Why do people care about getting good ph for water used in final flushing?

[JAB]

If the PH is not in the correct range then yes your plant will lockout and ONLY uptake water which end result feeds off its stored nutrients and will kill your plant in a quicker, more stressful and aggressive way. Less stress the better. The quality of your plant will ensure that your getting the most out of the strain you are growing. The reason your question is hard to answer for me is because your literally causing intentional harm to your plant by not PHing the water so itll lock itself out. Which is counteractive to the main end goal of a healthy, quality dense bud filled plant. Just by researching this website and following along i can tell that the last 2 or so weeks of life packs on bud weight and creates a more dense bud which is what we are all after right? Keeping your plant alive and healthy until the end will ensure the quality of your bud and allow it to grow to its fullest potential. I dont see the point in intentionally causing harm and adding stress right before shes ready to go naturally. If you plain PH watered the plant in last week of life she is going to use up the leftover nutes in the soil anyways and this seems more natural. Just my opinion of course.

 

[CannaDaTaBiz]

This thread is cracking me up! Ask question. Get an answer. Argue with said answer. Ask same question worded differently. Get same answer. Argue with said answer. Hilarious!

I was asking why, no one answered why. Neither anyone said they have tested using higher PH water, nor gave any solid rationale about this.

The reason i ask for reasons and rationale or some experience, is because there have also been lots of false beliefs in the past, hence im not convinced by opinions without testing or even solid rationale.

This is like me asking how world was created and am being offered a bible and being told that its the truth and end of story..

I understand many people think about things from personal experiences and what they have found out works for them based on what others said. But im trying to look at the issue from more objective point of view. I want to understand what is happening inside the plant and in the soil, im not asking what people have experienced works for them.

Good example is the fact that people used to think that flushing with everything is essential. All the pros said this. However it turned out not to be true. It shows that people did not understand what was really going on, but were just talking about what worked for them, about their personal experiences. Here people are answering again what works for them, about their personal experiences, but no one answers why what they do works the best.

Again im not saying that its wrong to PH the water, im asking what is the rationale behind this accepted "fact".

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.

I would add that if you cant explain it at all, you dont understand it at all. You might know that A is better than B, but if you cant explain why A is better than B, you dont understand them. But then again how can you be sure that A is really better than B and its not just dependant on the situation that puts B in disadvantage? That would be just knowing your own personal experience about A and B i nthat particular situation you observed them.

 

[MIAutomatic]

It is funny, cracking me up too.
This dude is just getting worked up talking himself in circles when more experienced growers (not me) have taken the time to answer his questions, then tells they their years of experience are not good enough….

 

[CannaDaTaBiz]

If the PH is not in the correct range then yes your plant will lockout and ONLY uptake water which end result feeds off its stored nutrients and will kill your plant in a quicker, more stressful and aggressive way. Less stress the better. The quality of your plant will ensure that your getting the most out of the strain you are growing. The reason your question is hard to answer for me is because your literally causing intentional harm to your plant by not PHing the water so itll lock itself out. Which is counteractive to the main end goal of a healthy, quality dense bud filled plant. Just by researching this website and following along i can tell that the last 2 or so weeks of life packs on bud weight and creates a more dense bud which is what we are all after right? Keeping your plant alive and healthy until the end will ensure the quality of your bud and allow it to grow to its fullest potential. I dont see the point in intentionally causing harm and adding stress right before shes ready to go naturally. If you plain PH watered the plant in last week of life she is going to use up the leftover nutes in the soil anyways and this seems more natural. Just my opinion of course.

Yea this makes sense that if not stressing the plants gives better results. But many people intentionally stress the plants in the end and claim they get better results, there being more trichomes being produced as a defence and/or trichomes turning cloudy or amber faster. Naturally there are different types of stress that might effect the plant differently.

Do you know if some people have strategically tested different plant stressors and their effects on end product? I know keeping the plant in the dark before chopping for was it 48 hours was optimal for terpene production. This naturally is different type of stress, but nevertheless it is putting the plant in environment that would normally be very poor for it and getting better results than keeping the plant in perfect environment until the end.

I have not been able to come to any conclusion about stressing in the end. I tried to put screws on the stem, given ice water etc. but have not been able to test it well enough with cuttings to really see if they made a difference or not. Also some people say its good and others say its not, so..

