Family Tree Grow

[Melville Hobbes]

#33 looks a lot happier, leaves are fairly horizontal & looks a bit bigger than the Gelato, nice

Thanks con!
Now I just need to figure out how to keep her that way!
I skipped her last time I watered, so she should be getting pretty dry, but her pot has enough weight to it that she must be drinking really slowly.

 

[Keffka]

Day 34
Huh.

Family Tree 18 November 2023.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Left to right: Do si dos, Gelato, Do si dos #33

Do si dos

Do si dos 18 November 2023.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Do si dos Day 34

Do si dos 18 November 2023 1.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Do si dos Day 34

Do si dos #33

Do si dos 33 18 November 2023.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Do si dos #33 Day 34

Do si dos 33 18 November 2023 1.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Do si dos #33 Day 34

Gelato

Gelato 18 November 2023.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Gelato Day 34

Gelato 18 November 2023 1.jpg

• Melville Hobbes
• Nov 18, 2023

Gelato Day 34

I was referring to pepper plants of the same age and strain being planted in the same media, only with half of them given myco, and the other half not.
I did that over multiple years to see if there was any benefit. I also gave them all a standard fertilization regime of Miracle Gro during veg, switching to standard tomato fertilizer at fruit set.
The MGs NPK is something ridiculous like 15-30-15.
The myco plants were bigger, healthier, and yielded better every year, so eventually I just went with myco in all pots before switching to a soil that already had glomus intraradices spores added.
The article says the plant limits the colonization by mycos, but it doesn't stop it outright.

I used a product called Myke vegetable and herb. It's just mycos. As I said, this was with hot peppers, and it was before I joined the military, so long before I started growing cannabis.
I don't have any journals or pics, which is why I don't usually bring it up, or use it to give advice.
I didn't read your question as accusatory, just a request for information. I would be asking similar questions in your place.

Was the miracle gro a dry or liquid amendment?

 

[Keffka]

I don't have any journals or pics, which is why I don't usually bring it up, or use it to give advice.

I can appreciate even anecdotal experiences. It’s where most findings begin. If there’s a way to sidestep the limitations, or if there’s different information I want to know it

 

[Melville Hobbes]

Was the miracle gro a dry or liquid amendment?

The blue crystals that you dissolve in water. They work, but I've moved on from them.

I can appreciate even anecdotal experiences. It’s where most findings begin. If there’s a way to sidestep the limitations, or if there’s different information I want to know it

Yeah, but there's a big difference between knowing that something works, and knowing why.
Most broscience starts from someone coming up with their own explanation of why something works, when they don't have the foundational knowledge necessary to say for sure.
I try not to put my own explanations out there without a sound source backing me up.

 

[Melville Hobbes]

The blue crystals that you dissolve in water. They work, but I've moved on from them.

Yeah, but there's a big difference between knowing that something works, and knowing why.
Most broscience starts from someone coming up with their own explanation of why something works, when they don't have the foundational knowledge necessary to say for sure.
I try not to put my own explanations out there without a sound source backing me up.

And now I'm sounding accusatory.
That's not directed at you, just a gripe I have about some of the things spread around sites like this one, especially by people who really should know better.

 

[Carmen Ray]

The blue crystals that you dissolve in water. They work, but I've moved on from them.

Yeah, but there's a big difference between knowing that something works, and knowing why.

When I was skimming through the paper on Trichoderma I was thinking that I fall into the category of wanting to know that something works, and not necessarily why. I want to know that the science is out there, but I don't need to know the science myself, unless the explanation can be simplified

Most broscience starts from someone coming up with their own explanation of why something works, when they don't have the foundational knowledge necessary to say for sure.

This drives me up the fecking pole too. Erryone is Einstein

I try not to put my own explanations out there without a sound source backing me up.

I respect and appreciate the integrity. You do know a lot more than you say though! It shows in the health and vitality of your plants erry time a coconut, and every now and then out pops a science nugget

 

[Keffka]

The blue crystals that you dissolve in water. They work, but I've moved on from them.

Hmm.. it may be the composition of the crystals because that almost sounds halfway between a dry and liquid. Either way it’s fascinating and now I want to go read more.

Yeah, but there's a big difference between knowing that something works, and knowing why.
Most broscience starts from someone coming up with their own explanation of why something works, when they don't have the foundational knowledge necessary to say for sure.
I try not to put my own explanations out there without a sound source backing me up.

I agree a thousand percent. It’s why any time I disagree, or am trying to inform I provide sources, books, pages from a book, or will clearly state “This is only anecdotal but”.

