What gets counted in EC?

im sure SCMC will swing by and skool ya on NPK

he's helped me out w/ it numerous times

 

what do you mean by, "go in on top?" i grow in coco, and make a tub of nutes every few days. i add 2 tbsp. of fulvic, and 2 of humic. in thte thread title it asks, "what gets counted in ec." anything that adds a numerical value to your reading is counted, lol, automatically by your meter. i use ppm myself.

 

I had written something earlier but then my phone died and now I cannot remember what it was.

I count everything, even the Epsom, which shouldn't be changing the EC dramatically anyway. When I recommend a dosage, or speak of my own, here's my basic assumption. That the water has about 0.3ec of "hardness" to begin with, whether it be tap water or filtered water enriched with a cal-mag product. The rest is going to be the Macro nutrient system and supplements plus any additives.

I always use the total, final, everything's mixed, solution EC when talking about my own feeding regiments.

I use fulvic as a pH down, basically to offset the increase to the pH from my potassium silicate supplement. I run about 2.5ml per gallon. It will produce a misleading pH reading because of the weakly bonded organic acids that will break down once introduced to the media. Since using a silicate and a fulvic acid in coco I have paid little to no attention to the pH, although when I do test it, it is typically very low going in, 4.8 to 5.5ish, and stable coming out at 6.3 to 6.5ish.

The total EC is only half the equation. The reason I take a more "scientific" approach is because the ratio of elements that comprise the EC are the flip side of the nutrient coin. It is equally important to provide a healthy EC as it is to provide a healthy relationship of one element to the other for the phase of growth the plant is in. This can be difficult to get right when using a few different products.

I tell people to calculate their minimum ppm levels as well as being aware of their EC when growing hydroponically in coco. I speak about that at length in many places and I can find a link if you cannot find one for yourself. It helps to keep track of as much information as you have available to you. I find measurements and calculations can provide insight when you make observations about the plant as well as recognizing an issue with buildup prior to seeing evidence of that in the plant, and a logical approach can be determined based on the known past feeding program because of detail.

Really, only important for "new" growers or someone looking to dial in a strain. The greenness of ones thumb is the real factor when it comes to how much measuring, testing, calculating, and balancing, a person needs to do for success in the grow room.

 

[quote name='"967"']My tap water EC is 0.07 and i don't enrich with calmag, unfortunately can't find it anywhere although ill probably order calcium nitrate as its about the only thing i can find

Epsom raises my EC by 0.1, is that too strong? Molasses a further 0.2 but i thought this would be disregarded as it seems most believe you can't overdo it. I've yet to test the regen-a-root and fulvic acid

What would you guess is the best target figure with all these supplements? I really thought it would be measure a+b, pk and maybe epsom to desired EC, then add the others and not worry about the reading. Otherwise if i included everything and aimed for 1.5EC i would be seriously lacking macro nutrients no?

As for the fulvic, what do you mean by it creating a misleading pH reading? Does it measure different to what it actually is? the stuff i got says 5ml per litre, I'm not gonna use that much as that bottle would be over in 10 feedings, but thats a way up there compared to what you feed.. do you feed on the weak side or possibly higher strength? What would the EC of the fulvic alone be?

Cheers man i'm sure if figure it out (kinda), thought i was on the right track there for a change but apparently not haha[/quote]

You are on pretty much the right track. A 0.1ec increase with the Epsom is a little extreme but not totally outrageous for a mag hungry plant in coco during mid bloom. Molasses does contain some micro elements but the organic aspect of the product is ultimately not as effective with this particular nutrient program. In soil, or organics in general, molasses is a much better fit but you won't hurt anything by using the stuff.

I tend to aim for a lower EC and let the plant show a deficiency naturally rather than one caused by buildup. Feeding a little more to fix a shortage is way easier than removing buildup. With canna I start with a 1.2ec in flowering. Equal parts a+b and cannazym, about 7ml per gallon or so. I then increase the cannazym over the next two weeks to get the EC up around 1.4, for about 10 to 12ml per gallon. Then the PK can be used. 1ml per gallon at first and up to 3ml per gallon. Any more and you risk an issue with the plant.
The final EC winds up around 1.7 or so with everything by the end of flowering.

Canna tends to run a little short on potassium and magnesium during flowering. I don't use the stuff anymore but for vegetative plants I don't think there is a better system around. Rhizotonic is the shit.

 

My main question would be: is there a reason you're taking this approach to your feeding?

I mean, molasses, for example, is just an additive. It contains small amounts of secondary nutes, micro nutes and sugar. Things like fulvic and humic are uptake additives. Whether they really have any effect at all in a chemically fed substrate is totally up in the air. I've used them and I can say honestly I can't tell any difference whatsoever.

In a nutshell, what I'm trying to say is they're very much a secondary concern. Without any doubt at all you should be getting perfectly healthy plants with your base feed, know exactly what strength they like and at what point - most importantly, know how to read your plant and adjust the strength based on appearance - and then after than you can add in fulvic, humic and molasses without too much concern.

Always remember that it's the base feed which is going to affect your plants the most. It might sound obvious but it relates to your post. I mean, if I bring up my EC from 0.2 (out of the tap) to 0.3 with molasses, then I add in epsoms to bring that up to 0.4, if I then bring it up to 1.2 with my base A&B feeds, and then the plant begins to look a tiny bit hungry, then I do the same as above, but bring it up to 1.3 or 1.4 with the base feed. Do you know what I mean? It's really very simple.

To sum it up, you gauge the feed strength based only on the main base food, the only difference is 0.4 or 0.5 (because of the additives you've used) rather than 0.2, is your starting point.