- Thread starter
- #161
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
The flower house has completely open walls. The veg house has screen walls that are open at the top. Lots of natural air flow, on a breezy day. No fans.
Cbdhemp808's Comparison Grow - HI-BISCUS SIP Bucket Vs. Nursery Pot
- Thread starter cbdhemp808
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #162
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Late last night I checked and the branch is back in business!
- Thread starter
- #163
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
I totally see what you are saying, and I'm definitely going to check the brix.
Just for clarity, what we're talking about here is the SIP plant, not the nursery POT plant. The POT plant is a good control, because it is functioning normally and well with a wet/dry cycle, and if there is a brix problem due to non-water-related issues, then the POT plant's leaves would show a similar result to the SIP plant's leaves.
So the question is, is the SIP getting too much water? That's a tricky question to answer, because a SIP is self-watering. As we have already determined, the answer probably lies in the soil composition. If the soil is holding onto the water too much, then this would be generally bad for the plant.
Let's consider what happens when both containers are "dry", i.e. they have returned to their baseline weight. If we then water the POT plant to runoff, and then measure the weight, or use a moisture probe, we'll get a high reading—i.e. there's lots of water in the soil. The same goes for the SIP plant. The POT plant's soil now enters a phase of continual drying out, over the course of 2-3 days. I think this is working perfectly well with the soil mix I'm using for this grow, because the perk rate and drainage rate are very high. With the amount of coco and perlite in the soil, I feel like there's plenty of air getting into the soil. Now, with the SIP plant, things are more complicated...
Because the SIP's reservoir is full at the beginning of the wet cycle, the soil above the reservoir takes longer to reach the end of the dry cycle, because water is wicked up from the reservoir as the roots absorb the water. So we can now ask, is the soil too wet during this extended wet period? If the answer is yes, then the SIP in general I think doesn't work. Or I should say, this SIP that I designed doesn't work—perhaps it wicks too efficiently.
I think the answer is actually, no—the soil isn't too wet. Why? Because the roots are fairly quickly cycling the water. They are consuming the water from the upper soil and driving the wicking. If there was stagnation and sluggish uptake of water, I would think differently. Nutrient uptake and water uptake go hand-in-hand. If either one isn't happening, then the "pump" shuts down.
So, these are some "macro" considerations. There may be some "micro" considerations in the composition of the soil, as we were discussing before, with the possibility there's too much carbon in the soil. I'm about to make another batch of soil today and I intend to: decrease the coco, decrease the worm castings, increase the compost soil, and increase the perlite. I'm thinking: 7 gal compost soil (high mineral/low organics), 3 gal coco, 3 gal worm castings, 3 gal perlite.
I think the definition of the wet/dry cycle, in the case of optimum soil composition is this: a spectrum that evolves over the course of 2-3 days from too wet to too dry. Every type of pot goes through this, from plastic nursery pots to fabric pots, if there is proper drainage at the bottom. SIPs also do this, except they trap the runoff in a reservoir, and the water get re-absorbed. With a SIP, the drying-out period is extended. If the soil is "too wet" during this extended drying-out period, what's the remedy? Don't fill the reservoir? That would defeat the purpose of the SIP—one may as well return to pots at that point. The only option is to wait until the container loses it's water weight before fertigating again. (This could be done with a scale or a moisture probe.)
At this point, if the brix is low, I think it will be primarily because of poor solar exposure. Plants with bigger "solar panels" will do better, which is what I'm seeing with my CBD #9 pheno vs. the two HI-BISCUS plants.It's the roof of the flower house... yeah, I need to get up there and scrub it. The veg house roof's plastic film is a bit of a nightmare to clean, but also needs cleaned. I haven't specifically noticed better growth/health after cleaning, but it's pretty much a given. The sun angle is so low right now that anything that will help increase the light is helpful, even if it's only a small increase. Right now for the flower house, the surrounding vegetation is a bigger issue than the roof.
Gee64
Well-Known Member
Once you have the water probe and the refractometer readings you will either be already good or have the data you need to make things better.I totally see what you are saying, and I'm definitely going to check the brix.
