What's new
Bud Builders - Making Friends, Growing Cannabis

Register a free account today to become a Bud Builders member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on our site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox.

Join the fun and make some friends!

Mythbusters

Maybe start out with the obvious ones. The buffer one we just talked about is a good one. Dark period before flip.

I'm sure a quick tour through youtube will yield you mounds of material.
 
GoodShit97 said:
Id like to know how the electrics of the earth clean soil.🤣🤦🏻‍

Thank you good sir 🙏🏼
Click to expand...
I'm all over that lol.

You made me spit out a little coffee.

I think for my first trick I am going to get into the value of biologics in the root zone. Do they help, or is it another expensive snake oil bottle on the shelf?

I have quite a few ideas after that, but some of these tests can be stacked together. For example the effect of spectrum left vs right side of tent.
 
Moe.Red said:
I'm all over that lol.

You made me spit out a little coffee.

I think for my first trick I am going to get into the value of biologics in the root zone. Do they help, or is it another expensive snake oil bottle on the shelf?

I have quite a few ideas after that, but some of these tests can be stacked together. For example the effect of spectrum left vs right side of tent.
Click to expand...
That guy was smoking something other than weed lol.
 
Moe.Red said:
no doubt. A cocktail of meds for sure. I really wish he would have come back sober, I wanted to talk to him!
Click to expand...
Did you ever figure out how to influence Brix% ?...DrGreen55 seems to have gone on a hiatus, I have this tool...all bright and shinny, then there's my new garlic press, bought just because.......and when I do use it I get low numbers I'd like to see them increased........but they sit idle, looking at me all sad like....
 
New Mythbuster Q.......

Do mothers lose vitality after a series of cuts have been taken from her? If so how long before she should be put out to pasture and flowered? Can first cuts from a new mother be used as a next generation mother for the eventual drop in vitality the original mother may experience if she does lose vitality?
 
Rootsruler said:
New Mythbuster Q.......

Do mothers lose vitality after a series of cuts have been taken from her? If so how long before she should be put out to pasture and flowered? Can first cuts from a new mother be used as a next generation mother for the eventual drop in vitality the original mother may experience if she does lose vitality?
Click to expand...
Excellent question I clone clones alll the time
 
Rootsruler said:
New Mythbuster Q.......

Do mothers lose vitality after a series of cuts have been taken from her? If so how long before she should be put out to pasture and flowered? Can first cuts from a new mother be used as a next generation mother for the eventual drop in vitality the original mother may experience if she does lose vitality?
Click to expand...
I’m on the second set of clones. ATM. But nothing setup to study.
 
Rootsruler said:
New Mythbuster Q.......

Do mothers lose vitality after a series of cuts have been taken from her? If so how long before she should be put out to pasture and flowered? Can first cuts from a new mother be used as a next generation mother for the eventual drop in vitality the original mother may experience if she does lose vitality?
Click to expand...
I clone of the mothers, flip them, clone of the kids, flip them and continue but after a while adding new strains something has to give so out with the old and in with the new.....its sad to see them go...like saying goodbye to an old car but there's always something worthy to fill its place.
 
Pipecarver said:
Did you ever figure out how to influence Brix% ?...DrGreen55 seems to have gone on a hiatus, I have this tool...all bright and shinny, then there's my new garlic press, bought just because.......and when I do use it I get low numbers I'd like to see them increased........but they sit idle, looking at me all sad like....
Click to expand...
In short, does not react like I was lead to believe. I think you saw this too - leaves that are dying off have high brix.

Seems like a maple tree going colorful in the fall - they say the colors are due to the carbs trapped in the leaves.

I have a really really healthy plant in flower right now, and 10 is about all I can muster. But then grab a leaf that is dying off, and it might be 20.

I think we need to throw away the dying leaves as the info is not useful. Trying to get my healthy stuff from 10 to 12+ is where I am at right now.
 
Rootsruler said:
New Mythbuster Q.......

Do mothers lose vitality after a series of cuts have been taken from her? If so how long before she should be put out to pasture and flowered? Can first cuts from a new mother be used as a next generation mother for the eventual drop in vitality the original mother may experience if she does lose vitality?
Click to expand...
I like the question.

How would you put a number or measurement on vitality? How to design this test?
 
Moe.Red said:
I like the question.