 

[JAB]

Yea this makes sense that if not stressing the plants gives better results. But many people intentionally stress the plants in the end and claim they get better results, there being more trichomes being produced as a defence and/or trichomes turning cloudy or amber faster. Naturally there are different types of stress that might effect the plant differently.

Do you know if some people have strategically tested different plant stressors and their effects on end product? I know keeping the plant in the dark before chopping for was it 48 hours was optimal for terpene production. This naturally is different type of stress, but nevertheless it is putting the plant in environment that would normally be very poor for it and getting better results than keeping the plant in perfect environment until the end.

I have not been able to come to any conclusion about stressing in the end. I tried to put screws on the stem, given ice water etc. but have not been able to test it well enough with cuttings to really see if they made a difference or not.

Only thing i can say is just from opinion is that there are definitely different types of stress that can benefit the plant for instance LST stresses but produces more light impact which triggers more growth. There is no benefit to lock out that i know of. Just high stress that leads to no nutes, high stress and death.

 

[Son of Hobbes]

@CannaDaTaBiz

For starters, give this a read through:

Flushing: The Myth that won't Die

Of all the garden myths that exist, I hate this one the most! I'll do my best to drive nails in its coffin, once and for all! So first, I'm going to give you a little information, then, DO your homework! This can't be answered in a paragraph, you need to get some in depth information. I'm...

www.autoflower.org

We've literally been discussing the fallacies of flushing for nearly 6 years on this forum. Whether you agree, disagree, on the fence, etc, there's some great answers, links, and perspectives from all around the globe.

You seem to be pushing back on any opinions, advice, or guidance on this topic, yet you don't seem to have any real grasp of it yourself (and I say that respectfully.) If you're perceiving your fellow growers as hostile; I think they are feeling the same thing from you about your willingness to even discuss the topic. Just some friendly advice, approach tends to breed the response

So are you saying that flushing is not needed if you grow in a certain way, like keep nutrient intake in check etc. But has benefits if people dont grow optimally? How big of part of growers you think uses optimal amounts of nutrients and knows how when to reduce them etc? Or would you say that most growers use the amounts of nutrients put on the package? If so, are you saying that those amounts are the perfect amounts or just that it does not matter if you give too much nutes?

Do you not agree that especially new growers have the tendency to overfeed the plants? I know i dont have to heavy feed the plants, but i would argue that most people do feed at least a bit too much.

For starters you're arguing two different types of flushing.

Flushing to fix problems with your medium is Animal A (which, again this is still the act of running water through the pot to leach out water soluble nutrients in the medium.)

Flushing at harvest because you think it's removing things from the plant is Animal B (which in reality, it's still leaching water soluble nutrients from the medium.)

As to growers overfeeding plants; that is a common issue, but again you'd point to "Animal A" to help correct that (and by correct, I mean you're trying to correct the issues in your medium, which in turns help correct things with the plant. You're not flushing anything out of the plant, burn damage is damage done.)

Many growers also start their nutrient regiments (especially if it's new to them or the grow) at 1/4 to 1/2 strength of normal recommendations. This helps you see how the plants react. Just like you wouldn't cram a t-bone steak down a babies throat, the nutrient requirements for seedlings and establishing plants is generally less than something already in the full swing.

Again this topic is about how to flush if you do flush, not about whether your optimal growing methods require flushing or not.

Then follow the status quo that growers blindly accepted for decades with absolutely little science to substantiate the claims. If you're not open to the idea that harvest flushing may not in fact do the thing what growers generally accepted it as so to do, then why try to reinvent the wheel?

Flush with pH'd water , case closed (though not scientifically proven.) It's literally that simple.

Again, I will refer you to agricultural leaching:

"In agricultural ecosystems, leaching is an important balance between preventing salt accumulation and removing nutrients from soil. Without proper amounts of water to leach these salts (known as the leaching fraction) from the upper soil horizons, the growth of the plants can be slightly to severely impacted. The impact depends on the salt tolerance of the plant and the type of salts accumulating in the soil."

If people settle on some "truth" without being able to explain why that is true, then it should be questioned.

By that same slippery slope logic, should we here not all reserve that same right to question someone who questions everything?

It accumulates inside the plant tissue and if you feed the plant too much, it will accumulate too much of it in its tissues and then you get for example nitrogen toxicity. Or is this not true?

