower it'll put down, but that doesn't mean by computing that alone I can calculate 0-60 times at Laguna Seca on a perfect day OR a 60F day with a fat rider and half bald tires.

Ah but you can make the same fuel over and over. That's a pretty simple test. The affect on 2 different plants (even clones) via stress? That's hard. Especially for a non scientist grower. And why spend $500 on a test only to satisfy your curiosity hunch when all you want to do is smoke it? A visual inspection and side by side smoke test is good enough. And to be honest, if I can take a dozen pictures of each plant, and if I see more trichomes, that's good enough for me. Some people would even do a smoke test (I'm not a qualified toker. lol). And that's good too.

Typically, the more trichomes, the better. And from a sales perspective, a normal trichome bud gets me $800, and one loaded with crystals gets you $2400 (like a burmese I saw last year). As a non smoker, and for many people, that's what's important.

We're visual people and great flower is what we're after, and like a great rocket fuel, the fun is in using it.

 

[Lost in a SOG]

This paper details some of the mechanics of plant turgor regulation and responses to stress. It suggests sugars, K, and amino acids would get flushed from cells most if they are used by the plants to maintain pressure.

Flowers under pressure: ins and outs of turgor regulation in development

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4204789/

truth is science still cant design a probe that can measure inside a cell. The pressure inside a cell is greater than a car tire. Heavy meats..

 

[TychoMonolyth]

Nice find.

 

[Lost in a SOG]

We need to dig into the science a bit or its all just anecdotal and opinion.. i like both, one informs the other.. left and right brained thought and all that.

I keep also thinking that the effect of the flushing might be born out more in the curing decarb/isomerisation process.

Anyway what is "best" for us all to decide on is far too subjective as we all have slightly different taste buds, neurochemistry and lifestyles but if we at least get to the biology of what is going on in the plant we can be informed.

I have noticed more harm than good in any alive organic or soiless based system i have ever grown in so it would suggest to me at the very least that stress is more to do with the stochastic changing the microbiome relationship than anything, destabilising to some extent the plants (and its trillions of helpers) turgor control and charge potential.

Maybe you could argue this greater saturation happens naturally into autumn anyway in some places as the suns evaporation/transpiration ability drops off but i dont know how true that is for afghanistan, south america, asia or various parts of africa etc etc where our landraces and hashplants came from as their weather is very different to temperate climes.

 

[MedFaced]

the concept of flushing is to do just that if those trials weren't successful that simply implies they did not replicate a mechanism that achieves the desired results

many farmers here have you can see the difference of nitrogen store in the tissue

arguing someone else's trial versus real life experience is unproductive

if you have something beneficial to add other than doubt have at it

Ok. I’ll word it another way. The articles you’re posting, support the thesis paper. Everything you’ve posted states that certain elements like P and K don’t just flush/leech away—FLUSHING is MYTH.

Flushing removes simple N like Nitrates but the Cations are trapped in the soil and water won’t remove them.

I hope this brings you clarity.

 

[pinkus]

LOL. So much conformation bias from so many directions.

 

[Weird]

Ok. I’ll word it another way. The articles you’re posting, support the thesis paper. Everything you’ve posted states that certain elements like P and K don’t just flush/leech away—FLUSHING is MYTH.

Flushing removes simple N like Nitrates't but the Cations are trapped in the soil and water won’t remove them.

I hope this brings you clarity.

except plants employ translocation of minerals according to need and cues such as mineral needs at to complete maturation

if you don't know how to get your plant to feed off of its own stores in such a way it effects mineral composition that is on you

to claim this phenomenon does not exists or that simply plants can't be "manipulated" to do so through lighter feeding regiments or cues to organic mechanism then you are simply proving ignorance

if you are asking for exhaustive scientific studies on a newly legalized plant you are also ignorant

if you have nothing beneficial to add you are trolling

 

[Weird]

for those too inept to google

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4429656/

Leaf mineral nutrient remobilization during leaf senescence and modulation by nutrient deficiency

I can't fathom a "professional" from a "professional" agricultural industry being this ignorant and inept