... sig ...

[acespicoli]

POTENCY
YIELD
DURATION
CHEMO-TYPE COMPLEXITY
FLOWER MATURITY TYPE ALT PHYLLOTAXY
INDOOR VS OUTDOOR MORPHOLOGY

PERFECTLY IMPERFECT
NOVELTY
WILD

 

[Mithridate]

All good facets of botany, albeit math heavy at times

 

[Dime]

,

 

[acespicoli]

,

Nice find thanks

 

[acespicoli]

While both purple and green phototrophic bacteria and cyanobacteria are types of bacteria that utilize light for photosynthesis, the key difference is that cyanobacteria produce oxygen as a byproduct of photosynthesis, whereas purple and green phototrophic bacteria do not; this is because cyanobacteria use water as an electron donor, while the other groups use alternative sources like hydrogen sulfide, making their photosynthesis "anoxygenic" (not producing oxygen).

Key points to remember:

• Pigments:
  Both groups use light-absorbing pigments for photosynthesis, but cyanobacteria use chlorophyll similar to plants, while purple and green bacteria use bacteriochlorophyll which absorbs different wavelengths of light.
  
  
• Electron donor:
  Cyanobacteria use water as an electron donor during photosynthesis, resulting in oxygen release. Purple and green bacteria typically use hydrogen sulfide, producing elemental sulfur as a byproduct.
  
  
• Ecological niche:
  Due to their oxygen-producing ability, cyanobacteria can thrive in a wider range of environments compared to purple and green bacteria, which are usually found in anaerobic environments where hydrogen sulfide is present
  
  

• Pure Haze	Breeder Choice Organisation	150	sativa	regular
  Purple Kush #1	Breeder Choice Organisation	-	mostly indica	regular
  Royal Purple Kush	Breeder Choice Organisation	63	mostly indica	regular

  

 

[acespicoli]

Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Plantae
Clade:	Tracheophytes
Clade:	Angiosperms
Clade:	Eudicots
Clade:	Rosids
Order:	Rosales
Family:	Cannabaceae
Genus:	Cannabis

Origin of Land Plants

Section contents: Embryophytes (land plants) Origin of land plants ← The land plant life cycle Greek and Latin in botanical terminology Feature image: Tree of relationships in Kingdom Plantae. From left to right: glaucophyte algae, red algae, green algae, and land plants. Credits: Glaucocystis...

www.digitalatlasofancientlife.org

The plant chloroplast is considered primary because it descends from this original endosymbiotic relationship between host cell and cyanobacterium. It is thought that the ancestors of today's plant chloroplasts may have become endosymbionts over one billion years ago (see here).

Do plants need to sleep?

They aren't animals, but do they need nightly rest too?

naturalwonders.substack.com

 

[acespicoli]

Figure 5.​

Open in a new tab
Morphological characteristics of the cannabis plants during the vegetative phase and the reproductive phase. (A) Two stipules (small, leaf-like structures found at the base of a petiole), demonstrating the juvenile phase. (B) Bracts (modified leaves found just below a flower) and solitary flowers (i.e., perigonal bracts and style), demonstrating the reproductive phase. stp: stipule; sty: style; br: bract; pbr: perigonal bract.

There was substantial growth related to plant height associated with the long-day photoperiod (18/6). During the long-day photoperiod, the plant height increased from 4.05 ± 0.62 cm in seedlings with cotyledons to 81.23 ± 3.51 cm in plants with the twelve true leaves (Figure 7). In addition, the longest secondary branches in the lower part of the plant extended to a maximum length of 19.28 ± 1.52 cm (Figure 7).


Once the phyllotaxy shifted from opposite to alternative, the photoperiod was changed to short-day conditions (12/12). To prevent the potential misidentification of solitary flower stigmata within the apical zone as inflorescences, the commencement of inflorescence development was delineated as the point where a minimum of three pairs of stigmata became discernible atop the apical shoot. After 10 days of the short photoperiod, inflorescence was observed atop the apical shoot at node 15. At the full-flowering stage (after 15 days of the short-day photoperiod), the main inflorescences became evident at the apical extremity of both the main stem and secondary- and tertiary-order branches (Figure 7 and Figure 8). Moreover, all leaves of the main and axillary shoots were in an alternate phyllotaxy. The plant height in the short-day photoperiod increased from 81.23 ± 3.51 cm to 113.62 ± 7.58 cm (Figure 7). In addition, the longest secondary branches in the lower part of the plant extended to a maximum length of 25.31 ± 3.24 cm (Figure 7). It is notable that the augmentation of plant height and secondary branch length in the short-day photoperiod exhibited reduced growth compared to the long-day photoperiod (Figure 7).


