Epsilon v2 Plan, 6g per watt goal

[DrDankHands]

Epsilon Protocol v1.1 — 3×3 SOG Grow Bible (Autos, 300 W)​

Goal: Ultra‑high efficiency and yield in a 3×3 ft (0.91×0.91 m) tent using 36 autoflowers in a 6×6 SOG grid under ~300 W LED, CO₂ enrichment, living‑soil hybrid nutrition, and AI‑assisted environment control. Updated to include strain selection, canopy layout, and harvest‑flow design tailored to the 2025 rotation.

---

0) North‑Star Metrics​

• Yield per watt (lamp only): 4.0 g/W achieved (baseline), target 4.5–6.5 g/W.
• Yield per square foot: 148 g/ft² achieved, target 170–220 g/ft².
• Uniformity: emitter‑to‑emitter flow ±5%, PPFD map ≥70% within ±15%.
• Harvest flow: staged front→back, right→left access.

Principle: Photon capture × (CO₂ × VPD × root O₂) × uniformity × uptime = grams.

---

1) System Overview​

• Tent: 3×3 ft, access front & right only.
• Canopy: 36 autos in 6×6 grid, strain layout optimized for stretch, finish, and access.
• Light: ~300 W bar LED, 24/0.
• CO₂: Tablet/bucket generator, AI‑controlled 1000–1200 ppm.
• Airflow: 2 oscillating fans above canopy (corner‑mount), 2 Multifan S5 under canopy.
• Irrigation: 16 mm ring main, dual 2 L/h emitters per pot, fine disc filtration.
• Reservoir: 50 L sealed, aerated; 50/50 carbon‑polished dehu condensate + tap.
• Automation: AC Infinity AI controller (temp/RH/CO₂/VPD) + smart irrigation timer.

---

2) Environment Targets​

• Leaf temp: 27–29 °C veg/early, 26–28 °C mid/late.
• VPD: 1.0–1.2 kPa veg → 1.2–1.4 kPa bloom.
• CO₂: 800–1000 ppm veg; 1000–1200 ppm bloom.
• Placement: sensor at canopy center, shaded, gently moving air.
• Access flow: early harvest strains placed at front/right for staged removal.

---

3) Lighting Strategy​

• Target PPFD: 700–950 µmol/m²/s canopy average.
• DLI (24/0): 60–80 mol/m²/day.
• Placement: prime strains (Velvet, Twilight, Cherry) centered; stable workhorses (Zkittlez, BBOG) edges.
• Reflectance: use bright tent walls + optional side curtains.

---

4) CO₂ Integration​

• Bucket + tablets → tubing from above canopy.
• Controller logic: 950–1100 ppm veg, 1050–1200 ppm flower.
• Exhaust pulse logic prevents dumping enrichment.
• Staging: CO₂‑responsive strains (Twilight, Cherry) center canopy for longest exposure.

---

5) Airflow​

• Above: 2 oscillators corner‑mounted, angled across canopy.
• Under: 2 Multifan S5 diagonals, angled up.
• Exhaust: top back corner; intake opposite low.
• Goal: turbulent mixing, no dead zones.

---

6) Irrigation​

• Ring main racetrack: 16 mm rails 10 cm from walls, joined front & back.
• Feed point: mid‑bottom with optional trim valves.
• Emitters: 2 × 2 L/h per pot via 4 mm T, opposite pot edges.
• Flow demand: 144 L/h total (~2.4 L/min).
• Filters: coarse mesh + 120‑mesh disc.
• Pump: 25–40 W, 1500–2000 L/h, 2–3 m head.
• Flush valves: bottom corners, weekly purge.
• Bypass: for microbes/teas.

---

7) Reservoir & Water​

• Fill source: 50% dehu → carbon → res; 50% tap via valve.
• Aeration: airstone or gentle recirc.
• UV (optional): pre‑res only.
• Maintenance: Cleanse/HOCl between runs, not during microbial feeds.

---

8) Media & Biology​

• Base: Terra Pro Plus + worm castings, frass, lime, fish/blood/bone, perlite.
• Mycorrhizae: Great White at sow/transplant.
• Topdress: veg wk3–4, bloom wk5–7.
• Microbes: Tribus weekly; Mammoth P weekly pre‑flower → late; molasses 5 mL/L weekly via bypass; coconut water once early/mid bloom.
• Caution: avoid mixing microbes with Athena Cleanse.

