nobodyhere
Well-Known Member
I think about this too a bit. With other plants as well.
InTheShed Grows Inside & Out: Jump In Any Time
I think about this too a bit. With other plants as well.
That would make an interesting pipe. I would try to straighten and drill while it's still green and pliable. That's a pretty fat trunk! Then if you're lucky it will naturally rebend to the original shape on its own.
And I thought Bob's name was Bo.
Unless his last name if Rown...Huh, imagine that. Having taking a good look at it now, I do believe you are correct.
Not sure about IR and anything about trichome production. Far red and red light do make plants grow differently.
You question is; why are there larfy small buds in the shade and big fatty nugs in the sun on the same plant.
It's a complicated question really. Seems simple on the surface but there's a lot going on in and around a plant that regulates growth either at the top or sides and down low on the plant.
Environment is a huge, lighting, temps, RH it's all inter connected.
Trichomes are a defense mechanism for a plant. Why are they on the flowers more so than on leaves? The primary function of the flowers are to reproduce and make seeds. Not to produce chlorophyll.
Are there less trichomes down low on the lower flowers? And why?
Brings up another question. Do those lower flowers trichomes contain less THC?
More questions than answers here my friend.
I have studied some on the lighting thing. Red/far red lighting has been studied and it may glean some interesting light on the question about lower flowers being smaller than flowers higher up on the cannabis plant.
Btw - we grow Lilly outdoors. The lower flowers are larger than the higher up flowers and open sooner and seem to smell the strongest (promoting pollination/reproduction). Interesting observation. So not all plants grow the same with regard to flowers and reproduction. Not a huge surprise.
Here's an info bomb on the red/far red lighting. This is a quote from a text book from GA Tech. It's somewhat sciencey but not to hard of a read. I've read several other sources that back this up.
Info bomb alert:
"Red light: growth, germination, and photoperiodism
Blue light promotes stem bending, but red light (as opposed to far-red light) promotes stem elongation, or growth. Why? Red light indicates full sun to a plant, while far-red light indicates that a plant is being shaded out by another plant. This is because unfiltered, full sunlight contains much more red light than far-red light. Chlorophyll absorbs strongly in the red region of the visible spectrum, but not in the far-red region, so any plant in the shade of another plant on the forest floor will be exposed to light that has been depleted of red light and but enriched for far-red-light. The non-shaded areas on the forest floor have more red light, and red light triggers plant growth. In other words, plants use the red vs far-red light detection to grow away from shade and towards light.
The chromoproteins responsible for red/far-red light detection are called phytochromes. Phytochromes have two photo-interconvertible forms: Pr (phytochrome red) and Pfr (phytochrome far-red). The forms are named for what they are capable of absorbing next: the Pr form is capable of absorbing red light (~667 nm), and the Pfr form is capable of absorbing far-red light (~730 nm). When the Pr form absorbs red light, it is immediately converted to Pfr; and when Pfr absorbs far-red light, it is quickly converted back to Pr. Absorption of red or far-red light causes a massive change to the shape of the chromophore, altering the conformation and activity of the phytochrome protein to which it is bound. Pfr is the physiologically active form of the protein. Because phytochrome is in the Pfr state after exposure to red light, this means that exposure to red light turns the phytochrome “on.” Exposure to far-red light inhibits phytochrome activity. Together, the two forms represent the phytochrome system.
The biologically inactive form of phytochrome (Pr) is converted to the biologically active form Pfr under illumination with red light. Far-red light and darkness convert the molecule back to the inactive form. Image credit: OpenStax Biology
The phytochrome system acts as a biological light switch. It monitors the level, intensity, duration, and color of environmental light. The effect of red light is reversible by immediately shining far-red light on the sample, which converts the chromoprotein to the inactive Pr form. Additionally, Pfr can slowly revert to Pr in the dark, or break down over time. In all instances, the physiological response induced by red light is reversed. The active form of phytochrome (Pfr) can directly activate other molecules in the cytoplasm, or it can be trafficked to the nucleus, where it directly activates or represses specific gene expression.
The behaviors that the phytochrome system regulates include plant growth, seed germination, and photoperiodism (behaviors regulated by day length):
- Phytochrome stimulates plant growth toward red light via the hormone cytokinin, which promotes cell division, and gibberellin, which promotes stem elongation. Cytokinin is activated by the Pfr form of phytochrome, thus causing cell division in the apical meristems that are in the presence of red light. Interestingly, cytokinin is only capable of promoting cell division when it is also in the presence of auxin, which is present at apical meristems but not other locations in the plant. Auxin also regulates levels of gibberellin."
