How to Use UV And IR For Growing Indoor Plants

[Jaz]

This statement means, science does not have a method that accomplishes the goal.

... at the time of writing... nearly 2 years ago - a long time when it comes to science which is continually evolving.

I like (sarcasm) how you put blinkers on, just because science hasn't achieved that goal 'yet', for whatever reason, you believe it's now set in stone and not worth the research.
This is what halts progress.

It's the backyard growers that are doing experiments and achieving contradictory results which can pique the interest of scientists to do further research.

j

 

[Peat Phreak]

I like how you put blinkers on, just because science hasn't achieved that goal 'yet', for whatever reason, you believe it's now set in stone and not worth the research.
This is what halts progress.

That is not what I believe. If people want to tinker with UV lights, more power to them!

Wake me up when actual science clearly shows UV is worth using.

 

[Jaz]

Wake me up when actual science clearly shows UV is worth using.

Will do, you go ahead and keep sleeping, others here may want to experiment without your negativity.

j

 

[Peat Phreak]

Will do, you go ahead and keep sleeping, others here may want to experiment without your negativity.

j

Being realistic isn't being negative. I'm gonna let the actual scientists run the UV experiments. I trust them.

 

[2Water]

I know I keep on jumping in unreplied to and ignored, but wouldn't it be fair to say that since cannabis has been so hybridized and diversified through phenotypic selection, and science has proven variances in response to different light spectrums from strain to strain; that both of you are correct?

The reason that there is no clear cut scientific data to point to yes UV does this by this much at this rate of light, is because they have not yet been able to define the constant to form repeatable results through all strains. But since the addition has been shown to affect some more than others in a beneficial way, you can't count out entirely the benefit of utilizing uv lighting.

As far as I can tell, it is a 50/50 gamble that you are growing the right strain, with the right amount of uv, for the proper dli to produce whatever response is wanted. Or you wont meet atleast one of those variables and won't gain anything. But what do I know, just postulating because I love a good debate

 

[OGpapa]

Will do, you go ahead and keep sleeping, others here may want to experiment without your negativity.

j

An opinion doesn't make you negative.

Society is built on opinions. Science is based on facts. Not opinions. Who would you believe?!

 

[Phytoplankton]

i just got back from the future via wormhole ... the board was living in harmony and had all the answers.
i forgot to copy them though dammit.

now i gotta figure out where i put the portal.

But the more important question is: In the future, have they determined if UVB is good for cannabis?

 

[Keffka]

I'm also a heterosexual cis male that uses the pronouns: he/him/sir/dude/bro.

No worries, heterosexual cis male sir/dude/bro.

I believe P double was referring to my language, I was only using they/them since I was unaware of his gender and it’s a simple change to make until I know what he prefers.

I know I keep on jumping in unreplied to and ignored,

Hey now, I replied to you earlier with this:

To be fair.. Mars Hydro did not explicitly state which UV light they’re talking about. They’ve strongly implied a specific band, but it’s odd they didn’t outright label it.

I think the original counterpoint was regardless of band, there’s not a lot of research to justify hundred dollar purchases, and the research that does exist isn’t solid enough for a lot of growers to alter their grows and schedules, yet. I know a lot of people here won’t get on board until Light master Dr Bugbee drops knowledge about it, which is fair, he has earned his reputation as a trusted source when it comes to light affecting cannabis growth.

It’s how we got back on to the Dr. Bugbee topic. One of the things I believe I read was, in a lot of instances, it’s difficult to tell how much of a difference is being made because a lot of strains are reaching peak efficiency for what we can measure, in comparison to the data we have on record (as far back as the 80s in some cases).

 

[2Water]

Hey now, I replied to you earlier with this:

Apologies..... mostly ignored

 

[Jaz]

It’s how we got back on to the Dr. Bugbee topic.

Professor Erik Runkle also agrees with Bugbee.

Some common effects of UV on crops include inhibition of extension growth (shorter stems and smaller leaves), increase in leaf thickness and waxiness (thicker cuticles) and greater leaf colouration, especially for plants with purplish leaves such as red-leaf lettuce, purple millet and purple fountain grass.

Research also has shown that plants grown with UV generally have less insect feeding on leaves and are less vulnerable to fungal pathogens compared to plants grown with little or no UV.

UV-C and sometimes UV-B are used to decontaminate water and surfaces, killing virtually all micro-organisms. These high-energy wavelengths could potentially be delivered to plants to kill pathogens on leaves as well.


UV Radiation and Applications in Horticulture

... but of course, a certain member here doesn't consider a professor to be an 'actual scientist'.

Runkle's credentials:

Erik Runkle

Prof. Runkle also features in this vid, have cued it up for those interested; Bugbee followed by Runkle:

Keep in mind the interview is conducted by a person who sells light products and a certain member here believes if a professor appears in a 'marketing video' he is not to be believed.

Interview with the Technical Director at Bridge Farms who's experimenting with UV on cannabis:

j

 

[bluter]

But the more important question is: In the future, have they determined if UVB is good for cannabis?

the whole living in harmony thing didn't register at all over there ?



edit : dear @Mars Hydro - we're sorry. sigh.

 

[Peat Phreak]

Professor Erik Runkle also agrees with Bugbee.

Some common effects of UV on crops include inhibition of extension growth (shorter stems and smaller leaves), increase in leaf thickness and waxiness (thicker cuticles) and greater leaf colouration, especially for plants with purplish leaves such as red-leaf lettuce, purple millet and purple fountain grass.

Research also has shown that plants grown with UV generally have less insect feeding on leaves and are less vulnerable to fungal pathogens compared to plants grown with little or no UV.