How would you put a number or measurement on vitality? How to design this test?
Click to expand...
What if we break it down into sub myths? Does the actual mother itself change as far as growing vitality? IOW, if I had flowered the mother after I took initial cuts from her as an established mother versus taking 10 sets of cuts from her then flowering, would we see any appreciable difference in the performance metrics we look for as far as THC/Cannabinoid content in the mother itself? Does age of the mother change it's vegetative vitality? Does the age of the mother play a role in those same performance metrics and is there a cutoff in those same metrics that we can quantify as the point of diminishing returns?
 
Last edited:
Rootsruler said:
What if we break it down into sub myths? Does the actual mother itself change as far as growing vitality? IOW, if I had flowered the mother after I took initial cuts from her as an established mother versus taking 10 sets of cuts from her then flowering, would we see any appreciable difference in the performance metrics we look for as far as THC/Cannabinoid content in the mother itself? Does the age of the mother play a role in those same performance metrics and is there a cutoff in those same metrics that we can quantify as the point of diminishing returns?
Click to expand...
My gut tells me yes it does. I have read that it does. I've never tested it. Seems interesting.

Also, I do tissue culture. A side quest would be can you "re-invigorate" an old plant by using TC on the apical meristem and just getting the stem cells? I have also read this is possible, but again never done a side by side.

🤔
 
Well I sure lost vitality after becoming a mother. 🤣 I think it probably depends how many cuts and how often you take them... they obviously need time to recover. I think if you overdo it, they get shocked and stop growing to heal. When I used to keep mamas of the swamp monster and heavily clone, they would look sad for a week or so, then look like they went into overdrive and pushed a bunch of new growth... rinse and repeat till you have a bush lol. Just like a heavy defoliation, they look pissed and sad, then have a burst of growth... depending when you do it of course.
 
There are some traits I have found with clones or mothers that have been around for many years. I have a plant I have ran for 5 years and it does just fine time and time again. Regardless of mother or clone. I had an old cut of an OG I think it was platnium OG. Secondly I have a 20 plus year old cut of SSH. The first trait I have identified it they do not clone well and the roots are less than ideal. I believe the term that has been applied to this is genetic drift.
 
So after a quick google search the non scientific consensus seems to be that, theoretically, your mother plant should not lose it's vitality as long as you keep her pruned, fed correctly and she lives in the correct environment. What will reduce vitality are pests and disease which are supposed to mutate genetics along with carrying weaker DNA to clones so the suggestion is that mothers need to be on a periodic pest/disease mitigation program.

Successive clone cut sessions will not yield inferior clones as long as the mother is given the time in the conditions illustrated above to heal and re-establish itself.

I'll continue looking for any papers or scientific studies, not just in cannabis but in general plant biology to see if this is a general trend. It could also be type specific as perennial and annual plant biology probably has a hand in this.
 
Last edited:
Moe.Red said:
My gut tells me yes it does. I have read that it does. I've never tested it. Seems interesting.

Also, I do tissue culture. A side quest would be can you "re-invigorate" an old plant by using TC on the apical meristem and just getting the stem cells? I have also read this is possible, but again never done a side by side.

🤔
Click to expand...
Is there a way to take and keep tissue culture's around without specialized tools?
 
Anthem275 said:
There are some traits I have found with clones or mothers that have been around for many years. I have a plant I have ran for 5 years and it does just fine time and time again. Regardless of mother or clone. I had an old cut of an OG I think it was platnium OG. Secondly I have a 20 plus year old cut of SSH. The first trait I have identified it they do not clone well and the roots are less than ideal. I believe the term that has been applied to this is genetic drift.
Click to expand...
Genetic drift doesn't happen to individual plants. What's happened to your plant, if genetic, was a mutation. But it might be more likely that the plant picked up some virus or other pathogen over the years that weakens it in that specific way.

Genetic drift is when the gene frequencies of a population change over time, but not due to environmental pressure.
 
ZombieRider said:
Is there a way to take and keep tissue culture's around without specialized tools?
Click to expand...
The issue with TC for most growers is the sterile workspace requirements. Most folks don't have access to a laminar flow hood. Other than that, the rest is not bad.

There are some little kits out there, have not tried them. I use a rather large setup made for mushrooms.
 
Farmerdave said:
Guess it would depend on your location, Here in Michigan in the greenhouse we use supplemental lighting on cloudy days. I believe the tomato growers in greenhouse hang side lights down to get light into the canopy.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking more in regards to tent growers where supplemental lighting introduces new problems like heat. Outdoor grows have the luxury of not having their environments contained. One of the outdoor farms I worked at used to supplement their hoop houses with CFL's strung across.

