- Thread starter
- #741
Emilya Green
Well-Known Member
It's ok Homer, and I don't mind your quoting me in that other thread... it really got them riled up didn't it? Instead of discussing your original question they quickly steered the conversation in a direction where they think they got me... but actually they don't. It just isn't worth it to argue about it on someone else's thread.Thank you so much for the info Emilya. I just missed your message by a few minutes before I added the BE and SK. I am in my first week of flower and giving 5g/gal MC so I am a little early but I only gave them I gram of each so hopefully I will be ok.
I am definitely going to keep reading as this is one informative journal. Also sorry for involving you inadvertently in that little brouhaha in the MC thread. I was just trying to give credit where due but it didn’t get perceived as that by all, unfortunately.
Also in retrospect my advice about fridge drying I would like to add a qualifier that the bags I used are double layered so you may want to double bag your buds and seal the ends especially since the outer buds would dry more. I reach in and mix my buds up every other day so they dry evenly and since you will be away I think double bagging and sealing would help.
I don't think you will hurt anything being slightly early and coming in hard with the BE and SC... just watch carefully for any signs of damage, and then if you do, read it correctly. I would think that at 5g MC you are right about in the range where you want to be. Just watch carefully, and know that you are always one water cycle away from being able to readjust to new levels.
Regarding my harvest, I have all the buds now stripped from the branches and 2/3 full in large ball jars, outfitted with cheesecloth on the top as their lids. The jars are maintaining an RH between 88 and 80, going up and down as the buds cast off moisture. It is 39 degrees F in the fridge, and I am confident they are going to be fine until Sunday after next.
I know a lot of folks are reading both this and "The MC Thread" so I will take this opportunity to further explain what I know of MC. As was said today, GLN isn't talking... and many of the percentages of the additional secondary nutrients is propitiatory information that they are not going to tell us... so coming up with an 8% chelated figure is simply a wild guess on my friend's part and one that can't be taken seriously. We really don't know how much of the overall mix is chelated percentage wise, but it doesn't matter... especially if the topic at hand was flushing...
But, I digress...
The discussion is partially correct... not all of our nutrients are or need to be chelated. There are certain elements that tend to bind with soil and interact against the other elements, and these need to be chelated to remain available to the plant, but not everything is or needs to be chelated.
This fertilizer however is using a different method of supplying nutrients than we are all used to, so that its delivery is not dependent on the cation exchange rate or the pH of the medium as to the mobility of the needed elements. By using specialized versions of some of our common nutrients, GLN has managed to make forms of our NP&K that are extremely water soluble, and these versions of these macro nutrients come right up into the plant with the water, not needing specialized root structures to make it happen. GLN doesn't stop there though, and they include several different chemical versions of our macronutrients in the mix so that not only does some of it come up with the water, other parts are amino chelated to be very efficiently and quickly absorbed by the plant, and still others are in forms that will stay in the medium and be taken up by the parts of the roots specialized in that nutrient in the traditional way.
Why all these paths?
Our plants don't use the same amount of each of the nutrients in a given time. The "mix' that ends up inside the plant is designed to be at a certain NPK balance while also including the long list of micronutrients that our plants need. Our plants use large amounts of some of those nutrients, the macronutrients, nitrogen, calcium, magnesium, potassium and Iron, and without them coming in in different forms all at the same time, there would be times when some of the nutrients were available in the mix, but the ones being used in such large amounts would be in lesser supply in that mix... GLN makes sure this mix stays balanced all through the feeding cycle by providing several paths of entry for these major nutrients, so that the optimum amounts are always available to the plant. The amino chelation combined with highly water soluble nutrients that are not chelated, allows for a very rapid absorption of the entire nutrient package and a constant supply of all of the building blocks needed for full expression of these plants. We need to understand that with this new Vegan technology, most of the magic happens inside the plant and not at the root/medium level. The trick to making this system work is to keep the levels where they need to be inside the plant, by using all these multiple forms of the nutrients entering the system via at least 3 different paths. With the proper mix, GLN has developed a beautiful system that keeps a constant stream of the needed nutrients coming in with each watering... as long as the levels are where they need to be so as to not cause lockouts.
So what is it we were arguing about again?? The size of the molecules?