CoffeeShopSeeds Sponsored Grow: Emmie’s Huge 1 Month Interval Constant Harvest

[Emilya Green]

I think that I am going to temporarily break the SIP on these new seedlings. I am going to physically lift the 7g containers out of there and place a 6mil plastic layer down between the wick foot and the grow bag. I can always restart the wick later on by removing the barrier and top watering to runoff.

These plants look like every overwatered plant that I have ever advised on. Here are two examples of what overwatering looks like

 

[Emilya Green]

I did a little rearranging of the lights and for now have retired the Mars SP-3000 so that I can put my NextLight 420h in over Veg Room #1. With careful leveling of the light at the 2' level above the soil,

and centering the planters under that light, we now have a fairly even spread of 28k LUX at each side, and in the middle where the runty plants are at the moment, we have about 40k LUX at the plant level. The light is set to about 50% and already is showing itself to have a superior spread than the previous skinny light. We will see what the plants think about it after a day or so.

The SIPs still have not been broken, but I have not watered again either. The most waterlogged looking plant is looking better, so I am going to leave things be for now.

Trying another strategy to catch the smallest plants up with the biggest, I did give a small feeding of @GeoFlora Nutrients VEG to that one plant, just to see if we can see an obvious difference after doing so. The new plant in the solo cup will get its first feeding as soon as the seedling needs to be watered again.

The biggest plant suddenly is expanding its trunk size and now is twice the size of the rest of them. I suspect that it has just figured out how to optimize the SIP system, and now is ready to grow with some added zest.

Here are the rest, not wanting to leave anyone out

 

[HashGirl]

Good morning, Emilya.

As you know, I'm trying to implement a perpetual grow, too. The 18th of every month is dedicated to putting 4 new seeds in water and moving the plants at the end second month of veg to 12/12.

What I want to know is how long do you give your new seeds to take? What is your process if they don't germinate and how does it affect your timetable?

 

[Emilya Green]

Good morning, Emilya.

As you know, I'm trying to implement a perpetual grow, too. The 18th of every month is dedicated to putting 4 new seeds in water and moving the plants at the end second month of veg to 12/12.

What I want to know is how long do you give your new seeds to take? What is your process if they don't germinate and how does it affect your timetable?

The germination process is the one stage in this that always gets messed up and adds extra time to the grows. It's especially worse if I grow regulars and have to sort out later where the males and females are.

All seeds are different depending on where they came from, like out of my jar in the fridge, or bonus seeds giving away with some expensive seeds. The expensive seeds are usually right up in a couple of days and we have to dedicate less than a week to the germination process. Bonus seeds sometimes never come up as well as some of them out of my jar in the fridge, so I'm very flexible at this stage. I found that I've gotten so far off schedule with my purple kush/dynomico experiment that I probably missed a month or more of turnaround time during this year of trying to be a perpetual grow. The key word to perpetual seems to be, flexibility.

 

[Emilya Green]

I have also had to hurry up my process is just a little bit after I learned that Missouri laws consider any plant showing pistils as a blooming plant, so the idea of vegging for 2 months actually now adds to my Bloom count. This totally changes things since the first three weeks or so can be considered early veg but then 4 to 5 weeks is the end of veg, maybe 6 weeks, but that's pushing it. My limiting factor seems to be the 12 plants that I'm allowed to have in bloom.

 

[Emilya Green]

I moved my nursery into the room with the MEGA because of its wider light distribution. The plants are all starting to take off now, but still looking like they are overwatered. I still have not broken the SIP, wanting instead to see how the plants resolve this on their own. I have every bit of confidence that my newest and smallest one in the solo cup, is going to catch up with these SIP inhabitants. Tonight, a few shots around the room to show the huge difference between the lead and lagging plants.

 

[Azimuth]

I still have not broken the SIP, wanting instead to see how the plants resolve this on their own. I

What is it that you mean when you say you haven't broken the SIP?

 

[Emilya Green]

What is it that you mean when you say you haven't broken the SIP?

I was considering lifting the 7g containers off of the wick feet and putting a piece of plastic between until the plants established themselves.

 

[Azimuth]

Oh yeah, I forgot that your set-up wasn't integrated.

 

[ReservoirDog]

Great play-by-play. Thank you for the discussion regarding local law and the difficulties that present when minding these important details. Even the most conscientious growers will be struggling with keeping things between the lines at times, and considering the early stage many legal growers are at, I feel discussion will be very helpful in many different ways. Let some light in!