---

9) Nutrition Timeline (with Dark Cycle Flavor Optimization)​

• Weeks 1–2: water + light Tribus.
• Weeks 3–4: veg topdress, silica to wk6, molasses biweekly.
• Weeks 5–6: bloom topdress, Mammoth P weekly, molasses weekly, coconut water once.
• Weeks 7–8: repeat bloom, Mammoth P, molasses weekly, stop silica wk7.
• Weeks 9–10: taper, add second coconut water.
• Weeks 11–12: water only, increase VPD for density.
• Rescue: Cal‑Mag only if symptoms show.

---

10) Canopy Management​

• Planting grid: 6×6, 15 cm centers.
• Training: minimal LST, early tuck, selective defol, light lollipopping wk4–5.
• Defol cadence: small weekly sessions, maintain airflow lanes.
• Grouping: strains grouped in rows for even canopy; stretchy at back, compact mid, showcase front.

---

11) Strain Layout & Harvest Flow (v1.1)​

• Back rows (6 & 5): Blueberry Ghost OG (stable mid‑finishers), + a couple Zkittlez on Row 5 edge to break wall.
• Mid rows (4 & 3): Row 4 = all Cherry Alien (mid‑finishers). Row 3 = all Zkittlez (early‑finishers).
• Front rows (2 & 1): Velvet Drip (early), Twilight Zlush (late), with Zkittlez swapped into Row 1 front edge for early harvest ease.
• Access logic: early strains front/right; late strains tucked deeper.
• Harvest order:
  • Day 75–80 → Zkittlez + Velvet (front/right).
  • Day 80–85 → BBOG + Cherry.
  • Day 85–90 → Twilight center/front.
• Reasoning: early chop clears path, late finishers enjoy better airflow/light.

---

12) Commissioning & Runbook​

• Commissioning: leak test, catch test (±5% flow), flush 10–20 s, sensor verify, CO₂ ppm hold, PPFD mapping.
• Daily: check AI controller graphs, res level, visual plant check.
• Weekly: flush ports, bypass for microbes, fan check, airstone clean.
• Phase adjustments: re‑map PPFD post‑defol, adjust VPD/CO₂.

---

13) Troubleshooting Matrix​

Symptom	Likely Cause	Fast Check	Fix
Dry pot	Clogged emitter	Flow test	Swap emitter; flush lines
Weak corners	Pressure imbalance	Catch test	Adjust trim valve; confirm ring link
RH spikes	Overwater	Pot weight, leaf feel	Shorten runtime; boost under‑fans
CO₂ drop	Exhaust purge	Ppm graph	Adjust fan hysteresis, injection point
Slime in res	Light leak/stagnant	Lid/airstone check	Reseal, clean, UV pre‑res

---

14) Harvest, Dry, Cure​

• Harvest passes: 2–3 waves aligned to early/mid/late finishers.
• Dry: 18–20 °C, 55–60% RH, 7–14d.
• Cure: 58–62% RH jars, burped, tracked.
• Post‑mortem: note phenos and canopy behavior for layout v1.2 refinement.

---

15) Expansion & Data Logging​

• Expansion: bump pot size to 1.5–2 gal; add slim sidebars if PPFD drops at edges.
• Logging: watt draw (power meter), PPFD/DLI snapshots, irrigation volumes, CO₂ ppm averages, harvest wet/dry weights.
• Metrics: always report g/W (lamp) and g/kWh (whole room).

---

16) Visual Canopy Map​

Orientation: Row 1 = front (accessible); Row 6 = back. Column 6 = right side (accessible).


Legend:

• BBOG = Blueberry Ghost OG (Mid finisher)
• Zkittlez (Early finisher)
• Cherry Alien (Mid finisher)
• Velvet Drip (Early finisher)
• Twilight Zlush (Late finisher)

Grid Layout (Rows back→front):

	Col1	Col2	Col3	Col4	Col5	Col6
Row 6
Row 5
Row 4
Row 3
Row 2
Row 1

Access flow:

• Front + right edges (Row 1, Col 6) harvested first (Zkittlez/Velvet).
• Back/left (BBOG + Cherry) mid-harvest.
• Central Twilight last.

---

Any questions tips or help towards this impossible goal are welcome.​

Thanks for reading.
DrDankHands

Epsilon V1 pre crop - Dry yield > 1200g

 

[THCosmic]

Pushing the limits! You, sir, are a ganja pioneer!

