Jacks 3-2-1 help

MustGro

Well-Known Member
Here’s a question on the ratio of the ingredients in the 321 line.
Check out the numbers in the Jack’s feed chart.


It says 378.54 grams of Part A per 100 gallons.
252.36 of Part B
and 98.94 grams of Epsom per 100 gallons.

Do the math (divide by 100) and you get 3.78 grams of part A, 2.52 grams of part B, and .99 grams of Epsom per gallon.
It’s a bit off from the 3.6 to 2.4 to 1.2 ratio they preach, actually 3.78 to 2.52 to 1.
Am I off base on that? I actually like the .99 epsom better than the 1.2; there’s a lot of mag in it.
 

Flowki

Well-Known Member
It is simple. Gallon of water and you drop the 3 ingredients in it and you done. I always go by the 1000 ppm strength and it's amazing. Occasionally drop some recharge, Tribus, and silica.
Yes 3 ingredients are simple, but as for the rest, at 1000ppm of synthetic feed, the microbes are very likely doing nothing for the plant, just eating molasses, and then dying. The likes of kelp etc, in a synthetic setting are also likely better used as foliar. Silica is just an expensive ph up.
 

Green Refuge

Well-Known Member
Actually you should mix the CalNit separate from the Jacks and Epsom Salts then combine the two once diluted, or at least mix in the CalNit last after the Jacks and Epsom has been fully dissolved.
I mix the jacks until it dissolves completely then the other two. Never had an issue unless I leave it out for a few days then it separates.
 

Green Refuge

Well-Known Member
Yes 3 ingredients are simple, but as for the rest, at 1000ppm of synthetic feed, the microbes are very likely doing nothing for the plant, just eating molasses, and then dying. The likes of kelp etc, in a synthetic setting are also likely better used as foliar. Silica is just an expensive ph up.
Why are the microbes dying ? They can't tell the difference between synthetic and organic. If I'm adding anything other than 321 I decrease the dose to equal 1000ppm total.
 

mile.high

Well-Known Member
Yeah there's a specific order and you have to make sure it dissolves before you add the next ingredient. I haven't used it in a while I miss that shit. Never seen plants grow so fast and healthy in my life.
It’s just cal-nit last. You could premix the part a and mag sulfate together dry without issues. The part a has mag sulfate in it.
 

Flowki

Well-Known Member
Why are the microbes dying ? They can't tell the difference between synthetic and organic. If I'm adding anything other than 321 I decrease the dose to equal 1000ppm total.
Synthetic uptake is faster, it cuts out the middle man (microbes). If you started with a synthetic routine, no substantial microbe colonies will be present. If you then lower the synthetic ppm to 600, and then add in microbes, the roots are not going to wait for the microbes to establish when they have access to 600ppm worth of up-take ready synthetics.

Further more, can you tell me the absolute bare minimum ppm rate of npkcm and micro nutrients that are required at any given phase, if not, you need to know. Your light intensity will lower or raise it, your humidity will lower or raise it (for better or worse), your ph will scure it. Your plants may be ''green'' on 600ppm of synthetic feed and nothing else. They may even be green on 500ppm, for a given time, depending on the previous build ups that may be present.

The companies that promote this stuff tell you to keep adding it, that is the red flag. Not only do you wash microbes out if using run off (and you have to use run off if using higher levels of synthetics) if you go above the threshold of root signalling for microbes, they will not be called on. If they are called on in some trickery kind off way, then your synthetic feed will be building in the medium, unused. As the concentrations increase that will kill off the microbes at the surface or edges of the pot, unless you always keep the medium complete moist (it may kill them off anyway, due to the build up massively swinging ph or just being too toxic for them). Either way it is a waste of money. The latest studies still don't know the full complexity of root signalling, and we certainly know very little about the ppm threshold of synthetic npkcm and how that interacts with root signalling for specific microbes, and at various stages, relating to MJ. These companies say ''add this much with this much, and then keep adding this much''. What I've wrote above is the context behind that bs advice. Plants can get by and appear to be happy on a surprisingly low amount of ppm, end yield is the only way you can determine if your microbes are working. And for that, you would need to use a low enough range of synthetic PPM to ensure that it is not the synthetic ppm carrying the plant. I would suggest you'd need to be in the 0.4 to 0.5 EC range (perhaps even lower) for synthetics, supplying the rest through organic mechanisms in order to prove your concept.

Synthetic feeders are pulling 2gpw. That is the bench mark for part synthetic/part organic growers. If you are reaching 2gpw then is the quality better?. If not, what's the point. Synthetics are doing it already, with far less complication. Im sure those who are adding microbes to their synthetic routine think it's simple, if they just follow what is on the label. Look into it and see for yourself.
 
Last edited:

Wastei

Well-Known Member
I now do "3-2-1" in veg and 1g Calcium nitrate and 3.6g 5-12-26 ratio in mid to late flower. Tops out at 1.2-1.3 EC in Aero in my system, about the same as when I was running DWC.
 
Last edited:

Rurumo

Well-Known Member
I've seen studies claiming up to 50% reduction in need for inorganic fertilizer in plants treated with arbuscular mycorrhizae. I know you guys were talking specifically about rhizobacteria, but I'm not at all convinced that inorganic fertilizer kills them off either. Flowki made some great points and I generally agree with him, but the studies looking at the effects of inorganic fertilizer on the microbiome are far from conclusive. Most are done in fields and show that certain species are promoted or suppressed depending on if the inputs are organic or inorganic and depending on the concentration of phosphorus specifically. My personal feeling is that while high PPMs of phosphorus do suppress the microbiome in general, even a small population can have a large effect in your media through all the countless enzymes, hormones, secondary metabolites, ISR, etc. For me, cultivating a population of mycorrhizae, trichoderma, and various PGPRs is worth it in any grow utilizing inorganic fertilizers simply due to the effect they have on the health and flavor of the finished product. When I first started growing, I wondered why my DWC plants using the GH 3 part nutes had so much less flavor than the plants I grew in soil using the same nutes. I think it comes down to the microbiome and the incredible pharmacy of secondary metabolites they produce, which we are only beginning to understand.
 

thenasty1

Well-Known Member
Do the math (divide by 100) and you get 3.78 grams of part A, 2.52 grams of part B, and .99 grams of Epsom per gallon.
It’s a bit off from the 3.6 to 2.4 to 1.2 ratio they preach, actually 3.78 to 2.52 to 1.
Am I off base on that? I actually like the .99 epsom better than the 1.2; there’s a lot of mag in it.
this is how i run it
 
Top