1st Time

😅 and what’s the question? Nice Seedling btw

Better answer it has a week attached!!!!!

Hey 👋 Plant is developing okay. Some strains grow slower, somes do faster. Height will mostly be gained in stretch. Until you get into stretch plant grows slow and steady. Just be patient 👊👍🍀

atlien415 spazzing out again, taking things too literally, arguing over pedantic nonsense... Using his favorite fallacious logic: strawman, misprepresenting what was said, tangetial nonsense, false comparisons, nit-picking unrelated aspects and of course just making shit up. Also engages in ad hominem as a form of argument. This person has zero integrity in how they argue. The live their life like a perpetual middle schooler. They start with some self-absorbed motivation and selectively chooses what he focus on to manufacture useless arguments that are hyper-focused on some aspect that isn't even relevant to the original question(s). just an example or 2 cause i'm not wasting too much time on this. The conversion from EC can use one of several conversion factors. that alone should tell you the lack of accuracy by comparison to calculating elemental ppm. Gauranteed analysis are a gauranteed minimums. if a manufacturer is fucking that up, you shoudln't buy their stuff. Arguing about this when he knows better shows that this is really some irrational personal attack. He's an emotionally-driven person constantly looking to start a fight over utter nonsense. Not only that, but overall concentration doesn't tell you shit. Tracking individual ppms or 'weighted average %'s based on dosing' will allow you to confidently and precisely adjust your formula based on observation of growth. It can be applied to the next grow and confidently expect the intended result. With soilless/hydro nutes you can absolutely expect consistency. Sure their are some variations to specific ingredients, but it's a small pool. Either it is 100% soluble and 100% plant ready or it is not. Nothing groundbreaking has been discovered about plants relative to home gardening context. you can feel safe using information from "way back" in 2019, LOL. Existing knowledge is not something you ignore. New research that hasn't been peer-reviewed or shown to be a repeatable and consistent relationship or effect is what you need to be wary of. "Existing knowledge that is old must be bad! LOL Fire! Ungh! Fire bad!" - atlen415 displays SNL frankenstein sophistication. The idea being communicated was to track what you feed in a resolved way and the benefits should be obvious. Atlien415 arguing about this in tangential ways and nit-picking irrelevant details shows how this is just about him personally attacking me as opposed to anything productive. A bug has craweld WAY up his ass. tap or ro concerns? This is just another example of him picking a fight over nothing. Some half-wit will complain about how much i write, then another half-wit complains i didn't write enough. If the numbers were calculated from the labels, obviously that's not including the what come in the water. Why would it? Magic? You'd have to make up figments in your head (atlien's) to think anything differently. carbs? your flower also isn't being 'carb-loaded' LOL. Again, irrelevant detail Flushing does not affect structure of flower development. This ignored unhealthy plants, because the context is a healthy plant with proper results, not some dumpster fire fuck up. I don't get how this twit can say i said things 'too difinitively.' Everything is a ballpark to start in then you have to observe and adjust for the numerous local variables. Yet another example of making things up and misrepresenting what was said. Atlien415 is just a mean girl being hysterical, again. He's a little insecure stalker with way too much time on their hands. For all his need to fee superior, his grows sure look like mids. LOL

