ATTENTION: Irish "Tomato" Growers!

Hello Irish â??Tomatoâ?� Growers,


I'm sure this is the weirdest post ever proffered on this forum... but I'm hoping enough people will read it that I can scrounge up sufficient interest to make my experiment viable.

First off, allow me to introduce myself: I'm neither a â??tomatoâ?� grower, nor a â??tomatoâ?� smoker... in fact I'm a non-drinking, non-smoking science nerd who refrains from all forms of recreational drugs. I doubt I'd have much in common with any member of this forum.

However, we do enjoy somewhat overlapping interests... one of my hobbies is an interest in biologically-active and specially engineered anthropogenic soils.



Last summer I splashed out on a stock of ingredients and brewed up a batch of rhizobacteria-enriched biologically-activated soil. But lacking even one green thumb (I couldn't keep a mold alive), I decided to shared out my soil samples among the neighbouhood gardening enthusiasts.

Well it seems this latest tweaked recipe exceeded even my expectations: huge, virulent plants/flowers/vegetables; exceptionally high biomass yields and several of the greenhouse-grown varieties reached maturity months ahead of schedule (despite the late frosts).

Unfortunately, none of my neighbours had the prescience to grow a control batch in regular garden soil for comparison... and I negected to request they do so. This oversight means I have no comparative measure of the soils fertility.



This year I had hoped to recruit help for a rerun of the experiment among some of the amateur gardening/allotment groups in and around Dublin... but I've found these guys to be... well, very amateur indeed. Their dithering means its now too late in the season to plant outdoors.


So a (stoner) friend recommended I make contact with the burgeoning community of home-grow â??tomatoâ?� enthusiasts, and here I am.



Realising that most successful regular â??tomatoâ?� growers are somewhat secretive and cautious for legal considerations, I should probably offer the incentive of explaining exacty what benefits anthropogenic biologcally-enriched soils offer the amateur gardener:

...markedly increased growth rates (more crops per year for the indoor grower)

...shorter seed-to-maturity times (the high biological availability of nutrients increases plant BMR: basal metabolic rate)

...significantly higher biomass yields (bigger, healthier, more resilient plants): 30% extra growth is not uncommon

...exceptional phytochemical yields: especially as it relates to the more complex phytochemicals such as lycopene yields in regular tomatoes. Presumably the same applies to the various cannibinoids (THC; CBD; CBN; THVC; CBC and CBL) found in other â??tomatoesâ?�.
Organic crops grown with a suitably tailored engineered soil often boast many, many times the phytochemical yield of similar intensively grown (fertiliser) crops, sometimes twenty or more times the regular, conventional yield. Although I do not know what effect (if any) this increased yield might have on the ratio of cannibinoids.


The particular soil recipe I have devised (which I've comically nicknamed â??Paydirtâ?�) should have such myriad benefits for the amateur â??tomatoâ?� grower: as it offers the seedlings many times the normal level of soil nutrients WITHOUT the threat of â??nutrient burnâ?� (there is no fertiliser added to my soil).


Interested?


What I need are a few volunteers willing to grow one or two plants in my â??Paydirtâ?� soil alongside their regular crop (which then becomes the de-facto control group I need for comparison), so long as those volunteers meet certain specific requirements:

1- GROWER COMPETENCE
REGULAR GROWERS ONLY! Only consistent growers who are both REGIMENTED and COMPETENT with a good reputation

2- COMPARITIVE CROPS
Plants grown in my â??Paydirtâ?� soil must be part of a larger regular crop (two of a crop of ten plants for example) for statistical comparison

3- PLANT ISOLATION
ALL plants must be grown in separate pots (to avoid cross-contamination that might pollute the rhizobacteria cultures)

4- ATTENTION TO DETAIL
Volunteers must be willing to follow the EXACT planting instructions supplied with the â??Paydirtâ?� soil

5- UNIFORM CONDITIONS
Volunteers must water; feed and sun ALL plants (both their reglar crop and the plants grown in my soil) using identical protocols

6- ACTIVE INGREDIENT YIELD COMPARISONS
The plants must be harvested and processed separately: for comparison of the active ingredient yields (ie: please prepare samples from both crops and report back on separate â??Toke Testsâ?�)

7- REPORTING
Volunteers must be prepared to report back their progress at regular intervals (after the first month; at maturity and after harvesting). This can be done via this thread: posted progress photos would suffice, weighing of plants or calculation of biomass is not necessary. However a final ounce tally would be helpful.

8- UNIFORM NUTRIENT DOSING
Organic growers preferred, but not required (once the same nutrient dose is used for all plants)


Other than that, I dont mind which specific techniques you use (I'm not a gardener myself), so long as ALL the plants are exposed to identical conditions then the comparison with the regular crop remains valid. That being said, once the plants grown in the â??Paydirtâ?� soil exceed the size of the regular crop they may require more water (but not more nutrients).



If this sounds like something you might be interested in then please feel free to contact me via this email address: paydirt-at-hush mail.com

I realise that this particular situation requires a modicum of discretion and I will endeavour to keep everything completely anonymous (hence the cheesey username). I won't answer any pms sent through the forum, (which may be subject to surveillence) and would prefer NOT to meet any of the volunteers in person, nor know any personal details of any volunteer. Please keep this in mind.

Samples will be delivered by means of a drop-off-and-collect arrangement.



Please also be aware that pragmatism must also impose its own restrictions. For example: I live in the Dublin area and simply can't travel huge distances to deliver samples.

Other than that my only caveat would be: NO TIMEWASTERS PLEASE!

