Why is my unflushed plant turning yellow and dying?

[maryjohn]

mj would you agree though that in organic gardening its bad practice to grow anything in too rich a soil as it just leads to soft sappy growth that has less disease resistance and tends to be much more attractibe to pests....

did you look at the link i posted ?

V.

I agree Verdant, absolutely, and without reservation, with your statement above. But I edited out the last sentence, because that one I can't say i agree because it isn't clear. Did you mean using the right amount of nutrition for the plant, or using the right amount of nutrition for the microbes? My system is after all closed off from the world, and I need to fill in for the extractive process that brings nutrients from below up the surface, and the process that pulls others from the air. Had I a large container to grow in, I would probably feed it in a corner well away from the plants even as the plants grow. That's making a deposit, and the plant lives off the interest, not the principal. This may be heresy, but I find that a correct application of miracle grow - intended to provide raw materials to microbes - is organic gardening, whereas applying manure directly to fields or containers - with the intention of directly feeding plants - is conventional gardening. I don't want to admit that too loud, and can say it now because only the organic community is reading this now. Organic soil to me is not about materials, it's about systems.

But it is very hard to make soil too rich when you depend on nutrient cycling instead of vertebrate defecation, which is an exception in nature anyway. Deer seem to poop on game trails. Walk through the woods, and you don't see a piece of poop by every plant. If i have enough inert, and a good texture, I can't possibly have too much nutrient cycling. Now if communication with the microherd is a reality, it makes it even more difficult for bad things to happen.

I've seen it mentioned that a way to force lots of N to be released would be to brew compost tea for a very long while to create a protozoan monoculture, which would release soluble N in great amounts as the little buggers eat the even smaller buggers (phagocytosis - er, not that there's anything wrong with that). Which brings me back to this: if you want to really know the balance in your soil, microscopy is far more informative than spectrography. I don't have a microscope. Yet. So I go buy smell, taste, touch, and history.

Er... didn't read the link yet. I'm fucking around on the board ATM.

 

[jmansweed]

I agree Verdant, absolutely, and without reservation, with your statement above. But I edited out the last sentence, because that one I can't say i agree because it isn't clear. Did you mean using the right amount of nutrition for the plant, or using the right amount of nutrition for the microbes? My system is after all closed off from the world, and I need to fill in for the extractive process that brings nutrients from below up the surface, and the process that pulls others from the air. Had I a large container to grow in, I would probably feed it in a corner well away from the plants even as the plants grow. That's making a deposit, and the plant lives off the interest, not the principal. This may be heresy, but I find that a correct application of miracle grow - intended to provide raw materials to microbes - is organic gardening, whereas applying manure directly to fields or containers - with the intention of directly feeding plants - is conventional gardening. I don't want to admit that too loud, and can say it now because only the organic community is reading this now. Organic soil to me is not about materials, it's about systems."



I completely understand your point of the process of the soil food web and promoting that system can be viewed as organic farming. Clearly however, and maybe I'm stating the obvious, Miracle grow has no place in a 100% organic grow - even if the microbes eventually preform in a similar manner.

Conventional gardening - IMHO can still be viewed organically. It's clear that some of us grow the plant and some grow the soil, the organic factor however, should be viewed more from an ingrediant stand point. Although the practice of true organic agriculture is not adhered to, we can't tell some one who grows w/ no synthetics, chemicals, GMO's pests, plant growth regulators etc that their methods are not organic. They may not adhere to the traditional practices but do make it a priority to omit anything non-organic typically resulting in healthier, high quality product.

 

[maryjohn]

doh! we are into semantics now.

I like semantics too, but could we revive Vonforne's thread on the word organic instead of discussing it here? He did a really good job and it's worth reviving.


To answer your other question, there is a moral case to be made against miracle grow and other destructive products with externalized costs (everybody pays). That's why I didn't say it too loud. I'd rather see conventional farming with less harmful inputs rather than more harmful. On the other hand, in midwest dairy country here in the US, tremendous harm is being inflicted on the environment (and the water table) using exclusively organic means. Too many cows, too many shitpiles, too many carcasses. The chesapeake is being choked by chicken shit (sorry, had to say it). Manure is not innocuous, and the surface of this planet can only support so much in one place. Moreover, we now have impervious surfaces that concentrate runoff. It's the death of a thousand cuts.

There are no absolutes. It is entirely possible to do less harm with synthetic pesticides and more harm with organic pollution. That's why nutrient cycling is now being taught in schools dealing with agronomy. Before only biologists studying natural systems really thought about it.

 

[Hundred Gram Oz]

I haven't read this thread, but are your roots ok? Have you checked them? Is your medium soggy or drying out as it should be?
HGO

 

[jmansweed]

Point well taken Maryjohn - I agree that bio-dynamics is the way to go but couldn't leave the Miracle grow comment alone. I'll check Vonfornes thread out.

 

[VerdantGreen]

I haven't read this thread, but are your roots ok? Have you checked them? Is your medium soggy or drying out as it should be?
HGO

and the moral of that story is: always read the thread before posting

mj - yes, perhaps i should have said enough N for the microbes so as they can provide enough N for my plants. did someone mention semantics

---

perhaps encouraging the plant to use the nutes stored in it's leaves towards the end of the grow has no bearing on natural senescence, but either way, it achieves a similar result - so if both are happening then its all good as far as i'm concerned.

V.

 

[maryjohn]

not just semantics verdant!

added advantage of what I call soil parsimony. free lunches make for weak plants, as you say.

