LED and BUD QUALITY

[Ca++]

Far red lessens the plants reaction to blue.
If you have enough blue that the plants are practicing light avoidance (growing squat) then the far red can reduce that. Thus, you could say from trail and observation, that far red makes them stretch. Though the reality is that blue puts the brakes on, and far red is jamming it's foot under the pedal.
It's quite a few cannabis papers coming together, that tells us this from a number of angles. No single paper contains it all. Only one really got to the chemical interference at the depth of our understanding. While they all take some finding, in the piles of older papers saying far red causes stretch, in some unknown species.

Avoiding blue isn't common to all plant types. Not a lot is common. Looking at the response curves on 10 different papers, could show 10 different curves. I'm not sure why there is a need to say just one is correct. Different plant, different absorption. Just look at them. A nice cabbage, with dark thick crinkly leaves, isn't going to take in light like a rose petal. Put each over a torch, and see how much tech you really need, to see this is so. Many of these curves are drawn with little more effort. I actually gave up trying to make arguments with them, as it's just not my work. However the collective weight of knowledge, all pointing in a similar direction, is more than most growers will ever need.



Should I reduce Ca inputs in the final weeks? The plants struggle to take it, so should I counter with more, or just let it be. I reuse coco, so do have reason to keep adding at least some. While too much can actually hinder uptake, a bit like soup.
Random.. but it's been playing on my mind.

 

[jackspratt61]

Far red lessens the plants reaction to blue.
If you have enough blue that the plants are practicing light avoidance (growing squat) then the far red can reduce that. Thus, you could say from trail and observation, that far red makes them stretch. Though the reality is that blue puts the brakes on, and far red is jamming it's foot under the pedal.
It's quite a few cannabis papers coming together, that tells us this from a number of angles. No single paper contains it all. Only one really got to the chemical interference at the depth of our understanding. While they all take some finding, in the piles of older papers saying far red causes stretch, in some unknown species.

Avoiding blue isn't common to all plant types. Not a lot is common. Looking at the response curves on 10 different papers, could show 10 different curves. I'm not sure why there is a need to say just one is correct. Different plant, different absorption. Just look at them. A nice cabbage, with dark thick crinkly leaves, isn't going to take in light like a rose petal. Put each over a torch, and see how much tech you really need, to see this is so. Many of these curves are drawn with little more effort. I actually gave up trying to make arguments with them, as it's just not my work. However the collective weight of knowledge, all pointing in a similar direction, is more than most growers will ever need.



Should I reduce Ca inputs in the final weeks? The plants struggle to take it, so should I counter with more, or just let it be. I reuse coco, so do have reason to keep adding at least some. While too much can actually hinder uptake, a bit like soup.
Random.. but it's been playing on my mind.

Run ca/p at a steady ratio throughout. Perhaps a 10-15% increase in P during flower.

 

[Ca++]

Run ca/p at a steady ratio throughout. Perhaps a 10-15% increase in flower.

Thanks Jack. I will just plough on then. I'm running a simple recipe, and looking to see how little I can do to it. So not veering off is just the ticket.

It's a little odd, this ionic coco. about 45ppm P, and 50ppm Ca. It's a single bottle, which might explain it. It's great with HID, but Mg was never far away from showing. It's not listed.
I'm running it using calmag, to get that 50Ca to 86Ca, while the Mg and N are useful. The Ionic has a fairly high K, so the N is accommodated. Week 4, and not a hint of deficiency. Just 300w of LED per meter though. Until today. When the sodium was struck.

 

[Rocket Soul]

Far red lessens the plants reaction to blue.
If you have enough blue that the plants are practicing light avoidance (growing squat) then the far red can reduce that. Thus, you could say from trail and observation, that far red makes them stretch. Though the reality is that blue puts the brakes on, and far red is jamming it's foot under the pedal.
It's quite a few cannabis papers coming together, that tells us this from a number of angles. No single paper contains it all. Only one really got to the chemical interference at the depth of our understanding. While they all take some finding, in the piles of older papers saying far red causes stretch, in some unknown species.

Avoiding blue isn't common to all plant types. Not a lot is common. Looking at the response curves on 10 different papers, could show 10 different curves. I'm not sure why there is a need to say just one is correct. Different plant, different absorption. Just look at them. A nice cabbage, with dark thick crinkly leaves, isn't going to take in light like a rose petal. Put each over a torch, and see how much tech you really need, to see this is so. Many of these curves are drawn with little more effort. I actually gave up trying to make arguments with them, as it's just not my work. However the collective weight of knowledge, all pointing in a similar direction, is more than most growers will ever need.



