- This information is going to come mainly from memory and anecdotally, but I am sure others can relate to what the concept I am eliciting. Note that I am placing these concepts in general terms for discussion, and should be taken with a grain of salt.
- The scope of this idea has become much more solidifying after reading over the recent New Zealand study (The Scrog study.. Can’t remember the name) and their investigation of hydroponic cultivation and Cannabis.
- In particular what I found interesting were among the individual plants from clone, the discrepancy in individual cannabinoid levels from crop to crop.
- As we know, factors like yield, taste, and cannabinoid levels are controlled both by genetic factors fundamentally, and environmental factors. What I found surprising was the degree to which environmental factors can impact something like cannabinoid level, such as THC levels in particular.
- It appeared to me based on this data that in general terms, an individual plant will have a genetically determined “average” level that can be obtained; so for instance, if one plots THC level on a scale from 0% to 30% (which is the minimum and about the maximum THC % obtainable that studies have shown), one can break up that scale into 0%-9.99% (10%) as being low, 10%-20% as being medium, and 20%-30% as being high on the scale.
- The other factor that popped out to me from this data, was that this “average” genetically determined level is strongly influenced by environmental factors, which seemed to be about in the range of 10 percentage points up and down per individual on this scale. In other words, for an individual with the natural genetic inclination for high THC, poorly grown will obtain around 20% as is it’s genetic predetermination, but grown well can allow for “full” phenotypic expression and obtain up to as high as 30% THC.
- And as one can see, even a discrepancy of 3% to 5% is actually very large, and there would be a big difference in Cannabis that is 3% THC or 9% THC, even though the samples come from the same individual cultivar. And again, when considering a difference between 10% THC, or 15%, or even 20% and 25%, that is a big difference, with just a (seemingly) simple combination of factors that make up ‘environment’ being a strong influence on this THC level that can be obtained from any particular individual plant.
- I have made other investigations into Cannabis nutrient levels based off of various tissue analysis, what is a “proper” level of nutrients/elements, and when the plant seems to use more or less (to try and garner ideas about ratios and amounts of fertilizer I want to use in my soil and for top dressing). I can say preliminary that high N, K, and Ca should be maintained, with P levels about half to even a third of those levels, more on par with the amount of Mg (If I remember correctly, don’t have the notes in front of me). Also, a P/K boost is probably useful around week 5, but of course, much more K than P is required (based on what tissue analysis seems to tell us....). I have been making and testing out some soil mixes that follow along these ideas of high N and K vs P, as well as testing some VERY hot, nutrient rich soil mixes, to see what happens. I am trying to kill plants by overdoing it lol. But this is in response to being largely disappointed with the LC mix 1 with amendment 1 (bone+ blood), it runs out of nutrients, especially N and Ca, much too quickly.
- Of course for any individual or population this range/scale I am using will vary according to that individual, but I am throwing out these ideas in general terms of mind off of this recent data. What this all means in summary, is that environment has a strong impact on phenotypic expression of any particular individual. Growers should be inclined to perhaps try and work on improving individual environmental conditions to their optimum for that particular individual plant so as to maximize phenotypic expression and obtain the full potential that individual plant can achieve (if their results with a particular plant or strain are not what was expected or desired) (before they decide to do away with a particular strain).
Discuss!
- The scope of this idea has become much more solidifying after reading over the recent New Zealand study (The Scrog study.. Can’t remember the name) and their investigation of hydroponic cultivation and Cannabis.
- In particular what I found interesting were among the individual plants from clone, the discrepancy in individual cannabinoid levels from crop to crop.
- As we know, factors like yield, taste, and cannabinoid levels are controlled both by genetic factors fundamentally, and environmental factors. What I found surprising was the degree to which environmental factors can impact something like cannabinoid level, such as THC levels in particular.
- It appeared to me based on this data that in general terms, an individual plant will have a genetically determined “average” level that can be obtained; so for instance, if one plots THC level on a scale from 0% to 30% (which is the minimum and about the maximum THC % obtainable that studies have shown), one can break up that scale into 0%-9.99% (10%) as being low, 10%-20% as being medium, and 20%-30% as being high on the scale.
- The other factor that popped out to me from this data, was that this “average” genetically determined level is strongly influenced by environmental factors, which seemed to be about in the range of 10 percentage points up and down per individual on this scale. In other words, for an individual with the natural genetic inclination for high THC, poorly grown will obtain around 20% as is it’s genetic predetermination, but grown well can allow for “full” phenotypic expression and obtain up to as high as 30% THC.
- And as one can see, even a discrepancy of 3% to 5% is actually very large, and there would be a big difference in Cannabis that is 3% THC or 9% THC, even though the samples come from the same individual cultivar. And again, when considering a difference between 10% THC, or 15%, or even 20% and 25%, that is a big difference, with just a (seemingly) simple combination of factors that make up ‘environment’ being a strong influence on this THC level that can be obtained from any particular individual plant.
- I have made other investigations into Cannabis nutrient levels based off of various tissue analysis, what is a “proper” level of nutrients/elements, and when the plant seems to use more or less (to try and garner ideas about ratios and amounts of fertilizer I want to use in my soil and for top dressing). I can say preliminary that high N, K, and Ca should be maintained, with P levels about half to even a third of those levels, more on par with the amount of Mg (If I remember correctly, don’t have the notes in front of me). Also, a P/K boost is probably useful around week 5, but of course, much more K than P is required (based on what tissue analysis seems to tell us....). I have been making and testing out some soil mixes that follow along these ideas of high N and K vs P, as well as testing some VERY hot, nutrient rich soil mixes, to see what happens. I am trying to kill plants by overdoing it lol. But this is in response to being largely disappointed with the LC mix 1 with amendment 1 (bone+ blood), it runs out of nutrients, especially N and Ca, much too quickly.
- Of course for any individual or population this range/scale I am using will vary according to that individual, but I am throwing out these ideas in general terms of mind off of this recent data. What this all means in summary, is that environment has a strong impact on phenotypic expression of any particular individual. Growers should be inclined to perhaps try and work on improving individual environmental conditions to their optimum for that particular individual plant so as to maximize phenotypic expression and obtain the full potential that individual plant can achieve (if their results with a particular plant or strain are not what was expected or desired) (before they decide to do away with a particular strain).
Discuss!
Thank you.
