Really! Really, like you know how to relax. That would be one stressful trip for sure. JK
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
bobblehead overtakes
- Thread starter bobblehead
- Start date
Really! Really, like you know how to relax. That would be one stressful trip for sure. JK
Who is it? " I think it's the devil." I don't give a fuck bro i'll go to the looney bin with ya.
Oh boy, here I come again... With my "correlations" and scientific documents... lol...
So Okra is a C3 plants. Cannabis is a C3 plant.
F. O. OLASANTAN and A. W. SALAU (2008). Effect of pruning on growth, leaf yield and pod yields of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench). The Journal of Agricultural Science, 146, pp 93-102. doi:10.1017/S0021859607007290.
It doesn't look like this is a RCD either... but imo that doesn't mean anything if the study was conducted well. It just means nobody has cited it yet.
Abstract
Young leaves and pods of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench) are edible, and so a crop management strategy for removing edible leaves while sustaining good pod yields is required. Pruning treatments were imposed on apically debudded okra plants for 3 years to assess effects of removing a quarter, half or three-quarters of the primary branches on growth and fresh leaf and pod yields. Pruning significantly (P<0·05) delayed fruiting by 8–10 days, extended length of harvest duration by 12–15 days and increased number of pods/plant by 10–40% and pod yield by 9–36% more than the control plants which had neither apical bud removal nor pruning. However, no difference in pod weight or pod length was found between these treatments and the control. Three-quarters pruning significantly (P<0·05) increased fresh leaf yield by 29–49%, but not all the leaves were desirable for consumption because of high fibre content. Decreases were seen in the numbers of secondary branches, shoot dry weight and pod yields (by 40–57, 22–36 and 22–30%, respectively, more than a quarter or half pruning). Although early production of pods in the control plants is often important for early maturity and high market prices, the present study found that a delay in fruiting, an extension in length of harvest duration and an increase in pod yield in plants with a quarter or half pruning enhanced staggered production and maximal pod yield. This helps to ensure a better market price and to enable growers avoid a glut on the market. A direct promotional effect of pruning on pod yields provides a possible strategy for growing okra for both leaf and pod harvests. A quarter or half pruning from the upper parts of the main stems of apically debudded plants to ensure good production and quality of leaves and pods is therefore recommended if okra is to be grown for both leaf and pod yields.
So now that there is some evidence for leaf pruning on the table... Can we compare cannabis to other crops? lol...
imo, what I'm taking away from having read the whole paper... Is that because leaf pruning delays maturing, its not something you would want to practice indoors. Indoors you want your plants to finish as fast as possible, so that you can get the next crop flowering. Say you do leaf pruning on 4 crops, and it adds 1 week to each harvest... That's a whole month of extra flower time. You could fit 5 crops vs. 4 into the year by not doing the leaf pruning. I think that leaf pruning is more for the outdoor growers, who only have 1 season, not including light dep.
So Okra is a C3 plants. Cannabis is a C3 plant.
F. O. OLASANTAN and A. W. SALAU (2008). Effect of pruning on growth, leaf yield and pod yields of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench). The Journal of Agricultural Science, 146, pp 93-102. doi:10.1017/S0021859607007290.
It doesn't look like this is a RCD either... but imo that doesn't mean anything if the study was conducted well. It just means nobody has cited it yet.
Abstract
Young leaves and pods of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus (L.) Moench) are edible, and so a crop management strategy for removing edible leaves while sustaining good pod yields is required. Pruning treatments were imposed on apically debudded okra plants for 3 years to assess effects of removing a quarter, half or three-quarters of the primary branches on growth and fresh leaf and pod yields. Pruning significantly (P<0·05) delayed fruiting by 8–10 days, extended length of harvest duration by 12–15 days and increased number of pods/plant by 10–40% and pod yield by 9–36% more than the control plants which had neither apical bud removal nor pruning. However, no difference in pod weight or pod length was found between these treatments and the control. Three-quarters pruning significantly (P<0·05) increased fresh leaf yield by 29–49%, but not all the leaves were desirable for consumption because of high fibre content. Decreases were seen in the numbers of secondary branches, shoot dry weight and pod yields (by 40–57, 22–36 and 22–30%, respectively, more than a quarter or half pruning). Although early production of pods in the control plants is often important for early maturity and high market prices, the present study found that a delay in fruiting, an extension in length of harvest duration and an increase in pod yield in plants with a quarter or half pruning enhanced staggered production and maximal pod yield. This helps to ensure a better market price and to enable growers avoid a glut on the market. A direct promotional effect of pruning on pod yields provides a possible strategy for growing okra for both leaf and pod harvests. A quarter or half pruning from the upper parts of the main stems of apically debudded plants to ensure good production and quality of leaves and pods is therefore recommended if okra is to be grown for both leaf and pod yields.
