Defoliation Side By Side - Bushy Plants

[Dirtbag]

You guys should check out Miami mango on instagram.

 

[Bobrown14]

 

[Jimster]

I've never used nets, and I probably never will, but I also grow a lot of old school strains that haven't been hybridized to hell and back. Growing in the wild, a plant that would be too heavy and snapping all of it's branches wouldn't be around long. The original Sativas grew tall and large but didn't have issues with being overloaded/overweight... same with Indica. With the selective breeding, most of the current plants need to be supported. Not many grow tall anymore and most produce 5X the weight of buds that their original parents did. So, is defoliating necessary? I think so, for the most part, although I prefer moderation with just a leaf pulled here and there.
Of course, this is just my opinion, not to start any more controversy. :)

 

[Migrower]

Grape analogy is like comparing apples to oranges to be honest. Actually fruits do ripen better and faster and get sweeter with more sunlight.

Grape farming is one of the very few horticultural industries that actually will take off leaves SELECTIVELY when the grape fruit is set and ripening on the vine.

Fruits and flowers are actually completely different in how they ripen. Not the greatest analogy tbh.


Do I think these training ideas just came about? Yes, they just came about in around the same time people started to use chemicals in bottles to grow flowers. Yeah. I guess the first 10 thousand years of human cultivation of cannabis doesn't count?

Whats your point??

Yields cause if it yields you need to do some scientific studies to prove what you say. I bet dollars to donuts any outdoor grower will kick your ass with yields every day all day and they don't prune or defoil or train or whatever you wanna call it.

Yields = biomass over time.

You could spend 6 months training your plants to grow under thru netting and get decent yields. I run plants naturally and harvest every 40-50 days of flowering @ roughly 1.3 gm per watt.

Do your math and see if your training/defoil adds up. The yield argument is nothing new.

What it comes down to is people justifying their own techniques weather they make any sense or not. It doesn't matter. It's been done so it must be right.

This thought process actually has name and has been studied.

It's called "illusory truth effect"


"In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.
Researchers attributed the illusory truth effect's impact on participants who knew the correct answer to begin with, but were persuaded to believe otherwise through the repetition of a falsehood, to "processing fluency".

An example of this is "you get more bigger better dank nugs if you cut off all the fan leaves"

On the surface it makes no sense but after "hearing" it said over and over its becomes a defacto truth. Even though it is not.

Grape analogy is like comparing apples to oranges to be honest. Actually fruits do ripen better and faster and get sweeter with more sunlight.

Grape farming is one of the very few horticultural industries that actually will take off leaves SELECTIVELY when the grape fruit is set and ripening on the vine.

Fruits and flowers are actually completely different in how they ripen. Not the greatest analogy tbh.


Do I think these training ideas just came about? Yes, they just came about in around the same time people started to use chemicals in bottles to grow flowers. Yeah. I guess the first 10 thousand years of human cultivation of cannabis doesn't count?

Whats your point??

Yields cause if it yields you need to do some scientific studies to prove what you say. I bet dollars to donuts any outdoor grower will kick your ass with yields every day all day and they don't prune or defoil or train or whatever you wanna call it.

Yields = biomass over time.

You could spend 6 months training your plants to grow under thru netting and get decent yields. I run plants naturally and harvest every 40-50 days of flowering @ roughly 1.3 gm per watt.

Do your math and see if your training/defoil adds up. The yield argument is nothing new.

What it comes down to is people justifying their own techniques weather they make any sense or not. It doesn't matter. It's been done so it must be right.

This thought process actually has name and has been studied.

It's called "illusory truth effect"


"In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.
Researchers attributed the illusory truth effect's impact on participants who knew the correct answer to begin with, but were persuaded to believe otherwise through the repetition of a falsehood, to "processing fluency".

An example of this is "you get more bigger better dank nugs if you cut off all the fan leaves"

On the surface it makes no sense but after "hearing" it said over and over its becomes a defacto truth. Even though it is not.

I was thinking you would say something similar. You are not worth arguing with. I guess all commercial horticulture industry people are wrong. They use these techniques to lose money. They put forth resources and labor into these methods to lose in the end. And I grow outdoors too. Comparing indoor and outdoor is ludicrous. And pruning outdoors is essential for optimal growth also. I’m over the argument . I could care less what others do that dont effect me or things I love and care for.

 

[Migrower]

I've never used nets, and I probably never will, but I also grow a lot of old school strains that haven't been hybridized to hell and back. Growing in the wild, a plant that would be too heavy and snapping all of it's branches wouldn't be around long. The original Sativas grew tall and large but didn't have issues with being overloaded/overweight... same with Indica. With the selective breeding, most of the current plants need to be supported. Not many grow tall anymore and most produce 5X the weight of buds that their original parents did. So, is defoliating necessary? I think so, for the most part, although I prefer moderation with just a leaf pulled here and there.
Of course, this is just my opinion, not to start any more controversy. :)

Many strains indoor and outdoor, grown optimally, will need support.

 

[Migrower]

You guys should check out Miami mango on instagram.

Just did. Will be following

 

[Dirtbag]

Just did. Will be following

He defies logic. I'm not a defoliator personally besides pulling selectively to improve light and air, but Miami goes bananas and srips them down hard.
And I cant explain why, but his plants perform incredibly. It certainly does not match my results when I tried a full strip on a plant and got leafy buds. There has to be more to it then just pulling leaves off, he must make up for what the leaves no longer provide with a nutrient plan that's somehow different to how you feed a normal Bush.

Either way, despite how differently he grows compared to me and my beliefs about plant health, its impressive.

 

[Jimster]

Many strains indoor and outdoor, grown optimally, will need support.

I guess my point is that the original strains of Sativas and Indicas normally didn't need supporting, as they didn't have the current genetics that provides the big buds that everyone strives for. I can't say that I have ever seen old school Colombian and Mexican plants falling and snapping, regardless of how they are grown. For the most part, seeds and plants have been selectivly bred to increase the potency and yield... this is what we do. I'm referring to the original landrace plants that used to be the mainstay of the Mj business until the later 70s. You could grow some big plants, but their yield and size of their buds are considerably larger than the plants that provided me with the Mexican bricks of the 60. Those same plants grown today would have a greater yield and possibly potency, but I don't think that you would get the massive buds that you get from a lot of strains in the present. I think most of those massive bud qualities have been bred into the current strains, intentionally or not. By nature, growers try to breed the most robust and potent plants, while the landrace strains don't have that influence... there is no advantage to having overly heavy flowers that snap, bend, and have other issues that could influence the seed setting.
Humans have other priorities..... :cool:

 

[cemchris]

Grape analogy is like comparing apples to oranges to be honest. Actually fruits do ripen better and faster and get sweeter with more sunlight.

Grape farming is one of the very few horticultural industries that actually will take off leaves SELECTIVELY when the grape fruit is set and ripening on the vine.

Fruits and flowers are actually completely different in how they ripen. Not the greatest analogy tbh.


Do I think these training ideas just came about? Yes, they just came about in around the same time people started to use chemicals in bottles to grow flowers. Yeah. I guess the first 10 thousand years of human cultivation of cannabis doesn't count?

Whats your point??

Yields cause if it yields you need to do some scientific studies to prove what you say. I bet dollars to donuts any outdoor grower will kick your ass with yields every day all day and they don't prune or defoil or train or whatever you wanna call it.

Yields = biomass over time.

You could spend 6 months training your plants to grow under thru netting and get decent yields. I run plants naturally and harvest every 40-50 days of flowering @ roughly 1.3 gm per watt.

Do your math and see if your training/defoil adds up. The yield argument is nothing new.

What it comes down to is people justifying their own techniques weather they make any sense or not. It doesn't matter. It's been done so it must be right.

This thought process actually has name and has been studied.

