LED and BUD QUALITY

[Prawn Connery]

Your ignorance can't be hide.

Yeah the bulb were mixed in large setups ''back in the days''.

It was not for UV or far red.

It was for blue photon.

DUH.

Yeah, the old-skool growers were so dumb, they completely ignored all that violet and UVA in Metal Halide when they mixed it with HPS. I mean, what was I thinking when I did it 25 years ago?

Then again, I forgot that you don't actually know how to read these spectral graphs. That's why you insisted there was nothing wrong with Spider Farmer absorption graph that was 50nm out of scale.

110% if you start a cultivation buisness , in the real market, you fail. DM me , when you do.

Well then, I'd better go back in time and give back all that money I made over the years growing some of the best pot in my area.

Why would I DM you? You haven't shown us anything. How about you DM me when you figure out how to grow a plant bigger than 1oz?

 

[Prawn Connery]

Why the hell are you so rude all the time? Calling this guy ignorant and saying they will fail? If the plant you just posted recently showed up anywhere in my garden id call MYSELF a failure. That leggy scraggly incredibly poor example of anything is what you chose to post. You cant show us dogshit and then trash talk someone who has been literally running circles around you. @Prawn Connery i really think you should considering just dropping it with this one. To each their own. You made a valiant effort which i commend you for, but you are talking to a wall. @weedemart humbleness goes a long way, i see you dont care one bit about that, name calling and whatnot, grow the fuck up man.

I agree. My only concern is the spread of disinformation. If he won't listen, that's fine, but there are other people reading this who would probably like to know the truth of what's being discussed.

Im a big fan of bugbee, but, again, this is not drug type cannabis. Until the same study is performed on high thc varieties its just interesting. Its not at all worth concluding that UV isnt worth using.

I posted the results of an Australian trial that showed manipulating photoperiod during flowering had the opposite effect on high-THC vs high-CBD varieties.

I'm not going to cast aspersions on Bugbee's research, but it is not the be-all, end-all, as his methodologies do not always align with what growers in the real world (that includes me) would like to see tested. That would be:

1. High-THC plants – that's what nearly all of us grow
2. UVA – previous studies (Magagnini et al) have shown increases in THC through UVA. violet and blue exposure. This goes against Bugbee's assertions

The Effect of Light Spectrum on the Morphology and Cannabinoid Content of Cannabis sativa L.

Abstract. Cannabis sativa L. flowers are the main source of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) used in medicine. One of the most important growth factors in cannabis cultivation is light; light quality, light intensity, and photoperiod play a big role in a successful growth protocol. The aim of the...

karger.com

Bar graphs (mean and standard deviation) of plant parameters evaluated. a Height (cm). b Stem (g/plant). c Flowers (g/plant). d Leaves (g/plant). e THC in flowers (%). f CBD in flowers (%). g THCV in flowers (%). h CBG in flowers (%). i Yield of cannabinoids (g/plant). Different letters inside the bars show significant differences (Tukey HSD, p < 0.05). Solid lines and lower case letters are for trial 1, and dashed lines and upper case letters are for trial 2. Significant differences between trials are represented by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).

 

[weedemart]

The plant you are talking about yielded 3 oz of pure fire

Sorry it's not the best picture. It was take a long time ago and at that time I was not sharing anything.

Still an amazing plant in my book.

I wont argue anymore on UV.

 

[Prawn Connery]

''Ultraviolet photons (UV) can damage critical biochemical processes. Plants synthesize photo-protective pigments that absorb UV to minimize damage. Cannabinoids absorb UV, so increased UV has the potential to increase cannabinoid synthesis.

Anyone can post test results. But not everyone can interpret them.

The pigment referred to above is the UVR8 pathway, which I have already explained goes into the UVA, violet and blue ranges, so the same photomorphogenic response can be triggered by any photons in this range, to varying degrees.

UVR8 peaks at around 280nm and then tapers off through the UVB ad UVA ranges. This makes sense, because the shorter the wavelength, the more potential photo-oxidative damage to cellular DNA. So the stronger the UVB (shorter wavelength), the greater the response.

What people like you don't realise is that part of the response is the production of secondary metabolites such as cannabinoids that absorb UV – and block it from reaching the epidermis – to protect the plant. But those same compounds are broken down by the very UV light they absorb – which is why the plant needs to produce more.

I have already shown everyone here how cannabinoid levels can go backwards with too much UVB. And I have shown how they can be increased by eliciting the same UVR8 pathway response via UVA, violet and blue that does not break cannabinoids down as quickly, resulting in a nett increase.

