Massproducer
Member
Naysayer of what
Defoliation: Hi-Yield Technique?
- Thread starter k33ftr33z
- Start date
- Status
they don't mean anything if you're changing multiple variables. how is that so hard to understand?
if you defoliate in hydro, and then don't defoliate in soil, but get more... what caused your increase in yield?
if you use blumats... with smaller pots, there is less surface area taking up moisture.
perhaps before you were overwatering your 2gal pots and now you're watering them better because the amount of surface area to take up moisture is more optimal?
if you defoliate in hydro, and then don't defoliate in soil, but get more... what caused your increase in yield?
if you use blumats... with smaller pots, there is less surface area taking up moisture.
perhaps before you were overwatering your 2gal pots and now you're watering them better because the amount of surface area to take up moisture is more optimal?
Or the correct answer...Defoliation! Ever heard of being dialed in? Once you get there, maybe you will be willing to open your eyes to other methods. It is virtually impossible to duplicate any grow. But if you are dialed in, your yields are always pretty damn close. Down sizing my pot did not make my plants get more bud, it was the extra light from defoliating and NOTHING else. You are wasting your time right now. I suggest putting your energy to learning how to improve your own grow. Take care
G
gdawg
I've been growing the same strain same style no variables for the past two+ years. And for the past year I run 2 tents beside each other exactly alike. Identical. I'm dialed in. My yields are always within a half ounce its like a machine. Last year I had a bumper yield that was an ounce and a half heavy I can't explain that.I have an 8 week haze hybrid that crazy stretches till week 4 and I scrog. This run I began a slight leaf picking of the top maybe 6 inches of canopy around week 3 flower. I'm around week 6 now and it looks like I'm gonna have another bumper run. Can't say yet this is the reason but I will do the same on my other tent and see if its consistent. I just pulled the leaves that were shading nothing drastic but a Definate picking spread over a week.
G
gdawg
It makes sense to me that the lower and larger leaves in my canopy are taking up the slack and then some of the leaves I picked since they are now in full light. But I haven't finished this run yet so I am not judging just yet.
OP says to defoliate in Veg.
I have been defoliating in Veg.
The plants I'm growing now are bigger than any plants I've ever grown.
But I veg'd them out a week or two longer.
Because of this, I'm not going to post:
Defoliating works! I tried it and now I'm getting more than ever!
The reason I'm not posting that is because I just can't say for sure.
I also have a plant that never shows deficiencies when I grow her, but this time she is showing spots in her veins and unusual yellowing.
Is it because I defoliated?
I don't know.
The data is inconclusive.
I have been defoliating in Veg.
The plants I'm growing now are bigger than any plants I've ever grown.
But I veg'd them out a week or two longer.
Because of this, I'm not going to post:
Defoliating works! I tried it and now I'm getting more than ever!
The reason I'm not posting that is because I just can't say for sure.
I also have a plant that never shows deficiencies when I grow her, but this time she is showing spots in her veins and unusual yellowing.
Is it because I defoliated?
I don't know.
The data is inconclusive.
..sorry watching BBC-America
bs0
Active member
Initially you were advocating a side by side situation...
Then you were arguing the definition, 'bonsai tek' 'leaf pruning tek'... 'defoliation means total stripping of leaves'
"1. To deprive (a plant, tree, or forest) of leaves.
2. To cause the leaves of (a plant, tree, or forest) to fall off, especially by the use of chemicals.
v.intr.
To lose foliage."
Now you are asking for 10 grows worth of information?
I've responded before, relating my experience and my concerns with this technique. If you go way back to the beginning of this thread you can see I have been doing this for quite awhile. I harvest every two weeks, and in the time since this thread has begun I have had more than 10 harvests. I would probably be defined by people in these forums as a 'cash cropper'. I defoliate because it has been, for me, a TREMENDOUS boon to my yields. I actually began to do so, of my own experimentation, before this thread was ever posted.
I rarely defol in veg. I don't understand the point. In flowering I defol at the end of stretch and then a bit at a time until 2 weeks before harvest at which point I strip ALL fan leaves. I also never strip leaves to the point where light hits the floor, that would be wasted light.
My last run was up to about 1.3 gpw. When I began, I was at about .6 gpw. It's not effective with every strain, but the strains it is effective with it is AMAZINGLY effective.
I don't understand how people can get angry about this.. "this is dangerous" "I don't want people to spread misinformation" etc. etc... If you are uncomfortable with the concept, just let it be and move on. If you have bad experience with the concept, please relate the bad experience. (just as I have related my entirely positive experience.. similar to keeftrees and delta9nx and the other fellow I don't remember) Coming into a thread and demanding people do work for you is fairly rude, in my opinion. Not that I have any problem with you or anyone else here, but this is a stoner forum after all and I don't think it is reasonable to expect people to cater their anecdotal experience to you in some hyper-empirical fashion. Especially considering some people, like me, who aren't about to start posting up huge image galleries to put themselves at risk solely to benefit someone else. Posting here makes me uneasy enough.
This shit works for me. It works fantastically for me. After 100+ pages I would venture a guess I am not the only one. Some people like to grow hydro, some people like to grow dirt, I like to grow aero... Everyone needs to do what they are comfortable with.
There is undoubtedly some science to this, but there is also a very much an art to it. This, I think, is why people see such varied results.
As I mentioned previous, there is no insult intended in this post and I'm not looking to argue. This is my experience and take it for whatever you want.
This is all that mattered from the post.
So... I defoliated 14 of 19 flowering girls, and i think the buds are getting thicker faster - 3 weeks 2 days into 12/12.
However starting today i swapped the 400 (was only using one of two, their still smaller..) for a 600, so now there's no validity to any conclusion about whether defoliation gave me higher yields...
But the girls look hella happy, and I'm gonna defo the next round, and having never not defo'd under a 6 I'll just have to defer to delta, k33f, and the rest of the boys all having done crap-loads of runs, and posting pics that convinced me. That's just that.
So thanks for pointing me in the right direction, I'm excited, and plan to flip-flop the 600 in a couple months
I wanna grow 8-14oz plants too!Initially you were advocating a side by side situation...
Then you were arguing the definition, 'bonsai tek' 'leaf pruning tek'... 'defoliation means total stripping of leaves'
"1. To deprive (a plant, tree, or forest) of leaves.
2. To cause the leaves of (a plant, tree, or forest) to fall off, especially by the use of chemicals.
v.intr.
To lose foliage."
Now you are asking for 10 grows worth of information?
I've responded before, relating my experience and my concerns with this technique. If you go way back to the beginning of this thread you can see I have been doing this for quite awhile. I harvest every two weeks, and in the time since this thread has begun I have had more than 10 harvests. I would probably be defined by people in these forums as a 'cash cropper'. I defoliate because it has been, for me, a TREMENDOUS boon to my yields. I actually began to do so, of my own experimentation, before this thread was ever posted.
I rarely defol in veg. I don't understand the point. In flowering I defol at the end of stretch and then a bit at a time until 2 weeks before harvest at which point I strip ALL fan leaves. I also never strip leaves to the point where light hits the floor, that would be wasted light.
My last run was up to about 1.3 gpw. When I began, I was at about .6 gpw. It's not effective with every strain, but the strains it is effective with it is AMAZINGLY effective.
I don't understand how people can get angry about this.. "this is dangerous" "I don't want people to spread misinformation" etc. etc... If you are uncomfortable with the concept, just let it be and move on. If you have bad experience with the concept, please relate the bad experience. (just as I have related my entirely positive experience.. similar to keeftrees and delta9nx and the other fellow I don't remember) Coming into a thread and demanding people do work for you is fairly rude, in my opinion. Not that I have any problem with you or anyone else here, but this is a stoner forum after all and I don't think it is reasonable to expect people to cater their anecdotal experience to you in some hyper-empirical fashion. Especially considering some people, like me, who aren't about to start posting up huge image galleries to put themselves at risk solely to benefit someone else. Posting here makes me uneasy enough.
This shit works for me. It works fantastically for me. After 100+ pages I would venture a guess I am not the only one. Some people like to grow hydro, some people like to grow dirt, I like to grow aero... Everyone needs to do what they are comfortable with.
