The gas lantern routine

[The General]

I have read about GLR for years now, and I finally decided to give it a try. Wow! I was shocked how well it works for veg. I'm sold, I will continue to use this lighting schedule. Plus, when I put them into flower they start flowering much quicker.

 

[Universeaware]

Hello, I'm in a bit of a predicament, I've been using gas lantern and I'm at the third week, the strongest and biggest plant is showing pistils, none of the others are but they are smaller. Could it be that my HPS doesn't have enough blue spectrum to trick them in that one hour? Should I re-adjust my lighting scheduale or let it play out hoping that only this one kicks in flower? Or I could turn up my LED for that one hour and see if she reverts (very very early flower).

I'm lost as hell. Anyone has opinions?

 

[Bassman59]

They can show sex without going into flower. I wouldn't be too worried about it so long as you have the timers right.

 

[Universeaware]

Thanks for the quick answer.
Give me a sec, taking more pictures.

 

[Bassman59]

So you're using a different light for the 1 hour than your normal lights on? If it's weak ass lights, I would say that could be an issue. Personally, I use a mechanical timer that allows me to use the same light for the 1 hr on as the rest of the day.

But showing sex is fine.

That pic, sorry to say is pretty bad for showing anything you're trying to point out. You need to be a lot closer. We don't care what the grow looks like (in context to the issue), show the pistil issue for a clearer response.

 

[Universeaware]

I've been using HPS + digital timer 12-1 (12-5.5-1-5.5), what I'm saying is: Should I complement that one hour that the lights are ON halfway through the dark period with a LED to reinforce the "idea"? lol. Or change the scheduale all together, or not even worry about it?

Here are the pictures at 20 days close-up on the only one that is showing pistils atm (the most developed one of the LSD's)

Thanks for any answer provided, sorry if I worry too much, but I care a lot about the tiny things lol.

 

[Bassman59]

no worries, worry wort.

You're all good. leave it as is. It's just showing sex, which will often happen using GLR. But they wont get to actually go into flower with the 1 hr on.

My opinion anyways.

 

[The General]

no worries, worry wort.

You're all good. leave it as is. It's just showing sex, which will often happen using GLR. But they wont get to actually go into flower with the 1 hr on.

My opinion anyways.

I agree with Bassman. My plants show sex too with GLR, but never flower. Just make sure your timer is set correctly. The best part of GLR is when I do put my plants into 12/12 they flower like crazy!

 

[NEPharmer]

It's funny how many people hear of a new way of growing, but shoot it down immediately having no clue if it actually works or not. I've been using this method for the last 2 years with great results. Keep an open mind before shooting down an idea. This one saved me a lot of money over the last few years.

 

[SouthEnd26]

I Grow Sweet Tooth And Sour Diesel I Grew Both Of Them And And My Last Grow At 20/4 And All My Plants Love It I Think Its Better Than 18/6 Its A Good Amount Of Rest

 

[bandai]

Please post your findings those would be quite interesting. All the best on your current grow

(3) Tangerine Dreams; (2) Big Bang Autos (grown under GLR, and switched to 12/12, then 11/13 after 4 weeks of flowering):

I've been watching and they just started to show hairs a few weeks ago. I don't see hermies yet (a little early maybe), but as far as growth goes I have to cut the top of the plants off more because they are running into the lights. I'm sold on the growth end of this lighting routine so far; I'll report back on the yield end when flowering is complete.

Note : I'm doing a comparison study (for myself) using Joint Doctor Lowryder #1 under GLR for the first grow, 18/6 for the second, and 20/4 for the last to see how autos yield with this method.

 

[bandai]

Thank you to all who contributed to this thread. Definitely a good read.

 

[NorCal Labs]

very badass. I'm going to try it very soon and post my results.

 

[homegrowndank]

it works very well on my grows , i also use the DLS for flowering starting @ 11 on 13 off .
i have done 3 grows side by side same nutes just different light cycles (24/0 ,18/6 & 12/12 ).
GLR & DLS gave me a much larger yield and beautiful canopies !