The Magagnini experiment – and there were two trials conducted – compliments my own testing. In other words, when I applied similar methods and spectra, I got similar results. That is not a coincidence.

But don't worry, this post isn't for you, it's for everyone else.

 

[Prawn Connery]

The plant you are talking about yielded 3 oz of pure fire

Sorry it's not the best picture. It was take a long time ago and at that time I was not sharing anything.

Still an amazing plant in my book.

I wont argue anymore on UV.

It's not an amazing plant. There's a multitude of plants in this thread that make yours look like what it is – a beginner's plant. Nothing more. I also doubt there was 3oz on it.

This plant only produced 4oz and it is bigger than yours and has a similar structure – plus the buds are a lot denser.

"Pure fire" is what the kiddies all say these days, so I'm guessing you're still in your 20s and don't have that much experience. If you had experience, you'd have photos of decent plants to show us.

 

[Prawn Connery]

what are the retail prices of your units prawn ? how long is the warranty you offer?

Hi mate, prices are on the website. Take 10% off if you are overseas and a further 10% off with the ICM discount code "forum". We can help with cheaper shipping. Five-year warranty on the lights and 8-year manufacturer's warranty on the drivers. Compared to other lights, you need to factor in the extra cost of UVA and Far Red, which are usually sold separately by the cheaper brands.

EDIT: Website products here: https://growlightsaustralia.com/products/

 

[weedemart]

It's not an amazing plant. There's a multitude of plants in this thread that make yours look like what it is – a beginner's plant. Nothing more. I also doubt there was 3oz on it.

This plant only produced 4oz and it is bigger than yours and has a similar structure – plus the buds are a lot denser.

"Pure fire" is what the kiddies all say these days, so I'm guessing you're still in your 20s and don't have that much experience. If you had experience, you'd have photos of decent plants to show us.
View attachment 18965602

View attachment 18965606

View attachment 18965605

6oz from those 2 plants... What does it mean... Nothing. Thats only 10th planets .... Wait till you see my c99.You want a show. I'm preparing one.

 

[DARKSIDER]

6oz from those 2 plants... What does it mean... Nothing. Thats only 10th planets .... Wait till you see my c99.You want a show. I'm preparing one.
View attachment 18965618

View attachment 18965619
View attachment 18965620
View attachment 18965621

Nice Thick Stalks

 

[Porky82]

Nice Thick Stalks

I was thinking the exact same thing!!

 

[Crooked8]

6oz from those 2 plants... What does it mean... Nothing. Thats only 10th planets .... Wait till you see my c99.You want a show. I'm preparing one.
View attachment 18965618

View attachment 18965619
View attachment 18965620
View attachment 18965621 View attachment 18965623 View attachment 18965622

That new “improved” rockwool holds too much water. Thats why you have heavy rooting around the outside and not as much through the block. It holds sooo much water, so they seek an oxygen rich environment on the outside and tops of the blocks. Good looking buds though. Im hopeful grodan will give us a lighter weight option(other than pargro which also sucks compared to the expert(silver) product they stopped making. Adjusting has been a headache and ive been trying to snatch up every old style delta 10 and 6 or 8inch slab across the entire usa over it. Its night and day.

 

[DARKSIDER]

My Mac# About a week or so left give or take . View attachment 20240226_090118.jpg

 

[shiva82]

Hi mate, prices are on the website. Take 10% off if you are overseas and a further 10% off with the ICM discount code "forum". We can help with cheaper shipping. Five-year warranty on the lights and 8-year manufacturer's warranty on the drivers. Compared to other lights, you need to factor in the extra cost of UVA and Far Red, which are usually sold separately by the cheaper brands.

EDIT: Website products here: https://growlightsaustralia.com/products/

cheers prawn . when i finally upgrade , i will consider your units for sure . that's a great warranty too . respect

 

[weedemart]

That new “improved” rockwool holds too much water. Thats why you have heavy rooting around the outside and not as much through the block. It holds sooo much water, so they seek an oxygen rich environment on the outside and tops of the blocks. Good looking buds though. Im hopeful grodan will give us a lighter weight option(other than pargro which also sucks compared to the expert(silver) product they stopped making. Adjusting has been a headache and ive been trying to snatch up every old style delta 10 and 6 or 8inch slab across the entire usa over it. Its night and day.

It's the height of the cube and the way they manufactured the cube that does this effect. On smaller cube I get heavy root mass at bottom.They are designed to drain this way.

The water holding capacity of grodan cube is their edge ...

after many test,the best cube size is 6x6x4 it give plenty of room for roots, good water buffer and it drain in 1 day.

