Making Your Own Nutrient Concentrates

That’s cool. I wonder if it will help make it function for me in a less wacky manner. I’ve been wrestling with her Hydro Buddy a lot lately and have learned a few new tricks.

Most recently I have figured out that it prefers to have lots of substances in the mix. It will spit out crazy mixes and error messages till I get up to about eight or more substances on the list Then usually all of a sudden it will resolve the targets perfectly.

Then I look over the main page where I see some of the substances only getting used in microscopic amounts. I go through and enter fixed weights for the substances, based on the mix it came up with, and remove all the ones that are barely being used, to simplify the mix

I can generally juggle the fixed weights to make it work once HB has given me the head start.
 
Weaselcracker said:
That’s cool. I wonder if it will help make it function for me in a less wacky manner. I’ve been wrestling with her Hydro Buddy a lot lately and have learned a few new tricks.

Most recently I have figured out that it prefers to have lots of substances in the mix. It will spit out crazy mixes and error messages till I get up to about eight or more substances on the list Then usually all of a sudden it will resolve the targets perfectly.

Then I look over the main page where I see some of the substances only getting used in microscopic amounts. I go through and enter fixed weights for the substances, based on the mix it came up with, and remove all the ones that are barely being used, to simplify the mix

I can generally juggle the fixed weights to make it work once HB has given me the head start.
Click to expand...

I used to go through that headache when trying to use Jack's as a base, then dial in desired targets and it would basically freak out on me. But when I started making my own everything, and being able to not have to worry about chaning the micros, and also providing 2 sources of all the macros, life got really easy. That's why I use so many different salts. It's always the same 9 jugs, but there's as little 2 of every macro as well as Mag. Calcium only has one source, but it's the best source of calcium, bu tthen there's 2 Mags, 3 nitrates, 3 potassiums, 2 phosphates, 1 ammonium and 1 silica. All those NPandK sources makes it easy for HB to do the magic.

What targets are giving you grief? Or is it trying to achieve them with less substances being loaded that's giving you grief? I'm sure you could massage the numbers a bit after the errors, than recalculate?
 
I haven’t been able to figure out why it does what it does. It will do things like exceed most of the targets by a crazy amount- for no good reason, resulting in a whole bunch of pop-up error messages, and then not even use several of the bottles that it could’ve used,

Anyway- having figured out that it is happier if I enter a whole bunch of substances, that’s helped a lot. Then I just reverse engineer the mix with fixed weights to simplify it
 
Weaselcracker said:
I haven’t been able to figure out why it does what it does. It will do things like exceed most of the targets by a crazy amount- for no good reason, resulting in a whole bunch of pop-up error messages, and then not even use several of the bottles that it could’ve used,

Anyway- having figured out that it is happier if I enter a whole bunch of substances, that’s helped a lot. Then I just reverse engineer the mix with fixed weights to simplify it
Click to expand...

If you want to force it to your will, load one substance at a time and target an element, calculate, than jot down the weight it tells you. Go through the whole line of substances you want to use until you have all of your jotted down weights. Then load all of the substances and set their weights and calculate that way. You'll probably have to make minor tweaks to the weights 2 or 3 times, but eventually, you'll find what you're looking for.
 
The more I read the more confused I get....

Have you ever read any articles suggesting that phosphorus levels should be very low? I just read two articles in a row saying things similar to what I have pasted in below.

“

9. Manage Phosphorus in the 15-ppm to 25-ppm Range​

Phosphorus (P) is an essential element for plant growth. It plays a critical part in energy transfer within the plant, flowering enhancement and stem elongation. At NCSU, we have been focusing our research on the role of P in plant growth in greenhouse floriculture production. For most floriculture species, growth is maximized when 10 ppm to 15 ppm P is provided. Levels below that (~5 ppm to 10 ppm) are useful for controlling excessive plant growth. This may be a production option for cannabis growers who want to manage excessive plant growth, as no plant growth regulators (PGRs) are registered for cannabis, and two of the most common PGRs, paclobutrazol and daminozide, may be part of the chemical contamination screening program and would make your cannabis unsellable. Providing no P, or too little, will lead to a P deficiency, in which plants will be stunted and flower production will be negatively impacted.