Does the added lighting fill out flower sites lower in the canopy that the initial lighting is not able to sufficiently supply with the photons it needs to fully flower? If it does add some additional dry weight to the final harvest is the amount worth the added cost?

In my case, I currently have two 275w COB/Quantum boards I am currently using for veg/flower in a 5 x 5 tent. I'm seriously considering upgrading to a bar style light that should put out around 700w at 100%. Would I be able to use the quantum boards as sidelighting?

I made some support bars to hang the net from and help brace the tent. I could hang light bars across each of those bars and have lighting coming from all four sides lighting up the interior of the canopy from all angles. Would it be worth the cost for the added yield?

These:


Installed on these:

04092023 defol side post.jpg
 
Peer reviewed paper on sub canopy lighting @Moe.Red


Short answer? The study saw a 15% - 20% increase in yield volume overall along with an increase in terpene and cannabinoid profiles if you use red-blue or red-blue-green light spectrums.

The study also placed the lights 2 cm above soil line. As far as I understand it, the leaf tops photosynthesize while the leaf bottoms are where transpiration occurs. If this is the case then it would hold that placing lights below the leaf tops is counterintuitive to what we're trying to achieve. Placing the horizontally placed light bars 6" - 9" below the canopy line angled downward so that they are hitting the leaf tops in the undercanopy would seem like the logical place to place them for most effective photon delivery to that part of the plant. Obviously as the plants grow taller you're going to want to be able to move the SCL to best expose the plants to as much light and to as many leaves as possible. SCL placement would depend on if you are growing into a screen or letting the plants grow normally. The screen grower would want to place them horizontally for the best coverage of that area whereas the normal grower would want the light installed vertically so that the entire length of the plant gets the added light energy. I would also add that it would seem that the added SCL contributes to the overall PPFD in the tent vs just the overhead light. The one thing I'm not sure of is the heat being generated from the SCL. How close can you place your plants to a 60w LED light?

It would seem that with a 15% increase in yield on a normal 2 lb tent run you're going to increase your yield an extra 5oz or more.

The SCL's I posted above total 240w between the 4 of them at a cost of $100. Estimated additional running cost for electricity would be around $10 a month. Initial light purchase of $100 + $40(4 month from veg to harvest) would mean a $140 initial outlay. Zips of weed out in Cali are going for $90. If the increase in yield is correct SCL should be a no brainer.

I've read and talked to many people about sidelighting and most don't think it does enough to warrant it but this study seems to say different.

Can anyone refute this with quantifiable data so that I don't waste $140 on broscience?
 
Last edited:
Rootsruler said:
Peer reviewed paper on sub canopy lighting @Moe.Red


Short answer? The study saw a 15% - 20% increase in yield volume overall along with an increase in terpene and cannabinoid profiles if you use red-blue or red-blue-green light spectrums.

The study also placed the lights 2 cm above soil line. As far as I understand it, the leaf tops photosynthesize while the leaf bottoms are where transpiration occurs. If this is the case then it would hold that placing lights below the leaf tops is counterintuitive to what we're trying to achieve. Placing the horizontally placed light bars 6" - 9" below the canopy line angled downward so that they are hitting the leaf tops in the undercanopy would seem like the logical place to place them for most effective photon delivery to that part of the plant. Obviously as the plants grow taller you're going to want to be able to move the SCL to best expose the plants to as much light to as many leaves as possible. SCL placement would depend on if you are growing into a screen or letting the plants grow normally. The screen grower would want to place them horizontally for the best coverage of that area whereas the normal grower would want the light installed vertically so that the entire length of the plant gets the added light energy. I would also add that it would seem that the added SCL contributes to the overall PPFD in the tent vs just the overhead light. The one thing I'm not sure of is the heat being generated from the SCL. How close can you place your plants to a 60w LED light?

It would seem that with a 15% increase in yield on a normal 2 lb tent run you're going to increase your yield an extra 5oz or more.

The SCL's I posted above total 240w between the 4 of them at a cost of $100. Estimated additional running cost for electricity would be around $10 a month. Initial light purchase of $100 + $40(4 month from veg to harvest) would mean a $140 initial outlay. Zips of weed out in Cali are going for $90. If the increase in yield is correct SCL should be a no brainer.

I've read and talked to many people about sidelighting and most don't think it does enough to warrant it but this study seems to say different.

Can anyone refute this with quantifiable data so that I don't waste $140 on broscience?
Click to expand...
No data to offer but I was wanting side lighting for a while and I've been discouraged from it from my limited research.....I can't remember details YT video's Dr.B.B I think and a few others I watched over the years. I think its for the same reason we lollypop that just waste nutes on lower waste product or inferior buds......Not to say that we can't boost lower fruit but it may be at the expense of the top. I think there was some increase in volume but not worth the added elect cost....