The only thing I recommend is maybe rearrange your grid layout so that all early finishers are the easily accessible plants to make for easy early harvest while the others still need time to finish. I ran a similar setup in a 2x2 tent, but not quite as densely packed as this as I only had 8 plants per tent. When I needed to harvest a back plant early it was always a pain fearing I would damage the other plants I had to reach over and through to get to the back plant.

Anything over 1oz/sqft is amazing and you are going for 5x-6x that amount. Best of luck to this grow!

 

[DrDankHands]

Pushing the limits! You, sir, are a ganja pioneer!

The only thing I recommend is maybe rearrange your grid layout so that all early finishers are the easily accessible plants to make for easy early harvest while the others still need time to finish. I ran a similar setup in a 2x2 tent, but not quite as densely packed as this as I only had 8 plants per tent. When I needed to harvest a back plant early it was always a pain fearing I would damage the other plants I had to reach over and through to get to the back plant.

Anything over 1oz/sqft is amazing and you are going for 5x-6x that amount. Best of luck to this grow!

Thanks man, I am trying to perfect the maximum possible grams per watt while keeping the choice of various strains and trying to bring the cost per gram down as low as possible, depending on total yeild this time I'm projected to be hitting £0.16 - £1 a gram (cost to produce with everything considered) and I have amortized all from first crop, meaning I am actually growing for free technically. Original cost of setup, (tent equipment soil seeds electric water everything was £2600). This grow cost (£600 for soil seeds) and an extra (£350 on equipment upgrades).
Usually I would have spent £4000 for a years worth of weed, so with those savings added, I'm growing for my second year starting from +£550 which covers electric and water this cycle making my cost per gram £0 when all is considered and I will consequently save the £4000 this time too making my next grow start from +£4000, I've made the whole thing modular also, so the costs can be maintained even at scale this process can be replicated side by side in a large area and would be 3 times cheaper and more efficient and easier to control than any commercial production currently known the best commercial grows still only manage around 3g per watt and costs of around £2-£3 g per gram.
I'm dreaming big, but this whole thing is open source so I'm not trying to hide my methods or madness it's for all to explore exploit and enjoy.
That's a good idea and makes sense, I will consider rearranging before transplanting in 2 weeks. I will be germinating in 5 days so I have time to make that change.
Thankyou for you wishes of luck I will certainly need them to hit my dream target yield.
Happy growing
DrDankHands

 

[Randyy]

Thank you for sharing all that information! I will definitely keep an eye on this thread.

 

[DrDankHands]

Thank you for sharing all that information! I will definitely keep an eye on this thread.

Your welcome, I hope to update every few days if possible and I will be documenting everything so any questions feel free to ask

 

[JIMKSI64]

Throw this idea into the mix. Was not a cannabis plant but intriguing idea.

Effects of elevated pressure on rate of photosynthesis during plant growth

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of an artificially controlled environment, particularly elevated total pressure, on net photosynth…

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[Randyy]

Your welcome, I hope to update every few days if possible and I will be documenting everything so any questions feel free to ask

Sounds good, looking forward to it.

Not sure if this is a question, but I gotta say that I am a bit confused about the light. Seems crazy to me that you are able to get so much out of it. I thought that co2 boosting wouldn't do much unless you are using something like a 1000w HPS. I guess I was wrong about that one. What kind of light are you using, I'm thinking brand and model? It must be a good one that has a high output per watt?!

 

[DrDankHands]

Sounds good, looking forward to it.

Not sure if this is a question, but I gotta say that I am a bit confused about the light. Seems crazy to me that you are able to get so much out of it. I thought that co2 boosting wouldn't do much unless you are using something like a 1000w HPS. I guess I was wrong about that one. What kind of light are you using, I'm thinking brand and model? It must be a good one that has a high output per watt?!