Plants (Basel)
. 2023 Oct 22;12(20):3646. doi: 10.3390/plants12203646


Rudimentary. Sound advice for growers wishing to avoid herm stress

 

[acespicoli]

• (Top)
• Self fertilizing crops (autogamous crops)
• Mass selection
• Selection of cross-pollinated crops
  Toggle Selection of cross-pollinated crops subsection
  • Mass selection
  • Recurrent selection
  • Half-sib selection with progeny testing
  • Full-sib selection with progeny testing
• Breeding of asexually propagated crops
  Toggle Breeding of asexually propagated crops subsection
  • Improving asexual plant material through selection
  • Selection of asexual plants
• New clone development
• See also
• References

Gene pyramiding - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[acespicoli]

List of notable plant breeders​

• Yvonne Aitken
• Norman Borlaug
• Luther Burbank
• Keith Downey
• Thomas Andrew Knight
• Niels Ebbesen Hansen
• Nazareno Strampelli
• Nikolai Vavilov

• Luther Burbank
• Norman Borlaug
• Nikolai Vavilov

Dwarfing​

Dwarfing is an important agronomic quality for wheat; dwarf plants produce thick stems. The cultivars Borlaug worked with had tall, thin stalks. Taller wheat grasses better compete for sunlight but tend to collapse under the weight of the extra grain—a trait called lodging—from the rapid growth spurts induced by nitrogen fertilizer Borlaug used in the poor soil. To prevent this, he bred wheat to favor shorter, stronger stalks that could better support larger seed heads. In 1953, he acquired a Japanese dwarf variety of wheat called Norin 10 developed by the agronomist Gonjiro Inazuka in Iwate Prefecture, including ones which had been crossed with a high-yielding American cultivar called Brevor 14 by Orville Vogel.[36] Norin 10/Brevor 14 is semi-dwarf (one-half to two-thirds the height of standard varieties) and produces more stalks and thus more heads of grain per plant. Also, larger amounts of assimilate were partitioned into the actual grains, further increasing the yield. Borlaug crossbred the semi-dwarf Norin 10/Brevor 14 cultivar with his disease-resistant cultivars to produce wheat varieties that were adapted to tropical and sub-tropical climates.[37]

Borlaug's new semi-dwarf, disease-resistant varieties, called Pitic 62 and Penjamo 62, changed the potential yield of spring wheat dramatically. By 1963, 95% of Mexico's wheat crops used the semi-dwarf varieties developed by Borlaug. That year, the harvest was six times larger than in 1944, the year Borlaug arrived in Mexico. Mexico had become fully self-sufficient in wheat production, and a net exporter of wheat.[38] Four other high-yield varieties were also released, in 1964: Lerma Rojo 64, Siete Cerros, Sonora 64, and Super X.

Double harvest season​

Initially, Borlaug's work had been concentrated in the central highlands, in the village of Chapingo near Texcoco, where the problems with rust and poor soil were most prevalent. The village never met their aims. He realized that he could speed up breeding by taking advantage of the country's two growing seasons. In the summer he would breed wheat in the central highlands as usual, then immediately take the seeds north to the Valle del Yaqui research station near Ciudad Obregón, Sonora. The difference in altitudes and temperatures would allow more crops to be grown each year.[citation needed]

Borlaug's boss, George Harrar, was against this expansion. Besides the extra costs of doubling the work, Borlaug's plan went against a then-held principle of agronomy that has since been disproved. It was believed that to store energy for germination before being planted, seeds needed a rest period after harvesting. When Harrar vetoed his plan, Borlaug resigned. Elvin Stakman, who was visiting the project, calmed the situation, talking Borlaug into withdrawing his resignation and Harrar into allowing the double wheat season. As of 1945, wheat would then be bred at locations 700 miles (1000 km) apart, 10 degrees apart in latitude, and 8,500 feet (2600 m) apart in altitude. This was called "shuttle breeding".[33]


Locations of Borlaug's research stations in the Yaqui Valley and Chapingo
As an unexpected benefit of the double wheat season, the new breeds did not have problems with photoperiodism. Normally, wheat varieties cannot adapt to new environments, due to the changing periods of sunlight. Borlaug later recalled, "As it worked out, in the north, we were planting when the days were getting shorter, at low elevation and high temperature. Then we'd take the seed from the best plants south and plant it at high elevation, when days were getting longer and there was lots of rain. Soon we had varieties that fit the whole range of conditions. That wasn't supposed to happen by the books".[32] This meant that the project would not need to start separate breeding programs for each geographic region of the planet.

 

[acespicoli]

DLI Terminology:​

PHOTOPERIODISM: The physiological growth or reproduction response of a plant when exposed to a specific photoperiod or day length and the corresponding period of darkness.

DLI: Daily Light Integral refers to the total number of PAR photons, delivered to a square meter area through the course of a 24-hour period. It is expressed as moles of light (mol) per square meter (m−2) per day (d−1).

PPFD: Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density as measured in micromoles per second, per square meter(μmol/m2/s) is a snapshot of all PAR light falling on a surface within a single second.

Daily Light Integral Maps:​

These maps show the average DLI across the United States for each month of the year. (click to enlarge) Save
U.S. DLI MAPS: Researchers from Purdue University have analyzed the solar radiation levels over a 14 year period. This data then allowed them to compile DLI maps all across the United States. Daily light integral varies significantly depending on latitude and other geographic factors. But the light levels also change dramatically depending on the time of year.

To properly depict the fluctuation in DLI across both space and time, 12 monthly DLI maps for the lower 48 states can been seen above. As plants assimilate solar radiation, this directly drives plant growth. Different plant types have different DLI requirements for optimal health. This is why horticulturists and commercial growers pay very close attention to this metric.

You can check here to seen an interactive version of these maps: U.S. Daily Light Integral Map

Daily Light Integral Chart:​

This daily light integral (DLI) chart shows the relationship between photoperiod and PPFD. (click to enlarge) Save
The daily light integral chart shown above is colored coded using the exact same values as the US DLI map. This allows you to quickly compare artificial grow light settings to the natural sunlight exposure that outdoor plants receive.

For example, in Pennsylvania, in April, the average DLI is between 30 and 35. By looking at this DLI chart, you can determine the light intensity that would be needed to match typical outdoor levels. By scanning the chart, you can see that a 14 hour light cycle would require PPFD levels between 600 to 700 μmols.

Daily Light Integral for Plants:​

To maintain optimal plant growth, it's important to provide adequate light levels as measured by the DLI. What DLI levels do plants really need? Unfortunately, there's no simple answer to that question. Different plant types are adapted to different light intensities. Some low light plants like lettuce have much lower requirements. On the other hand, high light plants such as tomatoes have much higher requirements for peak production.

Purdue University has put out some great information, including their own daily light integral chart. This DLI chart is plant-specific. It lists many greenhouse crops, showing the minimum DLI levels that the plants would need to achieve an acceptable quality of growth.

These dimmable LEDs are an excellent way dial in the perfect PPFD levels without needing to alter the hanging height.
ADJUSTING FOR DLI: If necessary, the light intensity can be boosted by placing your lights closer to the plants. Alternatively, increasing the duration of the light cycle is a second option. Both approaches effectively raise the DLI and boost plant growth!

Of course, when plants are getting too much light the reverse applies. Raising lights might solve the problem. This may increase your coverage area, allowing you to grow more plants. Or you can decrease the PPFD levels by dimming your light source. Reducing the light cycle is also advantageous due to the reduction in power consumption. Ideally, a grower will want their plants to yield more mass per watts consumed. That's why it's so important to understand how all of these metrics relate to each other.

Sunrise and Sunset Calculator

Calculate local times for sunrises, sunsets, meridian passing, Sun distance, altitude and twilight, dusk and dawn times.

www.timeanddate.com

If there's one question that never allows a cannabis grower any sleep, it's — are my plants getting enough light?

If this question has ever crossed your mind, don't worry, you're not alone. Considering every professional-grade marijuana grow facility is decked out in ultra-powerful lighting, it's no mystery why many home growers find their lighting solution inadequate.

Luckily for you, your cannabis crop’s success isn't dependent on the size of your lights. Instead, the health of your marijuana plants in regards to lighting relies on a parameter known as the daily light integral or DLI for short.

Read along as we describe recommended DLI values for cannabis from seedling, to vegetative, to flower (a.k.a. bloom), to harvest. You'll learn what the DLI is, how it affects plants, how it can save you money, and how you can optimally use your grow lights by measuring and adjusting the DLI.

Contents​

• A Brief Recap on DLI
• The Effect of DLI on Plants
• DLI for Cannabis
• Increasing Yields with CO2
• Look At What Your Plants Tell You
• The Economic Benefit of an Optimal DLI
• How to Optimize The DLI of Your Cannabis Plants With a Grow Light Meter

A Brief Recap on DLI​

As we've previously described what the DLI is, let's take this time to briefly recap the fundamental points regarding the DLI.


The daily light integral (DLI) is the total sum of photosynthetic lighting intensity measured as PPFD over a 24 hour period. In short, the DLI is a measure of usable light your plant receives over a day. Ultimately, supplying adequate light intensity and duration (i.e. the DLI) is the single most important factor when it comes to plant lighting.
The important part about plant lighting is that each plant has a maximum DLI in its respective growth stage. Thus, the DLI serves as a measurement that provides cultivators insight into the amount of usable light that a crop needs to flourish. Luckily, the effects of DLI on plants is well researched for many plants and we can harness this knowledge to cultivate cannabis better and cheaper.

The Effect of DLI on Plants​

The effect of the DLI on all plants is monumental. Without proper lighting, plants would have a tough time surviving. As we can see, plants throughout the world have adapted their lighting needs according to their environment.

Now, here's a list of effects of supplying proper amount of light on plants:

• Reduces node spacing
• Stimulates root and shoot growth
• Increases stem thickness
• Increases flower size
• Increases plant vigor
• Increases nutrient and water uptake
• Reduces susceptibility to disease and pest outbreaks
• Increases growth in general

As you can see, the DLI measure affects the entire plant — not just the leaves. Supplying your cannabis plants with proper lighting is the #1 factor for a successful marijuana crop.

DLI for Cannabis​

Now, let's talk specifically about cannabis plants and DLI.

Whether you grow marijuana indoors or outdoors, understanding the relationship between light and cannabis plant age is essential for a successful grow cycle leading to big, healthy buds and a bountiful harvest.

If you're mainly growing autoflowering cannabis, we recommend to read our article that is focused in lighting for autos after this one. All principles described within this article apply for autos as well.

Cannabis Lighting: PAR / PPFD And DLI For Autoflowers
If you’re wondering what grow lighting your autoflowering cannabis strains need to flourish, this article is for you. We’ve put together everything you need to know to optimally set your PPFD and DLI levels.

What's The Optimum DLI For Cannabis Plants Over The Full Grow Cycle?​

As cannabis originated from southern and mountainous areas such as Nepal, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and more it prefers a lot of light and thus, recommended DLI values are relatively high.