depends on lvl of solution ppm could be twice a week with 500 ppm or 1 with 1000

With coco coir base? That's 'soilless' so every irrigation... and every irrigation should have 10% runoff or more to avoid buildup. in a soilless context, you maintain a consistent, controlled level of nutrients around the roots. The runoff ensure you don't ge buildup -- even if the resulting equilibrium is not exactly what your formula is... it's still directly controlled by your formula, which is all that matters. Calculated elemental ppm is more accurate than an EC pet reading that is just a conversion of electrical conductivity. Don't compare the following numbers to EC readings / conversions. N 120-130 P 40-60 K 180-200 Ca 100+ Mg 75ish S 100ish. This would be a low concentration and a good ballpark to start. I use somethign similar on seedlings and never have an issue. So, using from the first irrigation is no problem, though you can rely on the seed to power itself the first ~10 days or so. sometimes i wait for the 2nd fertigation, but seem to get better results starting day 1. I use promix, which comes with an inidtial charge that is extremely similar, except for much lower potassium. So, in my context whether i fertilize with the first irrigation or not, it gets roughly the same thing from the get-go. from here you can simply observe and adjust... this basic formula, with your adjustments for local variables, will work well on 99% of marijuana plants. It's not my formula. IT's a formula used by several professional Ag companies for 'hydro' nute setups... hydro and soilless in regard to fertilization is essentially the same thing. there are websites and apps that can calculate and tabulate your elemmental ppm from gauranteed analysis lables and dosage. The better ones can even tell you the dosage to hit certain ppm targets. This is how you can use just about any brand of products to get a similar ratio/concentration. if it's a soilless/hydro fertilizer, it's 100% plant available and 100% soluble, so it'll translate across brands without much concern. jacks 321, megacrop, crop salts, sothern ag, masterblend et al all have a ~3 product setup that essentially equates to the above ratio/concentration, but that doesn't mean you can't get there with other products. Brand is mostly irrelevant when dealing with ubiquitous ingredients for soilless/hydro products. check out cocoforcannabis.com. their articles and guides are the best, bar none. The least amount of nonsense science out there. compare their guides to others to see what you should ignore, lol. All sorts of conjecture and unproven hypothesis of people that have no background education or experience on the matter. It's easy to avoid the really retarded stuff like burning your plant or icing the roots, but there's plenty of stuff that sounds right but makes no sense... e.g. anyone that thinks flushing changes the mineral content of buds - developing or not. Simply no biological process exists in the plant where it can change the mineral content of finished buds after the fact. There is no excretion system for such things. Toxicities and eficiencies may impact the end result of flowers, but they are still built according to DNA instructions. Molecules can't just be built whimisically with more Ca.. the molecule wouldn't function properly if it were constructed differently. The whole plant would fail if this were the case.

pH balance after everything has been dissolved into whatever waer you add to the pot in future. You don't need much silica. If part of normal fertigation, i think it's only 10-30 ppm before it's just a hinderance more than a benefit -- reference material for google search. So an amendment to the medium needs to provide roughly that over time... this is difficult to guage. pretty hard to see effects of silica without a clone 'control' plant to compare - even so probably can't discern from normal genetic diversity and changing local variables etc... way too many moving parts. Since you are using coco coir, i'd stick to normal soilless methods. The advantage of soilless is tightly controlling exact concentration and ratios of nutes around the roots. An amendment with unknwonw release of silica kinda contradicts the method. You can figure it out, if you prefer this path with azomite, but it'll take some trial and error as far as adding too much or too little azomite etc. looks like it is fairly soluble but not very soluble, whatever that means, lol (water solubility 5.9)... could probably grind it and dissolve it to make a stock solution of concentrated liquid, that you can add a mL at a time to fertilizer. In your case i guess it's just the pH, but taht's still a huge hassle.. it's going to continue to dissolve and raise your pH over time until it is exhausted. Another reason to prefer adding it to your fertilizer, then as typical, ph-balance after all nutes have been added and dissolved. Acetic acid is a great option. Cheap and it doesn't add anything that can throw off your nutrient balance. Don't overpay for marijuana branded pH balancers (up or down) - they are just run-of-the-mill acids and bases. You can find the same ingredient for 1/10th the price. 3 gallons of white distilled vinegar (acetic acid) will last a long time. If your fertilizer formula is the same each time, it'll take the same mL per liter (or gallon) to correct teh pH.. measure it out 1mL at a time until you get there, then after that you ddn't have to go through that process again unless you drastically change how much silica is added or a similar effect.

Also, "7.3" isn't the end of the world. You'll eventually get it back down, and the impact won't be significant. it's one pot.. if throwing out a few dollars isn't a big deal can always just start new. or, start new and let that one soak in some acidic water for a while and use in future after you correct the pH.

Use quality soil / medium / coco / pebbles whatever. Why does someone buy shitty stuff that I have to set up from the beginning... So if you want to transplant, just use good medium.