All of the fertilizers I have in the house have a low P value. I have one that's specifically for peppers (Chilli Focus) that has an NPK of 3 - 1 - 4.4. I also ordered another fertilizer which I thought was just fish extract but apparently is a full-on fertilizer (Biobizz Fish-Mix) with an NPK of 5 - 1 - 4. Is phosphate less important or something? I know too much nitrogen will negatively impact fruitset so I just want to be sure I'm doing things right. It's the first time I'm really going to use fertilizers and I'm a bit cautious.
-
If you need help identifying a pepper, disease, or plant issue, please post in Identification.
How important are phosphates?
- Thread starter b3rnd
- Start date
This is my favorite topic.b3rnd said:
.
P value should always be the lowest of the three, unless you have a soil test or an expert agronomist, who tells you otherwise.
.
Having more of something doesn't give you "better" of whatever it's function is. Phosphorus is the building block of strong roots. But your plant knows how much it needs. You can't add more, get more. Just like you can't induce flowering by adding potassium. (although you can by dropping N)
I know that's what you've always been told... but do you really know that for sure?b3rnd said:
.
My testing and growing says completely otherwise. I mean, too much salt-based nitrogen, at the point of burning, can surely ruin your fruitset.
.
Here's the kick, though... If you drop N levels at flowering, just like the cannabis growers, be aware that they are OK with yellowing leaves at flowering. That's basically an "end of life cycle" acceptance. Even then, some of the better growers keep their N constant, and have green plants throughout. So, make your own decision on strategy, there. LOL
.
I only throw that part in because so much of what we end up with, revolves around pot growers. (for better and for worse)
By the way... don't mistake what I've said. Dropping N can induce flowering, but it doesn't mean that it's optimal to either induce, or to reduce. The plant will flower when it wants - no need to induce. And if you keep the whole plant healthy, you'll be well-primed to stay in continuous pod production mode.
.
Either of your ferts will work fine. You can keep using them throughout your entire grow. No need to get crazy with cycling nutrients at intervals. (as in, there is no need to switch to "bloom" nutes) Keeping it simple, generally offers the greatest reward. (unless you like complicated)
.
Either of your ferts will work fine. You can keep using them throughout your entire grow. No need to get crazy with cycling nutrients at intervals. (as in, there is no need to switch to "bloom" nutes) Keeping it simple, generally offers the greatest reward. (unless you like complicated)
Chilidude said:
Define "seems to be helpful"...
.
By my evidence, when N is reduced during fruit/flower, there also seems to be a corresponding reduction in output continuity, or a "cycle". Whereas continuous N, by the same evidence, results in a continuous output, plus vegetative growth and sustainment. Also, as I posted in another thread, even a non-ideal formula can produce spectacular results. I did not use bloom booster here. I used a combination of fish fertilizer (5-1-1) for the first 3 months of the grow, and CNS17 (3-1-2) for the remainder. This was an OUTSIDE grow, and look at what I got:
.
.
What's the point of that, you might ask? Well, not all of my plants perform that well, even though it's the same media, same conditions, same basic food. My point is, how well do you define "seems to be helpful"? I've spent a lot of time doing comparative testing of different nutrients and strategies. In none of my testing did higher P or K than N, produce anything that did better, in the long run. But by the same token... One must be studious with this subject. Because I concluded that this plant was just a freak. I've not seen pod production like that before, or since. And nothing in my garden has every outproduced either my Fish fert or CNS17 grows.
.
Balanced nutrients in hydroponics would lead to higher overall TDS. Not what you want. But in soil, or Drain to Waste applications, not so much of a problem. Not ideal, either, but you can't win them all. I'd take a 4-4-4 balanced fertilizer for the life of the plant, over multi-part snake oil formulations, any day.
.
Yes, it's a true statement that a balanced fertilizer would work fine. Where I have a problem, is when companies intentionally mislead people into buying multi-part products for a grow, when in fact, they know very well what the actual science behind the plant is. People are making ridiculous money off this, and in the end, we don't need it to be good growers. We don't need to keep passing on junk science. Growing should be fun and easy.
That is why i also study the effect of the different npk rations in coco coir growing, how does the Ghe floramicro/floramato fertilizer with 6-2-6 that i change a little bit to increase the portion of the K compared to the N portion in the flowering period compare to the Hesi coco 3-4-5 in the end of the season.
We will see what kind of results these two will create in the end for us all to see as it is good for the chilikind.
We will see what kind of results these two will create in the end for us all to see as it is good for the chilikind.
Chilidude said:
Your coco coir actually has enough K in it to sustain several entire grows, with no addition. So, the higher K is actually even less necessary. However, for that K to be available, you need to dose Calcium (possibly) a bit more often than usual. Or add in a good compost, to take care of that for you.
That Hesi is some oddball stuff. They use a 1-part formula, but it's completely out of whack. 3-4-5... I find it odd that anyone would want to sacrifice so much of their limited TDS allowance on such an unbalanced formulation. But I'm guessing their marketing department probably has a stronger pull than their research department. (assuming that they actually have one)
.
Are companies in Europe not required to provide a guaranteed analysis of their products? Or does the one they have just not include Calcium?
.
Are companies in Europe not required to provide a guaranteed analysis of their products? Or does the one they have just not include Calcium?
solid7 said:
I dont know about that part, but most companies do say what they have added in the fertilizer and Hesi coco does say it have calcium, but the label doest say how much. However it seems that the added calsium in it seem to be just enough for the chili growing needs, as i dont see any calsium related deficiencies.