And now I'm sounding accusatory.
That's not directed at you, just a gripe I have about some of the things spread around sites like this one, especially by people who really should know better.

Hah! We just get each other going some times that’s all

I totally get that though, and can think of some specific instances you’re referring to around here. I also totally agree with you. I said it above but I try to communicate very clearly wether something I’m saying is rooted in data/facts or if it’s just something that’s been observed/heard.

While this site has its problems like every other one, I’ve definitely encountered more genuine people with integrity here than anywhere else. It’s part of the reason I want to make sure it’s clear I’m not being an accusatory asshole, I respect the level of integrity and respect displayed by quite a few, even behind anonymity.

 

[Keffka]

I respect and appreciate the integrity. You do know a lot more than you say though! It shows in the health and vitality of your plants erry time a coconut, and every now and then out pops a science nugget

Agreed! Mel is like this often, so is @InTheShed

They’ve honestly both blown me away in such low key ways across a range of topics I’ve often wondered if they’re actually quantum physicists in disguise

 

[NickHardy]

Plenty of K-W-P round these parts.

 

[Azimuth]

I totally get that though, and can think of some specific instances you’re referring to around here. I also totally agree with you. I said it above but I try to communicate very clearly wether something I’m saying is rooted in data/facts or if it’s just something that’s been observed/heard.

I, for one, think there can be real value in what you guys are calling 'bro science.' I do lots of experimenting on my own, trying to find what works for me. I'll often use other's results/claims as a jumping off point to test my own theories. I do try to state when things are based on my experience and they may or may not be replicable as some things are environmentally influenced, but I reject the notion that the only useful practices are based in peer reviewed scientific papers.

And that's especially true in our world where the study of this plant is mostly illegal or based on sub-standard supplies from some government controlled farm. It's almost like they are providing crap so the studies show it's not effective.

Not many of us have the fancy lab equipment or scientific backgrounds to produce peer reviewable papers, but that doesn't mean there's no value in it. In fact, a lot of the fancy scientific studies and papers got their start because of some claim someone made that seemed implausible.

 

[Melville Hobbes]

Hmm.. it may be the composition of the crystals because that almost sounds halfway between a dry and liquid. Either way it’s fascinating and now I want to go read more.

It's just a water soluble fertilizer. What's interesting is some of the older growers I spoke with have used it as a veg nute for cannabis. Even one guy who grew guerilla style used to use it because it was easier to carry in to the grow site, and dissolved quickly and completely, even in cold water.
It's really not great for weed though. Too much P, and IIRC low in both calcium and magnesium.

While this site has its problems like every other one, I’ve definitely encountered more genuine people with integrity here than anywhere else.

Yeah, it's definitely better than the others I've gone through.
Disagreements tend to stay polite and confined to a particular thread.

Agreed! Mel is like this often, so is @InTheShed

They’ve honestly both blown me away in such low key ways across a range of topics I’ve often wondered if they’re actually quantum physicists in disguise

Thanks for the compliment!
Quantum physics makes my head hurt.

K-W-P

?

I, for one, think there can be real value in what you guys are calling 'bro science.' I do lots of experimenting on my own, trying to find what works for me.

I'd call that citizen science rather than broscience.
It's taking your results and coming up with explanations for them when you can't account for all the variables that could have affected your results, and putting your explanations out there as hard facts that crosses the line.

Not many of us have the fancy lab equipment or scientific backgrounds to produce peer reviewable papers, but that doesn't mean there's no value in it. In fact, a lot of the fancy scientific studies and papers got their start because of some claim someone made that seemed implausible.

True. But that has lead some to discounting the results obtained by those who do have the equipment and background to produce those papers.
Especially when they debunk a claim, or uncover the real reason something works which is contrary to the explanation a person came up with for themselves.

 

[Keffka]

I, for one, think there can be real value in what you guys are calling 'bro science.' I do lots of experimenting on my own, trying to find what works for me. I'll often use other's results/claims as a jumping off point to test my own theories. I do try to state when things are based on my experience and they may or may not be replicable as some things are environmentally influenced, but I reject the notion that the only useful practices are based in peer reviewed scientific papers.

Agreed, however, I think there is a difference between bro science and basement science, or citizen science as Mel called it. A lot of studies are launched off the anecdotes of basement science, and said scientists understand their findings aren’t hard facts, yet.

Bro science is how Mel explained it. Coming to conclusions based off faulty data and passing those conclusions off as facts. I haven’t seen you do that, and you clearly state your intentions/findings.

And that's especially true in our world where the study of this plant is mostly illegal or based on sub-standard supplies from some government controlled farm. It's almost like they are providing crap so the studies show it's not effective.

