Methodical, scientific approach to nutrients and nutrient formulations discussion

I love the title! Betcha it won't get as much attention as if you had posted "Humboldt, the secret to success!" ...or the Bushmaster thingie. Notice how quiet it got when I revealed the truth about this product and the risks involved? Hah!

http://www.rollitup.org/advanced-mar...w-guide-5.html

You could sit here and spends hours trying to consolidate, collect the thousands of posts regarding nutrition, errrrr, I mean vendor fertilizer and supplement products. Anyhow, here's a few links folks should memorize if they want to grow fine plants.

What is plant nutrition?
http://retirees.uwaterloo.ca/~jerry/orchids/nutri.html

Nutrient excesses and deficiencies
http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/c...nutri_def.html

The concept of nutrient antagonism
http://www.totalgro.com/concepts.htm

I can hear it now - "but is isn't pot!"

Well...... then go buy your snake oils, follow your charts, and rots of ruck.

Uncle Ben

Fathers of Hydroponic Nutrient Formulations

The last formulation Hoaglands is from 1950. As you can see the science has been around a while. That is why there is not much new, just a lot of new marketing.

(Jensen)
gm/100 gallons of water
magnesium sulfate 187
monopotassium phosphate 105
potassium nitrate 77 .
calcium nitrate 189
chelated iron {FeDTPA) 9.6
boric acid 1.0
manganese choride 0.9
cupric chloride 0.05
molybdic acid 0.02
zinc sulfate 0.15 ·

N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, B, Mn, Zn, Cu, Mo
ppm 106, 62, 156, 93, 48, 64, 3.8, 0.46, 0.81, 0.09, 0.05, 0.03


(Cooper)
gm/100 gallons of water
potassium nitrate 221
magnesium sulfate 194
calcium nitrate 380
monopotassium phosphate 99
Iron chelate (FeEDTA) 30
manganese sulfate 2.3
boric acid 0.6
copper sulfate 0.15
zinc sulfate 0.17
ammonium molybdate 0.I4

N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, B, Mn, Zn, Cu, Mo
ppm 236, 60, 300, 185, 50, 68, 12, 0.3, 2.0, 0.1, 0.02


(Johnson)
gm/100 gallons of water
potassium nitrate 95
monopotassium phosphate 54
magnesium sulfate 95
calcium nitrate 173
chelated iron (FeDTPA) 9
boric acid 0.5
manganese sulfate 0.3
zinc sulfate 0.04
copper sulfate 0.01
molybdic acid 0.007

N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, B, Mn, Zn, Cu, Mo
ppm 105, 33, 138, 85, 25, 33, 2.3 , 0.23, 0.26, 0.024, 0.01, 0.007


(Larsen )
gm/100 gallons of water
potassium nitrate 67
calcium nitrate 360
potassium magnesium sulfate 167
potassium sulfate 130
chelated iron (FeDTPA) 12
phosphoric acid (75%) (40 ml)
Manganese sulfate 0.5
boric acid 2.2
zinc sulfate 0.5
copper sulfate 0.5
molybdic acid 0.04

N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, B, Mn, Zn, Cu, Mo
ppm 172, 41, 300, 180, 48, 158, 3, 1.0, 1.3, 0.3, 0.3, 0.07

