rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
yep.
Will this work
- Thread starter cannn
- Start date
cannn
Well-Known Member
In there though it says the way around using floranova grow is to use extra micro with bloom. You seem to ignore the micro entirely
"Where the 100N-100P-200K-60Mg target profile relates to General Hydroponics Flora Series 3 part liquid fertilizer products, the same profile can be mixed without using any of the GH Grow component. If one carefully reads the labels, he'll find the Micro component actually contains more N than the Grow, and the Grow component contains nothing else that isn't already contained in the Micro and Bloom components. Substituting a little more of the Micro component to make up for the missing Grow precludes the use of the Grow component altogether."
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
it's the flora grow. it's the original lineup from GH: flora series grow, bloom, micro.
now there is flora nova and flora duo series too.
cannn
Well-Known Member
Yeah that always fucks me up. I shouldve noticed it said flora series and not floranova. My bad
Thanks for all your help!! I didnt expect to learn as much as i have from this thread. Btw do you monitor your ppm? If so what do you try to keep it at? I totally ignored the ppm meter aspect until yesterday. Not that i didn't know i just needed a million things and wasnt thinking
Last edited:
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
kinda sorta. i do drain to waste so i only check it when i mix up a batch. i'm at high elevation 9000ft so my ppms are pretty low since things just don't grow as fast here. usually 0.3 Ec to 1.0 EC max depending on plant stage of growth.
BobCajun
Well-Known Member
Yeah I guess I made a mistake there. It should be 80. I said 2 mls/L as an example, but the label recommends 2.5 so that's what I used. 2.5 x 8 is 20, x 0.4 is 8. The ppm is 10 times that so 80 ppm. But they also recommend 3.75 mls/L for "max strength for rapidly growing plants", which would definitely be too much. Even 80 is on the high side and has been known to reduce growth in other plants. You really want 20-40 ppm for max growth. So probably 1 ml/L. You'd probably be low on K and N though, at least K. But if you used the Grow version you'd probably be right in the proper range.
cannn
Well-Known Member
Do you have any pics of your plants using these nutes you could conveniently post? Id love to see your results this way. Bob keeps coming over here trying to say this nute ratio is off, that itll cause a deficiency of this and an issue with that, but one thing that cant be argued with is results. Im honestly not certain whos right at this point. Its really confusing getting 2 people at odds on this
Last edited:
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
sorry but i don't do pics. you'll just have to take my word and that of others too.
https://www.thcfarmer.com/community/threads/gh-flora-nova-bloom-thread.30961/
https://www.growery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/330477
not to discredit bob but from what i've read of his posts on this thread, he's guessing and estimating and surmising without any experience with it.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
show me the scientific study where you got your "normal" nutrient levels for cannabis??
i think thousands of users of floranova bloom are better proof that it works than your hyperbole.
BobCajun
Well-Known Member
A scientist named Richard Hoagland. He's a scientist, you're a stoner, which would I believe? How hard is it to type "hoagland solution" into google? From what I read, 60 ppm is where it starts getting bad, 80 is where roots start getting brown and stuff, 20-40 is optimal, 20 is the best of all.
Last edited:
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
you can't can ya?
your scientist developed it in the 1930s? for tomatoes? hahaha. step your game up bob.
what i also found:
*Note though, that the Hoagland solution was designed for tomatoes in full fruiting, in a certain container size and with a certain rez volume. Given all of these factors then, the hoagland solution was (at that time) optimized for 1 week of growth. At the end of 1 week certain elements would be below sufficiency or gone, so either the solution was replaced or in other cases "topped off". Primarily the critically missing elements were N, K, Fe.
your scientist developed it in the 1930s? for tomatoes? hahaha. step your game up bob.
what i also found:
*Note though, that the Hoagland solution was designed for tomatoes in full fruiting, in a certain container size and with a certain rez volume. Given all of these factors then, the hoagland solution was (at that time) optimized for 1 week of growth. At the end of 1 week certain elements would be below sufficiency or gone, so either the solution was replaced or in other cases "topped off". Primarily the critically missing elements were N, K, Fe.
cannn
Well-Known Member
Its really not that hard and if you did youd find its not the right solution to be following for cannabis..