Regarding SIPs I've found the size of the wick, ie its surface area on both sides of the gap but more importantly its overall volume, to be the most consistent structural factor impacting the constant overall moisture level. (reservoir fullness matters a great deal but falls into the 'situational' category)

I notice that you are using a 7 gallon pot with a perforated-pipe wicking foot with a 6 inch diameter and, at this stage anyway, you are wishing to reduce moisture level.

My, otherwise very similar, 27 gal tubby-SIPs utilise 10gal pots (w/ peat/perlite) and a perf-pipe wick of 4 inches diameter. If anything, in my case, I would welcome slightly more moisture.

I know that my larger pot volume matters, but I'm quite sure from experimental experience that wick volume is the greater contributing factor in moisture level measured over time. A large pot will moisten slower from dead-dry when first built, but, when the evaporative factor kicks in and everything is in gear and moving, wick volume determines the incoming flow factor, regardless of pot size, and therefore regulates the consistent moisture level reached.

Unless a pot is at field capacity from top to bottom, which they obviously aren't, then there is always opportunity for the wick to add more water and it will carry on doing so. Plant use and evaporation over time have to be considered against the wick's in-flow capacity, yes, but there is a point where the wick is just too efficient. I believe wick volume is the best, most consistent metric for this, and pot-size variability can be discounted to a greater degree.

Your mature plants appear very happy with the large wicking foot. The search for perfection, it appears, goes on!

I have over 20 experimental quicky-builds that have never seen a plant, I merely watch the moisture levels, time them, and make other semi-ridiculous observations. I've found that while the overall pot/planter volume is important, the wick volume is especially impactful and has a more regulatory impact on overall moisture levels using common planter sizes from 7 to 27 gallons both soft and hard - over meaningful time periods.

I confess it's been so difficult not to snicker every time I say, "optimal wick volume", that I haven't properly worked out the physics - so I can't give you a 'proper theory', just a consistent observation. But those, and my best regards, I share freely!

 

[Emsrighthand]

I moved my nursery into the room with the MEGA because of its wider light distribution. The plants are all starting to take off now, but still looking like they are overwatered. I still have not broken the SIP, wanting instead to see how the plants resolve this on their own. I have every bit of confidence that my newest and smallest one in the solo cup, is going to catch up with these SIP inhabitants. Tonight, a few shots around the room to show the huge difference between the lead and lagging plants.

I have to say, these pictures do absolutely no justice. Compared to actually seeing them in person last night. Have to say they look amazing!

 

[Emilya Green]

Great play-by-play. Thank you for the discussion regarding local law and the difficulties that present when minding these important details. Even the most conscientious growers will be struggling with keeping things between the lines at times, and considering the early stage many legal growers are at, I feel discussion will be very helpful in many different ways. Let some light in!

Regarding SIPs I've found the size of the wick, ie its surface area on both sides of the gap but more importantly its overall volume, to be the most consistent structural factor impacting the constant overall moisture level. (reservoir fullness matters a great deal but falls into the 'situational' category)

I notice that you are using a 7 gallon pot with a perforated-pipe wicking foot with a 6 inch diameter and, at this stage anyway, you are wishing to reduce moisture level.

My, otherwise very similar, 27 gal tubby-SIPs utilise 10gal pots (w/ peat/perlite) and a perf-pipe wick of 4 inches diameter. If anything, in my case, I would welcome slightly more moisture.

I know that my larger pot volume matters, but I'm quite sure from experimental experience that wick volume is the greater contributing factor in moisture level measured over time. A large pot will moisten slower from dead-dry when first built, but, when the evaporative factor kicks in and everything is in gear and moving, wick volume determines the incoming flow factor, regardless of pot size, and therefore regulates the consistent moisture level reached.

Unless a pot is at field capacity from top to bottom, which they obviously aren't, then there is always opportunity for the wick to add more water and it will carry on doing so. Plant use and evaporation over time have to be considered against the wick's in-flow capacity, yes, but there is a point where the wick is just too efficient. I believe wick volume is the best, most consistent metric for this, and pot-size variability can be discounted to a greater degree.

Your mature plants appear very happy with the large wicking foot. The search for perfection, it appears, goes on!

