Why flushing is a myth yes and no explained!

[BeaverHuntr]

I find that when I hang whole plants that by the time I get the buds manicured and in a jar half the resin is sitting on the table.

When I cut into branches and trim/manicure while the plants are still wet my buds look pristine when they go into jars. The resin glands are not nearly as delicate when wet. Also the amount of handling when trimming wet and in smaller branches is a fraction of drying a whole plant.

I think that it is not so much a whole plant that makes for a good taste as it is a slow dry... although drying a plant whole with sugar leaves on will help a plant dry slower... that is not the only way possible to get a good slow dry.

I find that 2 weeks minimum for dry is best... The longer you can keep the buds damp the better. High humidity for the first 3-5 days does wonders. Obviously, you run risk of mold.

When I was a noob I was hanging whole plants... I've gone back and forth.. but these days i cut into 8-12 inch branches and fully manicure. Dry over 2 weeks... it's not the best, but it is my preferred balance of being easy and effective (quality).

Fitting 4+ lbs of buds (dried) in its post harvest state in a 3x2x5 cabinet requires a sacrifice or two.... i'm still dreaming of a warehouse.

I live in AZ with like 16% humidity at all times..But maybe thats why hanging the whole plant works for me so well because it gives me "slow dry" especially for having such low humidity by hanging the whole plant it takes 7-10 days here in AZ to dry and be ready for the jars

 

[WIskyDick]

I live in AZ with like 16% humidity at all times..But maybe thats why hanging the whole plant works for me so well because it gives me "slow dry" especially for having such low humidity by hanging the whole plant it takes 7-10 days here in AZ to dry and be ready for the jars

16% rh? That seems awfully dry to me I have added a small humidifier to keep a room closer 65-70% rh to keep a good long dry. Even at 40%rh my buds dry up tooooooo fast! 16% for me would crisp my plants into dust when I touch them! (in my experiences & most of everyone ik) not saying your wrong. but maybe for a whole plant hang and dry 16% works but seems very dry to me even for hanging the whole thing untrimmed....?

 

[Ninjabowler]

Sure I agree, the first post is spot on.

Reminds me of girdling, remember that old columbian and mexican gold. They stripped the stalk right out in the field, so the pot would oxidize faster. And the
chlorophyll will leave more quickly.

This is turning into a good thread, lots of pro wizdom at this table. Nice to see someone with some backstory supporting the OP.

 

[masterbasians]

hey guys, im not trying to say i know some shit, but im just kinda puttin in my 2 cents so dont hate on me for it
so, im just kinda reading inputs, i thought the pyramid was very logical in some ways but not in others
such as, u refer to the "slaves" but i would consider it like a co-owner in a business
because, the plant works as a whole, which is why i like a pyramid as a reference, but its not like the slaves don't want to take the nutrients, it's like, if u worked for a company that u had some peice of ownership in, you want it to succeed, because that makes yourself succeed as well.
but i agree that there would be an example of 100k of stone moving through the plants at a time, because the plant will take what it will USE, not necessarily what it needs. I mean it's a living thing, we are not MAKING it grow, it will grow outside unattended, but i beleive we are trying to HELP it grow the best way we believe.

so with that said, the plant taking everything that it will use, what happens to npk, i've seen reference to spraying nutes on your buds and then smoking them, to see if u taste a difference. does it stay npk in the buds or does it break down and convert to buds, sugars, leaves, stock, etc.?
and after its npk but before its buds, what is it?