There is undoubtedly some science to this, but there is also a very much an art to it. This, I think, is why people see such varied results.
As I mentioned previous, there is no insult intended in this post and I'm not looking to argue. This is my experience and take it for whatever you want.
Great post. I also am bewildered over the demanding posture of those who act as though they are being deceived or misinformed.
I am grateful to all who have taken this up and found it to be adding to their bottom line. Also to those, like yourself, who have been doing this a long time and discovered it out of trial and error out of necessity.
It is unfortunate the negativity. Let's reset the thread for those who are participating and contributing their results, whether it is accompanied by a spreadsheet or not. Those demanding some kind of proof must have pictures blocked or something.
The technique isn't for everyone and if one's setup is so dialed at over 1gpw than maybe this isn't worth it.
You are right that there is an art to it. Managing the variables in any given cycle is an art and defoliating is one of my key management tools.
S
SCROG McDuck
Delta9nsx has found, in his thread 'passive plan killer'..
that when
defoliating, EC/ppms might be better at a lower level.
Just a thought...
I thought there might be some clarification due for those who are just stumbling upon this thread.
Defoliation: I will stick with that term as it is exactly the term for this process. Nothing scary about it. I does not need to imply completely stripping plants although this is done by some practitioners with no ill effects.
Some recent posters have expressed discomfort with the title of the thread as a High-Yield Technique. Their quease is enflamed because there is no "scientific" proof to back up this claim/title.
Scientific proof, they say will be established by a side-by-side, plant-for-plant trial.
This is an oversimplification and is not the intention of this technique. That is why I have warned repeatedly to not just apply this wholesale to your setup until becoming familiar with the results. Other factors are at play.
The reason a plant-for-plant side-by-side will likely be inconclusive is that this a management technique for a grow area. Regardless of spacing or plant count or grow field square footage crowding becomes an issue. A cretain degree of crowding is proper. If things are not crowded enough you have wasted space. If they are over-crowded you get diminishing returns. So the sweet spot can be elusive when variables like growth rate and spreading enter the mix.
Defoliation is a management technique for a grow area rather than an individual freestanding plant. Yields can be improved by fine tuning the grow by taking advantage of the effects of defoliation.
Defoliation has several benficial side effects that any grower should appreciate. It tends to reduce node spacing thereby enhancing stature for indoor use. When combining that response with a little more veg time in my case I get a more compact and productive candidate for placement into bud. It also allows better air circulation. The crowding then managed some have found they can fit more plant in there setup. This means more yield. Not necessarily per-plant but the defoliation allows more plant material. Whether that plant productive material is gained by more plants or by larger plants with more branches the end result in the allotted grow space is more production-higher yield.
So the leaf-friendly inquisitors must understand that we are talking about managing a group of plants to improve yield in a given space. That is why just pulling a couple of plants aside and defoliating the shit out of them and letting them race a couple of high reaching leafy stretchers bolting for the light is not going to reveal anything. What you are testing is not grow-room management but whether defoliation increases yield on a plant-for-plant basis when plants are cloned, vegged, and budded in controlled comparable sequence. That is not what has been practiced nor claimed. Everyone manages differently based on finishing plant size and spacing and varietal individuality. Introducing defoliation will allow a redefining of ones timeline or layout to accomodate the different stature and potential to crowd now that leaves are not in the picture.
So ease up please folks, who are new to this discussion. We are not out to prove anything to you. We are out to share our expereince so that you may benefit if you can find the flexilbility and open mind to explore. No one and I mean NO ONE has demonstrated ANY ill-effects from defoliating ... EVER. SO please refrain from "Keeping the Fear Alive" and know that science and technique must be allowed to progress through experimentation.
Agriculture is a very tough endeavor to translate to scientific testing. Where in the chemlab you can have predictable results when dealing with pure components. With mathematics and physics you have set numerical values and principals that have withstood the postulate,theorem, proof sequence. Agriculture introduces some challenges to obtaining scientific results. Plants themselves are highly individual as is the environment on any given day or season despite our attempts to control it indoors.
