Side by side comparison
- Thread starter Incognegro
- Start date
what was the result? I think the un touched plant would produce more bud?
each leaf is a grow factrory where photosynthesis takes place now if you start pulling off leaf then photosynthesis is going to slow= result in less bud.
I can see how certain training and pruning practises can increase yield, but cant see how pulling off "all" the fan leaf is going to increase yield only reduce it? well logic would tell you that.
each leaf is a grow factrory where photosynthesis takes place now if you start pulling off leaf then photosynthesis is going to slow= result in less bud.
I can see how certain training and pruning practises can increase yield, but cant see how pulling off "all" the fan leaf is going to increase yield only reduce it? well logic would tell you that.
Incognegro
Member
With run with the side by side experiment yielded the same overall yield, both plants bringing in 78 grams... not too bad... when i have time and space to do this again, I will, and will wait til after the stretch 
Holy crap. So you're telling me that defoliating your plant made NO DIFFERENCE?
JWP
Active member
Nope...
The non-defoliated plant was also defoliated...
Not the best side by side.
I dont understand why in an experiment where 1 plant is defoliated and 1 is not and grown side by side you would then cut leaves off the one that is not supposed to have leaves removed...
Incognegro
Member
With the way I did it, (which was at the start of flowering, and not after the 3week stretch) I don't think it was a fair comparison... not sure what the folks on the "ignore list" are saying, lol, nor do I care, that's why they are there.
The only thing I noticed was the wet weight was more, (I'm thinking because of the leaves and whatnot) but the final dry weight was the same.... I have pics, just gotta upload them...
The only thing I noticed was the wet weight was more, (I'm thinking because of the leaves and whatnot) but the final dry weight was the same.... I have pics, just gotta upload them...
C
Cheeb
I cant see the pics because I'm not your friend, but you say they gave you the same weight.
I can only imagine the weight/product from the defoiled plant was of better structure/density. Yes?
When measuring the control plant what exactly are you considering weight?
I've done similar "tests" and have determined that while the defoiled plant did out weigh the non-defoiled plant - the buds from it were all grade A sell-able, where-as the non-defoiled plant may have weighed a tad more, but that was including lower larfy which one wouldn't be happy finding in their bag.
I think my non-defoiled plants may weigh more when you get down to the nitty gritty, but I still favor the defoiled approach as I do not have the time/patience to make hash w/ all the lower stuff.
- -
That being said if you lower pruned the non-defoiled plant then I'm not sure how this can even be considered a side by side comparison.. A "control" in any experiment should remain untouched... in order to compare the experimented sides results to.
I can only imagine the weight/product from the defoiled plant was of better structure/density. Yes?
When measuring the control plant what exactly are you considering weight?
I've done similar "tests" and have determined that while the defoiled plant did out weigh the non-defoiled plant - the buds from it were all grade A sell-able, where-as the non-defoiled plant may have weighed a tad more, but that was including lower larfy which one wouldn't be happy finding in their bag.
I think my non-defoiled plants may weigh more when you get down to the nitty gritty, but I still favor the defoiled approach as I do not have the time/patience to make hash w/ all the lower stuff.
- -
That being said if you lower pruned the non-defoiled plant then I'm not sure how this can even be considered a side by side comparison.. A "control" in any experiment should remain untouched... in order to compare the experimented sides results to.
KrazyieFosho
Member
Can i see the pics plz.
El Toker
Member
I've not seen the pictures as I'm not willing to buy into the whole private gallery thing, it's irritatingly immature even by the standards of this forum.
A control doesn't have to remain untouched. If you were trialling a new medication to help people who had just had heart attacks you wouldn't have a control group who were just directed into a darkened room and ignored for 24 hours. It makes more sense to have a control group treated in a standard way, and lollipoping is exactly that as many if not most growers do this to some extent.
It's already been conceded by the devout defoliators that defoliation increases the required vegging time by sending the plant into shock for a week and shortens the flowering period also by shocking the plant. All of this was supposed to have been offset by the increased yield from the extra bud sites. The results are pretty clear, there is no increased yield.
Time to let it go, you guys are starting to look more than a little bit ridiculous now. You've based all this on the word of someone who gave themselves a user-name in leet-speak, only posted on one other thread and failed to address any of the many criticisms made. He's not even posted since October last year, he knows that his attempt to con the forum into accepting him as some kind of revolutionary horticulturist has failed and he's walked away. The only attempt to demonstrate the "high yield" technique has been a crushing failure. Now that failure has been explained away because apparently nobody smokes small buds any-more, I must have missed that memo.
A control doesn't have to remain untouched. If you were trialling a new medication to help people who had just had heart attacks you wouldn't have a control group who were just directed into a darkened room and ignored for 24 hours. It makes more sense to have a control group treated in a standard way, and lollipoping is exactly that as many if not most growers do this to some extent.
It's already been conceded by the devout defoliators that defoliation increases the required vegging time by sending the plant into shock for a week and shortens the flowering period also by shocking the plant. All of this was supposed to have been offset by the increased yield from the extra bud sites. The results are pretty clear, there is no increased yield.