 

[Ninjabowler]

hey guys, im not trying to say i know some shit, but im just kinda puttin in my 2 cents so dont hate on me for it
so, im just kinda reading inputs, i thought the pyramid was very logical in some ways but not in others
such as, u refer to the "slaves" but i would consider it like a co-owner in a business
because, the plant works as a whole, which is why i like a pyramid as a reference, but its not like the slaves don't want to take the nutrients, it's like, if u worked for a company that u had some peice of ownership in, you want it to succeed, because that makes yourself succeed as well.
but i agree that there would be an example of 100k of stone moving through the plants at a time, because the plant will take what it will USE, not necessarily what it needs. I mean it's a living thing, we are not MAKING it grow, it will grow outside unattended, but i beleive we are trying to HELP it grow the best way we believe.

so with that said, the plant taking everything that it will use, what happens to npk, i've seen reference to spraying nutes on your buds and then smoking them, to see if u taste a difference. does it stay npk in the buds or does it break down and convert to buds, sugars, leaves, stock, etc.?
and after its npk but before its buds, what is it?

And then this happens?? Oh boy lol

 

[akula]

masterbasians if you were to look more in depth into the xylem/phloem vascular system you would find out they are exactly that, slaves. But ok if slaves is a bit too hard of a term for you, you can say co-owner if you want. A co-owner that has one simple labor intensive job that others tell him how hard to and fast to do that job. But politically correctness and all.....

I made it pretty simplistic in my analogy before, but the fact of the matter is that I sort of combined the xylem and phloem into one group that I called the slaves.....err or co-owners. The fact of the matter is that they are two separate distinct systems. The xylem system brings the nutes to the leaves to produce carbs and sugars that are then transported by the phloem system to the sinks through fluid dynamics. The the calyxes (buds) dont do any processing, they only build. They take the raw materials and build the reproductive systems. The ultimate goal is to combine these with outside production (pollen) obviously. No storage (even short term) is done in the calyxes. The raw materials are used immediately. Your macro and micro nutrients have already be converted to energy long before they even get to the sinks.

 

[BeaverHuntr]

16% rh? That seems awfully dry to me I have added a small humidifier to keep a room closer 65-70% rh to keep a good long dry. Even at 40%rh my buds dry up tooooooo fast! 16% for me would crisp my plants into dust when I touch them! (in my experiences & most of everyone ik) not saying your wrong. but maybe for a whole plant hang and dry 16% works but seems very dry to me even for hanging the whole thing untrimmed....?

Yeah man its that dry up here in the desert. I was always taught to jar them up when the buds feel "dry to the touch" I never get over dried buds and I do know what over dried buds feel like because my very first grow I over dried my buds, but maybe I will try to throw a couple humidifiers in the room and see if that changes anything. I have no complaints about my finished buds though they are always sticky icky and dense after a 14 day cure. Anyways I'll look into raising the R/H.

 

[Ninjabowler]

masterbasians if you were to look more in depth into the xylem/phloem vascular system you would find out they are exactly that, slaves. But ok if slaves is a bit too hard of a term for you, you can say co-owner if you want. A co-owner that has one simple labor intensive job that others tell him how hard to and fast to do that job. But politically correctness and all.....

I made it pretty simplistic in my analogy before, but the fact of the matter is that I sort of combined the xylem and phloem into one group that I called the slaves.....err or co-owners. The fact of the matter is that they are two separate distinct systems. The xylem system brings the nutes to the leaves to produce carbs and sugars that are then transported by the phloem system to the sinks through fluid dynamics. The the calyxes (buds) dont do any processing, they only build. They take the raw materials and build the reproductive systems. The ultimate goal is to combine these with outside production (pollen) obviously. No storage (even short term) is done in the calyxes. The raw materials are used immediately. Your macro and micro nutrients have already be converted to energy long before they even get to the sinks.

Nice post, good science thanks,
So then since the leaves as you say do the energy convertion and move the necessary food to buds. I would assume they store excess useable nutrients aswell correct or not?

Another question, are you talking about the fan leaves or the leaves covered in tricombes that are in the bud? I know they will both convert energy but which one is the main provider of the carbs and sugars? Do they have different functions or are they primarily the same function? Thanks

 

[Ninjabowler]

Also one more thing, Akula, if you say that the reproductive calyxes store no food storage then there can never be a build up of excess nutrients in the bud....no way no how?

