I had plants that I did not do it too and those where four or five of the plants I decided to put outdoors and not flower in my little indoor area as I only wanted to keep my best five. I’ve read forums and threads on people’s opinion. I guess I could look to see if actual controlled research has been done. I can only speak for what I have seen in my own plants and my own experience. As so it should be. I guess I’ll be doing a bit of further research on it myself.

OldManRiver said:

A couple thoughts:

1) first off, the beginning of this discussion is about an outdoor grow. So indoors is kinda tangential. My comments are in light of outdoor growth.

2) healthy pot grows really vigorously. It's pretty easy for it to get eight feet tall in four months. When it gets to a certain size, it seems to accelerate. If you didn't have a control plant when you pruned, you have no way of knowing whether the growth you experienced was simply that normal acceleration.

Click to expand...

I think that's where the problem was. In that quote, I was talking about what I do.
I grow indoor. I have no real experience growing outdoor.

It may be true that sun provides enough light that lower growth being shaded doesn't have any affect on the amount of photosynthesis that occurs.

But as far as I know, no experiment has been done that shows yield comparisons of plants that have been pruned vrs ones that have not. It goes against everything I've seen to the contrary. I dunno man, it's kind of hard to make the argument without data. Specially since man kind has been improving yields by pruning for years.

Anyways. Something to think about. Would love to see data if the study is ever run.

And science doesn’t support most cannabis theories because controlled government testing(which would be presented to us as”scientific evidence “ hasn’t been done. Or more so if it has ,has not been published for general populations. Most knowledge you acquire about this plant will come from either first hand knowledge i.e. yourself or second hand from growing forums,acquaintances,or friends who grow. So it’s hard to find scientifically backed evidence. Besides science changes as time changes. It’s not permanent. And I in no way intend to be argumentative or negative in anyway. On the contrary this should be about expanding ones knowledge.

Migrower said:

I had plants that I did not do it too and those where four or five of the plants I decided to put outdoors and not flower in my little indoor area as I only wanted to keep my best five. I’ve read forums and threads on people’s opinion. I guess I could look to see if actual controlled research has been done. I can only speak for what I have seen in my own plants and my own experience. As so it should be. I guess I’ll be doing a bit of further research on it myself.

Click to expand...

I live in the Pacific Northwest. There are literally 100's of acres of legal commercially grown weed here now. The outdoor guys doing it in large scale are not defoliating.

To your point, you took your best plants, defoliated them, and compared them to worse plants that you didn't. That's hardly a controlled experiment.

I have two girl scout cookies going right now that are pretty close in size. I'll run the experiment.

People's opinions on these forums and Facebook are not useful, in my experience. Popularity doesn't equal fact. Witness the thousands of growers that are convinced that they can taste the difference between 'organic' nitrogen and 'chemical' nitrogen, or that believe that flushing removes nutes from a plant.

Migrower said:

And science doesn’t support most cannabis theories because controlled government testing(which would be presented to us as”scientific evidence “ hasn’t been done. Or more so if it has ,has not been published for general populations. Most knowledge you acquire about this plant will come from either first hand knowledge i.e. yourself or second hand from growing forums,acquaintances,or friends who grow. So it’s hard to find scientifically backed evidence. Besides science changes as time changes. It’s not permanent. And I in no way intend to be argumentative or negative in anyway. On the contrary this should be about expanding ones knowledge.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Science is absolutely relevant and quite available. Much of the chatter about flushing and nutrient use is directly contradicted by well established research and knowledge about nutrient transport pathways. I published a link to a paper that measured the effects of flushing (none) here, which was widely dismissed by the 'organic' experts. It's nonetheless valid, and consistent with the published research on plant metabolism. Search on VPD here if you're interested.

Yes I agree about people opinion and I care less about popular topics. I care about what is best for the plant. If not defoliating is better I would use that method. And No that’s not what I did. I didn’t try to do any controlled experiment. Though it was an experiment I guess. I just left four of five of my plants alone to grow by themselves. I must admit no training was done either and I’m sure that would make a difference opening up the plant. But the ones I thinned out and trained definitely grew much faster and healthier. So far from a controlled experiment but a self taught lesson none the less. I thinned out and opened up those girls I did nothing too and they are much healthier. I can go take a pic of the stalk and you can see the difference. The plants inside and out are the same age.

And there’s been research on cannabis itself or a similar plant.

Outside vs inside same age outside one of the left alone

OldManRiver said:

I live in the Pacific Northwest. There are literally 100's of acres of legal commercially grown weed here now. The outdoor guys doing it in large scale are not defoliating.