This is made essentially according to the following reference: D.R. Hoagland and D.I. Arnon. The water-culture method of growing plants without soil. Calif. Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ. 347. 1950. There is one change and that is in the form of iron added.
In making nutrient solutions, always add the required quantities of stock solutions to a fairly large volume of water and then make to volume. Stocks can be stored on the shelf. Below are the quantities to make Full Strength Hoagland's solution. In order to make ½ strength as used in most of this workshop just cut all stock solution amounts by ½ and make up to volume as usual.
Prepare the following stock solutions (1-6) and use the amounts indicated to prepare 1 liter ( final volume ) of nutrient solution:
1. 1.00 M NH4H2PO4 use 1 mL/L of nutrient solution
2. 1.00 M KNO3 use 6 mL/L of nutrient solution
3. 1.00 M Ca(NO3 )2 use 4 mL/L of nutrient solution
4. 1.00 M MgSO4 use 2 mL/L of nutrient solution
Micronutrient stocks: combine the following amount of salts in a total volume of one liter of water, and then use 1 mL/L of this entire stock mixture (5) along with the stocks above(1-4) and the iron stock (6) described below to make up a total of 1 L of nutrient solution.
5. 2.86 gm H3BO3
1.81 gm MnCl2 .4H2O
0.22 gm ZnSO4 .7H2 O
0.08 gm CuSO4 . 5H2O
0.02 gm H2MoO4 . H2O
(Asssaying 85% MoO3)
6. Iron stock: to the above 5 stocks add 0.25 ml of this iron stock for 1 liter of nutrient solution.
To make up the iron stock, take 26.1 g EDTA and dissolve in 286 ml water that has ~19 g KOH . Then dissolve 24.9 g FeSO4.7H2O in ~ 500 ml water. Slowly add the iron sulfate solution to the potassium EDTA solution and aerate this solution overnight with stirring. The pH rises to about 7.1 and the solution is wine red and very little precipitation occurs. Make to 1 liter final volume and store in a bottle covered with foil (dark).
Note: Hoagland’s recipe called for 1 ml of 0.5% iron tartrate stock per liter of nutrient solution but we use the above substitution.

The following chart is the basis for simple mixing of a nutrient formulation when you know the ppm concentrations you wish to have for a finished mix.

It does require some data not given such as conversions from liters to gallons. Also it does not address two part mixing to prevent precipitation. I will address those matters in another post. Where you see the **’s before a fertilizer it is because the previous listed compound contains more than one fertilizer. Example Calcium nitrate contains both nitrogen and calcium.

Chemical compound****Supplied element*****Grams for 1 ppm per 1,000 liters
Ammonium sulfate (21-0-0) Nitrogen 4.76
Calcium nitrate (15.5-0-0) Nitrogen 6.45
**********************Calcium 4.70
Potassium nitrate (13.75-0-36.9) Nitrogen 7.30
*************************Potassium 2.60
Sodium nitrate (15.5-0-0) Nitrogen 6.45
Urea (46-0-0) Nitrogen 2.17
Monopotassium phosphate (0-22.5-28 ) Potassium 3.53
*******************************Phosphorus 4.45
Potassium sulfate (0-0-43.3) Potassium 2.50
Potassium chloride (0-0-49.8 ) Potassium 2.05
Monocalcium phosphate
(triple super) (0-20.8-0) Calcium 13
*********************Phosphorus 4.78
Monoammonium phosphate (ll-20.8-0) Phosphorus 4.78
Calcium sulfate (gypsum) Calcium 4.80
Boric Acid Boron 5.64
Copper sulfate Copper 3.91
Ferrous sulfate Iron 5.54
Chelated iron 9% Iron 11.10
Manganese sulfate Manganese 4.05
Magnesium sulfate (Epsom salts) Magnesium 10.75
Molybdenum trioxide Mo03 Molybdenum 1.50
Sodium molybdate Molybdenum 2.56
Zinc sulfate Zinc 4.42
Pottasium Nitrate 2.6 grams KNO3 in 1000 ml of water equals 1 ppm K and 0.36 ppm N

The above formulas are just for educational and historical reference. They are not specifically designed for marijuana specifically but for general green house hydroponics. I have dozens and dozens of actual formulations that are more recent and of more interest to forum viewers. With them I will supply the guarnteed analysis, ppm of each salt or mineral etc., mixing amounts and directions for mainly two part mixes. I will also supply the calculated EC, pH and calculated final mixed TDS etc, etc. Typically I formulate for 100X concentrations in 1 gallon formulations. ie a generic equivalent to something like GH Flora Micro and Florabloom as the Lucas method would be a combined formulation made in a two part mix. That would mean two gallons so diluted it would be at a minimum of 200 gallons. However I formulate according to reported analysis so the strength is much greater than that bottled by someone like GH.

Generic Two Part ratio 1:2 ie Generic Lucas (Yes the same ingrediants could be mixed differently so that all the trace elements would be in part A like in Floramicro (part A) but then it would be a possible excuse for GH to base a complaint with the site administrators, so....)