Not many of us have the fancy lab equipment or scientific backgrounds to produce peer reviewable papers, but that doesn't mean there's no value in it. In fact, a lot of the fancy scientific studies and papers got their start because of some claim someone made that seemed implausible.

Yep, like I said above, a lot of studies are begun because of basement science. You can’t begin a journey if you don’t know the starting point. The line between bro and basement is crossed when you believe the starting point is the finish line.

I think that makes sense, I’m pretty baked

 

[Keffka]

It's just a water soluble fertilizer. What's interesting is some of the older growers I spoke with have used it as a veg nute for cannabis. Even one guy who grew guerilla style used to use it because it was easier to carry in to the grow site, and dissolved quickly and completely, even in cold water.
It's really not great for weed though. Too much P, and IIRC low in both calcium and magnesium

MG gets a lot of hate but I’ve seen growers pull off some great harvests with it. I think it illustrates well the importance of understanding the fundamentals of plant growth. If you understand the fundamentals you can still make magic even in “crappy” situations.

It’s even more wild that it’s high in P, no wonder you think what you do, it’s hard to argue with what you see with your own eyes.

Is this the product?

Thanks for the compliment!
Quantum physics makes my head hurt

Quantum entanglement took me longer to understand than I’m willing to admit I’m also not a big fan of the variable nature of the quantum arena, but I also am a big fan of the variable nature of it, so basically I’m kind of quantum entangled myself

 

[Azimuth]

Agreed, however, I think there is a difference between bro science and basement science, or citizen science as Mel called it. A lot of studies are launched off the anecdotes of basement science, and said scientists understand their findings aren’t hard facts, yet.

Bro science is how Mel explained it. Coming to conclusions based off faulty data and passing those conclusions off as facts. I haven’t seen you do that, and you clearly state your intentions/findings.




Yep, like I said above, a lot of studies are begun because of basement science. You can’t begin a journey if you don’t know the starting point. The line between bro and basement is crossed when you believe the starting point is the finish line.

I think that makes sense, I’m pretty baked

As legality increases more official studies will confirm or deny common practices, but to a certain extent we're groping in the dark because of prohibition.

And, even what we take as "official" results need to be revisited. A good case in point is the droughting study many of us use as the basis for our current practice.

Yes, I know it was done in a lab as part of a thesis project, but for me it is quite lacking as solid proof. To my knowledge it was never officially re-run, had a very limited source of inputs (strains weren't varied, conditions not varied etc) so I consider that more in the citizen science category at least for now, for me anyways.

I still practice it as anecdotally it seems true for my plants, but it seems a pretty flimsy basis on which to state definitive conclusions.

So, for me not an officially settled issue even though the study is often thrown around as proof that it works. I seem to be a bit of an outlier on that thread with that opinion though.

 

[Keffka]

As legality increases more official studies will confirm or deny common practices, but to a certain extent we're groping in the dark because of prohibition.

And, even what we take as "official" results need to be revisited. A good case in point is the droughting study many of us use as the basis for our current practice.

Yes, I know it was done in a lab as part of a thesis project, but for me it is quite lacking as solid proof. To my knowledge it was never officially re-run, had a very limited source of inputs (strains weren't varied, conditions not varied etc) so I consider that more in the citizen science category at least for now, for me anyways.

I still practice it as anecdotally it seems true for my plants, but it seems a pretty flimsy basis on which to state definitive conclusions.

So, for me not an officially settled issue even though the study is often thrown around as proof that it works. I seem to be a bit of an outlier on that thread with that opinion though.

Agreed wholeheartedly. I’m not convinced of droughtings effects, but I’m also not opposed to it. It makes sense it would work but it also hasn’t been rigorously lab tested as you said.

As long as we’re still trying to identify and measure the various compounds that makeup a cannabis flower we can’t officially make any claims like droughting does. However that doesn’t mean we should stop, it just means people should be a little more critical, and understand how powerful psychology and confirmation bias can be.

 

[NickHardy]

Plenty of strings being pulled a few posts back, eh Keffka?

11 maybe.

K-W-P hoped someone might have got my random sense of humor

Knowledge - Wisdom - Power

From the song Snoopworld by Snoop Dogg

Keffka thinks they’re high… yeah Sunday night and I’m bed bound! Thank you all for fascinating reading!

Nick

 

[Bill284]

Plenty of strings being pulled a few posts back, eh Keffka?

11 maybe.

