Defoliation: Hi-Yield Technique?

[Grat3fulh3ad]

I do not defoliate. I leave the majority% of the leaves alone.
defoliation is removing the leaves from, not removing A leaf from.
I do prune, including pruning some leaves in some circumstances.

What is being labeled here as defoliation is just a subset of pruning.

 

[Scrogerman]

if an environment is kept ideal, mold is a non issue. Defoilated or non. Open wounds on plants heal almost immediately if they are healthy.

Do your research! In matters not in a thick canopy(like ScrOG) conditions can be ideal for botrytis to bloom/florish on open wounds, conditions here are ideal.

Gratefullhead talks sense. Why was my post stating that removed? How childish!

 

[huntingbb]

I do not defoliate. I leave the majority% of the leaves alone.
defoliation is removing the leaves from, not removing A leaf from.
I do prune, including pruning some leaves in some circumstances.

What is being labeled here as defoliation is just a subset of pruning.

sure, though i do challenge you to a google search of "partial defoliation"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="partial+defoliation"

if oxford uni is a good source for you, i think we will be able to agree defoliation is subset of pruning, partial defoliation subset of this.

ok moving on again..

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

sure, though i do challenge you to a google search of "partial defoliation"
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="partial+defoliation"

if oxford uni is a good source for you, i think we will be able to agree defoliation is subset of pruning, partial defoliation subset of this.

ok moving on again..

Lol... love the oxford paper (but it was not from Oxford uni, it was from Uni of Florida) leaf pruning only affects leaf size and not fruiting growth or quality... Nice choice! The Full title is "Partial Defoliation Can Decrease Average Leaf Size, But Has Little Affect on Orange Tree Growth, Fruit Yield, and Juice Quality"


BTW... had the title of the thread been titled "PARTIAL defoliation", or if any of the people here even used the term "PARTIAL defoliation", then you'd have something a point... but, they don't and you don't.

Of course the article is good enough for me... they had enough sense to realize that the qualifier "partially" is a necessary part of their paper title, since they did not actually defoliate anything... and they realize their partial defoliation was fruitless.


The thread is titled 'defoliation', and is not about defoliation... at the most it is about leaf pruning... nor is defoliation a high yield technique... any more than any sort of pruning is a high yield technique...

The title of the thread should be "Partial Defoliation: another pruning technique."


I could name plenty of things that a one word definition does not appropriately apply to, but adding a qualifier changes the meaning and makes the definition applicable.



BTW... I never said defoliation was not a subset of pruning, I said it is a bonsai pruning technique, and I clearly said it was a subset of pruning. I did say that defoliation is NOT actually what is going down in this thread, and nothing was remotely incorrect about that statement. Defoliation is not the technique being practiced, leaf pruning is.

I do not mind if you like to call leaf pruning 'partial defoliation', but calling it defoliation is incorrect and misleading.

Just like calling a semicircle a circle would be incorrect and misleading.

 

[slowandeasy]

Here is an example of what a defoliated vegged plant looks like versus a clone that was topped, but never defoliated ever. They were from the same plant and vegged the same amount of time. Plant on left only defoliated, never topped. Plant on right, topped more than once. I would not call defoliating over 75 percent of leaves partial defoliation. The leaves have since grown back, so this is the results after a couple of weeks.




https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=22766&pictureid=526653




https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=22766&pictureid=526654






https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=22766&pictureid=526655



They both look nice, but if you have to keep your plants around for 5 more weeks to fit into a small tent....which one is going to work better? If I could flip right away, I would not defoliate in veg...but it does an excellent job at keeping my plants compact. If you look closely, you will see that the defoliated plant has way more future bud sites...they are just small for now...but in 5 weeks they will be much larger.

This is only my second time defoliating in Veg, and like others have said...doing it in veg is Strain dependent for sure. My Sour Bubble clone did not like it at all, it stunted it too much. Seems that mostly Sativa plants do better with Defoliating in Veg. The only plant that did not like it was Indica. Hope this helps somebody out. I still promote defoliation, but will not be doing it in veg on Indica plants ever. In Flower after stretch, they seem fine once defoliated.

