_mahavishnu
- 129
- 63
If you’re thinking pretty hard about giving them extra time to finish up, I think I’m gonna just stick to my 105. I forget, do you lose if your guess is over weignt, even if you’re closest?
Rasta Jeff has some good practical grower advice. In general he seems like a decent enough dude. Seems to breed good commercial strains.I'd think it'd be useful for ripening faster; not finishing out.
You're gonna stress them and cause them to slow their uptake and inhibit STP processes and the like... I feel like it's a surefire way to lose weight and robustness in your phytochemical makeup... but yeah, your trichomes will probably look more finished.
I haven't listened to what he has to say, but I have a hard time taking anything seriously from a white dude with dreads decked out in a Steve from Blue's Clues outfit... prejudicially speaking, of course.
So true. Like throwing a flowering plant back in veg. I always reduce the intensity the last couple weeks. I’m with you herezHe doesnt even mention testing this 18/6 at the end. He says “he feels” it bulks them up more.
This is more silly marketing in my opinion. These breeders need gimics today to stay popular. This one has no idea what hes talking about. Like the jungle boys he reminds me of.
and 18/6 while the plant tires and weakens at the end of its life would negatively impact terps, flavanoids and potency. Last two weeks it is best to reduce light intensity a bit for quality. I have tested this many times over.
The hype is high with this fraud. Sorry just my opinion.
All the commercial guys are on Instagram. No secrets there.. they post like every 4 hours. Never see them throw their plants back into 18/6. But to each their own.And now you see why a lot of the commercial guys are not on here sharing there knowledge, and stuff you guys have no clue about, everything is silly and hype etc, and you guys are welcome to your opinion, but at least have an educated one. most of you never even heard of this, but this has been done for more years then I can remember, And I know breeders that you guys all love, do it as well. I seen it done , done it, seen testing on it etc for many years. So I'm not just throwing it out their willy nilly . I have an educated opinion on it.
but let me be clear I could careless what anyone thinks without any practical knowledge on the subject. I'm putting it out there for the guys who are interested in looking into it and maybe seeing how it works for them.
I'll give him a listen sometime.Rasta Jeff has some good practical grower advice. In general he seems like a decent enough dude. Seems to breed good commercial strains.
I'll give him a listen sometime.
I've admitted my prejudice. Unlike most of those with prejudices, mine quickly wither with proof of their unwarranted assumption. But I'll still poke at him for his rastafari Steve Burns ensemble
I trust there's something in there if he's got such repute.
Honestly, i just know him from all the stuff he puts out through his pod. But i honestly believe the stuff he puts out on his pod comes from a good place. His vibes are a lot better than....most of the content producers in this space.he sounds like a talented salesman. Good speaker. Silly image. Typical for new market noobs. We called these guys “trustafarians” in colorado.
i said huffy in jest. And i dont watch you tube or instagram. I think the new industry has pretty much hurt the quality of weed available for the most part. But the bigger the grower the worse the quality has been true for me since i started moving flowers as a teenager in the 80’s.
i grow weed because commercial weed sucks now. The best growers with the best plants went away for the most part. They dont pay fees and taxes Or go online to brag or market themselves. They never had to.
Now the best weed is with the personal medical grower. All the info is out there to succeed. Scaling up for profit is not helpful. Budweiser vs craft beer. ;-)
Yeah, I'm not here to ruffle feathers. I just think production and quality are not related terms.Rasta is the only one I know of that openly talked about, could be more I just don't knwo , and I'm not going to list guys that I worked with or know of, as thats not my place, but I remember in an older podcast from a year back or something Rasta talked about this and mentions Breeder Steve from columbia and he said the same.
Good to know. People shouldn't be putting out bad vibes unless they've got bad shit to spread. But, like MiMed said, great salesmen are great at replicating good vibes. In fact, they might even have genuine good vibes but not a good filter for what it is they're spreading.Honestly, i just know him from all the stuff he puts out through his pod. But i honestly believe the stuff he puts out on his pod comes from a good place. His vibes are a lot better than....most of the content producers in this space.
There seem to be a lot of resentful, miserable people in the industry. He seems alright.
Honestly, i just know him from all the stuff he puts out through his pod. But i honestly believe the stuff he puts out on his pod comes from a good place. His vibes are a lot better than....most of the content producers in this space.
There seem to be a lot of resentful, miserable people in the industry. He seems alright.
Not all home grown is good some of it sucks the same as some commercial stuff you can't lump it all together, the places i'm talking about had their own science guys, botanists etc. and stuff wasn't done off the cuff or without plenty of testing.
Yeah, I'm not here to ruffle feathers. I just think production and quality are not related terms.
Good to know. People shouldn't be putting out bad vibes unless they've got bad shit to spread. But, like MiMed said, great salesmen are great at replicating good vibes. In fact, they might even have genuine good vibes but not a good filter for what it is they're spreading.
