Vegas, organic gardening is certainly not a crock and luckily, many hundreds of thousands of growers are willing to go the extra mile to produce organic fruits and vegetables. You should know, though, that you will have to study up on the nutritional requirements of citrus in general...and figure out how to provide them,organically, within the confines of a container. You are going to have to provide everything that your plant needs; citrus have some specific micro-nutrient requirements. I see nothing in the Jobe's product that disturbs me too much, though it does not have micro-nutrients, also called miner elements. Fish emulsion could assist in providing some key elements, when used in conjunction with your Jobe's. HOWEVER! It really isn't intended for container culture. There are no directions that I see on the label as to dose and frequency. Another aspect that is troublesome is that I can see how repeated use of this product would muddy up your potting mix....fill the so important pore spaces with fine particles. If you were looking for a product with a high Nitrogen analysis, you'll have to go with something other than your 'organic' products. Lots of container hobbyists resort to the commercial soluble fertilizers, while still using using organic methods for the rest of the plant care. I'm not saying that you should, but just be aware that you will have to keep up with the fert. in order to provide your citrus with what it needs. Another factor in the yellowing 'may' be the potting medium. Again, container culture is entirely different that growing in situ. Garden soil or compost added to a perfect good potting medium can result in a mucky, slow-to-drain mixture. Roots can function in that kind of environment, which is why we have learned to provide a potting mix that remains coarse textured and porous. I may not be the only one that would love to see you re-pot your plant entirely. I'd also like to warn you that moisture meters are notoriously inaccurate. Most of us have learned to rely on the most sophisticated digital equipment we have....our fingers. ;-)

Better, but I'm not a fan of anything MG; if you read the label carefully, you might see it falls short in CA, MG. Many here like Foliage Pro; but I am not a container grower. My mature producing Meyers in the field get 3 pounds per year of 18-6-12 with 2% each MG and CA, plus 1% each Iron and zinc... it is specially made for me; so unless you need 10,000 pounds or more per year, you proly have to look for something close to that. FYI, I have found it nearly impossible to over feed a Meyer; but mine are all inground. Do a search here for Patty (hoosierquilt) or Mike (Meyer_mike) and you will get better advice for containers.

There is no difference (NPK) between 9-3-6 and 6-2-4, or 3:1:2 other than the grower's hand on the measuring spoon or the frequency with which the fertilizer is applied, and it's not the fertilizer's NPK %s that determines the amount of N the plant gets, again it's the hand of the grower. 9-3-6 is an excellent all-purpose fertilizer for virtually anything grown in containers. If the grower wants to supplement the N or K, he can easily do so by adding to the fertilizer solution small amounts of urea or ammonium nitrate for nitrogen, or KCl for potassium - very simple and it adds a great deal of versatility to grower's nutritional supplementation program should the grower wish to do any fine tuning. I don't, and I've posted hundreds & hundreds of perfectly healthy and productive plants on these forums. By far, the most efficient pathway for getting nutrients into the plant is via roots, and the cuticular waxes in citrus leaves makes foliar 'feeding' relatively ineffective. Additionally, foliar feeding is most useful when the plant's growth rate is outpacing its ability to assimilate nutrients from the soil. That condition rarely occurs in container culture or when a program of regular applications of a complete fertilizer with all the essential nutrients plants normally take from the soil is in place. You're fine with your 9-3-6, April. You just need to apply more frequently and possibly at a higher concentration. Al

Actually, I didn't make that implication. I mentioned that foliar applications of nutrients have a place and can be effective, usually within a very narrow set of parameters, and to varying degrees depending on plant material, what nutrient is deficient, what you're using, how it's applied, often WHEN it's applied. A grower's program might be described as 'willy nilly' when the grower uses foliar applications of nutrients w/o answers to critical questions and especially when they don't even understand the questions, the answers to which determine efficacy. That's simply flying blind, and makes willy nilly is a fair adjective. Foliar aps of nutrients can't/don't work unless there is actually a deficiency of the nutrients you are supplying. In the case where multiple nutrients are being supplied, it's possible that a deficiency mighty be corrected at the same time a toxicity is being introduced because you're supplying a nutrient that is already amply available, which means that more of same has only the potential to limit. A well-reasoned approach to nutrition would find the grower answering a number of questions related to the potential to improve things or add to the number of factors that are potentially limiting. Absent tissue and or soil analysis, if foliar applications have a notable value when used on plants that can actually absorb nutrients from foliar applications, it lies more in its ability to act as an aid in identifying a deficiency than actually relieving one, but the act of applying a number of nutrients all at the same time eliminates any potential help from that quarter because when all is done, you won't likely have fixed the issue and still won't know which nutrient applied. Linda Chalker-Scott is a horticultural scientist with a PhD. She is probably most noted for helping the growing community by debunking horticultural myths, one of which is the assertion that foliar applications are an effective/efficient way to provide plant nutrition. How well and how thoroughly we qualify our offerings with facts rather than observations/statements that are often very subjective or biased serves not only to illustrate our grasp of the topic, it also serves to keep our credibility intact. When we actually have the best interest of the grower at the forefront and are providing reliable, well-qualified information, what sells it is our credibility. I've always limited myself to operating only within the limits of my knowledge, which is why whenever anything I say is challenged, I have all the facts I need at my disposal to back my offering. I never have to rely on selling my offering by using statements like "It works for me" or it might not be the best way, but ........ Dr Scott takes on the topic of Foliar Feeding, here. If you take the time to peruse her offering, you'll find her and my qualifying information amazingly close to the same, so it's not as though I'm a lone voice in the wilderness on this topic or operating beyond the limits of my knowledge. The crux of the issue is, it's very unlikely you'll gain any real traction via foliar feeding, and more likely you'll end up worse off than when you started, even if the plant ends up looking prettier (I qualified that statement above, too). I hope Dr Scott's offering helps us get to the point where we needn't keep belaboring this and similar points. Al