 

[jaykush]

free lunches make for weak plants, as you say.

i always saw it the other way around, weak plants make good lunches....for pests.

 

[maryjohn]

how about "free lunches make for weak plants that are free lunches"?

 

[Hundred Gram Oz]

and the moral of that story is: always read the thread before posting

mj - yes, perhaps i should have said enough N for the microbes so as they can provide enough N for my plants. did someone mention semantics

---

perhaps encouraging the plant to use the nutes stored in it's leaves towards the end of the grow has no bearing on natural senescence, but either way, it achieves a similar result - so if both are happening then its all good as far as i'm concerned.

V.

Yeah I'm too lazy so what was his problem (still too lazy)
HGO

 

[MrFista]

Natural senescence switches off and turns on hundreds of genes. All the activity in the leaves is part of senescence. Breaking down things for reuse including N and P in the leaves is naturally occuring senescence.

The plant is in control of this process, not us. We can screw with it with hormones, and yes we can try starve the plant out, otherwise it's all naturally occuring processes.

 

[ScrubNinja]

Stoned, in nature all annuals and biennials die after reproducing (or attempting to reproduce).

Hello mj, in response to the above: here (northern oz) the longer sativas will go into a natural reveg and start "afresh" next season. We have 2 longest days of the year or some wierd shit, I don't understand it much. I tried reading wiki so I could sound smart but it confused me more. See what I mean? But I thought it worth mentioning.

 

[maryjohn]

Damn! One should never make absolute statements! Doh! Don't I look stupid now! Well, not stupid, just ignorant really.

I have to admit, all my knowledge of this plant comes from temperate conditions. Cannabis Sativa is tropical, no? Is it a perennial? In regions close to the equator, does the distinction even apply? My jungle knowledge is slim, tell us more scrub.

this is neat...

 

[VerdantGreen]

ive seen pics of mj trees that are years old. often pure sativas are harvested multiple times in 2 or 3 different windows throughout the season.

mj your example of mazar is pretty much at the opposite end of the weed spectrum (which incidentally is a very colourful spectrum ) so senescence may be a bit more cut and dried with that strain. most of the stuff we grow however is somewhere inbetween.

V.

 

[Microbeman]

Damn! One should never make absolute statements! Doh! Don't I look stupid now! Well, not stupid, just ignorant really.

I have to admit, all my knowledge of this plant comes from temperate conditions. Cannabis Sativa is tropical, no? Is it a perennial? In regions close to the equator, does the distinction even apply? My jungle knowledge is slim, tell us more scrub.

this is neat...

i'm on the road and can only use one hand on this computer so please forgive the lower case. in my understanding a pure sativa which is evolved in equatorial regions is not triggered by photoperiod but flowers according to slight shifts in light spectrum along with some other unknowns or hypotheticals. it does normally still die and is an annual. i have not heard of what scrubninja mentioned but am interested. perhaps it is in bi-annual evolutionary process; perhaps from hybrid confusion/evolution.

 

[Microbeman]

ive seen pics of mj trees that are years old. often pure sativas are harvested multiple times in 2 or 3 different windows throughout the season.

mj your example of mazar is pretty much at the opposite end of the weed spectrum (which incidentally is a very colourful spectrum ) so senescence may be a bit more cut and dried with that strain. most of the stuff we grow however is somewhere inbetween.

V.

v; i've indeed had these trees but they require indica genes [i think] and except for very stressful gene shifting re-vegetation proceedures, they are in extented vegetation. i suppose the sativas you mention just continue to flower extensively throughout the season and perhaps someone has discovered a way to manipulate this in sativa. the best sativa i ever had came from the oaxaca valley.

 

[VerdantGreen]

hi mm im not totally sure but i think that age is an important factor for flowering in sativas and so if the plant is left in the ground the frost wont kill it and it will grow again the following season.

(im not talking about trees as in the method of growing, im talking about trees as in proper trees )

V.

 

[jaykush]

ive had thai's that went from flowering, to a veg/flower, then back to starting over. the old buds would be on the plant all ripened while new fresh buds would be growing. but it was a very rare trait. and hard to keep with my breeding efforts. the thais i have now dont do it.

 

[jmansweed]

I read an interesting report as I've been buried in this senescence/anual info for a few days now. As latitude and altitude increase the number and proportion of annual plants decreases. Simply put, this is because the length of season does not provide enough energy to grow rapid seed development insuring reproduction. The opposite seems to occur as well. Decreasing latitude and elevation we see an increase in annual and biennual plants. Many crops, like a large amount of the vege's we grow are actually biannuals that we simply harvest early or grow in an area that promotes early senescence.

In regards to Marijuana, it is clearly a annual, it flowers once naturally and although we can promote a second bloom, in nature, w/ no influence it will die. It's structure also represents your typical annual structure and growth habits clearly fall into this catagory. Annual and Biennials are closely related. Biennials many times, will practice the annual process and visa-versa. Climate, daylight hours, hormones and our influences all promote or delay senescence. Although there are many natural processes we must respect with this plant I believe we are only begining to realize the potencial of our actions and/or schedules we force upon this cannabis.

 

[MrFista]

The parents/grandparents of all my strains are landrace that live for years and years. Each year a harvest, then reveg in the ground. Next year even bigger plants till they resemble small trees. This only works in the frost free far north. Down south it's an annual, and rarely finishes in time for winter.

The strain is called dum dum. We do not know the origins just it's been here for over 20 years. Every seed female, herms at base late in season when large crop of seedless flowers already available. Given up trying to interest breeders in this they got their heads up their ass when they hear the word hermaphrodite.