Fertilizer Program - Containerized Plants II

Let me begin with a brief and hopefully not too technical explanation of how plants absorb water from the soil and how they obtain the nutrients/solutes that are dissolved in that water. Most of us remember from our biology classes that cells have membranes that are semi-permeable. That is, they allow some things to pass through the walls, like water and select elements in ionic form dissolved in the water, while excluding other materials like large organic molecules. Osmosis is a natural phenomenon that is nature’s attempt at creating a balance (isotonicity) in the concentration of solutes in water inside and outside of cells. Water and ionic solutes will pass in and out of cell walls until an equilibrium is reached and the level of solutes in the water surrounding the cell is the same as the level of solutes in the cell.

This process begins when the finest roots absorb water molecule by molecule at the cellular level from the surface of soil particles and transport it, along with its nutrient load, throughout the plant. I want to keep this simple, so I’ll just say that the best water absorption occurs when the level of solutes in soil water is lowest, and in the presence of good amounts of oxygen (this is where I get to plug a well-aerated and free-draining soil), ;o). Deionized (distilled) water contains no solutes, and is easiest for plants to absorb. Of course, since distilled water contains no nutrients, using it alone practically guarantees deficiencies of multiple nutrients as the plant is shorted the building materials (nutrients) it needs to manufacture food, keep its systems orderly, and keep its metabolism running smoothly.

We already learned that if the dissolved solutes in soil water are low, the plant may be well-hydrated, but starving; however, if they are too high, the plant may have a large store of nutrients in the soil, but because of osmotic pressure, the plant may be unable to absorb the water and could die of thirst in a sea of plenty. When this condition occurs, and is severe enough (high concentrations of solutes in soil water), it causes fertilizer burn (plasmolysis), a condition seen when plasma is torn from cell walls as the water inside the cell exits to maintain solute equilibrium with the water surrounding the cell.

Our job, because you cannot depend on an adequate supply of nutrients from the organic component of a container soil, is to provide a solution of dissolved nutrients in a concentration high enough to supply nutrients in the adequate to luxury range, yet still low enough that it remains easy for the plant to take up enough water to be well-hydrated and free of drought stress. Electrical conductivity (EC) of, and the level of TDS (total dissolved solids) in the soil solution is a reliable way to judge the adequacy of solutes and the plant’s ability to take up water. There are meters that measure these concentrations, and for most plants the ideal range of conductivity is from 1.5 - 3.5 mS, with some, like tomatoes, being as high as 4.5 mS. This is more technical than I wanted to be, but I added it in case someone wanted to search "mS" or "EC". Most of us, including me, will have to be satisfied with simply guessing at concentrations, but understanding how plants take up water and fertilizer, as well as the effects of solute concentrations in soil water is an important piece of the fertilizing puzzle.

Now, some disconcerting news - you have listened to all this talk about nutrient concentrations, but what do we supply, when, and how do we supply them? We have to decide what nutrients are appropriate to add to our supplementation program, but how? Most of us are just hobby growers and cannot do tissue analysis to determine what is lacking. We can be observant and learn the symptoms of various nutrient deficiencies though - and we CAN make some surprising generalizations.

What if I said that the nutritional needs of all plants is basically the same and that one fertilizer could suit almost all the plants we grow in containers - that by increasing/decreasing the dosage as we water, we could even manipulate plants to bloom and fruit more abundantly? It’s really quite logical, so please let me explain.

Tissue analysis of plants will nearly always show NPK to be in the ratio of approximately 10:1.5:7. If we assign N the constant of 100, P and K will range from 13-19 and 45-70 respectively. (I’ll try to remember to make a chart showing the relative ratios of all the other 13 essential nutrients that don’t come from the air at the end of what I write.) All we need to do is supply nutrients in approximately the same ratio as plants use them, and in adequate amounts to keep them in the adequate to luxury range at all times.

Remember that we can maximize water uptake by keeping the concentrations of solutes low, so a continual supply of a weak solution is best. Nutrients don’t often just suddenly appear in large quantities in nature, so the low and continual dose method most closely mimics the nutritional supply Mother Nature offers. If you decide to adopt a "fertilize every time you water" approach, most liquid fertilizers can be applied at ¾ to 1 tsp per gallon for best results. If you decide that’s too much work, try halving the dose recommended & cutting the interval in half. You can work out the math for granular soluble fertilizers and apply at a similar rate.

The system is rather self regulating if fertilizer is applied in low concentrations each time you water, even with houseplants in winter. As the plant’s growth slows, so does its need for both water and nutrients. Larger plants and plants that are growing robustly will need more water and nutrients, so linking nutrient supply to the water supply is a win/win situation all around.

Another advantage to supplying a continual low concentration of fertilizer is it eliminates the tendency of plants to show symptoms of nutrient deficiencies after they have received high doses of fertilizer and then been allowed to return to a more favorable level of soil solute concentrations. Even at perfectly acceptable concentrations of nutrients in the soil, plants previously exposed to high concentrations of fertilizer readily display these symptoms.

You will still need to guard against watering in sips, and that habit’s accompanying tendency to allow solute (salt) accumulation in soils. Remember that as salts accumulate, both water and nutrient uptake is made more difficult and finally impaired or made impossible in severe cases. Your soils should always allow you to water so that at least 10-15% of the total volume of water applied passes through the soil and out the drain hole to be discarded. This flushes the soil and carries accumulating solutes out the drain hole.

I have recently switched to a liquid fertilizer with micronutrients in a 12:4:8 NPK ratio. Note how closely this fit’s the average ratio of NPK content in plant tissues, noted above (10:1.5:7). If the P looks a little high at 4, consider that in container soils, P begins to be more tightly held as pH goes from 6.5 to below 6.0, which is on the high side of most container soil’s pH, so the manufacturer probably gave this some careful consideration. Also, P and K percentages shown on fertilizer packages are not the actual amount of P or K in the blend. The percentage of P on the package is the percentage of P2O5 (phosphorous pentoxide) and you need to multiply the percentage shown by .43 to get the actual amount of P in the fertilizer. Similarly, the K level percentage shown is actually the level of K2O ( potassium oxide) and must be multiplied by .83 to arrive at the actual amount of K supplied.

To answer the inevitable questions about specialty fertilizers and "special" plant nutritional requirements, let me repeat that plants need nutrients in roughly the same ratio. Ratio is an entirely a separate consideration from dosage. You’ll need to adjust the dosage to fit the plant and perhaps strike a happy medium in containers that have a diversity of material.

If nutrient availability is unbalanced - if plants are getting more than they need of certain nutrients, but less than they need of others, the nutrient they need the most will be the one that limits growth. There are 6 factors that affect plant growth and yield; they are: air water light temperature soil or media nutrients. Liebig's Law of Limiting Factors states the most deficient factor limits plant growth and increasing the supply of non-limiting factors will not increase plant growth. Only by increasing most deficient nutrient will the plant growth increase. There is also an optimum combination?ratio of the nutrients and increasing them, individually or in various combinations, can lead to toxicities.

When individual nutrients are available in excess, it not only unnecessarily contributes to the total volume of solutes in the soil solution, which makes it more difficult for the plant to absorb water and nutrients, it also often creates an antagonistic deficiency of other nutrients as toxicity levels block a plant's ability to take up other nutrients. E.g., too much Fe (iron) can cause a Mn (manganese) deficiency, with the converse also true, Too much Ca (calcium) can cause a Mg (magnesium) deficiency. Too much P (phosphorous) can cause an insoluble precipitate with Fe and make Fe unavailable. It also interferes with the uptake of several other micro-nutrients. You can see why it’s advantageous to supply nutrients in as close to the same ratio in which plants use them and at levels not so high that they interfere with water uptake. I know I’m repeating myself here, but this is an important point.