Optimal P levels have not been determined for cannabis through scientific studies. As stated, most floriculture species have maximum growth with 10 ppm to 15 ppm P. Levels above that typically are not beneficial, and you are wasting your money. But with cannabis’s response to P fertilization currently uncertain, a more generous amount of 15 ppm to 25 ppm P is suggested as the target range at this time.”
 
Weaselcracker said:
The more I read the more confused I get....

Have you ever read any articles suggesting that phosphorus levels should be very low? I just read two articles in a row saying things similar to what I have pasted in below.

“

9. Manage Phosphorus in the 15-ppm to 25-ppm Range​

Phosphorus (P) is an essential element for plant growth. It plays a critical part in energy transfer within the plant, flowering enhancement and stem elongation. At NCSU, we have been focusing our research on the role of P in plant growth in greenhouse floriculture production. For most floriculture species, growth is maximized when 10 ppm to 15 ppm P is provided. Levels below that (~5 ppm to 10 ppm) are useful for controlling excessive plant growth. This may be a production option for cannabis growers who want to manage excessive plant growth, as no plant growth regulators (PGRs) are registered for cannabis, and two of the most common PGRs, paclobutrazol and daminozide, may be part of the chemical contamination screening program and would make your cannabis unsellable. Providing no P, or too little, will lead to a P deficiency, in which plants will be stunted and flower production will be negatively impacted.

Optimal P levels have not been determined for cannabis through scientific studies. As stated, most floriculture species have maximum growth with 10 ppm to 15 ppm P. Levels above that typically are not beneficial, and you are wasting your money. But with cannabis’s response to P fertilization currently uncertain, a more generous amount of 15 ppm to 25 ppm P is suggested as the target range at this time.”
Click to expand...

Lower P numbers was the basis for my Growing Without Bloom Nutes thread, and there's several articles, videos, podcast links, on the first 2 pages on the topic. "Michigan State Orchid Food" also showed better results than the "tried and true" high P fertilizers that orchid growers traditional used. It has very little P. I've actually used that formula on Cannabis before, but it was in my earlier years of growing and under inferior lighting. Might be interesting to try it again now. I still have some left. See Orchidgain fertilizer.
 
I hadn’t seen P numbers that low before tonight. But I’m going to try it in my next round of experiments.

Most of the way through a long but good article here which has some interesting info once you get far enough along -broken link

https:// manicbotanix.com/hydroponic-nutrient-science/
 
At a feeding level of 150ppm N the Orchidgain fertilizer would be about 10ppm P. I'm normally gonna feed a mature plant in the 150-180ppm N range. With that Orchidgain that's 10-13ppm P. Interesting how that kinda lines up with the article excerpt you posted @Weaselcracker .
 
I’ve been grasping at straws all over the place trying to find the cause of my deficiencies. I think my new deficiency suspect of the week is going to be P now.

Edit. While you are here at @farside05, what is your fauxmix usually buffered to? I’ve got about 20 gallons of it going. Right now it’s showing 6.2 so I was planning to drop it a little bit further
 
In my experience, I had poor plant growth at lower P levels in the neighborhood of 40ppm. In rockwool croutons, I've had fantastic results at 65ppm P, but that much in Faux Mix seems to not be ideal. I've since whittled it back to 55ppm and that seems to be the stable region. Low P in theory is more ideal as it is less likely to bond with available calcium and precipitate in the root zone, but in practice I didn't see meaningful improvements when I went lower, so I just reverted back to what has worked for me and what is in range of Megacrop.

If however, actual ideal P is at 10-15ppm, I have a bone to pick with the mofo that labeled it as a macro nutrient, lol.

Weas, if I were you, I would test low P on one plant before committing your whole grow to the theory.
 
Definitely. I’m just sitting around plotting out some sort of plan for side by side tests with some little clones. I wish I had some more obvious clues as where to start but nothing really stands out. Can’t even blame ph since all my soil tests seem fine.
 