Good question! The light I’m using is actually pretty modest, a 300 W LED (Viparspectra KS3000). The trick isn’t brute wattage, it’s efficiency and environment synergy.
Modern LEDs (like bar-style KS series, Spider Farmer, etc.) push 2.7–3.0 µmol/J, so every watt counts.
CO₂ enrichment isn’t only for 1000W HPS, if your PPFD is in the 700–950 µmol/m²/s range and your VPD is dialed in, plants will use the extra CO₂. Even a 300W LED in a 3×3 can reach that.
The real magic is uniformity + biology → tight SOG canopy, living soil, microbes, and automated environment control. That’s what lets me push into yield-per-watt numbers that sound crazy on paper.
So it’s not that the light is “special”, it’s about getting every variable (light, CO₂, airflow, irrigation, root zone) to work in balance. A lot of people underestimate just how much you can get from a well-dialled 300 W setup.
DrDankHands

 

[Randyy]

Good question! The light I’m using is actually pretty modest, a 300 W LED (Viparspectra KS3000). The trick isn’t brute wattage, it’s efficiency and environment synergy.
Modern LEDs (like bar-style KS series, Spider Farmer, etc.) push 2.7–3.0 µmol/J, so every watt counts.
CO₂ enrichment isn’t only for 1000W HPS, if your PPFD is in the 700–950 µmol/m²/s range and your VPD is dialed in, plants will use the extra CO₂. Even a 300W LED in a 3×3 can reach that.
The real magic is uniformity + biology → tight SOG canopy, living soil, microbes, and automated environment control. That’s what lets me push into yield-per-watt numbers that sound crazy on paper.
So it’s not that the light is “special”, it’s about getting every variable (light, CO₂, airflow, irrigation, root zone) to work in balance. A lot of people underestimate just how much you can get from a well-dialled 300 W setup.
DrDankHands

Very interesting! You certainly changed my view on some things here. I understand that there is a balance or synergy to be found between the amount of light, water and nutrients that a plant can absorb. Adding more light without adding the other requirements won't help much. What surprises me though, is that the ceiling for light absorption relative to co2 is so low. Surely blew my mind there. :)

So about automation and maintaining a stable environment inside the tent. I have a pretty basic setup and the reason why I never really bothered to think much of automation and trying to maintain a stable environment in regards to temperature, humidity, VPD or co2 is because I'm thinking that the environment inside the tent will even out with the environment in the room the tent is in. Problem here is that if the room has open windows most of the time, then trying to stabilize the tent environment will kinda be like trying to stabilize the atmosphere. So I guess my question here is about how you maintain a stable environment?! Do you have a sorta closed off room, venting air from the tent directly outside or how do you go about this? Hope that makes sense.

 

[DrDankHands]

Throw this idea into the mix. Was not a cannabis plant but intriguing idea.

Effects of elevated pressure on rate of photosynthesis during plant growth

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of an artificially controlled environment, particularly elevated total pressure, on net photosynth…

www.sciencedirect.com

Yeah that’s a really interesting study They weren’t working with cannabis, but the core idea still translates: pressure changes how gases like CO₂ and O₂ move in and out of the leaf. At normal atmospheric pressure, if you just raise the total pressure without adding more CO₂, photosynthesis actually drops because diffusion slows. But if you raise both the pressure and the CO₂ partial pressure, photosynthesis can shoot up by 1.5× or more.

Obviously I’m not running a hyperbaric growth chamber but the principle still backs up what I’m doing. By keeping my VPD/humidity in range and running elevated CO₂, I’m recreating the ‘sweet spot’ they found—maximizing CO₂ availability at the leaf surface so the plants can photosynthesize more efficiently even under a 300 W LED. So while I can’t control air pressure, it’s a cool confirmation that CO₂ enrichment + tight environment control pays off outside of just big HPS setups.
DrDankHands

 

[DrDankHands]

Very interesting! You certainly changed my view on some things here. I understand that there is a balance or synergy to be found between the amount of light, water and nutrients that a plant can absorb. Adding more light without adding the other requirements won't help much. What surprises me though, is that the ceiling for light absorption relative to co2 is so low. Surely blew my mind there. :)

So about automation and maintaining a stable environment inside the tent. I have a pretty basic setup and the reason why I never really bothered to think much of automation and trying to maintain a stable environment in regards to temperature, humidity, VPD or co2 is because I'm thinking that the environment inside the tent will even out with the environment in the room the tent is in. Problem here is that if the room has open windows most of the time, then trying to stabilize the tent environment will kinda be like trying to stabilize the atmosphere. So I guess my question here is about how you maintain a stable environment?! Do you have a sorta closed off room, venting air from the tent directly outside or how do you go about this? Hope that makes sense.