No scientific facts for agriculture involve using a single plant to establish a conclusion. Usually it is done over a field of plants to eliminate the variables and potential regression found in any individual in any plant species.
So it is with defoliation, a field strategy to get more form the overall harvest by maximizing productive spacing. In fact, I'd rather see it as a 3 dimensional strategy as we are dealing with a column of premium light so it would behoove the grower to concentrate all of the productive capacity to within that premium light column. That is why I defoliate and train SCROG-like. I don't want things too tall.
The GroTunnel I build has a compartment that utilizes the whole of the premium light column and wasting no space in top-of-bucket-to-floor dead light zone.
The contention is somewhat welcome as long as it is natural curiosity and open minds prevail. There has been more than enough photographic evidence of the results of defoliation and it looks very good.
I never thought that so many would still have an axe to grind and even insist on university-level-blind-study documentation before THEY are willing to try it. That is some stubborn posturing. If they want to convince us we are doing harm and reducing yields it is their burden of proof to present. We are already practicing and have seen both ways.
As for whether it is indeed a High-Yield Technique, I can assure them that the experience and know-how exhibited by the several poster/participants is clear. These folks are not beginners by any stretch of the imagination.
Defoliation: I will stick with that term as it is exactly the term for this process. Nothing scary about it. I does not need to imply completely stripping plants although this is done by some practitioners with no ill effects.
Some recent posters have expressed discomfort with the title of the thread as a High-Yield Technique. Their quease is enflamed because there is no "scientific" proof to back up this claim/title.
Scientific proof, they say will be established by a side-by-side, plant-for-plant trial.
This is an oversimplification and is not the intention of this technique. That is why I have warned repeatedly to not just apply this wholesale to your setup until becoming familiar with the results. Other factors are at play.
The reason a plant-for-plant side-by-side will likely be inconclusive is that this a management technique for a grow area. Regardless of spacing or plant count or grow field square footage crowding becomes an issue. A cretain degree of crowding is proper. If things are not crowded enough you have wasted space. If they are over-crowded you get diminishing returns. So the sweet spot can be elusive when variables like growth rate and spreading enter the mix.
Defoliation is a management technique for a grow area rather than an individual freestanding plant. Yields can be improved by fine tuning the grow by taking advantage of the effects of defoliation.
Defoliation has several benficial side effects that any grower should appreciate. It tends to reduce node spacing thereby enhancing stature for indoor use. When combining that response with a little more veg time in my case I get a more compact and productive candidate for placement into bud. It also allows better air circulation. The crowding then managed some have found they can fit more plant in there setup. This means more yield. Not necessarily per-plant but the defoliation allows more plant material. Whether that plant productive material is gained by more plants or by larger plants with more branches the end result in the allotted grow space is more production-higher yield.
So the leaf-friendly inquisitors must understand that we are talking about managing a group of plants to improve yield in a given space. That is why just pulling a couple of plants aside and defoliating the shit out of them and letting them race a couple of high reaching leafy stretchers bolting for the light is not going to reveal anything. What you are testing is not grow-room management but whether defoliation increases yield on a plant-for-plant basis when plants are cloned, vegged, and budded in controlled comparable sequence. That is not what has been practiced nor claimed. Everyone manages differently based on finishing plant size and spacing and varietal individuality. Introducing defoliation will allow a redefining of ones timeline or layout to accomodate the different stature and potential to crowd now that leaves are not in the picture.
So ease up please folks, who are new to this discussion. We are not out to prove anything to you. We are out to share our expereince so that you may benefit if you can find the flexilbility and open mind to explore. No one and I mean NO ONE has demonstrated ANY ill-effects from defoliating ... EVER. SO please refrain from "Keeping the Fear Alive" and know that science and technique must be allowed to progress through experimentation.
Agriculture is a very tough endeavor to translate to scientific testing. Where in the chemlab you can have predictable results when dealing with pure components. With mathematics and physics you have set numerical values and principals that have withstood the postulate,theorem, proof sequence. Agriculture introduces some challenges to obtaining scientific results. Plants themselves are highly individual as is the environment on any given day or season despite our attempts to control it indoors.