Time to let it go, you guys are starting to look more than a little bit ridiculous now. You've based all this on the word of someone who gave themselves a user-name in leet-speak, only posted on one other thread and failed to address any of the many criticisms made. He's not even posted since October last year, he knows that his attempt to con the forum into accepting him as some kind of revolutionary horticulturist has failed and he's walked away. The only attempt to demonstrate the "high yield" technique has been a crushing failure. Now that failure has been explained away because apparently nobody smokes small buds any-more, I must have missed that memo.
Incognegro
Member
I will let the pics speak for themselves, when I get a chance to upload them... I took over a 100 pics....
Been busy setting up the new room...
I agree with you on most points.
I believe that a true test will only be accomplished if you run two side by side grows where you completely fill up two identical spaces with plants and defoliate one side and don't defoliate the other.
To me, it seems clear that the argument was that if you defoliate you can cram a few more plants in there then you otherwise could, in which case you might increase your yield over a denser canopy.
If you put one plant in the center of an empty space and another plant (clones from same mother) next to it and then defoliate one of them, it seems clear that the defoliated plant will have less larf, but no overall gain in yield.
This is what my own personal experiment showed. In the same cab, competing with one another, the plants yielded within a gram of one another but one had more fluff and useless larf at the bottom and one had smaller buds distributed throughout the plant.
I hope to do a documented side by side on this subject in a few months. Just for fun.
so two boxes with the same intensity of light and ventilation, one with 10 defoliated plants, one with 5 foliated ones (or however the space works)?
if someone has the space to do something like this I would think this would be the best way to figure out the benefits
if someone has the space to do something like this I would think this would be the best way to figure out the benefits
El Toker
Member
That's certainly the aim of a SCROG or a SOG which are tried and trusted and also fit in with our understanding of the basics of plant physiology, but that's not the same as the OPs suggestion of stripping most of the foliage away leaving a tall skinny traumatised plant that only captures a fraction of the light falling on it.
Incognegro
Member
Rasta311, you're as bout as useful as tits on a bull... find someone else to admire, I've got enough fans, and haters...
I had a control plant, a trimmed plant, and defoliated plant...
What i did seem to notice is that the defoliated plant, did seem to be a lil more densely packed compared to the untouched control plant, but only slightly more than the trimmed plant.
Where are those pics? lol..gotta find the cam... will try to load them today/tonight.
Anti, I tend to agree with you...about defoliation leading to more of a structural difference vs actual physical weight...
I had a control plant, a trimmed plant, and defoliated plant...
What i did seem to notice is that the defoliated plant, did seem to be a lil more densely packed compared to the untouched control plant, but only slightly more than the trimmed plant.
Where are those pics? lol..gotta find the cam... will try to load them today/tonight.
Anti, I tend to agree with you...about defoliation leading to more of a structural difference vs actual physical weight...
Incognegro
Member
Well, okay here are the pics as promised... I was also wrong with the dry weights... I forgot I ran multiple experiments or "tests" doing different things, and those weights reflected such.
Defoliated
Trimmed
Untouched
Trimmed and Def side by side, defoliated on the right
Defoliated top bud
Defol in the bag
After looking over all my notes (yes, I take notes
)
Defoliated plant: 233 grams freshly cut, 117g semi dry, 90gs 1week later, completely dry.
Trimmed plant: 293g freshly cut, 134 semi dry, 90gs 1 week later, completely dry.
Untouched plant: 315g freshly cut, 159 semi dry, 90s 1 weeks later completely dry.
Also, when I say freshly cut, I mean cut off the plant, and all leaves trimmed already, nothing being weighed but buds, maybe an occasional stem, or branch.
These were the final verdicts....
As I've said b4, once I get everything running smoothly at the new spot, once I get some more clones going, I will do test again.
Oh, I promised I'd list strain at the end.... Mendo Purple was my lady for the experiment...
After looking over all my notes (yes, I take notes
)Defoliated plant: 233 grams freshly cut, 117g semi dry, 90gs 1week later, completely dry.
Trimmed plant: 293g freshly cut, 134 semi dry, 90gs 1 week later, completely dry.
Untouched plant: 315g freshly cut, 159 semi dry, 90s 1 weeks later completely dry.
Also, when I say freshly cut, I mean cut off the plant, and all leaves trimmed already, nothing being weighed but buds, maybe an occasional stem, or branch.
These were the final verdicts....
As I've said b4, once I get everything running smoothly at the new spot, once I get some more clones going, I will do test again.
Oh, I promised I'd list strain at the end.... Mendo Purple was my lady for the experiment...
90g, 90g, 90s?
You realize the difference between 90g and 99g could mean $100 to some folks. Maybe the next side by side could be more detailed.
You realize the difference between 90g and 99g could mean $100 to some folks. Maybe the next side by side could be more detailed.
Defoliated plant: 233 grams freshly cut, 117g semi dry, 90gs 1week later, completely dry.
Trimmed plant: 293g freshly cut, 134 semi dry, 90gs 1 week later, completely dry.
Untouched plant: 315g freshly cut, 159 semi dry, 90s 1 weeks later completely dry.
Also, when I say freshly cut, I mean cut off the plant, and all leaves trimmed already, nothing being weighed but buds, maybe an occasional stem, or branch.
These were the final verdicts....
sounds like density was increased, probably the inner buds forming better...