In agricultural terms, cannabis plants require full-sun to flourish. Indoors, however, cultivators must consider the light height, light output, and lighting duration to achieve proper lighting.

Based on research and experience, we’ve broken down ideal DLI values for cannabis plants over the length of the full grow cycle:

The optimal DLI over a full cannabis grow cycle from seedling (or clone for that matter) to harvest Pin It
As you can see, cannabis seedlings or clones require less light, whereas a cannabis plant flourishes when supplied with a lot of light in its vegetative (veg) and flowering (bloom) stage. Providing the plant with too much light too early will result in damage, as it needs time to adjust to higher light intensities. To initiate the flowering period, the lighting duration is reduced significantly (typically from 18 hours down to 12 hours), which also results in a lower DLI. Light intensity is then gradually increased to get big buds. Providing such a high DLI with just about 12 hours of lighting requires a strong grow light able to supply a high PPFD.


As the ideal cannabis DLI requirement changes from week to week, we recommend measuring and adjusting DLI repeatedly and regularly.
Cannabis growth can be increased even further if additional CO2 is added to the grow space. As this is a bit of an advanced topic, it is described in more detail a little later within this article.

Cannabis growers can achieve an optimal DLI value by understanding the basics of choosing the right grow light and the correct positioning for indoor grow lights.

DLI For Cannabis Autoflowers​

Autoflowering cannabis (also called day neutral cannabis) varieties automatically switch from vegetative growth to the flowering stage based on age, as opposed to the ratio of light to dark hours required with regular, photoperiod dependent strains. As for the DLI, this means that the plant can be considered to be in the vegetative stage even when flowers are present. Therefore, no flowering phase is initiated by the light schedule and DLI levels of over 40 mol/m²/d can be kept until the plant is harvested.

The optimal DLI over a full autoflowering cannabis grow cycle from seed to harvest Pin It

Cannabis PPFD Range​

Providing ideal immediate PAR intensity (measured in PPFD) to your cannabis plant is just as crucial as providing the optimal amount of light throughout the day. As the DLI is the product of time (photoperiod) and light intensity (PPFD), you can hit an optimal DLI value with the wrong combination of those two parameters (e.g. when you have very bright lights but only on for an hour). We’ve written an in-depth article about cannabis PAR levels that dives deeper into the topic. To keep it simple for now, we recommend the following PPFD for your cannabis plant:

Growth Phase	PAR Level (PPFD)
Seedling / Clone	100 – 300
Vegetative	250 – 600
Bloom / Flowering	500 – 1050

Cannabis Photoperiod​

To progress the cannabis plant through its vegetative and flowering stage, different lighting durations, so-called photoperiods, are required to simulate the season’s natural rhythm. In general, you want to keep your lights on for as long as possible, but also need to create a drastic shift when initiating the flowering period. Common cannabis photoperiods are 18 hours for the vegetative phase and 12 hours for the flowering phase. There is a range however, and you can adjust your lighting to fit into it. We recommend to keep your lights on for the following duration:

Growth Phase	Photoperiod (h)
Seedling / Clone	16 – 24
Vegetative	16 – 24
Bloom / Flowering	10 – 13
Maturing	10 – 14

Mind that the flowering period is not required for autoflowers per-se, as they flower based on an internal clock. Therefore, you could keep the lights on for longer to achieve a higher DLI with lower PPFD. Keeping a photoperiod of 20 h is a good place to start when growing autoflowers.

Cannabis DLI Calculator​

We know that cannabis lighting can be complex and maybe even overwhelming. To make your life as a grower easier, we created our cannabis DLI calculator that uses the knowledge supplied in this article to calculate a recommendation for your grow lighting.

Increasing Yields with CO2​

Photosynthesis mainly requires photons (light), water and CO2. As for really maxing out the rate of photosynthesis, all plants do have a point where more light and water just does not equal more growth, but more often than not, inadequate CO2 supplementation is the primary limiting factor.

Influence of CO2 concentration on the rate of photosynthesis Pin It
General indoor CO2 levels of about 400 to 600 ppm quickly restrict photosynthetic activity to less than half of what would be possible. Supplementing higher CO2 to at least 800 ppm greatly boosts photosynthetic activity and allows for more light or rather higher PAR levels. If you really want to max out your cannabis plant’s growth, we recommend the following CO2 levels:

Growth Phase	CO2 Level (ppm)
Seedling / Clone	400
Vegetative	400 – 800
Bloom / Flowering	800 – 1400

Adding CO2 to your cannabis grow is a science of its own. If you want to dive deeper into this topic, we recommend our article on exactly that.

Look At What Your Plants Tell You​

It’s important to note that all of the research on cannabis DLI, cannabis PAR levels, cannabis CO2 and every other lighting aspect won’t be able to exactly cover the needs of your specific plants in your individual setup. There are many other factors such as the grow room temperature, spectral light distribution, amount and quality of water, nutrients, cannabis genetics, and many more that have an influence on how well your marijuana plants grow.

We recommend treating all the aforementioned values and ranges as a basic guideline to act as a starting point for optimizing the lighting of your individual plants. If they seem happy and healthy, you’re definitely on the right track!

The Economic Benefit of an Optimal DLI​

Most indoor cannabis growers, or indoor horticulturalists, for that matter, have yet to discover the economic benefits they can get when optimizing their lighting.

