U~know~who
New member
Truth is in the gardens, not in the books.
So you're saying that vegging plants on 24h are constantly photosynthesizing?
So to go where your going, I would need to have X[watts] for 24hr lighting and Y[watts] for 18h lighting. With Y>X.
So they each get the same, roughly, amount of photons over the two week period.
I still think my experiment is of use, due to the abilities of the plants observed in flower following 24h compared to those of the plants with 18h (in terms of just changing light hours, nothing else),
but I see what you're saying and it is the more proper method. Thanks for the insight, I'm going to draw up another experiment with that adjustment. Probably will have to use all CFL's to get an accurate supplement for 18h. hmm...
Ok I see what you're saying now too. I got too concerned about isolating variables to realize what I was overlooking.
Spurr, from what I can tell, you've read lotsa scholarly journals and have tried to attempt to "connect the dots" from different studies and draw conclusions from that - insofar as I can tell (please, correct me if I'm wrong), you have not linked to one study yet where the variable tested was hours of light per day on marijuana plants in vegging - again, please correct me if I'm wrong here.
I realize you've linked to similar papers regarding plants that are similar in many ways to weed, but have yet to do so with weed -
therefore, any conclusions that you claim to draw ARE WHOLLY DEPENDENT ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT WHATEVER PLANT WAS STUDIED IN THAT PARTICULAR STUDY IS IDENTICAL IN EVERY WAY TO WEED, which I find to be a "stretch" at best.
The scary part here is that you have had no formal academic studies, nor have had a mentor to oversee your work and let you know what correlations/conclusions are relevant to plant biology and which are simply spurious (no pun intended).
From this, you have FORMED AN OPINION OF WHAT YOU THINK.
Admittedly, you lack the required capital (although you seem to be saving up) for the equipment necessary to test your hypothesis, so unless I'm missing something, I FAIL TO SEE HOW YOU CAN POSSIBLY MAKE THE CLAIMS YOU MAKE WITH ANY DEGREE OF SERIOUSNESS.
If you continue to want to espouse these beliefs, please, please, please make sure that everyone knows THAT IT IS YOUR OPINION BASED ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE, AND HAS YET TO BE TESTED OR VERIFIED.
Spurr, please do upload the studies on Cannabis you have. Its guaranteed that I will read them.
@ Anyone interested,
Here is a few of the papers I have on PPFD, also info about UV-b and Co2 and temp and stomatal conductance, etc. I will upload others tomorrow...
All papers show ideal PPFD is ~1,500.
1. "Effect of light intensity on photosynthetic characteristics of four high THC yielding varieties of cannabis sativa"
2. "Photosynthetic response of Cannabis sativa L. to variations in photosynthetic photon flux densities, temperature and CO2 conditions"
3. "UV-B RADIATION EFFECTS ON PHOTOSYNTHESIS, GROWTH AND CANNABINOID PRODUCTION OF TWO Cannabis sativa CHEMOTYPE"
4. "Thidiazuron-induced high-frequency direct shoot organogenesis of Cannabis sativa L."
.....
I realize you've linked to similar papers regarding plants that are similar in many ways to weed, but have yet to do so with weed - therefore, any conclusions that you claim to draw ARE WHOLLY DEPENDENT ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT WHATEVER PLANT WAS STUDIED IN THAT PARTICULAR STUDY IS IDENTICAL IN EVERY WAY TO WEED, which I find to be a "stretch" at best.
The scary part here is that you have had no formal academic studies, nor have had a mentor to oversee your work and let you know what correlations/conclusions are relevant to plant biology and which are simply spurious (no pun intended).
.....
Kopite, ive never seen Cannabis classified as c4 - what makes you say that?
VG
It's simply.
FWIW, yes, cannabis is a C3 plant due to how cannabis fixes Co2 - carbon (re: RuBP). Cannabis is not a C4 plant. No one should be citing Ed.R.Re: C3 plants
I keep seeing it mentioned that cannabis is classed as a C3 is this just based on the fact Ed said so?
http://www.cannabisculture.com/v2/articles/3127.html
I have it as a C4 type myself?
I'm fairly sure i have read it, but would have to dig the info out...
If you read that then your sauces are wrong.