Should I add UVB Light?

[MIMedGrower]

Half the info here way over my head, but I surf and read all these treads and I sure see/ rather read about some pretty successful growers harming or even killin plants call it over exposed ? Intensity? What ever you want, but is the reward really worth the risk?

i still barely get high off most dispensary weed and they all claim to have added uv. Other parameters are more important to cannabinoid production than light spectrum. Gains with add ons are minimal.

When I tested cmh and got the 3% bump we were sure the weed was more something. More heady? More potent? More something.

Then when we blind tested the weed no one could reliably tell which was the higher thc weed.

And the uv will do a lot more damage to the room than just the plants over time.

 

[DennisBrown]

you don’t mention it but in a reflective grow tent the light is much more intense and the inverse square law does not apply as much.

many many growers report burning plants with these uv bulbs. And most are in tents from my observation. When it was more popular a few years ago there were tons of posts with puckering leaves.

how different is your bulb compared to the htg one? I will say most of the issues I see used those bulbs. I can’t remember the brand name. @Aqua Man was sent them for his grow.

That is true for visible light, but almost all surfaces do not reflect UV very well, if at all. In fact, filtering it out is trivial. We have to use special reflective materials, special clear plastics to transmit (OP-4 acrylic), etc. This is why we put reflective "paint" inside all of our lamps, to recapture the 50% of light that is normally going away from the plant. Regular Mylar and the like will not reflect UVB very well, the wavelength is too small and it gets absorbed. The shiny side of aluminum foil works well, a lot of customers doing UV resin curing use that to capture light that doesn't hit the product, but it isn't so practical for growing. And yes, the Inverse Square Law isn't a perfect ratio for long tubes, it applies better to single points of influence (like the Sun, or gravity from the Earth) but it still applies here because all the UV you are going to get to the plant is that which is in the direct line of sight of the bulb.

 

[Moshmen]

i still barely get high off most dispensary weed and they all claim to have added uv. Other parameters are more important to cannabinoid production than light spectrum. Gains with add ons are minimal.

When I tested cmh and got the 3% bump we were sure the weed was more something. More heady? More potent? More something.

Then when we blind tested the weed no one could reliably tell which was the higher thc weed.

And the uv will do a lot more damage to the room than just the plants over time.

U said the D word

 

[Milson]

I wonder if I am just too soon and it’s making CBG by sucking the life out of the leaves as a step one to making THCA

I wonder what it needs to protect the leaves and pull instead from the roots?

I think "where it pulls from" is a very complex question. I have seen studies that suggest se terpenes may be a precursor to olivolic acid, which starts the chain.

You're never going to believe this, but i did some digging. This rabbit hole brought to you by haze + widow.

So i was reading this paper about thcas, the enzyme that accelerates the reaction from cbga to thca.

Crystallization of Δ1-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA) synthase from Cannabis sativa

Δ[1] -Tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA) synthase is a novel oxidoreductase that catalyzes the biosynthesis of the psychoactive compound THCA in Cannabis sativa (Mexican strain). In order to investigate the structure–function relationship ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And then i thought about this other paper i had read a while ago about the preliminary findings from dna studies on cannabis. Specifically, the most interesting finding for me was they found the gene for thcas. It differed between the two strains they were analyzing, a cbd strain and a thc strain. However, the two genes were exactly the same in each of the two thc drug strains they had.

Exactly.

And just one?

Seemed kind of weird... But anyway, in thinking about this problem, it struck me that uvr8 works by the tryptophan becoming excited by the 320nm light and on and on until it interacts with the messenger rna for a gene that is not the one I was just talking about.

And if it was, we would see a rapid decline in cbga I would think because it would be pulling from that.

But we don't. Which makes sense because that would be kind of an idiosyncratic relationship for such a generalized function in plants.

So it seems more likely that it contributes to the increased thc production primarily by increasing the amount of cbga at that end of the chain. And that requires more of the precursors, which up the chain possibly include some terpenes (I'm sorry i don't have the steam to chase down these sources right now they might partially be in milsonmilson.me but i may not have put them up there yet). The interaction with thcas idk of course.....but anecdotally i think many people suggest a smell difference.

