THCFarmer.com
121,301 Members Log In Register
Log In Register

2 Plants One Pot And Separating Them

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nybadboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

2 Plants One Pot And Separating Them

Nybadboy 43 Replies 12,746 Views
Page 2 of 3 · Replies 21–40 of 44
#28
i would just leave them plants together many growers do 2 plant side by side in one pot just make sure pot is begin enough
Years back we did out door planted in rows like potato mounding one plant on one side of mount one on other side ..
did really well
 
#29
Seamaiden said:
IIRC, aspen grow clonally, EG, again IIRC, the oldest living organism on earth is a stand of aspen somewhere in the Rockies that are thought to be something like 80,000yo. Cannabis is an annual that does not grow clonally even though it can be cloned. What you're thinking about is a method of growing clones together outside, pushed all together, to make them look like one plant. Each clone doesn't grow more than what its neighbor allows (and, believe you me, police count trunks, too). So, I don't know that they compete for space, when I've grown clones tightly together they just... grew together. They didn't grow bigger/better, they performed the same as a clone planted by itself. I hope that makes sense.


Makes sense. Didn't take into consideration for cannons being an annual plant either. Just something I had wondered about.
Click to expand...
 
#30
Seamaiden said:
IIRC, aspen grow clonally, EG, again IIRC, the oldest living organism on earth is a stand of aspen somewhere in the Rockies that are thought to be something like 80,000yo. Cannabis is an annual that does not grow clonally even though it can be cloned. What you're thinking about is a method of growing clones together outside, pushed all together, to make them look like one plant. Each clone doesn't grow more than what its neighbor allows (and, believe you me, police count trunks, too). So, I don't know that they compete for space, when I've grown clones tightly together they just... grew together. They didn't grow bigger/better, they performed the same as a clone planted by itself. I hope that makes sense.

The issue that is really presenting itself when one plants multiple seedlings together has to do as much with handling should they all turn out to be female (and either one of them is a keeper), and how rough you may need to be if one turns out to be a male, or hermies, etc. I don't think it's a hard rule in that regard, it's just a handling issue more than anything from my perspective.

I don't know, sorry!

Really? If it's starting from the top, wouldn't that indicate an immobile element, not mobile? Wouldn't a macronutrient that's immobile be something like Ca here? On a scientific level is why I'm asking these questions, because what you're posting doesn't make sense in that regard.
Click to expand...
Well bro if you know from a scientific level that ca is calcium which is a macro nutrient and its mobile if its working downwards on the plant its a micro deficiency micro nutrients are immobile ca can be moved to the top part of the plants thats why calcium deficiencies start at the bottom and go up
 
#31
Seamaiden said:
IIRC, aspen grow clonally, EG, again IIRC, the oldest living organism on earth is a stand of aspen somewhere in the Rockies that are thought to be something like 80,000yo. Cannabis is an annual that does not grow clonally even though it can be cloned. What you're thinking about is a method of growing clones together outside, pushed all together, to make them look like one plant. Each clone doesn't grow more than what its neighbor allows (and, believe you me, police count trunks, too). So, I don't know that they compete for space, when I've grown clones tightly together they just... grew together. They didn't grow bigger/better, they performed the same as a clone planted by itself. I hope that makes sense.

The issue that is really presenting itself when one plants multiple seedlings together has to do as much with handling should they all turn out to be female (and either one of them is a keeper), and how rough you may need to be if one turns out to be a male, or hermies, etc. I don't think it's a hard rule in that regard, it's just a handling issue more than anything from my perspective.

I don't know, sorry!

Really? If it's starting from the top, wouldn't that indicate an immobile element, not mobile? Wouldn't a macronutrient that's immobile be something like Ca here? On a scientific level is why I'm asking these questions, because what you're posting doesn't make sense in that regard.
Click to expand...
Macro nutrients are mobile so calcium is mobile cuz its a macro nutrient if it works top to bottom its micro nutrient deficiency
 
#32
@Bobby reefah She is not a bro

"An important characteristic of some nutrients is the ability to move within the plant tissue. In general, when certain nutrients are deficient in the plant tissue, that nutrient is able translocate from older leaves to younger leaves where that nutrient is needed for growth. Nutrients with this ability are said to be mobile nutrients, and include nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, and molybdenum. In contrast, immobile nutrients do not have the ability to translocate from old to new growth. Immobile nutrients include calcium, sulfur, boron, copper, iron, manganese, and zinc.
Nutrient mobility, or immobility, provides us with special clues when diagnosing deficiency symptoms. If the deficiency symptom appears first in the old growth, we know that the deficient nutrient is mobile. On the other hand, if the symptom appears in new growth, the deficient nutrient is immobile."
http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/mauisoil/c_relationship.aspx
 
Last edited:
#33
Bobby reefah said:
Well bro if you know from a scientific level that ca is calcium which is a macro nutrient and its mobile if its working downwards on the plant its a micro deficiency micro nutrients are immobile ca can be moved to the top part of the plants thats why calcium deficiencies start at the bottom and go up
Click to expand...
Bra, not bro. Ca is immobile. Deficiencies appear on newest growth, not older. It is considered by some to be one of the secondary macronutrients outside of NPK along with Mg and S.
Bobby reefah said:
Macro nutrients are mobile so calcium is mobile cuz its a macro nutrient if it works top to bottom its micro nutrient deficiency
Click to expand...
I think you want to reexamine that stance bro. Ca is immobile. You wanna read Homesteader's link, or one I provide you? It's cited by other researchers (as is Homesteader's), but what the hell, let's do it anyway, shall we?

"Calcium movement in plants is unidirectional, moving up from the roots and generally routed to meristematic zones and young tissue. Once deposited in leaf tissue it is not recycled, even under calcium stress conditions."
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00103627909366887
 
#35
Seamaiden said:
IIRC, aspen grow clonally, EG, again IIRC, the oldest living organism on earth is a stand of aspen somewhere in the Rockies that are thought to be something like 80,000yo. Cannabis is an annual that does not grow clonally even though it can be cloned. What you're thinking about is a method of growing clones together outside, pushed all together, to make them look like one plant. Each clone doesn't grow more than what its neighbor allows (and, believe you me, police count trunks, too). So, I don't know that they compete for space, when I've grown clones tightly together they just... grew together. They didn't grow bigger/better, they performed the same as a clone planted by itself. I hope that makes sense.

The issue that is really presenting itself when one plants multiple seedlings together has to do as much with handling should they all turn out to be female (and either one of them is a keeper), and how rough you may need to be if one turns out to be a male, or hermies, etc. I don't think it's a hard rule in that regard, it's just a handling issue more than anything from my perspective.

I don't know, sorry!

Really? If it's starting from the top, wouldn't that indicate an immobile element, not mobile? Wouldn't a macronutrient that's immobile be something like Ca here? On a scientific level is why I'm asking these questions, because what you're posting doesn't make sense in that regard.
Click to expand...
Calcium is a mobile nutrient
 
#36
@Bobby reefah Calcium is an immobile nutrient and thus why it shows deficiency in younger growth because the plant cannot transfer calcium from older leaves.
 
#38
Seamaiden said:
According to whom? Citation. If you know science, you can find citations.
Click to expand...
I do know science calcium is a macro nutrient macros are mobile they move up the plant im going to school for plants and i took a test on this, this month
 
#39
Homesteader said:
@Bobby reefah Calcium is an immobile nutrient and thus why it shows deficiency in younger growth because the plant cannot transfer calcium from older leaves.
Click to expand...
Then tell me why did we have a test on this and i got it correct then?
 
Page 2 of 3 · Replies 21–40 of 44
Back
Top Bottom