 

[Jupiter79]

I changed it to 18/6 and i definitely see a difference between the 12-1 schedule and 18/6, the plants grow faster and look healthier. Not sure if the healthier thing has anything to do with the lamp as i just changed nutrients.
In the article they stated that the 12-1 schedule causes less stress to the plant then 18/6 or 24/0. Nowhere in the world a plant gets 18 hours of sun a day.

This may be a little late but what the hell: About that last sentence. In high or low latitude places like Canada, Scandinavia, Siberia, uttermost southern parts of Argentina and Chile have days with many hours of sun during summertime. I live in Sweden and during the summer it's normal with 18+ hours of light and all the plants grows like nothing ever happened. Even at the highest latitudes the sun is even up for 24 hrs a day, during the peak of summer (lasts about one month). And there's plants there too. Maybe Siberia won't have any plants but that's just for the Cold, but even Siberia actually has a rich plant life in the summer. But in winter time it's the opposite, light becomes less and less. So plants around the world do get 18 hrs of light per day or even more. All the countries have this that days grow longer and longer in the spring until it reaches a peak in summer and the days starts to get shorter again until mid-winter and then longer again, it's just that it's bigger and more extreme differences in the higher or lower latitude parts of the world.

Allthough Sweden is a country where many plants couldn't grow, it's not because of the light, it's because of the cold and constant inconcistency in weather. Because in the summer, if the weather is good and the sunny days are not too much disturbed by clouds and rain and cold winds the plants grow like hell. But we usually have bad summers so, it's hard to grow good in general over here. But it's because of the weather, not the light. If it was the light; we (and most of northern Canada) wouldn't have as many plants as we do have.

I think it's the other way around , that more light is better (but I'm not certain about the 24/0 schedule though). Because that's why we, despite the awfully bad and inconcistent weather, actually have a rich plant life during summer. It's like the long days makes them "catch up" and that those many hours makes up for the other bad conditions.

So it could not have been a serious article if the author/authors didn't even know that there are places in the world that (at least partially) have 18 hrs of light per day and even 24 hrs sometimes. It's a well known fact.

 

[GrizzWald]

This may be a little late but what the hell: About that last sentence. In high or low latitude places like Canada, Scandinavia, Siberia, uttermost southern parts of Argentina and Chile have days with many hours of sun during summertime. I live in Sweden and during the summer it's normal with 18+ hours of light and all the plants grows like nothing ever happened. Even at the highest latitudes the sun is even up for 24 hrs a day, during the peak of summer (lasts about one month). And there's plants there too. Maybe Siberia won't have any plants but that's just for the Cold, but even Siberia actually has a rich plant life in the summer. But in winter time it's the opposite, light becomes less and less. So plants around the world do get 18 hrs of light per day or even more. All the countries have this that days grow longer and longer in the spring until it reaches a peak in summer and the days starts to get shorter again until mid-winter and then longer again, it's just that it's bigger and more extreme differences in the higher or lower latitude parts of the world.

Allthough Sweden is a country where many plants couldn't grow, it's not because of the light, it's because of the cold and constant inconcistency in weather. Because in the summer, if the weather is good and the sunny days are not too much disturbed by clouds and rain and cold winds the plants grow like hell. But we usually have bad summers so, it's hard to grow good in general over here. But it's because of the weather, not the light. If it was the light; we (and most of northern Canada) wouldn't have as many plants as we do have.

I think it's the other way around , that more light is better (but I'm not certain about the 24/0 schedule though). Because that's why we, despite the awfully bad and inconcistent weather, actually have a rich plant life during summer. It's like the long days makes them "catch up" and that those many hours makes up for the other bad conditions.

So it could not have been a serious article if the author/authors didn't even know that there are places in the world that (at least partially) have 18 hrs of light per day and even 24 hrs sometimes. It's a well known fact.

Aren't we talking about mj? Check me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it is a natural plant to these areas.

