-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
LED and BUD QUALITY
- Thread starter Tropical Sun
- Start date
here we go….
Sure mate. You invented the Emerson Effect.
Because that LED doesn't have any Far Red – which is what we've been talking about all this time. You don't really have any idea what you're saying, do you? Perhaps that's Bugbee's fault for not explaining the Emerson Effect properly. But if you knew what it was yourself, you wouldn't be talking nonsense now. Also, your plant is a bit chlorotic. Nitrogen and magnesium are your friends.I knew you were gonna call UV . thats funny. I holded the best parts.
NO UV and indoor! light were 30inch above apex. mars ts1000
doesnt need uv to modulate stretch
View attachment 18963172
weedemart
Well-known member
Like I mentionned, I never heard anyone talk about Emerson effect before you so that's kinda funny as you explained it like someone who just discovered it. Far red is photosynthetic and it is part of the photosynthesis. UV is not. actually uv is totally useless except for UVB and the only reliable UVB light are T5 , thats why I said commercials are not ready for it. Now the hype is on far red but thing is you better spend on more effective photons! Why? Because far red cause morphologic change in plant and it doesnt benefit production in cannabis as it would with leafy greens. Leggy and stretchy plant are not desirable in my book.And UV damages plants thats just unproductive.
Photosynthetically-active radiation, UV-A and UV-B, causes both common and specific damage and photoprotective responses in the model liverwort Marchantia polymorpha subsp. ruderalis
We studied the effects of different radiation treatments on the physiology and UV-absorbing compounds of the model liverwort Marchantia polymorpha subsp. ruderalis. Starting from gemmae, samples were exposed to five radiation treatments: low photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), low PAR+...
pubs.rsc.org
Wrong. it does have far red but no UV. And wrong again if you had read , they suffered from drought I forgot one irrigation. Theres is no way my feed lack of nitrogen.
Last edited:
weedemart
Well-known member
And btw if you want live proof of far red disadvantage in certain situation; try start from seed directly under strong light with far red. Do a side by side with T5 6400k spectrum. 100% guarenteed your seeds will end up less stretchy with T5. Why? No far red!And no UV.
thats the smart thing to do...
Brother Nature
Well-known member
The headache comes from the far red spectrum…
CrushnYuba
Well-known member
just the weed i have seen. maybe because there are more small or new growers using led. The cannabis industry is really big here. i see a ton of weed being grown and brokered. Most my friends make a living on cannabis. i really have not seen much that was grown with led. what i have seen was not my favorite. what i have grown myself i was not super impressed with. I do still use it for veg. you got to ask, why dont i see a bunch of dank led packs? i see hundreds of lbs from different growers being sold every day.
for whatever reason, i have seen alot of hungry or sad looking led plants on this board. i dont know if its a coincidence.
I imagine strain selection does make a difference. definitely different plants like different conditions. in the greenhouse selection for the time of year is important. i have some plants that love july and august but are just mediocre being flowered in sept-oct. some that dont like the heat of mid summer but love to be flowered in april-may or sept-oct. some plants need shade cloth to produce their best and dont like full intensity.
I think if you have a look over this thread you'll see there are some very impressive plants being grown under LED by guys who know what they're doing. I won't post them all up, but you only need to scroll back a few pages. I'm not talking about the noobs growing in cupboards under cheap Chinese LEDs.
It would be interesting to know where you are located and why there is such a predominance of HIDs when we're starting to see LEDs used more frequently and on larger scales. I'm not in the US or Canada, and so legal grow ops in Australia are few and far between in comparison, but we've fitted medicinal cannabis grows (and other scaled horticulture) with LED lighting and the results have been as good as anything I've seen under, for example, HPS. I have fitted out a lot of larger private grows, too, and no-one has gone back to HIDs after trialling LEDs. But then I'm talking 10s of pounds, not 100s of pounds like you.
I was with a local medicinal cannabis distributor the other day who imports a lot of flower from Canada (because the Australian industry is still in its infancy), and we were discussing the different strains he's importing and how some were being grown under LED and some under HPS. We were wondering if this mainly had to do with temperature management or the fact that some of the older lines still perform well under HPS because they were selectively bred under it for so long (40+ years).
We've discussed some of these things in this thread as well. The main difference between LED and HID is IR radiation and I posted up some info a while back showing that, despite the added IR, the difference in leaf temperature between HPS and LED is less than 2C. Interestingly, LED leaf temps are higher under LED than outdoors where there is an abundance of IR from sunlight.
The only other big difference is between the spectra, as HPS has a lot more green light which can penetrate further (and does not saturate chloroplasts as quickly as red and blue light), especially as HPS tends to stretch a little more due to the lack of blue and UVA light (as well as the added IR, which also causes plants to stretch). For particular strains that grow densely, a little bit of stretch is a good thing to allow added air circulation and light penetration into the lower canopy.
So maybe it's just a bit colder where you are? Or maybe it is strain-specific – which is why I asked. Like a lot of other old-skool growers, some of my friends and I grew for more than 20 years under HPS, but we haven't looked back since switching to LED. In terms of visual appeal, LED has it all over HPS – it's just tighter. But in terms of (subjective) potency and taste, I honestly haven't noticed a huge difference in quality when growing the same strains. We had a particular Skunk variety that we grew for about 12 years that transitioned HPS to LED about five years ago, and if anything it got better. No drop-off in overall yield, a huge increase in yield per watt, and tighter buds that had the same flavour and potency. I've done some THC testing as well, and we're getting up to 25% and more THC under LED.
On a related note, we saw THC levels get completely destroyed with the addition of UVB (T5 reptile bulbs). Here's the same Afghan Skunk strain going from 22.5% THC grown under UVA (~400nm) supplemented light down to less than 14% simply with the addition of too much UVB. This shows why you need to be careful with the type and timing of UV you use, as UV will photo-oxidise cannabinoids at the same time it stresses the plant into producing more.
weedemart
Well-known member
How much time plant were exposed to uvb per day ?
I plan to do 15min midcycle last 3 weeks, what you think. First time experiment with reptisun
Same
Look, I'm happy to try to help you – I'm happy to try to help anyone – but:
1. A little bit of humility goes a long way – there are some very experienced growers here who would also be more than willing to help you if you didn't act like a know-it-all.
2. You are just plain wrong about a lot of things, and until you accept that, and are willing to listen to other people, we're not going to get very far. I will add another post after this one (later – no time now) pointing out where you appear to have gone wrong, and I am happy to discuss it in a civilised manner. But you also have to be willing to accept the experience of others – or at very least research it for yourself using the right sources – and if you disagree, then we expect you to have a valid reason and offer evidence for your assertions so that we can all debate them.
I'll be back.
Sorry for deviating from the argument at hand, but I recently stumbled across some 2015 research into using OLEDs to more accurately mimic PAR/PBAR. Has anyone encountered these, or know why they don’t seem to have progressed further?
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
www.oledworks.com
Plant Growth Absorption Spectrum Mimicking Light Sources - PMC
Plant factories have attracted increasing attention because they can produce fresh fruits and vegetables free from pesticides in all weather. However, the emission spectra from current light sources significantly mismatch the spectra absorbed by ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Grow Lights
Imagine OLEDs for grow light applications - the ultra-thin profile saves space while the full-spectrum illumination promotes growth.
www.oledworks.com
Terpyterps
Active member
Photons are photons. No magic here! HPS is pain in the a55 heat vice and produces photons at very low efficiency. Now electricity being super expensive I rather use it efficiently and no struggles with temps. HPS is ancient dinosaur still popping up once in a while in these types of topics. You could supplement your plants with UVB and IR/FR to get extra help with your tricome production and give your plants enough carbon molecules to actually build up them till they are mature. To me it looks like there were not enough carbon to produce those tricomes fully and no wonder if it is not given to the plants while they are underneath strong LED that has higher nutrient requirements usually.
Ca++
Well-known member
I'm probably just diving in with preconceptions, but the 5 seconds I gave this, seem like it's snake oil.Sorry for deviating from the argument at hand, but I recently stumbled across some 2015 research into using OLEDs to more accurately mimic PAR/PBAR. Has anyone encountered these, or know why they don’t seem to have progressed further?
Plant Growth Absorption Spectrum Mimicking Light Sources - PMC
Plant factories have attracted increasing attention because they can produce fresh fruits and vegetables free from pesticides in all weather. However, the emission spectra from current light sources significantly mismatch the spectra absorbed by ...
Grow Lights
Imagine OLEDs for grow light applications - the ultra-thin profile saves space while the full-spectrum illumination promotes growth.
OLED efficiency is the first problem. In a TV, by 300nits of brightness, they use twice the power of a regular LED TV.
Like in TV, these guys seem to be selling some better colour renditioning. Their house of cards is built on the foundation that a plant wants a certain spectrum. This is information they just don't have. They have their opinion on what we need, and think the perfect match is better met with OLED.
The big problem here, is not knowing the right spectrum to chase after anyway.
I would try an address the sulphation issue. I can't convince my search engine the OLED isn't a type of car battery though. I imagine it's looking at 3rd party sites, who have indexed with AI, which thinks it knows best.
Rocket Soul
Well-known member
The ways of the led section are mysterious and usually annoying and headache inducing...