Just for clarity, what we're talking about here is the SIP plant, not the nursery POT plant. The POT plant is a good control, because it is functioning normally and well with a wet/dry cycle, and if there is a brix problem due to non-water-related issues, then the POT plant's leaves would show a similar result to the SIP plant's leaves.
So the question is, is the SIP getting too much water? That's a tricky question to answer, because a SIP is self-watering. As we have already determined, the answer probably lies in the soil composition. If the soil is holding onto the water too much, then this would be generally bad for the plant.
Let's consider what happens when both containers are "dry", i.e. they have returned to their baseline weight. If we then water the POT plant to runoff, and then measure the weight, or use a moisture probe, we'll get a high reading—i.e. there's lots of water in the soil. The same goes for the SIP plant. The POT plant's soil now enters a phase of continual drying out, over the course of 2-3 days. I think this is working perfectly well with the soil mix I'm using for this grow, because the perk rate and drainage rate are very high. With the amount of coco and perlite in the soil, I feel like there's plenty of air getting into the soil. Now, with the SIP plant, things are more complicated...
Because the SIP's reservoir is full at the beginning of the wet cycle, the soil above the reservoir takes longer to reach the end of the dry cycle, because water is wicked up from the reservoir as the roots absorb the water. So we can now ask, is the soil too wet during this extended wet period? If the answer is yes, then the SIP in general I think doesn't work. Or I should say, this SIP that I designed doesn't work—perhaps it wicks too efficiently.
I think the answer is actually, no—the soil isn't too wet. Why? Because the roots are fairly quickly cycling the water. They are consuming the water from the upper soil and driving the wicking. If there was stagnation and sluggish uptake of water, I would think differently. Nutrient uptake and water uptake go hand-in-hand. If either one isn't happening, then the "pump" shuts down.
So, these are some "macro" considerations. There may be some "micro" considerations in the composition of the soil, as we were discussing before, with the possibility there's too much carbon in the soil. I'm about to make another batch of soil today and I intend to: decrease the coco, decrease the worm castings, increase the compost soil, and increase the perlite. I'm thinking: 7 gal compost soil (high mineral/low organics), 3 gal coco, 3 gal worm castings, 3 gal perlite.
I think the definition of the wet/dry cycle, in the case of optimum soil composition is this: a spectrum that evolves over the course of 2-3 days from too wet to too dry. Every type of pot goes through this, from plastic nursery pots to fabric pots, if there is proper drainage at the bottom. SIPs also do this, except they trap the runoff in a reservoir, and the water get re-absorbed. With a SIP, the drying-out period is extended. If the soil is "too wet" during this extended drying-out period, what's the remedy? Don't fill the reservoir? That would defeat the purpose of the SIP—one may as well return to pots at that point. The only option is to wait until the container loses it's water weight before fertigating again. (This could be done with a scale or a moisture probe.)
It's the roof of the flower house... yeah, I need to get up there and scrub it. The veg house roof's plastic film is a bit of a nightmare to clean, but also needs cleaned. I haven't specifically noticed better growth/health after cleaning, but it's pretty much a given. The sun angle is so low right now that anything that will help increase the light is helpful, even if it's only a small increase. Right now for the flower house, the surrounding vegetation is a bigger issue than the roof.
Hopefully the data shows room for improvement.
- Thread starter
- #165
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
It's touch and go right now.
- Thread starter
- #166
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
I made a new batch of soil according to this recipe and the perk rate was lousy. I'll be adding 2 more gallons of coco, and then retest. Probably more perlite as well.
- Thread starter
- #167
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Thanks. Yes on the brix. I won't be testing the soil moisture unless I run out of options and that's the only thing left to look at. Reason being, I've been doing wet/dry successfully for a long time. The new twist is SIP, and I'm not sure I even want to continue with SIP. I need to do more testing with what I've got going. I have a nice looking CBD pheno in flower, in a SIP, and I have two other plants in veg, in SIPs, looking good and coming along. So I'm still collecting performance data on my SIP design, SIP + LOS, etc.
