Soil pH'd to 6.5 with chemical nutrients -Why?

Can anyone explain why it is you would use a pH of 6.5 with plants being grown in soil if you are using chemical fertilizers? this seems to be the norm, pH 6.5 in soil, regardless of what your feeding that soil

If your using chemical nutrients(salts) with soil than your feeding your plants hydroponically, and not relying on the micro-herd to do feed the plant. Seems to me 5.8 would be the better pH range for soil being fed with chemicals. A soil mix void of nutrient should be treated as a soilless media and not as a true soil

...just questioning the status quo as always, if anyone can explain that I would be greatfull

5.8 for hydro, 6.2 for potting container media. thats the pH i shoot for. i believe if you look into it, you will learn about buffering capacity and things like that.

i ripped this off just for you, dude.

Cannabis requires a pH range around the neutral value of 6.0-6.5 so that it can assimilate nutrients from the growing medium. In any cultivation the pH of the water must therefore be monitored and adjusted appropriately. A full point difference in pH represents a tenfold increase in either acidity or alkalinity. If you water on soil with pH 5.5 it is 10 times more acidic than pH 6.5! A pH below 6.0 can trigger a deficiency of calcium resulting in burnt root tips and black spots on leaves. A pH above 7.0 causes a deficiency in iron which results in chlorotic leaves and yellowing of veins. The assimilation of all major & secondary nutrients required by cannabis for healthy growth and flowering can be seriously affected by an incorrect pH. Most affected are phosphorous, potassium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and manganese

Bonkleesha said:

5.8 for hydro, 6.2 for potting container media. thats the pH i shoot for. i believe if you look into it, you will learn about buffering capacity and things like that.

i ripped this off just for you, dude.

Cannabis requires a pH range around the neutral value of 6.0-6.5 so that it can assimilate nutrients from the growing medium. In any cultivation the pH of the water must therefore be monitored and adjusted appropriately. A full point difference in pH represents a tenfold increase in either acidity or alkalinity. If you water on soil with pH 5.5 it is 10 times more acidic than pH 6.5! A pH below 6.0 can trigger a deficiency of calcium resulting in burnt root tips and black spots on leaves. A pH above 7.0 causes a deficiency in iron which results in chlorotic leaves and yellowing of veins. The assimilation of all major & secondary nutrients required by cannabis for healthy growth and flowering can be seriously affected by an incorrect pH. Most affected are phosphorous, potassium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and manganese

Click to expand...

"Cannabis requires a pH range around the neutral value of 6.0-6.5 so that it can assimilate nutrients from the growing medium"

" The assimilation of all major & secondary nutrients required by cannabis for healthy growth and flowering can be seriously affected by an incorrect pH"

Yes this is excellent information if your growing cannabis in a living organic soil. But that's not what I'm discussing. Most "soil" that indoor growers grow in runs out of nutrients within a few weeks, and for the majority of the grow the plant is being fed with chemical(salt) nutrients. Salt based nutrients do not need to be assimilated as they already present in their usefull form and are best absorbed in the pH 5.8 range. I don't see how it is any different than a soilless media, and the pH used should reflect that

"Cannabis requires a pH range around the neutral value of 6.0-6.5 so that it can assimilate nutrients from the growing medium"

medium... the soilless mix you use.

if it runs out of nutes, get one that has the polymers covering the fertilizer grains. time release. yah, there are BIG name companies that fuck their container mix up so u buy more liquid nutes.

and its NOT soil. its a sterile media that has organic matter and aggregate. maybe the ferts like i said. u could always go to a soil & media place and have them mix whatever you want.

i dont know whatelse to put. i dont think you have a good concept of it. take a soils, media, and nutrition class. tired of trying to lead blind noobs that dont listen.

and no offense... its not just you. apparently there are LOTS of people on here who one up my horticulture info that i got in college... where did you learn your fundamentals (just curious since u thro everything i say out the window)... AND THEN YOU REFER TO CONTAINER MIX as "soil". fuck it. clean out ur vaccum and plant in that if you want dirt. your narrow mindedness has prevented you from learning something great here. its ok, tho. to each their own.

I'm not trying to start a pissing match 4 posts into the thread, I'm looking for some constructive thought on what I have presented and not a copy and paste "I'm right and you better accept it" answer

You agree that potting mix is merely a soilless blend ammended with composts. You act like I'm an utter moron for refering to potting mix as "soil" but type potting mix into google and you'll see many ammended soilless mixes are also called "soil". I agree that soilless medium is not soil, which is the whole point of me starting this thread, so reread what I'm asking please.

When the ammendments/composts in the potting mix medium become spent the remaining medium becomes truly a soilless medium. The medium no longer has any function to the plant other than holding onto the roots/microherd and providing storage of water/nutrient solution as well as giving aeration. Rockwool, coco, perlite, hydroton, and other soilless media all serve this same purpose and all are fed with a pH of 5.8. Do you see the inconsisteny?
please note this is only regarding salt based nutrients as I have mentioned

I fully encourage you to prove me wrong on this, but please throroughly explain how I am wrong and teach me something.
prove that you are proving me wrong

The fact that you went to college and got angry at my post don't make me believe you. But some real data and an explanation of the science may help.
I've laid out my argument.
What is your logic?

i thought it was something to do with the way soil holds on to nutrients , soil holds on to nutes ,whereas hydro doesnt as much, so if you have a low ph with soil, feeding can cause a salt build up and can lower the ph to a dangerous level,but with hydro, you have precise control over the nutrient levels so you can keep lower....just my basic understanding but i might be wrong.