 

[jpill]

Question...what if you have a plant that is as green as the day you flipped her to flower. Lush and healthy green. Never dropped a leaf without it being rubbed off. No sign of age or deterioration at all and looks like itll stay growing way past the due date of your already nicely swollen harvest...still no two week water run to kill her a little bit? Comments

water molecules have a weak bond to fertilizer molecules so flushing with plain water is not really the way to achieve what you want. IMO you are better off flushing with molasses Or an omri rated sweetener like ("Sugaree" from cutting edge) Or ("final" from Bloom yellow bottles) Or even nutrients at quarter strength. A lot of people don't realize that you gain ALOT of weight in the last weeks of the plants life.

 

[jpill]

Also one more thing, Akula, if you say that the reproductive calyxes store no food storage then there can never be a build up of excess nutrients in the bud....no way no how?

the plants roots take up what nutrients it wants it doesn't "store" any nutrients per say.

 

[Ninjabowler]

water molecules have a weak bond to fertilizer molecules so flushing with plain water is not really the way to achieve what you want. IMO you are better off flushing with molasses Or an omri rated sweetener like ("Sugaree" from cutting edge) Or ("final" from Bloom yellow bottles) Or even nutrients at quarter strength. A lot of people don't realize that you gain ALOT of weight in the last weeks of the plants life.

Thank you, i was thinking about a banana compound sugar sub since my roots are well off or just quarter strength. Then running water up unto chop for 6-7 days. Sweet.

 

[akula]

Lo

Also one more thing, Akula, if you say that the reproductive calyxes store no food storage then there can never be a build up of excess nutrients in the bud....no way no how?

The calyxes don't use raw nutes, so what you mean by "food" is the plants processed products they use internally. And yes the xylems do not go to the sinks. And yes the calyxes are not storage, the "food" that has been previously processed and delivered by phleoms is never stored because it would break down too quickly is used to build when it is delivered. Now before you make any claim from this statement, you must first be able to define a calyex and know how they are defined in what we refer to as bud.

As I said earlier, this is not a topic we can not just give a quick tl;dr and have everyone go....oh yeah I get it now.

 

[Ninjabowler]

D. Storage of food

Fleshy leaves of Indian aloe, Portulaca and fleshy scale leaves of onion store food materials and water for the future of the plants. Fleshy and suc*culent leaves of xerophytic plants grow*ing in desert area always store a huge quantity of water, mucilage and food materials.

dioxide and water to simple glucose sugars in the presence of sunlight. This food is used (and stored) by the plant to grow and reproduce. As plants are able to produce "food" they are normally

^^ these two quotes seem to disagree with what you say of the leaf not storing food. Id rather not argue because nothing is accomplished through yelling and this is quoted from the internet so the validity my be limited.

The reasons i figured that plants would store nutrients in leaves and excess nutrient are just visual observations. When the plant stretches sometimes it can turn some of the leaves yellow. This to me seems like its useing some of its stored energy from leaves.

Oohhh my lights just came on...

The other reason is when theres an over abundance of nitrogen in the fertilizer the leaves turn dark green. Also when theres a deficiency they seem to be getting sucked dry of their nitrogen and chloropyhill in lower zones, i would think..to be used in other more pertinant proccesses.

Another observation relevant would be during a flush period where the leaves all seem like theyre sucked dry.

Thats why i asked...im no plant scientist myself, im just trying to figure it all out.
*edit - this relates to jpills comment*

 

[k0ijn]

This thread is a mess.

At least Akula & jpill use scientific research and publications to support their conclusions.


First of all, this thread is started on a fallacious basis.

We're talking about PRE-HARVEST FLUSHING here. Not flushing.
You have to first of all make a distinction between pre-harvest flushing and flushing in general.
It seems like the OP doesn't quite know what he is talking about.
He is correct in some conclusions and utterly mistaken in a lot of other conclusions.