So now that there is some evidence for leaf pruning on the table... Can we compare cannabis to other crops? lol...
imo, what I'm taking away from having read the whole paper... Is that because leaf pruning delays maturing, its not something you would want to practice indoors. Indoors you want your plants to finish as fast as possible, so that you can get the next crop flowering. Say you do leaf pruning on 4 crops, and it adds 1 week to each harvest... That's a whole month of extra flower time. You could fit 5 crops vs. 4 into the year by not doing the leaf pruning. I think that leaf pruning is more for the outdoor growers, who only have 1 season, not including light dep.
Good to see you guys caring about your futures. Us young cats need to stay free so we can figure this fucking plant out before all the old farts who steer us astray die out!
Nice link, picture, and summary bobbles. For me, the abstract matches what I've seen first hand defoliating and that's removing leaves will mean more will replace them in time. Defoliating can be used to shape plants and hell, slow down a plant if it's been growing too fast! Or if one of us ever does something too early... I don't like to go back on my words as I use to advocate for defoliating, but I don't like being wrong either. I've honestly shared my experiences (and roots.) With humor and humility, I've learned from my mistake regarding defoliating. Only time will tell how many other mistakes I'm making. Brassy is a sharp cat in my book and none of us are perfect. That study does say it'll improve yield at the expense of time...which could be justified considering plant count...AND when better ways to train are not used.
Nice link, picture, and summary bobbles. For me, the abstract matches what I've seen first hand defoliating and that's removing leaves will mean more will replace them in time. Defoliating can be used to shape plants and hell, slow down a plant if it's been growing too fast! Or if one of us ever does something too early... I don't like to go back on my words as I use to advocate for defoliating, but I don't like being wrong either. I've honestly shared my experiences (and roots.) With humor and humility, I've learned from my mistake regarding defoliating. Only time will tell how many other mistakes I'm making. Brassy is a sharp cat in my book and none of us are perfect. That study does say it'll improve yield at the expense of time...which could be justified considering plant count...AND when better ways to train are not used.
With enough persistence... You can teach an old dog a new trick... but that doesn't mean they have to like it! ha ha...
Its better when you do it with science. It removes the emotion. For me anyway.
Thanks for dropping in!
Yeah dude, after people smoke the Okra they're gonna be like "cookies? what cookies?"
Okra taste terrible...bleach!
G
greenmatter
try eating it instead of smoking it mega
SRGB
Member
Interesting topic.
Without entering the discussion from either point of view, we would probably suggest examining the various methods employed by greenhouses to produce desired results relevant to foliage and blossom manangement.
In particular, we would examine the practices of `training`, `thinning` and `spacing`. Training might be described as adjustment of the fruit load of each individual plant according to its vegetative vigor. Thinning may, or may not include leaf culling. Thinning may, or may not include lateral branch culling. Thinning may include both leaf and branch culling to produce the desired result. Thinning might be described as selectively limiting the number of fruits per plant, based on the distinctive vegetative vigor and specific fruit bearing capacity of a given plant. Spacing might be the practice of determining the amount of area a given plant or tree requires to produce the desired blossoms within the total garden area.
For the present instance, gardeners appear to be mostly concerned with increasing total `yield`, or total fruit or flower `weight`, by manipulating plant or tree foliage.
The present discussion has not, from what we could garner, introduced the closely related practice of thinning. Thinning can be found to be practiced in many horticultural or agricultural sectors.
We are not certain why the focus of the discussion appears to be concentrated on only leaf removal, or `defoliation`.
In general, leaf removal might tend to decrease the ability of a given plant or tree to produce its own food. Recall that plants and trees actually create their own food. Fertilizers or nutrients might be considered the building blocks of food production within the plant or tree - but not accurately `plant food`. Water and nutrients absorbed by a plant or trees` roots, then transported through the plants` vascular system to the plants` leaves, where there, in the leaves, the water and nutrients (elements, or compounds) are combined with carbohydrates (formed through photosynthesis) to produce various plant foods. Reduction of leaf area or mass might tend to reduce the total amount of food the plant can produce for itself internally, thus reducing overall growth.