It's called "illusory truth effect"


"In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.
Researchers attributed the illusory truth effect's impact on participants who knew the correct answer to begin with, but were persuaded to believe otherwise through the repetition of a falsehood, to "processing fluency".

An example of this is "you get more bigger better dank nugs if you cut off all the fan leaves"

On the surface it makes no sense but after "hearing" it said over and over its becomes a defacto truth. Even though it is not.

You are simply doing exactly the same thing that you are complaining about. You are taking a general statement and applying it to everyone's situation saying you have science on your side. Genetics, lights, enviro, plant age, plant count, feeds, ect all come into play. Comparing all of these from one grow to another is also an apples to oranges argument. You can claim they are all wrong all you like buy posting a picture of a jar of nugs but it doesn't change the facts of what some people experience and have proven with numbers over time and years in the same setup and environment.

I've said it before. My particular setup and style no defol is less weight. Period. That doesn't mean the next person is going to see the same results. As with anything test it out yourself and come to your own conclusions. If you learn anything about taking others advice who think they know what they are talking about is don't and use it as a suggestion to see if it works for you on a subject like this with this many variables.

 

[hawkman]

You are simply doing exactly the same thing that you are complaining about. You are taking a general statement and applying it to everyone's situation saying you have science on your side. Genetics, lights, enviro, plant age, plant count, feeds, ect all come into play. Comparing all of these from one grow to another is also an apples to oranges argument. You can claim they are all wrong all you like buy posting a picture of a jar of nugs but it doesn't change the facts of what some people experience and have proven with numbers over time and years in the same setup and environment.

I've said it before. My particular setup and style no defol is less weight. Period. That doesn't mean the next person is going to see the same results. As with anything test it out yourself and come to your own conclusions. If you learn anything about taking others advice who think they know what they are talking about is don't and use it as a suggestion to see if it works for you on a subject like this with this many variables.

We all have great growing methods they vary like personallitites - what work for one might not good for another

 

[UncleRomulus]

Y’all are thinking too hard.. im somewhere in the middle of this debate.. I get better results with a mild defoliation than without. I’ve also tried heavy defoliation and that seems to suck.
One major reason i defoliate is for humidity/ enviro reasons not yield. (Not having leaves laying on top of each other and risking pm etc) I imagine the commercial folks love taking extra leaves as opposed to risking rot or pm. Although my “evidence” is anecdotal, this ain’t rocket appliances and I needn’t read over any scientific studies to figure this one out personally.. I just adapt to what gives me better results with some lights, fans, genetics and junk that I’ve acquired. Imo plants enjoy having leaves, but can spare a few also.

 

[hawkman]

Y’all are thinking too hard.. im somewhere in the middle of this debate.. I get better results with a mild defoliation than without. I’ve also tried heavy defoliation and that seems to suck.
One major reason i defoliate is for humidity/ enviro reasons not yield. (Not having leaves laying on top of each other and risking pm etc) I imagine the commercial folks love taking extra leaves as opposed to risking rot or pm. Although my “evidence” is anecdotal, this ain’t rocket appliances and I needn’t read over any scientific studies to figure this one out personally.. I just adapt to what gives me better results with some lights, fans, genetics and junk that I’ve acquired. Imo plants enjoy having leaves, but can spare a few also.

That;'s a good way to look at it !!!! Less is Best

 

[Wilbo]

I kinda look at all leaves as solar panels that collect energy. I have noticed that leaves also will absorb things like over fertilizing, and push excess chems into the lower leaves, to save the rest of the plant...I have looked at this issue for years, and I am fair convinced of what I am saying here. I know I could be wrong; ask any of my ex's!!...; -)..peace

 

[cemchris]

I kinda look at all leaves as solar panels that collect energy. I have noticed that leaves also will absorb things like over fertilizing, and push excess chems into the lower leaves, to save the rest of the plant...I have looked at this issue for years, and I am fair convinced of what I am saying here. I know I could be wrong; ask any of my ex's!!...; -)..peace