Despite the fact that I'll be eating the cost of the ingredients for the sake of this little experiment, please consider that brewing a batch of biologically enriched soil is both a costly and labour intensive process: last years batch took two weeks to process and cost me 125 EURO PER PLANTING BAG (small bag). I dont mind being a grand down (I have enough ingredients to make eleven or so tree-bags) if I get some useable data... but I don't want to be dicked about.


Sincerely,
-PayDirt (not my real name)

PS: I'm not online very often, but if I've placed this thead in the wrong forum or broken any forum rules with this proposal then I'll abide by any actions taken by the moderators. I'll also attempt to answer any questions raised in this thread if forum members can be patient with me (bit of a technophobe).

78 views and still no replies? Not even a question?


Guess that's what happens when you post a really long and detailed thread on April 20th (Happy 4-20 by the way!)


Have to say I'm a little surprised. I thought the prospect of a significantly increased yield would have every Irish grower biting my hand off to be included in this little expriment.

No questions?... not even a sarcastic comment?


-PayDirt

hahaha I'd try putting it out there without the whole "tomatoe" thing going on dude :)
Just tell people your trying a way to make weed bigger and better! U gotta remember to everyone heres gonna be pretty f**kin sussed about their dope :D

whats up ,whats your contact details?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiftgt

whats up ,whats your contact details?

---

Just send me an email: paydirt at hush mail dot com


But please remember, I need experienced competent and cosistent growers willing to grow a couple of plants in my recipe soil alongside a regular crop for comparison purposes.

These growers must be willing to follow the detailed instructions I'll supply and then report back on their progress: photo at the halfway point; photo at harvest; yield comparison between the regular crop and the plants grown in my soil... and then a comparative "toke test" (there shold be many more times the usual amount of the more exotic cannabinoids in a plant grown in my soil: CBD; CBN; THCV; CBC; CBL etc).

No outdoor growers; no timewasters; no muppets... thanks.


If you can do this, fit the criteria and want to be involved, then just email me your:
-general location ("Stepaside", or "Tallaght" for example)
-a quick note about your general growing experience and competence (a pic of your current crop or even a link to a grow log)

That's all I need or want to know.

No names; no addresses; no detailed criminal histories... I'm not interested.

I'll drop off a couple of bags somewhere discreet near where you live. I email you the location. You collect. Simple.


I live in the Dublin suburbs, so I can't drive huge distaces for deliveries. Please keep this in mind.


Again, no timewasters. I'm already taking the hit on the cost of the ingredients (leftovers from last years batch: about eleven plant bags total at 115 euro a bag). But I do want some quality data for my efforts.


-PayDirt

Sounds interesting.. Would like to know some more info about those "secret ingredients"
Email on the way to ya..

:rastasmoke:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ned

Sounds interesting.. Would like to know some more info about those "secret ingredients"
Email on the way to ya..

:rastasmoke:

---

ned,


No need for the email. I can answer that right here.

I don't use any "secret ingredients" per say, it's more a question of how the soil is processed.

I use three basic steps:

-Base
No mystery here I use a mixture of moss peat and regular soil, just milled for a uniform paticulate size.

-Substrate
Can't go into too much detail here (trade secret), but I use a predigested inert organic nutrient mix that doesn't cause nutriet burn. When processed properly, the major constituent of the nutrient mix also provides a miroscopic architecture for bacterial growth, which is the next step.

-Bacteria
Once the substrate has been properly processed and added to the soil mix I add a rhizobacteria culture which adsorbs to the buk substrate material. Then I just brew the soil (under the right conditions: a warm photorestricted anaerobic environment) which promotes the growth of the rhizobacteria.

There you go... just one simple step followed by two tediously labor intensive and convoluted steps taking approximately two weeks.


No "secret ingredients".


This isn't new technology, but it seems few are aware of these processes.

For example, I've noticed on this and other weed-growing forums (lurked around for a few days before making this appeal) that no one seems to know anything about soil. Lots of discussion of the merits of various lighting protocols and nutrient mixes, but very little talk of soil engineering.


The evidence of this is the recurring problem of "nutrient burn". A problem that is very solvable.


True, excessive soluble chemical nutrients will always eventually cause nutrient burn, especially when growing a fast-maturing plant sensitive to such factors. But a proper pre-digested organic nutrient substrate added to the soil allows for optimum plant metabolism (rapid growth) without the need to resort to harsh soluble chemical nutrients.

This means plants grown in an engineered soil simply have access to more nutrients, whereas in a nutrient poor soil these chemicals have to be added, and the addition of such artificial nutrients adversely alters the soil chemistry.



That's why I want a comparative grow with identical protocols for my little experiment.

The level of excess nutrients required to cause nutrient burn in conjunction with my soil recipe will probably kill the batch of plants grown in regular soil alongside them (my soil has higher surface adsorption on the microscopic level).


-PayDirt

Just a quick bump for this thread.


For those interested; I've now got three volunteer growers for my little experiment (one from this forum, one from RollItUp.org, and another via reference from an acquaintance).

When I get five (maybe six) growers I'll brew up the last of my ingredients and divvy up the eleven or so plant bags (the brew itself will take two weeks).


If anyone else wants to apply for one of the two (maybe three) places left, then please don't hesitate to contact me: paydirt at hush mail dot com

I'm also still willing to answer any other questions posited in this thread.


Thanks again for all the feedback guys.


-PayDirt

Okay guys...

Thanks for all the input.

I now have three intested growers who meet my requirements (competent regular growers willing to run a comparative grow according to my stipulations). That's six plant bags (3 x 2).

I also have another couple of growers who have expressed an interest and from whom I am awaiting proof of growing competence (crop/set-up pics and/or a link to a growlog).
That should be another three or four plant bags.