Thinning might be described as removing undesirable growth to produce desirable growth. The practice is not focused only on leaves, or foliage, but can be comprehensive; including being tailored to the specific garden environment, and most importantly, the specific cultivar. Each cultivar might respond to foliage or branch removal in different manners.
There might be a number of reasons a gardener might remove foliage or branches. For the present discussion, the top reasons might be:
a) to remove or restrict unwanted growth
b) to encourage or train growth where it is desired
c) to promote flower and fruit production
d) to facilitate light penetration throughout the leaf canopy for more efficient use of light
e) to produce optimum fruit load
f) to create an environment in which complete leaf coverage could be constant (no light reaching walls or floor)
g) uniform exposure of foliage to light
Leaf removal without training might result in plant leaves simply growing back more vigorously surrounding the area of removal on the plant. Training without leaf removal might result in well trained plant without uniform light coverage onto leaves. Thinning without training might result in larger fruit without adequate support or anchorage compacted into a smaller area.
The gardener might find that there are numerous techniques for pruning, training and thinning plants or trees. The practices are not necessarily repeatable between different gardens. Different gardens might have different cultivars that respond differently to the practices employed. Differing environmental and spacial parameters might also effect final fruit weight. The genetics of the given plant or tree are also factors that might be considered.
With certain plants or trees training and thinning can be easily observed. When we post of this here, we are not simply referring to the mass removal of only leaves, but a comprehensive approach based on the total composite of the plant and the garden. Beginning with adequate understanding of the specific cultivar being pruned, trained and thinned. The plant response, might be, quite different amongst a large group of diverse specimen. One line might produce best if thinned to 1 to 2 terminal flowers only, with a single stake supporting its 1 to 2 blossoms. Another specimen might require 24 to 36 stakes per single plant for anchorage and concentric lateral support, and might produce 12 large terminal flowers with 12 additional smaller flowers developed from the vertically adjacent next lower branches.
The care and methods employed on the 2 differing specimens might be very different. The former would only require maintenance perhaps 4 to 6 occasions during a given season. The latter might require adjustments every day, or every other day. By adjustments, we mean keeping 36 branches of a fairly large plant or small tree tied to 36 stakes, removal of all lower branches save for the 36 selected branches, bending or shaping of a large plant or tree into 2 concentric squares with an outer perimeter of 20 feet, or each perimeter being 5 feet in width. Further, creating an inner square of stakes to support the selected next lower lateral branches. Basically, pruning to 12 main terminal flowers, with each of those selected branches being thinned to only 2 additional lower branches with terminal flowers, resulting in a large plant or small tree with 36 total flowers at the conclusion of the season.
Leaf removal is not really necessary if proper care is taken - beforehand - to accurately evaluate the genetic expression of the given cultivar. More importantly, proper anchorage and training and thinning to the number of branches and terminal flowers that would produce the desired result might be a good option. When anchored and trained and thinned properly, the leaves would be dispersed in a manner that would not affect the development of the adjacent selected branch and flower. In fact, due to training and thinning, the `spacing` might also be resolved, as leaves would grow into (or be trained to grow) the space where the removed branch previously was taking up space.
This is not intended to be any definitive post on the practice of `defoliation`, as the term has appeared on this board. Rather, it might be to post about the closely related practices of `training`, `thinning` and `spacing`, which might be considered interconnected within the scope of plant or tree foliage manipulation to produce desired results.
In conclusion, we would point to our SRBGB-Rose thread as a trivial example of training, thinning and spacing. A simple generic rose. Now 3 years old (at least from the period when we acquired it). There is a picture in the thread of a large blossom. We pruned to approximately 3 branches, thinned all lateral branches beneath those selected terminal flowers, resulting in 3 large rose blossoms, one of which is the first illustration in the thread. We did not concentrate on leaf removal. That particular rose did not produce an overabundance of leaves; additionally, it was outdoor, requiring all the leaves possible to capture as much sunlight as possible. Without removal of the lower branches, the largest terminal flower might not have gotten to approximately 7 to 8 inches in width.
There are a number of techniques that could be emplyed by gardners to produce the most from their genetics. We would note that `defoliation` might be more expansive than only leaf reomval. In fact, `training`, `thinning`, and `spacing` might be areas of
interest for further examination within any comprehensive technique(s) or foliage adjustment systems employed by gardeners to produce the optimal expression (within the present scope of total fruit and flower measurement) of their specific cultivars.
We hope this might be helpful.
Respectfully,
/SRGB/
Without entering the discussion from either point of view, we would probably suggest examining the various methods employed by greenhouses to produce desired results relevant to foliage and blossom manangement.