I remember being keen to add more lighting and boost that lower 1/3 of the plant most chop off........but I gave up on it...
 
Moe.Red said:
So I read the abstract and it makes sense that side lighting helped improve lower buds.

I wonder if you scrog so there are no lower larfy buds if it helps?
Click to expand...
In my case, I'm tucking branches into the first week of flower then letting the remaining stretch go vertical. 9" vertical branches is what I'm shooting for as LED light doesn't really penetrate much farther into the canopy than that. The picture below shows the cola shoots that finished on stretch. Some were a little taller but no biggie.

04282023 blurple side.jpg

On the GG4 scrog I did last time I pretty much kept everything tucked under the net. This time I'm allowing them to go vertical to multiply the foot print I have to work with. I filled the horizontal so now it's all about filling the vertical.

I'd like to be able to let them go taller vertically to be able to increase yields but I won't get the penetration I want to be able to reach the lower part of that. I'm hoping side lighting can do that.
 
Last edited:
Pipecarver said:
No data to offer but I was wanting side lighting for a while and I've been discouraged from it from my limited research.....I can't remember details YT video's Dr.B.B I think and a few others I watched over the years. I think its for the same reason we lollypop that just waste nutes on lower waste product or inferior buds......Not to say that we can't boost lower fruit but it may be at the expense of the top. I think there was some increase in volume but not worth the added elect cost....

I remember being keen to add more lighting and boost that lower 1/3 of the plant most chop off........but I gave up on it...
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to keep from lollypopping so much as being able to grow the plant taller in the tent and be able to light the lower half. As mentioned previously, I let them go vertical up to around 9". After 9" I see flower size diminish exponentially. I'd like to grow them vertically up to 12" -14". The side lighting could power that lower 3" - 5".

The report I posted also said that it should increase cannabanoids and terpenes.

The side lights I linked are 60w each. 4 of them would equal a 240w light, so heat wise it should be equivalent to adding another COB board in the tent meaning an average rise of around 2* - 3* in the tent with lights on.
 
Another thought I have in regards to side lighting is spectrum. What would be the effects of installing 4 separate light bars, in addition to the full spectrum SCL's, that are far red(700 - 750nm) to mimic sunrise and sunset? You could run those on a 14/10 flower schedule and reserve the first and last hour for just far red while still giving your girls their 12 hours. Once the overhead and SCL's come on the far reds turn off. On hour 13 overheads and SCL's turn off and far rights turn on for the last hour then lights off.
 
Last edited:
growsinse79 said:
Some people argue that plants grown with a longer veg are more potent than the same plant flowered with a short or no veg. I'm still waiting for someone to prove it to me.
Click to expand...
Never heard that one... doesn't make logical sense though, the genetics can do what they can do regardless of how big the plant is first right?
 
I would think a plant allowed to mature without being forced would be stronger in many ways.
So I would agree without proof that longer veg is better.
Maybe just me.
I cringe when I see people flip their 2 week old plants and the like.
What is too young? I think veg should be 8 weeks minimum.
 
steamroller said:
I would think a plant allowed to mature without being forced would be stronger in many ways.
So I would agree without proof that longer veg is better.
Maybe just me.
I cringe when I see people flip their 2 week old plants and the like.
What is too young? I think veg should be 8 weeks minimum.
Click to expand...
People flip at 2 weeks? They barely have any leaves at two weeks... Well I never lol... I assumed he meant longer as in extremely long compared to a normal veg time... but I see now that he said no veg... which I guess when you flip a baby? 🤷‍♀️
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bandit420
Great White vs Bigfoot Gold Mycorrhizae Fungi Bacteria Inoculums for growing marijuana
Replies
25
Views
3K
Max 2
Max 2
Garbage_bear
HELP! Forest Fires Fooked my grow
Replies
29
Views
2K
frankengoober
F
F
Low energy? No focus? You might be missing something.
Replies
1
Views
219
Observer
Observer
Bandit420
Indicas on parade! Copa Sunshine Daydream, Bodhi Trance Plant, Mandala Hashberry, & Uruz Violet Gas Kush F4, w/ special appearance by: Stinky Pink!
Replies
23
Views
1K
Stoneyluv
Stoneyluv
Coco Lopez
Project ABS #1.2
Replies
12
Views
788
Zen_seeker
Zen_seeker
Back
Top Bottom