-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Flowering.... trimming fan leaves off....leaving fan leaves on
- Thread starter vapedg13
- Start date
Green_science
Active member
As I said early on this thread anything green on a plant can perform photosynthesis, because it contains chlorophyll.
This is going to get a little bit complex so bare with me.
Chloroplasts are organelle's, in biology organelle's are "sub units" inside a cell, a simple way of understanding this is to think of a cell as an orchestra and it's organelles as the individual instruments, each with an, important, and different, part to play.
Inside these organelle's is where, among other things, Chlorophyll is found.
Cells>Organelle's>Chlorophyll.
There are a couple of different chlorophyll molecules in our beloved plants that we need to pay attention to these are named "chlorophyll a" and, you guessed it "chlorophyll b".
[sidenote] Some of you may of heard the word "Photoreceptor" chlorophyll is a Photoreceptor....anyway.
These 2 main chlorophyll molecules, a and b, work together, "a" having a far greater role in this process than "b" but by working together they are able to absorb light AKA energy at different wavelengths, this is the reason why some bulbs work better than others, you all heard the term plant usable light and PAR, well this is the science behind it.
For any of you who are interested in why red light is more effective for a blooming plant, and blue light more suited to vegative growth, I will touch on it very quickly as it's slightly off topic for this thread.
The easiest way for me to explain would be to say, plants do not want or ask for differing spectrum's at different times during their life, at all, but by us giving it to them, we can accelerate and enhance the processes that are occurring, so, when we give red light to a heavy flowering plant the natural processes that are already occurring inside a flowering plant are greatly enhanced and triggered, and the same stands true for blue light and vegative growth. Anyone interested in this further, can hit me up, and I'll teach you all about the light absorbing pigments cryptochromes, phytochromes and phototropins and how greater intensity's of light energy at differing wavelengths, trigger plant processes.
Back to the topic at hand.
These chlorophyll molecules are found in the plants flowers, provided they are, or are a shade of green, now, if you completely stripped a plant just before flowering it might grow decent flowers still, but, it absolutely could have grown bigger flowers had you not stripped it bare. The reason behind this is quiet simple, at the first stage of fructification ,before you have bud sites, if you had no leaves you would have nothing building these bud sites, you would have bare minimum photosynthesis (aka manufacturing of carbohydrates and the consequent building of proteins and enzymes) that build these bud sites, not that it wont still happen because it will, remember if its green it probably has chlorophyll in it and if it has them "Photoreceptors",....then... that's right, Photosynthesis will occur.
After our leaves have done their job and built these flowering spots, these bud sites will absolutely be able to photosynthesize "power" their selves, hence why a lot of you are noticing that defoliating after a few weeks of flowering yields better results.
Now THE IMPORTANT PART will defoliation help, there is no black and white here, with our weak HID lights that can barely penetrate the surface of a few leaves in a crowded room, defoliation, provided it is done at the correct time and without excessive stress to the plant will ABSOLUTELY help I have attached and image to help explain this
Now sure the un-defoliated plant, on the right, may have much more leaves thus more surface area thus more chlorophyll molecules, and thus be capable of more photosynthesis (why do you think larger outdoor plants yield more), the problem with that how ever is that although it has more chlorophyll molecules, under our pathetic HID lighting systems that barely penetrate through a few leaves, it actually has less chlorophyll molecules with access to usable (wavelenghts) of light.
In the sun you hardly have this problem and defoliation of outdoor plants (under most circumstances) is not going to help and may in some cases even be counter productive.
So why the varied results between people.
There are many many factors here, leaves serve other purposes, as most of you know, for example transpiration, perhaps the humidity in some of you're rooms is at such a level that is was actually beneficial to have the extra transpiration than to exchange that for more usable light, perhaps you're plants was not crowded or tall enough to warrant defoliation or perhaps all these things at once.
Perhaps you trimmed you're plants to early and/or to much and caused stress, and there's a 1000 other reasons that could be of factor in this.
Some synthetic ferts and additives already contain the enzymes carbohydrates and proteins that photosynthesis produces, thus a different feeding regime could definitely yield a different result on the same plant, trimmed at 1 week bloom, some ferts have more of the enzymes for example a plant needs to build node sites, etc etc and I could carry on.
Bottom line is this, in the right circumstance pruning our favorite flower bearing plant could absolutely yield a better final result, it's not open for discussion, it comes down to this, if pruning did not yield a better result for you, then it simply wasn't the right circumstance
On a side note, how you been Jbonez?
This is going to get a little bit complex so bare with me.
Chloroplasts are organelle's, in biology organelle's are "sub units" inside a cell, a simple way of understanding this is to think of a cell as an orchestra and it's organelles as the individual instruments, each with an, important, and different, part to play.
Inside these organelle's is where, among other things, Chlorophyll is found.
Cells>Organelle's>Chlorophyll.
There are a couple of different chlorophyll molecules in our beloved plants that we need to pay attention to these are named "chlorophyll a" and, you guessed it "chlorophyll b".
[sidenote] Some of you may of heard the word "Photoreceptor" chlorophyll is a Photoreceptor....anyway.
These 2 main chlorophyll molecules, a and b, work together, "a" having a far greater role in this process than "b" but by working together they are able to absorb light AKA energy at different wavelengths, this is the reason why some bulbs work better than others, you all heard the term plant usable light and PAR, well this is the science behind it.
For any of you who are interested in why red light is more effective for a blooming plant, and blue light more suited to vegative growth, I will touch on it very quickly as it's slightly off topic for this thread.
The easiest way for me to explain would be to say, plants do not want or ask for differing spectrum's at different times during their life, at all, but by us giving it to them, we can accelerate and enhance the processes that are occurring, so, when we give red light to a heavy flowering plant the natural processes that are already occurring inside a flowering plant are greatly enhanced and triggered, and the same stands true for blue light and vegative growth. Anyone interested in this further, can hit me up, and I'll teach you all about the light absorbing pigments cryptochromes, phytochromes and phototropins and how greater intensity's of light energy at differing wavelengths, trigger plant processes.
Back to the topic at hand.
These chlorophyll molecules are found in the plants flowers, provided they are, or are a shade of green, now, if you completely stripped a plant just before flowering it might grow decent flowers still, but, it absolutely could have grown bigger flowers had you not stripped it bare. The reason behind this is quiet simple, at the first stage of fructification ,before you have bud sites, if you had no leaves you would have nothing building these bud sites, you would have bare minimum photosynthesis (aka manufacturing of carbohydrates and the consequent building of proteins and enzymes) that build these bud sites, not that it wont still happen because it will, remember if its green it probably has chlorophyll in it and if it has them "Photoreceptors",....then... that's right, Photosynthesis will occur.
After our leaves have done their job and built these flowering spots, these bud sites will absolutely be able to photosynthesize "power" their selves, hence why a lot of you are noticing that defoliating after a few weeks of flowering yields better results.
Now THE IMPORTANT PART will defoliation help, there is no black and white here, with our weak HID lights that can barely penetrate the surface of a few leaves in a crowded room, defoliation, provided it is done at the correct time and without excessive stress to the plant will ABSOLUTELY help I have attached and image to help explain this
Now sure the un-defoliated plant, on the right, may have much more leaves thus more surface area thus more chlorophyll molecules, and thus be capable of more photosynthesis (why do you think larger outdoor plants yield more), the problem with that how ever is that although it has more chlorophyll molecules, under our pathetic HID lighting systems that barely penetrate through a few leaves, it actually has less chlorophyll molecules with access to usable (wavelenghts) of light.
In the sun you hardly have this problem and defoliation of outdoor plants (under most circumstances) is not going to help and may in some cases even be counter productive.
So why the varied results between people.
There are many many factors here, leaves serve other purposes, as most of you know, for example transpiration, perhaps the humidity in some of you're rooms is at such a level that is was actually beneficial to have the extra transpiration than to exchange that for more usable light, perhaps you're plants was not crowded or tall enough to warrant defoliation or perhaps all these things at once.
Perhaps you trimmed you're plants to early and/or to much and caused stress, and there's a 1000 other reasons that could be of factor in this.
Some synthetic ferts and additives already contain the enzymes carbohydrates and proteins that photosynthesis produces, thus a different feeding regime could definitely yield a different result on the same plant, trimmed at 1 week bloom, some ferts have more of the enzymes for example a plant needs to build node sites, etc etc and I could carry on.
Bottom line is this, in the right circumstance pruning our favorite flower bearing plant could absolutely yield a better final result, it's not open for discussion, it comes down to this, if pruning did not yield a better result for you, then it simply wasn't the right circumstance
On a side note, how you been Jbonez?
Last edited:
W
willyweed
thanks for the input above green science ,one other thing i would add.is to mention the more times you grow a single strain will help you in deciding where and when to rip leaves. when dialing in a room you are also dialing in the plant.we all know different plants have different needs.if you keep changing the variety of plant grown you will have to keep dialing in the different plants ie. plant needs .willyweed
TLoft13
Member
I can tell you right now that the science isn't even settled for "real" gardeners. Ask 3 expert gardeners how to trim/maintain/ rejuvenate an old oak and you get 4-5 opinions.
One will do a very light cut in autumn, another one slightly more in spring, one will tell you not to change the character of the tree too much, basically only cutting sick and dead wood....And most of these experts (most of them the owners of their businesses) were rather up-to-date reagarding plant science, working hand in hand with universitys ect.
I normally manage fuck things up just bad enough that the plant starts to defoliate itself. I really don't have any say so in the matter.
genetics are a powerful, inevitable deciding factor in all nearly all facets of life.
way more than some would like admit to
it messes up their argument...
I can tell you right now that the science isn't even settled for "real" gardeners. Ask 3 expert gardeners how to trim/maintain/ rejuvenate an old oak and you get 4-5 opinions.
And most of these experts (most of them, the owners of their businesses) were rather up-to-date regarding plant science, working hand in hand with universities ect.
very well said T13,
also what possible flaw in the anti defo argument that isn't brought up and discussed is we are growing in a artificial environment with a fixed point of light(s)
imho, stocky indy doms with wide bladed leafs like dinner plates need a good strip as they bloom but breeds like c99 and golden tiger that are branchy thin bladed plants need min to zero trimming of leafs.
Green_science
Active member
Just keeping people off my scent, I drew it like a 7 year old would on purpose.... I can draw much better if I wanted to
bmaster
Member
I've played around with it and didn't like it. I think the most that I'll be doing is right before harvest to lighten the load of pulling fans, if I even feel like doing that. I tend to run plants longer than expected and they usually gobble all their fans off by that point so, meh.
I would just encourage you to try it out a bit if you are unsure and on the fence. Just see what works for your situation.
I would just encourage you to try it out a bit if you are unsure and on the fence. Just see what works for your situation.
Arm I get ya and I'll add that I pref Vert over horiz...but it is how you use it all....I feed low, utilize the strain types vs method used, strip the lowers and use the space and the varieties to the best of my ability..without making it complex at all I just can tell when they are happy or by slow response..
lack of any response usually tells me somethins off...
good job DHF...dig your style m8....keep um inline sir...
my avr is 1.3gpw no matter the variety...and you may not see many that can claim that in mixed perpetual enviros...I do count #s in perpetual sets and pay attention to every detail..so its all very possible..I know of seen and have pics of folk workin on avr 3-4lbs/1k...all vert...very well designed...
I always know when my ladies are at peak health cause I never get a break..heh....they out grow me and its bloody hard just to keep up...prune, trim, cut back, train..no matter...all same when their singin...
Im not sayin nothin on the fan thing...To me its both ways and all good...do what ya feel and if ya talk to them they will talk to you..but if your plants look pissed off and "Act" slow?......its prob your fault..
Interesting to read how ppl deal with plants...If they just tried to live and grow with them it would be so easy...
Stress...heh...you stress a healthy plant?...not where Im from..