What about the high-P "Bloom Booster" fertilizers you might ask? To induce more prolific flowering, a reduced N supply will have more and better effect than the high P bloom formulas. When N is reduced, it slows vegetative growth without reducing photosynthesis. Since vegetative growth is limited by a lack of N, and the photosynthetic machinery continues to turn out food, it leaves an expendable surplus for the plant to spend on flowers and fruit. Plants use about 6 times more N than P, so fertilizers that supply more P than N are wasteful and more likely to inhibit blooms (remember that too much P inhibits uptake of Fe and many micro-nutrients - it raises pH unnecessarily as well, which could also be problematic). Popular "bloom-booster" fertilizers like 10-52-10 actually supply about 32x more P than your plant could ever use (in relationship to how much N it uses) and has the potential to wreak all kinds of havoc with your plants.

The fact that different species of plants grow in different types of soil where they are naturally found, does not mean that one needs more of a certain nutrient than the other. It just means that the plants have developed strategies to adapt to certain conditions, like excesses and deficiencies of particular nutrients.

Plants that "love" acid soils, e.g., have simply developed strategies to cope with those soils. Their calcium needs are still the same as any other plant and no different from the nutrient requirements of plants that thrive in alkaline soils. The problem for acid-loving plants is that they are unable to adequately limit their calcium uptake, and will absorb too much of it when available, resulting in cellular pH-values that are too high. Some acid-loving plants also have difficulties absorbing Fe, Mn, Cu, or Zn, which is more tightly held in alkaline soils, another reason why they thrive in low pH (acid) soils.

So, If you select a fertilizer that is close in ratio to the concentration of major elements in plant tissues, you’re going to be in good shape. Whether the fertilizer is furnished in chemical or organic form matters not a whit to the plant. Ions are ions, but there is one major consideration. Chemical fertilizers are available for immediate uptake while organic fertilizers must be acted on by passing through the gut of micro-organisms to break them down into usable elemental form. Since microorganism populations are affected by cultural conditions like moisture/air levels in the soil, soil pH, fertility levels, temperature, etc., they tend to follow a boom/bust cycle in container culture, which has an impact on the reliability and timing of delivery of nutrients supplied in organic form. Nutrients locked in hydrocarbon chains cannot be relied upon to be available when the plant needs them. This is particularly an issue with the immobile nutrients that must be present in the nutrient stream at all times for the plant to grow normally.

What is my approach? I have been very happy with Miracle-Gro 12-4-8 all purpose liquid fertilizer, or 24-8-16 Miracle-Gro granular all-purpose fertilizer - both are completely soluble. I incorporate a granular micro-nutrient supplement in my soils when I make them (Micromax) or use a soluble micro-nutrient blend (STEM). I would encourage you to make sure your plants are getting all the micro-nutrients. More readily available than the supplements I use is Earth Juice’s ’Microblast’. Last year, I discovered a fertilizer by Dyna-Gro called Foliage-Pro 9-3-6. It is a 3:1:2 ratio like I like and has ALL the primary macro-nutrients, secondary macro-nutrients (Ca, Mg, S) and all the micro-nutrients. It performed very well for me.

When plants are growing robustly, I try to fertilize my plants weakly (pun intended) with a half recommended dose of the concentrate at half the suggested intervals. When plants are growing slowly, I fertilize more often with very weak doses. It’s important to realize your soil must drain freely and you must water so a fair amount of water drains from your container each time you water to fertilize this way. This year my display containers performed better than they ever have in years past & they were still all looking amazingly attractive at the beginning of Oct when I finally decided to dismantle them because of imminent cold weather. I attribute results primarily to a good soil and a healthy nutrient supplementation program.

What would I recommend to someone who asked what to use as an all-purpose fertilizer for nearly all their container plantings? If you can find it, a 3:1:2 ratio soluble liquid fertilizer (24-8-16, 12-4-8, 9-3-6 are all 3:1:2 ratio fertilizers) that contains all the minor elements would great.

How plants use nutrients - the chart I promised:

I gave Nitrogen, because it's the largest nutrient component, the value of 100. Other nutrients are listed as a weight percentage of N.
N 100
P 13-19 (16) 1/6
K 45-80 (62) 3/5
S 6-9 (8) 1/12
Mg 5-15 (10) 1/10
Ca 5-15 (10) 1/10
Fe 0.7
Mn 0.4
B(oron) 0.2
Zn 0.06
Cu 0.03
Cl 0.03
M(olybden) 0.003
To read the chart: P - plants use 13-19 parts of P or an average of about 16 parts for every 100 parts of N, or 6 times more N than P. Plants use about 45-80 parts of K or an average of about 62 parts for every 100 parts of N, or about 3/5 as much K as N, and so on.

If you're still awake - thanks for reading. It makes me feel like the effort was worth it. ;o) Let me know what you think - please.
Al

Here is a link to the first posting of A Fertilizer Program for Containers

Another link to information about Container Soils- Water Movement and Retention

Al, you are awesome and so generous!

Do you have any suggestions for a good source of calcium, magnesium, and sulfur without having to mix a multitude of different products?

If you replace the Miracle Grow product with Dyna Grow Foliage Pro 9-3-6 you won't have to mix anything. It has calcium, magnesium and sulfur in it.

I finally found a good amount of "time", to look back at ALL your threads and posts, especially this one on fertilizing!

It was a priority..

Not only did it take several nights and days of reading, I got to say, it took alot of brain power, focus, and mental concetration too, something I have been lacking for quite a while..
Rest sure helps:-)

There are no words to describe how much we appreciate what you have taken the time to do for all of us here.

They say, you should make a book and sell it? If anyone here was to download all the precious info you have shared with us here, they would have that book, the way you designed it for, for free..:-)

Thankyou Al!

If you want to add Ca, Mg, and S, you can use a combination of dolomite (Ca + Mg) and elemental S. This usually assures the ratio of Ca:Mg will be favorable. Alternately, you could use gypsum (Ca + S) and add your Mg via MgSO4 (Epsom salts). The later wouldn't be best in newly made acidic soils because it won't raise pH. This could lead to too much Fe/Mn availability, and because there is S in both the gypsum and Epsom salts that becomes more readily available @ low pH, a S toxicity.

STEM doesn't have Ca or Mg anyway, and Micromax only contains Ca. Earth Juice Microblast contains no Ca, but the good news is it has no S either. Using Microblast along with gypsum for Ca and S would be a nice strategy, too.

You don't need to mix anything with the FP 9-3-6, which makes it a really good choice for supplying everything from one container. You should still lime your soils though to make sure there is residual Ca available for uptake.

Al

The 3:1:2 ratio fertilizers appear at a glance to have about twice as much P as plants need (as a function of N usage), but when the .43 factor is applied, you can see that the actual amount of P in relationship to N is very close to 3N:.5P (note the decimal point), or 6:1. It's no accident.

Where leaching occurs in mineral soils and fertilizing is much less frequent, perhaps the 7-9-5 might be more appropriate, but I'll stick with the 9-3-6 in containers. I used it in several dozen flowering/fruiting applications and saw nothing to make me believe numbers/size of blooms/fruit were inhibited in any way. ;o)

Al

I have been following this discussion with much interest. Lots of information lucidly explained and very much appreciated.

Where I live (Ireland) MG 24-8-16 is readily available but Foliage-Pro 9-3-6 is not.
However what is available is another water soluble, Phostrogen 14-10-27 which also contains:
Magnesium Oxide
Calcium Oxide
Sulphur Trioxide
Boron
Copper
Iron
Manganese
Molybdeneum
Zinc

The NPK is a good bit off the 3-1-2 ratio but I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

Kevin

If you look closely at the ratio of P:K that plants use, you'll see they use about 3.5 times more K than P. Your fertilizer, after using the factors of .43 and .83 for the actual % of P and K respectively, has a ratio of 4.3:22, so your fertilizer has about 5x more K than P instead of the 3.5x plants use. That's not something you can't live with.

