Organosilicone wetting agents

[girlwondergrows]

So there is a new class of nonionic spreader - wettter - penatrants. These have had great results getting chemicals onto and into plants. Unfortinatly most of the research I could find was about getting herbicides into plants, not exactly what we're looking for here. ;(

Has anyone else had any experience with these? From what I can tell they perform really well but I'm reluctant to use anything on my girls that I haven't heard more about. I'll list a few resources I've found and some brand names. Please chime in with any information you may have.

Hywet

Maxx Organosilicone Surfactant

Silwet L-77 http://greenhouse.ucdavis.edu/pest/labels/Silwet.PDF

Kinetic

A list of different organosilicone products: http://www.herbicide-adjuvants.com/...s=1&sb=3&so=ascend&ww=on&ProductValidated=Yes

Research on combining with pesticides: http://www.fcla.edu/FlaEnt/fe91p610.pdf

Article on page 226: http://books.google.com/books?id=z0...ge&q=kinetic nonionic helena chemical&f=false

 

[Dr. Detroit]

What are your intentions? Nutrient absorbtion, or maybe silica/mineral? Are you just looking for a way to break surface tension in your sprays?

 

[dankworth]

These wetting agents look quite interesting. I could see how they would help with penetration to the harder-to-reach internal structures.
Personally I would feel more comfortable using a more natural form of wetter/spreader/penetrant. One that did not require the use of latex personal protective equipment.
Thank you for introducing this subject, I had not given it much thought before you brought it up.

 

[girlwondergrows]

The potential advantage would be the ability to get anything you wanted directly into the plant tissues. I'm thinking the biggest gains might come from sugars, PGR's (hormones) and amino acids, as well as making some of the organic miticides translaminar.

Downsides could be pushing bacteria or fungus into the tissues, possibly rendering the plant useless for medicating if the silicon somehow stuck around in the plant and ended up in the bud, or ?????

Another interesting study, discusses some of this:
NOVEL ORGANOSILICONE ADJUVANTS TO REDUCE
AGROCHEMICAL SPRAY VOLUMES ON ROW CROPS
http://w.nzpps.org/journal/53/nzpp_533500.pdf

 

[dankworth]

I get the feeling those plant tissues are missing out, that they could be happier and more content with the right compounds inside the tissue.
Foliar teas could be of greater use, possibly...

But the risk of accidentally introducing any unwanted agent into the plant would be unacceptable. The plant's health and happiness could suffer, and the benefit of further enhanced foliar penetration would diminish greatly.

I think very gentle application of this technique initially would be the best for the plant. The plant may not have experienced anything quite like this before, so it is best to not overdo any stimulation initially.

Perhaps simply using the tried-and-true methods of foliar transfer will end up being the best solution. That would seem to protect against the risk to plant health from both external pathogens, and any sort of internal toxicity due to inadvertent buildup of synthetic agents.

The important thing is the plant deriving the benefit from careful application of foliar agents, with particular care given to her undersides. It is important to target the stomata in my opinion, where the greatest sensitivity to input is. Commonly people simply spray the top of the plant, which is nice for the plant, but not as nice for her as the gentle input under the leaves.

If the plant has not had any foliar application for a while, maybe what it needs is to be misted slowly to the point of runoff, just to assure satisfactory results. Two or three times in a row couldn't hurt, as long as the spray were gentle enough to avoid bruising, and the ppms were kept intentionally low for these first few times.

 

[leadsled]

fyi, can use yucca extract. Also use in teas/foliars for a cost effective organic solution.

t&j enterprises carries yucca extract. more costs effective than a store made NIS as well.

Here is a product that was recommended for peat and coco.

More info on NIS and another product.
Use of high quality non-ionic surfactant (NIS) for peat and coco is very important and will allow for much better water movement horizontally, thus greatly reducing water 'channeling' in media and allowing for much more uniform whetting of ALL media volume.

Most peat mixes come with NIS already, but they breakdown over time, esp. if the media has been in bags for > 4 moths. Coco doesn't come with NIS, but coco benefits greatly from NIS.

The best NIS on the market for s.peat, coco, bark, etc., is from AquaTrols, called "AquaGro PsiMatric". The other really good NIS option is called "Soax", but AquaGro PsiMatic is better.

AquaGro PsiMatric at 10 ppm in ferigation water, all the time. If grower only want to use it once a week, then use 80-100 ppm once a week. Besides assisting in complete and VERY efficient whetting of media, using a NIS allows for higher DO2 (dissolved oxygen) in water and greater efficiency uptake of Ca, B, and other ions by roots

Manufacturer site:
www aquatrols dot com

 

[dankworth]

I get the feeling those plant tissues are missing out, that they could be happier and more content with the right compounds inside the tissue.
Foliar teas could be of greater use, possibly...

http://t1.invalid.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcStQUyz6-CCMQPy--WkT347VIA9nsdYqG3fjlR2wRcTFf9P8Q2xVw

But the risk of accidentally introducing any unwanted agent into the plant would be unacceptable. The plant's health and happiness could suffer, and the benefit of further enhanced foliar penetration would diminish greatly.

http://t2.invalid.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQF2-Xu4hIGz86GpXRpU7XqE4kgZuRd5RWE7HqmU7oUlWsHcVgjjg

I think very gentle application of this technique initially would be the best for the plant. The plant may not have experienced anything quite like this before, so it is best to not overdo any stimulation initially.

http://t0.invalid.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcREx6_EWYQrclUAHMefSZcbtS-htEnPMgilxKSghqroOE6Gg17dUw

Perhaps simply using the tried-and-true methods of foliar transfer will end up being the best solution. That would seem to protect against the risk to plant health from both external pathogens, and any sort of internal toxicity due to inadvertent buildup of synthetic agents.

http://t1.invalid.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSfpeSwU94B7v7KATWJfvpaB2Vwbsx-V-nZb5KBFie7M2oe1T4t

The important thing is the plant deriving the benefit from careful application of foliar agents, with particular care given to her undersides. It is important to target the stomata in my opinion, where the greatest sensitivity to input is. Commonly people simply spray the top of the plant, which is nice for the plant, but not as nice for her as the gentle input under the leaves.

http://t3.invalid.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQpXOGJE40tm2BeEqZdMonzc53VoVdancobCRZ7kZhubZ-lk0fYkg

If the plant has not had any foliar application for a while, maybe what it needs is to be misted slowly to the point of runoff, just to assure satisfactory results. Two or three times in a row couldn't hurt, as long as the spray were gentle enough to avoid bruising, and the ppms were kept intentionally low for these first few times.

http://t1.invalid.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ4Av392dqlpdRGnKc8gIBoOLil3AVSUEn4VEeBRzbf26QwUSX1

 

[Mississip Hip]

dawn dish soap