Since each plant, such as cannabis, requires a specific DLI for optimal growth one can assume that going over or under the recommended DLI will cause a disproportionate economic impact on your wallet.

Increasing the DLI does not increase plant growth indefinitely – even the opposite Pin It
Many marijuana growers pay an unnecessarily high electricity bill because there's a common belief that the more light — the bigger the buds. This, however, couldn't be further from the truth. The more light is not always the better: There is a point where more light does not induce more plant growth or even causes harm to the plant. On the other end, having a lower than recommended DLI results in lackluster buds, and a missed growing opportunity.


In other words, there is a sweet spot that you want to hit that encompasses maximum plant growth with minimal DLI so your indoor growing operation won't produce a bigger electricity bill than you bargained for.

Front. Plant Sci., 26 September 2022
Sec. Crop and Product Physiology
Volume 13 - 2022 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.974018

Indoor grown cannabis yield increased proportionally with light intensity, but ultraviolet radiation did not affect yield or cannabinoid content​

 

[acespicoli]

Intensity and Spectrum: The Role of Lighting in Vapor Pressure Deficit​

August 24, 2023
By Hannia Mendoza-Dickey
Robert Manes
View All
Publication
Article
Cannabis Science and TechnologyJuly/August 2023
Volume 6
Issue 6
Pages: 22-30

This article delves into the aspects of horticultural light intensity and spectra as well as their relative influence on cannabis photosynthesis, photomorphogenesis, and overall yield.

This article delves into the aspects of horticultural light intensity and spectra as well as their relative influence on cannabis photosynthesis, photomorphogenesis, and overall yield. While the manipulation of lighting spectrum and the utilization of sufficient photon density can govern the expression of both major and minor cannabinoids, as well as secondary metabolites such as an array of terpenes, anthocyanins, and flavonoids; these important environmental factors exert considerable influence on plant transpiration and thus a plant’s physiological response to vapor pressure deficit (VPD). In the rapidly expanding cannabis industry, optimizing cultivation practices to maximize crop quality and yield hinges upon a cultivator’s understanding of the intricate interplay between various lighting modalities and VPD. In turn, correct management of VPD alleviates many of the problems that plague controlled environment agriculturists, such as nutritional deficiencies, mold, mildew, and waste of valuable resources, such as CO2, water, and nutrients—the latter of which also results in undesirable capital expenditures.
The art of cannabis and hemp cultivation is reliant on achieving a balance between utilizing stable genetics and the meticulous optimization of various environmental parameters. These factors synergistically contribute to the cultivation outcome, influencing the production of optimal yield and phytochemical composition of the plant varietals involved. To this point, vapor pressure deficit (VPD) emerges as a metric of paramount importance to the overall success of the cultivation environment. VPD is a measurement that represents the deficit between the amount of moisture in the air and the maximum moisture the air can hold (saturation). This metric exerts a profound impact on the transpiration rate within cannabis plants. Transpiration is a physiological process involving the transport of water (along with CO2 and dissolved nutrients) from the roots through the xylem to the leaf (stomata), where it undergoes a phase change into vapor and is subsequently released into the atmosphere.
Although transpiration is primarily driven by the vapor pressure within the plant, it’s important to note that the internal atmosphere of the leaf is not saturated. However, the stomata, which are tiny pores on the leaf, play a crucial role in pressure regulation and thermoregulation. The stomata serve as a gateway between the highly humid internal environment of a plant and the surrounding atmosphere. When humid and dry air come into contact, they attempt to balance each other out, with vapor pressure flowing from high humidity to low. Therefore, if the atmosphere is very hot and dry, water vapor will escape from the leaves at a faster rate, increasing the transpirational demand on cannabis plants and potentially leading to wilting and nutrient deficiencies (see Figure 1a). Conversely, in humid grow rooms where atmospheric conditions are not significantly different from those of the leaf, less water vapor will be able to escape—giving rise to various issues, including the development of fungal diseases, mold, and root rot (see Figure 1b). When the VPD is at an optimal level, plants can more effectively absorb and distribute the nutrients they need for growth and yield (see Figure 1c). Scientifically-minded growers favor VPD as a measure that provides insight in the ever-changing conditions of the air’s moisture-holding capacity at any given temperature.

How to Calculate for VPD in Your Cultivation Environment​

The Alduchov and Eskridge equation is an improved form of the Magnus’ formula and is commonly used to estimate the saturation vapor pressure (SVP) and VPD in meteorology. The VPD represents the difference between the saturation vapor pressure (es) and the actual vapor pressure (ea) of the air.
The Alduchov and Eskridge equation for calculating es is as follows in Equation 1:

where es is the saturation vapor pressure in kilopascals (kPa) and T is the temperature in degrees Celsius (°C).
To calculate the VPD, you need to know both the saturation vapor pressure (es) and the actual vapor pressure (ea) of the air. The VPD is then given by Equation 2:

For example, assume the temperature (T) is 25 °C and the actual vapor pressure (ea) is 2.5 kPa. We will calculate the saturation vapor pressure (es) and the VPD. Using the Alduchov and Eskridge equation, we can calculate the saturation vapor pressure (es)
as follows:

es = 0.6108 * exp[(17.27 * 25) / (25 + 237.3)]


es ≈ 3.17 kPa

Now, we can calculate the vapor pressure deficit (VPD) using the given actual vapor pressure (ea):

