## 2 Materials and Methods
Additionally, whole plants (\(n=10\)) were destructively harvested, and most recently mature leaves were subsampled and rinsed with DI water, washed in a solution of 0.5 M HCl, and again rinsed with DI water. The remaining above ground plant material was placed in a separate container for biomass determination. The root balls of the above plants were also quantified for root biomass production. This was accomplished utilizing a root washing protocol in which a light stream of water was moved longitudinally down the root ball to wash substrate away from the roots. After the entire circumference of the root ball had been washed, the root ball was subjected to a light agitation submerged in a bucket of water for three minutes. The above protocol was repeated for a minimum of eight times or until the root ball was free of the substrate. Roots and shoots were separated and dried at 70 \({}^{\circ}\)C for 72 h. Dried leaf tissue was ground in a mill (Thomas Wiley\({}^{\circledR}\) Mini-Mill; Thomas Scientific, Swedesboro, NJ, USA) with a 20-mesh (1 mm) screen and analyzed for nutrient concentrations. Total shoot dry weight (DW) was calculated by adding the oven-dry weight of the leaf tissue to the oven-dry weight of the remaining plant biomass. Leaf tissue analysis was completed by the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (NCDA) testing lab (Raleigh, NC, USA). Ground tissue samples were placed in vials containing ~8 g of tissue and delivered for analysis. Plant material (0.5 g) was treated with nitric acid (10 mLs of HNO\({}_{3}\) at 15.6 N) and was then digested in a microwave digestion system for 30 min (MARS 6 Microwaves, Matthews, NC, USA). After microwave digestion, the plant material was diluted with 50 mLs of deionized water and then vacuum filtered through acid-washed paper (Laboratory Filtration Group, Houston, TX, USA). After dilution, plant mineral tissue concentration was determined using Inductively Coupled Plasma-Optical Emission Spectrometry (ICP-OES) instrument (Spectro Arcos EOP, Mahwah, NJ, USA). More detailed descriptions, calibrations, and procedures can be found at the NCDA [13]. The third round of data (the pre-flowering stage of _C. sativa_) was taken on 7 November 2019. This data collection mirrored the first set of data and took plant growth, pH, and EC measurements as described above. Plants again received an application of MgSO4 \(\bullet\) 7 H2O (239.65 g/100 L) supplied at 500 mL per pot. The final round of data collection (the flowering stage of _C. sativa_) occurred on 5 December 2019. Data were collected on plant growth metrics as well as flower bud collection. Buds (\(n=5\)) were collected by taking the shoot apical bud (cola bud), four-terminal axillary buds, and four interior canopy buds (Figure 1). Fresh weights were taken of the composite bud samples. Details on bud harvest protocol can be found in the Supplementary Materials (Figures S1-S4). Upon bud harvest after 8 weeks of CNL induction and reproductive growth, the different bud morphologies and types were harvested for more information please reference the supplemental material and references [14; 15; 16] or supplementary citation [1; 2; 3]. Buds were then analyzed for cannabinoids and terpen (Avazyme Inc., Durham, NC, USA). Upon arrival, buds were lyophilized, ground, and a 2 g(1.98-2.02 g) sub-sample from the composite buds obtained. Analysis for cannabinoids was accomplished through high pressure liquid chromatography (SHIMADZU 8050 and 8040 Triple Quadrupole UHPLC/MS/MS analysis; Austin, TX, USA). Exact testing methods are unavailable given that Avazyme is a private company and their testing methods are proprietary. _C. sativa_ has multiple different cannabinoids and molecular types within each cannabinoid. The active forms of the cannabinoids are cannabigerol (CBG), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene (CBC), and \(\mathbf{\Delta^{9}}\)-tetrahydrocannabinol (\(\Delta^{9}\) THC). These forms are typically considered active given they have been decarboxylated.