Back to pre-harvest flushing vs. flushing;
One is good for nothing, the other can be used to clear a salt-buildup, error correction etc.

The easiest way to deconstruct the pro pre-harvest flushing theories is to focus on the nutrients, trans-location and usage.
The calyxes do not store nutrients.
There is a huge misunderstanding with regards to this topic.
People think that the nutrients used in growing automatically go to the calyxes (buds) and build up, leaving you with harsh tasting bud if you don't flush.
There is absolutely no proof of this being true.
In fact, scientific evidence shows that nutrients are stored primarily in the roots, stem(s) and leaves (fan leaves in particular).

Some nutrients are mobile, others aren't. That is why some parts of the plant reacts strongly to a deficiency, since the plant can't just move more nutrients to the distressed areas, it needs another feeding to solve the deficiency.

I get what jpill is saying, and he is somewhat correct in saying that no storage really occurs.
Since trans-location and usage of nutrients is very fluid and organic.
The only time you will see a 'storage' of nutrients in cannabis is if you overfeed.
And we're talking a proper abundance here, not just 5-10% overfeeding.


This subject has been discussed endlessly and it seems like we will never reach a consensus.

On the one side we have people who trust what science, logic and facts spell out.
On the other side we have people who will do it the way they always have done it and don't care about scientific research or facts.

That is fine, they can do whatever they want to. Anyone can do whatever they want to.

But don't claim pre-harvest flushing improves weed when you have zero proof.
It's in the same fallacy group as people who urge you to believe anything with evidence.


I will quote a post I've posted several times, in numerous different threads.
In which I explain the controversy of pre-harvest flushing in detail.
It's a long read, but if you're interested in the discussion you should read it.

All the information is out there, you can find it with a simple search of the forums.

But just to rest the case I've gathered up the points and links in one post (this is quotes of what I've written):




... I find it funny how you can still have unanswered questions.
Have you read all my posts?

The big debate in this thread is about _pre-harvest flushing_.
Not about leaching in general (leaching is flushing but is NOT the same as pre-harvest flushing), which has been explained by all of us against pre-harvest flushing many times, can be useful.
Leaching/flushing in general is thought of as to be:

Correcting grow medium errors.
Clearing salt buildup.
And just a general error corrector for solutions or medium in both hydro and soil.

Leaching is used by most growers, because problems tend to occur, even in the most perfect setups.


What we (especially Harrekin, SirLance and myself) in this thread who are against pre-harvest flushing state, is that pre-harvest flushing has not been proven to work for any of the reasons pre-harvest flushers claim they do it.
Many people claim improved taste, odour, yield, less harsh bud, better burning bud, better ash (whiter, cleaner) etc. etc.
They claim all kinds of wondrous things, which are apparently all thanks to the pre-harvest flush.

Although people claim this, there is no proof for any of it.
There are anecdotes of what people have done, there are stories, there are stories from authors (such as Cervantes, who is known to take information from other writes / growers and post it in his books).

What I have posted in this thread is a scientific study on the nutrient storage in plants, particularly ryegrass.

The study is very comprehensive and explains rather well about how nutrients are stored, where they are stored and what happens with the plants when nutrient levels are too high or too low (abundance versus. deficiency).

I will post the image from the study again showing this:





This explains a lot about the points in the discussion about pre-harvest flushing / leaching.

The study says that "growth requirements are generally achieved before high concentrations are attained".
This is a very important point.
Especially since this is about abundance versus deficiency (the optimal is 'critical').

What this study shows quite clearly is that if you underfeed the plants, the yield is affected quite heavily.
But what it also shows is that nutrient stored in the various parts of the plants change a lot depending on the levels on nutrients available (strength of the solution).

Since most experienced growers don't overfeed their plants but keep well measured levels of PPM, they can stray close to the 'critical' nutrient supply, giving their plants as much as possible without overfeeding or underfeeding.