Weaselcracker said:
Definitely. I’m just sitting around plotting out some sort of plan for side by side tests with some little clones. I wish I had some more obvious clues as where to start but nothing really stands out. Can’t even blame ph since all my soil tests seem fine.
Click to expand...

IDK if you want to get into VPD or light quality/intensity? Both topics scare the shit out of me, but I know also that both are very influential to the development of plants and their dietary needs.
 
I don’t because my dehumidifier is keeping things dry and stable in there for the most part, and I’ve grown some decent plants in the past. There’s something definitely off with the mix right now and white dead patches showing up all over.

I’ve been going over my old bottled feeding routines with Botanicare stuff and running them through HB to compare to my more recent mixes, but nothing really leaps out at me, other than the Botanicare mix has high P and low N in flowering. Also no NH4, but maybe it’s just not shown since it just say Nitrogen on the label. Calcium also lower like around 100. But it’s really just grabbing at straws.


I wasn’t 100% happy with those nutes to the point i want to use them as a gold standard to compare to, but they did ok most of the time
 
Weaselcracker said:
I wasn’t 100% happy with those nutes to the point i want to use them as a gold standard to compare to, but they did ok most of the time
Click to expand...

IMO, that's about as good as it gets in this field of study. I often cite Megacrop as my benchmark, but only because how good Farside's garden looks with it, but I've never actually tried the MC myself, but it's just good practice IMO to compare to others in hopes of learning new strategies that might help in planning a good regimen.

Next chance you get, try to snap a few pics of the white spots that plagues you. I don't think I ever had them and I don't recall seeing that in other journals, so I wonder if it's a geographic thing for your region?
 
Nah I figured out the white spots late last night finally but was/am ashamed to say it.
The little white spots that people said looks like thrip damage- turns out to be thrips. I had asked a few people about them and they said it would be quite obvious because I would see the adults leaping about like ittle grasshoppers.

I had seen nothing like that but then my vision isn’t that great. It wasn’t until I brought the leaves inside under a better microscope last night that I finally saw a couple of the young ones which look like little slugs or something.

Just went and sprayed the veg plants with neem so that should calm them down for a while.
 
Here are pics of a few of the most messed up older leaves I just picked off. Looks like K deficiencies for the most part. With Ca at 140 I wonder if it could be locking out the potassium.
I’m just gonna have to keep making semi-random guesses and different test mixes for now.

Another thought is that the ph of Promix and Sunshine Mix - which seems to be buffered to 5.5, is just a bit too low. Since my current batch of fauxmix is sitting at 6.1, I’m going to try a clone in that.
issues

issues

 
As far as I know, calcium (or any other cation) can lockout K. Read up on K in chapter 5 of that book, it's the most easily uptaken element and is very mobile in the plant. Perhaps just adding a bit more K to your regimen would do the trick?

Edit - an excerpt about N toxicity, notice that if N is toxic, changing the supply of K or B doesn't change anything.

Excess Symptoms
There is as much danger in N excess as deficiency, particularly for fruiting
crops. Excess N produces lush plants with dark green foliage; such plants are
susceptible to disease and insect attack and have greater sensitivity to changing
environmental conditions. Excess N in fruiting crops not only impairs blossom
set and fruit development but also reduces fruit quality. It is impossible to
affect fruit quality by adjusting the supply of those elements related to fruit
quality characteristics, mainly K and B, if the N content of the plant is in
excess. Excess N frequently does more permanent damage to the plant than
does N deficiency.
Click to expand...
 
Just by chance, how many ppm of K you feeding? I had a theory about too much K that throws everything out of kilter. We saw quite a bit of that with people that were running Mega Crop then adding their P K supplement.
 
I keep my K in the region of 215-225.
 
Had to go back and search my old posts in the Mega Crop thread. Seems like exceeding a ratio of 3:1, K to N, or exceeding 300ppm of K, was where issues started. Don't know if you're near either threshold, but there are some things to keep in mind.
 
Back
Top Bottom