When it comes to lower leaves. N, P, K, Mg (macros) are mobile nutes. Ca and most of the traces are immobile. If new grow needs more of a nutrient and currently doesnt have it for growth it will pull the mobile nutrient from lower growth. Immobile nutes can't be pulled and must be from the root zone or foliar. Why you see older growth dying out over time. Also why you see so much calcium in nutrient mixes when dealing with inert mediums vs amended. Why the mantra of "MOAR CALMG" has always been thrown around. Which is funny cause most of the time it's Mg not Ca since a Ca deficiency can only effect new growth. Macros will effect old growth.

 

[Medigrow]

Grape analogy is like comparing apples to oranges to be honest. Actually fruits do ripen better and faster and get sweeter with more sunlight.

Grape farming is one of the very few horticultural industries that actually will take off leaves SELECTIVELY when the grape fruit is set and ripening on the vine.

Fruits and flowers are actually completely different in how they ripen. Not the greatest analogy tbh.


Do I think these training ideas just came about? Yes, they just came about in around the same time people started to use chemicals in bottles to grow flowers. Yeah. I guess the first 10 thousand years of human cultivation of cannabis doesn't count?

Whats your point??

Yields cause if it yields you need to do some scientific studies to prove what you say. I bet dollars to donuts any outdoor grower will kick your ass with yields every day all day and they don't prune or defoil or train or whatever you wanna call it.

Yields = biomass over time.

You could spend 6 months training your plants to grow under thru netting and get decent yields. I run plants naturally and harvest every 40-50 days of flowering @ roughly 1.3 gm per watt.

Do your math and see if your training/defoil adds up. The yield argument is nothing new.

What it comes down to is people justifying their own techniques weather they make any sense or not. It doesn't matter. It's been done so it must be right.

This thought process actually has name and has been studied.

It's called "illusory truth effect"


"In a 2015 study, researchers discovered that familiarity can overpower rationality and that repetitively hearing that a certain fact is wrong can affect the hearer's beliefs.
Researchers attributed the illusory truth effect's impact on participants who knew the correct answer to begin with, but were persuaded to believe otherwise through the repetition of a falsehood, to "processing fluency".

An example of this is "you get more bigger better dank nugs if you cut off all the fan leaves"

On the surface it makes no sense but after "hearing" it said over and over its becomes a defacto truth. Even though it is not.

So, human grew weeds for thousand years and we have to keep it the same way? Humans evolve, gather new information, new techniques. Why invent LED, we should keep that good old filament bulb... Forget those tractors, use the horses! Stop looking in the past, people were dying from cold before... They still do but well, you understand what I mean. People are trying techniques that comes from different species because that's how human work, he reproduces...

I did the comparison, defoil half of my plants, same grow, same lights, same rdwc, different spot to create an even comparison and 10-15% more yield on the defoil, I didn't go nut on defoil but it worked. Test it out for yourself, and not only 4 plants each side of the lamp, you have to mix things up to get a more scientific approach.

Funny how this debate will never end, worst part is, a lot of people are not even testing it, they just repeat what they believe... As you explicitly wrote...

 

[Brown.Thumb]

It's good to know you didn't nut on your defoliated plants. No disrespect intended!!

 

[Medigrow]

It's good to know you didn't nut on your defoliated plants. No disrespect intended!!

ahah good one :P

 

[tims trim]

View attachment 893223this is the result of heavy defoliation

Old bud ...makes corn roll ...

 

[cemchris]

Funny how this debate will never end, worst part is, a lot of people are not even testing it, they just repeat what they believe... As you explicitly wrote...

So true. Next we should talk about all the benefits of 48 dark period before flower.....

 

[MIMedGrower]

So true. Next we should talk about all the benefits of 48 dark period before flower.....

Its 36 hours. If you go a full 48 your plants will explode. :-)



I know. My side by side test ended in disaster.