Hey Randy, really glad my earlier post gave you something new to think about, I had the exact same “mind blown” moment when I first realized how quickly the CO₂ ceiling comes into play with light absorption too. It makes sense once you see it, but it’s not something most people ever factor in.
On the environment side, you nailed the challenge perfectly. If the tent was just equalizing with the room it sits in, then yeah, it would be like trying to stabilize the weather. That’s why I treat the tent as its own sealed micro-climate.

Here’s how I run it:

Exhaust vents straight outside, so I’m not constantly recirculating warm, humid air.
Intake pulls from low to the ground under a window, where the coolest and most stable air naturally sits. That way the “feed air” is consistent regardless of how the outside weather shifts.
Inside the tent, everything is AI-controlled, intake/outtake fans, circulation, humidity, CO₂, and even irrigation timing. Because it’s sealed and managed directly, the tent isn’t relying on the room to stabilize. It’s self-contained.
The cool thing is that this makes VPD, CO₂, and RH adjustments actually stick. Once you’ve got that loop dialled, outside conditions barely matter anymore, the system just auto-adjusts.
The other half of the equation for me is biology. Beneficial microbes and mycorrhizae in the soil act like a buffer they unlock nutrients, protect roots, and smooth over small swings. It gives the plants more resilience and gives me more freedom. Instead of constantly worrying if a temp blip or a missed adjustment will cause a crash, the microbes give a lot of forgiveness.
And honestly, the AC Infinity automation gear has been a game changer. It takes all that constant knob-turning and graph-watching and just does it for you. I just set the targets, and the system maintains them while logging everything. Saves a huge amount of time and effort, and it feels like having a mini grow-room manager built into the tent.

So yeah, between automation and biology, the tent becomes really stable without me having to babysit it. That’s what makes it possible to push performance this far without the usual headaches.

 

[Trich99]

Following the thread bro!

 

[DrDankHands]

I'm wondering what everyone's thoughts are on potential maximum yield from my setup, please give reasoning for prediction.

 

[JIMKSI64]

Thoughts on projections are magic 8 ball stuff. I have followed several journals and diaries on the next big thing in cannabis. Guys pushing lights and CO2 and all the nutes and bennies.
There is a limit to photosynthesis and this is what you will hit. Grams of vegetation growth =energy+nutrition.
Document everything.
I ran down the rabbit hole of CO2 enrichment a while ago. Like 15 years ago where a guy was claiming huge growth in food crops running huge amounts of CO2. Or another one who started growing down with roots in a box and the vegetable and fruit dropping down. Over a dozen industry and educational based scientist put so much work into flawed and in some cases fraudulent ideas that in the end they all wound up in the same way

" Current test results can not be duplicated with methodology used by author of study"

You have a dialed in system. You have spot on nutrition and run CO2. I can point to a dozen growers on this forum who are already doing this.
Best run for a grower grams per watt was reported to be 4.02 grams per. Then the problems started. When the data from his " study " was done the numbers had been changed from the actual grow journal on ILGM. Some people think the Internet is partitioned and what goes on here is not known over there.
Just do not be another one of these guys.
I predict 2.8 grams per watt as this will match the highest yield I read that was verifiable with journals and data sets. I also see in your verbage that you baseline at 4 grams per watt. Could you expand on this and perhaps some data sets on your baseline grow.

I also see no mention of an IPM for bugs. I use a 3 band system for insect prevention I found in a journal using honey pots away from the grow, a barrier to access with positive pressure in the room and a close in chemical barrier with all the standard sticky traps and such
Good luck.

 

[DrDankHands]

Thoughts on projections are magic 8 ball stuff. I have followed several journals and diaries on the next big thing in cannabis. Guys pushing lights and CO2 and all the nutes and bennies.
There is a limit to photosynthesis and this is what you will hit. Grams of vegetation growth =energy+nutrition.
Document everything.
I ran down the rabbit hole of CO2 enrichment a while ago. Like 15 years ago where a guy was claiming huge growth in food crops running huge amounts of CO2. Or another one who started growing down with roots in a box and the vegetable and fruit dropping down. Over a dozen industry and educational based scientist put so much work into flawed and in some cases fraudulent ideas that in the end they all wound up in the same way

" Current test results can not be duplicated with methodology used by author of study"

You have a dialed in system. You have spot on nutrition and run CO2. I can point to a dozen growers on this forum who are already doing this.
Best run for a grower grams per watt was reported to be 4.02 grams per. Then the problems started. When the data from his " study " was done the numbers had been changed from the actual grow journal on ILGM. Some people think the Internet is partitioned and what goes on here is not known over there.
Just do not be another one of these guys.
I predict 2.8 grams per watt as this will match the highest yield I read that was verifiable with journals and data sets. I also see in your verbage that you baseline at 4 grams per watt. Could you expand on this and perhaps some data sets on your baseline grow.