In particular, we would examine the practices of `training`, `thinning` and `spacing`. Training might be described as adjustment of the fruit load of each individual plant according to its vegetative vigor. Thinning may, or may not include leaf culling. Thinning may, or may not include lateral branch culling. Thinning may include both leaf and branch culling to produce the desired result. Thinning might be described as selectively limiting the number of fruits per plant, based on the distinctive vegetative vigor and specific fruit bearing capacity of a given plant. Spacing might be the practice of determining the amount of area a given plant or tree requires to produce the desired blossoms within the total garden area.
For the present instance, gardeners appear to be mostly concerned with increasing total `yield`, or total fruit or flower `weight`, by manipulating plant or tree foliage.
The present discussion has not, from what we could garner, introduced the closely related practice of thinning. Thinning can be found to be practiced in many horticultural or agricultural sectors.
We are not certain why the focus of the discussion appears to be concentrated on only leaf removal, or `defoliation`.
In general, leaf removal might tend to decrease the ability of a given plant or tree to produce its own food. Recall that plants and trees actually create their own food. Fertilizers or nutrients might be considered the building blocks of food production within the plant or tree - but not accurately `plant food`. Water and nutrients absorbed by a plant or trees` roots, then transported through the plants` vascular system to the plants` leaves, where there, in the leaves, the water and nutrients (elements, or compounds) are combined with carbohydrates (formed through photosynthesis) to produce various plant foods. Reduction of leaf area or mass might tend to reduce the total amount of food the plant can produce for itself internally, thus reducing overall growth.
Thinning might be described as removing undesirable growth to produce desirable growth. The practice is not focused only on leaves, or foliage, but can be comprehensive; including being tailored to the specific garden environment, and most importantly, the specific cultivar. Each cultivar might respond to foliage or branch removal in different manners.
There might be a number of reasons a gardener might remove foliage or branches. For the present discussion, the top reasons might be:
a) to remove or restrict unwanted growth
b) to encourage or train growth where it is desired
c) to promote flower and fruit production
d) to facilitate light penetration throughout the leaf canopy for more efficient use of light
e) to produce optimum fruit load
f) to create an environment in which complete leaf coverage could be constant (no light reaching walls or floor)
g) uniform exposure of foliage to light
Leaf removal without training might result in plant leaves simply growing back more vigorously surrounding the area of removal on the plant. Training without leaf removal might result in well trained plant without uniform light coverage onto leaves. Thinning without training might result in larger fruit without adequate support or anchorage compacted into a smaller area.
The gardener might find that there are numerous techniques for pruning, training and thinning plants or trees. The practices are not necessarily repeatable between different gardens. Different gardens might have different cultivars that respond differently to the practices employed. Differing environmental and spacial parameters might also effect final fruit weight. The genetics of the given plant or tree are also factors that might be considered.
With certain plants or trees training and thinning can be easily observed. When we post of this here, we are not simply referring to the mass removal of only leaves, but a comprehensive approach based on the total composite of the plant and the garden. Beginning with adequate understanding of the specific cultivar being pruned, trained and thinned. The plant response, might be, quite different amongst a large group of diverse specimen. One line might produce best if thinned to 1 to 2 terminal flowers only, with a single stake supporting its 1 to 2 blossoms. Another specimen might require 24 to 36 stakes per single plant for anchorage and concentric lateral support, and might produce 12 large terminal flowers with 12 additional smaller flowers developed from the vertically adjacent next lower branches.
The care and methods employed on the 2 differing specimens might be very different. The former would only require maintenance perhaps 4 to 6 occasions during a given season. The latter might require adjustments every day, or every other day. By adjustments, we mean keeping 36 branches of a fairly large plant or small tree tied to 36 stakes, removal of all lower branches save for the 36 selected branches, bending or shaping of a large plant or tree into 2 concentric squares with an outer perimeter of 20 feet, or each perimeter being 5 feet in width. Further, creating an inner square of stakes to support the selected next lower lateral branches. Basically, pruning to 12 main terminal flowers, with each of those selected branches being thinned to only 2 additional lower branches with terminal flowers, resulting in a large plant or small tree with 36 total flowers at the conclusion of the season.
Leaf removal is not really necessary if proper care is taken - beforehand - to accurately evaluate the genetic expression of the given cultivar. More importantly, proper anchorage and training and thinning to the number of branches and terminal flowers that would produce the desired result might be a good option. When anchored and trained and thinned properly, the leaves would be dispersed in a manner that would not affect the development of the adjacent selected branch and flower. In fact, due to training and thinning, the `spacing` might also be resolved, as leaves would grow into (or be trained to grow) the space where the removed branch previously was taking up space.