Then I also have another small grower (referred by an acquaintance)... who will probably take my last bag.


That's all eleven bags allocated.


Unless... unless, of course, one of the two unverified growers fails to prove their competence.

I'm going to give them a week... then those last four bags are up for grabs.

Anybody who wants to get on the alternate list just drop me an email with:
-your (rough) location
-evidence (as specified above) of your growin competence

...to: paydirt at hush mail dot com


I'll be mixing and milling the soil this weekend, and the brewing process (bacterial inoculation) should take 12 or 13 days.

I'll be able to deliver the samples the weeend of the 30th and 31st of May.



Thanks again guys,
-PayDirt

I'll be updating this thread soon with the all the latest happenings in this little experiment, so watch this space.

-PayDirt

Okay guys, here's the long awaited update...



From the outset, it seems this whole experiment has been an exercise in futility. Literally everything went wrong.



When this thread petered out I had six growers interested in participating: five who made contact via the forums (RollItUp.org and Cannabis.com) and one introduced through an acquaintance. So I set about processing the bulk ingredients I had left over from last growing season; enough raw material for eleven plant grow bags.


Then the litany of woes began...


First: while processing the predigested organic substrate material I burnt out the motor on my milling machine... with only nine grow bags finished.


Second: of the five growers who expressed an interest (via the forums) in receiving samples of my soil, only three could provide the requisite evidence of their growing competence (ie: crop photos or grow-logs). So I was left with only nine plant bags, and only four qualified growers.


Third: of the three forum growers who expressed an interest, only two actually collected their samples. I won't name the grower who never got back to me with a preferred drop-off location... he knows who he is.




So, all in all, a total failure.


It's actually been so haphazard as to generate a sort of comedic appeal. Let me give you a few examples:


I supplied the soil in brown paper grow bags, so the growers could simply plant the entire bag in their regular soil, water their regular soil as usual and simply allow my â??PayDirtâ?� soil to slowly absorb the moisture it needs through the paper bag. However, the soil turned out to be so highly absorbent and soaked up so much water as to thoroughly saturate and disintegrate the paper bags... despite the fact that each paper bag was individually wrapped in plastic and then double wrapped in two thick plastic rubble sacks and all three sample deliveries were collected within 24 hours of being dropped off. The stuff is like a sponge.


The batch of sterilized worms I produced to provide aeration for the soil (always a good idea for any growers out there) were pilfered! I went to check on them one morning only to find a seagull in my garage greedily helping himself to the contents of my wormery. Now that it's been contaminated by a flying rodent I have to empty the wormery and start over.


Dropping off one of the samples in a public park in the middle of the night: torch in one hand, GPS in the other, backpack full of plastic wrapped soil bags... I inadvertently stumbled upon two young gay men in flagrante. Far from expressing any embarrassment, they seemed somewhat disappointed when I walked on instead of accepting their invitation to join in.




So, two bags each to a grower from Cannabis.com and another from RollItUp.org, two more bags to a friend of a friend, three bags still sitting in my garage unclaimed, a burned out milling machine, a sullied wormery and one homosxual proposition later... it's certainly been an experience.


I can't publish the results collected by my acquaintance grower as he could possibly be linked to me, but I'll endeavor to have the other two growers (who are known forum members) report their results in this thread.


I still have three bags left if anyone else is interested?




As usual, I'll happily answer any questions anyone might have.



Sincerely,

-PayDirt

sent u a mail.

Just wondering, how does this affect a strict nutrient diet? Is this to be used instead of nutrients? Also what is your "expected" yeild increase compared to standard non nutrient soil + nutrient additives?

Also would these living organisms in the soil affect the co2/o2 mixture in the air and acidity of soil?

karmeron,

Okay, okay, lots of questions here so I'll try to answer them all.

Below are all your questions including the ones asked in the email you sent me (Don't worry, it's just the pertinent soil questions. I keep all personal info confidential and delete all emails after I read them).

Just wondering, how does this affect a strict nutrient diet?

...it doesn't.

As I've explained, I use a predigested nutrient substrate which is highly absorbent and provides a microscopic structure to which the rhizobacteria can adhere. The nutrient substrate itself is inert (it's organically derived), it neither alters the ph nor interacts with the nutrients... but it will absorb solube nutrients. This doesn't hurt the plants growth, in fact it prevents the leaching of soluble nutrients via watering and helps istribute soluble nutrients more evenly.

However, the biggest problem with nutrient-only grows is the altered metabolism of nutient-only grown plants. Such plants ar effectively force-grown.

I liken this to human nutrition... you can produce really big kids just by stuffing them with copious quantities of starch, but they won't be healthy.

If you want the very best yield from your plants (and all you guys should be growing for yield as opposed to plant size or growth rate), then you need plants with optimised metabolisms... not just unhealthy sickly plants whose metabolisms are stressed due to being force-grown with excessive light; CO2 and bulk nutrients.

For that, you need to provide all the various micronutrients necessary to prevent deficiencies. Micronutrient deficiencies tend to hinder the production of the enzymes involved in the anabolic processes which produce the more exotic metabolites... such as the cannibinoids.

As I've already mentioned, you can adequately assess the metabolic health (and infer the qualiy of the soil) of a tomato plant based on the yield of exotic metabolites (ie: lycopene yields).

For example: Organically grown vegetables can often yield twenty or more times the quantity of various vitamins and minerals found in their mass-produced intensively-farmed rivals.

The same certainly should hold true for your particular brand of "tomatoes".


How does this effect the nutrients I already use?

There shouldn't be any negative interaction.

My soil is extremely absorbent. In fact it is so absorbent that it should almost completely eliminate the problem of nutrient burn... if you use the same nutient dose for both the plants grown in my soil and the contols, then the amount of soluble nutrient required to cause nute burn with my soil should kill the control group plants.