K-W-P hoped someone might have got my random sense of humor

Knowledge - Wisdom - Power

From the song Snoopworld by Snoop Dogg

Keffka thinks they’re high… yeah Sunday night and I’m bed bound! Thank you all for fascinating reading!

Nick

I missed your sense of humor and haven’t a clue what’s going on.
Bed bound?
See that f1 debacle?
Or am I in the wrong thread?
I’ve lost track of that too
Edit: forgot to say lost, lost track.
As in lost track of my mind


Stay safe
Bill284

 

[NickHardy]

@Bill284

String theory, 11 multiverses, Snoop Dogg song and I actually enjoyed that F1 race!

Plus way more sciencey inclined growers than you or I, chatting back and forth which is huge fun and interesting for me. Bunch of different thought processes. Love it.

But that might just be the Bruce Banner my wife finally released to me!

 

[Melville Hobbes]

MG gets a lot of hate but I’ve seen growers pull off some great harvests with it. I think it illustrates well the importance of understanding the fundamentals of plant growth. If you understand the fundamentals you can still make magic even in “crappy” situations.

It’s even more wild that it’s high in P, no wonder you think what you do, it’s hard to argue with what you see with your own eyes.

Is this the product?

Quantum entanglement took me longer to understand than I’m willing to admit I’m also not a big fan of the variable nature of the quantum arena, but I also am a big fan of the variable nature of it, so basically I’m kind of quantum entangled myself

Looks like it, although I can't see the NPK.
They have another like it that's listed as All Purpose, with different proportions. The all purpose one starts with 12% N, and has lower P and K.

As legality increases more official studies will confirm or deny common practices, but to a certain extent we're groping in the dark because of prohibition.

And, even what we take as "official" results need to be revisited. A good case in point is the droughting study many of us use as the basis for our current practice.

Yes, I know it was done in a lab as part of a thesis project, but for me it is quite lacking as solid proof. To my knowledge it was never officially re-run, had a very limited source of inputs (strains weren't varied, conditions not varied etc) so I consider that more in the citizen science category at least for now, for me anyways.

I still practice it as anecdotally it seems true for my plants, but it seems a pretty flimsy basis on which to state definitive conclusions.

So, for me not an officially settled issue even though the study is often thrown around as proof that it works. I seem to be a bit of an outlier on that thread with that opinion though.

That's how science works. Each study provides a data point, and every following study provides another.
Eventually a scientific consensus is reached, where there is a preponderance of evidence supporting or debunking the original conclusion. Often that occurs after a meta analysis of all high quality experiments/studies available.
I haven't read the droughting study, so I can't comment on the process, but I thought it was done with a large number of identical clones in a lab setting with controls? Minimizing variables with identical genetics in identical conditions?
You could argue that strain specific growth characteristics could be an unaccounted variable, but a lot of the citizen level results are ignored if you just use the same strain rather than identical clones.
What you're seeing in the droughting thread is pretty much what we've been talking about. A practice engaged in by some home growers is investigated by an academic professional, results are published, and home growers attempt to apply those results to their grows.
It's no also coincidence that the droughting study was carried out in a Canadian university after legalization. Now that it's federally legal here, and countries like Germany are moving forward with legalization we're going to see a lot more studies come out, some focussing on what we consider to be standard practice, and a lot of us are going to be unhappy with the results.
Especially anyone with an antiestablishment bent to their thinking.

Plenty of strings being pulled a few posts back, eh Keffka?

11 maybe.

K-W-P hoped someone might have got my random sense of humor

Knowledge - Wisdom - Power

From the song Snoopworld by Snoop Dogg

Keffka thinks they’re high… yeah Sunday night and I’m bed bound! Thank you all for fascinating reading!

Nick

AHH. Snoop isn't really on my p!stylist, lol!

I missed your sense of humor and haven’t a clue what’s going on.
Bed bound?
See that f1 debacle?
Or am I in the wrong thread?
I’ve lost track of that too
Edit: forgot to say lost, lost track.
As in lost track of my mind


Stay safe
Bill284

I think we're all going to need a nap when this conversation is done!

@Bill284

String theory, 11 multiverses, Snoop Dogg song and I actually enjoyed that F1 race!

Plus way more sciencey inclined growers than you or I, chatting back and forth which is huge fun and interesting for me. Bunch of different thought processes. Love it.

But that might just be the Bruce Banner my wife finally released to me!

I also like watching the discussion between other growers when they really get going. I've learned a lot by just sitting back and watching different thought processes on some subjects.
Enjoy the B Banner!

 

[Melville Hobbes]

I think I've missed a bunch of quotes, but there's a lot of discussion to go through here so I hope nobody feels neglected if I don't get back around to them!