 

[Danish88]

Whatever you want to call it...this is just a utilization of energy...more light penetration equals more bud. Concentrate the plants energy and cut down stress as much as possible. They can handle more than you think. We as indoor growers are already doing something not natural to these plants so why not utilize the power and light you are putting into your babies...thinning foliage or lolli popping all work, just experiment and watch the results

 

[huntingbb]

gah stupid double postie

 

[huntingbb]

Lol... love the oxford paper (but it was not from Oxford uni, it was from Uni of Florida) leaf pruning only affects leaf size and not fruiting growth or quality... Nice choice! The Full title is "Partial Defoliation Can Decrease Average Leaf Size, But Has Little Affect on Orange Tree Growth, Fruit Yield, and Juice Quality"


BTW... had the title of the thread been titled "PARTIAL defoliation", or if any of the people here even used the term "PARTIAL defoliation", then you'd have something a point... but, they don't and you don't.

Of course the article is good enough for me... they had enough sense to realize that the qualifier "partially" is a necessary part of their paper title, since they did not actually defoliate anything... and they realize their partial defoliation was fruitless.


The thread is titled 'defoliation', and is not about defoliation... at the most it is about leaf pruning... nor is defoliation a high yield technique... any more than any sort of pruning is a high yield technique...

The title of the thread should be "Partial Defoliation: another pruning technique."


I could name plenty of things that a one word definition does not appropriately apply to, but adding a qualifier changes the meaning and makes the definition applicable.



BTW... I never said defoliation was not a subset of pruning, I said it is a bonsai pruning technique, and I clearly said it was a subset of pruning. I did say that defoliation is NOT actually what is going down in this thread, and nothing was remotely incorrect about that statement. Defoliation is not the technique being practiced, leaf pruning is.

I do not mind if you like to call leaf pruning 'partial defoliation', but calling it defoliation is incorrect and misleading.

Just like calling a semicircle a circle would be incorrect and misleading.

Now now, while its been hard to see why you bother trolling this thread, it is becoming obvious this is some form of entertainment for you.

So now, sir, I'll call you on your conclusion:

The first result is statistically insignificant.

That's like justifying babykilling just because 'mr. X did it'.

Lets take a look at a smattering of results - still insignificant due to poll size, and method of doing so (just going from top down)

Effects of Partial Defoliation on the Growth of Liriodendron ...


The pattern of response of L. tulipifera to partial defoliation is clearcut. Leaflet removal restricted the development of leaf area by lowering the percentage of new growth devoted to leaves and by reducing the area of leaves produced from a given increment of foliar dry matter. The plants compensated for this reduction in foliage amount with a higher leaf efficiency as measured by unit leaf rate. The higher ULR may be an effect of a change in crown architecture, with lower leaves of defoliated plants receiving more light. Sweet (1966) also found higher rates of photosynthesis in Betula pubescens as measured by gaseous exchange following removal of mature leaves though in this case the effect could have been produced by changing average leaf age between treatments. Since defoliated plants had a lower LAR, their higher ULR could be attributed to a more favourable source-sink relationship (Humphries and Thome, 1964). A further compensatory mechanism appears to be a slightly higher rate of leaf production on defoliated plants. Since leaves of equivalent leaf number counting from the base were initiated earlier in the growing season on the partially defoliated plants they had a longer time to develop before cessation of growth occurred in the fall. The final size of leaves from number eleven onwards appears to have been influenced by the duration of the growth period available. Leaves on the defoliated plants had longer to develop and were, therefore, larger. The overall effects of these compensating mechanisms were revealed in final plant weight. Thus, removing approximately one-third and two-thirds of the leaflets developing on the main stem resulted in only 18 and 46 per cent reduction in final leaf weight and corresponding reduction in total dry weight production of 14 and 42 per cent respectively. The removal of leaflets allowed the experimental manipulation of the distribution of growth but resulted in a complex pattern of response in the seedlings. The isolation of various factors influencing seedling development would probably be better through sensitivity analysis of a mathematical model simulating growth.

Remember the dry there is the dry weight of the leaf.

I'll skip the next excerpt - they did not go a full life cycle so is useless for this discussion.

http://www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/reprint/29/1/39.pdf

seems to be a tough read for me, but looks like this may be the defining bit (i could be wrong, feel free to actually read this fully)

Removing one-half of previous leaves and of each new leaf weekly from the start of flowering caused little change in the sums of sugar and starch in leaves or young bolls but there was a 42% reduction in the main stems. The half-leaf treatment reduced plant height by 28%, number of mainstalk nodes by 5%, fresh weight of leaves plus stems by 30% and yield by 14%; relative fruitfulness was increased slightly. Fiber strength was increased but there was little change in other boll and fiber properties.


next is some stuff on grass, i don't think it applies

Partial Defoliation Stimulates Growth of Arizona Cottontop


just imagine where that's going....


