Strangely, the txplant-soillab.com site doesn't tell us which peer-reviewed study this data comes from- and goes to some pains to point out this is based on anecdotal commentary, not double-blind comparisons (doesn't tell us what kind of plant, where these thousands of acres are, who the growers were, etc etc etc), just like other mentions of molasses in this thread. I've seen this stuff before and because of the nature of the data, don't count it as credible. That's why I specified peer-reviewed botanical research. Any old kanaka can throw a bag of sugar on his garden plot and say it looks better later on. The txplant-soillab.com data is very lonely out there on the web, as well. If this was such a useful concept, you'd see at least an anecdotal preponderance, for what that's worth.
Here, let's look at something which is a little closer to the mark; From an Iowa State Univ paper on turfgrass horticulture: OK, so it seems you can get more nickel, molybdenum and zinc in your plant material is you add some amount of molasses to fertiliser. Keep in mind that the IA paper is for turfgrasses in soil and that grasses may or may not act like cannabis.
My interest in adding something "sweet" is purely to enhance flavor, any other benefit is a bonus. Iteresting stuff though!
It is interesting stuff. Whether it's terribly useful or not remains to be seen, though. I might buy in to adding sweetness if you were not smoking the cannabis, rather eating or chewing the stuff. Ever inhaled burning sugar smoke? Don't try it. Harsh as hell. You'll cough up your remaining lung. Sugar is a carbohydrate, as is cellulose, the main building block of most plants. Hash is cannabis resin, separated from the cellulose plant material. Hash is much smoother to smoke than resin when it's still attached to bud material. Seems that one of the secrets to smooth smoking is increasing the resin:cellulose plant material ratio, if not eliminating the cellulose altogether. Plus, if you have more resin on your plant by weight, you'll smoke less to get a buzz.
search npk values of mollasses Good Stuff.. I use it as a natural chelate-food for the soil as mentioned, and for it's k value in my organic teas.. Organic growing is where a carbohydrate/sugar source becomes so important. The microherd feeds off the sugars/carbs in the molasses. The teas is where mollasses excells IMO providing food for the microherd to eat while reproducing in the teas for 24-48 hours before feeding to the plants the teas... The added npk values k mostly in my opinon is the bonus. It also has the ability to sweeten the product, NO DOUBT IN MY MIND. Didn't have to search for scientific data or anything like that to prove it to me either, I tried it at a variety of dosages and came to my own conclusions that it infact can and does have some bearing on the finished products flavoring when used... If i waited for scientific proof or others to do the work for me i'd be waiting for a long long time for many things. I tried it at a variety of dosages and came to my conclusion.... It can be taken to far exactly as been said.. who wants all the buds to taste like caramel? That is exactly what YOU'LL get if you use TO MUCH mollasses right up to harvest as I have during my experiments. Prooving to ME anyway (that was my goal) to some degree the plant has the ability to use carbohydrates/sugars and can recieve them enough to impede on flavor directly from the soil/solution.. In my experiance anything over 1tblsp per gallon impeded on the flavor to much for my liking. 1-tsp if watered in, or 1-tbsp in teas per gallon will give you all the benefits mollases holds, and lightly sweeten the finished product without impedeing on the natural flavors of the herb. The only product I noticed a distinct flavor change with was straight up blackstrap mollases used above the reccomended dosages.. The sweet product, or sweat leaf has never given me the flavor change to that degree if used as directed IME.. Possibly becasue those are also designed for use in hydroponic systems where the roots have direct accesss to the solution- thus not as concentrated as straight up thick mollasses would be at 1-3tsp per gallon (I grow in soil) Take it for what it's worth. Take it with a grain of salt... But try it. See for yourself. Don't wait for others-in fact scientists who get paid 200,000+k a project to do the work for ya. I'm sure they got better things to do then try mollases on cannibis plants If houseplants and turfgrasses wasn't enough, keep waiting for those marijunana-mollases studies to come out.. The only scientists I hear about working with mj are those purchased by our government to work against us, and those purchased by large fertilizer firms such as advanced nutrients, who mind you are