BAP, brassinolide, triacontanol, Amino, kelp foliar question
June 7, 2007 at 7:27 pm #7785btaParticipant
This is my first post here but I have been ‘lurking’ for a while, great site.
I want to make a pre-mixed foliar solution in concentrate or ‘ready-to-use’ form which includes Ascophyllum Nodusum (kelp) liquid extract as a ‘base’. I am making this for a few friends who like the idea of my humble home-made solution. I am hoping some of you may offer your opinion on my proposed foliar solution, what it may be lacking or what it may not need.
Ideally I’d like to make a pre-mixed concentrate solution which can be added to water for dilution before use. Here are is a collection of some of my questions you might wish to answer:
a) Can the following components be pre-mixed and then stored or do they have to be used right away after mixing?
b) Can they be mixed together in concentrated liquid form within the kelp as the base?
c) What are ‘standard’ ratios (ppm?) for these components when used with tomatoes, peppers and other sun-loving vegetables?
d) I was thinking of using kelp as the ‘base’ for my foliar spray, does this sound wise?
Here is my mix (testing):
benzylaminopurine (dry) (1)
bassinolide 0.1% (dry) (2)
triacontanol (dry) (3)
Amino Acid Complex (dry) (4)
Fulvic Acid (dry) (5)
Yucca Extract (dry) (6)
Ascophyllum Nodusum [via. cold H20 extraction] (liquid) (7)
I have yet to make the solution, I’ve been busy ready up on hormones, cytokinins, etc. Do you have any quality links or tips on creating a foliar solution? Maybe in regards to mix method or quantities?
The site super-grow (linked below) contains very detailed directions for dissolving the components they sell in H2O. Ratios for ppms are based upon scientific research and usage rates are shown. I intend to start on the lighter doses and work upward. Is this a good plan?
The Yucca extract I found is intended as a dietary supplement (food grade), is this the correct type for foliar applications? Anyone know the correct mixing ratio?
I am not sure if the Ascophyllum Nodusum liquid extract I am thinking of using is in concentrate form or not (I’ve emailed the company). Is kelp a good component to use as a ‘base’? How diluted do you think it should be?
Here is part of the breakdown of naturally occurring acids in "Algamin" (the kelp I want to use):
30 ppm abscissic acid (ABA)
40 ppm cytokinins
70 ppm indole acetic acid (IAA)
Yes, I know this is a synthetic cytokinin and it may be redundant to include this when I’m using cold H20 extracted kelp (as kelp contains 40ppm cytokinins). But, I am assuming that more is better (to a point). I think a light-med application of BAP will be beneficial, acting in concert with the kelp’s cytokinins. I am wrong in my uneducated guess?
Another concern I have with this cytokinin is the method used to dilute it. The site super-grow gives directions which do not utilize NAOH (which I think is a good idea), instead they suggest:quote :
Does this ^^ sound correct?
I believe this steriod needs to be mixed just before it is used, is that correct? So I would have to give a friend the pre-mix solution including all the above (except brassinolide) and the correct amount of power brassinolide which they will use to mix with each application?
To dissolve this fatty acid (it’s not grandular) super-grow suggests:
(Polysorbate 20 is food grade)quote :
Does this ^^ sound correct?
If anyone wants link or info regarding the cytokinin (benszylaminopurine), steriod (brassinolide) or fatty acid (triacontanol) let me know.
[i]Opps, just found out I can not post links yet, I need 5 posts first. So if you want links post in this thread, help me out and I can reply, thus getting to five posts and you win the links! 😉 LOL . I can PM you links if you want them now or google "super-grow", "groworganic" and "biologicsecure" [I hope that doesn’t break site rules][/i]
I am kind of excited to test this mix out, all the components will only cost about 150.00 (I thought it would be more expensive).
April 14, 2009 at 10:04 am #90151BILL42Participant
I read and I would like to contact you sa as to know if you manage to do your pre-mix solution. If yes, did you apply it on some plants and what are the results.
In fact I am just trying to work with triacontanol.
Thanks for your answer.
If you want you can contact me:
my name is :
+33 623 697 728
August 23, 2012 at 6:43 pm #112155mbfertsParticipant
Hi my name is tom, and I handle the customer service for mbferts.com.
After cruising around the internet looking for other peoples direction on how to dissolve and use triacontanol I stumbled upon this thread.
We have just completed a 18 page article on:
1) How to dissolve triacontanol.
2) How to make a triacontanol concentrate.
3) How to use this triacontanol concentrate.
I feel that this will answer any questions regarding how to use triacontanol.
Here is the link:
December 22, 2012 at 8:06 am #113285
I am not sure if this is the correct thread. But I plan to purchase 30% purity Triacontanol to make my own growth juice instead of buying expensive branded ones such as Nirvana of Advanced Nutrients. Why pay extra for the "name" when we should be paying for the active ingredient, anyway.