I have over 20 experimental quicky-builds that have never seen a plant, I merely watch the moisture levels, time them, and make other semi-ridiculous observations. I've found that while the overall pot/planter volume is important, the wick volume is especially impactful and has a more regulatory impact on overall moisture levels using common planter sizes from 7 to 27 gallons both soft and hard - over meaningful time periods.

I confess it's been so difficult not to snicker every time I say, "optimal wick volume", that I haven't properly worked out the physics - so I can't give you a 'proper theory', just a consistent observation. But those, and my best regards, I share freely!

I have reasoned that it has a lot to do with the square inch area of the top of the foot. With these 6" pipes it is 47 square inches of surface area showing to the soil above, with it sticking up into my special layer of wicking soil about an inch or so. With the grow bag sitting on top of that layer of wicking soil to complete the wicking transfer into the bag, this large foot seems to be perfect for a 7 gallon, but would surely be too much for a 5 gallon. To use a smaller grow bag, I would use a 4" diameter foot.

We also have to consider what the lower bed of soil I have put on my floor is doing to help in the moisture transfer. If I had sat my grow bags directly on the foot, there would not be nearly the same amount of transfer. In my design, the 47 square inch top of my wick foot suddenly expands out to a little larger than the bag that I set on it by using the bed of soil surrounding it, providing almost no loss of upward movement of the water because of transferring to the bag... the bed of soil actually amplifies the wicking action, passively, sort of the same way that a transistor will amplify current in an electrical circuit.

 

[Azimuth]

I have reasoned that it has a lot to do with the square inch area of the top of the foot. With these 6" pipes it is 47 square inches of surface area showing to the soil above, with it sticking up into my special layer of wicking soil about an inch or so. With the grow bag sitting on top of that layer of wicking soil to complete the wicking transfer into the bag, this large foot seems to be perfect for a 7 gallon, but would surely be too much for a 5 gallon. To use a smaller grow bag, I would use a 4" diameter foot.

We also have to consider what the lower bed of soil I have put on my floor is doing to help in the moisture transfer. If I had sat my grow bags directly on the foot, there would not be nearly the same amount of transfer. In my design, the 47 square inch top of my wick foot suddenly expands out to a little larger than the bag that I set on it by using the bed of soil surrounding it, providing almost no loss of upward movement of the water because of transferring to the bag... the bed of soil actually amplifies the wicking action, passively, sort of the same way that a transistor will amplify current in an electrical circuit.

Are you finding the roots growing down into the "foot"?

 

[Emilya Green]

Are you finding the roots growing down into the "foot"?

So far, no.

 

[Emilya Green]

Today was feeding day all around. I have not fed yet, contrary to the way I normally do things, but these are not normal plants. These poor overwatered things have been barely hanging on, and today I proved to myself what is going on.

Since I top dressed this first round of @GeoFlora Nutrients VEG in, I also needed to top water enough to at least dampen the stuff and get its goodness moving down into the soil. The SIPs are still not dry even in the one with the two biggest plants, so the soil is still pretty damp. One of the young plants took some damage when it freaked out over all the water coming in from the bottom and its confusion over being in a relatively dark spot under the Mars SP-3000, that its primary growth tip stopped growing. That was it, no bud, no nothing coming out of the end of the primary stalk. It was leaned over to horizontal trying to track that light, and it stopped growing. Now under a better light, the two nodes under the dead tip decided to go for it, so I chopped the aborted top off and we are now letting it grow out from here, a self topped plant.

Puzzling over that, I then watered my two largest plants, and in brushing the large fans aside I realized just how weak these two plants are too. They are barely able to stand there by themselves, and a good wind could knock them over. There are hardly any roots under these plants at all. They do not like this. I really considered installing splints just to hold them up.

Tomorrow I am isolating the wick and setting these bags back down for some emergency care. Back to basics, I need to get a roots system under these plants before they are ready to SIP. I will be watering around the edges and from the top for a while, showing the roots how to go deep searching for water, using the wet/dry cycle.

Here are two of the smaller ones, starting to get with it, finally

Lastly, I finally got my photo studio set up, upstairs near the grow rooms. I am getting ready for another big photo shoot for my next project.

 

[Azimuth]

I like to start my SIPs off easy too. Not quite the wet/dry cycle you are proposing going back to because the SIPs do have different roots , but definitely a light touch on the water. I usually leave just a trace in the reservoir to start and water a new seedling very lightly for a few days until the roots find the moisture.