Should I reduce Ca inputs in the final weeks? The plants struggle to take it, so should I counter with more, or just let it be. I reuse coco, so do have reason to keep adding at least some. While too much can actually hinder uptake, a bit like soup.
Random.. but it's been playing on my mind.

Agree on the whole balance idea but its quite complicated; youre balancing both blue to total reds, photoreds to far reds and far red dominance in the total reds to total blues.

I think it was @Piecho who sent me this bit though i couldnt really find the source paper:

It should start at the relevant sextion i hope.
Increased far red with increased blue gave higher yields and a few more goodies. Nice cause this is cannarelated research.

Another thing about these results is that its without any green in the spectrum. Personally i think green contributes to a lot of yield numbers but maybe not in the most positive way. Green response studied in other species seems to be triggering intra cannopy behavior and growth; reduced transpiration (not in direct sunlight so doesnt really need as much transpiration as top cannopy) and more fibrous and dense growth: produce trunk and branchlike growth. So more weight but not really more bud, denser but maybe not exciting bud when it comes to taste, smell and high. This is my working hypothesis at least and seems to agree with what type of bud we get if i compare under 3000k 80cri (quite green dominant) and 2700k 90cri + 660nm (very red dominant): bigger chunkier buds but not as dense, yet somewhat more exciting quality aspects, especially with when we run some uv next to it

 

[weedemart]

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

Look I'm not gonna say I'm wrong and you're right. Because it's not the case. But you know what. I dont care if you're not willing to listen. I'm not a guru. Are you one of them?

 

[jackspratt61]

Thanks Jack. I will just plough on then. I'm running a simple recipe, and looking to see how little I can do to it. So not veering off is just the ticket.

It's a little odd, this ionic coco. about 45ppm P, and 50ppm Ca. It's a single bottle, which might explain it. It's great with HID, but Mg was never far away from showing. It's not listed.
I'm running it using calmag, to get that 50Ca to 86Ca, while the Mg and N are useful. The Ionic has a fairly high K, so the N is accommodated. Week 4, and not a hint of deficiency. Just 300w of LED per meter though. Until today. When the sodium was struck.

Is that 45 P or p2o5?

 

[Terpyterps]

For my liking I have had better buds with LED growing than HPS and have been growing plenty with both last twenty plus years. Might be also just because it is easier to keep the environmental stuff at point and also one big bonus with these new LED lights is that you can actually see what you are growing. It just doesn’t seem to make much sense why either light would make better than another if you are actually looking at light as photons as the plants do, so if you would run them side by side with matching PAR, nutrients and climate and so on. Only difference they have is with the spectrum that they produce those photons. So if the spectrum does contribute to the bud quality that would be the only reason why one would be better than another. But still those photons are photons no matter if they come out from my a55.

So does the spectrum in HPS or other lights have so much better than LED that would explain anything? I’m pretty sure that LED lights are giving better spectrum than other light sources minus sun oblivious. Thing is that cannabis has so much variation and things that are varying that it explains probably 99% of the endless quality discussion. Obviously we all want to grow the best weed than the guy next to you and no grower will ever admit growing bad weed and everyone is always thinking that they have the best light for whatever reason they tell themselves and have the best soil recipe or nutrient line or schedule and we all like to believe it ourselves.

Okay I guess those cookies are kicking in…

 

[Terpyterps]

And if you gain let’s say 1% increase in yield by adding UV or IR or FR or copper rods to your soil or use kool aid at the flower or throw bucket of ice to your plants it doesn’t matter if you are squeezing 1-3% extra, not in any hobbyists scale, those are for the growers who do acres and acres of weed where even 0.5% might make literally ton of a difference.

 

[weedemart]

Thanks Jack. I will just plough on then. I'm running a simple recipe, and looking to see how little I can do to it. So not veering off is just the ticket.

It's a little odd, this ionic coco. about 45ppm P, and 50ppm Ca. It's a single bottle, which might explain it. It's great with HID, but Mg was never far away from showing. It's not listed.
I'm running it using calmag, to get that 50Ca to 86Ca, while the Mg and N are useful. The Ionic has a fairly high K, so the N is accommodated. Week 4, and not a hint of deficiency. Just 300w of LED per meter though. Until today. When the sodium was struck.

I run start to finish 22ppm mg . No deficiency.
Same for P, 17 ppm start to finish.
80 ppm K start to finish.
120 ppm Ca start to finish.

So without spoiling my entire nutrients profile you can understand I feed X-17p-80k-22mg-X-120ca , start to finish , no deficiency.