Is this to be used instead of nutrients?

With ot without... doesn't really matter. If you just use the soil, it should out perform regular soil. If you use nutrients, it should out perform regular soil plus nutrients.

The nutrient mix that I use as a substrate is insoluble... you won't find it in any soluble nutrient mixture. It also contains the full spectrum of other elements (heavy metals etc) required for plant growth, stuff soluble nutrient manufacturers assume your plants can derive from the soil you use... but such is not always the case: even composts are manufactured from farm waste which itself is deficient in trace elements (intensive faming causes such deficiencies).

But it's not simply a matter of nutrients (soluble or otherwise), it's the elevated levels of rhizobacteria which the soil supports that makes the real difference.


I usually use a nutrient free soil and stick to a strict plan of nutrients, but does this "paydirt" also contain NPK?

Nope... just the naturally occuring nitrogen; phosphorous and potassium found in the compost base and the bacterial innoculant.


Also what is your "expected" yeild increase compared to standard non nutrient soil + nutrient additives?

I've seen up to (approx) 50% increase in plant size with ordinary garden plants. But can't be sure how much of that was down to the gardener usually using piss-poor garden dirt. I'd assume that the yield of complex metabolites is even higher again, but that would be an anecdotal observation.

This little comparative grow experiment is my first attempt at getting concrete comparison data.


Also would these living organisms in the soil affect the co2/o2 mixture in the air and acidity of soil?

Not noticeably... rhizobacteria are usually anaerobic (there are some chemosynths involved), but their impact upon either CO2 or O2 levels would be miniscule.

Even with the higher levels of microbes supported by the nutrient substrates in my soil, the total biomass is still pretty small... maybe a few grams at best. Not enough to adversely effect your air mixture.

If you are growing in pure CO2 (above atmospheric pressure: 101 kPa) then you will inhibit nitroen fixation (the primary benefit of rhizobacteria) simply because there isn't any nitrogen to fix in the first place. But again, my soil should out perform regular soil presuming identical conditions.

The nucleic acids in the rhizobacteria ARE present in sufficient quantities to alter ph, but these acids remain isolated behind the cell walls so long as the rhizobacteria enjoy a natural life cycle.

I've read that some of you "tomato" growers will bake/microwave your soil in order to sterilise it (lest moulds or fungus foul the crop). Doing this with my soil will most definitely acidify the soil... not to mention how badly it will affect the soils performance.

*************************************************


In the interst of honesty, I suppose a few caveats are in order:

So far only three growers have collected samples and are growing in my "paydirt" soil... of the nine bags I managed to process before my milling machine burnt out:

-two bags went to an acquaintance, but I haven't heard back from him yet;

-two more bags went to "liblah" over on Cannabis.com, he seems to be doing very well with it, but hasn't harvested yet;
ATTENTION: Irish "Tomato" Growers! - Page 4 - Marijuana Growing ...post at the bottom of the page

-two more went to a grower on this forum (he hasn't posted anything so I won't print his username); he's had a concretion problem. He didn't use any worms for aeration (something I recommend) and the soil seems to have solidified, stifling the roots which in turn somewhat stunted the plants;


...so for anyone interested in participating in this comparative grow (there are still three plant bags left), be aware that you are risking a lost crop.

Thats why I've been eating the cost of the bags (which is significant), and why I've only given two bags (enough for two plants) to each grower.


I've instructed the grower from this forum to add some worms and maybe mix the soil with some moss peat, so hopefully the plants can bounce back... I'll keep everyone informed of how things go.


-PayDirt

this is great. to bad with the whole disaster plan you had. Guess thats how it goes when ur business partners are stoners heheh
your words about our hobby's ignorance to a lot of soil aspects kind of shocked me. I joined this site and couldn't for the life of me find out why there was nobody out there spreading mycorr. habits/techniques for soil around much on online forums (the real indoor soil farmers don't get internet??).
ok my 2 cents.
I think you need to re-asess how you tend to "learn" about your soil's ability. Why not be more lofty in your goals. You should be looking deeper into your results and be deciding/or figuring more out about cannabis' specific needs in your soil. Ok or not so lofty(but still good):
what kind of chemical/disolved nutes can be added to what extent without hindering the plant? <--Thats a good question looking for a hypothesis :)
Do "tomato" plants often do better with more [conc.] of vitamens/elements the better as a rule(w/o burn of course)? your soil uses mycorrhizae as a very important factor; quick question, what is your choice of bacteria and how do you decide? Do you have just one bacteria type that you choose? and lastly,how would one learn more(online) on the overall process of creating organic, live, dirt like you have?

Just a little thought

If this soil has some naturaly occuring NPK and im putting in just enough to get the best yield, then your added NPK will be too much??

you keep talking about nute burn.... but I can honestly say as a grower and from talking to a lot of growers, this is not an issue, if you follow very carefully the guidelines that manufacturers give there is no nute burn. Most nutes are desigend to give th plant exactly the nutrients they need to give the best yields as proven by LOTS of tests. So I dont really see the major benifit of this, because if plants are given exactly what they need and then the "organisms" in your soil are producing more NPK that will be too much?

Also you mentioned about if you fed a human starch then they would be huge but not healthy, however, if you were harvesting a human for say fat, then you whould probably be getting as much of that out of them as u can, I havent really been shown that cannabis plants specifically need a lot of a micro nutrient to produce more "buds". most, if not all of the micro nutrients are in manufactured nutes, like "supervit" for example.

