Actually altitude from sea level would be fairly irrelevant to UVB levels, though latitude is quite important to them. It's why feral plants at the equator are so much more THC dominant than those at higher latitudes: UVB proportion. You're at a relatively high latitude to grow exceptional cannabis outdoors compared to say, The Congo or Columbia...
This guy runs down the peer-reviewed article fairly concisely:
Go and buy a cheap reptile CFL and point it at a particular bud for a few weeks prior to harvest and then tell me that UVB plays no role. It's easily observable by anyone if you don't believe me.
Once agin my out doors are still not any stronger then my indoors
ONCE AGIN!
"UVB spectral inclusion is
critical to resin production and THC percentage."-Dr. Detroit
I proved you wrong with a simple picture real proof (they say a 1000 words you know) not some lame ass study you pulled out of your ass and have no real personal experience in.
your statements that UVB is
critical are way over exaggerated and shows how little you really know, I showed how UVB was critical in no way to my resin and THC production with
actual proof you can see. you can keep your reptile light, ill continue to grow my frosty dank. while you toss your money down the trash.
and if what your saying is true post a picture of your UVB buds I would love to see what it does to there resin and THC production if its so
critical.
Not only that lets see what the peer review said I doubt you read it other wise you would have not used this to defend yourself since it backs ME up.
"I can't really say for certain what kind of effects UV-B would have on your plants. I just kept finding research about it as I looked into it. It would seem that UV-B was important to get cannabis to create a compound like cannabinoids, but I can't say if it is really that important now."
"Just to let you all know that this was written in 2004, and I have learned a lot since then, and somewhat revised my ideas about this. I should edit it, but didn't have the time right now. Maybe sometime soon."-2010
"Just as a strange side-note, while trying to find a copy of David Pate's dissertation, I just found out that he works for Hortapharm! That is Sam Skunkman's company, and when discussing this article, Sam had said that he did an experiment with Pate that was never published where they found no increase in THC from UV-B exposure (and the only scientific paper I've ever read that reported no change in drug-type varieties). I'm not sure what to make of this, yet, but I do find it a little interesting.
(edit)It also looks like he wrote a chapter for the book Advances in Hemp Research, published in 1999, titled "The Phytochemistry of Cananbis: It's Ecological and Evolutionary Implications". The title sounds a lot like mine, and I was able to read some of the pages from Google, but it is incomplete. He says in it explicitly, citing the Lydon '87 article I wrote an excerpt of the abstract above:
Quote:Their experiments demonstrate that under conditions of high UV-B exposure, drug-type Cannabis produces significantly greater quantities of THC.
I find it strange that David Pate wrote this, when Sam Skunkman says that they did an experiment together that showed no difference. Hell, Pate's Ph.D. dissertation was all about the effects of light on Cannabis. Something is not adding up."
"Nevil
I did experiments with UV light. I described it somewhere. Plants burn unless they are conditioned to it. I found no increase in potency or change in the character of the high. It's a dead horse.
N."
ill take real experience over bullshit papers anyday.
