I wasn't able to see the pics very well before, imo, it doesn't look to bad. I think with just regular waterings, slightly heavy on the run off, to wash out the bad stuff, it should be fine.
I agree with pretty much everything you say here. It's not a desirable situation at all but I think 'regular light-very light' feed, of balanced nutes, until the plant looks like it's getting better, is the way to go.
I personally would ph the waterings (for the problem plant only), to ~6, unless the ph of the soil is known to be to low, if that were the case, water at ~7 or so, seems like it would be okay. The soil/medium itself, controls the ph much more so than what you are watering with, from my limited experience of testing it. i.e. if you water 5.0 peat with 7.0 water, then test the peat, it will just read ~5.2 (not exact, but (from memory), pretty close).
I've never had problems using salt based nutes in 'soil', that were not just because my ph pen died on me unknowingly. All I have experience with was either dynagro grow and dynagro foliage pro, either by themselves. Always using the numbers I posted previously.
I agree, runoff is least ideal way to get precise idea of what is actually going on in the root zone ph or ec. From my limited experience, e.c./ppm of run of is not totally bad though. If you put in 700ppm and it comes out 2,000+ ppm, I believe you have ~found your problem and I have a good feeling this is what o.p. would see. When I did very little testing, I watered with 1.3 ec, my medium (peat and virmuclite), was 1.3 ec and my run off was 1.3 ec. Again, I tested this very little, no more than 5 pots of medium but it was pretty consistent iirc and i believe I do.
As for runoff ph, I gave a simple example above and any more than that, I would have to do more testing again and I think it would deserve it's own thread. I do pretty much agree, it's least ideal way to get actual root zone numbers. Growing organic soil now and my belief is that the ph of the soil needs to be near perfect before anything is put into it.
I have a bluelab soil ph pen and I don't care for it (for several reasons) and from what I can tell, it's ~the same 'hardware', as a ph liquid tester, just on the end of a stick, plus the 'contact area' is pretty small. From my experience, if a ph pen can be calibrated, it will work, so long as it can make good contact with whatever you are testing.
This is what I use to test my mediums/soil now. Most people laugh at me for it but it seems to work very well for me. Actually want to get a cheaper one and cut the plastic off that protect the probe so it can make contact with the soil better, may just do it with the one here and just leave a piece on there that will keep it from getting bumped to much when setting in a glass of water to test.
Blue lab soil ph tester left, HM ph 'liquid' tester on the right. The HM, for me, has always been faster, more consistent and more accurate in both liquid and soils/mediums. Both pens just calibrated.
Note: If attempting to do this with liquids ph pen, Be very gental. I make indent in soil with cap of pen, fairly moist - wet soil, allow time after wetting for ph to settle, gently press ph pen into the indent you made with the cap, you could also just use your fingers if you don't want to use the cap. Check several spots for consistency. I haven't tried this with e.c. pens, I have e.c. pens for medium/soil that I am happy with.
pens in reverse order here, in liquid..
Not trying to say you are wrong about anything, it's just my opinions and how I do things currently. Always seems to be different lol
The problem with flushing soil that has been pre-amended is that it washes out the salts that are water soluble and leaves everything else behind. You end up with a soil that is just as out of balance as it was before just with different unknown elements remaining. I have worked with many many growers in this situation withOF/
I agree with pretty much everything you say here. It's not a desirable situation at all but I think 'regular light-very light' feed, of balanced nutes, until the plant looks like it's getting better, is the way to go.
I personally would ph the waterings (for the problem plant only), to ~6, unless the ph of the soil is known to be to low, if that were the case, water at ~7 or so, seems like it would be okay. The soil/medium itself, controls the ph much more so than what you are watering with, from my limited experience of testing it. i.e. if you water 5.0 peat with 7.0 water, then test the peat, it will just read ~5.2 (not exact, but (from memory), pretty close).
I've never had problems using salt based nutes in 'soil', that were not just because my ph pen died on me unknowingly. All I have experience with was either dynagro grow and dynagro foliage pro, either by themselves. Always using the numbers I posted previously.
I agree, runoff is least ideal way to get precise idea of what is actually going on in the root zone ph or ec. From my limited experience, e.c./ppm of run of is not totally bad though. If you put in 700ppm and it comes out 2,000+ ppm, I believe you have ~found your problem and I have a good feeling this is what o.p. would see. When I did very little testing, I watered with 1.3 ec, my medium (peat and virmuclite), was 1.3 ec and my run off was 1.3 ec. Again, I tested this very little, no more than 5 pots of medium but it was pretty consistent iirc and i believe I do.
As for runoff ph, I gave a simple example above and any more than that, I would have to do more testing again and I think it would deserve it's own thread. I do pretty much agree, it's least ideal way to get actual root zone numbers. Growing organic soil now and my belief is that the ph of the soil needs to be near perfect before anything is put into it.
I have a bluelab soil ph pen and I don't care for it (for several reasons) and from what I can tell, it's ~the same 'hardware', as a ph liquid tester, just on the end of a stick, plus the 'contact area' is pretty small. From my experience, if a ph pen can be calibrated, it will work, so long as it can make good contact with whatever you are testing.
This is what I use to test my mediums/soil now. Most people laugh at me for it but it seems to work very well for me. Actually want to get a cheaper one and cut the plastic off that protect the probe so it can make contact with the soil better, may just do it with the one here and just leave a piece on there that will keep it from getting bumped to much when setting in a glass of water to test.
Blue lab soil ph tester left, HM ph 'liquid' tester on the right. The HM, for me, has always been faster, more consistent and more accurate in both liquid and soils/mediums. Both pens just calibrated.
Note: If attempting to do this with liquids ph pen, Be very gental. I make indent in soil with cap of pen, fairly moist - wet soil, allow time after wetting for ph to settle, gently press ph pen into the indent you made with the cap, you could also just use your fingers if you don't want to use the cap. Check several spots for consistency. I haven't tried this with e.c. pens, I have e.c. pens for medium/soil that I am happy with.
pens in reverse order here, in liquid..
Not trying to say you are wrong about anything, it's just my opinions and how I do things currently. Always seems to be different lol
Last edited:
