# K-Lite Poll



## jtrmd (Jun 26, 2015)

Since the other thread started getting out of hand. Here is a poll to use for a simple answer to the question for people like myself.

Work= seen improvement
Didn't work= no improvement or decline.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jun 26, 2015)

I'm not sure what you mean by "it worked" or "it didn't work". Worked for what? I've been using K-lite because it was said to help prevent erwinia be strengthening the plants. My incidence of that disease has decreased but not eliminated. So what do I check?


----------



## jtrmd (Jun 26, 2015)

SlipperFan said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by "it worked" or "it didn't work". Worked for what? I've been using K-lite because it was said to help prevent erwinia be strengthening the plants. My incidence of that disease has decreased but not eliminated. So what do I check?



I would say you go for* it worked. I was going to say improve or no improvement. In hindsight I sould have.


----------



## TyroneGenade (Jun 26, 2015)

How's this for definitions:

it worked: the plants grew and flowered
it didn't work: the plants deteriorated or died, improved when switched to different fertilizer


----------



## SlipperFan (Jun 26, 2015)

Doesn't fit my situation.


----------



## Mocchaccino (Jun 27, 2015)

Before one could jump to a conclusion, he should make sure that there's a test and a control. If K-lite wasn't the only single parameter to be tested, there was literally no conclusive statement. Also, how to justify the length of time. 2 years? 3 years? 5 years? Besides the sample has to be sufficiently large enough to make sure it is statistically relevant instead of a coincidence. 

I am using low K creating by my own. I could not draw a conclusion. I just feel good to use it and that's it.


----------



## abax (Jun 27, 2015)

This is an opinion poll, not a scientific survey. Give
jtrmd a break please. It's a fair summary of observations.


----------



## lepetitmartien (Jun 27, 2015)

Abax + 1

It's a way to see a little more clearly, giving confidence tha tpeople here are to answer in fairplay. No need to import the flame/trolling again, it's not the subject. We can have a local figure of the number of members who can have an opinion based on experience and maybe see what we can do from this point in a more rationnal manner next. Let's be pragmatic


----------



## jtrmd (Jun 27, 2015)

abax said:


> This is an opinion poll, not a scientific survey. Give
> jtrmd a break please. It's a fair summary of observations.



That was the point. I think ChrisFl started the other thread, and never got an answer. It turned into a internet ''peeing'' contest in now time.


----------



## Rick (Jun 27, 2015)

Not just worked past tense but continues to "work" after 4 years. Would like to see all the permutations of low K that folks are trying.

I know of several members in our society that never get on ST that are either using K lite, Ed Merkles version or making their own low K program that are seeing improved growth.


----------



## Happypaphy7 (Jun 27, 2015)

I appreciate the good intention and an effort of making things simple, but this can only mislead some people and not worth much. 
As someone pointed out above, the definition of what it means by working isn't clear at all and the suggested meaning of what works and not is also rather vague or too extreme, I'd say. 
I've tried a few different fertilizers and I don't believe anything dies in the short ( or even long) period of times unless concentrate is poured right on to the plants.


----------



## Rick (Jun 27, 2015)

Happypaphy7 said:


> I appreciate the good intention and an effort of making things simple, but this can only mislead some people and not worth much.
> As someone pointed out above, the definition of what it means by working isn't clear at all and the suggested meaning of what works and not is also rather vague or too extreme, I'd say.
> I've tried a few different fertilizers and I don't believe anything dies in the short ( or even long) period of times unless concentrate is poured right on to the plants.



This is a good point. The criteria of "worked" or the converse is extremely broad.

When I first came up with the low K concept my goals were:
1) to reduce my seedling mortality
2) reduce the incidence of "boom and bust" in my collection
3) decrease the "difficulty factor" of stereotypically difficult species I was growing. ( this mean either decreasing mortality or getting faster growth).

From the standpoint of the above, low K has been a success for me.

It was never intended to grow a superior show plant or improve floriforousness, so I was really surprised with positive results with plants that were already doing fine, and it was a definite plus for reduced incidence of Erwinia and root rots.

It's surprising to me how much of a product endorsement this thing with K-lite has turned into. No one owns a patent, trademark, or any semblance of intellectual property rights on the low K concept (as far as I know), so not sure why its so contentious. I used MSU for all the years leading up to low K, and couldn't get the results I wanted. But the MSU folks are now making K lite and don't see to have a problem with it.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jun 27, 2015)

I think you should correct your statement about MSU folks, Rick. I think you mean Greencare, who makes the MSU formula also makes K-lite. It's my understanding that they will make any formula you request -- I suppose there is a minimum amount -- but MSU is not involved, as far as I know.


----------



## Rick (Jun 27, 2015)

SlipperFan said:


> I think you should correct your statement about MSU folks, Rick. I think you mean Greencare, who makes the MSU formula also makes K-lite. It's my understanding that they will make any formula you request -- I suppose there is a minimum amount -- but MSU is not involved, as far as I know.



Correct Greencare will make the MSU formula, and whatever formula you want.

Greencare offers multiple formulas in their standard repertoire. Michigan State University is a public institution and conducted the original research that developed the formula based on leaf tissue concentrations of greenhouse grown orchids. MSU does not make and sell fertilizer.

http://www.blackmoreco.com/greencare.html 

However, Bill Argo is Greencare's (or the Blackmore Company's)primary consultant. Who was consulted by Ray when we were considering a low K option. Dr Argo was key to development of the MSU fertilizer.

http://www.prolibraries.com/ofa/?select=speaker&speakerID=7567

Also don't forget this post where Greencare asked Ray if they could sell K lite direct (this goes beyond making a custom test batch for retail hobby distribution)
http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=32365&highlight=Klite


----------



## Marco (Jun 27, 2015)

I have been using k-lite exclusively on a baby Neo sekai while using 20-20-20 on the mother plant. Seems to be ok. can't really tell much of a difference after a couple of weeks. However, I am taking periodic photos to compare growth. Will share in a years time.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jun 27, 2015)

Thanks, Rick, for the clarification.

MSU used to have a great orchid collection, and the person who cared for them won many awards. Unfortunately, cost-cutting there has pretty much resulted in the demise of that collection. At least the MSU formula, and subsequent spin-offs, are a lasting legacy of their efforts. 

It's good that Greencare and Bill Argo are still active.


----------



## monocotman (Jun 28, 2015)

*Msu*

Dot
I'd like to thank the MSU for their work in developing this fertiliser.
I believe that here in Europe the MSU formula is now marketed by akerne as their 'rain mix'.
I started to use it maybe three years ago and was frankly astonished in the improvement in growth in my plants. So much so that what was a few orchids on a windowsill has now grown to four or five times that size.
Some thing that we may overlook in some of the currently overheated discussions on fertiliser is the recommendation to use it at every watering at a very low rate.
As this mimics the situation in the wild it is not surprising that it works.
Regards
David


----------



## Ray (Jun 28, 2015)

David, I think that frequent use of very small amounts of fertilizer, coupled with heavy watering during application, may actually play more of a role in successful cultivation than does the formula - within reason.
In nature, there is a great deal of flushing and very little accumulation of nutrients and wastes. In captivity in a pot, it's entirely different, so following that regimen will tend to lead to slower accumulation of those wastes, no matter what the formula may be.

As to the poll, yes, it "works" for me.

How about another poll: "are peoples' reactions to this discussion reasonable?"


Ray Barkalow
firstrays.com


----------



## jtrmd (Jun 28, 2015)

Ray said:


> David, I think that frequent use of very small amounts of fertilizer, coupled with heavy watering during application.
> 
> As to the poll, yes, it "works" for me.
> 
> ...




That is pretty much how I fertilize (20-10-20 Peat-Lite) on a regular basis. Once a month I might go with straight water, because of laziness to mix up another 5 gallons of concentrate. Only out breaks of disease issue I ever had were my fault. Not replacing fans that stop in a very humid Greenhouse is asking for it. Plus it was a year I was pushing the min temp on everything. I have been growing for close to 20 yrs and still make rookie mistakes. Cutting my collection back has helped me monitor everything better. Now just need to cut it back again as seedlings bloom out. 

I am always a fan of polls, so that works for me.


----------



## lepetitmartien (Jun 28, 2015)

As a user of Rain mix for a few month, I have to correct one point. If the formula was MSU at the start, it's been modified and now differs from a few elements, latest change occured this spring with afaik a little S poured in.

It stopped an unbalance that took 3 years to show up in the making. (now using RO water and Rain Mix, before a chemically moded tap water and acidifying fert)

Now, here it's about K-lite


----------



## abax (Jun 28, 2015)

To answer your question, Ray, no. It was a general opinion survey and that is what it is intended to be. A few
folks here versed in chemistry get over-excited about anything to do with fertilizer. I think their opinions are
rather fine, but those of us who are not in that field rarely
know what the hell they're talking about. THAT'S
confusing.


----------



## Justin (Jun 29, 2015)

i predominantly use Miracle Gro orchid food 30-10-10 urea-based at 1/16 tsp every watering, w/ my municipal tapwater. I will rotate in K-lite maybe once per month, twice per month sometimes in the winter. Works great for me. 

Back when i was using reverse osmosis and was getting problems with bacterial and fungal rot on very soft growths, switching to K-Lite along with adding back in some tapwater per Rick's advice turned it all around. I eventually got rid of the R/O system entirely and phased to my current regimen.

Also like to use Kelp extract occasionally.


----------



## monocotman (Jun 29, 2015)

*rain mix*

Thanks for the info guys. 
Whatever the mix is it grows some lovely plants.
Hybrid phrags and both hybrid and species catts grow very well with it even in the less than ideal conditions of low humidity in a house,
regards,
David


----------



## Ray (Jun 29, 2015)

lepetitmartien said:


> As a user of Rain mix for a few month, I have to correct one point. If the formula was MSU at the start, it's been modified and now differs from a few elements, latest change occured this spring with afaik a little S poured in.



What is the % of additional S? MSU fertilizers have always had sulfur in them, - about 0.1%, if I recall correctly - courtesy of the use of various sulfates. It's just not listed in the analysis on the label..


----------



## bullsie (Jun 29, 2015)

abax said:


> A few
> folks here versed in chemistry get over-excited about anything to do with fertilizer. I think their opinions are
> rather fine, but those of us who are not in that field rarely
> know what the hell they're talking about. THAT'S
> confusing.



I'm one of those lost and confused when the conversations get deep. I just enjoy growing orchids, and like to keep it simple. I do enjoy the survey!


----------



## Gilda (Jun 30, 2015)

bullsie said:


> I'm one of those lost and confused when the conversations get deep. I just enjoy growing orchids, and like to keep it simple. I do enjoy the survey!


 
Same here.... I'm old and blonde..way over my head with all the chemistry involved.


----------



## lepetitmartien (Jun 30, 2015)

Ray said:


> What is the % of additional S? MSU fertilizers have always had sulfur in them, - about 0.1%, if I recall correctly - courtesy of the use of various sulfates. It's just not listed in the analysis on the label..


There was none before if I recollect well. I'll give you the figure next time I run across the paper…

The formula changed, if you have some dating before EOC2015, it's old version.


----------



## SlipperFan (Jun 30, 2015)

Directly from GreenCare, dated 2004. Which one changed? To what?

GreenCare
19-4-23
Orchid Well Water Special
Guaranteed Analysis
Total Nitrogen……………………………….….19%
13.6% Nitrate Nitrogen
5.7% Ammoniacal Nitrogen
Available Phosphate (P2O5)…………………..….4%
Potash (K2O)……………………………………23%
Calcium…………………………………..…….2.0%
Magnesium………………………………..……0.0%
Iron (Fe)……………………………………...0.160%
Manganese (Mn)…………………………..…0.080%
Zinc (Zn)…………………………………..…0.080%
Copper (Cu)……………………………….…0.080%
Boron (B)………………………………….…0.016%
Molybdenum (Mo)…………………………..0.016%
Derived from : Ammonium nitrate, ammonium phosphate, boric acid, copper sulfate, iron EDTA, manganese sulfate, potassium nitrate, sodium molybdate, and zinc sulfate
Potential Acidity: 140 lbs. Calcium carbonate equivalent per ton.

13-3-15
Orchid RO Water Special
Water Soluble Fertilizer
For Continuous Liquid Feeding Programs
Guaranteed Analysis
Total Nitrogen……………………………….….13%
12.5% Nitrate Nitrogen
0.7% Ammoniacal Nitrogen
Available Phosphate (P2O3)…………………..….3%
Potash (K2O)……………………………………15%
Calcium…………………………………..…….8.0%
Magnesium………………………………..……2.0%
Iron (Fe)……………………………………...0.177%
Manganese (Mn)…………………………..…0.088%
Zinc (Zn)…………………………………..…0.041%
Copper (Cu)……………………………….…0.044%
Boron (B)………………………………….…0.018%
Molybdenum (Mo)…………………………..0.018%
Derived from : boric acid, copper sulfate, iron EDTA, manganese sulfate, potassium phosphate, potassium nitrate, sodium molybdate, and zinc sulfate
Potential Basicity: 420 lbs. calcium carbonate equivalent per ton.


----------



## Rick (Jun 30, 2015)

I think the change referred to is the European version of MSU (Akerne's ?) rain mix.

The sulfate in MSU mixes only comes in with the trace metals, so very low.

If you stick with RO water the best bet is to add Epsom salt to get a few ppm of sulfate.

Otherwise sulfate is generally in abundance in surface waters, so can just add back in well or tap water to get several ppm.

Gypsum (calcium sulfate) is a common pot additive that also is a source of sulfate.

The real world is almost never short of sulfate.


----------



## lepetitmartien (Jul 2, 2015)

As I wrote, I was talking about Akerne Rain Mix yes.

(still forgot to bring the leaflet near the computer…)


----------



## Brabantia (Jul 2, 2015)

New Akerne. RM composition:
N NO3. : 11.0%
N NH3. : 0.8%
P. P2O5. : 2.7%
K. K2O. : 13.7%
Ca. CaO. : 11.8%
Mg. MgO : 3.5%
S. SO3. : 4.8%
Some modifications also for the oligo's: 
Fer : 0.10%. Old version. 0.17%. as MSU
Manganese : 0.05%. 0.08%
Zinc. : 0.01%. 0.04%
Copper. : 0.02%. 0.04%
Bore. : 0.02%. 0.01%
Molybdenum. : 0.01%
Cobalt. : 0.001%
No change for Mo and Co added.
. :


----------



## TyroneGenade (Jul 2, 2015)

Hooray! K-lite is winning 3:2.


----------



## Clark (Jul 2, 2015)

I feel like a winner!


----------



## Rick (Jul 2, 2015)

Brabantia said:


> New Akerne. RM composition:
> N NO3. : 11.0%
> N NH3. : 0.8%
> P. P2O5. : 2.7%
> ...



Is that a typo for sulfate (SO4) rather than sulfite (SO3)?

The NPK is almost identical to the Roberts Flower Supply version of MSU I used to use years ago. The Calcium is definitely beefed up.


----------



## lepetitmartien (Jul 2, 2015)

Rain Mix is *exclusively* for rain/RO water, maybe that's the point.


----------



## Brabantia (Jul 2, 2015)

Rick said:


> Is that a typo for sulfate (SO4) rather than sulfite (SO3)


No Rick not a typo error this is the sulfur content expressed in SO3.


----------



## Rick (Jul 2, 2015)

Brabantia said:


> No Rick not a typo error this is the sulfur content expressed in SO3.



weird way to express since sulfite is uncommon/unstable in environment.

Most all salts will be as sulfate forms.


----------



## Rick (Jul 2, 2015)

lepetitmartien said:


> Rain Mix is *exclusively* for rain/RO water, maybe that's the point.



The Roberts and Greencare MSU mixes were also for rain/RO. So you can see in the MSU well water version the difference in Ca and Mg compared to the "pure water" versions.

Seems like sulfate wasn't given significant consideration in prior versions of MSU pure water.


----------



## Rick (Jul 2, 2015)

Brabantia said:


> New Akerne. RM composition:
> N NO3. : 11.0%
> N NH3. : 0.8%
> P. P2O5. : 2.7%
> ...



Do you have the old Arkene numbers handy for comparison? (Just the Macros please).


----------



## Brabantia (Jul 3, 2015)

Old Akerne fertiliser version:
NNO3: 12.5%
NNH4: 0.5%
PP2O5: 3.0%
KK2O. : 15%
Mg MgO: 3.0%
CaCaO. : 11.0%

About S as SO3: SO3 is the oxyde of H2SO4. as P2O5 is the oxyde of H3PO4


----------



## Rick (Jul 3, 2015)

Brabantia said:


> Old Akerne fertiliser version:
> NNO3: 12.5%
> NNH4: 0.5%
> PP2O5: 3.0%
> ...



Thanks agro-chemist expression is so funny:wink: Reminds me of cooling tower engineers.

The new formula is almost within rounding error of the new one with the exception of S. The easiest way to bring that is with MgSO4, but could also us K2SO4. The solubility of CaSO4 could be problematic in concentrated solutions, Na2SO4 would be easy, but they don't list any Na, and I don't think the math adds up to bring it in with ammonium sulfate. 

This is a dry mix? So no use of sulfuric acid.

What would your guess be for the sulfate addition?


----------



## lepetitmartien (Jul 4, 2015)

Dry mix, very hygroscopic…


----------



## Brabantia (Jul 6, 2015)

Rick said:


> What would your guess be for the sulfate addition?


At 65 ppm N with MSU you have: 40 ppm Ca++ and 10 ppm Mg++. We can increase a little bit Mg: a ratio 1/3 is acceptable. I have computed that if with added 2gr Ammonium Sulfate and 4 gr Magnesium Sulfate hepta hydrate at 50 gr MSU we are nearly good versus Akerne new with sulfur. In this situation the solution has a ratio 90% NNO3 and 10% NNH4+ (not bad!) and Ca/Mg = 0.35. Of course we can use Potassium sulfate but we don'like it!


----------



## Rick (Jul 6, 2015)

Brabantia said:


> At 65 ppm N with MSU you have: 40 ppm Ca++ and 10 ppm Mg++. We can increase a little bit Mg: a ratio 1/3 is acceptable. I have computed that if with added 2gr Ammonium Sulfate and 4 gr Magnesium Sulfate hepta hydrate at 50 gr MSU we are nearly good versus Akerne new with sulfur. In this situation the solution has a ratio 90% NNO3 and 10% NNH4+ (not bad!) and Ca/Mg = 0.35. Of course we can use Potassium sulfate but we don'like it!



If you wanted to stick with all the K already in MSU. In 2011 (before K lite was designed) I "replaced the K nitrate in MSU with Ca nitrate and Mag sulfate. I'm not interested in going back to the days when I was dumping a bunch of extra Ca and Mg into the pot to attempt to compensate for the K from MSU. It didn't work for me for the 10 years prior, so I wouldn't expect it to work for me in 2015.

Seems simpler just to mix Arkene or MSU into your basic surface water that's typically loaded with sulfate, chloride and silicate salts of Ca, Mg, and Na.


----------