VPD = es - ea


= 3.17 - 2.5


≈ 0.67 kPa

In this example, at a temperature of 25 °C, theSVP is approximately 3.17 kPa, and the VPD is approximately 0.67 kPa.
Understanding VPD is crucial for optimizing plant growth and determining appropriate environmental conditions in various applications, including greenhouse cultivation, where maintaining an optimal VPD range is critical for maximizing crop productivity
and quality.
Figure 2 illustrates the recommended VPD levels for cannabis and hemp plants in vegetative stages. Within this chart, the dark green region (0.9-1.1 kPa) represents the most favorable VPD for cultivating cannabis plants. The light green area represents VPD ranges (0.7-0.9 kPa and 1.1-1.3 kPa) that are slightly outside of optimal range yet remain highly desirable. The yellow region indicates VPD levels that require adjustment to achieve optimal plant growth. Lastly, VPD values falling within the white range, lower than 0.5 kPa and higher than 1.7 kPa, are considered detrimental to the overall growth of the plants and require immediate correction.

Figure 3 represents recommended atmospheric VPD values for cannabis or hemp plants in the flowering stage. The green section is the VPD sweet spot and represents the most desirable atmospheric conditions for cannabis cultivation. Purple indicates VPD fringe ranges, but is still more than acceptable. Orange represents VPD conditions requiring adjustment. VPD falling within the white range is detrimental to plant function.

Conversely, the borderline transpiration zone (orange) denotes both elevated and low VPD values ranging from (1.7–2.3 kPa and 0.7–1.0 kPa), respectively. In the elevated orange zone, plants may experience accelerated water loss, increased stress, and lower transpiration rates. In the lower orange zone, plants may experience low transpiration, higher humidity, and may experience mold and mildew issues. The danger zone (white) represents extremely high or low VPD values outside the recommended ranges. Values below 0.4 kPa or above 2.3 kPa indicate potential severe transpirational issues such as excessive humidity levels or nutrient deficiencies due to high transpiration rates and should be corrected immediately.

Why a Lower VPD in Vegetative versus Flower?​

For plants in vegetative stages, root mass and stem structure are immature and have relatively little mass. The plant is focusing almost all of its resources to build these two components. Leaves with stomata are few, at least in the early stages of vegetation. A smaller root system contributes less root pressure to the plant system. Lower VPD exhibits more control over water and nutrient uptake for this stage of growth. A more controlled transpiration rate and less water loss occurs, minimizing water and nutrient stress.
During the flowering stage, the root system should be quite large and robust and root pressure should be high. Overall, plant mass during flower is many times that of plants in the vegetative stage of growth. Leaf area will be extensive and as flowers develop, water, CO₂, and nutrient demand will be significant. A higher VPD will provide for greater transpiration to satisfy the plant’s needs. However, it is important to note that extremely high VPDs can result in lower nutrient absorption and many growers increase nutrient levels to compensate. This can result in higher nutrient costs. In addition, higher transpiration may make plants more susceptible to mold, mildew, and root rot. Extremely high VPD may cause stomata to close to preserve resources, which demonstrates the undesirable side-effect of stunting growth.

What Role Does Lighting Play in the VPD Equation?​

Horticultural lighting, such as full-spectrum light emitting diode (LED) fixtures impact VPD indirectly by affecting the temperature and humidity in the growing environment. It is a common misconception that LEDs produce very little, or no, heat at all. This is incorrect. LEDs apply less heat to the plants than other technologies if the luminaire and facility thermal management systems are well designed (1). Most LEDs used for illumination purposes convert approximately 22–28% of input power into light that can be used by the plant. To the contrary, high intensity discharge (HID) lighting, such as high pressure sodium (HPS), ceramic metal halide (CMH), and metal halide (MH) lamps convert only 5–10% of their energy consumption into usable light. The rest of the input power for both HID and LED lighting is converted into infrared light (IR), which is felt as heat. Interestingly, HID lighting converts this energy into IR at the lamp (light bulb) itself, while LED waste heat is produced at the silicon junctions of the diodes (1). A properly ventilated LED luminaire will move this thermal radiation away from the plant as the heat rises, whereas HID lighting radiates this IR directly to the plant leaves. Additionally, HID horticultural lighting typically uses non-flammable metallic “hoods” to reflect light towards the plants, which further collects this IR and directs it at the leaves themselves. The bottom line here is that both technologies produce heat that greatly affects VPD, albeit LEDs present significantly less impact on transpiration issues due to lower leaf temperatures and lower VPD than their HID counterparts.