To your point, you took your best plants, defoliated them, and compared them to worse plants that you didn't. That's hardly a controlled experiment.

I have two girl scout cookies going right now that are pretty close in size. I'll run the experiment.

People's opinions on these forums and Facebook are not useful, in my experience. Popularity doesn't equal fact. Witness the thousands of growers that are convinced that they can taste the difference between 'organic' nitrogen and 'chemical' nitrogen, or that believe that flushing removes nutes from a plant.

Click to expand...

Dude, you have to stop putting words on my mouth. You have a nasty habit of pretending I said things I didn't then goi g on a long screed about it. Lol

I did no experiments. Controlled or otherwise. I never claimed to have. Since this topic came up I've been researching, and every stitch of peer reviewed evidence I've seen points toward pruning increasing yields.

Inside better photo

Here is my take on this situation. Leaves are necessary to produce the energy needed for plant growth... no leaves, no energy. More leaves, more energy. This can't be disputed. Removing lower leaves and branches will decrease the amount of energy available to the who plant needed for vegetative growth. If a plant can maintain a green leaf, it is getting energy from it. Plants also store energy in the larger leaves, often found on the lower branches.
When flowering comes around, things change. The plant changes from growing as much vegetation that it can (in order to fill up the gas tank) to producing offspring. It uses the energy that it produced during the vegetative stage, along with whatever the leaves are producing, to create seeds... or try to. The lower branches don't get much light and use a lot of energy trying to make seeds, so yes, it might be better to remove some of the lowest branches (or buds, specifically), but only during flowering. This will allow some of the stored energies to better make larger buds elsewhere .
In a plant's world, all branches that can make seeds are valuable, even the ones that make the small and wispy buds as long as they can make seeds. Removing the buds from these branches would be beneficial in producing larger buds, but leaving the leaves on would still benefit the plant. When you lightly take off a few leaves to allow light to enter the canopy, there is enough other growth to make up for the few missing leaves and later on, during flowering, the extra light helps the buds sitesto grow bigger. It's a balancing act between having as much energy producing leaves as possible and having as much light reach into the plant to increase the number and size of flowering points, whenever it begins to flower.
From a grower's point, big buds are desired and removing the bottom most branches aren't going to make too much of a difference, although loss of leaves equates to loss of made and stored energy. Without direct strong light, buds don't grow much, so the concentration should be to let light into the canopy as much as possible and not worry about the lowest branches since they produce energy and don't really get much light to grow buds, so it doesn't take many resources away from the main plant.
I'm sure there are a lot of holes in my overview of everything, but this is the easiest explanation that I have hatched. If the branches aren't getting enough light to hold their own, they wilt and die.

BigCube said:

Dude, you have to stop putting words on my mouth. You have a nasty habit of pretending I said things I didn't then goi g on a long screed about it. Lol

Click to expand...

I quoted you. Not sure how that's putting words in your mouth.

OldManRiver said:

I quoted you. Not sure how that's putting words in your mouth.

Click to expand...

Lol go back and read what you wrote. I never said any of the things you think I said. Anyways I'm not much for argument, I accept what the research says. You may very well be right. But all peer reviewed data I've seen supports pruning increasing yield and plant size.

If you want to convince me they are all wrong, I can't just take your word for it. I need evidence.

BigCube said:

Lol go back and read what you wrote. I never said any of the things you think I said. Anyways I'm not much for argument, I accept what the research says. You may very well be right. But all peer reviewed data I've seen supports pruning increasing yield and plant size.

If you want to convince me they are all wrong, I can't just take your word for it. I need evidence.

Click to expand...

Why not get two cuttings from the same plant, try both methods. Why rely on what someone has said, experiment for yourself? I have done this myself, different light and environment, always indoors, different lights. I might add, that plants outside grow a lot better, so that may skew results.

Ace9137 said:

Why not get two cuttings from the same plant, try both methods. Why rely on what someone has said, experiment for yourself? I have done this myself, different light and environment, always indoors, different lights. I might add, that plants outside grow a lot better, so that may skew results.

Click to expand...

Even if I did. The results would be nothing more than personal testament. Without hundreds of attempts and peer reviewed data logging my results would be useless.

Other more credable people have already done the experiments written and published scientific peer reviewed papers. Every one I've seen supports exactly what we've all been told. Pruning supports better plant growth and yields.

No need to do a pointless test on my own. They've already been done by professionals.