We are not saying overfeeding is correct, we're not talking about overfeeding neither, we feed our plants as close to the perfect ranges of PPM as possible.

The points of Gastanker was that since plants store nutrients, and nutrients are stored all over the plant (including in the calyxes (buds)) and causing a deficiency will cause the plant to 'eat away' at it's nutrient storage, you will end up with less nutrients in the calyxes, therefore less nutrients in your final product, and the smoke will be less harsh.
You will not end up with 'chem bud' so to speak.

This theory is unfounded, and the study I posted contradicts this theory.
First of all nutrients are not stored in the calyxes so there is nothing to flush out.
That in itself should be the end of it but I'll continue explaining.

The study says plants are high efficient, they can consume nutrients before high concentrations are attained, and since none of us against pre-harvest are overfeeding, we are not achieving 'too high' concentrations of nutrients.
None of us have 'chem bud', we have all tried flushing, and not flushing, we don't see a difference.
We might even be receiving higher yields (which none of us have recorded however) if the study is the be correct (nutrient levels in the plant greatly affect yield).
What we do see a difference in is when you dry & cure properly versus dry & cure wrongly.
Drying & curing is probably the single most important step in any grow, it can cause mold, it can cause joy and it can be a pain in the arse.
But drying and curing is where your weed either ages like a good wine or crumbles, molds up and becomes useless.
Most people fail in drying & curing, many are somewhat successful, few master it.
I for sure don't master it, I'm trying to however, I invest in drying & curing equipment quite a lot and I am very careful.
That doesn't stop mold from setting in from time to time though, due to slipup or assistant error.


I'm not saying I don't want people to flush / leach their plants if they have problems with nutrient levels, salt buildup or anything else.
I'm not saying that you can't do what you want with your own grow either.

Where my problem lies, is with people trying to get other people to pre-harvest flush / leach.
When they claim all these myths about improvement of: taste, odour, colour, ash, harshness etc. it irritates me that people are just left to believe whatever this person writes, with no scientific backing, no factual information presented.

This is why I post these studies, why I try to show people the facts.
There are logical explanations to all those things.
Bad tasting weed, harshness and ash can all be improved by doing a proper dry & cure.
Most people have these problems because they do not know how to properly dry & cure.



To conclude, I don't believe in the surplus nutrients / substances theory regarding normally PPM'ed weed (as close to 'critical' as possible without overfeeding nor underfeeding) contra flushed / leached weed.
This is the theory brought up by Gastanker who said that you'll get a surplus of nutrients if you do not pre-harvest flush your plants.
There is absolutely no evidence for this, neither did Gastanker provide any evidence.

Plants which are in a deficiency do not 'eat away' the excess nutrients in calyxes, there are no excess nutrients or stored nutrients in the calyxes.
The plants basically eat themselves (yellowing leaves, withering leaves) to stay alive.
I don't believe that pre-harvest flushing / leaching your weed will give you better tasting, smelling and looking weed.
I don't believe you will yield more either.

In fact, I trust quite the opposite, I "believe" that keeping nutrient levels proper all the way to harvest, is the best way to get the most out of your plants humanly possible.
I quote-mark believe, because it in fact has nothing to do with belief.
It has to do with facts and whether you value logic, reason and evidence or not.
That is the great thing about science, you don't have to believe in it for it to be true.

When you pre-harvest flush / leach your plants, you starve your plants at the most important phase of growth, late blooom.
You cause deficiency, which leads to (if we are to believe science) decreased productivity.
And most importantly, all the myths about pre-harvest flushing / leaching seem to be false.
Not one scientific piece of evidence has been provided by the pro pre-harvest flushing people.
You cannot find one study that proves any of pre-harvest flushings proclaimed positives.

Pre-harvest flushing is a myth. It does not do what it pretends it does or what people proclaim it does.
It would take me hours of typing to repeat everything that I and others have written regarding pre-harvest flushing.
I have posted a lot of scientific information, evidence from research, studies and journals.
Pre-harvest flushing has been thoroughly discredited by science and by people who have done side-by-side comparisons.
All if this information is still on these forums and can be found with a simple search.