Individual ppm's
Nitrogen 167
Phosphorus 333
Potassium 397
Magnesium 100
Calcium 215
Sulfur 133
Iron 3.33
Manganese 1.67
Boron 1.67
Zinc 1.00
Copper .33
Molybdenum .03

Ounces

Part A
Calcium Nitrate 28.5
Iron Chelate .90

Part B
MonoPotassium Phosphate 42.0
Magnesium Sulfate 27.0
Manganese Sulfate .179
Boric Acid / Solubor .245
Zinc Sulfate .117
Copper Sulfate .039
Ammonium Molybdate .001

Volume of Stock Solutions
2 gallons (one each)

Dilution Rate
100

pH 5.4

EC Part A 1.08, Part B 1.64

Mixed EC 2.72 diluted at a 1 to 100 ratio. ie roughly 4 ml per gallon (3.785 ml/gallon)

Total Salt Weight mg/L 3740

TDS mixed 1904

Ratios
N:K 0.4
Ca:N 1.3
K:P 1.2

I really do not know what any body wants in the way of information or training etc. but this is s a simple start.

I can teach anyone to formulate mathematically, by using tables or by using a spraed sheet. But you need to realise that without a purchases software package hand calculations (mathematical) are a PITA, but doable. Spread sheets make it easier but most free spread sheet programs ask for ppm's so you need to have access to ppm analysis or do the math to convert to ppms. Most commercial formulas except GH and AN are readily available. GH has most available, however for either AN or GH getting PPM amounts for supplements is much more difficult. Ant yone that has any of the major brand labels with a compltete nalyisis listing all % or ppms I v can easily do the calculations for mixing amounts etc if you will please post the information on the label. A manafacturer can not scream about the reposting of inforation already made public even if they are now with holding that information. Even MSDS 's are often enough to make up the formulation and miixing recipe. For an example, Flairform Pythoffs MSDS is sufficient to use for making a generic Phythoff preparation. Th pH up and down MSDS"s are adequate for a mixing recipe for pH up and pH down. So any such data will be helpful for this thread.

Darkdestruction420: This is a great idea. lets hope we can get some interesting discussion going.


Uncle Ben: Great Links! I especially liked "The concept of nutrient antagonism". I see many growers shooting for a total ppm when really they should also be looking at ratios.

Fatman7574: Are those ratios of N:K, Ca:N and K:P you listed the best for MJ? By the way where do you get all those chemicals in a major city without looking like a terrorist?

According to Botanicare these are ranges to keep your nutrient solution for each elementnot necessarily MJ)


N 160 – 250ppm
P 100 – 200ppm
K 250 – 350ppm
Ca 160 – 280ppm
Mg 45 – 75ppm
Fe 2 – 7ppm

Also I have a conversion for converting nutrient percentage to ppms, liquid nutrients only. Works for any brand name. These are the approximations.

1% N = 14 ppm (5ml of nut sol/gal)
1% P = 6 ppm (5ml of nut sol/gal)
1% K = 11 ppm (5 ml of nut sol/gal)
1% Ca = 13 ppm (5 ml of nut sol/gal)
1% Mg = 12 ppm (5ml of n. sol/gal)
0.1% Fe = 1.5 ppm(5ml of nut sol/gal)

Good stuff!

Originally Posted by fatman7574

Ratios
N:K 0.4
Ca:N 1.3
K:P 1.2

I really do not know what any body wants in the way of information or training etc. but this is s a simple start.

Me and another guy were kicking around pervasive hydro NPK ratios a bit in another thread. Why is it that almost ALL cannabis specific hydro foods have a value of N far less than K? Does anyone have any studies to show that K is not readily available under hydro conditions? For instance, I wouldn't be caught dead subjecting my plants to the "Lucas formula": 1.7-3.3-4

Dyna-Gro doesn't follow the herd, and they've been in hydro plant food production biz for forever. Their Foliage-Pro is a 9-3-6, which has been a standard NPK for most foliage plants as long as I can remember. Their Liquid Grow is a 7-9-5 and they also make a 10-5-5.
http://www.dyna-gro.com/Website%20pd...e_analysis.pdf

UB

Originally Posted by hymem

Darkdestruction420: This is a great idea. lets hope we can get some interesting discussion going.


Uncle Ben: Great Links! I especially liked "The concept of nutrient antagonism". I see many growers shooting for a total ppm when really they should also be looking at ratios.

Yep, see my previous post and hundreds of others. Where people screw up is by making this simple gardening drill as confusing and complex as they can.