I was told that 30% purity Tricontanol is inferior to 95% and above purity, and "experts" tested that lower purity has little to no effect compared to high purity Triacontanol although both are at the same ppm. Is this true? Any REAL experts have tried lower purity Triacontanol and have great results?
In case you ask, the "experts" are the sellers. I suspect they are pushing me to buy the high purity one because it costs 3 to 6 times higher than the lower purity one. Higher purity one is a lot more expensive not due to the purity per se, but the technique used to further purity it.
So if a lower purity Triacontanol (30% purity) is just the same as a high purity Triacontanol (95% and above), unless we want to sell it, then certainly there is no better reason for me or anyone to spend unnecessary money to get the high purity Triacontanol.
I really hope there are true experts here on this site who have had actually used and tested with low purity Triacontanol and are able to provide such invaluable knowledge to those who seek to save money and at the same time get maximum effect with low purity Tricontanol and not forgetting getting huge boost with low purity Triacontanol.
Please note that this is purely on Triacontanol and the effect is purely from Triacontanol, and not a concoction of other plant growth regulators. Once we know that we CAN indeed use low purity Triacontanol and CAN indeed obtain the same effect as using high purity Triacontanol, from thereon we can then mix with whatever plant growth regulators according to our heart’s desire. Basically "Low purity Triacontanol" is the main star here.
December 22, 2012 at 1:06 pm #113286
I’m no expert, but are you sure you’re talking about 30% purify? What are the 70%? Or is it 30% solution?
December 22, 2012 at 3:21 pm #113287
30% Triacontanol. The rest are Octacosanol, Hexacosanol, Tetracosanol, Nonacosanol and other polycosanol that make up to 100%.
There is also a 1.5% purity, water soluble. The price for this one is very high because it is "water soluble". The high price for this water soluble one is due to the process to make it water soluble for the sake of convenience to the end user.
Both aforementioned 30% and 1.5% Triacontanol are in powder form.
Yes, I am more than certain of the data and question that I asked. Maybe my message really could cause people to think that I might be joking because almost all people in forums of which I visited bought high purity Triaconcanol, they bought from people who sell high purity Triacontanol. To date, in forums, I have not seen anyone using less than 90% Triacontanol (powder). Some do not mention what purity they are using but from the amount of Triacontanol powder that they use to make up a certain ppm 1000ml, it is easy to know that they are using high purity Triacontanol, you can actually calculate it.
Low purity Triacontanol is very common in China and in India. All because it is cheaper than high purity one. But I do not know whether or not low purity and high purity Triacontanol differ in their effects towards plant growth.
People have the belief that the higher the purity of a chemical, the better the effect will be. But my thinking is, we are growing plants in pots and not using it for any tests that require extremely precise results nor using it on tissue culture (which also needs precise quantity and quality PGR so that results are constant and not contaminated by other variables). As if spending a lot of money to buy the highest quality car but not willing to drive it outside afraid that the sun, wind, dust and rain will spoil the car. In other words, it does not serve the purpose. If it is for the purpose of decoration and only decoration, it is much wiser to save money not to have the engine included. Similarly, if the effect of low purity Triacontanol on plants is the same as that of high purity Triacontanol, there is no reason for me to spend so much more on high purity Triacontanol. On a road with speed limit and/or a road congested with cars, the speed of a Ferrari can’t shine. Unless I am a wealthy spoilt brat who has too much money to flaunt, there is no other better reason to intentionally buy a million dollar car and get stuck in the traffic and look like a fool.
Of course no one will look like a fool buying and using high purity Triacontanol for growing plants. What mentioned is just an analogy of what I am trying to say. May or may not be an accurate analogy but sometimes it is easier to illustrate an abstract idea by analogy with something concrete.
December 22, 2012 at 7:07 pm #113288
Using higher purity chemical may not have better effect, but probably the effect will be more reproducible and probably also achiavable with lower concentration, because if the other compounds had better effect, you would be using them 😉
However, if your aim is only to grow plants, not to do anything else with them, you could try both purities at several concentrations on few plants and see the effect. The impurities may have similar effect, since they are similar chemicals.
December 23, 2012 at 2:15 am #113289
Hmmm. I like what you wrote and it make sense to me.
Are you a microbiologist, biochemist or something related to the mainstream science? If you had done practical research with Triacontanol, have you used low purity Triacontanol on your experimentation? Are there any differences between the high purity and low purity Triacontanol, in the laboratory context?
I cannot afford to try different purities of Triacontanol or plant growth regulators because it is very expensive. Which is the reason why I am forced to do my research on the Internet. As my theoretical research has failed, I am forced to ask people on forum to try my "luck" to see if anyone there/here has been using low purity Triacontanol. If someone used it and tried it then I do not need to reinvent the wheel. In forums, I can expect 50/50 (some people merely give suggestions and never use it, some people use it but at high purity). If this also fails, the last best option is me, myself being practical. However, it is not always possible to be practical when plant growth regulators are concern because they are very, very expensive.