At the end of the day a grower only really needs yeild of "buds" with good THC and CBD, not really anything else. so leaf and stem production is secondary importance, so technically a marijuana plant grown witth crap leaves/stems, but amazing buds is "unhealthy". But its what growers grow for.

I maybe way off but I just dont see the major issue. Usually in a non-organic grow, a decent nutrient diet and non-nutrient soil will not give nute burn and in the right conditons will give maximum yield without anything organic introduced. in fact usually it is a bad thing introducing "variable" non fully controlable organic compounds/organisms can cause imbalances.

Im not totally against it obviusly, but do you have anymore proof on these organisms producing exactly what marijuana needs with a full nutrient diet that we are told gives marijuana plants EXACTLY what they need for maximum yield?

karmeron and dmahny88,


Answering your posts:

this is great. to bad with the whole disaster plan you had. Guess thats how it goes when ur business partners are stoners heheh
your words about our hobby's ignorance to a lot of soil aspects kind of shocked me. I joined this site and couldn't for the life of me find out why there was nobody out there spreading mycorr. habits/techniques for soil around much on online forums (the real indoor soil farmers don't get internet??).
ok my 2 cents.

I agree... if you supply light; CO2; and soluble nutrients in gross excess (as most indoor growers do), then soil becomes the limiting factor. Why it is so overlooked by â??tomatoâ?� growers is beyond me.


I think you need to re-asess how you tend to "learn" about your soil's ability. Why not be more lofty in your goals. You should be looking deeper into your results and be deciding/or figuring more out about cannabis' specific needs in your soil. Ok or not so lofty(but still good):

This will be my last experiment with â??tomatoâ?� growers... I'm hoping to develop a product for use in pharmaceutical botanic research. Ireland produces approximately 70% of all of Europe's pharmaceuticals and hosts a huge amount of pharmacological/organic chemistry research.

The biggest area of research at the moment is the exotic organic compounds, most of which are considered â??Nature's cupboardâ?� ie: they are too complex to build from scratch in the lab and are better sourced from plants. So big-business chemical companies with very deep pockets are busily growing all sorts of weird plants with an eye to maximising the yield of very complicated phytochemicals.

There's money to be made there, as cost is no impediment to increased yield under such circumstances. Despite its precarious legal standing, cannabis just isn't expensive enough to justify the increased yields... my soil simply isnt a viable product for pot. Sorry.


what kind of chemical/disolved nutes can be added to what extent without hindering the plant? <--Thats a good question looking for a hypothesis

The increased absorbency allows the soil to hold a large amount of dissolved nutrients, they don't just pool in the water at the bottom of the pot as they would with regular soil.


Do "tomato" plants often do better with more [conc.] of vitamens/elements the better as a rule(w/o burn of course)?

Yes... that's the main difference between organic and mass produced vegetables.


your soil uses mycorrhizae as a very important factor; quick question, what is your choice of bacteria and how do you decide? Do you have just one bacteria type that you choose? and lastly,how would one learn more(online) on the overall process of creating organic, live, dirt like you have?

Mycorrhizae refers to the fungal root symbiotes... I use rhizobacteria. Rhizobcteria produce the more complex organic molecules which are preferentially absorbed by the roots over the plain raw nutrients, and this negates the need for the plant to do this metabolism.

For example: Kellogg's add iron filings (small quantities) to corn flakes so they can sell them as â??enriched with ironâ?�. But the iron is either elemental iron: [Fe] or iron oxide (rust) [FeO2.6H2O]... which then has to be converted to heme iron for your muscles and blood... eat a steak and the iron is already in heme form. Guess which form is better absorbed? Guess which metabolism is healthier: one supplied with raw nutrients, or one supplied with nutrients already in their biologically available form?

A biologically active soil processes raw nutrients into more bioavailable organic compounds of those nutriets.

The best way to do this is simply to collect lots of rhizobacterial samples and brew them up in a sample of your soil. That way the strains best suited to survive in your soil win out, but with minority populations of all sorts of differently suited cultures jostling for opportunity (which gives the soil great flexibility to adapt to changing conditions).

The problem is multiplying the microscopic surface area to such an extent that the soil can support massively elevated levels of rhizobaceria... I managed to do this with a specially processed inert substrate which, in and of itself, is a predigested plant nutrient. Pretty clever.

Just a little thought

If this soil has some naturaly occuring NPK and im putting in just enough to get the best yield, then your added NPK will be too much??

The naturally occuring NPK in the soil is in organic forms produced by the rhizobacteria... not the soluble chemical versions.

you keep talking about nute burn.... but I can honestly say as a grower and from talking to a lot of growers, this is not an issue, if you follow very carefully the guidelines that manufacturers give there is no nute burn. Most nutes are desigend to give th plant exactly the nutrients they need to give the best yields as proven by LOTS of tests. So I dont really see the major benifit of this, because if plants are given exactly what they need and then the "organisms" in your soil are producing more NPK that will be too much?

Those manufacturers use cetain assumptions when making their nutrient solutions... they assume normal soil absorbency; they assume normal nutrient profiles in the soil; they assume most growers are not growing so intensively as to be risking nute burn in the first place.

The testing you mention is done against other soluble nutrients... soluble nutrient solutions don't include ANY insoluble nutrients (colloiding insoluble nutrients is cost prohibitive).

Do your soluble nutes include all the obscure trace nutrients needed to produce the myriad enzymes involved in optimizing plant metabolism?

All the metals? (Lithium; sodium; magnesium; calcium; vanadium; chromium; manganese; iron; copper; zinc etc)

All the non-metals? (Boron; carbon; silicon; selenium; bromine; chlorine etc)

If these things aren't in your soluble nutrients (they aren't), it's hardly â??exactly what they needâ?�...your plants are taking all these trace minerals from your soil. Wouldn't they do better if these minerals were in organic bioavailable forms in an absorbent engineered soil?