- Thread starter
- #168
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
I added 2 more gallons of coco and wasn't satisfied. So I wound up adding a total of 4 more gallons of coco and another gallon of perlite.
New recipe:
7 gal compost soil (high mineral/low organics), 7 gal coco, 3 gal worm castings, 4 gal perlite.
...basically the same as the original recipe, but 2 gal less worm castings, and more perlite.
EDIT: Actually, I should say that worm castings are 4 gal less, because the original recipe had equal parts of compost soil, coco, and worm castings.
The branch is now pau, as we say here in Hawaii... finished, kaput, bye bye.
- Thread starter
- #169
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
DAY 25 of flower
Today I top-fertigated the SIP plant to runoff. Yesterday I fertigated the POT plant to runoff.
They're chugging along. Lots of leaf spot mold. Colas are small but developing.
SIP on the left, nursery POT on the right. The plants are still very similar in development. Sorry the plants are so lost in the background.
Top cola of the SIP plant.
Top cola of the POT plant.
Leaf spot mold. Annoying but probably won't impact the harvest.
HI-BISCUS.
HI-BISCUS.
Today I top-fertigated the SIP plant to runoff. Yesterday I fertigated the POT plant to runoff.
They're chugging along. Lots of leaf spot mold. Colas are small but developing.
SIP on the left, nursery POT on the right. The plants are still very similar in development. Sorry the plants are so lost in the background.
Top cola of the SIP plant.
Top cola of the POT plant.
Leaf spot mold. Annoying but probably won't impact the harvest.
HI-BISCUS.
HI-BISCUS.
- Thread starter
- #170
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Photos added above.
- Thread starter
- #171
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
DAY 30 of flower
Today I top-fertigated both plants to runoff. There's not a lot of change since DAY 25. The flowers are starting to develop a strong scent.
EDIT: The scent is sort of like a spicey/piney cleaning fluid. The upper buds are all still showing completely white stigmas. The buds on a nursery POT plant seem to be a bit more healthy. The SIP plant's buds seem to have a bit more shriveled and slightly brown stigmas, lower down on the plant.
Today I top-fertigated both plants to runoff. There's not a lot of change since DAY 25. The flowers are starting to develop a strong scent.
EDIT: The scent is sort of like a spicey/piney cleaning fluid. The upper buds are all still showing completely white stigmas. The buds on a nursery POT plant seem to be a bit more healthy. The SIP plant's buds seem to have a bit more shriveled and slightly brown stigmas, lower down on the plant.
- Thread starter
- #172
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
DAY 31 of flower
They are really getting hit hard by the leaf spot mold. I plucked a lot of leaves today. I'm feeling like this will impact the harvest some—not because sugar leaves will be impacted, but because of general loss of leaves and photosynthesis.
This is the worst time of year to grow cannabis outdoors in my location—cloudy, rainy, and low sun angle. Vegging is doable. Flowering is another matter, at least with my current setup.
They are really getting hit hard by the leaf spot mold. I plucked a lot of leaves today. I'm feeling like this will impact the harvest some—not because sugar leaves will be impacted, but because of general loss of leaves and photosynthesis.
This is the worst time of year to grow cannabis outdoors in my location—cloudy, rainy, and low sun angle. Vegging is doable. Flowering is another matter, at least with my current setup.
Sounds like a real challenge but your plants look good all the same. Hang in there.
- Thread starter
- #174
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
DAY 35 of flower
Today is chop day. The plants look like hell, but I think I've got a bit of a harvest. I'll take some photos.
Both plants have stopped drinking... SIP and nursery pot.
For comparison, the CBD in the SIP is also getting chopped today, and has some bud rot, but hopefully isolated. This was a fairly impressive grow, considering the seasonal low sunlight, and vegetation that was blocking the greenhouse earlier in flower.
Today is chop day. The plants look like hell, but I think I've got a bit of a harvest. I'll take some photos.
