NO... fan leaves are the solar panels...yeehaw.. inside plucking off the fan leaves and packing them in does indeed yield more tho..hmmm...I know what works but not always the science behind it...
-
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"!
Does bud itself need direct light? Why?
- Thread starter Redrum92
- Start date
sorry man, in reality fan leaves work nothing like solar panels do... solar panels consume zero of the electrical energy they create, on the other hand...
fan leaves, once past veg and especially the largest ones, consume just as much if not more of the photosynthetic energy they produce in the form of plant sugars... and are just keeping light away from the buds which can use the extra light and photosythesize for themselves especially with its sugar leaves.
the amount and rate at which you defoliate is very strain dependant I will add.
fan leaves, once past veg and especially the largest ones, consume just as much if not more of the photosynthetic energy they produce in the form of plant sugars... and are just keeping light away from the buds which can use the extra light and photosythesize for themselves especially with its sugar leaves.
the amount and rate at which you defoliate is very strain dependant I will add.
vitamingreeninc
Member
This makes sense, and then if you follow that thinking, when you remove a huge fan leaf, the plant may try and grow it back, but it won't have time to eve be as big as it was so all the sugars and energy used by that fan leaf will be overspill so it would be transfered to other areas...right?
This makes sense, and then if you follow that thinking, when you remove a huge fan leaf, the plant may try and grow it back, but it won't have time to eve be as big as it was so all the sugars and energy used by that fan leaf will be overspill so it would be transfered to other areas...right?
pretty much,
also, and the main point is, it allows the buds below that huge fan leaf to photosythesize more sugars of their own so they rely less on the movement of sugars from other peripheral areas of the plant, which costs the plant engery it could use to create buds or resin.
and again, the direct light effects the hormone levels in the bud and increases catalyzation of cannabinoids.
vitamingreeninc
Member
pretty much,
also, and the main point is, it allows the buds below that huge fan leaf to photosythesize more sugars of their own so they rely less on the movement of sugars from other peripheral areas of the plant, which costs the plant engery it could use to create buds or resin.
and again, the direct light effects the hormone levels in the bud and increases catalyzation of cannabinoids.
You agree it is strain dependent though correct? Do you also aspire to the thinking that Indica hybrids are more well suited for this method?
yep, narrow leaf varieties are already pretty open and cause very little shading in the first place... also I have noticed first hand that removing to many leaves to fast from a narrow leaf causes some issues.
my hypothesis would be that in general narrow leaf sativas have less chlorophyll (more pale green) in their leaves and therefore more leaves are better especially when they are grown away from the equaltorial/tropical sun.
i still remove leaves from narrow leaf sativas just much more selectively
my hypothesis would be that in general narrow leaf sativas have less chlorophyll (more pale green) in their leaves and therefore more leaves are better especially when they are grown away from the equaltorial/tropical sun.
i still remove leaves from narrow leaf sativas just much more selectively
lol if this was the case ,, then over centuries would the plant not adapt to droping leaves to create more seed cause really that is what the plant is really trying to do ??? but it appears ??? that is not the case thread after thread have shown just that loss of yield do to the stress of removing the storage banks of plants starches n sugars that create them nice buds
You know the saying and its true light do pass through leafs
and with that said why really bother one internode one shoot 1 " fucking usless bud wet no other to join to lol and when dried is nothing but fucking shake in a bag Geez
makes sense now does it ??
Here is a idea just like tomato plants remove them suckers there only taking away energy from that actual good buds you know them ones that join up and what people call nice buds ???
You know the saying and its true light do pass through leafs
and with that said why really bother one internode one shoot 1 " fucking usless bud wet no other to join to lol and when dried is nothing but fucking shake in a bag Geez makes sense now does it ??
Here is a idea just like tomato plants remove them suckers there only taking away energy from that actual good buds you know them ones that join up and what people call nice buds ???
Attachments
Redrum92
Well-known member
He actually did explain why- with the hormones and secondary metabolite. It was basic, but hey he contributed ... I can't tell if I'm being trolled or if somehow my OP called you out on some sensitive issue I'm not aware of?