Also you mentioned about if you fed a human starch then they would be huge but not healthy, however, if you were harvesting a human for say fat, then you whould probably be getting as much of that out of them as u can, I havent really been shown that cannabis plants specifically need a lot of a micro nutrient to produce more "buds". most, if not all of the micro nutrients are in manufactured nutes, like "supervit" for example.

...You're NOT harvesting a simple organic compound, you're harvesting a complex metabolically costly molecule.

A better analogy would be the yield of testosterone (a complex five-ring steroid) from starch-fed Americans... only healthy; properly nourished people have upper-end testosterone levels. Most obese, manourished (not under-norished, bt poory nourished) have such suppressed testosterone leves as to require anti-depressants.


At the end of the day a grower only really needs yeild of "buds" with good THC and CBD, not really anything else. so leaf and stem production is secondary importance, so technically a marijuana plant grown witth crap leaves/stems, but amazing buds is "unhealthy". But its what growers grow for.

Wrong. They should be growing for optimized plant metabolism: high yields of ALL the cannabinoids; and the cross-linking of cannabinoids that so greatly increases potency are secondary to proper plant metabolism. The healthier the plant the better the yield; the better the quality.


I maybe way off but I just dont see the major issue. Usually in a non-organic grow, a decent nutrient diet and non-nutrient soil will not give nute burn and in the right conditons will give maximum yield without anything organic introduced. in fact usually it is a bad thing introducing "variable" non fully controlable organic compounds/organisms can cause imbalances.

It gives HIGH yield, not maximum yield... minor mineral deficiencies hinder optimum metabolism. Maximum (quality) yield requires optimum metabolism.


Im not totally against it obviusly, but do you have anymore proof on these organisms producing exactly what marijuana needs with a full nutrient diet that we are told gives marijuana plants EXACTLY what they need for maximum yield?

...I know you're not totally against it, you sent me an email asking for ten pots worth.

But this is pretty simple really... you guys are growing with excess light; CO2; and soluble nutrients. So soil is your limiting factor.

Improve your soil... read up on rhizobacteria and the benefits of absorbent substrates.

Check out the pics "liblah" posted on RollItUp:
ATTENTION: Irish "Tomato" Growers! - Page 4 - Marijuana Growing

...his plants seem very healthy: bigger than usual leaves and an unusual colour (hopefully extra chlorophyll).

*************************************************

More succinct, one-line questons from now on please.

-PayDirt

To be honest this sounds like the age-old debate of organic v/s non-organic grows. in which no one has solidly proven that an organic grow is in fact any better than a non-organic grow.

"some" people say organic weed tastes better, but it is inconclusive. Look at hydroponic and aeroponic grows....(which have proven to give even higher yields than soil grows when done properly) this proves you dont even need soil at all to grow marijuana, so it is not necessarily the soil holding you back, only..possibly in soil grows.

What I owuld like to know is, what difference does naturally occuring micro-nutrients have over non-organic nutrients to the end product of weed, after all people smoke it, what would we expect the difference of it to be if grown with organic micro-nutrients coming from these rhizobacteria? I can certainly see how it would be viable for food and pharmaceuticals as you have mentioned about the iron in cereals thats added, but at the end of the day this is a product that people "mostly" smoke, and a lot of the chemicals in marijuana are probably destroyed in the process that arent needed to "get high".

Good points karmeron.


But lets talk turkey here...

Hydroponic beats soil; aerponic beats soil... but what about soil plus nutes?


Soil plus nutes beats nutes only (whether hydoponic or aerponic): because the soil provides the insoluble nutrients the solution doesn't. Provided the soil is absorbent and properly engineered: milled and cultured. You get more of the exotic cannabinoids and more cross-linking.

But you can't do this half-assed... a shitty organic grow can't beat plain old intensive farming. Only a quality organic grow can increase quality sufficiently to justify the effort.

The Japanese have pioneered proper organic growing with their "food-factories": organically grown vegetables mass-produced under clean-room conditions with no pesticides; fertilisers; or chemicals.
Plant Factories – The Future of Food
...and they usually use an engineered artificial soil instead of hydroponics.



If you want a bag (I have three left) and live near Dublin, email me some proof of your growing competence (pics/grow-log) with a rough location (just a town name)... I'll drop-off a bag somewhere nearby and email you the GPS location. Pick it up at your convenience.

Once you're willing to follow the instructions and report back your results, you can do your very own comparison grow.


-PayDirt

Listen. There a lot of people out there who do not grow for profit so when you said:
Despite its precarious legal standing, cannabis just isn't expensive enough to justify the increased yields... my soil simply isnt a viable product for pot. Sorry.

I was shocked, again. How could there not be people out there trying to AMP up their organics and figuring out what gets the best mycorrhizae interaction with the plant?
So is the specific product you have in mind creating for "tomatoes?" or are you doing this plant test b/c weed can be tested easily for it's final enzyme productions at chop? Just curious because it would be pretty crazy if a large scale bio-engineering company was trying to develop a weed-specific organic soil to produce for pharmaceuticals..
so how hard would this digested plant nutrient stuff be to make? tools? time? care? or is it just because you have some crazy cool skill in making good dirt?!?

dmahny88,

So is the specific product you have in mind creating for "tomatoes?"

...nope. It's a multipurpose/general-use soil, absorbent and inert with a neutral (7) ph. That way it can be acidified; alkalinated; dried or steeped as needed.