If its healthy you can do about anything and it jst keeps commin back stronger..in bloom proper work will cause auxins to go off and it really grows for You...
but most ppl blame the plants for sad expression or results...go figure...
ok to much talk I know...so my basic on fan or not....
Fans are the solar panels and food reserve..do they need all of them?..naa....
I leave a few lowers on but remove node point so I can use the fan as a diagnosis point...it will show low feeding Defs first usually by classic yellowin , etc..
later in bloom if its a certain type I take a few off each wk till its done..just helping it along at best...
I do not over feed and pull green plants...or remove fans to force bloom processes...but it def dont hurt to take some off and help light reach innermost bud sites and use these techs that do assist in this..
man theres so many ways to skin these cats....its really all just growin..the more ya try to learn the more you actually might tho..
just like the more you talk to your plants the more they can talk back to ya...
from what I was taught growin up....when ya do any of this and use the auxins of the plant it def will go crazy for ya...
plant cells, capillaries and vessels become more functional and stronger just like human bones when broken heal stronger..
in plants its said to actually increase the throughput and become more productive after it repairs itself from supercroppin techs or about any manipulation tech....
anyway...I dig doin these techs...
also never under estimate what this plant can do....
good stuff fellaz
this rig is what it is...not my work but it says it all...and anything is possible..
FOE20
Good Lord, not to try and hijack or anything but is there any other information available on that cage build? Did you trim out in there?
I am trying a more aggressive defoliation this run than I ever have before. Usually I just clear out under the screen, and take most of the big leaves off about 1-2 weeks before take down. I would swear I noticed higher yield in doing this as opposed to just letting it go all native.
The whole defoliation thing is not quite understood, even by the people who practice it, in my opinion.
I had a word with some lad on a forum a while back, and I decided to try defoliation. Then, on my latest grow, I did some experiments, one of which was defoliating really aggressively.
It seems some of the advice is not quite right, but there also seem to be really positive benefits, or should I say, the doubts/worries I had were pretty much allayed.
One test I did and which you can easily do with little effort was to remove a fan leaf on one side of a branch, and leave the other one parallel to it. You'll see that this has different effects depending on when and how you do it, and what the leaf is facilitating, ie a bud or a stem.
What I found was that the advice to indiscriminately strip of all fan leaves during veg, was bad advice. Yes the plant will now focus on producing stems, but at a much slower rate.
What I found was that the side branch from the node with no fan to facilitate it's growth, suffered as a result, compared to the lateral branch which had a fan leaf attached directly below.
What I also found was that after a certain point, the negative effect of stripping the fan leaf is lessened, to a point where you can safely remove the leaf without worry that it will impede the plant in any way. In other words, if you stripped the fan leaf just as the lateral shoot was just forming, it would develop at a much slower rate in comparison to one which had a fan leaf harvesting light energy. But, if allowed to grow and it's own leafs to form, the removal of the fan leaf at that point didn't effect it's growth much, if at all, in relation to that with the fan left on.
I found a very similar effect on bud development as well. Bud sites which were stripped of their adjoining fans before the shoots had developed, suffered a stunted start, whilst those which had developed slightly, when inspected later on and nearer to harvest day, had suffered little, if any growth impairment.
It tells me that there is a place for and a way to practice defoliation, but that, just like many gardening practices, it's a discipline and needs to be better understood to see the full benefits.
I had a word with some lad on a forum a while back, and I decided to try defoliation. Then, on my latest grow, I did some experiments, one of which was defoliating really aggressively.
It seems some of the advice is not quite right, but there also seem to be really positive benefits, or should I say, the doubts/worries I had were pretty much allayed.
One test I did and which you can easily do with little effort was to remove a fan leaf on one side of a branch, and leave the other one parallel to it. You'll see that this has different effects depending on when and how you do it, and what the leaf is facilitating, ie a bud or a stem.
What I found was that the advice to indiscriminately strip of all fan leaves during veg, was bad advice. Yes the plant will now focus on producing stems, but at a much slower rate.