all developing some type of carbohydrate source in their line ups these days. It's the growers who are gonna make the advances in marijuana cultivation, not any scientists.. the scientists come into play after a grower says HEY CHECK THIS OUT.. Edit: Suspect.... You'll probably get a boat load more info taking this over to a site with a larger organic growing population such as IC. But I'm sure even with the back and forth bickering and chest thumping here, you got what ya needed... Good luck!! I got a book signed by The best cook in the WORLD Emeril Lagosi does that make me a great chef? or just another idiot who waiting on line for an hour at the book signing? We discussed him working on one of my hot dogs carts. he liked the idea of my international goumet hot dog carts and the slogan "Nothing BUTT The Pigs ASS!!!" Got another from Mandala Mike in the big book of buds3, never met the guy in person. He just liked my growing-photography
. It also has the ability to sweeten the product, NO DOUBT IN MY MIND. I ask this question then......Why after 25 years of growing MJ have I never had a finished bud taste like Dead Fish and Bat shit ?thats what my girlz drink and alot of it What is really going on is the Molasses is feeding the "Lil'Critters" in the soilmix causing a accelerated breakdown and allowing the plant to reach its full potential flavor and potency
You are so absolutely ridiculously off base that I am actually physically laughing at you right now (sorry). The entire biochemical essence of a plant is the anabolic construction os sugars (glucose) during the Calvin Cycle (also referred to C3, or the dark cycle, because it happens in the dark), the plan expends most of its collected energy from a day in the sun into catalyzing the formation of glucose .... its called Carbon Fixation. If energy is available, it will store this glucose in the form of polymeric glucose (cellulose, sucrose, starch, etc. etc.): http://www.mrs.umn.edu/~goochv/CellBio/lectures/darkrxn/darkrxn.html Glucose is the plants actual fundamental food source, the macro/micronutrients we add during growth are used by the plant to make glucose (and the enzymes necessary in its catalysis). Sorry bud, but MOST of the plant material you're smoking IS SUGAR. Furthermore, plant roots differ drastically from the rest of the plant, since they are constantly in the dark, auxins and other allotropic hormones that control chlorophyll production are not active (so roots are white), the auxins and hormones in root cells produce a dramatically different array of proteins. In paticular, they produce membrane bound enzymes whose specific function is in the breakdown of sugars into ionic 'fragments' which are passively absorbed by the root system via the quantum field generated by high ionic charge near the region of the roots (photon flux density (LIGHT) also contributes to the quantum field felt by roots) (its also how N, P, and K are absorbed, in the form of cations). There is actually a new system of hydroponics called Quantumponics, it employs the use of an allotropic cell : http://www.hydrowholesale.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=hydro&Category_Code=h2o) to regulate the quantum field strength in the growing medium. If you'd like, when i'm at work in my LAB tommorow, I can try and find you some PEER-REVIEWED journal articles asserting the improvements that carbohydrate based nutrient mixtures have on plant growth rate, viability, metabolic homogenicity, and symbiosis with soil microorganisms. In the mean time, I suggest you take off you're 'arrogant dickhead' hat, and try to stop using words like 'peer-reviewed' in a forum that you know doesn't have very many scientists (aka most people don't know what this means), in order to stump the members of this board into accepting you're completely incorrect assumptions regarding carbohydrate uptake flux. Now you ARE dealing with a scientist, with three degrees, (Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Analytical Organic Chemistr) who wont put up with a. Comments that I would expect of a high school science student who thinks he knows everything (you don't even understand the dark cycle, or that sugars are the fundamental storage 'units' of life, PARTICULARLY IN PLANTS) b. Someone that tries to force the rest of the participants in this thread to accept you're views by asking them to obtain journal articles that are generally only available to the public if you PAY for them (from $19.99-$69.99 for ONE article). The only way to have full access to the base of 'peer-reviewed' journals necessary to find papers describing evidence regarding this topic is to have an account with an academic institution. Unfortunately for you, I OWN a laboratory in an academic