Tricks to swell in the last two weeks

acidking

Well-Known Member
Don't buy into any of those postulations. Got a link for me?
Sure thing, and although the study was on commercial hemp production, the same should hold true for Marijuana grown for its THC content.

Journal of Industrial Hemp, December 1997, Effect of nitrogen on tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content

Now it's just a matter of how to balance Nitrogen needed for growth with the Higher amounts that limit THC concentrations, it seems the best course of action would be adequate Nitrogen levels up until the last week, then flushing the Nitrogen out of the soil / reservoir and letting the plant use up it's excess stores.

Sorry UB, but until I see a chromatograph analysis on the correlation between actual THC content and Nitrogen for medical marijuana that contradicts this one for hemp, I'm going to err on the side that higher nitrogen levels cause lower THC levels.
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
The first thing i notice is that that study seems to be entirely relating to THC content in leaves. Don't know if that means the results can simply be used in relation to buds as well.
 

acidking

Well-Known Member
The first thing i notice is that that study seems to be entirely relating to THC content in leaves. Don't know if that means the results can simply be used in relation to buds as well.
I am of the opinion that it wouldn't really matter what part of the plant they tested, that higher Nitrogen levels would translate to lower THC levels in every part of the plant, not just the leaves.

Do I know it for a fact, no.

Would I love someone to do a follow up study, you bet.

Will I change my feeding schedule and increase the amount of Nitrogen I'm giving my plants... not until I see a chromatograph analysis that proves buds are an exception when it comes to the effect of Nitrogen on THC levels.
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member


Sure thing, and although the study was on commercial hemp production, the same should hold true for Marijuana grown for its THC content.

Journal of Industrial Hemp, December 1997, Effect of nitrogen on tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content

Now it's just a matter of how to balance Nitrogen needed for growth with the Higher amounts that limit THC concentrations, it seems the best course of action would be adequate Nitrogen levels up until the last week, then flushing the Nitrogen out of the soil / reservoir and letting the plant use up it's excess stores.

Sorry UB, but until I see a chromatograph analysis on the correlation between actual THC content and Nitrogen for medical marijuana that contradicts this one for hemp, I'm going to err on the side that higher nitrogen levels cause lower THC levels.
They concentrated on leaf. Sorry, but I don't smoke leaf. I smoke bud.

Doesn't matter, we don't have access to labs so it's more of the knittin' needles she saids. I will read my plants and do what it takes to keep them healthy and green until harvest.
 

acidking

Well-Known Member
It's more of the knittin' needles she saids.
Not quite, my assertion is that flushing could help raise THC levels in crops that were fed excessive Nitrogen, and I provided a study that shows that excessive Nitrogen does negatively effect THC levels... you have provided no compelling study to refute it. Seeing as how the people saying they are getting better results by flushing have a study, that seems to explain why they are getting better results, backing them up, and you haven't provided any studies backing your position that flushing is worthless, or that nitrogen doesn't negatively affect THC levels... I say the point is clearly in favor the people who choose to flush.

You are of course free to grow your crop however you want. Personally, the people who have smoked my buds have always managed to tell the difference between those that have been flushed and those that haven't. This despite the fact that none of them know I grow, and I've never discussed my grow techniques with any of them. It's usually because one or two plants decided to finish early and were chopped before the rest were ready to be flushed. They have always pointed out the (comparatively) inferior quality of the buds that haven't been flushed... they have commented on both the stone and the smoke... the buds that have been flushed tend to get raves about how incredibly smooth they smoke, and how stoney they are... and the buds that haven't been flushed tend to get compared unfavorably to the former in both stone and smoke. They have no idea the reasons behind their perceived differences, but having grown the buds, I know exactly why they are reacting differently to the buds they are smoking. Same strains, exact same growing conditions, the only difference being the early finishers didn't get flushed.

(Testimonials backed by Scientific Study and Blind Reviews) > (Personal bias & hubris)

Personally, if high nitrogen levels increased smoke-ability and THC levels I'd be all over that shit, but in my experience it hasn't. Researching where I went wrong in early grows led me to experiment, the result of those experiments have been that he lower I get the Nitrogen levels in the final week and a half, the better the finished product has become, and all other aspects being equal, blind tastings have shown that, at least among the smokers I know, they definitely prefer the quality and stone of plants that have been flushed to those that haven't, even though they haven't been told any details of the grow, just the strain they were smoking. Which for the last 6 cycles has been a cross of Underground Original's Killer Skunk x Serious Seed's Bubble Gum... so a very stable baseline for comparisons, I don't have to worry about different genetics skewing the subjective results of the people I smoke with.
 