This also strikes me with the whole "leave your plants in darkness for 24 hours before cut" thing having so much anecdotal evidence....the idea of the plant preparing for something that doesn't come (but only to the extent it can given senescence) via some mechanism like this.

I'm not saying it works like this. Just that hypothetically if it did, this stuff would fit.

 

[mashy]

i still barely get high off most dispensary weed and they all claim to have added uv. Other parameters are more important to cannabinoid production than light spectrum. Gains with add ons are minimal.

When I tested cmh and got the 3% bump we were sure the weed was more something. More heady? More potent? More something.

Then when we blind tested the weed no one could reliably tell which was the higher thc weed.

And the uv will do a lot more damage to the room than just the plants over time.

Hey @MIMedGrower, I know I'm in over my head in this thread but you were saying there are more important factors to cannabinoid production than light spectrum. What are the most important factors in your opinion. Genuine question, trying to learn

 

[Milson]

I think "where it pulls from" is a very complex question. I have seen studies that suggest se terpenes may be a precursor to olivolic acid, which starts the chain.

You're never going to believe this, but i did some digging. This rabbit hole brought to you by haze + widow.

So i was reading this paper about thcas, the enzyme that accelerates the reaction from cbga to thca.

Crystallization of Δ1-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA) synthase from Cannabis sativa

Δ[1] -Tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA) synthase is a novel oxidoreductase that catalyzes the biosynthesis of the psychoactive compound THCA in Cannabis sativa (Mexican strain). In order to investigate the structure–function relationship ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

View attachment 1109839View attachment 1109840

And then i thought about this other paper i had read a while ago about the preliminary findings from dna studies on cannabis. Specifically, the most interesting finding for me was they found the gene for thcas. It differed between the two strains they were analyzing, a cbd strain and a thc strain. However, the two genes were exactly the same in each of the two thc drug strains they had.

Exactly.

And just one?

Seemed kind of weird... But anyway, in thinking about this problem, it struck me that uvr8 works by the tryptophan becoming excited by the 320nm light and on and on until it interacts with the messenger rna for a gene that is not the one I was just talking about.

And if it was, we would see a rapid decline in cbga I would think because it would be pulling from that.

But we don't. Which makes sense because that would be kind of an idiosyncratic relationship for such a generalized function in plants.

So it seems more likely that it contributes to the increased thc production primarily by increasing the amount of cbga at that end of the chain. And that requires more of the precursors, which up the chain possibly include some terpenes (I'm sorry i don't have the steam to chase down these sources right now they might partially be in milsonmilson.me but i may not have put them up there yet). The interaction with thcas idk of course.....but anecdotally i think many people suggest a smell difference.

This also strikes me with the whole "leave your plants in darkness for 24 hours before cut" thing having so much anecdotal evidence....the idea of the plant preparing for something that doesn't come (but only to the extent it can given senescence) via some mechanism like this.

I'm not saying it works like this. Just that hypothetically if it did, this stuff would fit.

Re the genetic stuff....there is a better version of this but this is in the right direction.

Breakthrough cannabis genomics study (preprint) identifies genes for cannabinoid production, pathogen resistance, and more - Medicinal Genomics

A new collaborative study (preprint) consisting of scientists from Medicinal Genomics, The University of Florida, Pacific Biosciences, and Minnibis, is opening our understanding of the cannabis genome. It has gotten to a point where breeders can use genomic data to make informed breeding...

www.medicinalgenomics.com

Edit: this is the one i was looking for.

A physical and genetic map of Cannabis sativa identifies extensive rearrangements at the THC/CBD acid synthase loci

Cannabis sativa is widely cultivated for medicinal, food, industrial, and recreational use, but much remains unknown regarding its genetics, including the molecular determinants of cannabinoid content. Here, we describe a combined physical and genetic ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[MIMedGrower]

Hey @MIMedGrower, I know I'm in over my head in this thread but you were saying there are more important factors to cannabinoid production than light spectrum. What are the most important factors in your opinion. Genuine question, trying to learn

proper stable environment counts more than most things IMO.

Adding stuff can do more harm than good.

