FlaVUH White Page

Summary of FlaVUH Supplement Application

The taste, quality, and combustion potential of medical plants all rely on key chemical characteristics found within the plant at the time of harvest. Cultivation impacts the plant's entire growth cycle and alters its chemical characteristics. Improved management practices can create better quality. Medical plant growers regularly carry out a flushing period where they will feed the plant water in the days or weeks before harvest. Many growers believe the flush matters but scientific studies are skeptical and, so far, show no validity to the practice. 

A recent trial was carried out that involved the use of 3ml/gal of FlaVUH mixed with a salt-based fertilizer and applied directly to a container-grown medical plant. The study then compared the growth of the plant administered FlaVUH with one that was not supplemented with the formula. The plant that received FlaVUH experienced a 14% growth increase with no adverse impact on the vegetative growth of the plant or the electrical conductivity and growing medium's pH levels. 

Methods and Materials Used

During a study, the root cuttings of six medical plants were taken and transplanted into pots that measured 3.5 inches square. There was one plant per pot. 

The plans were monitored for 15 days throughout the vegetative state. Once the plants that were treated reached an acceptable height and canopy size they were transplanted and potted in 1.55-gal blow-molded black pots throughout the flowering stage. The plants were potted in a soil mixture known as Sunshine Six #4 and kept at a density of the following: 0.78 plants/ft2.

All of the plants in the study were hand fertilized using Valenza Nutrients (valenzanutrients.com). When administering the fertilizer, the manufacturer recommended rates were followed at a 10 to 20% leaching fraction. The growth rate mixture was 3ml/gal. 

The experiment which was carried out in a very randomized fashion involved the  FlaVUH supplementation as the single factor in the plant's growth. 

During the research, the following was carried out:

• Each of the six replicates were potted as an experimental unit.


• The plants were re-oriented in the growth room weekly until a trestle was used on day 12 of the flowering state to limit variability in the location.


• On each grow table, along the border of the table, non-experimental plants were placed to help create consistent density and reduce border effects. 


• FlaVUH supplementation was used to ensure growth and reliability.

Harvard accrued 53 days into the flowering state. The stems were all cut nx to the soil and then the plants were hang-dried until the moisture content in the plant's fiber was reduced to only 11 to 13%.  All floral material was removed from the stemand the leaves further trimmed to ensure an accurate dry rate.

• Photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) was maintained at the canopy level at t 300-500Μmol·m-2s.


• During the vegetative period, the light was maintained at 18-hour stretches of time throughout the photoperiod and into the flowering state at which point it was increased to 650 ± 50 μmol·m-2 S-1


• The light was then lowered to a 12-hour photoperiod under Gavita Pro 1650e LED grow lights.


• Co2 was held at an ambient level of 400 tp 600 ppm. 


• Harvest took place 63 days into the flowering stage.


• All stems were clipped at the soil level.


• Plants were hang-dried to reach a point of 11 to 13% water.


• All floral material was trimmed


• Leaves were also trimmed to reduce the yield or dry floral weight of each of the plants.


• The canopy and plant height were measured at the end of the vegetative stage. 


• Growth index for each plant relied on the following calucations height
  (cm) x length (cm) x width (cm) x 300-1.


• Every two weeks, throughout the flowering stage, the grow media pH and EC were measured using the pour-through method.

 

Data Analysis

All data used was analyzed via the JMP Statistical Discovery Version 13.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). 

With each, un-paried tests determined the impact of the FlaVUH treatment to see how it affected the yield, growth, and growing media. 

Results

Four measurements were taken of the pH and EC. The control group was significantly different at P>0.1 in each case.

Vegetative Growth

The growth index measured  55 ± 9.7 compared to 67 ± 16.3 for the FlaVUH treatment.

Yield

There was an increase in yield of 14% in the FlaVUH supplementation group compared to the nontreated group.

Conclusion

FlaVUH increased the yield by 14% 

FlaVUH did not impact electrical conductivity and the pH within the grow media.

---