No scientific facts for agriculture involve using a single plant to establish a conclusion. Usually it is done over a field of plants to eliminate the variables and potential regression found in any individual in any plant species.
So it is with defoliation, a field strategy to get more form the overall harvest by maximizing productive spacing. In fact, I'd rather see it as a 3 dimensional strategy as we are dealing with a column of premium light so it would behoove the grower to concentrate all of the productive capacity to within that premium light column. That is why I defoliate and train SCROG-like. I don't want things too tall.
The GroTunnel I build has a compartment that utilizes the whole of the premium light column and wasting no space in top-of-bucket-to-floor dead light zone.
The contention is somewhat welcome as long as it is natural curiosity and open minds prevail. There has been more than enough photographic evidence of the results of defoliation and it looks very good.
I never thought that so many would still have an axe to grind and even insist on university-level-blind-study documentation before THEY are willing to try it. That is some stubborn posturing. If they want to convince us we are doing harm and reducing yields it is their burden of proof to present. We are already practicing and have seen both ways.
As for whether it is indeed a High-Yield Technique, I can assure them that the experience and know-how exhibited by the several poster/participants is clear. These folks are not beginners by any stretch of the imagination.
El Toker
Member
What a ridiculous straw man argument. I suggest you go back and read the critical posts again and respond to the points that were really made. You really do use a lot of words to say very very litttle.
A side by side falls a long way short of "scientific proof", it would however go much further to demonstrate the efficacy or otherwise of pruning leaves than hundreds of pictures of leafless plants. The fact that there isn't a single one amongst the hundreds of pictures says a lot to me about this "high yield technique" (roflmao).
I believe the scale, and mine says it works. I trust it over you or anyone else. But let me guess....my scale is broken?
El Toker
Member
I'm really happy to hear about your functional scale, I think that's great for you. If you'd like to make a point about the topic in hand, please feel free to do so.
I'm not here to insult, or merely to argue... but there is discussion and peer review which should take place. There is nothing wrong with asking people making claims to measure those claims.Initially you were advocating a side by side situation...
Then you were arguing the definition, 'bonsai tek' 'leaf pruning tek'... 'defoliation means total stripping of leaves'
"1. To deprive (a plant, tree, or forest) of leaves.
2. To cause the leaves of (a plant, tree, or forest) to fall off, especially by the use of chemicals.
v.intr.
To lose foliage."
Now you are asking for 10 grows worth of information?
I've responded before, relating my experience and my concerns with this technique. If you go way back to the beginning of this thread you can see I have been doing this for quite awhile. I harvest every two weeks, and in the time since this thread has begun I have had more than 10 harvests. I would probably be defined by people in these forums as a 'cash cropper'. I defoliate because it has been, for me, a TREMENDOUS boon to my yields. I actually began to do so, of my own experimentation, before this thread was ever posted.
I rarely defol in veg. I don't understand the point. In flowering I defol at the end of stretch and then a bit at a time until 2 weeks before harvest at which point I strip ALL fan leaves. I also never strip leaves to the point where light hits the floor, that would be wasted light.
My last run was up to about 1.3 gpw. When I began, I was at about .6 gpw. It's not effective with every strain, but the strains it is effective with it is AMAZINGLY effective.
I don't understand how people can get angry about this.. "this is dangerous" "I don't want people to spread misinformation" etc. etc... If you are uncomfortable with the concept, just let it be and move on. If you have bad experience with the concept, please relate the bad experience. (just as I have related my entirely positive experience.. similar to keeftrees and delta9nx and the other fellow I don't remember) Coming into a thread and demanding people do work for you is fairly rude, in my opinion. Not that I have any problem with you or anyone else here, but this is a stoner forum after all and I don't think it is reasonable to expect people to cater their anecdotal experience to you in some hyper-empirical fashion. Especially considering some people, like me, who aren't about to start posting up huge image galleries to put themselves at risk solely to benefit someone else. Posting here makes me uneasy enough.