This is not intended to be any definitive post on the practice of `defoliation`, as the term has appeared on this board. Rather, it might be to post about the closely related practices of `training`, `thinning` and `spacing`, which might be considered interconnected within the scope of plant or tree foliage manipulation to produce desired results.
In conclusion, we would point to our SRBGB-Rose thread as a trivial example of training, thinning and spacing. A simple generic rose. Now 3 years old (at least from the period when we acquired it). There is a picture in the thread of a large blossom. We pruned to approximately 3 branches, thinned all lateral branches beneath those selected terminal flowers, resulting in 3 large rose blossoms, one of which is the first illustration in the thread. We did not concentrate on leaf removal. That particular rose did not produce an overabundance of leaves; additionally, it was outdoor, requiring all the leaves possible to capture as much sunlight as possible. Without removal of the lower branches, the largest terminal flower might not have gotten to approximately 7 to 8 inches in width.
There are a number of techniques that could be emplyed by gardners to produce the most from their genetics. We would note that `defoliation` might be more expansive than only leaf reomval. In fact, `training`, `thinning`, and `spacing` might be areas of
interest for further examination within any comprehensive technique(s) or foliage adjustment systems employed by gardeners to produce the optimal expression (within the present scope of total fruit and flower measurement) of their specific cultivars.
We hope this might be helpful.
Respectfully,
/SRGB/
If you want to keep this thread peaceful, you'd be well advised to quash this defoliation talk sooner than later. The religions leaders will soon find their way over and begin to clog your thread with bullshit.
O
otis33
Agreed, this thread is too good to be ruined by an argument that will never be resolved. The funny thing to me is, bobbles has experience defoliating, and has always been forthcoming with his failures as well as successes, so we should all just sit back and keep learning. If something works for him or does not work the results will be documented. Keep doing what you do bobbles.
Voldemort Voldemort Voldemort!
RM - aquagrower
Active member
This right here is why I don't think that there will ever be a "definative conclusion" to this discussion. Truth of the matter is that no matter how hard we may attempt to replicate another's garden, just ain't possable.
I believe it is up to each and every grower to find what works in THEIR space, and adjust accordingly.
Amen my Brutha from a different mutha!
Do you bread that ocra before you smoke it?
Got cookies?
I grew out Mega's GSC forum cut x UK Cheese, if that was really the male... Anyway, I called it "dirty girlscout". I sent a few packs into the server fund, and Mega got a donor tag. ha ha...
Here's what I got.
In the early samples I took, DGS3 was the winner as far as flavor and aroma are concerned. They're all fire, so its going to be hard picking a clear winner. GSC is a great breeder plant. I'm probably going to have to grow most of them over again to make a decision. Not to start another blumat fight... but I grew these plants with blumats, and some of the pots were heavier than others. Its really not a fair comparison of plant potential. Luckily I have clones of each and every one of them.
DGS3 aka "Okra OG"
I don't think a single gram of these plants is leaving my personal stash...
I grew out Mega's GSC forum cut x UK Cheese, if that was really the male... Anyway, I called it "dirty girlscout". I sent a few packs into the server fund, and Mega got a donor tag. ha ha...
Here's what I got.
In the early samples I took, DGS3 was the winner as far as flavor and aroma are concerned. They're all fire, so its going to be hard picking a clear winner. GSC is a great breeder plant. I'm probably going to have to grow most of them over again to make a decision. Not to start another blumat fight... but I grew these plants with blumats, and some of the pots were heavier than others. Its really not a fair comparison of plant potential. Luckily I have clones of each and every one of them.
DGS3 aka "Okra OG"
I don't think a single gram of these plants is leaving my personal stash...
Man whoever the breeder was of that fine DANK FIRE......must be one crazy mutha-fukka.....and an elite breeder.....
Last edited:
Yeah man, that megaburbank has some elite skeelz that's for damn sure... His mad breeding skeelz make it look like I can grow... and smoke the final product and determine if its worth a damn... Unlike some people around here...
I've made my point of view clear, but ultimately I think you've nailed it with that last sentence
.
I've made my point of view clear, but ultimately I think you've nailed it with that last sentence
and out of respect for each other we don't go into each others threads and sling shit. We respectfully agree to disagree, and poke fun at each other.
:friends:
