willard3 said:
-
If you need help identifying a pepper, disease, or plant issue, please post in Identification.
Nutrient Deficiency?
- Thread starter newbiepepperguy
- Start date
This is a rather trivial topic that you seem to have taken to heart solid7.
There is a world of information out there that anyone could use to argue a point - rose growers vs medicinal growers. Heck some even argue that the world is flat. At the end of the day it's no skin off my nose if you don't believe in x product, or y method.
It's also not something that I have any interest in going into great lengths and efforts just so a random poster (no offense OP
) believe's what I say and follows my methods over someone else's simply because I know there's more than one way to skin a cat. That said if that's the path you choose than more power to you. Good luck on your grow this year.
Neil
There is a world of information out there that anyone could use to argue a point - rose growers vs medicinal growers. Heck some even argue that the world is flat. At the end of the day it's no skin off my nose if you don't believe in x product, or y method.
It's also not something that I have any interest in going into great lengths and efforts just so a random poster (no offense OP
) believe's what I say and follows my methods over someone else's simply because I know there's more than one way to skin a cat. That said if that's the path you choose than more power to you. Good luck on your grow this year. Neil
That's good - because the actual science doesn't favor you one bit. I could do a Northeast Chile Man special here, and deluge you with a myriad of scholarly links - but you'll still just follow, and continue to promote the same old line.Blister said:It's also not something that I have any interest in going into great lengths and efforts just so a random poster (no offense OP
.
By the way, it's not trivial when you're recommending bad practices to someone who is new, or unfamiliar with, successful growing. When it impacts the complexity of a grow, or the bottom line (read: $), it's not trivial. And just because a thing is done, does not mean that it works in the way that you think it does!
You've been around for a bit. I've seen your posts. Frankly it wouldn't matter what I say, link or post, scientific or not. You're right on your head and will go to great lengths to "prove" that your right, much like the people that argue the earth is flat. That's the part that I have no interest in.
Again good luck with your season.
Neil
Again good luck with your season.
Neil
Yes, it would, actually. But you're not the kind of person who supports opinion with fact, are you? You said your piece, and it's expected to be taken as gospel. I've had a few views that have changed since I've started coming around here. Nobody should have to go through the confusing shit that newbies have to go through to learn about a subject they love. (or desperately want to)Blister said:
Except that we're not arguing about a flat earth. Although, this is a distinct parallel. You have the old school "veg" and "bloom" mentality, and I have the controversial "new" view that plants don't selectively uptake nutrients. And I can very much see why you'd not be keen to (try to) defend your position. God forbid you should try to help people disseminate all of the bullshit that is floating around out there, making some people rich, while frustrating others.Blister said:
Thanks for the well wishes. I believe it's going to be a grand growing season.
I'm sure that your plants look great - but it doesn't mean that what you said earlier was true. There is more than one facet to growing, and the environmental ones are often bigger than the nutritional ones. (but it's still important to have a good foundation)Blister said:
.
Plants still don't take up nutrients preferentially, just because you put more of something there, than something else. It never worked that way, but marketing makes people believe that it does.
Considering Blister was talking about growing in Coco, the Bloom and Veg technique wouldn't be reliant upon the assumption that plants selectively up take nutrients. Since there's little to no nutrients in Coco, it seems like using the Bloom or Veg would force the plant to take up more or less of each nutrient. Just like if you set four slices of bread and one egg on an otherwise empty table in front of a starving person, that person is going to eat more bread than eggs. If less eggs forces the man to stop growing, but sufficient bread allows him to grow flowers on his head, I'm sure he's going to start growing a bunch of flowers on his head. Idk.. I didn't go to college to study botany, and I highly doubt anyone of this thread did either. In the end, we all just spew whatever we've been able to find on the internet that we've decide to believe. Or there's the ones that have tested different methods and have for some reason got better results from one method than the other. That to me sounds more promising than relying on something someone else read on the internet, whether the one method was actually the reason behind the better outcome or not.
Beardedpepper said:
Sorry, but you're saying the same thing, and it's false. This isn't an opinion, and it's not something that I dreamed up. The growing media is irrelevant, unless the media, itself, claims some of the available nutrients. (such as the case of nitrogen fixation in uncomposted cellulose)
.
Plants don't choose what nutrients they use, nor do they binge, based on availability. Your eggs and bread analogy has no application, whatsoever, to plants They take up what's available, up to their required amount. No more, and only less if some portion of the nutrients have been limited. Plants don't eat - they exchange ions.
.
solid7 said:
That's why I said "sufficient" amount, and not "excessive" amount. My point was that if the media is lacking nitrogen, and you feed it a fertilizer that has nitrogen in it, but less than what the plant normally needs, and had a "sufficient" amount of phosphorus (just as much as the plant needs), it may be inclined to focus most of it's energy on reproducing. Yes, you are right. Plants typically only take up what they need. Any more would cause issues. But plants' needs also change throughout the different stages of growth. You are giving bad advice saying that most medias have a sufficient amount of nutrients. I have used several different types of big name potting soils that were suppose to food for 3-6 months, and have never had a sufficient amount of really any one kind of nutrients in those potting soils for my plants. I have always had to add nutrients. Coco medium would definitely be lacking in nutrients. Even with the rabbit manure he said he amends it with.
Beardedpepper said:
What are you talking about??? I most certainly did not say that! Coco is high in K, but otherwise inert. In other words, it has to be fertilized! And of course it's going to take up what it's lacking. That's why I said that when you correct a limiting factor, the plant responds with vigor - and this can be mistaken for supplemental growth.
Even when I use the term "selective", I'm using it in a very selective way. Plants are indeed, very selective, when it comes to nutrients - but it's based on need, not preference. (or use due to availability) Here is what I'm talking about:
http://plantcellbiology.masters.grkraj.org/html/Plant_Cellular_Physiology4-Absorption_Of_Mineral_Nutrients.htm
The Article said:
I honestly have no idea how you've so catastrophically misinterpreted what I've said. My point has been, consistently, that there is no need for separate "Veg" and "Bloom" fertilizers. I'm squarely in the "Grow Only" camp.