@55% min W.C
6x6x6=90g****
6x6x4=60g*****
4x4x4=26g
4x4x2.5=14.8gr

 

[Prawn Connery]

Nice Thick Stalks

LOL! That's a bit of a back-handed compliment, isn't it?

6oz from those 2 plants... What does it mean... Nothing. Thats only 10th planets .... Wait till you see my c99.You want a show. I'm preparing one.
View attachment 18965618

View attachment 18965619
View attachment 18965620
View attachment 18965621 View attachment 18965623 View attachment 18965622

Is that it? OK.

 

[Crooked8]

It's the height of the cube and the way they manufactured the cube that does this effect. On smaller cube I get heavy root mass at bottom.They are designed to drain this way.

The water holding capacity of grodan cube is their edge ...

after many test,the best cube size is 6x6x4 it give plenty of room for roots, good water buffer and it drain in 1 day.

@55% min W.C
6x6x6=90g****
6x6x4=60g*****
4x4x4=26g
4x4x2.5=14.8gr

Its funny, youve literally done the same test i did. But i had a higher WC, after a full flood in ebb and flow tables i tested the weight of a pargo, expert and improved 4x4x4 and although i dont have the numbers handy, the expert was clearly the lowest weight and i was told by grodan that pargro would be the lightest. WC was always in the 60-61% range, but the numbers were very different consistently. I was so sure i repeated the test with a few blocks, always expert the lightest and its so plug and play for us. Id guarantee you in an expert block you would have more roots out of the bottom but either way thats a healthy plant. Thanks for contributing.

 

[weedemart]

LOL! That's a bit of a back-handed compliment, isn't it?



Is that it? OK.

Thats just a preview of the upcoming show.

Its funny, youve literally done the same test i did. But i had a higher WC, after a full flood in ebb and flow tables i tested the weight of a pargo, expert and improved 4x4x4 and although i dont have the numbers handy, the expert was clearly the lowest weight and i was told by grodan that pargro would be the lightest. WC was always in the 60-61% range, but the numbers were very different consistently. I was so sure i repeated the test with a few blocks, always expert the lightest and its so plug and play for us. Id guarantee you in an expert block you would have more roots out of the bottom but either way thats a healthy plant. Thanks for contributing.

Im not sure to understand. What I did, I measured the average dry weight of flower mass at harvest on every size of cube at 55% W.C dry back.

Fast dry back are not a good thing it make your rootzone environnement unstable. I prefer 1 or less irrigation per day.

We dont have expert block here anyway , they only offer improved.

 

[DARKSIDER]

LOL! That's a bit of a back-handed compliment, isn't it?

Lol Could well be Prawn Connery or maybes a like would of been good enough Credit when and where its due,, nice to see you about,,. Nice to see your lights are doing ok best of luck with them

 

[Crooked8]

Thats just a preview of the upcoming show.

Im not sure to understand. What I did, I measured the average dry weight of flower mass at harvest on every size of cube at 55% W.C dry back.

Fast dry back are not a good thing it make your rootzone environnement unstable.

Oh boy yeah those numbers dont make sense with my experiment. We did a completely different test. I tested how much each block of the same size from grodan weighed at full saturation. Basically to find out which block would drain the most and hold the least amount of water for a superior oxygen rich environment. I learned my lesson with too hard of drybacks for sure. Anyway, were off base here, back to Leds.

Just filled the lab back up…..

 

[Prawn Connery]

Lol Could well be Prawn Connery or maybes a like would of been good enough Credit when and where its due,, nice to see you about,,. Nice to see your lights are doing ok best of luck with them

He's very good at growing stalk That's all I'm saying.

 

[Rocket Soul]

''Ultraviolet photons (UV) can damage critical biochemical processes. Plants synthesize photo-protective pigments that absorb UV to minimize damage. Cannabinoids absorb UV, so increased UV has the potential to increase cannabinoid synthesis. Studies in the 1980’s provided some evidence for this hypothesis in low-cannabinoid cultivars, but recent studies did not find an increase in cannabinoid synthesis with increasing UV in high-cannabinoid cultivars. These studies used low UV photon fluxes, so we examined the effect of higher UV photon fluxes. We used fluorescent UV lights with 55% UV-B (280 to 314 nm) and 45% UV-A (315 to 399 nm). Treatments began three weeks after the start of short days and continued for five weeks until harvest. Established weighting factors were used to calculate the daily biologically effective UV photon flux (UV-PFDBE; 280 to 399 nm). Daily UV-PFDBE levels were 0, 0.02, 0.05, and 0.11 mol m-2 d-1 with a background daily light integral (DLI) of 30 mol m-2 d-1. This provided a ratio of daily UV-PFDBE to DLI of 41 to 218% of summer sunlight in the field. Cannabinoid concentration was 3 to 13% higher than the control in UV treated plants, but the effect was not statistically significant. Fv/Fm and flower yield were reduced only in the highest UV treatment. These data support recent literature and lead us to conclude that an elevated flux of UV photons is not an effective approach to increase cannabinoid concentration in high-cannabinoid cultivars.''

