Last grow was 10 smaller plants. Loose buds and it was more of a learning experience when it came to harvesting. Got a little too dry. Still smoked wonderful. This run I managed the grow a little better. Harvesting in a staggered weekly schedule gives me time to rotate the plants thru the cut, hang, trim, manicure, jar, burp, smoke, burp, burp, smoke, etc. Haha. It's a process we all come to love. Yeah man I keep updated on the quality control. Sample last night still a little green, but goes right to the head.Great work, Smokie. Looks like your system/perpetual grow is working out for you and your plants. Fresh, top shelf weed every few weeks does not suck! Let us know how the smokie turns out.
On a separate note, you mentioned the chop was a bittersweet time. Maybe, but I get stoked because it means another shot at perfecting the cure and the manicure, and we get to do it all over again. Hasn’t gotten old yet (cause there is always room for improvement), and it’s sounds as if you might feel the same way. Again, nice work.
Being in soil I think, and have read, the growth rate is slightly slower than anything else. Really thinking ten weeks is target. Considering taking last one down as it's getting very "done" looking. No nutes for past two weeks just soil/water. That 11 wk Target is getting me anxious!! Lol.dude thats great that experimenting actually paid off :smoking:
people want to strictly believe the instructions but one little mistake and you add time to the final chop
Never considered pumice. This is first reclaim. First addition of perlite or similar material. Previously only had vermiculite in mix. Soil seemed dense so I went with the typical perlite. Not sure how many times I'll reuse this soil. As it breaksdown, maybe I'll consider the police next time. Pumice add anything to the soil? Mineral content? My mix already contains some azomite.I've put junior plants (4 - 6 weeks old) into fairly hot soil before with little ill effect...I suspect seedlings might have a harder time dealing with it. Have you considered using pumice instead of perlite? I think perlite is fine for soil that isn't reused, but pumice has similar properties and lasts longer in the soil for peeps like you and me who are too cheap (or too conscientious or too lazy) to buy and make up new soil every grow.
Data, testing, and science and shit. Love it. Keep in touch with your results and findings. I like to hear about substantial experience. I think it'll be well worth the data collecting for the professional operation. I'm kind of winging it with what I know and have collected along the way. I'm with you on the soil concepts. Taste, smells and overall simplicity is what I enjoy. This current soil reclaim is slightly half assed, but will do the job. It has all the essentials. I amended the base mix with the perlite and mc and added the same amendments I used originally. I increased the amounts of npk specific granulars ever so slightly, but omitted the general granular fert. I will continue a once a week supplement with the nftg nutes throughout the grow. Gonna throw some girls in it as soon as next week. Unfortunately, it's only been mixed for about two weeks. Sink or swim I suppose at this point. Lol.<Meander>(@OldSmokie76) Pretty sure you can get combo devices. For my home plants, I don't test anything so I only have and use pH strips. For our business, we also have and use the pH meter to spot check runoff (although I have been advised to get a ppm meter...baby steps...I wouldn't know right now what to do with a ppm meter...I have the idea, but not the "feeling" of it...stupid way to say it, but there you have it...and I suppose maybe I should get the "feel"...Frank Herbert had something to say about that, naturally).
As for what's typical with testing, I'll say right now that there are other more "experienced" people around here who can comment on testing more intelligently than I can (and I did not say old, I did not), but I can give you my data points. We tested NPK for our soil before & after our last harvest cycle and learned yep, our plants used nutrients and the bigger plants typically used more (I can't remember exactly what the ratios were before/after...record-keeping apparently isn't a strong suit). This simple test wasn't all that informative mainly because we weren't planning to recycle the soil from the last harvest (and we didn’t). But it was also unhelpful because we didn't take enough samples and didn't have a plan for our testing. That's right, no plan for how we might use the data, we stuck it to ourselves. So I guess I learned that we came to testing (clears throat), unprepared. We could have tested how much of which nutrient was used by what cultivar, and that might have given us something to think about anyway. Not there's a noticeable lack of "fucking things" to think about.
Now we're starting to build and grow out of living soil because we think we can grow weed that tastes, smells, and is better using live soil / a viable soil food web. (And that's what it's all about for me, you, and most others I suspect...producing the best, most effective cannabis/product we can.) Anyway, we're getting the full-meal-deal before we put our juniors into harvest containers and holes this time around (nutritional, soil health, and microbiological assays). I'm hoping these series of tests, our post-harvest tests, and the repeated testing we'll be doing for the next few cycles at least will help us determine:
(1) whether/how much our soil is deficient and/or depleted in nutrients, minerals, or microbes (factors influenced by our effectiveness as growers, the quality/quantity of our inputs, and environmental factors...here is where geeking out can be a helpful trait because there is potentially a lot of "fucking things" to monitor and track)
(2) whether our attempt at no-till is doing what we expect in the soil (adding back/preserving nutes, minerals, microbes)
(3) whether our attempt at building a living soil is working
(4) whether we get to a point where we have a viable soil food web
And as luck would have it we do know what our definition of success is...but that's our definition...and that's as it should be...some of it is cost and numbers, but that's, well, quantitative, and there are other more qualitative (and exciting...and secret...like how well does...oh yes, it's a fucking secret) things we're looking at as well. This is going to be fun (I'm already having fun, and I haven't taken a sample yet...soil is still cooking). Later this year I’ll be able to give you a more informed opinion about testing. All I can say now is, I’m all in. </Meander>