The Effect of Partial Defoliation on Growth Characteristics of ...

(gotta retype)

The effect of partial defoliation over the whole canopy on the reproductive growth of vitis vinifera l. cv. cabernet sauvignon was investigated. The 33% defoliation treatment prior to pea size and the 66% defoliation treatment prior to veraison adversely affected fresh mass per berry and yield at harvest. The 33% defoliation treatment from veraison increased fresh berry mass. Partial defoliation had no effect on berry water content. Dry matter started to accumulate rapidly only after pea size stage.

The fresh berry mass:cane mass ratio increased with partial defoliation from veraison. leaf area/g fresh mass results indicated that control vines carried excess foliage which prevented maximum photosynthetic activity.

Partial defoliation of the canopy improved budding percentage, generally increasing with increasing defoliation, whereas bud fertility was improved by only 33% defoliation. In general, leaf removal from bud break and berry set was more effective in improving budding, whereas bud fertility was favored by partial defoliation from bud break.

Are you getting the picture here?

IN SOME SITUATIONS ITS PREFERABLE. Of course, nothing here is about cannabis so the search is essentially bullshit.

OK, so what if you don't like the terminology of the thread. You go argue with the scientists about that.

OK, so what if you don't agree with the conclusions of the thread. do a side by side and make everyone stfu.

If i might request:

Please do a SOG for each, at least 25-49 plants per side - this will help us get 'field' type results, and maybe have a decent average.

You should feel bad a newb is counseling you on manners

 

[bs0]

Lol... love the oxford paper (but it was not from Oxford uni, it was from Uni of Florida) leaf pruning only affects leaf size and not fruiting growth or quality... Nice choice! The Full title is "Partial Defoliation Can Decrease Average Leaf Size, But Has Little Affect on Orange Tree Growth, Fruit Yield, and Juice Quality"


BTW... had the title of the thread been titled "PARTIAL defoliation", or if any of the people here even used the term "PARTIAL defoliation", then you'd have something a point... but, they don't and you don't.

Of course the article is good enough for me... they had enough sense to realize that the qualifier "partially" is a necessary part of their paper title, since they did not actually defoliate anything... and they realize their partial defoliation was fruitless.


The thread is titled 'defoliation', and is not about defoliation... at the most it is about leaf pruning... nor is defoliation a high yield technique... any more than any sort of pruning is a high yield technique...

The title of the thread should be "Partial Defoliation: another pruning technique."


I could name plenty of things that a one word definition does not appropriately apply to, but adding a qualifier changes the meaning and makes the definition applicable.



BTW... I never said defoliation was not a subset of pruning, I said it is a bonsai pruning technique, and I clearly said it was a subset of pruning. I did say that defoliation is NOT actually what is going down in this thread, and nothing was remotely incorrect about that statement. Defoliation is not the technique being practiced, leaf pruning is.

I do not mind if you like to call leaf pruning 'partial defoliation', but calling it defoliation is incorrect and misleading.

Just like calling a semicircle a circle would be incorrect and misleading.

Endlessly arguing your own accepted definition provides little benefit here.

What did you say in your other thread? "I could argue your definition of "gear" but I accept your usage because I know the meaning behind it"? I wish you would follow your own advice.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Your nitpicking does not make me feel bad at all, even if you call it counsel.
I do appreciate your supplying the term which could have correctly titled the thread.
'partial defoliation'

Calling "partial defoliation: a pruning technique', 'Defoliation: a High yield technique' is as far off as calling a 'semi circle' a 'circle'.

Not a thing I've said is being argues against by anything any scientist you referenced has said.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Endlessly arguing your own accepted definition provides little benefit here.

What did you say in your other thread? "I could argue your definition of "gear" but I accept your usage because I know the meaning behind it"? I wish you would follow your own advice.

Apples and oranges.

had he been calling my 'gear', 'kumquats', I'd have corrected that too.
gear is commonly used to describe a vendors wares.

Defoliation is not commonly used to describe leaf pruning, unless qualified with 'partial'.

It would be simple to use an accepted definition here instead of stubbornly continuing to call something a thing it is not.


I only further supported my opinion because it was nitpicked by someone completely changing the terms being used, and acting as if that change retroactively covered the terms used in the thread, and useing a paper which undermined the pro-defol position to do so.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

The overall effects of these compensating mechanisms were revealed in final plant weight. Thus, removing approximately one-third and two-thirds of the leaflets developing on the main stem resulted in only 18 and 46 per cent reduction in final leaf weight and corresponding reduction in total dry weight production of 14 and 42 per cent respectively. The removal of leaflets allowed the experimental manipulation of the distribution of growth but resulted in a complex pattern of response in the seedlings. The isolation of various factors influencing seedling development would probably be better through sensitivity analysis of a mathematical model simulating growth.

Remember the dry there is the dry weight of the leaf.

Total dry weight is differentiated from leaf dry weight.
I do not look to reduce my total dry weight. thanks.

I'll skip the next excerpt - they did not go a full life cycle so is useless for this discussion.

http://www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/reprint/29/1/39.pdf

seems to be a tough read for me, but looks like this may be the defining bit (i could be wrong, feel free to actually read this fully)

Removing one-half of previous leaves and of each new leaf weekly from the start of flowering caused little change in the sums of sugar and starch in leaves or young bolls but there was a 42% reductionin the main stems. The half-leaf treatment reduced plant height by 28%, number of mainstalk nodes by 5%, fresh weight of leaves plus stems by 30% and yield by 14%; relative fruitfulness was increased slightly. Fiber strength was increased but there was little change in other boll and fiber properties.

fruitfulness relative to plant height and weight increased slightly, but since overall growth was reduced there was no net increase in fruitfulness.

next is some stuff on grass, i don't think it applies

Partial Defoliation Stimulates Growth of Arizona Cottontop


just imagine where that's going....


The Effect of Partial Defoliation on Growth Characteristics of ...

(gotta retype)

The effect of partial defoliation over the whole canopy on the reproductive growth of vitis vinifera l. cv. cabernet sauvignon was investigated. The 33% defoliation treatment prior to pea size and the 66% defoliation treatment prior to veraison adversely affected fresh mass per berry and yield at harvest. The 33% defoliation treatment from veraison increased fresh berry mass. Partial defoliation had no effect on berry water content. Dry matter started to accumulate rapidly only after pea size stage.

The fresh berry mass:cane mass ratio increased with partial defoliation from veraison. leaf area/g fresh mass results indicated that control vines carried excess foliage which prevented maximum photosynthetic activity.

Partial defoliation of the canopy improved budding percentage, generally increasing with increasing defoliation, whereas bud fertility was improved by only 33% defoliation. In general, leaf removal from bud break and berry set was more effective in improving budding, whereas bud fertility was favored by partial defoliation from bud break.

Are you getting the picture here?

IN SOME SITUATIONS ITS PREFERABLE. Of course, nothing here is about cannabis so the search is essentially bullshit.[/SIZE]

I've HAD the picture... I said long ago that for some individual plants in some garden paradigms pruning some of the leaves has some positive effect.

The converse is also true...

Some individual plants in some garden paradigms are adversely affected by leaf pruning...

You're not demonstrating anything I have not said already

OK, so what if you don't like the terminology of the thread. You go argue with the scientists about that.

The scientist have said nothing at all arguing with my use of terminology.

You don't see partial defoliation called defoliation by the scientist... any more than you see semi circles called circles by mathematicians.

OK, so what if you don't agree with the conclusions of the thread. do a side by side and make everyone stfu.

If i might request:

Please do a SOG for each, at least 25-49 plants per side - this will help us get 'field' type results, and maybe have a decent average.

You should feel bad a newb is counseling you on manners [/COLOR]

How could I disagree with the conclusions of the thread? There are no conclusions... Anyone paying attention to the results can see that it is a hit and miss proposition.

And no you may not request...

If I assert anything I'll provide evidence that backs it up.
If I assert anything that needs to be demonstrated in a side by side... I'll have the evidence already ready already before asserting anything.

 

[TruthOrLie]

If this technique works it should be so simple to put two plants side by side and demonstrate the difference.

I have tried and 'failed' this technique because the plant I defoliated developed grey mold.

It would be fruitless for a failure of this method, or a nonbeliever to perform a side by side.

Please, someone who has success with this method, please do a side by side. Please.

Arguing dictionary definitions is not the business.

 

[VerdantGreen]

i for one would love to see a side by side with the same cut and conditions.

 

[GeorgeSmiley]

i for one would love to see a side by side with the same cut and conditions.

I can do it on the next round that clones just hit dirt or I can do it with vegging now but they're already a couple months into veg without any defoliation.

I defoliated last round, yield was lower than similar runs where leaves were left alone.