 

[MIMedGrower]

That is true for visible light, but almost all surfaces do not reflect UV very well, if at all. In fact, filtering it out is trivial. We have to use special reflective materials, special clear plastics to transmit (OP-4 acrylic), etc. This is why we put reflective "paint" inside all of our lamps, to recapture the 50% of light that is normally going away from the plant. Regular Mylar and the like will not reflect UVB very well, the wavelength is too small and it gets absorbed. The shiny side of aluminum foil works well, a lot of customers doing UV resin curing use that to capture light that doesn't hit the product, but it isn't so practical for growing. And yes, the Inverse Square Law isn't a perfect ratio for long tubes, it applies better to single points of influence (like the Sun, or gravity from the Earth) but it still applies here because all the UV you are going to get to the plant is that which is in the direct line of sight of the bulb.

then why are so many growers burning their healthy plants with these uv tubes?

 

[MIMedGrower]

U said the D word

what d word?

 

[shaganja]

Half the info here way over my head, but I surf and read all these treads and I sure see/ rather read about some pretty successful growers harming or even killin plants call it over exposed ? Intensity? What ever you want, but is the reward really worth the risk?

Hell yes its worth the risk! All experimenting done is worth the risk. Our posting of experiments gone bad will help more growers not do the same thing. Same reason you tell the server, the food is wrong. You are helping the next customer hopefully. And really, burning the tops of a few buds, was worth it. I just did some lst and good to go. I'm not sure how moe killed his, but If you are watching them while experimenting, you can move them, or move your light up, or shorten time. I've never killed any. been experimenting with these for 4 or 5 runs now. Perhaps the solacure is more Intense than the agromax.

 

[Milson]

Re the genetic stuff....there is a better version of this but this is in the right direction.

Breakthrough cannabis genomics study (preprint) identifies genes for cannabinoid production, pathogen resistance, and more - Medicinal Genomics

A new collaborative study (preprint) consisting of scientists from Medicinal Genomics, The University of Florida, Pacific Biosciences, and Minnibis, is opening our understanding of the cannabis genome. It has gotten to a point where breeders can use genomic data to make informed breeding...

www.medicinalgenomics.com

Edit: this is the one i was looking for.

A physical and genetic map of Cannabis sativa identifies extensive rearrangements at the THC/CBD acid synthase loci

Cannabis sativa is widely cultivated for medicinal, food, industrial, and recreational use, but much remains unknown regarding its genetics, including the molecular determinants of cannabinoid content. Here, we describe a combined physical and genetic ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The pieces of interest (to me) of that first write-up.

 

[DennisBrown]

then why are so many growers burning their healthy plants with these uv tubes?

"These UV tubes" aren't all the same. The vary as much as 10x the amount of UVB they have. There's someone in this thread using our Flower Power that is having an issue, but that is super rare, and again, we've been doing this longer than anyone. I've heard more from Agro users because their bulbs are higher total UVB. The design goal (for us) isn't to make the lamp as high as possible, or we would just use a medical lamp, 100% narrowband UVB @ 313nm +/-. The goal is the high band stuff (280-290nm), which does the triggering, while NOT making the total bulb 75% UVB. For starters, a bulb that hot will get noticed by the FDA, but more importantly, it's hard to work with because exposure times are so short. Don't take the %s too serious, but this is why we have 7%, 14% and two 34% bulbs, and working on a new formula for a different industry, but will have some uses in close up cannabis as well, closer to 10%. The main point is you can't lump all UV bulbs in the same pot. If someone is burning plants, they are using the wrong bulb for their application or they aren't using it proper in some way.

 

[DennisBrown]

Hell yes its worth the risk! All experimenting done is worth the risk. Our posting of experiments gone bad will help more growers not do the same thing. Same reason you tell the server, the food is wrong. You are helping the next customer hopefully. And really, burning the tops of a few buds, was worth it. I just did some lst and good to go. I'm not sure how moe killed his, but If you are watching them while experimenting, you can move them, or move your light up, or shorten time. I've never killed any. been experimenting with these for 4 or 5 runs now. Perhaps the solacure is more Intense than the agromax.

We just have a very different spectrum. I think they have more total UVB, but ours is shifted where we want it, in the absolute highest bands. This is also the part of the spectrum that has the most energy, and burn potential, but burning plants when used right is rare. If it is happening, I want to know and want to talk to the person myself to figure out why. This is how we all learn.