It still just seemed odd as the whole "leaves = main solar cells/power plants" paradigm seems to hold true 99% of the time. But I guess that's why this plant is so awesome.
I guess the next question: is bud getting light the most important? Like stripping 3/4 leaves would be beneficial? Where does it stop? Half? Just ones directly shading bud? Maybe these are better left for the defoliation thread... But I wanted to avoid it at all costs as flaming and "my experience>your experience" kinda took over. lapides you'd probably love that thread, homegirl.
Anyone that can be more specific is much appreciated but I appreciate all the knowledge dropped off in this thread. Thanks to the majority of you.
I dont think any one thing in cultivation is most important, but getting as much intense light to the buds is in my experience (aside from having buds to close to the light) a good thing...
all of your specifics are really really strain and evnironmentally dependant...
I typically take ones that are significantly shading budsites... removing 3/4 could be beneficial for some varieties that are naturally super leafy and bushy with wide leaves... and could be detrimental to a pure narrow leaf sativa.
Redrum92
Well-known member
Infinitesimal thanks a lot for all your contributions. The whole green=chlorophyll=energy thing was obvious but needed to be said.... I get so caught up in the little details I forget the obvious.
I still think the defoliation thing is a good debate as people swear by either side ...
I'm still wondering if bud is more efficient in producing "energy". And does light->bud = "energy" for whole plant? Or is 'energy' just used locally? Same with leaves- vice versa.
I still think the defoliation thing is a good debate as people swear by either side ...
I'm still wondering if bud is more efficient in producing "energy". And does light->bud = "energy" for whole plant? Or is 'energy' just used locally? Same with leaves- vice versa.
no problem glad to help,
I try and make things as simple as possible to understand without losing the principal concept and sometimes it just takes someone bringing something to your attention in a different way to make things click... been there.
from my understanding sugars can move, via the phloem, around the plant though it requires energy to do so... making increased localized photosythesis more efficient in total when all things are considered....
resin production/cannabinoid synthesis is highly dependent on light intensity, lower shelf buds and larf buds are typically lower quality and less potent than ones in the optimal "zone" for light intensity (which is strain dependant).
I think its a trade off with all things being factors, maybe bud is not "more efficient" but probably equal to or less than only to a slight degree in terms of photosynthesis... but the overall "cos"t of consuming those sugars, in the form of making/sustaining tissues and fueling biosythesis of phytochemicals, is lower when the plant doesn't have to expend any energy to get the sugers where they need to be... which means more to use for more desirable metabolic functions like increased; calyx count, resin production, terpene and cannabinoid synthesis etc.
so when you consider that you wont loose much photosynthetic energy if any, and the reduced "cost" of localized production of sugars should offset any possible loss... (though I believe its been proven by the horticulture industry that old large leaves are inefficient and should be rermoved just because they consume more than they produce)... most of the gain comes from extra resin and no B grade or Larf buds...
when done right... (as I have messed it up before, and not done it at all, and have seen the differences in the same genotype)... they typically tend to get fulller, biomass wise, and produce more resin which more resin typically means an increase in weight and quality
I try and make things as simple as possible to understand without losing the principal concept and sometimes it just takes someone bringing something to your attention in a different way to make things click... been there.
from my understanding sugars can move, via the phloem, around the plant though it requires energy to do so... making increased localized photosythesis more efficient in total when all things are considered....
resin production/cannabinoid synthesis is highly dependent on light intensity, lower shelf buds and larf buds are typically lower quality and less potent than ones in the optimal "zone" for light intensity (which is strain dependant).
I think its a trade off with all things being factors, maybe bud is not "more efficient" but probably equal to or less than only to a slight degree in terms of photosynthesis... but the overall "cos"t of consuming those sugars, in the form of making/sustaining tissues and fueling biosythesis of phytochemicals, is lower when the plant doesn't have to expend any energy to get the sugers where they need to be... which means more to use for more desirable metabolic functions like increased; calyx count, resin production, terpene and cannabinoid synthesis etc.
so when you consider that you wont loose much photosynthetic energy if any, and the reduced "cost" of localized production of sugars should offset any possible loss... (though I believe its been proven by the horticulture industry that old large leaves are inefficient and should be rermoved just because they consume more than they produce)... most of the gain comes from extra resin and no B grade or Larf buds...
when done right... (as I have messed it up before, and not done it at all, and have seen the differences in the same genotype)... they typically tend to get fulller, biomass wise, and produce more resin which more resin typically means an increase in weight and quality
lol if this was the case ,, then over centuries would the plant not adapt to droping leaves to create more seed cause really that is what the plant is really trying to do ??? but it appears ??? that is not the case thread after thread have shown just that loss of yield do to the stress of removing the storage banks of plants starches n sugars that create them nice buds
You know the saying and its true light do pass through leafs
makes sense now does it ??
Here is a idea just like tomato plants remove them suckers there only taking away energy from that actual good buds you know them ones that join up and what people call nice buds ???
We the cultivators are creating a unnatural situation by excluding male plants. With seedless flowers and a extended flowering period the plants finish far differently than they would if left in a native setting.
nkatadelgormo
Member
Food for thought. I was once owner of a large hydroponic warehouse grow. The plants were grown in hydro buckets and fed by flood and drain. However a small amount of nutrient solution would remain at the bottom of the buckets.
One day we get spooked by a break in. We were 5 weeks into flower. We chopped everything basically off at the stalk and left turning off all power to lights pumps ac everything. . After one month of not hearing anything from cops, we returned. In our haste to leave, we noticed that on virtually every plant that we chopped, , we had left a few small buds and branches. Every one of the buds was now fat and ready to chop. Over 5 oz total.
They had no light. No nutrient change. No oxygen exchange. No co2. These buds matured over 4 weeks and never saw any light. The roots were left in a nutrient solution they continued to feed. The buds were virtually the same in every aspect as if they had been in full light. I can't explain how. But it's a fact
One day we get spooked by a break in. We were 5 weeks into flower. We chopped everything basically off at the stalk and left turning off all power to lights pumps ac everything. . After one month of not hearing anything from cops, we returned. In our haste to leave, we noticed that on virtually every plant that we chopped, , we had left a few small buds and branches. Every one of the buds was now fat and ready to chop. Over 5 oz total.
They had no light. No nutrient change. No oxygen exchange. No co2. These buds matured over 4 weeks and never saw any light. The roots were left in a nutrient solution they continued to feed. The buds were virtually the same in every aspect as if they had been in full light. I can't explain how. But it's a fact
Last edited:
B
Baron Greenback
There may well be something in it - I firmly believe there is.
Most soft fruit seems to ripen in the sun, hence seasons for peaches, strawberries and so on. Eating them out of season is a tasteless experience.
According to my botanist dad, he believes flowers receive energy from the closest leaf, the smaller the petiole, the faster the energy gets there (I paraphrase somewhat - I was quite lean when he was explaining this). He also thinks defoliation will stimulate leaf production.
One thing that does seem to be overlooked is that we have a new paradigm with indoor growing, it is related to outside but palpably different.
Personally, I'm willing to try most things, if it works keep it. Observation and experimentation - sounds like science to me
Most soft fruit seems to ripen in the sun, hence seasons for peaches, strawberries and so on. Eating them out of season is a tasteless experience.
According to my botanist dad, he believes flowers receive energy from the closest leaf, the smaller the petiole, the faster the energy gets there (I paraphrase somewhat - I was quite lean when he was explaining this
). He also thinks defoliation will stimulate leaf production.One thing that does seem to be overlooked is that we have a new paradigm with indoor growing, it is related to outside but palpably different.
