Defoliation: Hi-Yield Technique?

[whodare]

the problem with your solar panel analogy is the plant doesn't sell its energy to the grid, it is stored, and used to grow new leafs stems and buds...


funny two posts back to back that contradict. both arguing for. is it stress or no stress?

at least steve admits that, but he's a little silly accusing me of not having experience growing, pruning, and defoliating.

and your right steve pruning doesn't provide the same results as stripping them bare, it works better

heres some bushes for you boys. 3 weeks from roots touching water. never topped or defoliated, just pruned properly.

 

[whodare]

yes you can stunt your plant and cause harm to your yield if you defoliate improperly or to fast... there was a noob in here a while back with tall spindly plants and was trying every trick he could read to get larger yields and frostier nugs, he went through his plants and picked nearly all the fans off at once... it looked like a bunch of twigs packed together. No doubt that did not help him, but he also didn't do it properly and never should have even attempted it on that crop.

he didnt do it wrong, that is what defoliation is. though he did do it at the wrong time.

If someone does not like Defoliation... cool do things your way nobody will fault you for that. But coming in here to argue your point that Defol is a negative and detrimental practice only makes it harder for some of us to help a person new to the idea understand, how to do it properly so they don't hurt their plants or yield.

not knocking defoliation. get it?

im setting the record straight that defoliation and pruning are different techniques. those people who dont see severely(even if temporary) stunted growth or stress are likely just pruning.

they are different techniques used for different purposes.

anyway yall have fun, im out of this circle jerk, i just dont want someone coming on here costing themselves thousands when they "do it wrong". some people grow more than an oz a run.

 

[Infinitesimal]

whodare,
my post was directed at no one in particular, lately this thread has been nothing but back and forth bickering between people that seem to not be able to agree or even agree to disagree... to no end or obvious goal. I just tried to offer my opinion on, the defol vs. not defol argument as well as, what I feel is the proper way to safely & beneficially defoliate.

again, nothing was directed at you... I didn't mean to ruffle feathers if that is the case

Peace,
Infi

 

[hempfield]

Can I have a small suggestion : the title of this thread, even written as Defoliation: Hi-Yield Technique? , should be read as Propper Pruning: Hi-Yield Technique ?

Is just a thought ...

I bet we would see a lot of arguing even on the subject of Pruning. Am I right or not ?

 

[St3ve]

at least steve admits that, but he's a little silly accusing me of not having experience growing, pruning, and defoliating.

and your right steve pruning doesn't provide the same results as stripping them bare, it works better

I'm not accusing you of that overall whodare, I'm just simply saying you don't have the experience applying this particular technique properly. Not knocking ANYTHING else. If you did, you would not be saying what you are saying.. that's all. I'm confident enough in saying this because I have failed so many times at this by not doing it correctly, its easy to see the benefits of when I do. Plain and simple. Showing us pictures of nice plants is irrelevant. I mean, if you advocated LSTing and someone showed you a nice healthy plant that was NOT LST'd would it really matter?

Enough people have failed at DWC to be able to say it doesn't work. Why? Because its pretty hard... meaning you can fail pretty easily at it and would feel that it just doesn't work. HOWEVER, if you take the time to learn it, it can work very well.

And there is no BETTER this or BETTER that... so to speak. Its all different, and it all has different applications. Topping a plant in one situation is beneficial, in others not so much. Basic pruning is always needed.. but how and how much is applicable to the grow. Defoliation is another tool, a very specific one. If you're growing outside, or vert, or have plenty of room, or no seperate veg.. ALL of these things and I WOULD NOT defoliate.

If you DO have a limited space to flower, AND you have a separate veg area with MORE than enough time so you don't get behind in flowering, then yes it CAN be beneficial if done properly.

What funny is, everything I am saying right here, in this txt, on page 200 and whatever, is exactly what the OP says in the first post. However if ppl can't make it work, they want to blame the technique and not the learning curve.

 

[Bassy59]

the problem with your solar panel analogy is the plant doesn't sell its energy to the grid, it is stored, and used to grow new leafs stems and buds...


pruning doesn't provide the same results as stripping them bare, it works better

heres some bushes for you boys. 3 weeks from roots touching water. never topped or defoliated, just pruned properly.

ok first off, you don't get to define defoliation in the ops thread. You want to define it? Make your own thread. Then we will use the CONTEXT which you describe as YOUR definition of DEFOLIATION, in the CONTEXT OF YOUR THREAD.

Got it? Or is that too complicated for you to understand?

So, I ask you, by YOUR definition of defoliation and pruning, not the ops, what would you call these based on before and after pics, defoliated or pruned?

 

[Bassy59]

You say 10oz from 1200 g's wet I say bullshit, properly dried your looking at a half pound. .

My bad on how I termed the area of my plants. I meant 36" cubed, not 36 cubic inches.

I am putting them into jars now to cure. My dry weight on the one plant is 10.84oz. Or 26.5% of wet. I use a diminishing light schedule, and while I can't say for sure yet, it appears to lose less water in drying. Or shall I say, it retains more weight it seems. Need a few more grows before I can have a confidence number on that, but as I've heard from some others, 25-30% is seemingly normal rather than 20-25% we're used to.

Edit: Oh, I am jarring them for cure at 67% rh. I'll slowly bring them down to 64-65% then just burbs from there.

 

[whodare]

36" cubed and I'll yield a pound all day.... Maybe more.

My coco trays yield1.8# in a 40"x40"x24" space. Without defoliation.
My current scrog (see pics in last post) should do a 1.5 a light(4 plants per) or better in a 48" space with only three feet from screen to bulbs.

Actually if your only yielding 10oz in that space you could up your game significantly, no offense.

 

[whodare]

ok first off, you don't get to define defoliation in the ops thread. You want to define it? Make your own thread. Then we will use the CONTEXT which you describe as YOUR definition of DEFOLIATION, in the CONTEXT OF YOUR THREAD.

Got it? Or is that too complicated for you to understand?

So, I ask you, by YOUR definition of defoliation and pruning, not the ops, what would you call these based on before and after pics, defoliated or pruned?

I'm not defining defoliation I'm saying it's a bad idea 99% of the time. Pruning is a more effective, less stressful/damaging, and a well recognized cultural practice outside of dope farmers, ya know in the real world where science matters.


http://db.nr.usu.edu/qlc/pdf/R32131.pdf

Immediate effects of defoliation:
Instant reduction of photosynthesis

Summary of root responses to defoliation:
Root elongation stops after defoliation and much of the stored carbohydrates are used up to help the plant recover.

I want a big root system as that directly effects yield significantly. Root to shoot ratio is important. With proper pruning you focus more roots to less shoots without stunting the growth of either.

But y'all have fun stressing, stalling, and inhibiting root growth.

Go talk to some professionals in the agriculture and floriculture industry, see what they say about pruning and defoliation.

 

[Bassy59]

I'm not defining defoliation I'm saying it's a bad idea 99% of the time. Pruning is a more effective, less stressful/damaging, and a well recognized cultural practice outside of dope farmers, ya know in the real world where science matters.

PLEASE answer my question that I stated in the post you quoted.

*Damn I wish I took pics of the massive root balls.

 

[Bassy59]

Actually if your only yielding 10oz in that space you could up your game significantly, no offense.

I already posted where I screwed up this grow, yet I still got over 10oz from ONE PLANT

Plz sir, show me your UPPED GAME with one plant in similar space.

I by no means am boasting. In fact, I expect more next grow from each plant. You sir have not shown us ANYTHING to expound on yields per plant. All the while we have mentioned our own personal experience and players like d9 showing yields of up to 19oz and averages of 15oz from single plants. As well, the op states (iirc) he yields an avg of 12.52oz per PLANT in 32" cubed.

Step up to the plate. Take a swing. Disprove us that have had significant improvements in yield.

 

[Bassy59]

Please Obi Wan, enlighten the wineries:

 

[whodare]

Your plants are defoliated. How old are they from roots touching water?


Your significant improvements likely come from the extended veg. And increased root to shoot ratio. Maybe a little experience earned along the way.

Picture 1, 1.8# on a 3x3 tray no veg, well rooted clones, no defoliation. That's after I lost 4 plants to a stem disease.

Pic2&4 14oz bubba. Never defoliated

Pic3, scrog set to yield 6-8ozs a plant easily. Never defoliated, just pruned regularly through veg.

 

[whodare]

Please Obi Wan, enlighten the wineries:

Enlighten yourself, ass.

http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/45/12/1804.abstract

Viticulture in Michigan is limited by a cool and humid climate and as a result, there is a problem of harvest season cluster rot, especially in cultivars with compact cluster morphology. Economically important wine grape varieties in eastern North America possess varying susceptibility to harvest season cluster rot. Some important cultivars that are susceptible are Pinot gris, Pinot noir, Riesling (Vitis vinifera L.) as well as Seyval and Vignoles (French–American hybrids or interspecific hybrid cultivars). A common characteristic of these cultivars is the compactness of the berries held on the cluster rachis. The aim of this work was to determine whether a quantified amount of leaf removal or a temporary reduction in carbon assimilation at the beginning of bloom would reduce fruit set and cluster compactness. Vines subjected to removal of four or six basal leaves had an average fruit set reduction of ≈45% from a non-treated control. Cluster weight and berries per cluster were similarly reduced with a greater effect on the basal than the apical cluster of the shoot. Reduced fruit set was associated with a reduction in cluster compactness and harvest season rot. This was also reflected in yield and basic fruit chemistry parameters associated with the importance of basal leaves to the developing cluster. Multiple applications of stylet oil at different time intervals resulted in significant reduction in net photosynthesis (Pn). A single application had no significant impact on Pn, whereas multiple applications reduced leaf assimilation rates. However, this reduction in Pn did not reduce fruit set or improve cluster compactness. There was a strong negative effect of early leaf removal in Year 1 on vine performance in Year 2; this carryover effect increased shootless nodes per vine, reduced the number of clusters per shoot and per vine, and dramatically reduced fruit set and consequently yield per vine.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212124553.htm

ScienceDaily (Dec. 12, 2011) — Wine grape production in the Great Lakes Viticultural Region can be a challenging enterprise. Spring frost, winter injury, short and variable growing seasons, and cool, humid growing conditions subject grape vines to disease, including harvest season cluster rot. Tight-clustered wine grape varieties in the region show varying susceptibility to cluster rot; cultivars such as Pinot gris, Pinot noir, Riesling, Seyval, and Vignoles are all susceptible, making it difficult to achieve maximum fruit maturity for these economically important varieties.




Seedless Fruit
Leaf removal in the fruiting zone has been used successfully as a vineyard management practice during the summer season. When used on high-density canopies, leaf removal techniques improve clusters' microclimate, reducing conditions that can cause bunch rot complex diseases and improving fruit quality. However, leaf removal can also affect fruit quality negatively. Excessive leaf removal can lead to overexposed clusters (high light intensity and high temperature) and reduced berry color in red cultivars. Moreover, the effects of leaf removal on yield vary depending on timing and severity.
Paolo Sabbatini and G. Stanley Howell from the Department of Horticulture at Michigan State University conducted experiments to determine whether early leaf removal influences vine performance, or if non-destructive, short-term photosynthesis reduction at the beginning of bloom would influence vine performance in a manner similar to leaf removal. The experiments were conducted at the Horticulture Teaching Research Center in East Lansing and the Southwest Michigan Research and Extension Center in Benton Harbor, Michigan. The research findings were published in HortScience.
Fruit set reduction resulting from early leaf removal, in all the cultivars except Pinot noir, confirmed the importance of carbohydrate supply during the fruit set period. Vines subjected to removal of four or six basal leaves had an average fruit set reduction of approximately 45% from a non-treated control. "Cluster weight and berries per cluster were similarly reduced with a greater effect on the basal than the apical cluster of the shoot. Reduced fruit set was associated with a reduction in cluster compactness and harvest season rot," said Sabbatini. "This was also reflected in yield and basic fruit chemistry parameters associated with the importance of basal leaves to the developing cluster."
The experiments showed a strong negative effect of early leaf removal in year one of the study on vine performance in year two. This "carryover effect" increased shootless nodes per vine, reduced the number of clusters per shoot and per vine, and dramatically reduced fruit set and yield per vine.
"From our data, we cannot assess whether this carryover is related to reduced bud cold hardiness or bud damage resulting from the leaf removal practice," the researchers added. "Unless these negative carryover responses can be ameliorated, this approach to reduce cluster compactness and cluster rot will not be acceptable. We speculate that this could be readily accommodated through retaining non-fruiting shoots at the head with all leaves retained that serve as canes to be retained for production in the next year."

http://www.pawinegrape.com/uploads/PDF%20files/Meeting%20Presentations/Ontario-Maryland%202012/Poni_leaf%20removal.pdf

Abstract: The effectiveness of early leaf removal on high-yielding cultivars Sangiovese and Trebbiano (Vitis vin- ifera L.) was investigated as a tool for reducing crop potential and for inducing looser clusters that are less sus- ceptible to rot. Fruit set, cluster weight, berry number per cluster, berry size, and cluster compactness were re- duced by all defoliation treatments as compared to non-defoliated shoots. Physiological assessment performed in a one-year study on Sangiovese indicated that prebloom removal of the six basal leaves elicited no difference be- tween treatments in mean seasonal assimilation (A) per shoot (2.91 μmol s-1 for control against 2.81 μmol s-1 for the defoliated), a fact due to the offsetting action of more vigorous lateral shoot formation and higher A rates for both main and lateral leaves after veraison in the defoliated shoots. Grape composition was improved by defolia- tion (higher Brix in both cultivars and higher anthocyanins and phenolics in Sangiovese) as a result of more as- similates being available per unit of cropping and smaller berries characterized by an increased skin-to-pulp ratio. The three-year-study on Trebbiano also showed no carryover effects of defoliation on the following year’s bud differentiation and very few year x treatment interactions, suggesting the prevailing effects of leaf removal over variability because of climate. Overall, early defoliation may be an excellent tool for yield control, replacing time- consuming manual cluster thinning. A time-consistent response suggests that this practice may also improve grape composition.

 

[Bassy59]

And to refute your scientific data:

The effect of partial defoliation over the whole canopy on the reproductive growth of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon was investigated. The 33% defoliation treatment prior to pea size and the 66% defoliation treatment prior to veraison adversely affected fresh mass per berry and yiled at harvest. The 33% defoliation treatment from veraison increased fresh berry mass. Partial defoliation had no effect on berry water content. Dry matter started to accumulate rapidly pnly from after pea size stage.
The fresh berry mass:cane mass ratio increased with partial defoliation from veraison. Leaf area/g fresh mass results indicated that control vines carried excess foliage which prevented maximum photosynthetic activity.
Partial defoliation of the canopy improved budding percentage, generally increasing with increasing defoliation, whereas bud fertility was improved only by 33% defoliation. In general, leaf removal from bud break and berry set was more effective in improving budding, whereas bud fertility was favoured by partial defoliation from bud break.

So, maybe, just maybe your scientific data is not all inclusive to all plants. hrm? Here we have grapes where it worked to increase yield, and you have grapes where it didnt increase yield.

Some differences: Strains! OH MY FAWKING GOD! You mean different types of grapes act differently to varied methods of growing? What about AREA OF THE WORLD? Your quoted studies were limited to Michigan or iirc north eastern USA and (I'm not looking at it atm) there was mention of relatively HUMID climates. OH WAIT! You mean to tell me also that climates may make a difference? Oh shit.

But wait, we're growing indoors, with more controlled conditions? I wonder if something like that could make a difference? hrm?

 

[Bassy59]

Your plants are defoliated. How old are they from roots touching water?

https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=36013&pictureid=859766&thumb=1

I can't answer that question definitively. I just don't recall. But I do happen to have a root pic from the same day of the 2nd plant from the back.

 

[whodare]

And to refute your scientific data:

The effect of partial defoliation over the whole canopy on the reproductive growth of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon was investigated. The 33% defoliation treatment prior to pea size and the 66% defoliation treatment prior to veraison adversely affected fresh mass per berry and yiled at harvest. The 33% defoliation treatment from veraison increased fresh berry mass. Partial defoliation had no effect on berry water content. Dry matter started to accumulate rapidly pnly from after pea size stage.
The fresh berry mass:cane mass ratio increased with partial defoliation from veraison. Leaf area/g fresh mass results indicated that control vines carried excess foliage which prevented maximum photosynthetic activity.
Partial defoliation of the canopy improved budding percentage, generally increasing with increasing defoliation, whereas bud fertility was improved only by 33% defoliation. In general, leaf removal from bud break and berry set was more effective in improving budding, whereas bud fertility was favoured by partial defoliation from bud break.

So, maybe, just maybe your scientific data is not all inclusive to all plants. hrm? Here we have grapes where it worked to increase yield, and you have grapes where it didnt increase yield.

Some differences: Strains! OH MY FAWKING GOD! You mean different types of grapes act differently to varied methods of growing? What about AREA OF THE WORLD? Your quoted studies were limited to Michigan or iirc north eastern USA and (I'm not looking at it atm) there was mention of relatively HUMID climates. OH WAIT! You mean to tell me also that climates may make a difference? Oh shit.

But wait, we're growing indoors, with more controlled conditions? I wonder if something like that could make a difference? hrm?

You crack me up.

Funny that 30% number pops up, where else did I hear that?


here maybe?

greyskull, did you read any of the rest of the post of any of my other post?

I AM ABSOLUTELY PROMOTING PROPER PRUNING(sorry for the caps, i want clarity)

that includes, as i said before, frequent removal of sucker branches, and large leafs blocking light to lower nodes. in veg for me, 10% gets stripped a week.

i personally leave as many large leafs below as i can.

i get rid of all suckers and clear out the canopy i little more aggressively(30%) 3 days to a week before flower so that they are 100% recovered and ready to blast off in stretch.

in stretch i resume frequent but light leaf and sucker removal, and then 3-4 days before the end of stretch i clear the rest of the suckers and leafs.

from the end of stretch on its strictly leaf removal only when it is large and blocking or resting on a nearby bud, and only if it cant be tucked away.



so i repeat im for good cultural practices ie pruning throughout the grow cycle...

but extreme defoliation is only for extreme circumstances, small spaces, extreme humidity in late cycle, quick ripening(if done wrong delayed).

I can't answer that question definitively. I just don't recall. But I do happen to have a root pic from the same day of the 2nd plant from the back.

If those plants are any older than a week from roots to water I'm sorry but that is sad. those plants and roots are healthy by all means, stressed maybe, and definitely stunted.


Again this is a plant 3 weeks from roots to water. A GDP at that, a known slow vegger. 26" tall 24" wide stem the size of a half dollar. Never defoliated.

 

[St3ve]

THanks for ignoring my posts to you whodare. :/ I see you are another one here who just cherry picks things you think you can make a case against. The fact is though, we use it in our gardens, and we grow more bud because of it. You're going to have to make peace with that some day.

Trying to prove things with science doesn't mean anything in my garden. Just because you post up (someone else's findings and not your own) doesn't make my plants suffer and my yields suffer.

Your significant improvements likely come from the extended veg. And increased root to shoot ratio.

Its true.. and if I had to guess why this tech works in MY garden, this would probably be it.

People like you, and DrFever just love showing how successful you are at growing in OTHER ways, but you wont take the time to learn something different. Its sad really.. If you ever change and decide to become more open minded let me know. I could give you some pointers on how to try this tech out successfully, and I'm happy to help. But you won't.. internet "know it alls" can't back down.

 

[Bassy59]

Is your plant above in 12/12 yet? What did it yield (or expect to yield if growing now)?

 

[whodare]

THanks for ignoring my posts to you whodare.

I've addressed your posts numerous times.

Trying to prove things with science doesn't mean anything in my garden. Just because you post up (someone else's findings and not your own) doesn't make my plants suffer and my yields suffer.

I've posted results as good or better than most in this thread. And I did it with out needed extra time for the plants to recover.

Good for you, don't listen to science then.

Its true.. and if I had to guess why this tech works in MY garden, this would probably be it.

and I'm saying you can get the better root to shoot ratio, and increased branching from mild pruning and avoid stalling your roots and plants from heavy defoliation. I've posted my experience.

People like you, and DrFever just love showing how successful you are at growing in OTHER ways, but you wont take the time to learn something different. Its sad really.. If you ever change and decide to become more open minded let me know. I could give you some pointers on how to try this tech out successfully, and I'm happy to help. But you won't.. internet "know it alls" can't back down.

Lol I'm far from arrogant in fact I don't think anything I've done has been exceptional in the yield department, averaging 1.5 or more per 1k ain't no slouching either though, specially on 3x3 trays, quality is there but because I haven't had a perfect grow(always seem to be short a plant or two) so I haven't hit that magical 2per 1k but I will, and I'll do it faster by pruning and not defoliating.

I have defoliated clones that I know very well, they were smaller than their sisters who were just pruned, both were branchy.

Is your plant above in 12/12 yet? What did it yield (or expect to yield if growing now)?

No those plants start flower in 2 days. I expect 6-8 oz min 6 on the smaller ones 8 on the larger. More if they are heavy yielders. The space each plant has is 24"x24"x24". If I do my conservative estimate I'll hit over 1.5 per light. My generous estimate closer to 2 per.