It's not too important, but CaO and MgO are not technically soluble. They both form suspensions or colloidal dispersions in water. The S compound is soluble.

Al

I will give it a try - and keep an eye on the N.

Must also thank you for advice gleaned from an earlier thread on root pruning Acers. Managed to rescue two of mine that were container bound that everyone told me that my only recourse was to replant them in the garden. Having given the roots a severe haircut, they are now both back to normal in the same containers.

Kevin

Regarding JaG's comments, I found Clemson University stating "There are no easily accessible guidelines regarding the application rate of gypsum in a homeowner situation. It is sparingly soluble and so it is nearly impossible to over-apply. In the Western part of the United States, many crops grow just fine in soils that have naturally occurring, undissolved accumulations of gypsum throughout the soil. Generally, a homeowner can just sprinkle a fine layer over the soil surface and work it in. A general application rate is 100 to 150 pounds per 1,000 square feet."

This would have me working approximately 2.75 pounds of gypsum into each of my 22" diameter containers. As Epsom Salt would not seem to persist in the containers like the gypsum with frequent watering, I am wondering if fertilizing with a magnesium fertilizer like Dyna-Gro Foliar Pro would be enough to keep the available Calcium to Magnesium ratio in check. With sulphur in Gypsum, in Epsom Salt, and in Foliar Pro, my 8.2 pH well water might not be enough to keep pH where it needs to be. Any thoughts?

Damon

Kevin - glad you found the info useful - both for the Acers and the fertilizer.

Deep roots - the answer to your question, or at least an educated guess would depend in part on the balance of Ca:Mg in your irrigation water. If you are using a soil that is guaranteed to start out acidic (bark/peat) then liming is the way to go. If you are using something more mineral-based like the gritty mix, then gypsum/Epsom salts is better. You really need to either do some adjusting based on trial/error, or learn how your water stacks up if you want to really fine tune your nutrition. I can tell you HOW it works, but it's up to you to work with what you have & do the fine tuning. Everyone's situation will be a little (or a lot) different, so there is no one size fits all. ;o)

SG - think it's a good idea to flush even SWCs occasionally if you're using soluble fertilizers, but one of the reasons they work well is because you're not continually adding to compaction by top-watering - something of a catch-22. It sounds to me like 1/4 strength in the reservoir is a good choice, but I'll defer to one of the other guys who have more experience with the SWCs. Hopefully one of them will be along soon to add to what I offered.

Good luck to all. ;o)

Al

It sounds to me like 1/4 strength in the reservoir is a good choice, but I'll defer to one of the other guys who have more experience with the SWCs. Hopefully one of them will be along soon to add to what I offered.

While I can't claim what I do is 'the best', I simply make a full strength gallon of FP 9-3-6 and add it to the reservoir and top off with plain water. The SWC I have use either 3 or 4 gallon reservoirs so 1 full strength gallon results (initially) in a 1/4 or 1/3 strength solution.

Now Al, I do have a question. Up thread you indicated that the Calcium and Magnesium in FP aren't water soluble, but in suspension. Does this imply they won't readily wick upward with the water?

Al

My first inclination, because you don't NEED the CRF is to forgo it altogether. Second, you might use a charge of something like Osmocote in as close to the same ratio as you can find and with the minors, and then simply reduce the application rate of the 9-3-6. I have done both in the past, but now rarely use the CRFs.

I'll look in a couple of texts & see if I can find any suggestions other than what I said. I may not, because advice will likely be crop-specific ..... except perhaps for some general advice about soils/nutrition for bedding plants.

Al

thanks

I don't often use them because I'm diligent about making sure I supply nutrients when they're needed and & like having control over my supplementation program. That said, some folks are very unsure of what their plants need and might look at CRFs as a blessing.

I include them in the soil recipes I share with you just to cover the bases - in case you forget to fertilize, but as noted, you really don't NEED them.

If you use the Dynamite with micro-nutrients, I think the best choice for a very high % of plants would be the All-Purpose Select 15-5-9 or the All-Purpose 18-6-8 formula.

Al

I will be doing hose watering from inside the apartment to both the patios (if I can find a good adaptor that doesn't require too much brute force to get the aerator off).

Now I historically first over then under water as my physical issues come & go...so I guess the first question is...how often do I water with the 5:1:1 mix? I got the let it flow until it runs well through the pot thing...but is that watering only 1 time a week? How do they survive out in the heat & sun if only 1 time a week?

Second once I figure out the timing thing...how do I get the proper amount of fertilizer into each plant using the hose? I'm guessing there is an accessory of some kind or do I have to lug around containers of water? I'm honestly clueless here.

Thanks all!
Suz

If you think you might be one of those that have trouble telling when a planting needs water, then use a wick with a little tail sticking out the drain hole. Make sure the wick is getting enough air circulation that it CAN dry, and then when it DOES feel dry, it's OK to water.

I use a 2 liter watering can for my small planting fertilizer needs. I generally mix fertilizer solution by the batch & then fill the 2 L container & apply it to the plants. It works well & the smaller container is easier to lug around than the 2 gallon one. I don't use a hose end sprayer/applicator.

Al

It's a hard question to answer, because there are multiple variables, but generally in container culture, it's advantageous to have our nutrients delivered in soluble form. This, of course, means they will be subject to leaching because of the moderate CEC of most container media - especially those with low bulk density like the 5:1:1 (or even the gritty) mix.

Generally, all the other elements are supplied as a comparative function of the amount of N delivered. I think that trying to decide HOW to supply P&K to ensure it's availability w/o supplying it in soluble form is complicated beyond anything I would want to tackle w/o sophisticated regular testing.

You CAN add some of the versatility you're looking for to a 3:1:2, 2:1:2, or to some degree, even a 1:1:1 ratio fertilizer by using a micro-nutrient supplement and reducing o/a supply of N by simply reducing the total amount of NPK supplied, and combining a soluble K supplement (or even including a little potash in the soil when you make it) to prevent K deficiencies due to the reduced rates.

Al

What you need to watch out for is: If you use this product when soils are cool or when micro-organism populations are low, it tends to remain in the soil, unavailable, but there. Because it's not available, you might see signs of N deficiency (usually chlorotic [yellowing of] old leaves) and be tempted to add more. Now, you have a double dose of a high-N product in the soil and the potential for plasmolysis (fertilizer burn).

So yes, you should follow directions carefully & avoid over-using. It will diffuse through the soil if you only incorporate it into the surface soil. I don't know what the 'burn potential' is for this fertilizer in direct contact with roots - you might read the package carefully to see if that is addressed.

Al

1 tsp of MG/gallon each time you water is pretty heavy use of fertilizer if you/re not continually flushing the soil, and it sounds like you won't be. Expect problems @ that rate.

Your secondary macros, Mg and Ca, will come from the lime. I use Micromax as an insoluble source of minors when I make soils, and STEM soluble for many applications - particularly in the second and third growth cycle of some plantings. Neither are particularly easy to find, but I can help if you write. You could also use Earth Juice MicroBlast in your fertilizer supplementation program, which you can buy online or from hydroponics stores.

Al

If you turn the bottle over in the soil, the physical factors that come into play are very complex. The size of the soil particles have a bearing, as does the size of the opening in the bottle top (err - bottom, I guess) ;o).

Ideally, you'll want to experiment with the hole size. You'll want it to be small enough that the GFP is just barely enough to overcome the surface tension keeping air out. Then, water will flow slowly out of the bottle as air goes in. What you'll be depending on then, is the fact that the soil immediately around the opening of the bottle will be saturated (so no air can get into the bottle & no water out). Hopefully, this water will move away from the bottle via capillary action, moistening the rest of the soil and allowing enough air into the soil around the opening that air can enter the bottle to displace the water there.

This watering method won't work in soils that drain freely because there will always be air available in the soil to enter the bottle. Even with a small hole in the cap, the water will quickly drain from the bottle & through the soil.