If you stop giving a plant nutrients. Why do you think the leaves turn yellow, if it is not because the plant uses nutrients from the old leaf tissues to grow new tissue? (and yes i know not all nutrients act like this, but nitrogen does, hence the yellow leaf example)

Or do you claim that there is a threshold for nutrients inside plant tissue and if it gets too much of them, then they get locked and cannot be used by the plant anymore?

Or are you just trying to be smart and are talking as if im personally trying to remove the excess nutrients, when im talking about the plants using them?

If that's the case then, then this was already answered. If you want the plants to use the nutrients already in the soil, you still pH the water because that's the OPTIMAL RANGE of solubility of those nutrients in the medium. You've cut the nutrients, now you're just giving the medium the pH'd water it needs for whatever is remaining to be uptaken. You're not flushing the plant, you're flushing the medium (Animal A,) which still requires moving a volume of water through the medium itself.

Boomsies! *mic drop*

I was asking why, no one answered why. Neither anyone said they have tested using higher PH water, nor gave any solid rationale about this.

The reason i ask for reasons and rationale or some experience, is because there have also been lots of false beliefs in the past, hence im not convinced by opinions without testing or even solid rationale.

Because many growers have been down this path before your existential questions about cultivation ever existed. Not everything that happens with plants is brand new territory, much of this is territory already traveled. And that doesn't mean we shouldn't still discuss and have conversations, that's why places like this forum exist. But hammering on the same note isn't much of a song.

Here people are answering again what works for them, about their personal experiences, but no one answers why what they do works the best.

Because there is no discernible difference. And science seems to back that more than not. I say this respectfully, have you even looked at any of these flushing trials or rhetoric?

I know keeping the plant in the dark before chopping for was it 48 hours was optimal for terpene production. This naturally is different type of stress, but nevertheless it is putting the plant in environment that would normally be very poor for it and getting better results than keeping the plant in perfect environment until the end.

Again, there is very little science that backs this up. Can YOU explain this?

The idea behind crop steering the plants isn't that you just stress it with anything. It's the idea that you intentionally introduce specific types of stress at specific times in order to try to produce a desired response.

If any/all stress made the plants more potent, then all new growers on the planet would have the most fuego weed in existence (as they overfeed their plants and improperly pH their water wink wink lol.)

 

[Death The Cultivator]

It accumulates inside the plant tissue and if you feed the plant too much, it will accumulate too much of it in its tissues and then you get for example nitrogen toxicity. Or is this not true?

If you stop giving a plant nutrients. Why do you think the leaves turn yellow, if it is not because the plant uses nutrients from the old leaf tissues to grow new tissue? (and yes i know not all nutrients act like this, but nitrogen does, hence the yellow leaf example)

Or do you claim that there is a threshold for nutrients inside plant tissue and if it gets too much of them, then they get locked and cannot be used by the plant anymore?

Or are you just trying to be smart and are talking as if im personally trying to remove the excess nutrients, when im talking about the plants using them?

Better understanding pH dynamics in hydroponic culture – Science in Hydroponics

scienceinhydroponics.com

 

[Son of Hobbes]

I tried to put screws on the stem, given ice water etc. but have not been able to test it well enough with cuttings to really see if they made a difference or not. Also some people say its good and others say its not, so..

This goes back to my post about "bro science" that I put up a few weeks in Myth Busters. And it's not that bro science is inherently fake, false, or just not true, but it's not substantiated (and worse, can often be harmful with little rhetoric behind it,) and yet still blindly repeated over and over again because "someone told me so."

Putting skewers and screws in the stalks of your plants creates open wounds, which is like Olive Garden buffet for pests and pathogens. Wounding provides nutrients to pathogens and facilitates their entry into the tissue and subsequent infection.

Quit doing this.

Heck, I'll even take this one step further on the whole "flushing" thing before harvest by talking about senescence.

By cutting nutrients, you're basically forcing stress-induced senescence in the plant (senescence is the aging process of plants,) whereas letting them naturally die, you're speeding up that process.

Some growers think there's benefits to this because senescence causes chlorophyll to break down while the plant is still living, whiiiiiiiiiiich is in fact true.

BUT, perhaps is only a "pick-and-choose" part of the explanation.

There are three major reasons why leaf senescence is a crucial trait.

First, a leaf is an organ where carbohydrates, many nutrients and some novel compounds are synthesized. It is the major source for grain filling in crop such as barley, wheat and rice, which is especially true for flag leaves. The photosynthetic longevity of leaves is thus a major determinant of crop yield and biomass accumulation.