badbackbill

Active Member
Thx for all the feed back.............. The good and the bad. I'm pretty happy with my resaults so far, I'm just tryin to dail in the last few weeks. No one can tell me the plants don't need a flush period. Me and all my buddies can pic the weed that hasnt been completely flushed. I'd bet money out of 20 samples of weed and 3 hadnt been flushed I'd pic them out. Its like wine tasteing for us. I'm willing to give up yield for quality anytime. As for additives and such I was taught how to grow. And the system isn't broke...... I'd have a hard time changing it drastically because a couple guys on line say they don't work ......... Now if it was everyone you would have to think it was true. I like to ask and fillter the responses and take them for what they are ........opinions.
 
Not quite, my assertion is that flushing could help raise THC levels in crops that were fed excessive Nitrogen, and I provided a study that shows that excessive Nitrogen does negatively effect THC levels... you have provided no compelling study to refute it. Seeing as how the people saying they are getting better results by flushing have a study, that seems to explain why they are getting better results, backing them up, and you haven't provided any studies backing your position that flushing is worthless, or that nitrogen doesn't negatively affect THC levels... I say the point is clearly in favor the people who choose to flush.

You are of course free to grow your crop however you want. Personally, the people who have smoked my buds have always managed to tell the difference between those that have been flushed and those that haven't. This despite the fact that none of them know I grow, and I've never discussed my grow techniques with any of them. It's usually because one or two plants decided to finish early and were chopped before the rest were ready to be flushed. They have always pointed out the (comparatively) inferior quality of the buds that haven't been flushed... they have commented on both the stone and the smoke... the buds that have been flushed tend to get raves about how incredibly smooth they smoke, and how stoney they are... and the buds that haven't been flushed tend to get compared unfavorably to the former in both stone and smoke. They have no idea the reasons behind their perceived differences, but having grown the buds, I know exactly why they are reacting differently to the buds they are smoking. Same strains, exact same growing conditions, the only difference being the early finishers didn't get flushed.

(Testimonials backed by Scientific Study and Blind Reviews) > (Personal bias & hubris)

Personally, if high nitrogen levels increased smoke-ability and THC levels I'd be all over that shit, but in my experience it hasn't. Researching where I went wrong in early grows led me to experiment, the result of those experiments have been that he lower I get the Nitrogen levels in the final week and a half, the better the finished product has become, and all other aspects being equal, blind tastings have shown that, at least among the smokers I know, they definitely prefer the quality and stone of plants that have been flushed to those that haven't, even though they haven't been told any details of the grow, just the strain they were smoking. Which for the last 6 cycles has been a cross of Underground Original's Killer Skunk x Serious Seed's Bubble Gum... so a very stable baseline for comparisons, I don't have to worry about different genetics skewing the subjective results of the people I smoke with.

as i always say, FLUSHING IS ONLY necessary to fix a problem. You say excessive Nitrogen, You wouldn't need to flush a plant that has been givin the proper amount of N.
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
Not quite, my assertion is that flushing could help raise THC levels in crops that were fed excessive Nitrogen,
I don't know what "excessive N" is. If you feed a plant too much N it will burn some of the plant matter like root hairs, show up as leaf margin/tip burning, margin cupping, etc. and in general stress the plant and compromise its vigor and health.

Flushing is another myth, now a paradigm with some, that started with the Dutch in atonement for them burning up their plants by applying too much salts. A plant is not a radiator, it does not flush. Leaching the soil aka "flushing" does nothing but deprive a soil borne plant proper nutrition.

2nd, I don't care what people say, especially in cannabis gardening forums. Again, I will take care of a plant's nutritional needs until harvest. I know what plant unit drives production and that includes production of cannabanoids - it's the leaves. I do know that buds tend to have a crispy, a gritty feel, when plants are fed with the typical low N bloom foods.

Lot's of caveats in that study beginning with the plant material tested -

1. Kompolti Hibrid TC - This high-fiber variety has a THC content (0.5-0.7%). . Seems to me that testing nothing is nothing.

2. Table 2 shows that plant mass more than doubled with the higher amount of N, 228%, while the THC content of the leaves only decreased 18%. That may be significant to a farmer dealing with the law, but not regarding smoking. You just smoke a tad more to get the same high. Again, if you're damn near the legal limit for THC production regarding your hemp genetics, than I guess one could agree that this is a "significant reduction in THC" plus the bonus of producing a lot more fiber which is the goal of a hemp farmer - production per acre. Still, seems to me that 18% of nothing is, well, 'nothing'.

3. They never measured flowers, only leaves which doesn't make sense to me unless they're focused on the fiber found in leaves - Plants were grown until the end of flowering for staminate plants. Leaf samples were collected on 13 August in the following way: every leaf of both the staminate and pistillate plants was collected, dried at 40�C for 24 hr, ground, weighed, homogenized,.....

Also, you pounded your chest regarding the "he saids she saids" and that's OK. I'd like to see photos of your garden in order to get an idea on the health of your plants, please.

Sidenote - it's high levels of P that induce stretch.

Interesting study fer sure!

UB
 

acidking

Well-Known Member
I'd like to see photos of your garden in order to get an idea on the health of your plants, please.
I stopped taking pictures of my grows a couple of years ago when I learned that memory cards and phones don't actually wipe your data when you format... and can be recovered fairly easily. My current crop is in early veg state, or I would take pictures of that for you. I will be sure to post pics for you when this next batch is ready to be harvested. Until then, here is a grow about 3-4 weeks from harvest, that I photographed 2 years ago...

You can find the thread for it here.

This was one of my smaller yields, when I was still experimenting with additives and nutrients from different companies. Like you, I have come to the conclusion that most additives are bunk and no substitute for proper nutrient levels. The only exception for me is a Triacontanol foliar feed. I have since cut out all the other gimmicks and my plants are much happier for it, and my yields have increased dramatically. I'm currently averaging almost double the dried weight that I got with the pictured run. Unlike you, I don't have the time or inclination to mix my own nutrient formulas to save a few bucks. I'm currently very happy with Botanicare's CNS17 Commercial Nutrient Line, it's relatively cheap compared to other nutrient systems out there, and it's a complete solution, no deficiencies that need additives to correct. My current crop will be the 2nd using Botanicare's CNS17 line, my last one was record breaking, for me anyway, 1100 grams in a 3x6 closet, from plants that were unavoidably heat stressed. Several weeks of 100(f)+ weather at 80% humidity does not make for an ideal indoor grow under 1600w of HPS&CMH lighting... even with air conditioners running flat out 24/7. Which is why I plan on switching to (2) Inda-Gro Pro 420, and (2) Inda-Gro Pro 200s for next summers run. I'll keep them running year round if they perform at the same level as the 1600w I have now. Plants are limited to about 3' to 3.5' tall, 3 week veg, Flowering time approximately 55-65 days. The 3 ebb and flow systems have been swapped out for 2 Aeroponic units that share a reservoir cooler.

Anyway, I'd like to see some pictures of your grows too, and although I don't currently agree with you on the subject of flushing nutrients, I'm sure there are still a lot of tips you have picked up over the years that could be valuable.
 

Attachments

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
I stopped taking pictures of my grows a couple of years ago when I learned that memory cards and phones don't actually wipe your data when you format... and can be recovered fairly easily.
There are programs like CCleaner which not only safely keep your computer clean but have Wipe programs. If you need encryption, for free, it's hard to beat the TOR program.

A few things I've learned over the years is:

1. Choice of MH, HPS, or enhanced lamps only helps the pocketbook of hydro shops, not plant health. Some of my first grows were using HPS exclusively at only 38 watts/s.f. and they were incredible.

2. Soil is very forgiving. One "aw shit" with hydro and you're toast.

3. It's a weed. If you apply the same cheap foods and methods that you would growing tomatoes, you'll do fine.

Here's an experiment using plain soil, cheap foods, custom soil and mostly my own crosses. https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/9114-spin-out-chemical-root-pruning.html

Here's what I and other commercial growers think about bloom foods, as stolen by another cannabis jerk - http://forum.grasscity.com/indoor-marijuana-growing/215941-never-ending-abuse-phosphorous-enhance-flowering.html
 

acidking

Well-Known Member
1. Choice of MH, HPS, or enhanced lamps only helps the pocketbook of hydro shops, not plant health. Some of my first grows were using HPS exclusively at only 38 watts/s.f. and they were incredible.
So what is your personal preference for indoor grow lighting?

2. Soil is very forgiving. One "aw shit" with hydro and you're toast.
Agreed, but I live downtown in a second story apartment, soil really isn't an realistic option for my location. I do love the spinout containers, I was intrigued by the tech when I first read about them probably 5 or 6 years ago, if I had the space, or a house in the country, you can bet I'd be growing in soil.

Here's what I and other commercial growers think about bloom foods, as stolen by another cannabis jerk - http://forum.grasscity.com/indoor-marijuana-growing/215941-never-ending-abuse-phosphorous-enhance-flowering.html

I'll keep it in mind, but so far a low (N), High (P), and mid (K) is working great for me in the last two weeks of flower, as is a short flush. I don't generally flush for more than 2 days... which seems to be enough for the plant to get rid of some of it's extra stores... without any obvious detrimental effects.

Cheers,
Acidking
 

patlpp

New Member
@acidking - I've seen great results utilizing Advanced Overdrive which is comparable to CNS ripe. How much ripe do you use for each dose? The reason I asked is that Overdrive is 30-35$/qt whereas Ripe is 20$ . However, Overdrive dosage (recommeded) is 8ml/gal. Isn't ripe like 20ml/gal?
 

Ringsixty

Well-Known Member
When i started growing i bought into these things, boost, big bud etc, and thought that it was those which was giving me good yields. Then once i was able to grow a nice happy plant (basically once i bought a real ph meter not one of those 2 prong bastards) i did a few side by side comparisson grows. The additives made no difference to my yield.
Same here.bongsmilie
 

acidking

Well-Known Member
@acidking - I've seen great results utilizing Advanced Overdrive which is comparable to CNS ripe. How much ripe do you use for each dose? The reason I asked is that Overdrive is 30-35$/qt whereas Ripe is 20$ . However, Overdrive dosage (recommeded) is 8ml/gal. Isn't ripe like 20ml/gal?
Ripe is about $26 per gallon and is a complete nutrient solution at 20ml/gal, not an additive.
Overdrive is $118 gallon and a supplement to be used in conjunction with your other nutrients. Overdrive's 8ml is 40% of Ripe's 20ml if you take that gallon of Overdrive and multiply it x 40% to get how much the equivalent overdrive usage would cost compared to Ripe, it comes to $47, and that cost is on top of the other nutrients you need to be feeding your plants, because Overdrive isn't a complete nutrient system.

I used to use AN's products but they were causing more problems than they were worth, especially since they aren't stable, nutrients falling out of solution is a big problem, and once they do, no amount of shaking is going to help. My brand new bottle of pH perfect Connoisseur B was so bad that it was like 2 ounces of Rock Candy at the bottom of the container, I even tried getting it back in suspension by mixing the crystalized nutrients it with water and Fulvic Acid in a blender, to no avail. I still have it, but I refuse to use it. If your nutrients can't stay suspended in solution then it screws up the amounts your plants are getting. Most of their additives ended up causing me major pH problems and promoting root rot that could only be solved by flushing the system and shocking with H2O2. They may work well for soil, but for Hydro I've found AN products to be a nightmare, there are better/cheaper nutrients out there. Botanicare's CNS17 is my favorite so far. I've tried the following Brands/Products - Ionic's - Grow/Bloom/Boost, General Hydroponic's - Flora series (and FloraNova), Advanced Nutrients - Sensi, Connoisseur, Bud Ignitor, Nirvana, Piranha, Sensizym, Tarantula, Botanicare's - CNS17, Liquid Karma, Cal-Mag, Humboldt Nutrients - Gravity, Hydrofarm's - Grow/Bloom dry nutrients, Hygrozyme - Hygrozyme, and Generic - Fulvic Acid, Silica and H2O2. From the list of nutrients, Advanced Nutrients was the worst performer and caused the most problems.
 

Huel Perkins

Well-Known Member
@acidking - I've seen great results utilizing Advanced Overdrive which is comparable to CNS ripe. How much ripe do you use for each dose? The reason I asked is that Overdrive is 30-35$/qt whereas Ripe is 20$ . However, Overdrive dosage (recommeded) is 8ml/gal. Isn't ripe like 20ml/gal?
I've used Overdrive (free samples from a local shop) the last two weeks of flowering on half of my garden in two consecutive grows and so no difference whatsoever. I've also tried the dry powder Kool Bloom in the same manner and saw nothing in terms of improved bud size or trich development. Unfortunately i actually paid for the dry Kool Bloom.

All of these final stage bloom boosters are bogus in my experience....
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
I also think that they use silly high prices for the products to convince you that they must surely be worthwhile if they cost that much. Growers can be blind fools at times.
 

cephalopod

Well-Known Member
As an added note, studies have shown that THC levels are highest in the morning and degrade throughout the day, which is why the extended dark periods before harvest have gained traction. Whether there is any benefit to adding extra days to a dark period, I don't know, but by harvesting after a dark period, or first thing in the morning, you will be harvesting at your plants peak THC time of day.


This is a honest question here...where does the thc go after the lights come on?
 
Top