If you analyze the idea, you'll see that it will only work in slow soils that already are too water-retentive to guarantee the best growth/plant health and don't need it, likely exacerbating a potentially existing problem - and it won't work in those free-draining, well-aerated soils that might benefit from the idea.

Al

Al

Take care.

Al

Alice

After reading all of these fertilization threads, there's one thing I'm still sort of confused about--Dyna-Gro Foliar Pro 9-3-6 looks good, but because of time and expense, I opted to start with MG 24-8-16 soluble for my first year, and maybe branch out next year. I made Al's 5:1:1 mix with the recommended amount of lime, so I think I'm good for Ca & Mg. I was prepared to hunt down a separate source for micronutrients, but upon inspecting the label, I noticed the MG has some already.

I put the numbers into the same scale as Al's above table of ideal values to compare (see below). Some are still lacking, but some are already too high. SO...my confusion now is, would adding STEM or earthblast or something like that cause me to overdose on some of these elements? Should I try to add the lacking elements individually?

I have pretty low expectations for my first try at veggies, so I will be happy if the things even grow more leaves--But I figure since I'm making a hobby out of it... :)

Thanks everyone,
Maria

------------
**Al's**
N 100
P 13-19
K 45-80
S 6-9
Mg 5-15
Ca 5-15
Fe 0.7
Mn 0.4
B(oron) 0.2
Zn 0.06
Cu 0.03
Cl 0.03
M(olybden) 0.003

**MG 24-8-16 soluble**
N 100
P 33
K 67
S -----
Mg -----
Ca -----
Fe 0.63
Mn 0.21
B(oron) 0.08
Zn 0.25
Cu 0.29
Cl -----
M(olybden) 0.002

As far as the other elements (other than NPK), Ca & Mg are covered with the lime. The MG 24-8-16 has Fe, Mn, Z, Cu,. Peter's Professional 24-8-16 soluble (readily available, though perhaps not as common as MG) also has Mo and B, so if you want to avoid using a micro-nutrient supplement, why not use that? Glaringly absent then is S. You can buy a small bag of agricultural S and you're good to go. It's extremely unlikely any of the remaining nutrients would be in short supply.

You could also just use the lime in the 5:1:1 mix & use the FP 9-3-6 and be done with the worrying. ;o)

Al

That makes total sense, I forgot about the whole P & K molecular thing. About the micros--The MG 24-8-16 label I have says it does have B and Mo, but the Boron is very low, (.08 vs your ideal .2) it was actually the one I was most concerned about.

If you think that Boron disparity isn't too great, I think I'll do lime, sulfer, and the MG for year one. Maybe try something else next year.

Thanks so, so much for taking the time. So few people are willing indulge my craziness.

Best,
Maria

I know you'll want to worry some more, and I won't wreck your good time, but if it was me - I wouldn't worry. ;o) (teasing, of course)

Al

I haven't ever even fertilized my house plants other than a few foliar feedings w/ my AVCT and the MG container mix they were first potted in, many 2 years ago.

Thanks Al!

No seriously, thanks Al.

I'm using the MG 24-8-16. I planted out a little over two weeks ago and watered well at that time. The plants didn't need watering for 2 weeks, and when I did water, I fertilized (about 1/2 strength). I meant to dilute to 1/3 but made a mistake when I was mixing up the solution.

My question is- I don't seem to be needing to water as frequently (just yet) as I had expected. Will it be ok to fertilize every time I water (I thought you said that you did this, but can't remember now), at perhaps 1/4 strength with the MG product? I used dolomitic lime in my mix, and I am going to get some S to add to my fert program, which should have all of the major and micros covered.

Thanks!

Al

If you're watering thoroughly when you DO water - so that plenty of water is moving through the soil and out the drain hole, you can water at 1/8-1/4 strength each time you water, but not if your soil is slow and you have to water in sips. Hold off on the fertilizing when average soil temperatures (you'll have to guess) are below 55* or above 85*.

Al

Westy

Libby - I've honestly never seen a plant that doesn't do VERY well in the gritty mix, so I'm pretty sure it's a cultural factor other than the soil - it's really very root-friendly. The first think I think of is that you might be over-watering? Try sticking a wick in the drain hole & water only when the wick feels dry or at the very first sign of wilting.

I too like to be in control now of my plants needs, and like to know that for sure they are getting fed when I feed them.

The only down side is that you HAVE to be consistant at it. You can not let waterings go by without fertilizing everytime....

I know many here like to put the hose to their plants outside as do I, especially when there is a lack of rain, and this is so easy, in fact my plants seem to relish their showers along with a good drenching.
But, as soon as I am done hose watering, I take a 2 gallon container filled with water and fertilizer, then hand water anyway to put the nutrition back in the soil..

Thanks so for for this very informative thread!!!
I would of never have been able to accomplish so much if it hadn't been for everyones input and involvement..;-)

With dolomite being about 20% Ca and 10% Mg, you would also think that they would be released in about a 2:1 ratio, but what actually occurs is: at first, during the first few months, the release rate is about 1:1 or a little greater, then slowly shifting to around a 2:1 release at some point in the soil/planting's life, and then after 9 months to a year to 2:.05 or even less. This issue can be very acute for plants grown in the same soil for more than a single growth cycle.

Al

margaret

Over-application of micro-nutrients is a bad thing. Micro-nutrients generally have a much narrower range between deficiency/toxicity levels, so it's important not to over-apply.

Lol - I have a friend who is a retired teacher who started with a hobby nursery that's grown into quite an enterprise. He was growing mostly in peat-based soils, but I eventually got him straightened out & he's extremely happy for having made some adjustments. I hope things work as well for you. ;o)

Al

Margaret

Al

"The advantage of a bad memory is that one enjoys several times the same good things for the first time." Friedrich Nietzsche

1.) I have a plant called Miracle Fruit. At least two different people have reported it dying after being given Miracle Gro, and everyone tells me "it needs very little fertilizer". I'm using a variation of the 5-1-1 mix (more peat though and gypsum + epsom, everyone claims this plant does better in very moist soil). Should I fertilize it or just hold off? I have some FP but I'm worried I'll see the same effects as people with the Miracle Gro. I've heard success though with Azaela fertilizer and Fish Emulsion...I have both. Possibly using the Fish Emulsion as a foliar feed. To clarify, the Azaelea fertilizer comes in because this plant requires a very low PH simular to blueberries. I've also considered giving it some "chelated iron/soil acidifier". Any take on this? I've been taking the wait and see approach, and it's been maddeningly slow growing but that's what I heard to expect.

2.) This is easier...I have started some Goji berries in pure peat pellets with netting around them. How big before transplanting them to the 5-1-1 do you think?

3.) This is a little off topic, but would you recommend FP for the ground also?

Thanks
Greg

There is absolutely no reason the plant should succumb after fertilizing with MG. I think someone is transferring blame for their inabilities to satisfy the plant to a scapegoat - the fertilizer.

I think you're right to be using the gypsum/E-salts because of the pH issue with this plant. I think I would use MG 30-10-10 to help ensure against normal upward pH creep of the soil + a little Pro-TeKt 0-0-3 to bring up the K levels. Alternately, you could skip the Pro-TeKt and use a tbsp of potash/gallon of soil when you make it, though the plant would probably benefit from Pro-TeKt's silicon content, too.

I don't think the fish emulsion is going to make a huge difference as opposed to MG fertilizer or another soluble. I actually think you'd be less happy if you were to use it exclusively, because of sporadic delivery to the plant caused by fluctuations in soil microbial populations. It's actually pretty ineffective as a foliar fertilizer because plants are able to move nutrients in (mostly) ionic form into the nutrient stream, and only a very small % of FE's nutrients are able to enter the nutrient stream through leaves. You then have to consider plants on a plant by plant basis and decide if foliar feeding is of any benefit to that plant at all. Plants with waxy cuticles are often unable to diffuse nutrients through their 'skin', leaving stomata as the only (inefficient) secondary pathway. A very good case could be built around the fact that since MG and other soluble fertilizer's nutrients are provided in ionic form, that they would be much more effective than FE in foliar applications.

