G
GOOROO
and how many kw?
No dutchmaster, or cyco...I know they have pgr's but they kill it
No dutchmaster, or cyco...I know they have pgr's but they kill it
Laboratory Grade Warehouse
- Thread starter desertsquirrel
- Start date
desertsquirrel
Member
DM and AN are the only lines that i refuse to use. They are downright trash imo..
And your getting a little personal with the watts question.
G
GOOROO
well shit you've got over 100 strains so that alone is gonna put you well above 100 plants but alright......
I work in multiple facilities in Co. Your's def looks the most up to par thus far.
I work in multiple facilities in Co. Your's def looks the most up to par thus far.
desertsquirrel
Member
Thanks alot man.
WOW that is amazing is all I can think of saying LOL DAMN BRO you got it going on there LOL .. I would try that bud lol peace out Headband707
Pretty legit, would love to see the UC room during full flower
desertsquirrel
Member
sure...
Attachments
desertsquirrel
Member
Now thats a proper root ball. Sez it all to me.. Buds are the outcome. But the roots is where the magic happens IME
Keep up the good works
Keep up the good works
desertsquirrel
Member
Thanks alot paladin. i like your work as well.
80 lbs wet?! that had to be including the rootball. 80 lbs wet is atleast 20 lbs dry, and that isn't a 20 lb plant lol.
desertsquirrel
Member
moisture takes up at least 90-94% of plant weight, it could just be how far off your numbers are.
But why wouldnt it include roots? we had to lift those too right?
But why wouldnt it include roots? we had to lift those too right?
TicalionStalion
Active member
man, those UCs are official. the water movement thru them is amazing, looks like it would take ur hand off if u stuck it in! man, every UC setup iv seen has been amazing. might have to try the little 4 banger.
because the way you worded it made it sound like you pulled down 80 lbs of wet nugs. i have to call bullshit when i see it.
90-94%...? i never lose that much wet weight when i dry my herb. i lose generally 75%.
so it was including root ball? ok....that's quite possible. but that isn't an 8 lb plant even. just to be clear..
desertsquirrel
Member
http://www.plantstress.com/Methods/RWC.htm
"Relative water content (RWC) is the appropriate measure of plant water status in terms of the physiological consequence of cellular water deficit. While water potential as an estimate of plant water status is useful in dealing with water transport in the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum, it does not account for osmotic adjustment (OA). OA is a powerful mechanism of conserving cellular hydration under drought stress and RWC expresses the effect of OA in this respect. Hence RWC is an appropriate estimate of plant water status in terms of cellular hydration under the possible effect of both leaf water potential and OA.
The method has long been in use, even before it re-examination (Barrs and Weatherley, 1962), when it was also termed ‘relative turgidity’. Recently it gained increasing appreciation. Some exemplary uses and discussion of RWC in physiological as well breeding research can be found in this web site ‘Reference Database’ ID numbers 1903, 2181, 3418, 3813, 3883, 4793 and especially a nice analysis in 3940. Searching for keyword RWC will provide many more studies where this parameter has been used.
The method is simple. It estimates the current water content of the sampled leaf tissue relative the maximal water content it can hold at full turgidity. It is a measure of water deficit in the leaf.
***Normal values of RWC range between 98% in turgid and transpiring leaves to about 40% in severely desiccated and dying leaves. In most crop species the typical RWC at about wilting is around 60% to 70%, with exceptions."
Maybe your plants arnt very healthy? 75% is the TWP.
"Relative water content (RWC) is the appropriate measure of plant water status in terms of the physiological consequence of cellular water deficit. While water potential as an estimate of plant water status is useful in dealing with water transport in the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum, it does not account for osmotic adjustment (OA). OA is a powerful mechanism of conserving cellular hydration under drought stress and RWC expresses the effect of OA in this respect. Hence RWC is an appropriate estimate of plant water status in terms of cellular hydration under the possible effect of both leaf water potential and OA.
The method has long been in use, even before it re-examination (Barrs and Weatherley, 1962), when it was also termed ‘relative turgidity’. Recently it gained increasing appreciation. Some exemplary uses and discussion of RWC in physiological as well breeding research can be found in this web site ‘Reference Database’ ID numbers 1903, 2181, 3418, 3813, 3883, 4793 and especially a nice analysis in 3940. Searching for keyword RWC will provide many more studies where this parameter has been used.
The method is simple. It estimates the current water content of the sampled leaf tissue relative the maximal water content it can hold at full turgidity. It is a measure of water deficit in the leaf.
***Normal values of RWC range between 98% in turgid and transpiring leaves to about 40% in severely desiccated and dying leaves. In most crop species the typical RWC at about wilting is around 60% to 70%, with exceptions."
Maybe your plants arnt very healthy? 75% is the TWP.
I think you are talking about whole plant weight (wet) compared to dry buds, and he's talking about buds weight (wet compared to dry).
don't you know how much dry harvest you got from that plants? I'd be interested. thanks and congrats for your set-up.
don't you know how much dry harvest you got from that plants? I'd be interested. thanks and congrats for your set-up.
desertsquirrel
Member
I know how much because we collected data to correlate root mass/weight with finished product weights.
That information is unfortunately proprietary.
That information is unfortunately proprietary.
Why would that be 'proprietary' information? It would seem that if you found roots average X% of the total wet weight for strain A, then...??? It's just interesting information, not exactly something you are doing that is proprietary... not exactly something that gives another a 'competitive advantage' over you... or you over someone else.
Now, say if you found a way to reduce the total from X% to x%, and that netted you a higher overall yield for the same strain... then perhaps that process or procedure might be considered proprietary, as it would be unique to you.
I just don't get it. Right now it's just raw data that you could be sharing with the community... and we already have general working theories regarding root mass & health, as it relates to growth. You could be offering us basic data to evaluate this... again, not like its a competitive advantage for you or anything...???
desertsquirrel
Member
I dont own the data, its not mine to post.