Both plants have stopped drinking... SIP and nursery pot.
For comparison, the CBD in the SIP is also getting chopped today, and has some bud rot, but hopefully isolated. This was a fairly impressive grow, considering the seasonal low sunlight, and vegetation that was blocking the greenhouse earlier in flower.
- Thread starter
- #175
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Here's some shots just prior to yesterday's harvest of the HI-BISCUS in nursery pot vs. SIP.
The SIP plant had a lot more leaf spot mold, but they were both hit hard. Both plants also showed premature senescence, with lots of necrosis of sugar leaves and bracts. I pre-trimmed on site, and threw away lots of larfy lower stuff. Buds were poorly developed a loose/open, with way too much popcorn/sub-popcorn. Odor was very strong and piney. There was very little bud rot.
Canopy of the HI-BISCUS plant in the nursery pot. Overall the plant did better than the SIP plant, and produced more usable buds. In the end, the container was still heavy with water.
Canopy of the nursery pot plant.
Canopy of the HI-BISCUS plant in the SIP. In the end, the container was still heavy with water.
I pre-trimmed fan leaves and larfy lower popcorn.
In comparison, this CBD plant did fairly well, with intact leaves, much less leaf spot mold, and good cola and bud development. Buds were fat, dense, and well-spaced. Lots of completely clean buds and popcorn. In the end, the container was light weight—all water was used up.
Next I'll post some shots of the trimming.
The SIP plant had a lot more leaf spot mold, but they were both hit hard. Both plants also showed premature senescence, with lots of necrosis of sugar leaves and bracts. I pre-trimmed on site, and threw away lots of larfy lower stuff. Buds were poorly developed a loose/open, with way too much popcorn/sub-popcorn. Odor was very strong and piney. There was very little bud rot.
Canopy of the HI-BISCUS plant in the nursery pot. Overall the plant did better than the SIP plant, and produced more usable buds. In the end, the container was still heavy with water.
Canopy of the nursery pot plant.
Canopy of the HI-BISCUS plant in the SIP. In the end, the container was still heavy with water.
I pre-trimmed fan leaves and larfy lower popcorn.
In comparison, this CBD plant did fairly well, with intact leaves, much less leaf spot mold, and good cola and bud development. Buds were fat, dense, and well-spaced. Lots of completely clean buds and popcorn. In the end, the container was light weight—all water was used up.
Next I'll post some shots of the trimming.
- Thread starter
- #176
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Here's some shots from last night's trimming of the HI-BISCUS buds.
Total usable buds from the nursery pot plant.
Total usable buds from the SIP plant.
For comparison, total usable buds from the CBD plant in a SIP, harvested at the same time.
Final trimmed buds, nursery pot plant.
Final trimmed buds, SIP plant.
HI-BISCUS trichomes.
HI-BISCUS trichomes.
Total usable buds from the nursery pot plant.
Total usable buds from the SIP plant.
For comparison, total usable buds from the CBD plant in a SIP, harvested at the same time.
Final trimmed buds, nursery pot plant.
Final trimmed buds, SIP plant.
HI-BISCUS trichomes.
HI-BISCUS trichomes.
- Thread starter
- #177
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Well, that was a very interesting experience, growing these two identical HI-BISCUS clones, one in a nursery pot and one in my DIY SIP design. I learned a lot of things, with some great input from everyone who tagged along on this one. Thank you!
Here's some of my observations...
Obviously, the SIP did not outperform the pot—the opposite happened. Why? That's a good question. I'll address that below, but first I've got to say that this wasn't a great time of year to do this test, because of the low sun angle, plus rain and cloudy skies. On top of this, my flowering greenhouse roof was dirty, and on top of that the vegetation around the greenhouse was blocking the sun. I think these things impacted the SIP performance, and I also think that my HI-BISCUS pheno is a fairly fragile and finicky plant. In contrast, my CBD#9 pheno was flowered at the same time, in the same type of SIP, with the same soil, and did light years better than the HI-BISCUS. It's just a way more robust and vigorous plant, and may be genetically more adapted to lower sunlight conditions. For sure, it was better foliated than the HI-BISCUS—i.e. bigger "solar panels" and more of them. It makes sense that indica-dominant genetics would do better, because it originates from the northern latitudes. HI-BISCUS, on the other hand, is a fairly balanced 50/50 hybrid, which means it has a lot of sativa genetics. Sativas like lots of sun. I may try HI-BISCUS again in the spring, in the SIP.