I also see no mention of an IPM for bugs. I use a 3 band system for insect prevention I found in a journal using honey pots away from the grow, a barrier to access with positive pressure in the room and a close in chemical barrier with all the standard sticky traps and such
Good luck.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply, I share your skepticism about hype. Lots of guys chase numbers with lights, CO₂, and additives, but ignore balance. My approach is different: I want to document everything, tune every variable, and show what’s possible when the system is complete, from photons all the way down to the microbes.

1. Yield Limits & Photosynthesis
I agree there’s a biological ceiling, grams of growth = light energy + nutrients + stability. The difference is that most grows hit bottlenecks well before that ceiling. My 6 g/w projection isn’t a fantasy number, it’s an engineering goal based on removing each bottleneck one by one.

2. Microbial Soil Ecosystem (The Buffer & Safety Net)
This is the single biggest factor people overlook. My medium isn’t just “dirt + nutes”, it’s a living system:

Microbials & Mycorrhizae: These extend the root network, boost nutrient solubilization, and provide a buffer against both over/underfeeding.

Nutrient Cycling: Organic matter, enzymes, and beneficial bacteria keep availability steady and balanced, instead of the peaks and valleys of bottle feeding.

Disease Resistance: A diverse microbial population makes it very hard for pathogens to take hold.

Stress Mitigation: Healthy soil food web means plants recover faster from training, defoliation, or environmental shifts.
This living ecosystem is my biggest safety net. Even if another variable wobbles, the soil community smooths it out, which is why I can push harder with light, CO₂, and training than a sterile setup could tolerate.

3. Baseline vs. Projection
My baseline of ~4 g/w came before this soil ecosystem matured and before my climate/IPM refinements were fully dialed. With the living medium buffering plant health, I can maintain higher metabolic rates without hitting stress walls, which is why I see 6 g/w as achievable, not theoretical.

4. Why 6 g/w Is on the Table
It’s not just one silver bullet, it’s the compounding of:

Light efficiency (3.1 µmol/J LEDs, canopy trained for maximum photon capture).
CO₂ sync (1200–1500 ppm tied to VPD, not just enrichment for its own sake).
Living soil (microbials keeping uptake steady, reducing lockout risk).
Climate precision (dehumidification and airflow keeping late flower consistent).
Data-driven iteration (each run feeding back into the next).

5. IPM
I’m layered here as well: positive pressure + HEPA intake, sticky traps, and environmental discouragement of pests. Chemical sprays are last resort only. I try to only open the tent a dozen or so times throughout the entire grow and UV sterilize the surface of each pot once a week.

Closing Thought:
I know 6 g/w sounds ambitious, but the way I see it, that’s only because most people rely on fragmented systems. My setup leans on the microbial foundation as the buffer, letting me safely push light, CO₂, and nutrients into territory where others see diminishing returns. If I land at 5.5 instead of 6, that’s still pushing past the “accepted ceiling,” and the data is worth it.

 

[DrDankHands]

My objective in targeting 6 g per watt is twofold: first, to establish a verifiable benchmark that surpasses the current accepted record, which exists in a grey area without clear, standardized recognition; and second, to demonstrate that with a fully optimized system, the theoretical limits can be pushed further than most growers believe possible.

I’d break my motivation into three parts: roughly 30% driven by the competitive aspect of setting a world-class benchmark, 30% by necessity in terms of maximizing efficiency and return on investment, and 40% by proof-of-concept, showing that when every variable is engineered and harmonized, the ceiling can be lifted substantially. For me, the pursuit isn’t just about the yield figure itself, but about demonstrating what the plant is capable of when grown under ideal, data-driven conditions.

 

[Florida_Mike]

Really like your ideas and the attention to detail, plus the scientific approach you’re using. The AI-generated protocols look solid too. I’m all for new tech and AI in growing, but I’m gonna stay on the wait-and-see team for now.

Your setup sounds a lot like mine, except I run a recirculating drip system in rockwool slabs. Honestly, I don’t think any soil system can match the oxygen and nutrient delivery I get with this method.