Personally, I'm willing to try most things, if it works keep it. Observation and experimentation - sounds like science to me
In general, it is considered most important that the plant be healthy for it to produce high THC levels. The genotype of the plant, a result of seed selection, is the primary factor which determines the THC levels. After that, the provision of adequate organic nutrients, water, sunlight, fresh air, growing space, and time for maturation seems to be the key to producing high-THC Cannabis in all circumstances. Stress resulting from inadequacies in the environment limits the true expression of phenotype and cannabinoid potential. Cannabis finds a normal adaptive defense in the production of THC laden resins, and it seems logical that a healthy plant is best able to raise this defense. Forcing plants to produce is a perverse ideal and alien to the principles of organic agriculture. Plants are not machines that can be worked faster and harder to produce more. The life processes of the plant rely on delicate natural balances aimed at the ultimate survival of the plant until it reproduces. The most a Cannabis cultivator or researcher can expect to do is provide all the requisites for healthy growth and guide the plant until it matures.
Flowering in Cannabis may be forced or accelerated by many different techniques. This does not mean that THC production is forced, only that the time before and during flowering is shortened and flowers are produced rapidly. Most techniques involve the deprivation of light during the long days of summer to promote early floral induction and sexual differentiation. This is sometimes done by moving the plants inside a completely dark structure for 12 hours of each 24-hour day until the floral clusters are mature. This stimulates an autumn light cycle and promotes flowering at any time of the year. In the field, covers may be made to block out the sun for a few hours at sunrise or sunset, and these are used to cover small plants. Photoperiod alteration is most easily accomplished in a greenhouse, where blackout curtains are easily rolled over the plants. Drug Cannabis production requires 11-12 hours of continuous darkness to induce flowering and at least 10 hours of light for adequate THC production (Valle et al. 1978). In a greenhouse, supplemental lighting need be used only to extend daylength, while the sun supplies the energy needed for growth and THC biosynthesis. It is not known why at least 10 hours (and preferably 12 or 13 hours) of light are needed for high THC production. This is not dependent on accumulated solar energy since light responses can be activated and THC production increased with only a 40-watt bulb. A reasonable theory is that a light-sensitive pigment in the plant (possibly phytochrome) acts as a switch, causing the plant to follow the flowering cycle. THC production is probably associated with the induction of flowering resulting from the photoperiod change.
Cool night temperatures seem to promote flowering in plants that have previously differentiated sexually. Extended cold periods, however, cause metabolic processes to slow and maturation to cease. Most temperate Cannabis strains are sensitive to many of the signs of an approaching fall season and respond by beginning to flower. In contrast, strains from tropical areas, such as Thailand, often seem unresponsive to any signs of fall and never speed up development.
Contrary to popular thought, planting Cannabis strains later in the season in temperate latitudes may actually promote earlier flowering. Most cultivators believe that planting early gives the plant plenty of time to flower and it will finish earlier. This is often not true. Seedlings started in February or March grow for 4-5 months of increasing photoperiod before the days begin to get shorter following the solstice in June. Huge vegetative plants grow and may form floral inhibitors during the months of long photo-period. When the days begin to get shorter, these older plants may be reluctant to flower because of the floral inhibitors formed in the pre-floral leaves. Since floral cluster formation takes 6-10 weeks, the initial delay in flowering could push the harvest date into November or December. Cannabis started during the short days of December or January will often differentiate sex by March or April. Usually these plants form few floral clusters and rejuvenate for the long season ahead. No increased potency has been noticed in old rejuvenated plants. Plants started in late June or early July, after the summer solstice, are exposed only to days of decreasing photoperiod. When old enough they begin flowering immediately, possibly because they haven’t built up as many long-day floral inhibitors. They begin the 6-10 week floral period with plenty of time to finish during the warmer days of October. These later plantings yield smaller plants because they have a shorter vegetative cycle. This may prove an advantage. in greenhouse research, where it is common for plants to grow far too large for easy handling before they begin to flower. Late plantings after the summer solstice receive short inductive photoperiods almost immediately. However, flowering is delayed into September since the plant must grow before it is old enough to flower. Although flowering is delayed, the small plants rapidly produce copious quantities of flowers in a final effort to reproduce.