There may be something in the far red lighting thing that plays a part in your lower down flowers that you think are lower quality. I actually don't really have a lot of that LAF on my plants. I run a fair amount of red/far red lighting (1750K lumens) in my flower room.
When trimming I actually keep those lower down smallish nugs for personal consumption. I think they taste really good specially fresh and have a smoother taste as well.
I actually keep a small dish of those LARF flowers on my kitchen table. Its like a dish of nuts or chocolate but LARF buds. (we keep the chocolate fresh!) When friends come and visit - they get to sample the LARF. Usually with a cup of tea.
Preston has the effect on people. And I thought Bob's name was Bo
Bo Bob - I've been called a lot worse. lol most likely by my right wing relatives, sadly.
bobrown - just say "bob brown" real fast - it kinda blends together.
If you defoil during flower you're stressing the plant pretty hard and also taking away from the food source the plants need to grow flowers.
If you defoil in VEG you will increase your time in VEG. If you defoil early enough in VEG you will increase the time it will take the plant to mature.
That can sometimes be an advantage if you need more time in VEG. I usually just let my VEG plants go and cut them back and get rid of the lower stuff right before I go into flower but I don't do a lot of defoil. Just clean up the leaves touching soil or close and the lower shoots that wont make it to the canopy.
For me its all about timing. I'm trying to get my timing so I harvest and have VEG plants ready to go into flower, no delay.
So this defoil thing can be a useful tool with timing. But it does delay growth and cuts off food for the plant.
I don't think its a positive with a cannabis plant in flower. I want my flowering plants to finish without delay or stress. Leaves actually help the plant finish flowering in many ways. Plant growth hormones and sugars to name a few.
Wheat did - I'm allergic to that as are many many hoo-mans. All you gotta do is look at our obesity rate compared to what it was when I was a kid in the 60s.
There were very few obese people back then. I was considered obese @ 175#s @ 5'10" by my doc in 2014. Quit sugar and wheat. My body looks much closer to what I looked like physically back in the 60s/70s now. Attribute that to getting off wheat that was causing me to blow up like balloon for no apparent reason.
Wheat turns out did a mutation and was promoted do to yields being much higher in the mutated version. But its much harder to digest in humans. So it makes it all the way to our colon before its completely digested causes havoc in a lot of peoples gut. We have the wrong bacteria in the wrong part of our gut trying to digest food that should already be digested. Causes an allergic reaction in some folks (a lot of folks actually).
- Thread starter
- #14,325
We will always be calling it stepped on Lowded!
Great info Bo! Thanks for posting that. It raises a lot of questions that I'm not going to ask here because a. you might not know and b. we'd be really down in the weeds. One thing that stood out to me is that lower leaves are going in and out of shade as the sun moves across the sky, causing a constant switch from Pr to Pfr, which may account for the difference in lower buds being fed by those local leaves.
I amn't going to spend the money to have larf THC tested against upper colas, but I have found that I don't have the patience to deal with those skinny inner branches with lots of tiny puff-balls on them, so I've been trimming hard after stretch this round. I'm also not in need of more weed, so I won't miss the added larf weight. That said, I try to make sure that no sunlight can make its way to the soil level, which is to say that any leaves I take off weren't getting sunlight and performing much photosynthesis, so the plant shouldn't miss them.
I can add one more morsel of knowledge ...
Old mature fans are basically carb sinks - they produce and store sugars. All the hormonal activity generally bypasses them, so when you take one off, the plant doesn't react. Removing new growth will affect the foliage around it, and the rest of the plant to a lesser degree.
Spectrum also affects lower growth, or any shaded growth for that matter. As light passes through the canopy, the lower leaves receive more green for instance, which will promote various growth patterns that attempt to bring it into direct light - faster stem growth, leaf twisting, petiole length, etc.
If you're trying to push bud growth to the upper canopy, it makes more sense to remove budsites than fans. I've done that a couple times - left the fans on, while clipping off the shoots. They eventually fade and fall off anyway. I figure any carb production is a good thing.
Old mature fans are basically carb sinks - they produce and store sugars. All the hormonal activity generally bypasses them, so when you take one off, the plant doesn't react. Removing new growth will affect the foliage around it, and the rest of the plant to a lesser degree.
Spectrum also affects lower growth, or any shaded growth for that matter. As light passes through the canopy, the lower leaves receive more green for instance, which will promote various growth patterns that attempt to bring it into direct light - faster stem growth, leaf twisting, petiole length, etc.