That 4 g benchmark though… I’m curious. Is that something you’ve actually hit yourself, or just what you and the AI figure is possible? I only saw one picture posted, and you didn’t mention if it was yours—anyone can toss up a photo online.


Either way, I’m looking forward to following along. I’m always happy to pick up tips I can add to my system. I may be old and a bit slower to catch on these days, but I get there eventually.

 

[JIMKSI64]

References to the microbial soil ecosystem.
By my second grow the soil inspection revealed a loaf of mushroom like matter about 7 inches thick. The balance of the roots for the White Widow was drawn to this structure.
Is this the soil ecosystem?

 

[DrDankHands]

Really like your ideas and the attention to detail, plus the scientific approach you’re using. The AI-generated protocols look solid too. I’m all for new tech and AI in growing, but I’m gonna stay on the wait-and-see team for now.

Your setup sounds a lot like mine, except I run a recirculating drip system in rockwool slabs. Honestly, I don’t think any soil system can match the oxygen and nutrient delivery I get with this method.

That 4 g benchmark though… I’m curious. Is that something you’ve actually hit yourself, or just what you and the AI figure is possible? I only saw one picture posted, and you didn’t mention if it was yours—anyone can toss up a photo online.


Either way, I’m looking forward to following along. I’m always happy to pick up tips I can add to my system. I may be old and a bit slower to catch on these days, but I get there eventually.

Appreciate the thoughtful reply you’re spot on that recirculating drip in rockwool gives unbeatable oxygenation and delivery efficiency. If I was running a scaled commercial op, I’d probably lean that way too. For Epsilon though, part of the challenge I set myself was proving that a living-soil hybrid system, with all its microbial buffers, can push yields into the same range as hydro. A lot of my focus is on resilience: the biology makes the system more forgiving under stress, and that matters in a 36-plant micro-grid where one emitter clog could otherwise be a disaster.

On the 4 g/W benchmark, yes, that’s from my own V1 run. It came in right around 4.0 g/W lamp-only, ~148 g/ft², with a full 1.2 kg dry harvest in the 3×3. So not just theory, though I’ll admit V2’s 6+ g/W target is very much proof-of-concept territory. That’s why I’m logging everything in this rotation, so I’ve got hard data to back the claims (or eat humble pie if it falls short).
If you want to see the earlier build and some near-harvest shots, I did two posts on Epsilon V1, the original setup write-up and then Operation Epsilon: The Harvest Chronicles. Those cover the soil mix, automation, and the final results.

I’ll keep posting updates as V2 unfolds. I’m curious to see if some of the tricks from the soil/microbial side end up being transferable to a slab-based system like yours, CO₂/VPD control, harvest-flow staging, etc. Always good when different styles can cross-pollinate.

Cheers for following along!

DrDankHands

 

[DrDankHands]

References to the microbial soil ecosystem.
By my second grow the soil inspection revealed a loaf of mushroom like matter about 7 inches thick. The balance of the roots for the White Widow was drawn to this structure.
Is this the soil ecosystem?

That’s a really interesting observation

Yes, what you saw ties into the soil ecosystem at work. When we talk about a microbial soil ecosystem, we’re describing the living network of fungi, bacteria, protozoa, and other organisms that form in and around the root zone (the rhizosphere).
That 7-inch “loaf” you found is very likely a mycelial mat, the root-like threads (hyphae) of beneficial fungi binding organic matter together. These fungal networks do several things at once:

Nutrient cycling, they break down organic matter into plant-available forms.
Root partnerships, many fungi form mycorrhizal associations, literally plugging into roots to exchange nutrients for plant sugars.
Soil structure, hyphae knit particles together, holding moisture and oxygen pockets where roots thrive.

Selective attraction, roots will often seek out these fungal masses, because the symbiosis gives them phosphorus, trace minerals, and water they wouldn’t access otherwise.
So yes, that mass was a visible sign of your soil biology in action, the hidden architecture that makes organics so resilient compared to sterile hydro. In fact, in my own Epsilon runs I deliberately build for this: the Ecothrive base, frass, fish/blood/bone, molasses, and microbe inoculants (Tribus, Mammoth P, Microbial Mass) are all about cultivating that exact fungal/bacterial web.

The way your White Widow rooted into that structure shows the plant recognized it as a “partner.” That’s the soil ecosystem doing its job.

DrDankHands