Took me a couple minutes to check on wiki and figure that out after you brought it up lol
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
i don't understand his endgame? if he used floranova and it didn't work because of multiple deficiencies, then i'd understand. but to have never tried it and claim that it wont' work seems weird.
surprised he isn't recommending mercury vapor lamps that were invented in the early 1900s too. lol.
cannn
Well-Known Member
"During early growth, levels of phosphorous at 15 to 30 ppm are adequate for most crops. Over applications of phosphorous will trigger imbalances of iron (Fe) and calcium (Ca), and possibly zinc (Zn). Iron and zinc are very closely associated with keeping the plant “green”. When increasing phosphorous levels, calcium, iron, and zinc levels should be increased proportionately. Calcium should be maintained in a 1.5 : 1 ratio with phosphorous. Commercial hydroponic liquid calcium supplement products often contain levels of iron and other trace elements, making them ideal to use when increasing phosphorous levels for blooms.
Phosphorous levels may be increased to levels upwards of 250 ppm during the peak phase of bloom for heavy feeding crops, provided that it is done while maintaining important ratios such as calcium and micro-nutrients. Note that a strong “spike” of phosphorous levels in hydroponic crops during the first week of flowering may induce a slight stress/trigger; in some strains this helps control the height of the crop and flowering structure. This is an aggressive practice and is not recommended for the novice grower. You have to really know your plants before you consider subjecting them to short periods of stress for the long-term benefit of the crop. For example, increasing phosphorous levels to 200+ ppm during the first week of flowering and then gradually increasing phosphorous levels over the course of the crop after dropping to 100 ppm in the second week."
Taken from maximum yield by Erik Biksa
Erik Biksa has a diploma in agriculture with majors in fertilizer sciences and crop production. He also does some writing for high times.
Phosphorous levels may be increased to levels upwards of 250 ppm during the peak phase of bloom for heavy feeding crops, provided that it is done while maintaining important ratios such as calcium and micro-nutrients. Note that a strong “spike” of phosphorous levels in hydroponic crops during the first week of flowering may induce a slight stress/trigger; in some strains this helps control the height of the crop and flowering structure. This is an aggressive practice and is not recommended for the novice grower. You have to really know your plants before you consider subjecting them to short periods of stress for the long-term benefit of the crop. For example, increasing phosphorous levels to 200+ ppm during the first week of flowering and then gradually increasing phosphorous levels over the course of the crop after dropping to 100 ppm in the second week."
Taken from maximum yield by Erik Biksa
Erik Biksa has a diploma in agriculture with majors in fertilizer sciences and crop production. He also does some writing for high times.
You were saying?
Last edited:
cannn
Well-Known Member
Yeah i kinda got that when he said "from what i read"
I mainly wanted those in here to make the argument between you and bob more validated. But i certainly understand why you dont do it. Very smart. Im not that smart
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
I saw this at a gun show on a t shirt 25 years ago and it still sticks with me:
Admit nothing, Deny everything, Make counter-accusations.
If the FN bloom wasn't good, there'd be plenty of posts on every grow site about it. most people rave about it for how good a one part nutrient it is for cannabis.
Admit nothing, Deny everything, Make counter-accusations.
If the FN bloom wasn't good, there'd be plenty of posts on every grow site about it. most people rave about it for how good a one part nutrient it is for cannabis.
cannn
Well-Known Member
Not the best approach if you're trying to learn something. But yeah ill never stand down on an argument until i see some clear facts presented against me. Thats why i had to search out that erik birksa piece for bob. Plus i got really tired of seeing the words hoagland solution. I dont understand how he stands by it so adamantly when if hed done any research before following it he probably wouldve understood it wasnt right for this purpose from the start.
"The Hoagland solution has a lot of N and K so it is very well suited for the development of large plants like tomato and bell pepper. The solution is very good for the growth of plants with lower nutrient demands as well, such as lettuce and aquatic plants with the further dilution of the preparation to 1/4 or 1/5 of the original."
"What many people may not know is that the Hoagland/Arnon nutrient solution formulations require one gallon of nutrient solution to be used per plant with replacement on a weekly basis. If any of these use parameters are changed, i.e., the volume of solution, number of plants, and/or frequency of replacement, plant performance will be significantly affected, this is a factor that may not be realized by people using the formulations."
Also i dont know how much soil compares but i know for sure mine wouldnt get by with that amount of phosphorous and those ratios. Theyre always hungry for more phosphorous as it is.. Seems i can never fully satisfy them for that haha, there are always some purple stems. Not bad though
Last edited: