Scientific Methodology for Aeroponic Cannabis Cultivation

[Potfairy]

I have grown weary of poor forum moderation, pothead “bro wisdom”, and the seemingly incessantly contradictory anecdotal reports. So, as I generally do, I turned to the science community for peripherally associated articles and studies involving aeroponics.
Every properly proctored and designed scientific study lists the methodologies and processes to a minute degree, so that the information may be peer reviewed and replicated. I have learned that by reading the Methods, or Methodology sections of published and peer reviewed scientific studies, pertaining possibly only peripherally to the subject matter I’m researching, can have very valuable information.
In those veins, I offer the following paper listing a common scientific methodology for aeroponic cannabis cultivation. Enjoy.

Yield, Characterization, and Possible Exploitation of Cannabis Sativa L. Roots Grown under Aeroponics Cultivation

 

[Aqua Man]

Questioning information and sources is a good thing. Can you explain what in this study your referring to that corrects your issues with forum moderation, bro science.

Many very knowledgeable ppl here that provide some very relevant info. Is there something in particular we are supposed to be observing from this study? Oris it just to pass information along?

kinda seems like a shot at the forum members and staff using words that over complicate the message in an attempt to look more intelligent?

Maybe im reading that wrong but thats how it appears to me

 

[Neuro]

I have grown weary of poor forum moderation, pothead “bro wisdom”, and the seemingly incessantly contradictory anecdotal reports. So, as I generally do, I turned to the science community for peripherally associated articles and studies involving aeroponics.
Every properly proctored and designed scientific study lists the methodologies and processes to a minute degree, so that the information may be peer reviewed and replicated. I have learned that by reading the Methods, or Methodology sections of published and peer reviewed scientific studies, pertaining possibly only peripherally to the subject matter I’m researching, can have very valuable information.
In those veins, I offer the following paper listing a common scientific methodology for aeroponic cannabis cultivation. Enjoy.

Yield, Characterization, and Possible Exploitation of Cannabis Sativa L. Roots Grown under Aeroponics Cultivation

If we just relied on true, proven science we'd be behind the times. You kind of have to fly by the seat of your pants and take a certain amount of anecdotal evidence into account before deciding what's best for you. Given the historical legal status, there's been very little high-grade studies. I get your point of view. I'm a neuroscientist by trade. I've found botany and horticulture to be much less stringent in their requirements than many fields. That said, I just don't think you're going to be satisfied if you want an A to Z of how cannabis cultivation exactly works. We're just not there yet. Also realize that a lot of botanical and horticultural work of high quality is proprietary work. I think most folks here on the farm try and keep information as accurate as possible and are held to that by the mods.

 

[Potfairy]

If we just relied on true, proven science we'd be behind the times. You kind of have to fly by the seat of your pants and take a certain amount of anecdotal evidence into account before deciding what's best for you. Given the historical legal status, there's been very little high-grade studies. I get your point of view. I'm a neuroscientist by trade. I've found botany and horticulture to be much less stringent in their requirements than many fields. That said, I just don't think you're going to be satisfied if you want an A to Z of how cannabis cultivation exactly works. We're just not there yet. Also realize that a lot of botanical and horticultural work of high quality is proprietary work. I think most folks here on the farm try and keep information as accurate as possible and are held to that by the mods.

Darling, Im a Botanist by trade, raising, practice, and education. I am very well aware of advancement for the sake of knowledge rather than progress for progress’ sake.
A proven baseline will always be useful to a a broad range of people and skill levels.
I understand many folks think they grow better, or the best, or know better. Its the scourge of the cannabis community. Fortunately I have empirical evidence I grow the some of, if not the, highest grade cleanest flower in Colorado, possibly the US. Aeroponic cloning is giving me hell, but considering Im using homemade equipment rather than laboratory grade, I'm not terribly surprised.

Considering I have never heard mention of Hoaglands solution being commonly discussed on any weed forum, I understand the education level I am most likely speaking to, despite any claims made towards a particularly educated background.

For those with eyes to see, and ears to hear, this post is here. For the rest who are into it for the self-discovery of facts others have long worked past, I wish you well in your journey.

 

[Potfairy]

Questioning information and sources is a good thing. Can you explain what in this study your referring to that corrects your issues with forum moderation, bro science.

Many very knowledgeable ppl here that provide some very relevant info. Is there something in particular we are supposed to be observing from this study? Oris it just to pass information along?

kinda seems like a shot at the forum members and staff using words that over complicate the message in an attempt to look more intelligent?

Maybe im reading that wrong but thats how it appears to me

I can understand. This is how I normally speak. Im not fond of reducing my language to single syllables in order to accommodate willful ignorance. If you would like an honest suggest about forum moderation, push addressed subjects to the threads that are discussing them, and stop pushing the concept of “necrothread” and allowing new repetitive threads on the same subject. Proper moderation would do all the weed forums a healthy bit of good.

If by reading the methodologies provided, you cant understand how a proven method helps the hundreds of people on here with the same incessant questions, I cant help you. Instead of arguing, being a Mod, try starting a conversation rather than seeming to “take offense”. Did you actually read the methodologies presented and have something intelligent to input?

 

[GNick55]

Darling, Im a Botanist by trade, raising, practice, and education. I am very well aware of advancement for the sake of knowledge rather than progress for progress’ sake.
A proven baseline will always be useful to a a broad range of people and skill levels.
I understand many folks think they grow better, or the best, or know better. Its the scourge of the cannabis community. Fortunately I have empirical evidence I grow the some of, if not the, highest grade cleanest flower in Colorado, possibly the US. Aeroponic cloning is giving me hell, but considering Im using homemade equipment rather than laboratory grade, I'm not terribly surprised.

Considering I have never heard mention of Hoaglands solution being commonly discussed on any weed forum, I understand the education level I am most likely speaking to, despite any claims made towards a particularly educated background.

For those with eyes to see, and ears to hear, this post is here. For the rest who are into it for the self-discovery of facts others have long worked past, I wish you well in your journey.

wow seriously?
give your head a shake man..
just like that bugbee character pretending to know all about lights..

 

[GNick55]

I can understand. This is how I normally speak. Im not fond of reducing my language to single syllables in order to accommodate willful ignorance. If you would like an honest suggest about forum moderation, push addresses subjects to the threads that are discussing them, and stop pushing the concept of “necrothread” and allowing new repetitive threads on the same subject. Proper moderation would do all the weed forums a healthy bit of good.

If by reading the methodologies provided, you cant understand how a proven method helps the hundreds of people on here with the same incessant questions, I cant help you. Instead of arguing, being a Mod, try starting a conversation rather than seeming to “take offense”. Did you actually read the methodologies presented and have something intelligent to input?

why don’t you start your own website..
geezus some people

 

[Potfairy]

This is posted so that others who are immensely weary of statements without anything but subjective “evidence” that doesn't extend beyond “their word”, such as “I’m a neuroscientist” or “I'm a botanist”, have an independent, objective, third-party reviewed source of evidence for a process or solution. Word of warning, there are people on these forums purposefully posting EXTREMELY inaccurate information while claiming 100% success or “massive buds”. They are doing it to mess with you.

I can see now that if I ever post more resources, I wont be posting any sort of accompanying statements except a dumbing down of concepts so that the average bro doesn't take it personally.
I would even delete this one, if I could, and repost without comment except to point out the obvious relevant facts for the oblivious.
By all means ignore wisdom and proven knowledge with evidence. I would hope some of you would appreciate actual proof of claims as opposed to a million different bros all claiming that “even though I do the opposite of you, my way works!”.
Ive grown every garden plant you can think of and more strains of cannabis than most of you will ever see. But those are words, pictures are pictures. A peer reviewed study listed on a scientifically associated public server is FAR better evidence. those who choose to see that, this is for you.
If you contiue reading past this post, I can only imagine you are stoned and looking for a laugh riot, have fun, there have already been some doozies posted 😂🤣😂

😉

 

[Cirroji]

I bet you’re really fun at a party.

 

[GNick55]

This is posted so that others who are immensely weary of statements without anything but subjective “evidence” that doesn't extend beyond “their word”, such as “I’m a neuroscientist” or “I'm a botanist”, have an independent, objective, third-party reviewed source of evidence for a process or solution. Word of warning, there are people on these forums purposefully posting EXTREMELY inaccurate information while claiming 100% success or “massive buds”. They are doing it to mess with you.

I can see now that if I ever post more resources, I wont be posting any sort of accompanying statements except a dumbing down of concepts so that the average bro doesn't take it personally.
I would even delete this one, if I could, and repost without comment except to point out the obvious relevant facts for the oblivious.
By all means ignore wisdom and proven knowledge with evidence. I would hope some of you would appreciate actual proof of claims as opposed to a million different bros all claiming that “even though I do the opposite of you, my way works!”.
Ive grown every garden plant you can think of and more strains of cannabis than most of you will ever see. But those are words, pictures are pictures. A peer reviewed study listed on a scientifically associated public server is FAR better evidence. those who choose to see that, this is for you.
If you contiue reading past this post, I can only imagine you are stoned and looking for a laugh riot, have fun, there have already been some doozies posted 😂🤣😂

😉

keep it up and i’ll ban you from here.. seriously all your doing is showing your true self..
i’ve got 38 yrs in this and your another clown with a short time here,
i predict…

 

[GNick55]

I bet you’re really fun at a party.

 

[smokedareefer]

This is posted so that others who are immensely weary of statements without anything but subjective “evidence” that doesn't extend beyond “their word”, such as “I’m a neuroscientist” or “I'm a botanist”, have an independent, objective, third-party reviewed source of evidence for a process or solution. Word of warning, there are people on these forums purposefully posting EXTREMELY inaccurate information while claiming 100% success or “massive buds”. They are doing it to mess with you.

I can see now that if I ever post more resources, I wont be posting any sort of accompanying statements except a dumbing down of concepts so that the average bro doesn't take it personally.
I would even delete this one, if I could, and repost without comment except to point out the obvious relevant facts for the oblivious.
By all means ignore wisdom and proven knowledge with evidence. I would hope some of you would appreciate actual proof of claims as opposed to a million different bros all claiming that “even though I do the opposite of you, my way works!”.
Ive grown every garden plant you can think of and more strains of cannabis than most of you will ever see. But those are words, pictures are pictures. A peer reviewed study listed on a scientifically associated public server is FAR better evidence. those who choose to see that, this is for you.
If you contiue reading past this post, I can only imagine you are stoned and looking for a laugh riot, have fun, there have already been some doozies posted 😂🤣😂

😉

Maybe you can give me a heads up on what to expect in my current grow.

Rdwc, 4 plants in 13 gallon.
3 of the modules have my usual 2" cylindrical air stones and in the 4th plant i put a 4" (bro science and for my curiosity ) tia

 

[GNick55]

here’s one of @Potfairy pics,
most of you know what i think about the paper towel method, hahaha
science? hahahaha
your a joke..

 

[mysticepipedon]

I can understand. This is how I normally speak. Im not fond of reducing my language to single syllables in order to accommodate willful ignorance...

No one is asking you to dumb things down. There's just no reason to be a douche bag.

 

[Buzzy12]

Quite frankly, whatever information you were trying to "share", didn't work. A huge problem we have with society as a whole right now is educated people thinking they're so much smarter than everybody else. F.Y.I. if it wasn't for "bro science", then Cannabis wouldn't be anywhere close to the level of quality it is today. It certainly wasn't done by any botanist I've ever heard of or read about other than the now famous Mr. Blakey himself. It was done by passionate cultivators that risked their freedom in most cases. There's the right way to go about sharing information and then there's the way you chose to do it here...

What does it mean when you say, "I have grown weary of poor forum moderation"? Are you asking for censorship in the name of "science"?

A couple excerpts taken from that article. I can't read any further if the people conducting this study refer to Cannabis like this.

Cannabis sativa L. is a dioecious annual herbaceous plant, also defined as a big grass

Two subspecies can be identified within C. sativa: C. sativa subsp. indica, which contains more than 20% of the psychoactive compound D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in the resin produced by the female buds; and C. sativa subsp. sativa, which contains numerous bioactive molecules in all parts of the plant, but shows a much lower content of psychoactive molecules, particularly THC, which must not exceed 0.2 %

With the aim of filling this gap, in the present work, C. sativa var. Kompolti—a legal variety routinely used for food production purposes

@Aqua Man I agree with you. Not sure how that post can be taken any other way than an intellectual elite gracing us with their superior knowledge of science...

"It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance."

-Thomas Sowell

 

[Cirroji]

I find it amusing that someone with such a high intelligence doesn't have the grasp on basic human communication. Sometimes I really prefer plants to people.

 

[Moe.Red]

I have grown weary of poor forum moderation, pothead “bro wisdom”, and the seemingly incessantly contradictory anecdotal reports. So, as I generally do, I turned to the science community for peripherally associated articles and studies involving aeroponics.

I too am disturbed intellectually by contradictory info. Disturbed is the wrong word, challenged may be better. I'd like to know more than I do. I'd like to understand when someone does something contradictory to my knowledge base and it works well what happened? Bad data? My "knowledge" is bad, or what's being posted is? It's a puzzle and we do not have all the pieces, but we can see and feel the missing shapes and densities and make guesses.

I guess you could say we might have a similar viewpoint in that narrow respect.

Reading your linked paper, I'm walking away with so what? Just about anyone that has been doing this for a while would tell you without the need for a study that the roots in aeroponics and soil are different. We could also tell you that plant mass is higher faster with hydro and aero. This is nothing new or noteworthy even. The paper is about how we can harvest those roots and potentially extract:

"the phytosterols campesterol, stigmasterol, and β-sitosterol, and the triterpenes epi-friedelanol and friedelin"

Again, I say so what? That may be a focus for some big pharma effort, but not here.

This thread is a waste of time unless you want to jump down off that illusion of a high horse you got there and have a conversation. Stop being Sheldon Cooper, or you are just going to get laughed at like him.

You may have something to add to the discussion pool. I'm currently very interested in exudates and the processes that happen in the root zone. You seem to be touching that. But unless your next response is a human one, I will not engage with you further.

Bazinga.

 

[Moe.Red]

wow seriously?
give your head a shake man..
just like that bugbee character pretending to know all about lights..

I believe the correct phrase is "give your balls a tug." You are a canuck, you should know that! 😁

 

[Cool_Beans]

Never met a smart person that needed to announce their intelligence to attract an audience for their ideas.

 

[AnimalHouse]

I find it amusing that someone with such a high intelligence doesn't have the grasp on basic human communication. Sometimes I really prefer plants to people.

Plants, dogs, and cats for me haha!

Not too long ago I worked with a member of mensa. Smart guy, I suppose, but was the biggest doosh nozzle in the building. And with some things he was a total clueless idiot.
Like one time we were doing some demolition for a remodel. This dude takes a sledge hammer and tries to smash a pretty sturdy counter top with it. Told him we'll need to take it apart at the brackets, we can't just smash it. He insisted on using the hammer. He winds up and take a huge swing. The hammer bounces back up and smacks him in the face and knocks him out. We gather around laughing saying "Mensa got knocked the fuck out!"