Mad Hamish
Well-Known Member
I remember Rogg mentioning a cover crop of clover helps for a hot soil, it is somewhere on that marathon thread if his...
bodhi seeds
- Thread starter dankydonky
- Start date
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
Mad Hamish
Well-Known Member
Bear Grylls is still lost in there somewhere, trying to rub microbes together to make fire...
Amos Otis
Well-Known Member
RedCarpetMatches
Well-Known Member
Damn those newer strains went quick @ TSCC. Plus they raised the price/beam!
Ceedsman's having a 20% off promo July 4th
Ceedsman's having a 20% off promo July 4th
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
I've heard the LA Confidential has some of those smells, I actually have one fem in flower right now. Has some unique smells coming off her, only a couple weeks in though.
As far as organic vs chemical, there is no difference in the nutrients themselves - just when and how they get them. Organics will almost always be better and you can measure how much better with a refractometer. The only way chemicals can compete is with shit loads of work and effort to get the exact ratios the plant wants at the appropriate times, which as you can imagine isn't that easy. A lot of plants have been bred using the lucas formula, so it will do ok, but it won't be over the top awesome. And having done bottles and done living soil with many of the same strains, it's not even a contest as to which is superior.
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
It's a good thing to plant with your plants anyway. Clover pulls nitrogen from the air and brings it back into the soil. Pretty awesome stuff.
st0wandgrow
Well-Known Member
Yes. I plant it after I chop a plant. I then leave that container fallow for 3 weeks, then put another clone right in there. Once the clover starts to get shaded out by the marijuana plant, I chop the clover and leave it laying on the surface of the soil as a mulch
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
I have it planted outdoors with my big girls. They seem to like it.
DloMI
Well-Known Member
Of my satsumas, all 4 have a definite orange dank smell. I'm going to run 2 of them again. The smallest yielding, frostiest one and the short fat big bud one that smells like a orange sherbet push up pop. All 4 have solid top colas, would probably be a good strain for SOG. Only negative I see is 70+ days.
TonightYou
Well-Known Member
As I've mentioned, I'd prefer to run organics, yet am not willing to put in the effort based on where I currently am. Second, I'm science based (not claiming you are not, simply there is no science supporting the claim as "organics is better"). You've contradicted yourself the following sentence. What I believe is happening if you believe it's better is confirmation bias, or you've become a better grower (possibly both). Eta isn't LAC a slow grower? At least I've heard that somewhere
I'm prepared for 12 weeks if needed.
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
It's not confirmation bias. You can objectively measure it. All the science you've seen comparing the two is junk. You can grow crappy organic stuff too if you don't amend your soil. You can grow excellent hydroponic stuff too, but most do not and never will as it requires literal lab work to do right (in our game, increasingly food production is using lab work to determine what's best to feed but that's a gigantic industry with large resources - BC Hot House peppers are hydroponically grown and some of the best peppers you can buy).
Doesn't change that using the chemical nutrients we have available is really not a healthy practice either (for the earth).
TonightYou
Well-Known Member
nothing but respect man, I mean no offense. I'm speaking in generalized terms where plants (not specific to cannabis) were grown in both organic and inorganic methods. The conclusion was there was no difference in growth nor quality of the overall product. I would gladly read any peer reviewed sources you have to the contrary, but I have yet to the see anything that states otherwise.
OGEvilgenius
Well-Known Member
Your statement has so many parameters surrounding it that it's impossible to quantify. I can tell you definitively that the quality of product grown organically in a properly amended soil is much higher than something grown with a non specific and generic fertilizer regime. I don't disagree that there CAN be no discernible difference. I do disagree that in practice for most individuals there is no discernible difference. A plant in an organic mix will get exactly what it wants when it wants it. Assuming it's properly amended of course - and many certainly are not. Many lack in quality humus, there are a lot of variables to consider in this respect.
I can also tell you a lot of those studies were not very useful for anything (the ones you're referring too, I'm assuming more specifically to the Stanford meta analysis done which is basically just mathematical masturbation without proper control of variables - which they basically leave to the farmers almost always and a lot of farmers could be doing a lot better work than they are.
A plant grown with man made fertilizers gets what you give to it more or less. You can determine through trial and error and careful measurements and a bit of lab work what the plant wants and when it wants it. Most people don't have the resources though (or time) and it also becomes a lot more difficult to differentiate between a plant in good vs a plant in great health with just your naked eye. Some varieties (ie: certain kinds of tomatoes etc) have fertilizer mixes that were pretty well balanced for their needs you can purchase out of the package - which is nice, but we all know that would never really work for our plant in it's current form unless you were making mixes for clones given the instability of most lines.
I can also tell you a lot of those studies were not very useful for anything (the ones you're referring too, I'm assuming more specifically to the Stanford meta analysis done which is basically just mathematical masturbation without proper control of variables - which they basically leave to the farmers almost always and a lot of farmers could be doing a lot better work than they are.
A plant grown with man made fertilizers gets what you give to it more or less. You can determine through trial and error and careful measurements and a bit of lab work what the plant wants and when it wants it. Most people don't have the resources though (or time) and it also becomes a lot more difficult to differentiate between a plant in good vs a plant in great health with just your naked eye. Some varieties (ie: certain kinds of tomatoes etc) have fertilizer mixes that were pretty well balanced for their needs you can purchase out of the package - which is nice, but we all know that would never really work for our plant in it's current form unless you were making mixes for clones given the instability of most lines.
COGrown
Well-Known Member
LA Con is indeed a very slow vegging strain, but it flowers and finishes fast. My experience with LA Confidential is that it has more of a kushy flavor and smell, similar to bubba.
Bringing the hydro vs. organic debate into this thread should be grounds for a paddlin'.
TonightYou
Well-Known Member
We are on the same page of essentially saying as long as the parameters of a plants needs are met, route administration doesn't mater, correct?
I do agree that there are many variables. This is why reading the (almost always) tiring methodology is important. The studies I've read usually address it species dependent, and include concerns you've mentioned in the margin of error. So I agree, there are limits, yet taking a meta approach to the studies, the song remains the same.
See above. I agree to an extent, yet conclusions are similar on different plant species. I am open to anything that suggests otherwise, but as of yet, I haven't seen anything but mostly anecdotal evidence. I mean no offence, the burden of proof to a claim rests on repeatable, demonstrable evidence. Unless I've missed it, I haven't seen it.
I don't deny that relying on fertilizer can be a trial and error, nor at times be as frustrating, but so can organic. I don't see it as being any different as when I had my outdoor garden, using compost, I sometimes ran into problems. Now I will admit that I was no way near as interested in prepping soil. Nature did that for me, zero planning on my part. I'd send my soil/compost to a very well recognized state university that specialized in farming for a small fee to be analyzed. It was very interesting results, I wish I'd actually have been diligent back then, but I was real young. I think organic is better not for creating a better end product, but because its the responsible, most connected and environmentally friendly thing to do. Composting is easy (if you have the space), relies on nothing but time and organic materials to produce amazing soil. We've become very dependent on oil derived and mined materials when most things can be made right in ones own back yard. And no one try to tel me your "organic" when you are using some bat shit, being harvested in some cave in a country you can't find on a map, with illegal workers in exploited conditions shipped in a plastic bottle to the grow store or amazon near you. ETA In the last statement, I am no better, as I don't grow organic. I simply don't have the time nor energy based on where I'm living to make it happen. I've made attempts and fail, its far too much work unfortunately .