I have even asked for the price for Brassinolide and Forchlofenuron. Both of them are even more expensive than Triacontanol, Forchlorfenuron being the most expensive one among plant growth regulators. Maybe there are others that are more expensive, or it is just the sellers putting a high price to something that promises HUGE yield, HEAVY fruits. To business people or growers, they have no issues when it comes to trial and error because they can still get their money back even if something failed on their crops.
Oh, I was told that some chemicals such as Octacosanol may inhibit the Triacontanol effect, albeit Octacosanol is part of the polycosanol family of which they are extracted (beeswax, rice bran wax). There is such test done but it was said that the growth effect has been stimulated before it is inhibited by Octacosanol Messenger. I requested COA of both 30% and 95% purity, both of them show similar amount of Octacosanol. Therefore, I am making an educational guess that both high purity and low purity have not much of a difference except a high purity Triacontanol has higher percentage of Triacontanol, and low purity Triacontanol has lower percentage of Triacontanol. That is only my educational guess, not necessarily reflect reality.
December 23, 2012 at 7:27 am #113290
1. Educated guess.
2. Requested both for COA 30% and 95% purity.
December 23, 2012 at 9:46 am #113291
December 23, 2012 at 2:59 pm #113292
Oh, thank you, I will send them an enquiry e-mail to OlChemIm. 🙂
They have a wide range of plant growth regulators and there are more than 400 of them. 😯 Many of which I have no idea what they are! They do not list out which are cytokinins, which are auxins and so on and so forth. Not even a biochemist like you know them all unless you use them.
It is great to know you are a biochemist working with cytokinins. Do you mind sharing with me what you do with cytokinins? I read that Benzyleaminopurine is widely used in horticulture to increase plant growth. Then again, "plant growth" is vague. Almost every plant growth hormones is capable of stimulating "growth". Sometimes some regulators can have similar effects on plants. Sometimes some regulators cause plants to grow differently than expected that the particular PGR suppose to be stimulating. Predictable yet unpredictable. It is because different species of plants show different effects. I know the headache, time and cost all come together when it calls for testing species by species and PGR by PGR. 😡
I have a bottle of 5% Gibberellin in liquid form. Diluted to 100pmm to 500ppm and foliar sprayed on Stevia raubadiana, Salvia officinalis, Orchid (I do not know the species), and few other plants. They all showed slightly different growth patterns, not merely in height, as a matter of fact not all of them grew any taller than their natural speed of growth in height.
December 23, 2012 at 6:30 pm #113293
They do, here you have list of categories
(but they have for example adenine under cytokinins, which is quite questionable…)
My specialty is metabolism of isoprenoid cytokinins, I am purifying and identifying several proteins involved in their metabolism.
December 24, 2012 at 11:15 am #113296
Olchemlm probably means everything they carry is for "biochemistry". I am not familiar with many chemicals but I must agree that adenine sounds implausible to be used as a cytokinin.
The adenine I know is one of four DNA/RNA nucleotides.
Ah, no wonder you have "cis or trans" as your footer. I do not know what is isoprenoid cytokinins. Are they some types of aromatic substances? Ester of some sort.
It must be an almost impossible job to purify and identify those several proteins involved in their metabolism without advanced equipments. Do you use a PCR machine?
I have not the slightest how and what a "biochemist" does. I am trying to related myself with you with genetics. 😆 I was working with human blood, urine and faeces, and all possible testing and analysis with mammalian genes. Personally, I did not find them exciting. I got bored after a while. Maybe it is not my thing.
January 2, 2013 at 10:07 pm #113322
Olchemlm replied. They charge me 400g Triacontanol at 4,230.00 EUR (5,577.37 USD), 97%. I can forget about getting from them.
The most expensive Triacontanol I have yet to see is 18,000 USD for 400g of similar purity. I think the price is comparable to precious stones and minerals such as diamonds and gold. Frighteningly exorbitant.
Anyhow, Olchemlm cannot answer my question as to purity affecting the result. Most are only good at "selling" and not knowing what they are selling. Typical salespeople.
January 2, 2013 at 10:25 pm #113323
They know what are they selling, they just don’t know all effects.
Anyway, 5500 USD is less than 18000 USD, isn’t it? Do you need that much? Such chemicals are IMO used in at most micromolar concentrations.
January 5, 2013 at 3:44 am #113333
You are correct. I am thinking of "more" in quantity so it could be cheaper, but I did not consider that PGR can fetch such a high price. Most chemicals can last longer and more stable in powder form, so no harm of buying a little more than needed.
Another thing is I must consider is the trial and error. I think you know there will be a waste with all the testing. If one particular concentration does not work, that will be thrown away and make a new solution with higher concentration. The more is used the more is wasted when no effect is shown.
Do not forget that I am going to spray on plants and they will be in the real world situations where many aspects are not constant as in the laboratory. Even more PGR is used to spray on plants than in tissue culture.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.