|
in:
|
|
| Forums > Marijuana Growing > Cannabis Botany and Advanced Growing Science > The facts about CO2 ppm: don't use 1,500! | ||
| The facts about CO2 ppm: don't use 1,500! | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 | ||||
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: https://www.scirus.com/ & https://www.google.com/schhp?hl=en
Posts: 2,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The facts about CO2 ppm: don't use 1,500!
High,
I haven't posted much lately, but I thought this topic was important enough to write a thread. I have written about this topic quite a lot in the past, but I have never made a thread just for this topic. My goal: to try and kill the myth that 1,500 ppm CO2 is ideal. I want to get it known in the cannabis world, that it's important to not use > ~1,100-1,200 ppm CO2. In short, the claim that 1,500 ppm CO2 is ideal for cannabis is total hogwash. I challenged anyone a while ago to find a single scientific study showing 1,500 ppm is ideal for C3 flowering plants, or even just to find the reasons why it's claimed 1,500 ppm is ideal in the cannabis world. I assume the myth (yet another!) came from the liked of Ed Rosenthall or George Cervantes or Mel Frank, etc. If there is interest in the 'whys' I can explain why it's important to not use > 1,200 ppm, ideally we would use ~1,000-1,100 ppm. The effects from "super-optimal" CO2 concentrations range from reduced rate of photosynthesis, to reduced yield, reduced root growth, reduced stomatal openness, increased photorespiration, etc. In other words, nothing good. The reason why we should ideally use ~1,000 ppm, is for most C3 species (and C4 I think), CO2 "saturation" occurs at ~1,000-1,100 ppm. That means more than ~1,100 ppm (up to 1,200 ppm) isn't going to help the plants, it's only going to waste CO2 and hinder plants if CO2 is about > 1,200 ppm. The reason why we should ideally use < 1,200 ppm CO2 is the effect high (super-optimal) CO2 has on "Rubisco activase", the substance that turns inactive "Rubisco" into active Rubsico. At CO2 > ~1,200 (and temp > ~89'F) Rubsico activase is inhibited, which in turn inhibits conversion of inactive Rubisco into active Rubisco. And active Rubisco is needed for high rate of photosynthesis, which in turn leads to high growth rates and high yield, etc. So, to sum up: It's important to keep CO2 below ~1,200, and to be safe and most efficient, keep CO2 at ~1,000 ppm. Night time CO2 should be < ~500 ppm, unless one is trying to reduce dark respiration and stretch, then upwards of 750 ppm can be used for short periods (otherwise leaf chlorosis can set in). I can fully cite all those claims, if anyone wants to read the academic lit. For now, here are a few good studies looking at C3 wheat and rice plants:
CO2 crop growth enhancement and toxicity in wheat and rice Bugbee B, Spanarkel B, Johnson S, Monje O, Koerner G. Adv Space Res. 1994 Nov;14(11):257-67. Quote:
Grotenhuis T, Reuveni J, Bugbee B. Adv Space Res. 1997;20(10):1901-4. Quote:
Reuveni J, Bugbee B. Ann Bot. 1997 Oct;80(4):539-46. Quote:
Grotenhuis TP, Bugbee B. Crop Sci. 1997 Jul-Aug;37:1215-22. Quote:
Last edited by spurr; 09-20-2011 at 11:42 PM.. Reason: Carbon dioxide is "CO2", not "Co2". |
||||
|
|
29 members found this post helpful. |
|
|
#2 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: https://www.scirus.com/ & https://www.google.com/schhp?hl=en
Posts: 2,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The Cliff Notes:
In all the studies above, and others I have read on C3 plants, ~1,200 ppm CO2 is the limit to benefits from CO2. And ~1,000-1,200 ppm CO2 is the saturation point for most C3 species. For reference: 1,200 ppm CO2 = 0.12% CO2 = 1,200 micromole mol^-1 CO2. |
|
|
2 members found this post helpful. |
|
|
#3 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: https://www.scirus.com/ & https://www.google.com/schhp?hl=en
Posts: 2,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
@ MODS: May I request this thread be made a stickey?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
New Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 7
![]() |
Quote:
I don`t post much but everytime I check out this site I end up reading your post. I just want to thank you for all your hard work and all the help you have given to many,many growers myself included TY 1969BUBBA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 458
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
my #1 mentor for sure, and thats with zero private lessons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: gilligans island
Posts: 13,142
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
another great post . thanks for the info
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: https://www.scirus.com/ & https://www.google.com/schhp?hl=en
Posts: 2,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ethylene ...
A concern with high Co2, especially over ~1,000 ppm, is ethylene buildup. Even low ppm concentration of ethylene gas can affect flower (inflorescence) size, plant growth rate, seed set (for breeders), senescence, etc. If grow rooms or greenhouses are not vented at least once, ex., at the end of the day, and Co2 is used at 1,000 to 1,500 ppm (esp the latter), ethylene can buildup to levels that will lower yield. Here are a few good resources: "Ethylene synthesis and sensitivity in crop plants" Stephen P. Klassen and Bruce Bugbee HortScience Vol. 39(7) pp. 1546-1552 (2004) "Ethylene In The Greenhouse" The authors explain how to detect ethylene, how to take action against it and how to stop problems before they happen By W. Roland Leatherwood and Neil S. Mattson April 2010 https://www.greenhousegrower.com/magazine/?storyid=3153 ![]() "Ethylene, Plant Senescence and Abscission" Stanley P. Burg Plant Physiol. 1968 September; 43(9 Pt B): 1503–1511. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...00512-0034.pdf |
|
|
2 members found this post helpful. |
|
|
#8 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: https://www.scirus.com/ & https://www.google.com/schhp?hl=en
Posts: 2,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
EDIT:
I just fixed a typo, I first wrote that Rubisco activase is hindered when canopy temps exceed just over 92'F, but that's wrong. The correct temp is just above 89'F. So, make sure not to let canopy temp exceed 89'F
|
|
|
1 members found this post helpful. |
|
|
#9 |
|
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 580
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thanks for the info.
I might have missed it, but can you explain the connection between co2 over 1000 ppm and ethylene build-up? |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: https://www.scirus.com/ & https://www.google.com/schhp?hl=en
Posts: 2,431
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
@ 1969bubba, dizzlekush and supermanlives,
Thanks for the kind words, I'm glad you found this info useful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|