If you're using or intend to use MG fertilizer or any other fertilizer that contains Fe/Mn, you won't be experiencing any deficiencies of either element. I wouldn't recommend chelate applications because Fe/Mn toxicity at the low pH you are maintaining would be a real possibility. I think you're right to 'wait and see'.

Move the plants to the 5:1:1 mix ASAP. Though it's not to say that you won't have good luck, I've never had any luck growing on any plant in peat pellets. I abandoned their use after a season or two of frustration.

Unless you have had a soil test, fertilizing plants in the ground is pretty much a crap shoot. You can guess at what nutrients might be low based on geographical tendencies, but you'll probably run square into Murphy's Law. You can take the shotgun approach and fertilize with a 1:1:1 or 3:2:1 ratio and hope for the best, or just don't fertilize at all. About the only fertilizer I ever use in my gardens/beds is a little Milorganite around the elephant ears. ;o)

Plants send chemical messengers to their organs which stimulate growth activity in different areas. It's not particularly important in plants that are being transplanted with the root mass intact, but for plants that are being repotted (repotting includes root work, potting-up usually doesn't) or that have had their roots mauled, fertilizing inhibits the messengers that stimulate new root growth. I use Superthrive on my woody plant repots & don't fertilize for the first month - I don't give any extra consideration in this regard to the herbaceous transplants/repots, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be helpful to follow the same guidelines as I do with the woody stuff.

Al

I've always felt I was shooting in the dark, trying to get fertilization somewhat right. If only I could extract the CRF tablets I put in the container soil.

Next year, I'll go with FP.

So now I'm looking for the Farfards brand pine bark that Al has used.

It's quite pricey from this source (around $12/2.8 cu ft), but BFG Supply carries it. Nearest one to you is 19775 Sommers Dr, Brookfield, WI - (262) 797-6482

BTW, I used to live in Pleasant Prairie, it's where I grew up.

What do you guys recommend for fertilizer for an apricot tree in roughly a 50 gallon wood pot with a hybrid grit mix. Should i hit it with some MG and some N?

I would use a 3:1:2 ratio fertilizer until it starts producing and then switch to a 2:1:2 ratio. Alternately, I would use a 3:1:2 as above until the plant started producing, then reduce the dosages of 3:1:2 and add Pro-TeKt 0-0-3 to your fertilizer program. This 'sort' of changes your 3:1:2 fertilizer application into something with less N but still with adequate amounts of P and K in a favorable ratio to each other.

If you don't understand 'ratios' vs the % numbers on the containers, you can read about it in the thread above - it's there. If you don't care about delving into the science, you can use Foliage-Pro 9-3-6 (recommended) MG 24-8-16 or 12-4-8, or Peter's Professional 24-8-16 (3:1:2 RATIO fertilizers all) and be in good shape.

Al

Nathan

If you cut the dose in half, cut the interval in half. If it's above 80 or below 55*, withhold urea-based fertilizers like MG, but (primarily) nitrate fertilizers like Foliage-Pro are ok at reduced rates and INCREASED intervals.

Al

I've read all the posts for this topic as well as about half for the Container Soils - Water Movement and Retention 1-9 topic. The following is all the info i think you need to answer my question:

the soil is al's 5:1:1 mix large batch w/ (what i believe is appropriately sized) fir bark, perilite, peat moss, & garden lime. I have Peter's Professional all purpose water soluble fertilizer w/ micros 24-8-16 which does not contain Mg, Ca, or S. The fertilizer does list as part of the ingredients: ammonium sulfate, copper sulfate, and zinc sulfate. Water pH is average 7.3 with average alkalinity at 23.7 mg/L CaCO3. Chloride & Magnesium are 1.6 ppm on average, sodium 2.2 ppm on average, calcium is 6.8 ppm on average in my local water source. Going to be using the soil for veggies and herbs. I have E.B. Stone - Naturals - Soil Sulfer. Guaranteed Analysis is 90% sulfur derived from elemental sulfur.

Question:
Do i need, or should i add the extra S? if so how much S do i add to the big batch of al's 5:1:1 mix, and how did you figure that out? If there's any other info you think i might need to know or if i'm not on the right track please let me know. I've learned so much about water, soil, and fertilizer from reading these forums and your posts i just keep wanting to learn more. Thank you for all of you knowledgable advice put in straight forward ways to us whom are just learning.

It wouldn't hurt anything if you add a small amount of elemental S to the soil as insurance (almost certainly unnecessary though), but how much to add depends on how fine it is. If it's in prill form (pellets) you could add a teaspoon per gallon with no problem. If it's powdered, then maybe 1/8-1/4 tsp per gallon would be more appropriate.

Al

Al

I live in Korea currently. I have access to a grocery store and something like a WallMart but they don't have a gardening section - just some small local houseplants near the fishtank area. Too, I don't want to pay like 100 bucks for fertilizer for 10 acres when I only have a few pots in my house.

So, I've been trying to figure out if there is a mix of household items I can dissolve in water to make some liquid fertilizer for (I have some pepper; a couple bhut jolokia, naga morich, habanero, and a generic Korean pepper I got from the local market and some mint plants; apple, chocolate, and eau de cologne ). From the voracious reading I've done in the last few days I have come up with this mix.

2 tsp yeast, bakers, active dry
1/4 tsp salt substitute
2/3 tablet calcium supplement
1/4 tsp epsom salt
2 liter water

The above is based on the following assumptions.

The optimal fertilizer mix for a pepper plant goes something like:

N - 200ppm
P - 50ppm
K - 320ppm
Ca - 200ppm
Mg - 50ppm

(plus a bunch of other stuff, after reading this thread, which I think is covered by the yeast anyways)

epsom salt is magnesium sulfate or MgSO4 which contains 495mg/tsp Mg

calcium vitamins are calcium 600mg/tablet Ca

salt substitute is potassium chloride or KCl which contains 610mg/1/4tsp K

from:
http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/baked-products/5130/2

yeast, bakers, active dry contains the following minerals:
Amounts per tbsp
Calcium 7.7mg
Iron 2.0mg
Magnesium 11.8mg
Phosphorus 155.0mg
Potassium 240.0mg
Sodium 6.0mg
Zinc 0.8mg
Copper 0.1mg
Manganese 0.1mg
Selenium 2.9mcg

1 million mg = 1kg

1 liter of water = 1 kg of water

I'm totally guessing on the nitrogen but, from what I understand, protiens put in the soil (yeast in this case) will break down to nitrogen. How much nitrogen will 5g of protien break down into? I'm assuming it is at least 200mg but who knows? Also, is the pH of this balanced? Can I find out without buying a testing kit?

On a side note, one of my mint plants was sending off a runner so I made some cuttings out of it and placed it in a plate of water with a little of this fertilizer added. After one day it seems to be doing fine.

Please, any other thoughts/comments/suggestions/concerns?

I'm totally guessing on the nitrogen but, from what I understand, protiens put in the soil (yeast in this case) will break down to nitrogen. How much nitrogen will 5g of protien break down into?

The general rule of thumb if you know the percentage of protein is to divide that number by 6.25. This is like the reverse of the Kjeldahl method which is used to determine protein content from the amount of nitrogen. There may also be non protein sources of nitrogen present.

I can't really help you any further with your homemade fertilizer, but I will mention that the various salts you end up using may or may not end up becoming insoluble as they react with each other. It's not easy making a fertilizer due to many of the salts not being compatible with each other in terms of remaining soluble.

You don't have Miracle Grow or similar products in Korea? It's generally inexpensive and you could always make your own additives to supplement it if you saw a need.

