Now that is interesting. 
Thanks for sharing.
2 Likes
You can see some mutation here, this is a photo of the mutant GMO bud. The trichome development is… fucking radical.
6 Likes
That radical gmo plant, that’s why I came to OG. Without the seeds to sprout from generous members here, I’d be a totally ignorant fool. Observations obtained from those radical plants, is what really makes a difference in the research.
5 Likes
The incredible study there also gave me strange information. Cannabis trichomes, and only the capitate ones, glow under UV radiation. That explains so many things. Fuck me. Also, since they told me all about the density of the trichomes they found, I can easily compare it to my own plants. So the thing they explained was, you can shine UV on the bud and take an image. That makes it all these points of glowing lights on the bud that is the CAPITATE TRICHOMES and only them. Then you get out your computer counting software… and go to town. haha hah coulda use that info 3 years ago.
4 Likes
Sorry, I’ve lost track haha. Who is “they”?
1 Like
Zamir K. Punja , Darren B. Sutton and Tommy Kim They are researchers from simon fraser university here in my province.
They created this life changing study!
Once I read it… it changed my life. I’ll never be the same.
6 Likes
Ah, okay. I may read that whole thing, I may not, but I did just glance at the first few paragraphs and this sentence stood out: “Significantly more stalked-capitate trichomes were present on lower compared to upper bract surfaces at 6 weeks in both genotypes.” And it only stood out because I’ve been trimming for what feels like weeks now haha and noticed that the big “colas” that were nearest the lights look way less “frosty” than the lower nugs, which is something I’ve always noticed, every grow.
I realize that that’s not the same thing as what they’re talking about in that sentence I quoted, but I do think it’s interesting. And kind of annoying, too haha. I wish the big nugs were as frosty as the lowers… haha!
3 Likes
I’ll have to find the study but I remember looking at a comparison of tops vs mid buds on the same plant and the mid/lower buds routinely tested higher in terpene content while the tops had more cannabinoid content. Had to do with intensity of the light causing more terpene evaporation at the tops.
5 Likes
Yeah, no, that totally makes sense. But it doesn’t make it any less annoying haha. That’s interesting about the tops containing more cannabinoids, though.
2 Likes
I wonder if chopping the top buds then lowering the lights to make the mid/lower buds would help them catch up in the cannabinoid department or if it would be too late.
4 Likes
I mean, it is why commercially an even canopy and light penetration is so focused on. They’re looking to even the environment and create a consistent product so their testing is accurate for their patients. But, the fun is being a homegrower and being able to notice the nuances like lowers that smell/taste better. So I only loosely shoot for an even canopy. Sorry to sidetrack joe 
Edited to add that lots of people do harvest their tops earlier than the rest but I personally never have and don’t really see myself experimenting with it because it just doesn’t sit right with me lol but not knocking any that do in the slightest. I don’t know for sure that I’ve even tried bud harvested that way
3 Likes
Oh discussion is welcome!
This is an “auxilliary calyx” in veg from the GojiOG I just harvested that was like 3 percent.
They pointed out the midvein had the largest trichomes. Soon as I read that I was like duh fuck me. Talk about obvious shit I never noticed. So, I should be able to do a trichome count on this veg calyx with 250,000 micometers. Based on the line that is 500 long, a 500x500 should work!!! I’m pumped! Goals, man!
6 Likes
The thing about that is that cannabinoids alone do not for a good high make. It’s pretty well-documented that terpenes and a lot of other things contribute to the overall “entourage effect.” So harvesting in portions, chopping the tops first etc might “help” in regards to cannabinoid content or whatever, but would that really mean that the smoke would be “better”?
I agree. The plants are done when they’re done haha. I’m not gonna try to keep track of which portion of which plant is hanging and when I chopped that specific part, labeling multiple hangers for a single plant and whatever all else.
3 Likes
I think it works? I got a 40 count, but there wasn’t as much room. Also due to the shitty photo my count might be off. Except, who fucking knows. I’ll keep going and see what happens!!!
7 Likes
Yeah, I’m not gonna count them, either haha. It looks like about 40, though, maybe even a few more. Is that good? Is 40, like, the “ideal” or whatever?
2 Likes
Ahh that’s the secret. I have no fucking clue! In the study, the variation was wild, but I’m not sure how that translates to these veg calyxs. ahhhh All shall be revealed in time young grasshopper.
4 Likes
That actually, literally made me lol.
Well… In any event, 40 seems pretty good to me haha, even though I have no clue what we’re talking about here. Maybe you can use 40 as a baseline and anything above 40 would be, like, the ultimate haha.
It seems to me that the best way to determine whether or not a specific cultivar is good for making hash (that’s what you’re doing with these plants, right?) would be to just see how much hash you get from each one, sans microscope haha. But again, I really have no idea what you’re talking about on this thread.
I’m just following along because I love you haha.
2 Likes
Well, I’m at the point now where I can pick a hash maker at day 20 in bloom. So I’m working that back so I can detect a good hash maker in veg. Theoretically, I should get a higher trichome count on a plant that will yield better after it’s grown out. So far, I have only imaged the 3% plants. Aaaaand now the lab is down because my power supply failed hah hah! So I dusted off this shit computer, but it’s not good enough to hook up to my microscope. I’m gonna disassemble that PSU, and check for chaos circuits. Probably have to order a new one.
What I noticed about the trichome study was that the trichome count was 18 on one and 30 on another per mm^2. I should… perhaps, get the same kind of results, and be able to generate a baseline.
40+ trichomes good, 30 bad? I just pulled those numbers outta my ass.
2 Likes
Oh, right! Sorry, man, I totally forgot that that’s what was going on here haha.
I wonder, though, if trichome production/the amount of hash made from a specific plant/cultivar… I dunno the best way to put this… Like, you know how everybody says “Hazes” or whatever, “Sativas” etc are the Greatest Smoke, even though they don’t yield well and all that? Might the same thing apply to what you’re trying to figure out right now?
I guess what I’m asking is, are you only concerned about which plants produce the MOST hash or are you also interested in the quality? Am I making sense right now? Haha…
2 Likes