For example; the grower on RollItUp ("liblah") already has good results, healthy plants that are unusally green and large leaved; however, the grower on this forum (can't post his username without permission) didn't use any worms and found that the soil solidified... stifling the roots and somewhat stunting his plants. I've recommended he add lots of worms and a little moss peat to improve aeration. Hopefully this will rectify the situation.

The soil doesn't contain nutrients specific to one particlar plant strain, instead it contains an excess of all the trace minerals/nutrients in inert (but bioavailable) forms.


...or are you doing this plant test b/c weed can be tested easily for it's final enzyme productions at chop?

...yep.

Asking a competent pot smoker/grower for a yield and toke-test result only costs me my time (processing/delivering) and the price of the raw materials (just over 115 euro per plant bag when I bought the bulk materials two years ago).

If I used ordinary tomatoes, I'd have to grow them myself (I have no interest in gardening nor do I have any expertise), then pay thousands and thousands for lab tests (a lycopene yield and lycopene ratio would probably suffice, but a full vitamin/mineral panel might be required: that's big money).

If you guys get a high yield (analagous to the lycopene test), and an unusual high... then I know the plants are enhanced: more of the exotic cannabinoids and more cross-linking.

Cheaper, faster and you guys grow out of season. All the amateur gardeners I spoke to earlier in the year gave me the run around till long past planting season.


Just curious because it would be pretty crazy if a large scale bio-engineering company was trying to develop a weed-specific organic soil to produce for pharmaceuticals..

...no, they farm out the growing and pay handsomely for high yield crops (they are after chemicals they can't fabricate in the lab). Even some perfume companies do this.

The specialist growers are the ones interested in engineered soils, many even use their own recipes. They prefer general-use performance soils as they don't always want to disclose what they've been contracted to grow.

Very few species are grown in the lab (ie: desert/jungle varieties and potent hallucinogenics/poisons).


so how hard would this digested plant nutrient stuff be to make? tools? time? care? or is it just because you have some crazy cool skill in making good dirt?!?

It takes me two weeks to produce a batch of soil: one (labour intensive) day to process and mix the ingredients and thirteen to fifteen days to brew/multiply the bacteria.

It's not that hard once you have the equipment and the know how... but there are some proprietary secrets involved.


I start wth a base soil: nothing exotic, just a high quality compost but milled to a specific particulate size (I burnt out my milling machines motor making these nine bags so my whole operation is out of business till I can source some replacement parts).

Next I add the predigested nutrient substrate (trade secret) which provides both the soils absorbency and a microstructure to which rhizobaceria can adhere. Processing the substrate is more tricky as it involes a (slight) risk of combustion because it must be processed in an anhydrous state.

Once mixed with the soil it is no longer flammable.

Then I add the bacterial cultures (you need several to give the soil some adaptive potential).

Lock it up and brew the bacteria for a couple of weeks (when the smell changes the bacteria have reached saturation). This is just a matter of babysitting.


Just one corner of your garage will house all the equipment you need. The hard part is building up a proper collection of bacteria... you need samples from rich organic waste that has decayed in aerobic and anaerobic; warm and cool; acidic and alkaline conditions and all the variations of which you can manage.

I would warn any amateurs out there though, fermented or decayed sewage is rife with very viruent moulds and fungi... get sloppy and you'll get a nasty infection (or possibly a lung disease).


-PayDirt

Thanks for the RESPONSE! i think you have satisfied many like me who sat staring at this whole proposal bewildered. And for those *nerds* out there, who, as me... is enjoying all of this info as i am. i think the real purpose of this soil is being seen now..small labs, rarity plants. lets hear some results..im waiting!!lol
in the meantime..forget arguing about techniques lets just enjoy the opportunity to visualize this power of organics! But what does one Now consider to satisfy/optimize the happyness of the plant roots AND the hypae(right?-fungus part) do you tell people who use your products on different plants to mix the soil to treat THEIR plants and adjust your soil to their plant species needs?(aeration wise or otherwise) or must your soil retain it's certain "micro-spacyness" or wtvr maybe even something simple like perilite
i feel like weed roots are really well..weed like.. this is similiar to real tomatoe plants so how do you go on deciding the final qualitys of the soil?

dmahny88,


The thing you have to remember about soil is that most of it is an erosion byproduct.

Abiotic processes (weathering) and biotic processes (via living organisms) have been powdering and oxidizing the Earth's crust for a billion years. This powdered stone provides raw materials which are then processed into complex organic molecules by bacteria... it's the bacteria that provide the substrates for the growing plants. The raw chemicals (the eroded stones) aren't biologically availabe to the plants, the plants live off the work of the bacteria: spongers.

Remember, plants aren't cannibals... they dont consume other dead plants (compost). Soil bacteria (rhizobacteria) convert the inorganic (stone residue) and organic (plant waste) materials into the substrates the plants absorb. Bacteria were converting eroded stone into a nutritious slime for millions of years before plants evolved to take advantage of it.

So large fractions of your soil are completely unproductive:

-the stone residue is unproductive.

-all the organic material in excess of what the rhizobacteria can process is unproductive.

-all the perlite (and other aerating material) is unproductive.



Why not do what I do?

Make a soil that is only productive fractions: just enough organic material to support elevated levels of rhizobacteria and a nutrient base.


-PayDirt

But this still doesn't consider the plant's specific roots..a tree has a symbiotic relation with bacteria just as a cannabis plant does and both would prosper well in a soil with a maximizing amount of the "productive" elements(like yours) but STILL a plant's roots enjoy their own type/feel of soil depending on their root-type/DNA(pot plants have much different roots than other plants) so isn't there a big area of adjustment(so many different factors here) one could be messing around with to create a better product when using your soil as the base ingredient(drainage, water absorbance..basically anything that wouldn't really affect the microscopic bacterial growth part but would affect actual plant root growth)?..Just saying, are you trying to make the focus of your soil it's organic properties so that any plant with roots weed-like or tree-like will grow ok in your soil either way but will both have that same great bacterial potential??


so you make a soil that boosts soil metabolism. but for a plant to establish it's roots quickly and with strength like we want for these plants..shouldn't the soil's root growth potential be considered just as equally to it's levels of rhizobacteria?

dmahny88,

This is actually a common misconception... soil texture has no real effect on root growth.