Flowering in Cannabis may be forced or accelerated by many different techniques. This does not mean that THC production is forced, only that the time before and during flowering is shortened and flowers are produced rapidly. Most techniques involve the deprivation of light during the long days of summer to promote early floral induction and sexual differentiation. This is sometimes done by moving the plants inside a completely dark structure for 12 hours of each 24-hour day until the floral clusters are mature. This stimulates an autumn light cycle and promotes flowering at any time of the year. In the field, covers may be made to block out the sun for a few hours at sunrise or sunset, and these are used to cover small plants. Photoperiod alteration is most easily accomplished in a greenhouse, where blackout curtains are easily rolled over the plants. Drug Cannabis production requires 11-12 hours of continuous darkness to induce flowering and at least 10 hours of light for adequate THC production (Valle et al. 1978). In a greenhouse, supplemental lighting need be used only to extend daylength, while the sun supplies the energy needed for growth and THC biosynthesis. It is not known why at least 10 hours (and preferably 12 or 13 hours) of light are needed for high THC production. This is not dependent on accumulated solar energy since light responses can be activated and THC production increased with only a 40-watt bulb. A reasonable theory is that a light-sensitive pigment in the plant (possibly phytochrome) acts as a switch, causing the plant to follow the flowering cycle. THC production is probably associated with the induction of flowering resulting from the photoperiod change.
Cool night temperatures seem to promote flowering in plants that have previously differentiated sexually. Extended cold periods, however, cause metabolic processes to slow and maturation to cease. Most temperate Cannabis strains are sensitive to many of the signs of an approaching fall season and respond by beginning to flower. In contrast, strains from tropical areas, such as Thailand, often seem unresponsive to any signs of fall and never speed up development.
Contrary to popular thought, planting Cannabis strains later in the season in temperate latitudes may actually promote earlier flowering. Most cultivators believe that planting early gives the plant plenty of time to flower and it will finish earlier. This is often not true. Seedlings started in February or March grow for 4-5 months of increasing photoperiod before the days begin to get shorter following the solstice in June. Huge vegetative plants grow and may form floral inhibitors during the months of long photo-period. When the days begin to get shorter, these older plants may be reluctant to flower because of the floral inhibitors formed in the pre-floral leaves. Since floral cluster formation takes 6-10 weeks, the initial delay in flowering could push the harvest date into November or December. Cannabis started during the short days of December or January will often differentiate sex by March or April. Usually these plants form few floral clusters and rejuvenate for the long season ahead. No increased potency has been noticed in old rejuvenated plants. Plants started in late June or early July, after the summer solstice, are exposed only to days of decreasing photoperiod. When old enough they begin flowering immediately, possibly because they haven’t built up as many long-day floral inhibitors. They begin the 6-10 week floral period with plenty of time to finish during the warmer days of October. These later plantings yield smaller plants because they have a shorter vegetative cycle. This may prove an advantage. in greenhouse research, where it is common for plants to grow far too large for easy handling before they begin to flower. Late plantings after the summer solstice receive short inductive photoperiods almost immediately. However, flowering is delayed into September since the plant must grow before it is old enough to flower. Although flowering is delayed, the small plants rapidly produce copious quantities of flowers in a final effort to reproduce.
Dready_jake
Member
That's a good question on bud and having stomata, I'd like to know that too.
The resin is the plants defense from UV rays and animals/bugs.
My led has UV and my bud is always RIDICULOUSLY frosty regardless of genetics. (I've had one bad run under this light and it was still super frosty...)
Last bit here is Just my observations. Not necessarily facts lol.
The resin is the plants defense from UV rays and animals/bugs.
My led has UV and my bud is always RIDICULOUSLY frosty regardless of genetics. (I've had one bad run under this light and it was still super frosty...)
Last bit here is Just my observations. Not necessarily facts lol.
Redrum92
Well-known member
This is groundbreaking. Holy shit..... I wonder if anyone would have the time/resources to waste doing a simar test.
It seems bud maybe uses stores energy in leaves/plants?
Thanks all of you for your discussion... It adds to everyone's knowledge base.