Suffice to say that pre-harvest flushing does nothing of the things it says it does.
The easiest fact to understand:

Nutrients are not stored in the calyxes. There literally is nothing to 'flush out'.

Those who believe in pre-harvest flushing make a lot of arguments but have no proof, no scientifically backed up evidence.
And the fact is that this is science, namely biology & chemistry.
You can't go wrong following scientifically proven methods.
There's a reason why we use science to determine the best way of doing 'stuff'.

In the end it comes down to whether you understand the difference between facts and beliefs.

Just to sum up with some references and sources:

Books & Publications:

Marijuana Chemistry;
Genetics, Processing and Potency

Cannabis and Cannabinoids:
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Potential

Plant nutrition - from genetic engineering to field practice.


Research and testing:

montanabiotech.com

http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/



I use sciencedirect.com and ncbi.nlm.nih.gov to look up publications.


There are a lot more references and source I could link to/quote/name.
But it would be a hell of a job naming them all.
I just named some of the most respected (peer reviewed scientific publications only) ones here, you can find loads more by searching on ncbi, sciencedirect or google in fact.

 

[Ninjabowler]

^^ nice post kOjin. Your kinda right, this tread is a little of a mess but its still in the direction of the OP. Also my question line is leading somewhere just so you know. I just noticed though that you stated that nutrients are stored in roots, stem(s), leaves (primarily fan leaves) but then said that that you could see what jpill was saying and no extra nutrients are stored. Most of the growers i know feed way too high ppm, and as for saying that anyone knows the optimal nutrient doseage, if there was say twenty dip sticks in the plant we would know what optimal is, theres is not twenty dip sticks so over feeding in one area at certain points in the plants development is almost unavoidable when constantly adding fertilizer especially chemical fertilizer right?

 

[AltarNation]

fwiw, my first harvest got hung up in big pieces with all leaves, took a solid 12 days to dry. I was worried about it at the time, but the smoke was amazing. Even before curing it was not harsh at all. No flush.

My second harvest took 3 days to dry. It was trimmed up before hand to try something different. No flush here either. It smoked comparably worse. Significantly worse even.

I really have nothing to say about whether or not you SHOULD flush, but I will say with some certainty that long dry time is better and essentially cures the bud a good bit. Manage the humidity and keep the air moving and it's not going to mold. 12 days is fine and dandy. 3 days was like no cure at all.

 

[akula]

^^ these two quotes seem to disagree with what you say of the leaf not storing food. Id rather not argue because nothing is accomplished through yelling and this is quoted from the internet so the validity my be limited.

Was that directed toward me? Where did I ever say leaves did not have storage capacity for wither nutes or carbs/sugars? The leaves are conversion factories that take the micro/macro nutes and convert them into carbs sugars. To some degree the leaves will store both, but they are not the primary storage units, those are stems and stalks. The reason they are considered primary is because the are the direct connection links to the sinks.

Now I have a suspicion you may be a bit confused about what constitutes a calyx. Or maybe that response was not directed toward me.

**edit I just noticed your edit and guess it wasn't directed at me.

Anyways I also noticed you asked this

The other reason is when theres an over abundance of nitrogen in the fertilizer the leaves turn dark green. Also when theres a deficiency they seem to be getting sucked dry of their nitrogen and chloropyhill in lower zones, i would think..to be used in other more pertinant proccesses.

Another observation relevant would be during a flush period where the leaves all seem like theyre sucked dry.

Yes plants will cannibalize themselves in times of drought/famine for preservation. But remember, the leaves are energy producers. That means they use the micro/macro nutrients as to produce carbs/sugars for use in the sinks.

Take a look at this very....very simplified illustration it might help understanding what I am talking about.