This shit works for me. It works fantastically for me. After 100+ pages I would venture a guess I am not the only one. Some people like to grow hydro, some people like to grow dirt, I like to grow aero... Everyone needs to do what they are comfortable with.
There is undoubtedly some science to this, but there is also a very much an art to it. This, I think, is why people see such varied results.
As I mentioned previous, there is no insult intended in this post and I'm not looking to argue. This is my experience and take it for whatever you want.
No... I'm not asking for 10 consecutive grows. I never asked for 10 consecutive grows.
Why would you take me out of context like that?
Someone else was claiming that there was data from 10 consecutive grows already posted. I was commenting specifically to them. I did discuss the '10 consecutive grows' someone else claimed, but never asked for any specific number of anything.
Yes I advocate a side by side situation, or a consecutive gpw measurement, or ANY measurement technique which will actually demonstrate the claims being made. Obviously measurements would be useless without a control group and a test group.
The only thing that makes this at all 'dangerous' is the lack of consensus as to exactly when where or how it should be done, and the lack of a general protocol, and the misleading thread title... but it does not really make anything dangerous, just unclear... but why not clear things up if you can? (especially if you're advocating something)
also lmao at anyone who thinks asking for evidence, when someone makes a claim = anger over the claim.... just lmao. The only ones in the thread who seem to be angry are the ones being asked for evidence.
Of course demanding that people do work for you is rude, but asking people to verify something they are asserting is not, its just science.
What is up with starting a thread to demonstrate a technique and make a claim, and then getting bent out of shape when people ask you for evidence demonstrating the claim or to more clearly define exactly what the technique does and does not entail? It's easy to pretend as though the people asking the questions are out of line, and demonize them and their request, instead of simply having the discussion, I guess.
Yes defoliation means depriving a plant of leaves... like you just posted. If you leave leaves on your plant, then you did not deprive the plant of leaves. It does not really mean removing only a leaf from a plant, or just some leaves. When you debone something you don't just remove a portion of the bone. I don't understand why people get so angry when others expect words to be used according to their meaning. I don't understand why anyone would want to be stubborn and use an inaccurate and misleading term like defoliation to refer to pruning.
From your post:
That is correct.
Deprive the plant of leaves.
deprive |diˈprīv|
verb [ trans. ]
deny the possession or use of something.
Are you people denying your plant the possession or use of leaves?
Nope. just pruning away some of the leaves.
Do you call root pruning "de-rooting"
Do you call taking cuttings "delimbing"
Anyhow I'm out of this thread... only replied because you spoke directly to me. Thanks for the measurements you gave.
If your scale says "it works" instead of providing you with a measured weight, then they are probably broken.
If they provided you with a weight to compare to past weights, could you post them please? If you already did, I must've missed it.
Surely posting up a weight or two takes no more effort than posting up sarcasm. I'd believe your scale too, if you'd post up the weight increase for us.
Last edited:
Yeah douche, if you read my posts previously you would see that I have ran the same set up time after time and know what my average yield is. If your yield increases by a shit ton and the only thing you did differently is defoliate....I wonder what increased the yield?
BTW, what is the point you are tying to make? That we are all lying?
15 times now, I will post my final weight in a few days.. How about instead of accusing me of lying and trying to discredit me...you give me time to add up the totals. I do not benifit from posting anything on this thread...and have been taking a bashing for giving my personal results.
It worked for me, for sure. Jars are stable and curing, so I will post everything this week. Thanks for understanding.
BTW, my scale is not broken...come up with another reason to discredit me.
1. I NEVER accused you of lying.
2. I never tried to discredit you.
3. I'm waiting... I'd keep waiting quietly if you'd quit posting up things like "I believe the scale" which make it sound as though you have taken measurements that you're not sharing. To believe your scale would imply that you've already weighed everything, otherwise what would there be for you to believe.
Try removing the chip from your shoulder, looking at everything through those persecution colored glasses is making you take things differently that they were written.
I know you keep saying you'll post up weight in a few days... you said it a few days ago. We'll keep waiting. I just wonder how you believe your scales when they haven't told you anything yet.
BTW... If your scale says "it worked" instead of giving numerical measurements, it is indeed broken.
- Status