The Influence of Lighting Spectrum on VPD​

Lighting spectrum also affects VPD. Red light (~630–760 nm) is known to promote stomatal opening, increasing transpiration rates and potentially elevating VPD. Blue light (wavelengths around 400–500 nm), on the other hand, can have a suppressive effect on stomatal opening, which may reduce transpiration rates and subsequently lower VPD. However, both blue and red light used simultaneously and in the correct ratios can increase VPD dramatically (2).
White LEDs present a unique variable to VPD manipulation. Most LED luminaires on the global market use “full spectrum” white LEDs (Figure 1d). This full spectrum is created by coating a discrete high-intensity blue LED, commonly peaking at 450 nm, with a specially formulated phosphor. When this phosphor is excited by the output of the blue LED, it fluoresces and produces light across a broad spectrum. Since this blue LED’s base frequency (450 nm) is the source of most of the spectral energy produced, its amplitude is usually significant compared to the rest of the spectral radiation produced by the LED. Addition of any supplemental red (discrete) LEDs must take this into account to optimize crop yield and phytochemical production (1).
In plants, red light is primarily detected by phytochrome Pr (phytochrome red) and Pfr (phytochrome far red) photoreceptor proteins, whereas blue light is detected by the photoreceptor proteins cryptochromes and phototropins. The interaction of these phytochromes initiate a signaling cascade within the plant cells, ultimately leading to convergence of these protein signaling pathways, activating ion channels, which changes guard cell turgor pressure (3).
Guard cells are specialized and found in the epidermis of plant leaves and stems. When they are filled with water, or turgid, they stretch the epidermis and create openings in the stomata. When they deflate, the pressure on the plant epidermis is lessened and the stomata close. This opening and closing regulates gas exchange in transpiration and allowing CO2 to enter via the stomata. Guard cell water pressure is controlled by ion movement, specifically, potassium and chloride ions, across the cell membranes. Pumping these ions out of the guard cells causes water to also escape, deflating the guard cells (4,5).
Ion channels are protein channels residing in the cell membranes and they come in two configurations: gated channels, which are triggered by specific stimuli, such as voltage, chemicals, force, and temperature; and open channels, which as you might have guessed, stay open and serve as baseline or “leakage” channels. Upon exposure to red light, phytochrome photoreceptors activate signaling pathways that open potassium ion channels, allowing potassium ions to increase cell pressure and open stomata. The addition of blue light to this red light stimulates ion channel activity, thus increasing stomatal response (6).
Ion pumps use adenosine triphosphate (ATP, the cell’s energy currency) to transport ions across cell membranes. The pumps help maintain cell function, signaling, pressure balancing, and other physiological cell functions. Both red and blue light stimulate changes in ion concentrations and membrane potential that help manage cellular processes (7).
Collectively, the optimal ratio of red to blue light for stomatal opening can vary among different plant species, as well as stage of growth. Some plants exhibit a higher sensitivity to red light especially during flowering, while others have a greater requirement for blue light, especially during propagation and vegetative stages. Determining the ideal balance of red and blue light for specific plant species can maximize the stomatal response, thus having a profound impact on finding the optimal VPD window.

Conclusion​

By and large, the ongoing advancements in lighting technology continue to revolutionize indoor cannabis cultivation. Specifically, the importance of lighting spectrum and VPD cannot be overstated in aiming to achieve optimal growth and yield results. Fine tuning the spectral composition of light and maintaining an appropriate VPD within the cultivation environment are vital considerations for growers aiming to maximize their crop's potential. The interplay between red and blue light wavelengths, for instance, impacts the overall VPD, which in turn influences transpiration rates, stomatal conductance, and overall plant health. In simpler terms, maintaining consistent temperature and relative humidity in the cultivation space directly impacts the VPD, which in turn affects plant transpiration and growth. Consequently, a comprehension of the intricate relationship between lighting factors and VPD dynamics is indispensable for cultivators seeking to achieve exceptional outcomes in their cannabis production endeavors.

References

1. Manes, R. and Stumpf, T., How to Grow Marijuana with LEDs.1st ed., 2019.
2. Inoue, S. and Kinoshita, T., Blue Light Regulation of Stomatal Opening and the Plasma Membrane H+-ATPase. Plant Physiology, 2017, 174(2), 531–538.
3. Assmann, S.M. and Jegla, T., Guard Cell Sensory Systems: Recent Insights on Stomatal Responses to Light, Abscisic Acid, and CO2. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 2016, 33, 157-167.
4. Shimazaki et al., Blue light activates the plasma membrane H+-ATPase by phosphorylation of the C-terminus in stomatal guard cells, The EMBO Journal, 2007.
5. Mott et al., Blue light inhibition of guard cell anion channels mediated by abscisic acid, Plant Journal, 2008.
6. Hille, B., Ion Channels of Excitable Membranes, 2001, 3rd ed.
7. Alberts et al., Molecular Biology of the Cell, 2002, 4th ed.

​

About the Authors​

Dr. Zacariah Hildenbrand is a research Professor at the University of Texas at El Paso, the principal founder of Inform Environmental, a partner of Medusa Analytical, and is a director of the Curtis Mathes Corporation (OTC:CMCZ). Hannia Mendoza-Dickey is an MS Chemistry student at the University of Texas at El Paso. Robert J. Manes is with Curtis Mathes Corporation.
Direct correspondence to: [email protected].

How to Cite This Article
Mendoza-Dickey, H., Manes, R., Hildenbrand, Z., Intensity and Spectrum: The Role of Lighting in Vapor Pressure Deficit, Cannabis Science and Technology, 2023, 6(6), 22-32.