institution, so if you want to come to a thread and try and force you're views on ppl in a manner to which they cannot defend (because it would cost them $100's to obtain journal articles), well my friend, THE FIGHT IS ON Its only too bad that you're not actually a scientist (and if you are, you are most likely a tech with no clue ... you don't even understand fundamental biological metabolism *laugh*) PS: Prior to reading this thread I was unaware that there were carbohydrate based nutrients in small scale horticulture. I'm excited to see how this supplement will affect my plants. PPS: I AM A PEER-REVIEWER (are you?). I have about 100 papers on my desk a week to review. Now if you've ever read a journal article (and I don't believe you have), it takes quite a bit of time to grasp the experiment and then further to review the methodology used ... its often impossible to put myself (in my mind) in the laboratory of the researchers whose paper I am reviewing, this limits how accurate a review can be made in the context of scientific methodology. Furthermore, there is a LOT of RAMPANT corruption in the scientific community where results are often fabricated to push a paper to publication before the lab's grant(s) renewal deadline has passed. What i'm saying ... just because a publication has been peer-reviewed, really means very little with respect to the validity of the publication. The validity of a publication is determined by which journal it is published in. PPPS: Reviewing 100 papers a week, and trying to run a lab of 20 researchers doesn't leave me much time to prove or disprove punks like you. So I will 'try' my best to find compelling publications, but no promises. If I do find articles of relevence (which i'm sure I will since carbohydrate fortified growth medium is used in almost all industrial horticulture applications), I won't release it to you, or this forum, until you pay my lab for the cost of the publication. Don't pretend to be a scientist when you're not ... it pisses real scientisits like me off to no end (which would be why this post is so long)
Think it may be the simple forms of carbohydrate which allow it to be used more freely and unadultered then say bat shit, and dead fish which would have to be broken down much further before being used by the plants feeding off them.. I could be way off, but ask the scientist ^^ I'm sure he's more versed in this then I. Yah know I never tasted manure/guono etc., and I dont think my buds have that taste, but I use in very small amounts as well. But ya know in one of somas speaches I did hear him say he was tired of his "bud tasting like bat shit".. Dont quote me word for word but listen to his talk at the cannibis cup which I think can be found on that tube site or whatever that media site is.. u tube yeah thast it. Not sure 100% the context this was mentioned but I believe in the part where he mentions the reason he preffers ammending his soil beds with dry organics first, instead of pouring on liquid organic fertilizers at every feeding... I never tasted much fish, or bat shit before, but I have tasted sweet carmel tasting mollases buds. Like I said, no doubt in my mind when I used blackstrap double the reccomended dose I tasted a carmel flavoring to the buds.. Never used as foliar either, always poured in the soil.
hey bro no offense but back up this shit with some proof because everything iv read says differently.hows about some pics of your grows there MR. Bill Nye.
Bill Nye wasn't a scientist, he was an actor. I did back up my claims through explaining the basic biochemistry of living organisms. (I explained Quantumponics, Calvin cycle ..) I made the post because Al B.'s explanation of biological science is preposterous. His claims describe that sugars aren't important to organisms, when in fact the entire purpose of a plant's life is to sequester the energy of the sun by storing it in the bonds of glucose (and to reproduce of course =P). Its also fundamental to turgor pressure. He compares smoking pure sugar to smoking plants that have diverse complexes of carbohydrates with no 'peer-reviewed' evidence. He came on here acting arrogant, and disrupting other peoples posts detailing personal experience ... so I decided to do the same (but I actually tried to explain some things in laymans terms). You'll notice that I only have like 5 or 6 posts on this forum ... theres a reason for it. This place seems to be full of 16 year olds trying to make a quick buck, with no respect for gardening or science. I have extreme distaste for this, so i'll voice my opinion (ask virginharvester ). If you don't believe the science I have tried to describe, fine, do what you want ... but i'm not going to sit around wathcing wannabe scientist's sully the industry.
