N1ghtL1ght
Staff
Supporter
- 670
- 143
Hey tobh, it's an honour to have caught your attention. You must know, in my early days, long before I had an acc here, the occassional google search brought me here and I can still remember reading you from back then. And Dirtbag, Seamaiden, and Aquaman (at Rollitup IIRC).just dropping in here to say, goddamn am i super stoked to see a thread like this again. it's been YEARS since a real thread like this has cropped up. Excellent work, going to dig into your findings when i'm of a more sober mind.
Love the way you think.Hey tobh, it's an honour to have caught your attention. You must know, in my early days, long before I had an acc here, the occassional google search brought me here and I can still remember reading you from back then. And Dirtbag, Seamaiden, and Aquaman (at Rollitup IIRC).
Just the other day had a chat with tystikk why the forums become more deserted, at least, so it seems to me.
Even though today we almost know everything from science, still, I like to experiment and tap into th unknown, albeit with crude underground methods.
If it turns out that a 28h photoperiod flowers out properly there could be an adaptation to either longer light or darkness - somewhere in between 16/12 & 12/16.
Theoretically more light could equate more growth for photoperiodic plants. But one could also pick the same DLI/same cost just less PPFD/smaller lamp.
Or save on electricity. At ICMag some sativa-growers prefer 13h of darkness to better ripe them out, or some strains hardly finish. Could 16h darkness have even greater effect?
It remains to be seen...
What's the colour temp of your white chip? Are you using a green monochromatic diode? And what's the wavelength of your UVA diodes?I’ve kinda got my plans already but if you were to have total control over ppfd of each spectrum independently in terms of intensity and on off time, spectrum being blue white red green far red and uva, what is your feeling on where you would set it? 6’ of usable vertical space in a 4x8x8 under CO2 VPD perfect every single plant need met? 8 plants total. Going for max cannabinoids first terpenes second and yield third.
I know you have seen the same research I have
UV doesnt raise THC simple as that. Even if some wild granpas, that sell UV-bars in their freetime, try to tell people that plants only produce THC as a natural "UV-Barrier". Yeah i guess i would also disable my comments if i lied that obvious. I really forgot the name, was it maybe "Connecticut Lightsheds"?It doesnt raise THC and even that "increased oils and flavours" doesnt have any solid basis. But people like chasing dreams. If its fun to take care for your plants, set up lights and play with them.well what difference does it make in the end, if theres more THC or not.Saw two YT interviews with him where he said UVB for +THC doesn't work, refering to Magagnini et al, and that Lydon was in error, but I just can't follow his argument. And wish he would get to the bottom of this, I personally think it's genetic/chemotype based. And that UV needs to be dialed in properly in relation to the other light. As there are many who swear by it, but also say that even UVA already does the job to some extent.
So how does the plant protect itself in harsh UV conditions?UV doesnt raise THC simple as that. Even if some wild granpas, that sell UV-bars in their freetime, try to tell people that plants only produce THC as a natural "UV-Barrier". Yeah i guess i would also disable my comments if i lied that obvious. I really forgot the name, was it maybe "Connecticut Lightsheds"?It doesnt raise THC and even that "increased oils and flavours" doesnt have any solid basis. But people like chasing dreams. If its fun to take care for your plants, set up lights and play with them.well what difference does it make in the end, if theres more THC or not.
Dude, just fuk'n WOW!So good sunday farmers, here's a tiny update on the 14/14 experiment.
Day 51 of bloom:
View attachment 1268864
This is the most vigorous plant, in a corner, and the only 1 in a root pouche, which can hold half a liter more soil than the other plastic pots. Plus, more oxygen ;)
My overall impression is that 14/14 delayed the onset of flowering, like transitioning into. Other, more sativa-dom. strains are still not fully at buckling flowers up, and even that one does create new flowers after flowers. Plants sport more sugarleaves which I don't like but may be a condition to set the stage for high mass gains...
So you are eagerly awaited to present your theory.UV doesnt raise THC simple as that.
The UV, in fact, the presence of alot of individual colours of light have been time and again shown that the spectrum affects the chemical composition of the plant matter. Because plants need to react to a lot of problems associated with high or harsh illumination and developed intricate methods to offset the potential damaging light. By the production of sunscreen-pigments, and these capture in response to the presence of specific wavelength. Meaning the filter quite selectively and plants enrich themselves with a large number of these pigments. Many are still not known, but they keep popping up in experiments so they get labelled a proxy name according to their maxabsorb wavelength.So how does the plant protect itself in harsh UV conditions?
"what difference does it make in the end, if theres more THC or not". Agreed. Too much contention in what is supposed to be an enjoyable partaking. Do what make you happy!
I got you. I was hoping we would get that members explanation.The UV, in fact, the presence of alot of individual colours of light have been time and again shown that the spectrum affects the chemical composition of the plant matter. Because plants need to react to a lot of problems associated with high or harsh illumination and developed intricate methods to offset the potential damaging light. By the production of sunscreen-pigments, and these capture in response to the presence of specific wavelength. Meaning the filter quite selectively and plants enrich themselves with a large number of these pigments. Many are still not known, but they keep popping up in experiments so they get labelled a proxy name according to their maxabsorb wavelength.
Many of the main cannabinoids absorb heavily in the onset of UVB radiation. Some UVA and violet. It does make sense to filter these out to protect the ovulum from the mutative or ionizing danger. There are other theories (evaporation, insecticide) why should not all of them be true? Living organisms have this inane plasticity that cannot be understood as working as rigid like a steel car engine.
And expression is also up & downregulated by control mechanisms which can affect a phenotype from a large number of angles.
I have a theory? Wouldnt it be more precise that you have a theory? A theory that a laughable small amount of light of a specific wavelengh causes unsual high increase of THC? Dude there is a world and an internet beyond Youtube videos and anekdotes. I know for a fact that there is no increase in THC, nada. And Bruce B. doesnt need to be "more specific" when he says it just doesnt happen. Enough has been done and researched over the last years, thats why you wont hear a single more word about THC-increase through UV, at least not from reasonable and fact-based people like Bruce B. or Shane from Migro. Yeah Shane for example sells UV-lights, but over the last years he made clear that there is not increase in THC. Because hes an academic and he can read. And he doesnt lie to people, even if it would highly benefit him. Unlike "Connecticut lightsheds"The internet is free, youre free to look for the answer. This business is not much different than the bodybuilding supplement-industry. Deceide for yourself if you want to get to the bottom of things or not.So you are eagerly awaited to present your theory.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?