Ideas on why the SIP didn't perform well...
1) The soil was probably too wet in the SIP, too much of the time. My HI-BISCUS pheno isn't very robust and vigorous, so it didn't consume the available water and ferts rapidly enough. It's very telling that the grow came to an abrupt end, with necrosis setting in, and a heavy, water-laden container. (Curiously, the same thing happened with the nursery pot plant.)
2) Sunlight. Sunlight and lots of it equates to a healthy plant, with high brix (sugar content in the leaves). I'm convinced that for a SIP to function properly, you need to have lots of light.
3) I am using living organic soil (LOS), high in coco coir and worm castings. In order for this kind of medium to work well in a SIP, water cannot stagnate in the soil—it must drain and be used up by the roots, which requires aeration. When there is sufficient soil aeration, the microbes are able to "serve up" the available organic nutrients to the roots. Without this, feeding is interrupted, and with that, the energy to absorb water is also shut down. If this happens, plant growth is stunted and deficiencies will appear.
These are the main factors for the SIP. My SIP design, with its 3 domes, provides a large wicking area, and it seems that works against the need to keep the soil well aerated for the LOS to work well. I observed that when I top-fertigated to runoff, the reservoir level would drop over the next days, with water wicking upward as needed. This means the soil doesn't arrives at a dry point as with a wet/dry cycle of a normal pot. Whereas a non-LOS medium fertilized with synthetics would work in this scenario, LOS doesn't work (so well).
One decision that I made during this comparison grow may not have been the right move. I decided that top fertigation was better than using the fill tube. The opposite may have been better, i.e. to use the tube only, starting in mid to late veg when the root mass reaches a size where water consumption really picks up. I think this would keep the soil more aerated, by slowing down the wicking, since more (dry) soil would be available to soak up what gets wicked up. By using the tube only, and not top-fertigating, this would allow better management of water added to the system. With top-fertigation, I was watering to runoff, meaning not only was the soil saturated, but the reservoir was also filled. By mid to late flower, this was probably a very bad move. Instead, I should have allowed a drying out period, followed then by fertigation down the tube, with sensitively to observed consumption of the reservoir fert-water.
Then again, we can see that the nursery pot plant didn't really do that much better than the SIP plant, meaning that even with the normal wet/dry cycle, the outcome was still poor. To me, this probably means low sunlight was the primary culprit, not soil water content or the fact that I was using LOS in the SIP. If this grow had been done in the middle of summer, I expect overall both plants would have done way better; however, for the SIP to outperform the nursery pot in this scenario, I suspect that soil water content would need to be tweaked.
I have decided for now to keep using the SIP for my grow, and keep testing it and tweaking it. I also want to continue using my high-coco LOS. So, I will need to resolve the wet soil issue one way or another. I had the idea of using a membrane between the reservoir (top of domes) and the soil above. This would be a circular piece of fabric weed cloth—water and air permeable—that would slow the wicking action considerably, while at the same time allowing roots to reach the reservoir.
Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion where I'll do a postmortem SIP root reveal!
Here's some of my observations...