For example, premature senescence of photosynthetic leaves in soybean induced by abiotic stresses caused a loss of productivity due to a decrease in assimilatory capacity [3].

Another example is hybrid maize; analyses of over 50 years (1930–1980) of hybrid maize data in the USA and nearly 30 years (1959–1988) of maize hybrid yields in Ontario, Canada, found that the late onset of leaf senescence contributed to significant increases in maize yields [4,5].

Secondly, during leaf senescence, not only the green pigment chlorophyll but more importantly many nutrients such as vitamin C and proteins are quickly degraded.

Leaf senescence thus reduces the postharvest longevity of foliar vegetables and potted plants, and devalues animal feed.

Thirdly, a senescing leaf becomes more vulnerable to infection by pathogens, especially postharvest fungal pathogens, and some of the fungal pathogens may produce toxic chemicals, rendering our food and animal feed unsafe.


In summary, leaf senescence is an imperative trait that negatively impacts on crop yield and quality. With the increasingly understanding of regulatory mechanisms of leaf senescence, emerging new technologies targeting the leaf senescence trait have been, and will continue to be, developed for crop improvement.


So for whatever reason, while everyone is after "the fade," which can be quite natural in our annual cannabis plants, but when you're FORCING IT, you're likely doing more damage than good (in my humble opinion.)

 

[MIAutomatic]

This goes back to my post about "bro science" that I put up a few weeks in Myth Busters. And it's not that bro science is inherently fake, false, or just not true, but it's not substantiated (and worse, can often be harmful with little rhetoric behind it,) and yet still blindly repeated over and over again because "someone told me so."

Putting skewers and screws in the stalks of your plants creates open wounds, which is like Olive Garden buffet for pests and pathogens. Wounding provides nutrients to pathogens and facilitates their entry into the tissue and subsequent infection.

Quit doing this.

Heck, I'll even take this one step further on the whole "flushing" thing before harvest by talking about senescence.

By cutting nutrients, you're basically forcing stress-induced senescence in the plant (senescence is the aging process of plants,) whereas letting them naturally die, you're speeding up that process.

Some growers think there's benefits to this because senescence causes chlorophyll to break down while the plant is still living, whiiiiiiiiiiich is in fact true.

BUT, perhaps is only a "pick-and-choose" part of the explanation.

There are three major reasons why leaf senescence is a crucial trait.

First, a leaf is an organ where carbohydrates, many nutrients and some novel compounds are synthesized. It is the major source for grain filling in crop such as barley, wheat and rice, which is especially true for flag leaves. The photosynthetic longevity of leaves is thus a major determinant of crop yield and biomass accumulation.

For example, premature senescence of photosynthetic leaves in soybean induced by abiotic stresses caused a loss of productivity due to a decrease in assimilatory capacity [3].

Another example is hybrid maize; analyses of over 50 years (1930–1980) of hybrid maize data in the USA and nearly 30 years (1959–1988) of maize hybrid yields in Ontario, Canada, found that the late onset of leaf senescence contributed to significant increases in maize yields [4,5].

Secondly, during leaf senescence, not only the green pigment chlorophyll but more importantly many nutrients such as vitamin C and proteins are quickly degraded.

Leaf senescence thus reduces the postharvest longevity of foliar vegetables and potted plants, and devalues animal feed.

Thirdly, a senescing leaf becomes more vulnerable to infection by pathogens, especially postharvest fungal pathogens, and some of the fungal pathogens may produce toxic chemicals, rendering our food and animal feed unsafe.


In summary, leaf senescence is an imperative trait that negatively impacts on crop yield and quality. With the increasingly understanding of regulatory mechanisms of leaf senescence, emerging new technologies targeting the leaf senescence trait have been, and will continue to be, developed for crop improvement.


So for whatever reason, while everyone is after "the fade," which can be quite natural in our annual cannabis plants, but when you're FORCING IT, you're likely doing more damage than good (in my humble opinion.)

Wow!
Really great information, thanks @Son of Hobbes

This is what we are here for! I just learned some stuff.

 

[MIAutomatic]

Side bar to this silly show that has been going on, I really have learned so much on this site. I was on RIU for years before I came here. The knowledge on this site and the sense of community can’t be compared to any other online grow forum I have participated in.
You guys are all the best!