Notice how the xylem do not connect to the reproduction sink? Now they call the leaves and roots sinks because they are sinks. In our case they are the main sinks in the veg stage, in flowering they quickly become less important as a sink (to where the end of the life, you will see leaves start to die no matter what you do).

And in case anyone is confused at this point, the phloem transport energy made in the leaves...aka carbs/sugars.

 

[WIskyDick]

Yeah man its that dry up here in the desert. I was always taught to jar them up when the buds feel "dry to the touch" I never get over dried buds and I do know what over dried buds feel like because my very first grow I over dried my buds, but maybe I will try to throw a couple humidifiers in the room and see if that changes anything. I have no complaints about my finished buds though they are always sticky icky and dense after a 14 day cure. Anyways I'll look into raising the R/H.

I just find that when I raised my RH and keep them moist longer I get better taste and more weight at the end. I to dry them til they are dry to the touch, but I also feel that there is wrong conditions to use the (dry to the touch) timing. If it's too low RH and hot I have experienced that they can dry out from middle more than the eye or fingers can feel just losing a bit too much moisture to fast. I preferably like it moderately cooler and with a RH of %55 -%60 seems to be optimal for how I dry and cure. But drying and curing is like reading a MEN's Health Magazine finding the best work out, every month there is a new work out plan for the best abs!..lol so take it for what it's worth. I'm sure your buds are proper and headie! with 6,000 posts I'm sure you know more than I do.. Just My two cents.

 

[k0ijn]

^^ nice post kOjin. Your kinda right, this tread is a little of a mess but its still in the direction of the OP. Also my question line is leading somewhere just so you know. I just noticed though that you stated that nutrients are stored in roots, stem(s), leaves (primarily fan leaves) but then said that that you could see what jpill was saying and no extra nutrients are stored. Most of the growers i know feed way too high ppm, and as for saying that anyone knows the optimal nutrient doseage, if there was say twenty dip sticks in the plant we would know what optimal is, theres is not twenty dip sticks so over feeding in one area at certain points in the plants development is almost unavoidable when constantly adding fertilizer especially chemical fertilizer right?

We're talking about context here.
Nutrients are taken up by the plant as ions and then goes through changes during the translocation and eventual processes which the plants use them for.
What I meant with regards to jpill is that your argument seemed to be faced towards the production of sugars and not the retention of nutrients.
And in either case; Nutrients are not stored per se.
Nutrient uptake and conversion is very rapid, in normally fed gardens you will rarely see a nutrient storage in the plant.
Nutrient storage only really occurs during overfeeding, especially in new growth.
This is when a plant can retain as much as up to 10 times the amount of nutrients it would normally have in it's material.
This differs of course from roots to stems and so on, but you can see the picture I linked for more info.

No it's not unavoidable to refrain from attaining an abundance of nutrients in the plant.
This goes back to the misinformation and misconceptions surrounding flushing and pre-harvest flushing.
You don't need to flush anything unless some sort of error or accident happens.

I'd say that those who grow in soil use flushing rather frequently.
Not pre-harvest flushing. But flushing.
Because the soil can retain some unused salts and other minerals which will then build up over time.

In hydroponics this is usually not a problem if you just change the water regularly between grows.
It's all down to hygiene really, if you clean your pots and equipment properly then you will never run in to such a problem (unless of course an accident happens, like a nutrient spill from the container etc).
And again, please remember that it's not really a problem a lot of people run in to.
Most people I know don't overfeed or have salt buildups etc.
The optimal nutrient dose is something you learn with experience and by looking at the plants.
It's not that hard really, it's just down to; pay attention to details.

And I'd like to point out that there really isn't any difference between chem fertilizer and whatever other fert you may use.
Nitrogen ions are nitrogen ions, and just because it's synthetically produced does not mean it sticks more to the plant or your equipment.

Whether there's a difference in how the plant grows and performs on synthetic nutrients vs. organic is another discussion.