K
keithrs
Guest
I water daily at low ppms.
K-Lite Update?
- Thread starter Ray
- Start date
Help Support Slippertalk Orchid Forum:
I water daily at low ppms.
SlipperFan
Addicted
Daily? How many ppm?
K
keithrs
Guest
Around 130 T ppm - 30-35 ppm N
SlipperFan
Addicted
That is pretty low. About 1/4 t. per gallon.
K
keithrs
Guest
I made a concentrate.... 1/3 cup per 25 gal.
K
keithrs
Guest
My personal belief is that a low constant diet is better the letting my plants pig out once a week.
SlipperFan
Addicted
weakly daily 
Pesky U.S measures units :evil: but . Very difficult for us to have precise informations. What is 130 T ppm - 30 -35 ppm N? If it is 130 mgr Total fertilyser per liter it is 17 ppm N! If it is for for 1 gal. it is 17/3.75 ppm N.
. Very difficult for us to have precise informations. What is 130 T ppm - 30 -35 ppm N? If it is 130 mgr Total fertilyser per liter it is 17 ppm N! If it is for for 1 gal. it is 17/3.75 ppm N.
K
keithrs
Guest
Pesky U.S measures units :evil: but
130 (T)otal ppm - I test the ppm's and pH with a pen in my reservoir which is 25 gal.
I guesstimated the ppm N from one of Ray's fertilizer calculators. It's only a guesstimate but will get you fairly close. I added about 30 ppm's for micro's.
If its is indeed lower the 30 ppm N.... Then I'm even happier
. Shows that most orchids don't need 125 ppm N for them to grow well!
ppm are no US measurements units ... I think it is used in science all over the world, no??
Part pee million
Partie par million
Part pee million
Partie par million
yes, parts per million is a global unit of measure.
When talking fertilizer, it is a mass per mass measurement, equivalent to 1 mg per kilogram.
As the bulk density of the K-lite we've gotten has varied so much, I think it's almost impossible to know what mass Keith's 1/3 cup was.
When talking fertilizer, it is a mass per mass measurement, equivalent to 1 mg per kilogram.
As the bulk density of the K-lite we've gotten has varied so much, I think it's almost impossible to know what mass Keith's 1/3 cup was.
Rick
Well-Known Member
Your daily rate of N is only a little lower than my projected weekly rate of 40-50 mg/L N
You feed a lot!! But I'm glad you are liking the results.
K
keithrs
Guest
Your not feeding enough
oke:... Your probably right... But if I'm not mistaken John Biernbaum from MSU is fertilizing @ 125 ppm N almost every watering. I'm using about 1/4 of what recommend by MSU.I would love to see the results in a greenhouse!!!!
Rick
Well-Known Member
Really demonstrates how much slop there is in the system, but also so many unaccounted variables.
I've also fed at much heavier rates (during long days and warmer temps), and get fantastic growth of big multi growth plants short term. But I lost many of these big floppy plants after 5 or so years of this kind of push. Also can't really generalize across every species and hybrid (I think hybrids are inherently selected to handle high K fert too). Looking at the tissue concentration chart of Panamanian epiphytes you can see there is a lot of variability (mostly explained by ant presence) of K in this community of plants.
I also saw a couple of papers of commercial hybrid phale growers that fed at incredible rates (with high K). But their goal is to get things big fast and out the door ASAP. They also tend to use a lot of chemicals for disease and pest control.
My goal is quite a bit different in both time frame and reduced chemical intervention for mortality reduction.
K
keithrs
Guest
I can't agree more!
When the "MSU" article was published, 125 ppm N was what they had used in evaluating it, and a lot of us took it as a decent recommendation. Not long ago, Bill Argo told me they had not arrived at that level in any scientific manner: "We tried it and it worked".
I used that level at every watering for about 8 years. I have reduced it based upon the reasoning that it is well established that animals are healthier and live longer when fed a complete, yet moderate diet. Might that apply that to plants, too? (If only I could apply it to me.)
I used that level at every watering for about 8 years. I have reduced it based upon the reasoning that it is well established that animals are healthier and live longer when fed a complete, yet moderate diet. Might that apply that to plants, too? (If only I could apply it to me.)
Rick
Well-Known Member
Yes
There is some scientific basis for the 125 or so ppm N target but it's mainly from the agri crop science arena. As mentioned a ways back, fertilizer was mainly developed for corn, which gets somewhere more than 60% of all fertilizer produced, and probably about 80% of the world wide research budget. The balance is primarily for rice and wheat. Ornamental plants get a fraction of a percent of the world fertilizer production and research budget. So it's not hard to find a reference to 100ppm N, but in most cases it traces back to corn. Keeping in mind that the above 3 food crops are annuals, meant for maximum carbohydrate output over a 6-9month lifespan.
newbud
Orchid Maniac
Would it be asking too much for someone to explain what ppm is exactly and how do you measure it in your water? I realize you guys went to school for years to learn this but I'm just wondering if there's a crash course one could take? Thanks
Rick
Well-Known Member
PPM stands for parts per million. Its fairly synonymous with mg/L (milligrams per liter in liquid solutions) or mg/Kg (milligrams/Kilogram in solid mixtures).
Measuring "it" depends on the chemical in question. Since we were talking about N (nitrogen), you need a nitrogen specific test to measure it. The are several methods to measure nitrogen from either the ammonia, nitrate, or nitrate concentrations, and I believe urea N is measured as TKN (total Kledjal Nitrogen). You can get cheap and dirty ammonia and nitrate test kits from an aquarium store. But typically we just guesstimate the N in a fertilizer solution by straight math based on the percentages of the different ingredients in the fertilizer.
http://pubs.ext.vt.edu/430/430-100/430-100.html
Try the above link for a tutorial Jack