Time to make some tissue analysis. Most nutrient got more than what you really need. You probly never see deficiency except if you feed below 0.5. What you see is antagonism and lockout.

hint: K will greatly affect mg uptake as they both cation they compete against each other for uptake.
hint2: Cannabis doesnt react to K like other fruiting plants.
hint3: typical nutrient are formulated with edta chelated iron and edta is known to be stable up to ph 6.0. after that the iron become less and less soluble until it form insoluble form. This is the reason why it is critical to keep ph at rootzone below 6.0. Otherwise you will see '' deficiency'' but it's in fact lockout.
hint4: vpd play a major role in calcium uptake and bad environnement will lead to calcium lockout. A lot of grower would think it's a deficiency but it's not. Calcium deficiency is a myth.

 

[Crooked8]

Calcium defiency is a myth.

Ok then

 

[greyfader]

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 ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-resulting-mimic-PAS-OLED-device-shows-a-an-84-resemblance-with-the-photosynthetic_fig2_281148732

Grow Lights

Imagine OLEDs for grow light applications - the ultra-thin profile saves space while the full-spectrum illumination promotes growth.

www.oledworks.com

thank you for the link! i'm a graph collector.

 

[Hammerhead]

I don't see any major issues with a mixed light setup. My room has 4 LED lights with 1 CMH centered in the room. I do see tip burn a lot more than I did with all CMH. I use EC1.2 which isn't enough to cause tip burn. The LED brand causes plants to feed differently. Quantum boards will have a much narrower spread. I do not recommend diferant LED fixtures in the same room.

 

[jackspratt61]

I run start to finish 22ppm mg . No deficiency.
Same for P, 17 ppm start to finish.
80 ppm K start to finish.
120 ppm Ca start to finish.

So without spoiling my entire nutrients profile you can understand I feed X-17p-80k-22mg-X-120ca , start to finish , no deficiency.

Time to make some tissue analysis. Most nutrient got more than what you really need. You probly never see deficiency except if you feed below 0.5. What you see is antagonism and lockout.

hint: K will greatly affect mg uptake as they both cation they compete against each other for uptake.
hint2: Cannabis doesnt react to K like other fruiting plants.
hint3: typical nutrient are formulated with edta chelated iron and edta is known to be stable up to ph 6.0. after that the iron become less and less soluble until it form insoluble form. This is the reason why it is critical to keep ph at rootzone below 6.0. Otherwise you will see '' deficiency'' but it's in fact lockout.
hint4: vpd play a major role in calcium uptake and bad environnement will lead to calcium lockout. A lot of grower would think it's a deficiency but it's not. Calcium deficiency is a myth.

What ppm Fe and Mn?

 

[weedemart]

What ppm Fe and Mn?

Not gonna spoil this because it's the most intensive work part once you get everything dialed in , micro can be a pain to optimize and I value my work.

 

[Terpyterps]

Not gonna spoil this because it's the most intensive work part once you get everything dialed in , micro can be a pain to optimize and I value my work.

Sharing is caring <3

 

[jackspratt61]

Not gonna spoil this because it's the most intensive work part once you get everything dialed in , micro can be a pain to optimize and I value my work.

This won't be revealing at all...what ratio of Fe/Mn?

 

[weedemart]

This won't be revealing at all...what ratio of Fe/Mn?

6

 

[Ca++]

Is that 45 P or p2o5?

It should be 43.4ppm P, elemental. Though it's likely a minimum value being published.
Ca is actually 56ppm elemental, and a ml/l calmag makes it 93ppm.
Both are less in grow, which is where my Ca figure had a wobble.

I'm getting 15ppm Mg from the calmag. My feed says it has Mg, but gives no figure. I can't find the threshold in the listing practices. The regulations for bottle labeling, are difficult to navigate.

I'm going to go and see my sodium now. There is something strangely reassuring about that 2200K glow. If the leaves have dropped it will ruin my day though lol

 

[jackspratt61]

It should be 43.4ppm P, elemental. Though it's likely a minimum value being published.
Ca is actually 56ppm elemental, and a ml/l calmag makes it 93ppm.
Both are less in grow, which is where my Ca figure had a wobble.

I'm getting 15ppm Mg from the calmag. My feed says it has Mg, but gives no figure. I can't find the threshold in the listing practices. The regulations for bottle labeling, are difficult to navigate.

I'm going to go and see my sodium now. There is something strangely reassuring about that 2200K glow. If the leaves have dropped it will ruin my day though lol

 

[jackspratt61]

Have you tried calcium nitrate and mgs instead of calmag?