ghengas Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 Hi,i was wondering if you have to flush youre plants towards the end of youre grow if you are using bio gro/bloom.Should i flush them, or just stop feeding them,or feed them until harvest.Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer1 Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 You can’t wash the nutrient reserves from soil, soil based composts or composts except for the immediate soluble salts. You can,t flush nutrients from plants, you can starve them by just watering them. My advise if you are using an organic compost, is to alter your feed and reduce the amount towards the end of flowering. At the peak of blooming you would probably be using 1ml of grow and 3ml of bloom per litre of water. At about the end of week 6 change to some thing like 2ml gr and 2ml bl then 2ml gr 1ml bl then to the end 2 ml gr. This helps maintain the plants healthy right to the end of its life. This gives but that burns sweetly without the acrid taste produced by an excess of phosphorus. You don’t have to worry about the excess of nutrients in when growing with organic nutrients in the same way as you do with chemical fertilisers. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubblegumkid Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 (edited) ghengas u can flush nutriants and salts from any grow medium. STOP feeding 2 weeks before harvest and give only water. In the last 4 days ensure 20% flows from bottem of pot and remove it. In the last week or 2 plants DO need to be flushed. If u grow hydro and use an EC meter u will see the reading rise due to the plant expeling nutriants and salts into plan water. SO flush!!. Edited November 1, 2003 by bubblegumkid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad (the impala) Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 bubblegumkid -sorry mate, you're talking through your ass! - As my old schoolomaster would have said "read ot's post - read, mark,and inwardly digest!" Had you done your homework you'd have found out that you cannot extrapolate chemical hydro grow reactions into organics - they are wildly different! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sittingrelaxing Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 sorry mate, you're talking through your ass! go easy on the new fella.... sr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad (the impala) Posted November 1, 2003 Share Posted November 1, 2003 (edited) -apologies if a touch terse, am all "suited out" - have spent all day encased in one in the company of freemasons and their ilk - (the planet Zog is empty, they're all down here!) - it does not improve the temper of one who is at heart a sarong sort of a fella! ps probably something to do with too much blood in the tetrahytdracannabinol stream! - am remedying it post haste! :bush: Edited November 1, 2003 by farmweb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer1 Posted November 2, 2003 Share Posted November 2, 2003 I really like someone who knows their science! The IACR Rothampstead research station has had an ongoing experiment running continuously for over a 150 years. Using a field that has never had any fertiliser added to it. It has had a crop after crop of wheat taken off it from the start. They measure how much nutrient the crop takes out every year. They have sumps that collect the water that percolates through the top soil to ground water to check nutrient leaching. The average rain fall has been round 612 ml a year. The nutrient reserves in the top 22cm of soil is still round 2520 kilos of phosphorus and 7017 kilos of potash per hectare. The IACR soil research team are going to be really sad to hear every thing they have found to date has been totally wrong. So are all the horticultural science and advisory institutions world wide. As they all use the IACR data as the primary source to calculate nearly every thing to do with soil science relating to nutrient retention and leaching in the temperate zone. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghengas Posted November 2, 2003 Author Share Posted November 2, 2003 thanks everybody for youre help,so what you are saying ot is continue feeding them but just reduce the amounts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer1 Posted November 3, 2003 Share Posted November 3, 2003 Yes thats what I do. Take a look at the BioBizz chart, I have pinned it at the top of this forum. You can copy and print it. They recommend just water over the last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scraglor Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 I really like someone who knows their science!The IACR Rothampstead research station has had an ongoing experiment running continuously for over a 150 years. Using a field that has never had any fertiliser added to it. It has had a crop after crop of wheat taken off it from the start. They measure how much nutrient the crop takes out every year. They have sumps that collect the water that percolates through the top soil to ground water to check nutrient leaching. The average rain fall has been round 612 ml a year. The nutrient reserves in the top 22cm of soil is still round 2520 kilos of phosphorus and 7017 kilos of potash per hectare. The IACR soil research team are going to be really sad to hear every thing they have found to date has been totally wrong. So are all the horticultural science and advisory institutions world wide. As they all use the IACR data as the primary source to calculate nearly every thing to do with soil science relating to nutrient retention and leaching in the temperate zone. was interested so took a look at the iacr website, this small paragraph seems that they have changed their views, or is this only in particular circumstances? The overall surplus of P in the European Union, and concerns over eutrophication of fresh waters has lead to an increased interest in P losses from agricultural lands. Until recently P leaching from agricultural soils was considered to be negligible under most conditions so, consequently, it was little studied. However, measurements of P concentrations in drainage water from the famous, 156 year old Broadbalk experiment at Rothamsted have now disproved this. Unexpectedly, above about 60 mg P/ kg soil there was considerable P leaching, which was linearly related to soil P concentration (Heckrath et al. 1995). Other work has now confirmed this. Algal blooms are a common symptom of eutropication of fresh waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idle Hands Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Just a quick question about a 4 year old topic What time is considered 'peak of blooming' OT1 or anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCC Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 (edited) 5-7 weeks? e2a: I'm currently in debation wheather to give my 7 week girls grow only and then water for the final week, 9 weeks total. Edited November 24, 2007 by OCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer1 Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Nothing has changed, natural land and land farmed with good organic principles, means leaching is virtually zero, no different to how it has been for millions of years, the Rothampstead experiment is still ongoing as far as I know and as true today as it ever was. This is very different to the impact of chemically farmed land where millions of tons of soluble chemical salt fertilisers are applied every year, or industrial farming practises, where animals are kept in huge numbers on small areas of land or battery conditions, farmers spreading this waste at levels many times the ability of land to deal with and absorb. For many years, factory farmers and chemical companies have pointed at the Rothampstead experiment, to say we are not responsible for pollution. We have known since the fifties that they are responsible for polluting the water courses and aquifers. They are still in denial. The cost of this pollution every year in the uk alone is billions of £’s, this enviromental vandilisum has been allowed to continue because it supposedly supplies cheap food, who pays the hidden cost? We all do! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arbuscule Posted November 24, 2007 Share Posted November 24, 2007 Alarming stuff OT1 I get that the environmental vandalism of agribusiness leads to chemicals leaching into bodies of fresh-water and that the 'eutrophication' of these waters leads to dense populations of algal blooms. On a tiny scale in the 'biotope' of an aquarium overfeeding leads to excess nutrients in the water and consequent algal bloom. I imagine the same thing happens on a huge scale when nutrients leach into our waters Not sure if the shortsightedness of of agribusiness is inevitable due to shareholder obligations etc with their blind truncated timescales. Crying shame though I'm sure elected officials could do more to control this, but I guess their electoral timescales tend to work against measures which are wise in the long term but inconvenient in the short term. As you say, we're all paying the hidden cost of short term thinking, increasingly Wonder what the planet thinks of our species, if s/he/it 'thinks'? Got to be losing patience with the arrogant monkeys with our upright posture, opposable thumbs and much vaunted intelligence. Not really misanthropic here, just frustrated by our species' self-destructive blindness Thanks for the interlude from more obviously 'canna-specific' concerns. General organic gardening gems which slip into the canna discussions are teaching me more about growing canna (or any other plant) than any 'grow bible'. Cheers all Arbuscule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scraglor Posted November 25, 2007 Share Posted November 25, 2007 i dunno why they raen't fined by the ea? i used to work on a sewage works, and if we had high phosphorous or nitrates in our outfall the company would get fined like you wouldn't believe! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now