Growers think/assume soil texture has an effect because certain plants prefer certain soil conditions in the wild. But remember, in the wild (or when using regular soils under controlled conditions) the absorbable nutritious substrates are a very small fraction of the total; soil drainage and aeration are serious considerations when roots are struggling to grow.

When nutrients are available in gross excess, root growth is uninhibited... only aeration and water levels can limit it.


It doesn't matter what texture a soil has if it absorbs and holds water well as drainage becomes a moot point.

It doesn't matter what texture a soil has, or if that texture allows access to the exact specific nutrients the roots require... not if ALL the nutrients are present in gross excess... the roots simply take what they need.

...it's sort of like making dinner for your family reunion, nothing you prepare will satisfy carnivores; vegetarians; celiacs and vegans. But if you laid on a huge buffet spread with thousands of calories and dozens of courses for each guest: everyone can just help themselves.


With all that said, my soil does require worms for aeration... lest it solidify and smother the roots. My volunteer grower from this forum had this very problem because he forgot to add worms.


-PayDirt

Here's my latest post on the sister thread over at RollItUp, copied here for anyone interested:
************************************************** ***********
ATTENTION: Irish "Tomato" Growers! - Page 6 - Marijuana Growing
************************************************** ***********

As I explained to the last person who emailed me:

I only had enough substrate and ingredients to make 10 or 11 grow bags. But during the processing I (accidently) burnt out part of the drive shaft in my milling machine, with only 9 bags finished.

So I divided up the bags as best I could:
2 bags to a grower from RollItUp.org
2 bags to a grower from Cannabis.com
3 bags to an acquaintance of an acquaintance

...and two bags just sat in my garage, unwanted.

After a couple of months of no further interest I gifted these last two bags to a botanist friend for whom I have done some soil work in the past. Sort of a thank you present (he pays very well).

If he hasn't used them, and I can get them back... I'll give them to the last guy who inquired about joining the experiment.



To be honest, I think this entire endeavour has been a waste of time.

The grower from Cannabis.com forgot to add worms or moss peat to aerate the soil and somewhat stifled the roots of his plants... haven't heard from him since, so I don't know how the plants are doing.

The grower from this forum (he's posted in this thread, but I won't name anyone without their permission) made the mistake of growing two separate strains, which effectively defeats the purpose of the control group entirely... also, he was unable to water the plants for a few weeks as he was out of the country. Again, I haven't heard from him in a couple of months (he should be harvesting now) so I don't know whats going on with him either.


That's not a criticism of anyone involved, I'm still very grateful for the work put in by the volunteers, who, after all, are only amateur growers doing their best.


I just wish I had better results for my 1,200 euros of ingrediets and broken milling machine.


The acquaintance of an acquaintance (shady character whom I have never met) won't tell me how he got on at all... no pictures; no yield results; nothing. Bastard.

The only thing I know is that he wants a price quote on some sort of bulk discount on more bags... I've passed on word that the cost price is 115euro a bag, so I can't really sell bags for less than say 135euro (20 quid a bag for my work seems fair to me considering the to week processing time)... but at that price he's apparently considering a second grow with the sample bags to see how long the soil lasts.

I did offer him a deal: a set amount of bags; maybe 50 or 100 bags; at COST (115euro) in exchange for him buying me a new (or reconditioned milling machine). But he hasn't responded yet (which he will only do through a friend of a friend).



My current plan, is to get some better results (maybe even some customers) via some industrial (legal) growers in mainland Europe.

But this will be a much more expensive process:
-new milling machine
-Fed-Ex free samples to industrial growers who can do proper comparative grows against a control group

...thats gonna cost me several thousand straight off.

So if I go that route I'll probably opt for a heavy-duty industrial milling machine (which should bring down the manufacturing cost somewhat and better stabilise the product) , put up a discreet website and see if my magic dirt is a viable business in it's own right.

I certainly won't get any venure capital or investment for such a business (imagine that pitch on Dragon's Den!), so it'll probably have to be 6 or maybe 7 grand of my own money... risky.

Will keep you guys posted either way.

Let's hope for some results.


-PayDirt
PS... will gladly answer any further questions as time allows.

Just finished reading your thread now, great read! Must admit alot
went over my head (never did Biology). Sorry to hear it didn't go
so smoothly!

I'd love to test it against my normal recipe (peat moss + sand ,
organic fertilisers) using clones for the closest possible start in
life to see their differences. I understand if you're nearing your
wits with pot farmers, but I would love to know more! If there was
any possibility of getting a miniscule sample even, I could maybe
flower early to save time and see which yields more.

I'd normally do outdoors, but could use my 'lab' to keep it
contained, less variables that way.

I also have some auto flowering strains to try too. I have a goal
of trying to reduce these from their normal 9 weeks from
germination to harvest by any means possible (through
experimentation). I reckon a faster turnaround in that area would
be a huge achievement in the Tomatoe society, worldwide.

Misty.


P.S. I've heard alot of hype about UVB rays, which are lacking with
indoor ops (no real replacement for natural light). They increase
mainly just cannibinoids, or so I hear!

P.P.S. Your HM account is now closed down!

i would be very interested in trying out some of your super soil! [email protected] mail me