Proper maturity for an Ace sativa - ignore the trichomes?

[pinkus]

Yeah there are even tables of this in one of the rosenthal books. I personally almost always run under 12/12 (11/13) because I run sativas mostly... I used to run a northern lights at 13/11 all the time with no problems. I never measured to quantify weight gains but it ran 6 days longer than the same plant at 12/12.... IIRC

 

[mayan]

Curiouser and curiouser. Thanks, everyone - really interesting info. Ahhhh, the shifting sands of extreme variability!!

That's concerning about the "potency." We'll have to see - I'm running a couple of "waves" of plants - the first were flipped into 11/13 after about six weeks. I did it for a couple of reasons: a) my plants tended to start bolting as flowering period drifted on and I wanted to see whether one less hour would address it; and 2) I am growing a Zamaldelica which looked absolutely recalcitrant to flower - little wispy things and it was a matter of experiment or chop as she was taking up valuable real estate in my small flower room.

Now, I'm a non-botanical as they come, so it's hard to know why any of my grows do what they do - BUT...the Zamaldelica (one of the earlier wave - started flowering on 10/2)immediately started packing it on heavily after I changed the light. Whether it was due to the change in light regimen or whether it was merely its time to explode, I don't know. Similarly, the Malawi (2nd wave - placed into flower on 10/26) has been producing massive, dense buds. Genetics? Nature? Nurture? Don't have a clue - I can add, however, that I have not seen the rampant bolt yet either - in any of my plants - first or second wave. Whether this has come at the expense of potency, however, is unknown. If so, it's a deal breaker and I'll probably go back to 12/12 next time around.

Adze - can you refer me to any particular thread? I have been searching but haven't seen anything on point. I have read it - just don't remember any particulars.

Again, y'all...thanks!!!

 

[MostlyMe]

MostlyMe,

Reducing light hours absolutely does make a big difference in flowering time. Don't take my word for it, do any reading on the topic here and you'll find virtual unanimous agreement. A rare moment…
Adze.

I guess we would have to define 'a big difference'. I did read up on the subject, and wasn't impressed. What's another week on 12+ weeks for us non-commercial growers? (And I doubt you gain a week anyway by lowering to 11,25/13,75).

 

[Adze]

With the exception of auto flowers and some equatorial strains cannabis is photoperiod dependent to flower at all. Here’s what I’d call a big difference many strains wont flower at with 18 hours of light but start flowering soon after reducing the period to 12. It’s not that the plants grow more or less it’s that they will not flower at all or begin flowering if the photoperiod isn’t right. If you aren’t impressed you haven’t read enough. Try searching: cannabis photoperiod.

Here are a couple of ok threads about it. Seems like this information is so well accepted that you don’t find much debate among knowledgeable growers.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=156499&highlight=6/12

http://boards.cannabis.com/advanced-techniques/19331-interesting-advice-dj-short-photoperiods.html

 

[MostlyMe]

With the exception of auto flowers and some equatorial strains cannabis is photoperiod dependent to flower at all. Here’s what I’d call a big difference many strains wont flower at with 18 hours of light but start flowering soon after reducing the period to 12. It’s not that the plants grow more or less it’s that they will not flower at all or begin flowering if the photoperiod isn’t right. If you aren’t impressed you haven’t read enough. Try searching: cannabis photoperiod.

Here are a couple of ok threads about it. Seems like this information is so well accepted that you don’t find much debate among knowledgeable growers.

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=156499&highlight=6/12

http://boards.cannabis.com/advanced-techniques/19331-interesting-advice-dj-short-photoperiods.html

I guess I wasn't very precise: I meant I wasn't impressed with how much faster sativa's finish when you reduce the daylight hours beyond the standard 12 - so 11/13, 10/14, etc.

Let's take a sativa listed as needing 12 weeks to finish - this is almost certainly in 12/12 conditions. How much time do you think you can gain by running 11/13 or 10/14?