You could start by pointing out where the false premise in my argument is, because I believe the logic to be fairly bullet proof

Here are my premises, and I will finish with my conclusion:

-cheap store-bought potting mixes ammended with composts run out of nutrients sometime before harvest
-potting mixes that have been drained of their original nutrients should be considered soilless media
-When watering soilless media with a salt based nutrient solution a pH of 5.8 is ideal for nutrient uptake.(look up rockwool, coco, expanded clay pellets, perlite, and other examples)

Therefore the proper pH for potting mixes after the initial nutrients provided from the composts have been spent is 5.8.

Which premise is wrong? Is there a flaw in the logic?

Please note that I am aware that a compost tea should not be pH'd to 5.8 and I am only focusing on the salt based nutrients, as I have mentioned throughout the thread

how about this. since youre the one proving the world wrong, lets see your experiments. i mean, its not anything for me to show u the standard. you got some secret ganja god knowledge, then drop it like its hot!

did you get it from the same aliens that gave joseph smith the magic glasses to translate the magical mormon tablets?

Bonkleesha said:

how about this. since youre the one proving the world wrong, lets see your experiments. i mean, its not anything for me to show u the standard. you got some secret ganja god knowledge, then drop it like its hot!

did you get it from the same aliens that gave joseph smith the magic glasses to translate the magical mormon tablets?

Click to expand...

Your completely ignoring the fact that my argument as presented is completely reasonable. I'm not saying it is true as I have pointed out one of my premises may be false(so which one), and if so please correct it for me so that I will better understand.

I'm not saying I have some secret knowledge here. The three points I listed from which I deduced my conclusion are something most growers already know. I just applied logic to it.

Did you happen to take a course in logic and reasoning when you were in college?

I think you've demonstrated quite well that you are the one here that is narrow minded, or at least incompetent. It is obvious you do not understand the position you are defending, or you would have provided me with an explanation as to why I am wrong

Please correct my reasoning or explain which premise is incorrect or leave the thread as you have not put forth anything that demonstrates that my argument is false.

You have reached the level of troll

Keep in mind I feel there is a great chance that one of the premises are incorrect as it seems highly unlikely that pH5.8 would in fact be the ideal. If this were the case people would have discovered through trial and error that 5.8 was better and this would be common knowledge.

The whole point of this thread, as is stated from the beginning in the thread title is not "What" is the ideal pH... but "Why". You can't answer that so your no smarter than me.

If I had wanted to hear faith based oppinions rather than science I would have posted this thread in the spirituality forum

Your acting like your nutrients change as the pH changes.. What are you a wizard?

No, it's the roots ability to uptake the nutrients change as the pH changes..

You put soil in a container with all your other do dads and perlite mixes and bullshit.. Your soil is still there a month later, nutrient free.. But the roots are still in the soil..

It doesn't magically turn into a hydroponic system just because the base nutrients have released from the soil.

Do you understand now.. ?

This is an invitation for anyone that can explain the fault in my argument to please do so.

I did not start this thread to push my idea upon anyone as fact. I am merely presenting it so that anyone with a good understanding of chemisty and plant biology can explain the fault for me.

I am certainly not looking for an argument, however I will correct you if you fail to grasp the concept I am presenting

IN33DW33D said:

Your acting like your nutrients change as the pH changes.. What are you a wizard?

No, it's the roots ability to uptake the nutrients change as the pH changes..

You put soil in a container with all your other do dads and perlite mixes and bullshit.. Your soil is still there a month later, nutrient free.. But the roots are still in the soil..

It doesn't magically turn into a hydroponic system just because the base nutrients have released from the soil.

Do you understand now.. ?

Click to expand...

If the organic nutrients contained in the composts present in the medium are what make it a "soil", then when the medium no longer contains those organic nutrients anymore, what makes it "soil"?

Do you understand the question now?

Let's start over-

When is a medium considered to be soil?

Answer(at least what I believe to be the answer)- A medium is considered to be "soil", "IF AND ONLY IF" it contains organic(carbon based) nutrients that must be assimilated by the micro-herd before plant uptake

Ok everyone agrees?(if not please explain)

so it follows very clearly that:

If a medium contains no organic nutrients, it is not "soil"

Still following me?

If the medium is not soil and is being fed with salt based nutrients the pH should be 5.8 for optimum nutrient uptake

ok that all makes sense...

so why are you guys bashing the idea?

and I'm not even saying its true! I'm just asking you to tell me "WHY" it is not true

O yah. Youre a pro. Lets get u a forum sub section of your own.

Bonkleesha said:

O yah. Youre a pro. Lets get u a forum sub section of your own.

Click to expand...

ohhhhhh... now I get it! why didn't you explain it like that before? Such a well laid out argument and it clearly highlights the flaw in my theory! thank you!

"apparently there are LOTS of people on here who one up my horticulture info that i got in college... "

So where is it?

Thedillestpickle said:

Let's start over-

When is a medium considered to be soil?

Answer(at least what I believe to be the answer)- A medium is considered to be "soil", "IF AND ONLY IF" it contains organic(carbon based) nutrients that must be assimilated by the micro-herd before plant uptake

Click to expand...

maybe it has to do with sand, silt, and clay, how they form aggregates, cation exchanges (of course in nursery mix, too... but not from negatively charged clay)... H+, K+, Ca++, Mg++, NH4+, Al++ (or Al+++) are attracted to the necative charge of clay.

im sure when you decided to post ur bill nye science guy shit, you took into consideration what pH is.... H+ versus OH-

shit he knows it all already! dont waste ur breath.

hey. come back and talk to me when you can define soil. itll make this a lot easier if we are on the same level. your wordy shit just looks wordy.

TROLL IT NOOB.

hes cramming on wikipedia to make a retort. this should be good.