It's funny, I worked retail for quite a while and I - the awkward, kinda-off-putting, big-bearded guy - was always the employee customers would ask to see and I got a slew of returning customers pretty much just because I was a terrible salesman... kind of. I just didn't sell shit. Gave my honest opinion. Turned people away from products. Educated.i might have mentioned i was a sales manager and trainer for most of my 25 year career.
Please do link what you find. I cannot find anything in the scholarly article realm.I'm finding threads all the way back to 2008 that mention increasing light hours at the end of flowering. Nothing scientific yet, starting to look there now.
Increasing light hours at end of budding
I saw on a video that you can increase the light hours to 13 or 14 with one or two weeks left in the budding phase without negative consequences. Is this true? Will the plant just use the extra light on the buds and not revert to a vegetative state? thanks a lotwww.420magazine.com
Regulation of carbohydrate availability at night is a crucial aspect of plant metabolism. This is particularly true for annual species like Arabidopsis, which complete their life cycle in a year and are under strong selective pressure to optimize carbon utilization for the maximization of seed production. Arabidopsis has developed a sophisticated mechanism to control starch turnover during diel cycles which is robust to perturbations in light/dark patterns and also temperature (Pyl et al., 2012). In such a mechanism a central role is played by the circadian clock, and there are suggestions that the regulation of starch degradation is the clock's major contribution to the optimization of plant productivity (Graf and Smith, 2011).
Mathematical modeling is helping to unravel the molecular mechanisms that control starch degradation by generating hypotheses and testable predictions. This approach has been particularly useful in providing a starting point for future experiments for a process whose underlying mechanism was previously completely mysterious. The arithmetic division computation that produces the appropriate starch degradation rate is thought to occur at a post-translational level. Hence it will probably be necessary to analyse the dynamics of the relevant post-translational modifications in order to shed light on the identity of the molecules that implement the computation (Skeffington et al., 2014). Models could then be refined to incorporate additional biochemical details to aid the interpretation and design of new experiments.
However, some model predictions are already supported by experiments, such as the response to previously untested environmental perturbations. Mutants that accumulate abnormally high (e.g., sex4) or low (e.g., pgm) levels of starch are also important tools that can help to clarify many aspects of starch metabolism (see, e.g., Gibon et al., 2004). In particular, the starch degradation pattern of some starch-excess mutants was used to confirm predictions from the models (see above and Scialdone et al., 2013). Other predictions yet to be tested will help to elucidate important questions, such as whether the computation of the starch degradation rate is a one-off event occurring at dusk or whether it happens continuously during the night, and what is the role for cycles of starch phosphate content. Models have also helped to identify molecules that could have important regulatory functions (e.g., PWD and SnRK1). There have also been efforts to combine models for starch degradation and other aspects of plant metabolism with models at higher scales (e.g., concerning organ growth). The eventual goal here is to construct multiscale models that could provide new insights in plant behavior and help direct plant bioengineering (Chew et al., 2014).
Essentially all plants manufacture and store starch during daylight hours, breaking it down during the night, irrespective of the type of photosynthesis used: C3 (like Arabidopsis), C4 or CAM (Weise et al., 2011). Furthermore, evidence suggests that a similarly tight control of starch degradation (linear in time) takes place both in plants having the same type of photosynthesis as Arabidopsis (like Brachypodium distachyon, see Scialdone et al., 2013), and different types, like Mesembryanthemum crystallinum, a facultative CAM plant (Neuhaus and Schulte, 1996). While the biochemical details could differ, models based on the same general concepts could therefore be used to describe starch metabolism in a wide range of cases.
Similar mechanisms that allow optimization of the use of limited resources could also be operating in other biological processes (Scialdone et al., 2013). One example is the glycogen cycle in cyanobacteria (Pattanayak et al., 2014), which exhibits circadian clock-controlled dynamics similar to starch in Arabidopsis. Moreover, the use of glycogen reserves is thought to be important for the metabolism of the bacterium at night.
The problem of starch degradation is also a prominent example of how arithmetic computations can be performed in biology in an analog fashion through chemical kinetics (Cory and Perkins, 2008; Buisman et al., 2009). In addition to providing implementations that are simpler than digital alternatives, it has been argued that analog computation is more efficient in terms of energy expenditure and number of molecules required (Sarpeshkar, 2014). The potential of analog dynamics has recently begun to be appreciated in synthetic biology, with the engineering of synthetic analog gene circuits in living cells (Daniel et al., 2013; Sauro and Kim, 2013; Sarpeshkar, 2014). Indeed, the potential importance of analog information processing in these contexts is only now becoming clear and is likely to develop into a subject of intense research interest in the years ahead.