So ~533mg/2tsp yeast N. That is a little higher than what I was aiming for (200) but from Al's info it seems I should have been aiming higher anyways. I'm sleepy right now but I'll do the math again in the morning adjusted to Al's formula probably use 200 for nitrogen and go from there. Also, I guess I'll have to look into the components reacting with each other.

Some other questions though; I know Al says high P fertilizers are a waste because you can just lower N instead to get better results but does it work the same way with K? From what I've read fruiting plants need a little extra K in the same fashion a flowering plant needs more P. And then theres the Ca and Mg 1:1 vs 3:1. I'm not sure I understand Al up there. Is it that the specific compounds you are using for Ca and Mg move towards a 3:1 ratio over time so you mix them at 1:1? I'm not using dolomite, I'm using epsom salt and calcium supplements....

Some other questions though; I know Al says high P fertilizers are a waste because you can just lower N instead to get better results but does it work the same way with K? From what I've read fruiting plants need a little extra K in the same fashion a flowering plant needs more P. And then theres the Ca and Mg 1:1 vs 3:1. I'm not sure I understand Al up there. Is it that the specific compounds you are using for Ca and Mg move towards a 3:1 ratio over time so you mix them at 1:1? I'm not using dolomite, I'm using epsom salt and calcium supplements.

Well, this is Al's thread so I shouldn't be bogarting it, but I am really bored right now ;)

The reason to avoid excess P is because no plants need all that much P in comparison to N and K. The idea that flowers need high P to bloom well is a myth completely unsupported by science. It is true that lowering N can assist a flowering plant to chill out on the vegetative growth and get busy in the reproductive phase, but it's not necessary to overdose P to get this result. Overdosing P simply raises the salt level in the growing media which makes it harder for water to enter the plant via osmosis which is simply salts trying to reach equilibrium inside and outside the roots. To the extent the soil is loaded up with salts the plant can't use we are unnecessarily limiting the rate at which plants can take up water.

You are correct that many fruiting plants do appreciate a little more K than N and so if you wish to limit N to get the plant busy with flowering lower N while keeping K the same or a little more. This gets the plant what it needs (the K) without loading the soil with what it doesn't need (the P).

Dolomite lime contains both Calcium and Magnesium, but the solubility of the 2 is drastically different. If you won't be using dolomite lime Al is better qualified to help you choose alternate sources than I am so won't comment further.

I hope you don't think me rude, but if MG is available in your area I would just choose that in a 3:1:2 ratio and then choose an alternate source of P to tinker with the ratios. Much easier, not expensive and less prone to errors. Still, it's your time, money and plants so feel free to get your geek fully on if you wish to. :)

I doubled Al's numbers to make them fall in line with the ppm I found before. I then doubled again to make that fit in a 2 liter bottle of water which is what I'm mixing this in.

Al's ratio x4 for milligrams in a 2L bottle of water:
N 400
P 64
K 248
S 32
Mg 40
Ca 40
Fe 2.8
Mn 1.6
B 0.8
Zn 0.24
Cu 0.12
Cl 0.12
M 0.012

My mix:
1.5tsp yeast
1/8tsp salt substitute
1/8tsp epsom salt
1/4 tablet calcium
H2O - fill the rest of a 2Liter bottle

N 400mg *
P 77mg
K 425mg **
S ?
Ca 154mg ***
Mg 68mg ****

Fe 1mg
Mn .8mg
B -
Zn .4mg
Cu .05mg
Cl 610mg
M -

*5g protien converted to nitrogen supposedly according to Kjeldahl method using vol:protien/6.25
** 305mg from salt substitute and 120mg from yeast. I added almost double the potassium of Al's ratio since this is mstly for fruiting plants. If that is really a bad idea let me know.
*** 150mg from calcium carbonate supplement and 4mg from yeast. Again the ratio here is off on purpose, say if that's really a bad idea.
**** 62mg from epsom salt and 6mg from yeast.
? I found some web site that said KCl is 50% Cl by weight which means also 610mg Cl/1/4tsp but I couldn't find anything about how much sulfur is in epsom salt (I got the magnesium number off the container).

I think that is about as close as I can get without finding a larger container since my measuring tools are not that precise. As it stands, I will be eyeballing the 1/8 tsp.

On a side note, my wife says we can get fertilizer at this outdoor market they have on certain days. I'm going to check that out next time it happens and look for that 3:1:2 ratio.

I hope you find a suitable pre-made product. Also, if all they have is a 1:1:1 fertilizer, that would be my second choice. You could supplement that with KNO3 (40% K) and end up with a perfectly usable fertilizer at close to a 3:1:2 ratio.

BTW Epsom salts contains 13% S.

Al

Also, apparently mint and pepper plants attract bugs which are deadly to babies (my wife is 7months). I've never heard of that before and in fact I recall reading that strong smelling plants like mint actually repel bad bugs (e.g. clove oil is used as a mosquito repellant as or more effective than deet). Furthermore, the shop owner said if you keep the plants inside and water them with fertilizer then somehow the fertilizer will make the baby sick. I can understand if the baby eats the soil or drinks the water that drained from the container but otherwise it seems rather dubious. Anyone ever heard of this?

I hit up the market today with some unexpected results. They have a liquid fertilizer, in a 4-3-4 ratio. Can I add something to even that out?

Does this have the minors or just NPK? If NPK only it isn't much help to you. If it contains the minors then it should be easy enough to modify to whatever ratio you desire.

Also, apparently mint and pepper plants attract bugs which are deadly to babies (my wife is 7months). I've never heard of that before

Me either. I have four kids and grow mint and peppers and those silly kids pick up every bug they find and eat whatever they wish from the yard (more than a couple times I had to inform them the bug they were about to pick up would likely sting/bite and the plant they were about to eat would make them puke ;) Nobody has died or gone to the hospital. Having said that, I don't know what kind of beastiary you folks in Korea have around ;)

About the yeast. I thought at first that it would be impossible for yeast to propogate to any significant degree in soil because in my experience (mostly cooking) it needs a carbohydrate source for food but I checked anyway. Turns out I am correct - it eats the grain in bread and beer. Unless I also pour sugar into the soil, the yeast won't really have anything to eat and should therefore die off.

If your 4-3-3 lists Fe on the label, it's likely it also contains at least Mn and Z, with others a distinct possibility as well.

FWIW - I understand that yeast needs a carbohydrate source to multiply, but in addition to sugars and starches, cellulose is also a rich source of carbohydrates (wood products + yeast > wood alcohol), which is what prompted my musing.

Al

I have never gardened in anything but a container. Outdoors I do fine, indoors is a whole different story though. I am having real trouble using soluble fertilizers (even something as simple as General Hydro 3 part), flatly, admittedly I just plain suck at using them. I was hoping you could help me construct an organic dry nutrient recipe that could be successful for growing tomatoes and peppers, pretty please with a cherry on top? Even if you can't say exactly how the organic nutes will breakdown, or their timeframe in doing so; an educated guess from you would be fantastic.

I have binned at least 6 3-4 week old tomato plants in the last 3 days. With deficiencies ranging from phosphorus to micronutrient (almost certainly manganese and iron). I was attempting to grow the tomatoes using guano teas (Sunleaves high nitrogen) and maxicrop liquid kelp. My Peppers are actually doing acceptable, but they are in an organic dry fertilizer mix that I composted for two weeks before planting. The mix contains blood meal/bone meal/ kelp meal/garden lime/worm castings. I think the mix might actually be a bit too rich for the peppers and will likely try to adjust it during my next attempt.