Quantumponics *snickers*gawfaw's*I like you.your almost as full of shit as my old man..*snicker*.I invite anyone here to google Quantumponics or Quantumponics, Calvin cycle.O BTW bill nye realy is a scientist.just Google it!!!!LMAO
For a topic so sweet things are a bit sour. So it is settled. Sugars work because the plants directly/indirectly need and use them. A teaspoon here and there wont hurt them. This topic was discussed on a few other sites, almost as heated, but not quite as nerdy as we got.
True and I did get abit hot.Sorry Bill.I would still urge any hydro users to really do some research before using it.Iv been researching it and there are some that claim success.but also alot of cases of people claiming it caused sever slime and pathogens.so beware.As for soil...well I will be useing it in my organic vegitable grow coming up this fall and winter when the weather cools down abit.
OK this is intresting me. And it has come up to many time to blow-it-off ...So the way I flower .....each cute "lil' budlet"...is watered alone so how much Molasses per gallon for the test ? I will do one at the "Recomended Rate" per "The Postman" and one double and we will put this to the test using a friend of mine as the "Unbiased Taste Tester" I will video the "Tasting" and post it to "The Tube of U" for all to view. I will be takin clones this weekend and will use them for the testing.....I will start a thread when we begin This Kind is 4 years old everybody knows what it tastes like....so we will tell him it is something "New"
sounds great!!!please dont forget to record yield VS.your control group.one of the marketing tools is claiming larger yields by replacing carbs the plant has lost in bud production.Fuckn A it will be like cannabis myth busters!!! Way to go Doc.
I would do double the dose as I have done.. Anything over the reccommended does of 1tblsp per gallon gave me to much of a change to the point it was to noticable in the product when smoked. If anyone has read along in the journal I keep here it was never menioned exactly why I stopped or changed, but for a while i was feeding mollasees at EVERY watering. Experimented both with doubling the dose in the weeks prior to harvest feeding right up to the chop.. I wanted see if sweet buds were my thing. I wasn't to hot on the earthy flavor the ppp, and this seemed the way to go before i could get that diesel polllen on her.... Well I smoked it, and wasn't happy with the results, and went back to a lighter dose of 1sp per gallon or 1tbl in the teas, with at least 1-2 week period (A flush)were nothing gets added and those plant live of whatver is left in the soil. The results were much to my liking.. Didn't have that burnt sugar flavor, but a much fuller more robust flavor. I liked this results, and this is whats being done currently here. some a what mollases has to offer nutreint wise. This is actually off the back of granmas ur gonna laugh ("mild flavor" mollases what I use now) blackstrap has quite a bit more k, not sure on ca,mag, iron, and a much richer flavor I've done the experimenting.. I came to my own conclusions. Like I said no doubt in my mind flavors were changed.. ideal conditions raises sugar levels within the plant/brix correct? Could these higher levels stored in the plant transfer to a flavor? I'm asssuming the healthiest tomatoes are the sweeter of the bunch... It organic growing I would think mollases a natural chelate, food for the microherb which breaks down organic material releasing c02 from the root zone would create these ideal conditions for higher sugar content within the plant? A friend.. now is that as peer reviewed scientific as it gets Dr. LOL.. Smoke the shit yourself... you know the taste of your herb.. you tell me? It would be best to say here friend I grew this one different from this one same strain, notice a difference? That would get you better results then fibbing and telling him it's totally different.
hitech, i want to extend a heartfelt thanks to you and the others too who took alot time to post what you did. i'm no scientist, just a burnout/head who loves and appreciates good smoke, and i love to grow it just as much as i love to smoke it. even if i spend 48 straight hours researching on the internet, i would not have come close to posting as much info and fact as you so graciously have done. you are an asset to this community.