Frontiers | Elevated UV photon fluxes minimally affected cannabinoid concentration in a high-CBD cultivar

Ultraviolet photons (UV) can damage critical biochemical processes. Plants synthesize photo-protective pigments that absorb UV to minimize damage. Cannabinoi...

www.frontiersin.org

Keyword; effective



the interesting part. at the lowest rate of UVB ,cannabinoids concentration jumped 30%. But yield was lower on every UV treatment vs control. Thats in line with the yield dillution theory. You gain nothing from UV in term of productivity , you sacrifice productivity in order to get more ''quality''. That's why it's not efficient. You pay higher price to yield lower. Quality is not only about thc potency.

View attachment 18965354

Great you brought the study, but im not sure if its the one i was speaking about. This is the uvb reptile tubes: a terrible choice of uv supplementation as they are insanely intense. 55% uvb while sunlight is about 5% of the total uv. Ive seen people try to get uv supplementation to work with these, and they have generally failed. Even 30 min at 60cm/24" seems like it burns the shit out of plants, greatly reduced yield. Yes, this is uv supplement where youre changing yield for possibly quality. And Bugsbee puts 2 of them in there, for 5 hours, with what seems to be no preparation of the plants. Have you ever grown with these lights? You would have picked up on the error if you had, they are mad intense and does not provide a spectrum that the plant can actually handle.


Also this here:
"Established weighting factors were used to calculate the daily biologically effective UV photon flux (UV-PFDBE; 280 to 399 nm). Daily UV-PFDBE levels were 0, 0.02, 0.05, and 0.11 mol m-2 d-1 with a background daily light integral (DLI) of 30 mol m-2 d-1. This provided a ratio of daily UV-PFDBE to DLI of 41 to 218% of summer sunlight in the field. Cannabinoid concentration was 3 to 13% higher than the control in UV treated plants, but the effect was not statistically significant. "

Can you account a bit for this; what is the established weighting factor they use in order to get the uv intensity? They calculate the "biological uv dose" here based on the spectrum of those uvb tubes and an "established weighting factor"; a graph in this diagram. The weighting results in lower uv yield, upping the amount of uv they have to give in order to get the same amount of biological effect as day in sunshine:

i call bullshit on this weighting and the experiment in general (8plants per side? Please...) It is not the same to replace a days worth of biological dose of uvb/uva of approx 1:20 with a biological dose of uvb:uva 11:9. Why do i say this? Because ive seen it tried and it burned the shit out the plants.
Also, this weighting factor; see how it actually is contradicting what your saying? (uva means yield loss): if it is real then theres litterally no uv dose for anything over 310nm. So that uv dont matter to the plant apparently according to bugsbee, as hes not including it in his home made PpfdUVBE factor. The way he arrives to this is not good science, at least if youve seen these lights in action before, you need to realize that he calculates this factor based on that action spectrum (black line in the chart) but thay action spectrum seems to believe that no uva has any bio effect. What? How can you study something when also the same time making the assumption that it doesnt affect the plant???


Also lets look at the spectrum for the uvb tubes for a minute; how far down into uv do they go? 250-260nm? Uvc?

Tricomes and cannabinoides are like a sunscreen, the plant builds them for protection, but they also get "used up" by counteracting the uv, especially uvb. So im not surprised they had so little results, and with little statistical significance, i mean what do you expect with a 8 plant study?

The way you evaluate statistic significance in cases like this is by a statistics test called the T-test. Variance and low effect are basicly the enemies of statistical significance in a t-test, they represent a low signal to noise ratio. Bugsbee has managed to combine both here so im not surprised. Going thru the study this time im a bit less hawkish on this being on purpose; you could argue that he was expecting big effect on thc so he didnt add many plants. However he probably didnt realize that the spectrum and amount he was giving was going to "use up" the thc as much as stimulate it.

Tbh i hate arguing studies backwards and forwards. Id rather talk grower to grower, find out what people have tried, why they tried it, what results they had etc.
Would you like to do this instead? I mean you said you were incharge of spectrum fuckery for a growop, that sounds very similar to what i do now. Would you like to detail something you tried, how and why and what were your results?

I think this would be generally better for everyone here.