Plants turned yellow in mid flower but that could be container size choices.

I can do it with a couple BBK's right now 24 inch high since they are so low and branchy. Packed so tight with fans that no light reaches the main stem.

?????

 

[redspaghetti]

i for one would love to see a side by side with the same cut and conditions.

hey VG i have one that i am doing right now,

I have a cut of Lemon Kush that i am flowering along with her young.... the mother is about 2 months old and the cut is about 1 month, they went in the same time for flower,, one get trim like mad and the other doesnt get touch .... so far they're neck to neck in buds production but you can tell the untrim one has tons and tons of leafs ..


well see how they end up in a few more weeks

cheers,

 

[slowandeasy]

If this technique works it should be so simple to put two plants side by side and demonstrate the difference.

I have tried and 'failed' this technique because the plant I defoliated developed grey mold.

It would be fruitless for a failure of this method, or a nonbeliever to perform a side by side.

Please, someone who has success with this method, please do a side by side. Please.

Arguing dictionary definitions is not the business.

Dude how many times does it have to be said, doing a side by side is not cut and dry. Take a look at my pics from post 1985
They are the same clones, one defoliated...the other not. Same light, same nutes, same tent. This is in Veg mind you. I have 5 more weeks before they get flipped...the one not defoliated has been topped a couple of times and the other never has been topped.

If you see the difference in size already, what do you think is going to happen when you flip the switch? The one not defoliated will tower over the defoliated one. Blocking light and creating an uneven canopy. The light will be closer to the taller one, so that screws up the whole experiment.

Then only true way to do this would be side by side tents or rooms that are identical. Have everything the same, including lamp distance from plants. Having one plant 12 inches closer is not fair is it? People like myself that have been doing this a very long time do not have to prove to anyone if it works or not.

After doing some defoliating in Veg, I say it is Strain dependent how they react. For me, in Veg only, Indica's do not respond well, where as my Sativa dominant plants love it. In Flower if done after the stretch, neither were harmed and produced much more than previous rounds. Once you become a good grower and are not afraid of trying things to improve, you have less variables if things turn out better or worse. Experiments are not worth doing if you have nothing to compare to. Get yourself a "Green Thumb" before you try doing anything different. If you lack basic growing skills, then results will vary just because of lack of skill.

 

[Bob-Hope]

Ok thats a lot of pages since i last posted, not much to add mind,but still a lot to read.

Last few days now,dont expect any more growth.so thought id show a pic or two of my little tree.
Measure 17" tall by about 38" wide .

Had a dramatic temp drop the last few nights as well, which may or may not have added to the purpling.

I think the jury is still out on weather it was the right technique for me, its quite time consuming,(leaf removal) and in the back of my mind i cant quite get the idea out of my head that "what if i had left the fans"

So for my next grow im going to do what i believe is called supper cropping.

This method i hope will combat my height problem and still give me the security of keeping my fans.

So although im happy with my results,and having grown this strains many times,3rd time ive defoed, and 1 of 5 strains ive tried.

My experience tells me i can yield the same amount of weed with my old style of grow,and not have to spend as much time with them. so for me its a no brainer, its to time consuming for its efforts and im not convinced its worth it.

Bob.

P.S
I said at the beginning id give it a try and im glad i have,i have no negative vibes at all about defoliating, and if i ever need to employ anything ive learnt whilst doing this process, in the future then it was worth it.

 

[huntingbb]

Total dry weight is differentiated from leaf dry weight.
I do not look to reduce my total dry weight. thanks.fruitfulness relative to plant height and weight increased slightly, but since overall growth was reduced there was no net increase in fruitfulness.I've HAD the picture... I said long ago that for some individual plants in some garden paradigms pruning some of the leaves has some positive effect.

The converse is also true...

Some individual plants in some garden paradigms are adversely affected by leaf pruning...

You're not demonstrating anything I have not said alreadyThe scientist have said nothing at all arguing with my use of terminology.

You don't see partial defoliation called defoliation by the scientist... any more than you see semi circles called circles by mathematicians.


How could I disagree with the conclusions of the thread? There are no conclusions... Anyone paying attention to the results can see that it is a hit and miss proposition.

And no you may not request...

If I assert anything I'll provide evidence that backs it up.
If I assert anything that needs to be demonstrated in a side by side... I'll have the evidence already ready already before asserting anything.

then just prove that.

 

[Throwgar]

Hey! I'm Mr. 2000!