Here’s one by leafy. A published article at least. Must be supported by sources I would imagine.

Two more articles. It’s hard to find any that say not pruning increases yields.

BigCube said:

Even if I did. The results would be nothing more than personal testament. Without hundreds of attempts and peer reviewed data logging my results would be useless.

Other more credable people have already done the experiments written and published scientific peer reviewed papers. Every one I've seen supports exactly what we've all been told. Pruning supports better plant growth and yields.

No need to do a pointless test on my own. They've already been done by professionals.

Click to expand...

Who are the professionals? We all know that the data on the internet are obscure, pointless, and often times advertising gimmicks that are not even based on actual science. I find it interesting that point out doing a test and saying it would be "pointless", how do you think science is done, by a bunch of guys and gals in an underground bunker wearing white lab coats? Science is done by those without funding from some corporate sponsor who tells you what results to focus on. I believe Migrower even pointed out that most experiments are done in controlled environments, to add to that, most times, the results are skewed for continued funding from said sponsor. So what would be a credible person? Well, I think anyone that would do the experiment and produce results could/would/should be considered credible. You want to learn to grow, pay attention to how tomatoes are grown, or better yet go to burpee, good info there, maybe just consider that cannabis is a plant under the same rules as any other plant.

Migrower said:

Two more articles. It’s hard to find any that say not pruning increases yields.View attachment 880104View attachment 880105

Click to expand...

Migrower, who do you think perpetuates these myths about growing? Most not all, cannabis sites will tell you that pruning is a wonderful idea, they are wrong, try out the experiment, you were in college, you do know how to set up an experiment? You also know how to be objective? Weed sites are not accurate when it comes to gardening, at times I find flaws even at gardening sites, their information is much more on par compared to cannabis sites. Tell me, what would you do if after pruning your plant it catches a virus of some sort? Better yet, it looked healthy so you cut off a bunch of bottom leaves, branches, ect. , and now the top leaves are turning yellow and dying? Truth be told, you seem intelligent, yet, like most of us, have been suckered in by big corporate advertising/propaganda tactics.

Fwiw. Indoor I prune. I wouldn't call it defoliation only to help with air flow and light penetration.

Outdoor I really cannot see any benefit to it. Airflow and light are not really a concern.

Personally I don't buy into the theory that plants divert more energy to other bud sites. I mean plant processes happen and as long as there are adequate nutrients etc for those processes I can't see any reason there would be a change.

To me that's no different than saying giving your plant more nutes will make it grow bigger buds. A healthy plant does not divert more energy than it normally does.

I get the tomatoe reference but also fail to see how it applies to cannabis.

Pruning and defoliation are different. I do agree that selective pruning may increase yeilds by allowing better light penetration and airflow. But I also feels this mostly applies to indoor and would not be a concern so much with outdoor

Ace9137 said:

Who are the professionals? We all know that the data on the internet are obscure, pointless, and often times advertising gimmicks that are not even based on actual science. I find it interesting that point out doing a test and saying it would be "pointless", how do you think science is done, by a bunch of guys and gals in an underground bunker wearing white lab coats? Science is done by those without funding from some corporate sponsor who tells you what results to focus on. I believe Migrower even pointed out that most experiments are done in controlled environments, to add to that, most times, the results are skewed for continued funding from said sponsor. So what would be a credible person? Well, I think anyone that would do the experiment and produce results could/would/should be considered credible. You want to learn to grow, pay attention to how tomatoes are grown, or better yet go to burpee, good info there, maybe just consider that cannabis is a plant under the same rules as any other plant.

Migrower, who do you think perpetuates these myths about growing? Most not all, cannabis sites will tell you that pruning is a wonderful idea, they are wrong, try out the experiment, you were in college, you do know how to set up an experiment? You also know how to be objective? Weed sites are not accurate when it comes to gardening, at times I find flaws even at gardening sites, their information is much more on par compared to cannabis sites. Tell me, what would you do if after pruning your plant it catches a virus of some sort? Better yet, it looked healthy so you cut off a bunch of bottom leaves, branches, ect. , and now the top leaves are turning yellow and dying? Truth be told, you seem intelligent, yet, like most of us, have been suckered in by big corporate advertising/propaganda tactics.

Click to expand...

Scientists in the requiset field. I am talking about peer reviewed scientific papers written by scientists who's job it is to study such things and who ha e devoted years of their lives researching, testing and running the numbers.

You know, the absolute best possible evidence a person could have? Yeah, that.