So if you are willing to help me I have Blood Meal (12-0-0), Bone Meal (4-12-0), (Kelp Meal 1-0-2), Worm Castings (1% Nitrogen, 1% Ca, and 0.2% Fe), Lawn and Garden Lime (22% Calcium and 12% Magnesium, and Jersey Greensand (0-0-0.1, with 6% insoluble K). I also have access to Botanicare Sweet ( the label claims 2tsp/gallon will achieve 50ppm Mag, 75ppm Sulfur, 2ppm Iron) and Earth Juice Microblast (which I saw you are alrady familiar with). I would be using a professional potting mix such Pro-Mix or Sunshine Mix as my substrate.

Keeping in mind that for nearly all plants we should stick to 3-1-2. I am looking to grow Celebrity Hybrid and Red Cherry tomatoes. Would this mix be appropriate?

2tsp/gallon Blood Meal, 1 tsp/gallon Bone Meal, 5 tsp/gallon Kelp Meal, 1tsp/gallon greensand, 2 tsp/gallon lime, 1/2 cup/gallon worm castings. Then I would plan on watering with a Sweet (for sulfur) and Microblast concoction at a VERY dilute rate say every third or fourth watering just to try to ensure proper amounts of micronutrients. I will be composting this homemade soil for 10-14 days (however, long I can hold off on jumping the gun planting wise). I will be innoculating my medium with beneficial bacteria, fungi, trichoderma to facilitate nutrient breakdown and absorption.

My tapwater is absolutely horrid, measuring in at 820-850 ppm consistently. So I would plan on mixing RO/tapwater until about 100 ppm solution is achieved. My tapwater does contain some calcium and magnesium, but am hoping to limit the amounts a bit by using the RO water (so as not to overdo it). I could use plain RO water, but have two reservations about doing so. 1) I have been largely unsuccessful when trying this method in the past. 2) When I mix the microblast into RO water I suspect the pH will plummet. While the lime and microbes may help buffer the pH, I would prefer not to chance fate.

Al (or whomever else would like to chime in and help me toward a solution for my CONSTANT woes) I would be very appreciative for your input on my soil mix and advice for tweaking the recipe as you see to be appropriate. Even if that means calling my basic outlined plan above cockamamie foolishness. Lastly, the reason I would rather use the dry amendments is because I am so jaded toward bottled soluble fertilizers. I have never been successful using them and am nearing probably 10-12 attempts. I figure if all I must do is water (and use microblast every 3-4 waterings) it should be basically idiot proof.

I would like to keep a picture log of my progress if anyone is interested. I have offered to do so in the past, yet balked because each attempt has ended in miserable failure during early growth periods. Typically my tomatoes start to croak either just before, or just after transplant from 6-cell paks into 4-6 inch pots. Phosphorus deficiency has been present in EVERY single tomato plant I have ever grown indoors (maybe my irrigation water is too cold? Room temp is always 72-80 with 45-50% humidity). Then all sorts of yellow dots, black tips, and micronutrient deficiencies follow. My pepper plants generally do much better, and even grew some relatively large California Wonder Pepper plants last winter (using GH 3 part), but then I got the bright idea of using Pure Blend Pro 1/2 way through fruiting. However, I used the PBP, in RO water, on unlimed soil. Needless to say some shock/deficiency problems occurred, and they never really recovered.

I really, really want to be a good gardener. But continual failure gets to be a little defeatist after a while.

Thank you for your time and any/all responses.

BP

If you would still like to help me out a bit with my above post, I would be very appreciative. If not, no problem, feel free to move the above post to the appropriate thread.

Sorry.

BP

Perhaps we could start a dialog with a perspective more holistic than simply focusing on the nutritional needs of your plants? I'm extremely results oriented and am not interested in proving or arguing the point that it is or isn't possible to grow plants in containers with an all organic approach. I tend toward the soluble fertilizers and well-aerated, structurally stable media because I get far superior results with less effort. Unlike those that put ideology ahead of effort, the decisions to use what I have chosen come from practical elimination of methods, products, and materials I've tried and rejected based on results and performance.

Please don't consider what I said as a rant against anything you or anyone else has said, because it's simply an explanation of where I'm coming from. Most importantly, and at the risk of repeating, I'm not governed by ideology in my choices; rather, my choices are the winnowings of all the things I've learned and tried.

Al

Like you I am results oriented, I am flat out sick of failing trying to grow tomatoes indoors. I simply want fresh tomatoes all year round. I seem to NEVER be able to avoid phosphorus deficiency on my tomatoes. I mean every single tomato I have attempted have been at least slowed by phosphorus deficiency. Might that be because I am using irigation water that keeps the medium too cold, for too long a period of time? Even using synthetic GH 3 part I have been unable to avoid phosphorus def. Could it be my use of RO water on too many waterings either before or after first fertilization. I went by label instructions for the first fertilization, which I believe was a 1/4 tsp. each micro, grow, bloom.

I promise I have no agenda whatsoever regarding this issue. But I am going to try the organic soil dry amendment (blood, bone, kelp, worm castings, lime, greensand, perlite in Pro-Mix) because I have a ton of Pro-Mix to use. However, the Pro-Mix is VERY dry and the wetting agent seems to have expired. So it has become difficult to re wet the medium evenly without going through the tedious process of doing it manually beforehand. I may just use some ivory and a wetting agent.

I would really appreciate any sugestions you might have regarding the composition of my potential soil mix and/or liquid additives. I have to try the full on soil mix because I have been greatly unsuccessful using both synthetics and organic teas. I would consider giving synthetics a whirl on a couple plants using GH 3 part just for comparison purposes. But I would appreciate any advice you could dispense about both my potential organic soil mix, and use of GH 3 part.

Thank you for your time.

BP

Reading about your problems with Phosphorus, it triggered me to go and scrounge the net for information to satisfy my curiosity. I found this link, http://www.spectrumanalytic.com/support/library/ff/P_Basics.htm

I am sure that Tapla or JaG have better and more sound advice but I just wanted to throw that link out there. It was a nice read. (Note: The link isn't necessarily about organic fertilizers but it seems to discuss some of the chemistry that is inevitably, organic or synthetic, involved with plant P usage)

I think you can greatly simplify things here. First, don't bother with RO water. What is wrong with your water supply that you would want to use RO?

2nd, don't make fertilization complicated. Use DynaGro Foliage Pro 9-3-6 as the sole fertilizer, it has plenty of P for any plant.

What kind of lighting are you using indoors? If you want decent fruiting I would recommend HID lighting.

If you wish, you can also use DynaGro ProTekt 0-0-3 to boost potassium if you feel so inclined as it may lead to slightly better performance.

If growing indoors, you need to manage temperature so it's not excessively cold.

BP - JaG is right in his assessment of replacing things complicated with the KISS method. If you work on creating a well aerated soil and can provide good light and reasonable temperatures, there is little left to hamper your success other than your nutrient supplementation and watering habits. Adopt the FP 9-3-6 or other 3:1:2 ratio product as your default fertilizer, and all you're left to worry about is good watering practices. It really is THAT easy.

I use FP 9-3-6 on all my plants at work (about 15) in combination with distilled water or water from the dehumidifiers, and I did notice a change for the better after I switched to distilled water, so I think the RO water can make a difference, though it's certainly not going to be a 'make or break' deal.

I would suggest we start talking about your soil first. I can help you there, but I don't think I can be much help to you in devising an all organic nutrient supplementation program. That really is a dynamic proposition because any graph that would be drawn to illustrate nutrient availability (and thus usage) would not be linear, rather it would be very erratic due to fluctuating biotic populations. For that reason, what you would need to add to maintain maximum vitality, and when you need to add it, changes from something predictable to something very unpredictable. This, by necessity, calls all your husbandry skills into play because you need to make very considered timing decisions and take into account residual fractions of previously applied nutrients every time you wonder what nutrient(s) to appropriately apply.

I probably know at least a little more about physiology and nutrition than the average gardener, and what I know tells me that with my level of knowledge I would be leaving potential results lying unrealized on the growing tables, even after going through the extra reasoning and effort required by working within the confines of a self-imposed ideology.