What I found was that the side branch from the node with no fan to facilitate it's growth, suffered as a result, compared to the lateral branch which had a fan leaf attached directly below.
What I also found was that after a certain point, the negative effect of stripping the fan leaf is lessened, to a point where you can safely remove the leaf without worry that it will impede the plant in any way. In other words, if you stripped the fan leaf just as the lateral shoot was just forming, it would develop at a much slower rate in comparison to one which had a fan leaf harvesting light energy. But, if allowed to grow and it's own leafs to form, the removal of the fan leaf at that point didn't effect it's growth much, if at all, in relation to that with the fan left on.
I found a very similar effect on bud development as well. Bud sites which were stripped of their adjoining fans before the shoots had developed, suffered a stunted start, whilst those which had developed slightly, when inspected later on and nearer to harvest day, had suffered little, if any growth impairment.
It tells me that there is a place for and a way to practice defoliation, but that, just like many gardening practices, it's a discipline and needs to be better understood to see the full benefits.
Check out this canopy. It's packed in there. Many different strains. All of them defoliated very thoroughly a few weeks back. Sorry for the shit lighting.
The biggest question mark when doing this was that which permeates this whole debate - the whole theory behind the fan leaf and it's role in the plant's metabolism; ie that the fan harvests light energy and powers bud development and by stripping it you restrict the plant's ability to do that.
The stripping of the plants allowed the light all the way through the canopy, but I worried about the above, obviously.
Well, it seems to have had a positive effect and it appears that whatever we think we know about the role of fan leaves directly relative to bud development, must be reconsidered.
This is a bud at the the very back corner of the canopy on a branch which had been stripped completely of it's fan leaves. It's a foot long and nice and firm. I'm moving other buds out of the way with a cane to take this photo. When I release them they're as packed in like this as you can see in the first picture. I seriously doubt I would have got this kind of result if I hadn't defoliated.
If the fan leaves were directly related to the plant's ability to produce bud, this wouldn't have formed like it has. My thinking is that maybe the plant processes energy as a whole, using a total sum of it's green matter, and maybe the leaf is many times more efficient than we think.
It wouldn't be strange to assume that the plant produces many times the amount of foliage it actually needs in order to maximise it's chances in the wild, and in an indoor environment where conditions are perfectly tailored it needs far less of them, to the point where just a few small leaves can produce buds like this.
It's also worth considering that like I said earlier, the fan leaf facilitates a certain type of growth, after which point the smaller leaves facilitate the growth of the bud or stem they're directly attached to.
The biggest question mark when doing this was that which permeates this whole debate - the whole theory behind the fan leaf and it's role in the plant's metabolism; ie that the fan harvests light energy and powers bud development and by stripping it you restrict the plant's ability to do that.
The stripping of the plants allowed the light all the way through the canopy, but I worried about the above, obviously.
Well, it seems to have had a positive effect and it appears that whatever we think we know about the role of fan leaves directly relative to bud development, must be reconsidered.
This is a bud at the the very back corner of the canopy on a branch which had been stripped completely of it's fan leaves. It's a foot long and nice and firm. I'm moving other buds out of the way with a cane to take this photo. When I release them they're as packed in like this as you can see in the first picture. I seriously doubt I would have got this kind of result if I hadn't defoliated.
If the fan leaves were directly related to the plant's ability to produce bud, this wouldn't have formed like it has. My thinking is that maybe the plant processes energy as a whole, using a total sum of it's green matter, and maybe the leaf is many times more efficient than we think.
It wouldn't be strange to assume that the plant produces many times the amount of foliage it actually needs in order to maximise it's chances in the wild, and in an indoor environment where conditions are perfectly tailored it needs far less of them, to the point where just a few small leaves can produce buds like this.
It's also worth considering that like I said earlier, the fan leaf facilitates a certain type of growth, after which point the smaller leaves facilitate the growth of the bud or stem they're directly attached to.
Attachments
exactly and well said papaduc....
someone finally gets the genetic side of it and the simple practical
function of the leaf