UB

I would have a hard time saying any one formulation is best for marijuana, because it is a simple fact that many, many formulations produce the same results but do not have the same ratios. Saying that 10-10-10 is better than 5-10-10 is not not scientifically proven nor do simple empirical results based upon size or yield shown that to be true. There are too many variables involved to even produce a testing ting method to prove that 10-10-10 for example is better than 5-10-10.

There have been millions or billions of plant leaf samples tested and the best that the worlds top horticulturalists have ever come up with is a recommended "ratio range" for hydroponic growing of the most common green house agricultural products. The nutrient manafacturers manafacturers selling pot formulations do not do the testing of plant leaves or grow by standard testing methods that produce any real repeatable test results yet alone field results. Many, many y marijuana seed growers do better, testing than the top marijuana nutrient manufacturers. many commercial pot growers also do better testing. But then they usually tests for the needs of the growing conditions they provide and upon the strains they grow. While this is beneficial if you are providing all like parameters, this seldom is the case so we still in up with recommended ratios that we try top apply to all parameters used by different growers.

It is hoped the is thread will bring such research data and empirical data to print as then the growers themselves will be able to determine their needs rather than depending on manufacturers who pick some average and report it as being best.

In general the reasons to be specific about the ratios is most often more a economic decision. If there are fertilizer available in amounts beyond what the plants roots will take yup and that the plants will use then they are excess and will just be a waster of money in having them present. Secondly there is the issue that the extra unused fertilizer salts cause a rise in the EC as other nutrients are added so that for the same EC a lower concentration of the needed fertilizers will be available as less will be added of the more readily used ones. The third problem is in maintaining a balance that provided a readily manageable pH. While most problems can be managed well by just using a nutrient that is initially well balance and just dumping it and replacing it often, that can become quite expensive. Even the best fertilizers sold are not able to provide the beast ratio for all strains or all growing conditions so really most formulation marketing schemes are just that marketing schemes. The only real manner of complete nutrient management is through drain to waste system using frequent testing of in put nutrient pH and ppms as well as drained nutrient pH and ppms. In general this is what most research data is based upon when down by top researchers.

I had really hoped that this thread did not come down to a comparison of this brand does better than that brand. Actually I would hope that we could all reach a consensus that such posts would be edited out by the mods. If some one has empirical data beyond I used this and it worked better then of course that should be posted. However, without posting supporting empirical and base data such as this: growing method, strain, time periods, temperatures, lighting, humidity, lighting cycles, and this nutrient at this pH and EC at these stages produced these results and exhibited these problems, then the opinions really have no value.

The ratios shown are just the ratios for that individual formulation. Formulation data garnered from many, many "marijuana formulations, fall within the standard ratios used in other hydroponic ratios recommendations made by research by

These are the general ratio recommendations as posted by major research horticulturalists in regard to solution strengths . As can be seen they are pretty broad.

Figures are based upon ppm in solution:
N 100-400 Fe 0.5-6
P 10-100 Mn 0.3-4
K 100-650 B 0.1-0.8
Mg 10-95 Zn 0.1-0.5
Ca 70 -300 Cu 0.005-0.1
S 20-250 Mo 0.02-0.07

Ratios:
N:P 3-8
P 0.25-1.5
Ca:N 0.8-1.2
Mg:N 0.1-0.4
P:S 0.6-1.0

When looking at ratios a ratio like N:P 3-8 means the standard recommendation is that for each part:
Nitrogen there will be 3 to 8 parts Phosphorus etc.

Originally Posted by Uncle Ben

What is plant nutrition?
http://retirees.uwaterloo.ca/~jerry/orchids/nutri.html

Nutrient excesses and deficiencies
http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/c...nutri_def.html

The concept of nutrient antagonism
http://www.totalgro.com/concepts.htm

Uncle Ben

Coming to class for this thread. Good Links.

Commercially supplied data:
http://www.cropking.com/artin

Their fertilizer page:
http://www.cropking.com/HydroponicSu...a949547f254313

marijuana Book Integral Hydroponics Author G. Low articles relating to nutrients

Some hydro hype debunking:
http://www.integralhydro.com/advancednutrients.html

Plant Growth Regulator Formulas (copy written ie. Do Not post article copies or recipies):
http://www.integralhydro.com/plantgrowthregulators.html