UV-C and sometimes UV-B are used to decontaminate water and surfaces, killing virtually all micro-organisms. These high-energy wavelengths could potentially be delivered to plants to kill pathogens on leaves as well.


UV Radiation and Applications in Horticulture

... but of course, a certain member here doesn't consider a professor to be an 'actual scientist'.

No. He is an actual scientist. But you are having a problem actually understanding what he is saying and how it is relevant to this discussion. Did you notice he never said anything about UV increasing terpenes or cannabinoids? I did. That's because UV doesn't increase terpenes or cannabinoids overall. In fact, actual science clearly says the opposite.

 

[Peat Phreak]

Jaz is guilty of confirmation bias

Confirmation bias is our tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas. Confirmation bias explains why two people with opposing views on a topic can see the same evidence and come away feeling validated by it. This cognitive bias is most pronounced in the case of ingrained, ideological, or emotionally charged views.

Failing to interpret information in an unbiased way can lead to serious misjudgments. By understanding this, we can learn to identify it in ourselves and others. We can be cautious of data that seems to immediately support our views.

 

[Fenderbender]

Still same strain grown outdoors, under HPS or under LED results in different strength of taste with outdoors & HPS for the win, LED is a bit subdued in comparison.. now I only have warm & cool light and one red band... so I'm kinda interested what happens if the other red band is included and some UVA/B although that is also pretty absent from HPS so that's unlikely the issue.

 

[Jaz]

Did you notice he never said anything about UV increasing terpenes or cannabinoids?

Did you notice I didn't say Prof Runkle said anything about UV increasing terpenes or cannabinoids?

I did.

Have another read of what I posted that Runkle said, I don't see anything about terpenes or cannabinoids.

Some common effects of UV on crops include inhibition of extension growth (shorter stems and smaller leaves), increase in leaf thickness and waxiness (thicker cuticles) and greater leaf colouration, especially for plants with purplish leaves such as red-leaf lettuce, purple millet and purple fountain grass.

Research also has shown that plants grown with UV generally have less insect feeding on leaves and are less vulnerable to fungal pathogens compared to plants grown with little or no UV.

UV-C and sometimes UV-B are used to decontaminate water and surfaces, killing virtually all micro-organisms. These high-energy wavelengths could potentially be delivered to plants to kill pathogens on leaves as well.

UVB is not beneficial to growing cannabis.

I disagree and going from what Prof Runkle wrote above, I'd say he and others do too.

Y'see Peat Phreak is guilty of Confirmation bias. He's ignoring things I wrote and cherry-picking parts to validate his opinion of me.

Confirmation bias is our tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms our existing beliefs or ideas. This cognitive bias is most pronounced in the case of ingrained, ideological or emotionally charged views.

Failing to interpret information in an unbiased way can lead to serious misjudgments. By understanding this, we can learn to identify it in ourselves and others.

j

 

[Peat Phreak]

Have another read of what I posted that Runkle said, I don't see anything about terpenes or cannabinoids, you're saying UV has no beneficial effects, I disagree, so does Prof Runkle and others.

I knew your comeback would be a long version of "no you".

The alleged benefits you are desperately clinging to are not viewed as beneficial for cannabis by big cannabis. They are also not viewed as beneficial for cannabis by most scientists and most home growers.

Especially when UV has been shown to reduce photosynthesis in cannabis. So if you want to grow short plants with thick waxy leaves that don't produce as well, go right ahead, buddy. Fire up that UV.

 

[Peat Phreak]

Did you notice I didn't say Prof Runkle said anything about UV increasing terpenes or cannabinoids?

Fun fact - this all started because you falsely claimed UVB was "all about the terpenes". Did you notice that? You should have because you said it.

 

[Jaz]

not viewed as beneficial for cannabis by big cannabis.

Bridge Farms uses UV... if you bothered to watch the links I posted above.

UK cannabis firm bought by US-based fund in multimillion pound deal

I guess a £66M cannabis facility is not 'big cannabis' enough for you?

As mentioned before, Dutch Passion are also using UV... and no doubt others are too.

this all started because you claimed UVB was "all about the terpenes".

Look folks, now he's doing the nya-nya-nya, nya-nya thing.

Give it a rest dude, at the time of writing I didn't expect this to ramble on and on.

Of course I knew there were other benefits, my 'all about the terpenes' post included a vid that went into many other benefits, I wasn't going to type them all out, the vid also had Bugbee, Runkle and Bridge Farms... but of course, you didn't even bother to watch the vid, you decided instead of watching a few minutes of vid, it'd be better to waste days of your time typing up rebuttles... for whatever reason

j

 

[Peat Phreak]

I guess a £66M cannabis facility is not 'big cannabis' enough for you?

Not big enough to matter. And the point is UV is NOT commonly used for professional cannabis cultivation. There are always outliers. Congratulations for finding a small example. And remember, just because a few so called pros are using it, doesn't mean anything at all. Unless you desperately want it to.

 

[Peat Phreak]

Look folks, now he's doing the na-na-na-na thing.

Give it a rest dude, at the time of writing I didn't expect this to ramble on and on.

Of course I knew there were other benefits, my 'all about the terpenes' post included a vid that went into many other benefits, I wasn't going to type them all out, the vid also had Bugbee, Runkle and Bridge Farms... but of course, you didn't even bother to watch the vid, you decided instead of watching a few minutes of vid, it'd be better to waste days of your time typing up rebuttles... for whatever reason

j

Nope. You are simply hoping we forgot about your bogus claims. It's all about the terps, bro! No, it clearly isn't. Now all you have to cling to is short plants with waxy leaves that underproduce. If that's how you want to grow, go right ahead.