 

[Adze]

That’s a fair enough question but I can’t even venture a guess. Logically it would be strain dependent so my experience won’t help much. My concern was the loss of potency with the shorter light period. As I said this is an anecdotal observation, meaning I don’t have any supportive data. It is my subjective impression that the high of this cloned plant may have been adversely affected by the shortened photoperiod. It would be interesting to know if anyone else has had similar thoughts or experience.

 

[mayan]

Hey all - Well, speaking of anecdotal...I just tried a small sample of the Zamaldelica taken at about 9 weeks of flowering whilst I was culling lower scruff and it is outstanding - I'm relieved. The high is soaring and powerful. Electric in mind and body. I can only imagine how it will transform if it goes another several weeks - and it looks like it could. If the shortened period of light took away from the potency, I'll trade what ever I lost for bud activity that seemed to explode when I switched to 11/13. To be truthful, I can't imagine it's missing much. I have no comment on the length of the high - I'm pretty still ascendant but I realize the sample is mighty young at 9 weeks - but the quality is pretty amazing.

Needless to say - this is just a dispatch from a highly subjective and variable front. I"m sure everyone has very different approaches and tolerances.

 

[MostlyMe]

That’s a fair enough question but I can’t even venture a guess. Logically it would be strain dependent so my experience won’t help much. My concern was the loss of potency with the shorter light period. As I said this is an anecdotal observation, meaning I don’t have any supportive data. It is my subjective impression that the high of this cloned plant may have been adversely affected by the shortened photoperiod. It would be interesting to know if anyone else has had similar thoughts or experience.

Well, from what I've seen in discussions and reports, you'd be lucky to shave off a week for a 12-14 weeker. Not worth it IMO, as I stated before, because of the possible loss in potency.

I do agree we just don't have the proper data to make an informed decision, so it boils down to what one chooses to believe. I believe 11/13 is not worth it because it won't reduce flowering time that much, while lowering yield slightly and potency quite a bit.

Hey all - Well, speaking of anecdotal...I just tried a small sample of the Zamaldelica taken at about 9 weeks of flowering whilst I was culling lower scruff and it is outstanding - I'm relieved. The high is soaring and powerful. Electric in mind and body. I can only imagine how it will transform if it goes another several weeks - and it looks like it could. If the shortened period of light took away from the potency, I'll trade what ever I lost for bud activity that seemed to explode when I switched to 11/13. To be truthful, I can't imagine it's missing much. I have no comment on the length of the high - I'm pretty still ascendant but I realize the sample is mighty young at 9 weeks - but the quality is pretty amazing.

Needless to say - this is just a dispatch from a highly subjective and variable front. I"m sure everyone has very different approaches and tolerances.

That is good to know, as I have one going that is not far behind

P.S. Dont wait too long, if you have read this thread

 

[mayan]

Ah thanks, MostlyMe...As opposed to the aforesaid Panama which is looking ready at 71 days (although I'll let her go a bit longer), the Zamaldelica (flowered at the same time) looks like she is in full flower. I won't let her go too long (as I need the space in my little room) - I'm thinking 14 weeks - but I'll see how she talks to me. It's nice to be in a position to really benefit from this discussion.

Going by some of the criteria in this thread, I would be willing to consider taking the Panama now - although someone I very much trust swears by Panama taken at 14 weeks. I took a sample of her the other day. Who knows, maybe this is an earlier pheno? When it dries out over the next few days, I'll be able to an impression as to where she's at in her evolution. (Although I'm aware that -by the time I sample her- she'll already be farther downstream by several days).

 

[pinkus]

Again, Ed Rosenthall has tables of this in one of his books. I generally think he's the sloppiest of weed writers, but this is quite cut and dried.

just one example a lumboxafrican: it will be two numbers hours of light and weeks to harvest like this 12-11. ready?

14-13
13-12
12-11
11-10
10-9
9-8
8-7

of course this doesn't address bud quality.

 

[MostlyMe]

Again, Ed Rosenthall has tables of this in one of his books. I generally think he's the sloppiest of weed writers, but this is quite cut and dried.

just one example a lumboxafrican: it will be two numbers hours of light and weeks to harvest like this 12-11. ready?