 

[MIMedGrower]

"These UV tubes" aren't all the same. The vary as much as 10x the amount of UVB they have. There's someone in this thread using our Flower Power that is having an issue, but that is super rare, and again, we've been doing this longer than anyone. I've heard more from Agro users because their bulbs are higher total UVB. The design goal (for us) isn't to make the lamp as high as possible, or we would just use a medical lamp, 100% narrowband UVB @ 313nm +/-. The goal is the high band stuff (280-290nm), which does the triggering, while NOT making the total bulb 75% UVB. For starters, a bulb that hot will get noticed by the FDA, but more importantly, it's hard to work with because exposure times are so short. Don't take the %s too serious, but this is why we have 7%, 14% and two 34% bulbs, and working on a new formula for a different industry, but will have some uses in close up cannabis as well, closer to 10%. The main point is you can't lump all UV bulbs in the same pot. If someone is burning plants, they are using the wrong bulb for their application or they aren't using it proper in some way.

I was only referring to solacure and agromax. Don’t know any others. Both mentioned in previous comments.

I appreciate your knowledge but you avoid answering any question or comment that puts your product in question.

You stated cmh and mh have no uvb under 300 but both do. And now avoid answering about growers burning plants with your bulbs.

And yes someone said dr. Bugby sells product. But if you listen to him he is more worried about having the right meter to test plant lighting with his students. So he designed some. I’m not against someone representing or owning a company. I was a sales manager for almost 20 years.

 

[sshz]

Dennis, can you comment on this bulb?

SolarSystem UVB Replacement Bulb

UVB Replacement light made by California Lightworks. Latest generation high output UVB T5 fluorescent bulb.

californialightworks.com

 

[Milson]

Is nobody going to comment on having an extremely clear positive result after six days?

 

[DennisBrown]

I was only referring to solacure and agromax. Don’t know any others. Both mentioned in previous comments.

I appreciate your knowledge but you avoid answering any question or comment that puts your product in question.

You stated cmh and mh have no uvb under 300 but both do. And now avoid answering about growers burning plants with your bulbs.

And yes someone said dr. Bugby sells product. But if you listen to him he is more worried about having the right meter to test plant lighting with his students. So he designed some. I’m not against someone representing or owning a company. I was a sales manager for almost 20 years.

I'm not avoiding at all. In fact, I've posted a couple of times about it, clearly saying I need more information. We've been selling lamps for many, many years. Burning plants is not common unless someone is running them too long. If there is another scenario that burns them, I'm the first person that wants to know. I gave my personal email and phone number to get more info. This is a fine format for chatting, but not for debugging a problem, it's too slow.

I've personally tested CMH and MH, they have some UVA but not UVB. The main reason isn't the technology (they actually produce UVB but the glass envelope is designed to block it). Maybe someone is making some since I've done testing, which has been some time, but I would want to buy them and test them myself.

 

[DennisBrown]

Dennis, can you comment on this bulb?

SolarSystem UVB Replacement Bulb

UVB Replacement light made by California Lightworks. Latest generation high output UVB T5 fluorescent bulb.

californialightworks.com

Honestly, I couldn't tell you much anything about it. I haven't bought one to test, and don't know a lot of people using those.

 

[Moshmen]

what d word?

Dispensary- 4 letter word down here they are horrible

 

[MIMedGrower]

I'm not avoiding at all. In fact, I've posted a couple of times about it, clearly saying I need more information. We've been selling lamps for many, many years. Burning plants is not common unless someone is running them too long. If there is another scenario that burns them, I'm the first person that wants to know. I gave my personal email and phone number to get more info. This is a fine format for chatting, but not for debugging a problem, it's too slow.

I've personally tested CMH and MH, they have some UVA but not UVB. The main reason isn't the technology (they actually produce UVB but the glass envelope is designed to block it). Maybe someone is making some since I've done testing, which has been some time, but I would want to buy them and test them myself.

I linked dr. Bugby’s university of Utah spectrum analysis on the Phillips 315 3100k cmh bulb earlier. It shows both uva and uvb.

and Phillips uses glass and gasses and higher temps as well as square wave low frequency ballasts to run the bulb to maximize the sunlight spectrum as close as they could. I purchased them because of the information I linked.

Do you have any links to tests showing the 8% increase in thc you claim? I have only seen 4% at most.