I, too, find that too much wetness down below causes them to look droopy and overwatered and growth is definitely slowed. I've come to call this 2ish week period the transition phase and I don't start adding water to the reservoir until they show they are growing well. I use a dipstick to make sure the reservoir has  some water at the very bottom but I like to keep it minimal at the very beginning.

The challenge to solve is how best to get them started and through this phase as quickly as possible while still allowing the roots to form that they'll use for the rest of the grow.

But I'm with you, it's a bit frustrating to see that stall out period at the very beginning. Maybe your thoughts of developing a more traditional root system first to get them started and then letting them figure out the wetter medium thing a bit later might make for a faster overall progression. So, moving the transition period to a bit later in their development might help with this? Don't really know but I'm sure as we get more reps with these pots we'll be able to find the sweet spot.

 

[Emilya Green]

Three days after feeding, all of the plants have gotten significantly bigger. The SIP rezervoirs are all down pretty low, and of course lower where the biggest plants are. I have been very intentionally watering with one of my watering pitchers each day from the top, for the last 4 days. I believe that gravity wins in this situation, and now the "descending" water is showing the roots where to go. Before this, with watering rising up from the bottom, they were confused. As a result of this intensive care, the plants are all looking and feeling stronger and better established in the soil after just a few days. The big ones will be ready for full SIP action very soon, but so far I am still letting them drain the system until I see more lift. I am also waiting to top the big ones until I can see some more vigor, and then we are going to top them hard to sort of level the playing field.

I did a little experiment with our Candy Dawg in the solo cup. When first staring her I stood her in a drip tray full of water, to simulate the SIP tubs somewhat. That of course was a classic mistake and she almost stalled out from overwatering. Since that ugly start, I have been letting her dry out, and now she is looking better and just about ready for her first full watering. She is coming on fast, and I still believe she will catch up with her cousins in the SIP containers. When this little one is ready, I will put her in her own SIP, but we are going to keep her in the solo cup until she becomes unmanageable.

Here are all the girls, somewhat in order:

 

[nick5311]

I have done a global search for deep red 720nm and sadly Ali did not come up. This is new tech, and some that has not caught on yet. Hopefully soon someone will market this correctly.

Outside you don't need this, you have the sun! Down low on the horizon every morning before the sun sneaks up over the horizon, the plants can get a few minutes of deep red. If they can see it, they have no more need to overly stretch.

Have a good move!

Respectfully, this is not new tech, however your observation that using it for 10 minutes BEFORE lights on reducing stretch may be a new observation. (Most people use these primarily to shave off 2 hours of night time). Also, you don't need 720nm, you'll find many more options if you search for 730nm. The most commonly used product is the "Far red initiator puck" from rapidLEDs You can also find various strips available. If you prefer the strips and need driver recommendations let me know. If you want deep red (660nm) and far red (730nm) like your cutter strip, growdaddyleds uses good quality samsung diodes and is relatively inexpensive.

 

[Emilya Green]

Hi @nick5311 and welcome to the forum!

You are right that this is older technology. Even years ago, before we had LEDs, greenhouse operators used halogen spotlights to produce their far red and by far the most common application was the 10 minutes after the main lights went off, so as to put the plants to sleep rapidly. I am not the first to use the far red in the beginning of the day however, and I remember seeing other experiments claiming that this helped to reduce stretch. I may however be the first one to document this effect with at least a couple of years of experimentation and journals. Thank you also for the links to those other sources for Far Red lighting. Hopefully this will inspire others to check this out.

 

[nick5311]

Hi @nick5311 and welcome to the forum!

You are right that this is older technology. Even years ago, before we had LEDs, greenhouse operators used halogen spotlights to produce their far red and by far the most common application was the 10 minutes after the main lights went off, so as to put the plants to sleep rapidly. I am not the first to use the far red in the beginning of the day however, and I remember seeing other experiments claiming that this helped to reduce stretch. I may however be the first one to document this effect with at least a couple of years of experimentation and journals. Thank you also for the links to those other sources for Far Red lighting. Hopefully this will inspire others to check this out.

Thanks for the welcome -- I joined ages ago, but I guess that was my first post . If you have additional interests in using specific LEDs to influence growth (like, creating the tightest internodal spacing possible), I think you would find SuperAngryGuy's SLT (selective light training) posts fascinating over on reddit. I don't want to muddy up your thread too much so I can post something separately.