Rocket Soul
Well-known member
Are you sure you and prawn are even talking about the same thing? Far red does many things, not only one, and of the different things far red do the Emmerson effects is likely the last thing you would see acting in a flower intensity sotuation: its effect taper off quite fast at lightlevels higher than 150ppfd, its a low light phenomenon.Like I mentionned, I never heard anyone talk about Emerson effect before you so that's kinda funny as you explained it like someone who just discovered it. Far red is photosynthetic and it is part of the photosynthesis. UV is not. actually uv is totally useless except for UVB and the only reliable UVB light are T5 , thats why I said commercials are not ready for it. Now the hype is on far red but thing is you better spend on more effective photons! Why? Because far red cause morphologic change in plant and it doesnt benefit production in cannabis as it would with leafy greens. Leggy and stretchy plant are not desirable in my book.And UV damages plants thats just unproductive.
Photosynthetically-active radiation, UV-A and UV-B, causes both common and specific damage and photoprotective responses in the model liverwort Marchantia polymorpha subsp. ruderalis
We studied the effects of different radiation treatments on the physiology and UV-absorbing compounds of the model liverwort Marchantia polymorpha subsp. ruderalis. Starting from gemmae, samples were exposed to five radiation treatments: low photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), low PAR+...
Wrong. it does have far red but no UV. And wrong again if you had read , they suffered from drought I forgot one irrigation. Theres is no way my feed lack of nitrogen.
View attachment 18963185
View attachment 18963192
If what youre doing is adding far red and seeing how the plant grows different; thats not really necessarily the emmerson effect. Far red has morphogenetic effect aswell that will change they way your plant grows, both in relation to stretch and flowering/budding response.
Also, the chloro and pigment actionspectrum posted here is a little wrong; it shows chloro a and b peaks where theyre not supposed to be. Somebody got artistic with that chart:
Chloro a peaks around 470 and 730nm is not right, nor is chloro B at 500nm and 700nm; this is verifiable. If you lower those blue peaks by 30nm your close to scientificly established consensus. Similar with red peaks, they should be around 630 and 680 normally.
Tbh this graph seems to be based on a picture from someone else than the author, like if he grabbed a pic online and then just filled in the numbers under the graph. Cause if youd rescale this pic to 400nm where you currently get 450, and 700nm (more or less) where you now have 750nm then it would be more or less correct.
Sorry, but somebody pushed broscience to you here, check some proper action spectrums, generally the less colored they are the more likely they come from some bonafide research source.
dogzter
Drapetomaniac
Rocket Soul
Well-known member
While content of far red in the sun, and its lack of inducing insane stretch, is an important point to note i think that its hard to make a direct comparison here, since light intensity is also stretch inhibiting, and sun light is easily twice as intense as we use for indoor growing.Ah. Now I remember you. You were the guy who was going to school us all on how to grow on a massive scale, right? You claimed to be an expert grower and then started your little 4-plant rockwool grow and apparently couldn't even finish it and killed the plants!
Poor man's grow season 1
Hey everyone, I have some C99 seeds from Peakseedbc that I personally inbred quite a few years ago and I decided it was time to test them! The parents were very stable with little variation, in short the monstrous grapefruit pheno and the other not as impressive but very appreciated for its...www.icmag.com
I think we've dished out enough punishment to you in this thread already, but unfortunately I have to dish out a little more, because you are spreading more "bro science" and there's no room for bro science next to real science in my world.
This is absolutely not true and I will explain why. Look outside > do plants stretch excessively under sunlight? No. Sunlight contains 25% Far Red. It has a Red-to-Far Red ratio of (on average) around 1.3:1.
Many LED grow lights on the market have a R:FR ratio of up to 30:1. Ratios of 15:1 are typical. Our lights have around 4:1
So how is it even possible for indoor plants to stretch under R:FR ratios far higher than sunlight? And why do our lights not induce shade avoidance with over 10% Far Red when you claim "that far red with cannabis can be undesirable , especially in flowering if you want tight plants"?
I know the answer (which I will reveal later) – do you? (For those who don't know, the red to far red ratio triggers shade avoidance, but it is not as simple as that.)
Here is an 80% sativa I grew. It flowers for at least 12 weeks. You would expect it to stretch like a bastard with all the far red in my lights, right? Nope.
10% Far Red light. Pretty undesirable, right?
Also, I just thought I'd show you what a plant looks like when it flowers, because apparently your last plants died before they got the chance.
View attachment 18963117
What i can say from our first try with the GLA/prawn strips is that the added far red seems to be balance someway, no real difference in stretch with our other trays. That grow finishes in a few weeks, still not updated with pics; my growbuddy makes me jump thru a lot of hoops to post anything; theres a lot of paranoia up there in the grow. Got a few pics from midway thru and the beginning but i need to figure out a way to post similar as external links that i can disable; can only leave pics up for a bit of time according my buddy.
Prawn: from one thing to another, especially here while talking about Emmerson: have you ever evaluated red sup at 680nm? We added some to juice up our 2700k 90cri blux eb strips and it is looking real good...
Obviously there would be some efficiency loss in 680nm diodes, but at what point would that be cancelled out by being more aligned to plants spectrum needs?
