K-Lite has been around a few years now... updates?

[cnycharles]

To touch on the why tomatoes seem to do better in hydro than in the ground, some explanation could be that with roots in soil, there is limited movement of oxygen and nutrients, and output of wastes per se from the roots. In hydro, you usually have moving water which may have more oxygen from 'turbulation' (brain is tired, made up that word I think ). Also usually hydro water is fertilized, and often moving so it would seem (this would all vary depending on the exact type and timing of nutrient water application in hydro) that you have constant or more frequent oxygen and food intake possible and at the same time the moving liquid is taking root metabolites away.
Just like having vigorous air movement across the leaf can pull more nutrients up through the roots, the water movement can bring new and remove wastes more quickly. Also the readily available hydro goodies from moving water and the moving water removing wastes more easily could cost less energy used to do this, also possibly allowing greater tomato growth

Rays very frequent watering/feeding with s/h likely is allowing a more constant root growing condition because food isn't diminished and wastes are frequently removed and watering often might allow greater oxygen levels at the root zone. Someone who uses low levels periodically but doesn't flush and as a result applies less fertilizer may see less results using a product.
How and when you apply something can have a great effect on the final result, so just saying 'I use brand x or c' and I got these results, doesn't tell half the story. Plants in nature that are being deluged even with unmeasurable levels of food (but there is food in there) the plant can grow because it can collect enough to get by. Also wastes can be removed more often when water is moving over roots


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bullsie]

I quit using K-lite with my Catts because the new growth was very poor, weak, stunted, floppy, and sometimes yellowed. Floppy growth in some cases progressed to rot. Older leaves show a poor look to them. I did get some yellowing of mature leaves. But many exhibit signs of some sort of cell collapse. Lost quite a few seedlings for no reason that I could think of - everything has been the same for 2 years, including medium - but for the change in fertilizer. I agree, not cold tolerant either.

I was blaming a dark winter, but I've had those before. Matter of fact, I've been looking into supplemental lighting. I may still add the lighting, but have definitely changed fertilizer.

OH, I don't care for the taste of hydro grown tomatoes.....

 

[Stone]

I quit using K-lite with my Catts because the new growth was very poor, weak, stunted, floppy, and sometimes yellowed. Floppy growth in some cases progressed to rot. Older leaves show a poor look to them. I did get some yellowing of mature leaves. But many exhibit signs of some sort of cell collapse. Lost quite a few seedlings for no reason that I could think of - everything has been the same for 2 years, including medium - but for the change in fertilizer. I agree, not cold tolerant either.

I was blaming a dark winter, but I've had those before. Matter of fact, I've been looking into supplemental lighting. I may still add the lighting, but have definitely changed fertilizer.

OH, I don't care for the taste of hydro grown tomatoes.....

Floppy growth, yellowing older leaves and lack of cold hardiness are all signs of too much N and not enough K.

 

[rcb]

Naoki- yellowing for me started on the oldest leaves, (which is why at first didn't think about it) and within the leaf you could see the yellowing progress from the apex to the base. The leaf would then dry up and fall. But as time went on, it was getting to where only 1 yr old leaves would do this as well.

For example, my Latouria Dens, grow great, bloomed great, but they had no leaves except for the newest growths. They were naked lol.

Since I have switched back to MSU, the problem slowed, and now, it appears to have stopped.

 

[Ray]

I think that an aspect we have ignored is that of "limiting factors".

Brian Monk and I have had discussions about this in relation to alcohol in the old Jerry's Grow formula, and he proposed the analogy of oxygen supply to the muscles being the limiting factor in runners. (Secretariat, a thoroughbred who set all kinds of records, had a heart twice the size of a normal horse). Jerry's Grow's alcohol may have provided extra carbon to the plants, but Jerry, himself, pointed out that it was only effective in high-light plants - those that live in a high energy input environment, but may be limited in their ability to use that energy by their "fuel supply".

The discussion above about hydroponic tomatoes may very well - as Charles mentioned - have to do with some limiting factor being reduced or eliminated.

None of us knows what the "natural" limiting factors are in orchid growth. Providing lots of fertilizer does not automatically provide for better growth, and in many cases, actually have the opposite effect.

We are focusing all of our attention of the formula of fertilizer, but the differences we are seeing in the performance of our plants just "screams" that the formula is not, by itself, that limiting factor.

I have used K-Lite exclusively for over three years now, and I'm not seeing the yellowing of leaves. Folks have pointed out that it's because of my use of KelpMax, except I'm lazy and not that rigorous about its application, and if the plants see it more than a few times a year, I'd be surprised. Likewise, the difference has been attributed to my growing in semi-hydroponics, but the majority of my collection is not grown that way. What I DO do differently than many is water heavily and often, and that includes about 30 ppm N.

So what "limiting factor" have I reduced that allows K-Lite to be acceptable to the plants?


Ray Barkalow
firstrays.com

 

[naoki]

Charles has a good point that the stability of root environment could be important.

Yellowing of older leaves are consistent with (but not limited to) K deficiency as Mike pointed out. It is interesting some people have problems with K-Lite but others don't. As Ray and Charles mentioned, a lot of other things can influence effectiveness of fertilizer formula.

It is probably difficult to know when K-Lite causes problems (setting the optimality aside), but I do wonder a couple things. Maybe people using low CEC media are likely to have problems (e.g. I usually have some moss included), but Ray is ok with LECA (but with semi-hydro, nutrients could be available for a longer time). Greenhouse vs indoor (e.g. quicker drying in indoor causes the shorter window for the appropriate concentration for nutrients uptake)?

At least for my growing in grow tents with artificial light, I'm pretty sure the limiting factor is photosynthesis; appropriate amount of light, enough water to allow sufficient gas exchange, CO2:O2 ratio, and appropriate temperature (PS is pretty sensitive to temperature). It's difficult to optimize these elements for each species (some things are easy to control like high RH is almost always favored by most orchids to allow them freely open stomata). This is probably the reason I don't see much difference from one fertilizer to another. In other words, I'm not good at growing them yet, but it hasn't prevented me form commenting on fertilizer thread because it's fun to learn from you all.

 

[orcoholic]

I think that an aspect we have ignored is that of "limiting factors".

Brian Monk and I have had discussions about this in relation to alcohol in the old Jerry's Grow formula

There was alcohol in Jerry's??? Damn, I wasted it on my orchids!!!

 

[ChrisFL]

It's raining really hard this morning, probably about 4" per hour. I got a bright idea to go measure the pH of the rain here not in the forest. My bucket filled in a few seconds from water off our roof. I got wet, now I'm cold, but here is my proof oke:

There are absolutely not enough ions in that water for the electrode to work properly. The reading is worthless. I'm not calling you a liar, I'm calling you misled and misinformed.

You can trust a cheap pH electrode, or you can trust a PhD chemist who has been working with marine and meteoric chemistry for over a decade.

 

[ChrisFL]

Amazonian examples of meteoric rainout are typically pH ~4.5 from what I remember (most tropical rainout is between pH 4.0-5.0)

 

[ChrisFL]

Well, Lance, it is hard to argue with the numbers. Can you, for reference sake, take the pH of milk (6.4--6.8) or coffee (black, pH 5). Pure water with CO2 should be acidic, as low as 4 under some circumstances. If the pH of your milk and coffee correspond with the ideal values then you have a stronger case.

In any case, I'm going to start inoculating my S/H pots with moss.

It's VERY easy to argue with the numbers if you know how such electrode-bearing devices work. They cannot take a measurement in a solution with such a low conductivity.

 

[ChrisFL]

Generally, running pure water has a pH close to 7. Only when it is left to stand does enough CO2 dissolve into it to lower the pH a lot.

Rainwater does not.

CO2 isn't very soluble in water and is easily driven off by agitation.

EXCESS CO2 is what can be driven off. CO2 has an thermodynamic equilibrium solubility in water.

The reading close to 7 is expected for unpolluted rain water.

No it absolutely is not. It is expected to be ~5.6 in 1980's atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

 

[ChrisFL]

I don't know why I'm actually going to all this trouble when a simple google search will provide you with several examples, and even the equilibrium calculations, for the pH of rainwater in various locations.

 

[gonewild]

There are absolutely not enough ions in that water for the electrode to work properly. The reading is worthless. I'm not calling you a liar, I'm calling you misled and misinformed.

You can trust a cheap pH electrode, or you can trust a PhD chemist who has been working with marine and meteoric chemistry for over a decade.

On the test I made in the forest I also used a very good meter made by Volmatic.

I may be mislead and misinformed but the group of PhD biologists and grad students I had lunch with the other day were fascinated by my theories.

 

[lepetitmartien]

And moreover, any bits of thing or gaz (CO2 especially) dissolving will make the pH change with next to nothing involved.

And whatever the electrode…

 

[gonewild]

I don't know why I'm actually going to all this trouble when a simple google search will provide you with several examples, and even the equilibrium calculations, for the pH of rainwater in various locations.

On the first page of a google search I found an abstract.
Seems like maybe the location where the rain forms can effect the pH.
Note that the last line mentions biomass burning and road construction. The area I measured the rain/moss water had zero biomass burning and zero construction, it's one of the wettest places in South America and it's full of orchids.
Maybe I was there on a neutral day? So I'll invite you to come and test it yourself, then I'll trust your PHd more than my cheap meter. oke:


"ABSTRACT

Fog water, fog drip, and rainfall chemistry were examined at a seasonal tropical rain forest site in Xishuangbanna, south-west China between November 2001 and October 2002. During this period, radiation fog occurred on 204 days, with a total duration of 1949 hours of which 1618 hours (37% of the total time) occurred during the dry season (November to April). Mean pH values of fog water, fog drip, and rain were 6.78, 7.30, and 6.13, respectively. The ion with the highest concentration in both fog and rain water was bicarbonate (HCO3–), followed by calcium, magnesium, and ammonium. Concentrations of nitrate, HCO3–, ammonium, calcium, and potassium in fog water collected in the latter half of the dry season were significantly higher (p < 0.05) than earlier in the dry season. Ionic concentrations in fog drip were higher than those in fog water, except for ammonium and hydrogen. This is attributed to the washing-off of dust and ash-derived nutrients deposited on the leaves and by the leaching of alkaline ions from the leaves. Dry deposition of ash and dust is most probably related to biomass burning and road construction activity."

http://ebooks.cambridge.org/chapter.jsf?bid=CBO9780511778384&cid=CBO9780511778384A055

 

[gonewild]

And moreover, any bits of thing or gaz (CO2 especially) dissolving will make the pH change with next to nothing involved.

And whatever the electrode…

Then I guess the Peruvian cloud forest I was in has bits that make the water neutral rather than acid. Remember the CO2 level where I was maybe extremely low and the O2 level extremely high. There are no atmospheric pollutants from manufacturing, the air is as clean as can be, and it is brand new unused air.

 

[lepetitmartien]

Amazonian examples of meteoric rainout are typically pH ~4.5 from what I remember (most tropical rainout is between pH 4.0-5.0)

Amazonian rains are not exactly an example of pure water, even sacrifying to a less restrictive definition than the chemist do use. There's a lot of chemistry happening up there, including elements from dust coming from the Sahara, and N combinations done by lightning in the frequent storms.

I remember interestins analysis in the book on Vascular Epiphytes of 1993, lots of matter to think about… (rain, N circuit, tree position in its environment). It was even pointed out as a re-read to make at the scientific conferences of the EOC 2015 at Jodrell Lab in Kew Gardens. We still don't know or understand a lot of things happening there.

 

[gonewild]

We still don't know or understand a lot of things happening there.

Who's side are you on now? oke:

Here.... This research address neutral rain.

http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S0187-62362014000100004&script=sci_arttext

It happens. My observation was seeing it happen on the day I took the samples.

 

[ChrisFL]

Amazonian rains are not exactly an example of pure water, even sacrifying to a less restrictive definition than the chemist do use. There's a lot of chemistry happening up there, including elements from dust coming from the Sahara, and N combinations done by lightning in the frequent storms.

Try to keep up. No one is talking about pure water. We are talking about the pH of rainwater.

 

[gonewild]

Someone said to Google it.....

"Fig. 2 shows the water-quality data for rain coUected at Horton Plains from the first week ofNovember 1995 to the last week of April 1996. The pH varied between 5.8 and 7.5 with anaverage of 6.5. The typical range of pH for rain water is between 5.6 and 6.8 (NationalResearch Council). In this experiment three samples out of sixteen had a pH of more than 7.0. These three samples also had a relatively high concentration of NH4N. One possible ex-planation is that free anunonia in the air or in the clouds can react with O~ ions to form
NHtOH."

http://journals.sjp.ac.lk/index.php/fesympo/article/viewFile/1212/392