Obviously, the SIP did not outperform the pot—the opposite happened. Why? That's a good question. I'll address that below, but first I've got to say that this wasn't a great time of year to do this test, because of the low sun angle, plus rain and cloudy skies. On top of this, my flowering greenhouse roof was dirty, and on top of that the vegetation around the greenhouse was blocking the sun. I think these things impacted the SIP performance, and I also think that my HI-BISCUS pheno is a fairly fragile and finicky plant. In contrast, my CBD#9 pheno was flowered at the same time, in the same type of SIP, with the same soil, and did light years better than the HI-BISCUS. It's just a way more robust and vigorous plant, and may be genetically more adapted to lower sunlight conditions. For sure, it was better foliated than the HI-BISCUS—i.e. bigger "solar panels" and more of them. It makes sense that indica-dominant genetics would do better, because it originates from the northern latitudes. HI-BISCUS, on the other hand, is a fairly balanced 50/50 hybrid, which means it has a lot of sativa genetics. Sativas like lots of sun. I may try HI-BISCUS again in the spring, in the SIP.
Ideas on why the SIP didn't perform well...
1) The soil was probably too wet in the SIP, too much of the time. My HI-BISCUS pheno isn't very robust and vigorous, so it didn't consume the available water and ferts rapidly enough. It's very telling that the grow came to an abrupt end, with necrosis setting in, and a heavy, water-laden container. (Curiously, the same thing happened with the nursery pot plant.)
2) Sunlight. Sunlight and lots of it equates to a healthy plant, with high brix (sugar content in the leaves). I'm convinced that for a SIP to function properly, you need to have lots of light.
3) I am using living organic soil (LOS), high in coco coir and worm castings. In order for this kind of medium to work well in a SIP, water cannot stagnate in the soil—it must drain and be used up by the roots, which requires aeration. When there is sufficient soil aeration, the microbes are able to "serve up" the available organic nutrients to the roots. Without this, feeding is interrupted, and with that, the energy to absorb water is also shut down. If this happens, plant growth is stunted and deficiencies will appear.
These are the main factors for the SIP. My SIP design, with its 3 domes, provides a large wicking area, and it seems that works against the need to keep the soil well aerated for the LOS to work well. I observed that when I top-fertigated to runoff, the reservoir level would drop over the next days, with water wicking upward as needed. This means the soil doesn't arrives at a dry point as with a wet/dry cycle of a normal pot. Whereas a non-LOS medium fertilized with synthetics would work in this scenario, LOS doesn't work (so well).
One decision that I made during this comparison grow may not have been the right move. I decided that top fertigation was better than using the fill tube. The opposite may have been better, i.e. to use the tube only, starting in mid to late veg when the root mass reaches a size where water consumption really picks up. I think this would keep the soil more aerated, by slowing down the wicking, since more (dry) soil would be available to soak up what gets wicked up. By using the tube only, and not top-fertigating, this would allow better management of water added to the system. With top-fertigation, I was watering to runoff, meaning not only was the soil saturated, but the reservoir was also filled. By mid to late flower, this was probably a very bad move. Instead, I should have allowed a drying out period, followed then by fertigation down the tube, with sensitively to observed consumption of the reservoir fert-water.
Then again, we can see that the nursery pot plant didn't really do that much better than the SIP plant, meaning that even with the normal wet/dry cycle, the outcome was still poor. To me, this probably means low sunlight was the primary culprit, not soil water content or the fact that I was using LOS in the SIP. If this grow had been done in the middle of summer, I expect overall both plants would have done way better; however, for the SIP to outperform the nursery pot in this scenario, I suspect that soil water content would need to be tweaked.
I have decided for now to keep using the SIP for my grow, and keep testing it and tweaking it. I also want to continue using my high-coco LOS. So, I will need to resolve the wet soil issue one way or another. I had the idea of using a membrane between the reservoir (top of domes) and the soil above. This would be a circular piece of fabric weed cloth—water and air permeable—that would slow the wicking action considerably, while at the same time allowing roots to reach the reservoir.
Stay tuned for the exciting conclusion where I'll do a postmortem SIP root reveal!
I found with my LOS that if I top water, the extra roots seem to act as wicks and starve roots for o2. My best SIP grows have been rez only. The issue with that is brix if that's important to you. Mine make around 9 rez only and appear very healthy and robust. Not 15 or 17 though.
- Thread starter
- #179
cbdhemp808
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that. Is that indoor or outdoor?
Indoors and in earthBoxes with solid plastic mulch tops.