14-13
13-12
12-11
11-10
10-9
9-8
8-7

of course this doesn't address bud quality.

A week for every extra hour of darkness? I bet he pulled those numbers out of his ass. It's just too neat and linear.

 

[pinkus]

^^^i picked that one because it was linear (i wasn't going to fuck it up ). They are all linear too a point. It really does work similar to Ed's reporting IME. I know it's easy to dismiss old ed, but in this case the reporting holds water.

 

[pinkus]

I believe 11/13 is not worth it because it won't reduce flowering time that much, while lowering yield slightly and potency quite a bit.

I've run at 11/13 and 12/12 each for several years. there was NO perceptible decline in potency using clones from mature plants. Yield was definitely lower for indica dom plants. It was much harder to quantify on sats as buds (IME) get denser and there is less "bolting", in other words just generally better.

 

[Siever]

Here is another concept that I am clearly in the minority on. I think it is completely natural for sativa have it's leaves turn yellow and drop as it matures, some strains more than others. I even encourage it with nitrogen deprivation. This is a finger to the eye of other peoples sensibilities and they think I am cruelly torturing the plant. In my opinion, it is a natural nutrient cycle and the plants are adapted to it. It even makes the final product better and more potent, IMHO. Besides, it is even pretty to look at. Back in the day, buds were more colorful than what is being sold today. Check out these pictures:


This is my latest grow that I consider a little bit over fertilized. It ripened more quickly than I anticipated:
View Image




ThaiBliss

That is how you SHOULD grow pure sativas. If you start feeding them when their leaves turn yellow, you are overfeeding them. This natural yellowing is just part of the Sativa growcycle. Do not start feeding them or you will hurt them!!

Siever

 

[MostlyMe]

^^^i picked that one because it was linear (i wasn't going to fuck it up ). They are all linear too a point. It really does work similar to Ed's reporting IME. I know it's easy to dismiss old ed, but in this case the reporting holds water.

I've run at 11/13 and 12/12 each for several years. there was NO perceptible decline in potency using clones from mature plants. Yield was definitely lower for indica dom plants. It was much harder to quantify on sats as buds (IME) get denser and there is less "bolting", in other words just generally better.

No disrespect intended, but I need more people chiming in before I change my mind.

 

[pinkus]

No problem. It is pretty well documented though. Keep on running what works for you.

 

[Suspect]

Awww yiss, so happy I found this thread. Thanks!

 

[TommyJay]

First off killer thread here!...lots of great ideas flying around. Dj Short speaks out often about the generic 18/6 veg 12/12 flower cycle stating that it seems better suited to indicas and indica Dom hybrids. He says that the 12/12 flower cycle will cause your plants to express more indica type phenos and that people would be much happier with an 11/13 flower cycle as it will cause your plants to express far more interesting and desirable phenos. He does not claim that it will cut down on flower time tho.

Now around the equator where a lot of sativas have evolved for possibly millions of years the natural light cycle is closer to 13/11 veg and 11/13 flower. So it is possible that people got the idea of the 11/13 flower cycle cutting down on flower time because an 11/13 day night should kick most sativas into flowering right away. Whereas a 12/12 day night might keep them in a sort of veg/flower limbo that might actually add a week or two to the overall flowering time?

Take this with a grain of salt as I'm only basing this off of my own intuition and not solid science.

Peace and love!!

 

[MostlyMe]

No problem. It is pretty well documented though. Keep on running what works for you.

Well actually, I think I did change my mind now. Why shouldn't I trust info I find here, in a subforum filled with sativa enthusiasts, more than I find in other random places?

 

[Siever]

Hi,

I'm about to chop some Zamaldelica's (2 to be exact).I did the 11/13 for the first time. I can't say that 12/12 is better for them, because I only did this on Haze n°2 & Malawi.
I can say that these Zamaldelica's have so heavy (trichome packed) flowers that they are bending over.
Perhaps Dubi can say if this normal for this sativa although it is hard to believe that this one hour less has so much impact.
B.T.W. My Haze n°2 plants also bended over on 12/12, but that was a known trait for that strain. At least the version I had.

Siever