 

[Icemud]

Aren't we talking about mj? Check me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it is a natural plant to these areas.

I agree, we are talking about MJ, not the native plants of Sweden. Most of the land race strains that make up almost all of the Marijuana strains today and most of these come from areas that are used to around 12-14 hours of light. (afghani, colombian, african, hindu kush...) Just like nutrients, more is not always better.

 

[Jupiter79]

I was also NOT talking about the native plants of Sweden. In fact I wasn't even talking about plants. I was talking about light schedules, and my point was simply that it's wrong to say that

"nowhere in the world a plant gets 18 hours of light" When there actually are places in the world with 18+ hours light per day. And I even said that Sweden is not an ideal place to grow (outdoors) because of it's climate. But if the weather had been more suitable and together with those light conditions, then who knows?

Finally this statement is not wrong. "Most of the land race strains that make up almost all of the Marijuana strains today and most of these come from areas that are used to around 12-14 hours of light. (afghani, colombian, african, hindu kush...)"

But you are talking outdoor growing here, and the gas lantern routine vs. 18 or 24 hrs light scheme is definitely an indoor growing technique. The two are not really comparable.
Are you certain that in those land race countries that it would actually be worse for the plants, had they had say 18 hours of light, but with the exact same climate/weather conditions? Would it really be worse? Just like with the nutrients?
It's very hard to actually test how a plant would behave with 18 hours of light outdoors in e.g. Afghanistan. You can't just create 18 hours of light over there, unless it's indoors. But then the results may not be entirely compatible

 

[GrizzWald]

I think you missed the point. This is, your right, an indoor growing technique that is trying to stimulate a plant as light does outside but remember we are inside. Also about weather, marijuana grows better outdoors about a quarter distance from the equator to poles. Light durning mj growing season starts with 8.5/9 hours( early seed germination) peaks at 14, month into flowering (average) and drops back to about 10 hours harvest, well that how it works around here. So the plant never experienced 18/6 or 24/0 until indoor light cultivation started. By trying to replicate outdoor light stimulus I/d, hopefully a stronger healthier plant can be produced. Like a caged chicken isn't as strong/ healthy as a free range one. Not having a go but this is mj and it's genetics go a lot further back than 30odd years.

 

[Icemud]

But you are talking outdoor growing here, and the gas lantern routine vs. 18 or 24 hrs light scheme is definitely an indoor growing technique. The two are not really comparable.
Are you certain that in those land race countries that it would actually be worse for the plants, had they had say 18 hours of light, but with the exact same climate/weather conditions? Would it really be worse? Just like with the nutrients?
It's very hard to actually test how a plant would behave with 18 hours of light outdoors in e.g. Afghanistan. You can't just create 18 hours of light over there, unless it's indoors. But then the results may not be entirely compatible

First off I want to say I am not knocking your ideas or thoughts on your post. I just wanted to "shine some light", pun inteneded on what I have learned from my studies and reading. Respect.

I actually am pretty certain that adding more light to a "Short Day Plant" or SDP would cause negative effects based on all the studies I have read. Most studies of MANY different SDP's (which cannabis is, a short day plant) have shown less flower production, less growth, delayed flowering, delayed ripening. A study of sunflowers shows that using 24 hours of light does nothing beneficial over a 16 hour light period. A study of peppers also showed the same where a 24 hour light period showed no difference in the development, overall fruit production over a 16 hour light schedule. A study was done on sweet peppers and tomatos that also showed that there was no difference in growth from using 24 hours of light vs 16 hours of light. NASA did a study on potatos (tubers) and showed that a 24 hour period vs a 12 hour photoperiod the continuous lighting produced more plant leaf issues such as stress, chlorosis.

The only benefits I keep reading of 24 hour or longer light schedules is in the production of seeds, germination rates, and more leaf matter, but nothing points to more buds, increased quality or anything us MMJ growers would be interested in for the extra use of electricity. Also the only other benefit to using more daylight, is it prohibits the growth of PM which thrives under dark conditions.

I hope this info was helpful.