If you're trying to push bud growth to the upper canopy, it makes more sense to remove budsites than fans. I've done that a couple times - left the fans on, while clipping off the shoots. They eventually fade and fall off anyway. I figure any carb production is a good thing.
- Thread starter
- #14,327
Thanks for that info Graytail! I have done that in the past and have recommended to others when trimming the undergrowth. But there are times when there's loads to remove and limited hours to get it done. Then it's all coming off at once
. Barbershop vs salon maybe? There's a metaphor in there somewhere...
I know the routine. I hate trimming the stuff and just leave it on the plant. My wife is much better about harvesting it. I tell her just ditch it, that we have plenty of weed, but she says she wants it for cookies. I will say that some of it feels stickier than fat colas.
- Thread starter
- #14,329
Might be because those are more likely to get squoze, rather than the gentle care we take with our big buds! And they're harder to trim because of the tiny fans that grow in them.
Easier said then done bob lol
About the quitting wheat and sugars but you definitely right bud . Something I need to do is cut back carbs for sure sugar I can do a good job limiting myself to. Went to physio today feel good but realized I need to stop saying and start doing more of what I preach ya know.
Get my ass a better version of myself .
Cheese bob
Didn't finish reading but I'm just gonna say this.
I'm High AF puffing on the Jellium LAF I could NOT pass off to my friends.
It's smooth tasting, sticky AF - bag appeal a good 2.
I put the LAF on my kitchen table in a dish like a Scooby snack.
I'm High AF puffing on the Jellium LAF I could NOT pass off to my friends.
It's smooth tasting, sticky AF - bag appeal a good 2.
I put the LAF on my kitchen table in a dish like a Scooby snack.
- Thread starter
- #14,332
nobodyhere
Well-Known Member
My HSO Raspberry Diesels both produced well, with a lotta larf, I just dried entire stems and popped em off when dry. Still very high off those gals (today), will miss them for a few months or years.
- Thread starter
- #14,334
Speaking of larf (or the lack thereof), I thought I would do a Thursday update with some bud porn. I took these yesterday after work because I spend so much time moving and watering plants in the morning that I don't often have time to take pics as well. Even my wife said, "You have too many plants." 
These are all flip day 32.
First up, Berry Bomb (a Bomb Seeds clone from Agemon):
Next up is the AK-47 (an 420 clone, 6th or 7th generation as I've lost track):
And finally, Bedroom Cookies 2.2 (a Bedroom/Rich Farmer cross, clone from Archiweedies):
Let's go on from pictures to a discussion topic: flushing excess nutrient salts from the substrate during the grow. Emilya has posted on a number of occasions that it's important for those using synthetic nutes to flush their soil just before the last 2-3 weeks of the grow, to clear the medium of any build-up, allowing the roots to maximize nutrient uptake during the final push. (This would be a flush with the last water containing the normal nutrient mix, not a flush leaving nothing for the plant when it's done.)
I've never done that and my plants seem to do just fine, but when she posted it again yesterday I thought I would go back to my "Grower Services & Product Development Director" at ProMix and see what he had to say on the topic. Here is his reply:
"When any fertilizer is applied to a container, the plant will take up nutrients leaving some behind. This can create some imbalances in the root zone.
"A plain water irrigation leaches out the elements that are not used or any waste ions (such as sodium and/or chloride) that may have accumulated (all nutrients are supplied in fertilizers as mineral salts). Irrigate plants to allow 15-20% of water to flow from the bottom of the container.
"Generally, a good practice over a course of a week is to irrigate with fertilizer solution three times and follow the fourth irrigation with plain water to leach excess nutrients/salts. This would be applicable to all growing media."
Well, I try to water to runoff every time (I doubt I get to 15% and maybe 0% on the 10 gallon pots), but I've never flushed the waste ions from the medium during the grow. Going forward, I certainly won't be doing it every 4th watering, but it looks like once later in flower is a good idea!
Oh, notice there's no mention of pH'ing the water first.
These are all flip day 32.First up, Berry Bomb (a Bomb Seeds clone from Agemon):
Next up is the AK-47 (an 420 clone, 6th or 7th generation as I've lost track):
And finally, Bedroom Cookies 2.2 (a Bedroom/Rich Farmer cross, clone from Archiweedies):
Let's go on from pictures to a discussion topic: flushing excess nutrient salts from the substrate during the grow. Emilya has posted on a number of occasions that it's important for those using synthetic nutes to flush their soil just before the last 2-3 weeks of the grow, to clear the medium of any build-up, allowing the roots to maximize nutrient uptake during the final push. (This would be a flush with the last water containing the normal nutrient mix, not a flush leaving nothing for the plant when it's done.)
