I found some threads covering some parts. But I couldn’t find one where it was all collected in one place. Even the growfaqs didn’t seem to go into full detail on it.
Anyways I was thinking a minute ago about stress on a plant and how some is good while other’s are bad. Personally I don’t know what a majority of each are. For me if this thread hoes anywhere it’ll be a good place to learn. The stress isn’t for any particular reason as I’m aware that some can increase yeild and others can stunt a plant. I’m sure there’s even at least 1 that can increase essential oil production as well. Probably at a cost if I were to guess.
It’s what I meant by bad stress. Anything that will only cause issues. Things to avoid or else face the consequences of hurting the plants to a point they can’t recover from.
I know ScrOG and SOG are both good when done properly, but there’s probably an example someone could provide that hurts the plant instead of guiding it to a different shape.
I thought this thread could be a good place to collect a what not to do list of sorts
I’ve just noticed that a good portion of the growfaqs are missing content. About half of the sections in there are just blank. Even though they say they have something there it’s just a placeholder post.
Now we’re talking. What else can we put our heads together and collect? I can update the 1st post with the collection of info for anyone looking to learn from this thread. Just need to charge my phone first. On 1%
I’m of the opinion that all stress is bad for plants. It’s only when a plant is perfectly stress free that it can fully express its genetic potential.
You can trick the plant, for example to think it is being attacked by pests to build up their immune system (SAR). That might be considered a good stress.
THC, terpenes, etc are secondary metabolites that only get produced after the plant produces what it needs to grow.
I’ve seen that cannabis has a defense mechanism for UV light creating more THC (sunscreen) in response to that, but if I had to wager a guess I’d say it’s at a sacrifice to other potential cannabinoids, terpenes, or flavinoids potential. IDK if I’m close or not. Can anyone correct me if I’m wrong? I don’t like believing false facts.
Or the UV light causes the waxy outer membrane to get cloudy like cataracts? I’ve not seen direct testing of THC and UV, just anctidotal evidence. Theres a lot of “stoner science” out there, mainly due to prohibition.
They found the enzyme responsible for UV light reaction though, so I’m sure it’s not stoner science. On another thread I’ve already provided links with links to studies done. This should be the time we start to abolish bro science and get real science about the plants we love.
I used the word sunscreen as that’s basically the plants version of a tan to keep it from burning under intense light. Now I could be wrong, but I’m not the one who discovered the find. Just someone excited that real science about the plant is finally popping up
So far we have genetics play a majority role in plant stress and what’s good or bad, UV light is seen as bro science despite the UV Resistance Locus 8 (UVR8) photoreceptor being known about, any high stress will reduce total possible yeild by the nature of having resources reallocated to repair the damage, low stress is still bad for the plants even when used correctly, manipulation of enzymes intentionally to steer the plant in any direction other than it’s genetic blueprint wants it to go will reduce the total profile sacrificing certain aspects of the plant to boost another.
Did I misunderstand anything? The UV thing I’ll need to be proven wrong on as multiple separate sources have been able to find UVR8. If I’m wrong I’ll admit it, but just like I won’t believe bro science when real science says different I need to be proven wrong or I’ll keep believing in what can be proven not claimed.
Scientific method beats all bro science opinion every time. Let’s get some real replicable facts on here. Bro science that’s different for everyone will most likely be proven bad or wrong soon and definitely is not what I’m trying to learn. False facts only make the whole world ignorant
Finally i’ve decided to try to beam an isolated SOG clone with it during the duration of the flush in addition of a 250HPS (following what i’ve read in books) to directly taste the difference. And no increase of anything at all, physically or in the smoke. So i will dare to say than UVC lamps are useless for this application, outside eventually to have smoked the more sane bud of my existence and to have grown this clone with very specific cares and protections to don’t harm myself lol
I personnally think than like all “too easy theories to don’t be used all the time by everyone since a while”, the UV enrichment have less leverage than an optimal condition of grow / stress free conditions / good methods on quality of the buds.
If ever someone want to play with it or just to use it to clean, don’t underestimate this shit. It’s pretty agressive for the skin and the eyes, count in your investment the necessary tools to handle it (gloves, mask). I will add than you have to be a bit obsessionnal in the fiber to use this kind of stuff.