Al

I would be using either Pro-Mix BX or Sunshine Mix #1. I tell you what guys I might be able to get ahold of Dyna Gro FP. I currently have the Dyna-Gro Grow formula 7-9-5. Do you think that would be acceptable? My local garden store does not seem to stock the FP. I have one, more obscure place that I believe carries Dyna-Gro products and just might have FP, as I know for a fact they have the PRO-TEKT.

I currently am attempting to grow seedlings and small/medium plants under a 4 bulb 4ft HO fluorescent fixture, for a total of 216 watts. The temperature in the room is a bit cool at 72 F and if I water to runoff draws gnats and takes too long to dry out. My soil is Sunshine Mix# 4, ammended with an additional 15% perlite. It seems to be a very well aerated Mix.

The reason I am wanting to use the Pro-Mix BX is because last summer I was able to find 3.8 cu. ft. bales for less than $20 apiece. However, the wetting agent in the bales seems to be non-existant. When I add 15% worm castings and organic amendments to the Pro-Mix that seems to change the wetting properties and the lack of wetting agent is less of an issue.

I also have some B'Cuzz coco, I am not sure if either of you would be able to instruct me in how to grow in coco? I have heard it performs differently than a peat based mix.

If I am able to get my tomatoes past the seedling stage to at least an 8-12 inch plant I will be moving it to a space that is about 4x4 with two 400 W Metal Halide lamps . The Metal Halides are the Sunmaster Warm Deluxe variety and seem to work well for both Veg and reproductive growth. My reflective hoods are horizontal and are the Hydrofarm Radiant and Daystar models.

My space is basically a homemade setup that is constructed of PVC. A PVC frame with a piece of plywood on top which has a 256 CFM Dayton blower on it to exhaust the air in the microclimate when necessary. The PVC has walls made of Mylar on it, to act as a reflective surface and to make it mostly light tight. However, when the lights turn on I open the large Mylar flap acting as the door. Opening the flap exposes the microclimate to a MUCH larger surface area, helping with fresh air exchange. The tent is part of an area which is about 600 sq. ft.Inside the makeshift tent I have two fans circulating air. I find many less problems using the tent, because it helps the soil mix dry out more quickly. However, the space with the HO fluorescent bulb should work better than it is. Except that I cannot water until runoff without running into problems (gnats and nutrient deficiency).

I am unsure of using my tapwater because of the large amount of dissolved solids. My tapwater has chloramine in it and comes from the tap measuring 820-850 ppm. I always seem to run into problems when using it. I also seem to have nothing but problems using RO water as well. My gardening hobby has been nothing but problems for the better part of 2 years now. I ave considered mixing tapwater and RO water in order to make a solution of say 100-150 ppm. However, I suppose I could be messing with water chemistry by doing so. And lord knows that if there could be a probelm by doing something, it WILL affect me.

thanks for the curiosity and help so far guys.

BP

My strong suggestion is to skip the worm castings and 'organic amendments' - they're completely unnecessary for healthy plants. I'm not saying this because they are 'organic'; rather, I'm saying this because the castings are too fine and destroy aeration you're trying to protect. I'll wait to see what else you intended to amend with, but generally the amendments most use are unreliable in their delivery of nutrients, are too fine to be a durable part of soil structure, and/or break down quickly and soon will be too fine, but we can talk about that later.

Skip the coco for now. You're already showing me your soils tend to be far more water-retentive than what is prudent. Coco products also are high in pH and make it difficult to use dolomite when present in soils as a significant fraction. Salinity can also be an issue with coco products.

We need to talk about your closed set-up and get your plants in a soil that allows you to water copiously with no fear of repercussions from root issues of any kind. This is very important and something I suspected when I suggested a 'holistic' overview. Your soil is the foundation of your plantings, and if it is weak, you will be fighting it the entire way. That is soo unnecessary, so how about concentrating on a soil before we come back to nutrition?

Your tap water has 820-850 ppm TDS? What is the alkalinity? Do you know what the Ca/Mg levels are?

If you agree that your soil is where our focus should be, perhaps it would be more appropriate to discuss it on a thread devoted to soils rather than nutrition. I'll leave a link in case you agree.

Al

I do agree with Al though, you really need to start with a fast draining soil and no mix with a large amount of peat, coir or anything else that starts out fine particled or quickly breaks down to that is going to work well particularly indoors. You will have a constant battle with over watering and you will find it difficult to fertilize properly as well.

copper= 1.3 ppm
chloramines= 1.08 ppm
haleoacetic acids= 1 ppb
total trihalomethanes= 4 ppb
Barium= .0776 ppm
Fluoride= .421 ppm
Iron= less than 0.3 mg/L
Nitrate= .241 ppm
Sodium= 28,100 ppm (I swear this is what it says. I obviously don't believe this reading. I suppose they may have misprinted it and meant ppb. But it is listed at the stated value)

water hardness= 25 grains

pH= 7.2 (Usually comes from my tap at 7.2-7.4).

From what I can tell my water is very hard. I should really get a professional analysis done on my water, and just might do so since I am off today. Obviously there are a lot of missing variables, which could play an important factor in plant nutrition. I know the city is listing the values as they test at the water treatment plants. However, this city's infrastructure is crappy and in need of replacement. Plus, I am sure some of the plumbing in the home could contribute to some of the value my TDS meter is reading. However, my buddy is getting similar values in a home that is less than 3 years old (he keeps fishtanks).

Frankly knowing this city as well as I do, I would not be surprised to see them fudge the analysis as necessary. Small minded town, with a history of small minded politicians. Except we are no longer a small town, and desperately need to be shoved into the 21st century.

I swear if you guys can help me learn how to be a good indoor gardener, I will personally come to your town and take you out to dinner on one of my road trips. I am likely only 4-6 hours away from Al, a fellow midwesterner. I love to see things progress (blossom if you will), the reason I am now studying to be a teacher. Becoming a master gardener, first in practice, then for real certified has been a goal of mine since I started this hobby several years ago.

Al I will certainly check the link you provided in your last response. I will be more than happy to discuss a proper soil to be used indoors.

Thanks for the time ans consideration guys.

BP

I have read a good amount of the thread you pointed me towards concerning making a soil. I will be using your 5-1-1 mix. I have the garden lime. However, I have no micronutrient complex to add. Should the Dyna-Gro supply enough of the needed nutrients? I also have the option of obtaining the Earth Juice Microblast. I promise to leave the worm castings out of the soil mix. I was able to find U.S. Mulch pine bark mulch, which seems to be the size I am looking for. Pine bark, peat, perlite, and garden lime it is.

Out of curiosity do you have a thread discussing watering practices when using your 5-1-1- mix? I know the amount of water the plant needs will depend on whether I am using my HO fluorescents or my HID's (along with temp, humidity, air crculation etc). Are you a proponent of the lift the pot method?

Thank you so much for your help, I hope to do the forum proud with a fully documented thread.

BP

The FP has sulfur, but the label on the bottle doesn't list it. I believe it has something to do with labeling laws in some states. You can go to their website and see the full label.

The FP supplies all nutrients so another source of minor nutrients is not required.

In addition to the 511, I encourage you to give the gritty mix a whirl, especially since these are indoor plants. My preference for indoor plants is pretty much always the gritty mix over the 511, but the 511 is still much better for drainage than any off the shelf bagged mix.

As for your watering situation you can try one container with pure RO plus FP and one with straight tap water plus FP and see if you observe any differences. The main things I would be concerned with for the water are the alkalinity (not pH) and the electrical conductivity. Given the TDS you listed the EC is likely very high (a potential problem), but a proper water test will tell for sure. I don't want to make any recommendations without knowing those numbers as I don't want to steer you wrong or make unnecessary work for you.

Using a soil that drains well enough you can water to run off every single time you water is the biggest thing though. Water quality issues will be secondary.