I've never done that and my plants seem to do just fine, but when she posted it again yesterday I thought I would go back to my "Grower Services & Product Development Director" at ProMix and see what he had to say on the topic. Here is his reply:
"When any fertilizer is applied to a container, the plant will take up nutrients leaving some behind. This can create some imbalances in the root zone.
"A plain water irrigation leaches out the elements that are not used or any waste ions (such as sodium and/or chloride) that may have accumulated (all nutrients are supplied in fertilizers as mineral salts). Irrigate plants to allow 15-20% of water to flow from the bottom of the container.
"Generally, a good practice over a course of a week is to irrigate with fertilizer solution three times and follow the fourth irrigation with plain water to leach excess nutrients/salts. This would be applicable to all growing media."
Well, I try to water to runoff every time (I doubt I get to 15% and maybe 0% on the 10 gallon pots), but I've never flushed the waste ions from the medium during the grow. Going forward, I certainly won't be doing it every 4th watering, but it looks like once later in flower is a good idea!
Oh, notice there's no mention of pH'ing the water first.
My last few grows with the MC was feed feed feed all the time, right up until harvest. I have not yet experienced any harsh smoke, or anything that seemed too chemical to me if that makes sense. So, imho, at least with MC, I have found no reason to flush at all. I'm no scientist and he knows more than I ever will, but I go with what I know hands on and that's the results I need.
And, btw, the flowers look f'in awesome 
- Thread starter
- #14,337
Noooooooooooo! That's not what I'm talking about! I tried to be very clear what I meant about this type of flush, and it has nothing to do with chemical taste or any of that nonsense. It is specifically about clearing excess salts from the medium to enable the roots to function more effectively.
Thanks! The sun has been shining.And, btw, the flowers look f'in awesome
Ohhhhh! Ya it seems you were very clear after really reading it this time. Maybe a flow chart would have helped me.
- Thread starter
- #14,339
.
Flushing or leaching soil with water can only remove "some" soluble nutrients.
It really depends a huge amount on soil make up. Soil with high CEC won't leach out much nutrients and it wont leach them out evenly.
Here's an interesting quote:
"Within the soil
Mobility of a nutrient within the soil is closely related to the chemical properties of the soil, such as CEC and AEC, as well as the soil conditions, such as moisture. When there is sufficient moisture in the soil for leaching to occur, the percolating water can carry dissolved nutrients which will be subsequently lost from the soil profile. The nutrients which are easily leached are usually those nutrients that are less strongly held by soil particles. For instance, in a soil with a high CEC and low AEC, nitrate (an anion) will leach much more readily than calcium (a cation). Additionally, in such a soil, potassium (a monovalent cation) will leach more readily than calcium (divalent cation) since calcium is more strongly held to the soil particles than potassium.
Silica from minerals also dissolves and leaches from the soil profile during the processes of weathering. It is this dissolution and leaching that transforms primary minerals to the more weathered, secondary minerals that make up the finely-textured soils"
So only certain nutrients can leach out and it depends very much on the soil makeup. Soil is not soil-less medium.
I would consider peat moss a soil less medium very much the same as Coco choir with a different pH. Rinse away.
It really depends a huge amount on soil make up. Soil with high CEC won't leach out much nutrients and it wont leach them out evenly.
Here's an interesting quote:
"Within the soil
Mobility of a nutrient within the soil is closely related to the chemical properties of the soil, such as CEC and AEC, as well as the soil conditions, such as moisture. When there is sufficient moisture in the soil for leaching to occur, the percolating water can carry dissolved nutrients which will be subsequently lost from the soil profile. The nutrients which are easily leached are usually those nutrients that are less strongly held by soil particles. For instance, in a soil with a high CEC and low AEC, nitrate (an anion) will leach much more readily than calcium (a cation). Additionally, in such a soil, potassium (a monovalent cation) will leach more readily than calcium (divalent cation) since calcium is more strongly held to the soil particles than potassium.
Silica from minerals also dissolves and leaches from the soil profile during the processes of weathering. It is this dissolution and leaching that transforms primary minerals to the more weathered, secondary minerals that make up the finely-textured soils"
So only certain nutrients can leach out and it depends very much on the soil makeup. Soil is not soil-less medium.
I would consider peat moss a soil less medium very much the same as Coco choir with a different pH. Rinse away.
Similar threads