I just meant that UVR8 is well documented in a lot of plants not just cannabis.
I have a different link from the other threads that might help. You can never produce more than the plants are able to, but they do have receptors to deal with UV.
That’s multiple separate sources I’ve linked to across the site to show my research on the matter. Genetics still play a large role in how well it handles the stress. Too much will be bad, but fine tune the right spectrum and you will notice a difference.
IDK if I lucked out with my bulbs, but they produced near instant results. When they get too close I see the trichomes reduce significantly, but once I fixed that they started to become frosty. Whether that means more THC was produced wasn’t really the point of adding them. More as a way to make them more easily able to handle intense light from the coating of trichomes that now protect the plant. On top of the fact that UV does help with pests to a degree as well.
Let’s start to change my mind about it if I’m mistaken. I need sources not just opinion. Otherwise I’ll keep believing what’s been proven so far.
I plan to get another one the next year (not for enrichment), it’s not a big deal to document it but i don’t known if it value the price of twos samples analysis for cannabinoids rates.
It’s better to start from a successful point with a lamp on which you already certify the significant results imho. One stone twos birds.
I made sure that the UV lights I bought were well reviewed and i read all of them before I made my choice on what ones to buy. The ones I settled on had enough positive reviews that i chanced it. Sure it’s a reptile bulb, but if I read a majority of the reviews talking about how their reptile wasn’t helped by it I just think it’s not a UV light. If I see a trend of people talking about the reptiles health improving after giving them the light I have hope it’s a good one. The one I got had enough people talking about their reptiles health that I chanced it, but only after I saw enough people posting pictures of a happy lizard. Just basking under the light looking so pleased. Before I purchased it I was at least 80% certain it had plenty of UV light in the bulb. Especially if a lizard loves basking under it. A heat lamp is one thing, but a sick lizard regaining calcium after looking sickly was the review that sold me on these.
Apparently my memory fails me on these. I swear it had 100s of reviews a month ago, but whatever. Now it has 6. This is the light I use and I’ve seen a great benefit after installing it. The heat only climbs 10°f when I have both on with the hps. I set the AC to 70 and I see 80 in the room. If I set it to 64 I only see 70 at least, so there’s definitely a heat source in the house I’m unaware of.
It was the bearded dragon mention maybe that sold me then. I’m aware of how much UV they need the hard way.
I’ll definitely be using these on my next grow from the start. I was sold ok these the next day after installing them and seeing the results. I can hunt down the pics for reference. I have before and after pics that showed extremely strong growth of trichomes the next day. I installed them during the night cycle, so after lights out I watched the and saw that was the night they started to get frosty before my eyes. Making use of the light they previously only got when i opened the window.
IDK if I should be keeping them on all day or only for a duration of the day, but I’ve seen a literal night and day difference with my plants.
Unless that’s normal to get a significant amount of trichome growth overnight to look like a whole different plant. It’s my first grow, so I’m really only basing opinion on the fact that 4 different strains all responded the same to the addition of the bulbs and the fact that they have the UVR8 photoreceptor and to my knowledge I’ve seen that it also has the COP1 receptor as well to make use of the UVR8 photoreceptor. Again though I’m willing to be proven wrong. What use is the scientific method if we can’t admit when we’re wrong about something we previously believed?
On another note though I’m thinking that UV light shouldn’t be placed in the good stress category as even if it makes the potential for more THC to he produced I’m certain that it’s at a cost. There’s only so much a plant can do. To my knowledge a plant that has been in reveg doesn’t usually yeild the same as it originally did correct? Same deal with clones. You can get potent ones I’m sure. No one is arguing that fact, but all I’ve seen on the subject basically says that you sacrifice total yeild to do that. Though if you can harvest a plant 2x or more it’s effectively a much higher yeild per plant, so maybe I’ll change my own mind on that opinion just by typing out the only knowledge I know on the subject. I won’t be doing anything I don’t feel confident doing. If it’s untested I definitely won’t be using it on my girls. They’re all I have until my next grow
The problem is than this type of lamps will be totally useless for my initial needs, we are not talking about the same type of equipment at all. Not big deal, with this cheap price i guess than a fews others will be tempted.
I invite you to read this, and to take in count than to suractivate the acid synthase acid we are talking about, we are talking about dosage over 300mw/cm².