 

[acespicoli]

EC in water when feeding cannabis​

Plants need the best care to grow strong and healthy. One of the most important factors is the EC of the irrigation water. Therefore, it’s essential to monitor the EC level of the irrigation water. In this post, we want to clarify everything about the ideal EC level for cannabis.
Contents

• What is EC in water?
• Effects of high or low EC levels in crops
  • High EC
  • Low EC
• How to regulate EC levels in cannabis cultivation
• EC Meters

What is EC in water?​

EC, or electrical conductivity, is the ability of a liquid to conduct electricity. However, water doesn’t conduct electricity by itself, but rather depends on the amount of minerals it contains. Water with a good mineral content conducts electricity just like a wire. However, distilled water (H2O) does not.
EC allows us to measure the amount of minerals in the water to determine if it conducts electricity well and if it is suitable for plants.
For this reason, EC levels need to be ideal in your cannabis crops. The balance and concentration of nutrients in the soil and water are crucial for a grower, preventing issues like nutrient deficiencies or excesses. A plant may not recover from nutrient lockout or an overload of nutrients.

Effects of high or low EC levels in crops​

A distinctive trait of plants is their sensitivity to EC. It’s not sensitivity to electricity itself but rather to the mineral content in the water. The more fertilizer the water contains, the more electricity it will conduct, which can be checked with an EC and pH meter.
However, your plant might encounter difficulties in absorbing water with too many minerals. Due to the liquid’s high density, the roots may struggle to filter it properly, potentially causing problems.

High EC​

The ideal EC for cannabis is easy to calculate, and once you know it, you can assess what is happening with your plant. When the plant is exposed to high EC levels, it can’t absorb the nutrients, leading to a blockage. That’s why the ideal EC levels are crucial for cannabis to properly absorb all nutrients.

Low EC​

In cases where EC is low, the plant is forced to absorb more water through its roots. This causes the roots to expand to increase their capacity and take in more nutrients. Additionally, it’s easier for a plant to recover from low EC levels than the opposite.
Cannabis tolerates certain levels of water density. You can start watering with osmosis or distilled water and add specific nutrients to make better use of the fertilizer used. If you use tap water, your crop may not be able to absorb all the fertilizer it needs due to the water’s density. This can cause nutrient deficiencies and an increase in unabsorbable mineral salts in the soil, like lime and sodium. Such a situation means that each time you water, the plant won’t be able to absorb the nutrients, leading to root blockage.

How to regulate EC levels in cannabis cultivation​

When regulating EC levels, it’s important to consider the required levels for each stage. These are:

• During the first 15 days after germination, the ideal EC for cannabis is between 0.5 and 0.8.
• Progressively, increase the levels to 1.2 by the end of the growth phase.
• During the flowering stage, the EC should increase as the plant will need more nutrients, establishing EC between 1.2 and 1.6.
• In the fattening phase, increase EC to 1.8/2.1. This will be the maximum level.

To increase EC levels, simply add more fertilizer to the mix or change the nutrient solution for one with higher nutritional content.
The most common mistake novice growers make with EC is only measuring the water they are about to use for irrigation. The important EC values are those in the soil, as this is where the plants feed from. To measure EC levels when growing in soil, in addition to measuring the irrigation water, you should let the plant drain a bit of water and measure that runoff. This will tell you if the plant is getting enough nutrients or if the soil is overloaded.

EC Meters​

An important factor in controlling EC is measuring it as accurately as possible. For this, EC meters are essential.
EC meters are electronic devices composed of two parts, either attached or separate: a probe and an electrode. The electrode is responsible for calculating the conductivity of a liquid to determine the EC values, and it also measures temperature. It’s recommended to calibrate the meters for their first use and after each measurement to avoid errors.
There are two main types of meters:

• Portable meters are perfect for small or soil-based crops. They are very easy to use and don’t require much knowledge, like the Adwa EC meter. These meters have high precision, and most allow you to measure both EC and water temperature for better control of your crop.
• As for continuous meters, they are usually mounted on the wall or another convenient surface, like the Adwa continuous wall-mounted EC meter. These meters are perfect for coco or hydroponic crops. You simply submerge the probe in the water and plug it into the meter. They provide 100% precision, and it’s recommended to calibrate them at least once a month. With proper cleaning and calibration, these meters can last a long time.

Knowing the ideal EC for cannabis is crucial, as along with pH, these are the key indicators of water quality. By maintaining these levels as recommended, your plants will grow healthy and strong

Front. Plant Sci., 18 September 2023
Sec. Plant Metabolism and Chemodiversity
Volume 14 - 2023 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2023.1233232
This article is part of the Research TopicEnvironmental and Agronomic Factors affecting the Chemical Composition and Biological Activity of Cannabis ExtractsView all 8 articles

Cannabis Hunger Games: nutrient stress induction in flowering stage – impact of organic and mineral fertilizer levels on biomass, cannabidiol (CBD) yield and nutrient use efficiency​

 

[acespicoli]

Should be pretty simple to calculate a rough estimate, if I'm remembering my chemistry correctly. The formula for fermentation is:

C6H12O6 → 2 CH3CH2OH + 2 CO2

So, we should get the same quantity of ethanol molecules as CO2 molecules. If a "standard" 5 gallon batch is 5% ABV, that's equivalent to 0.25 gallons, or 0.95L of ethanol. Ethanol's density at 20C is 0.78945 kg/L, so we'd have 0.75 kg (750g) of ethanol in a 5g batch. Ethanol's molar mass is 46.07 g/mol, so we should have a total of about 16.3 moles of both ethanol and CO2 produced. 16.3 moles of CO2, at SATP, would have a volume of 24.8L * 16.3 = 404.2 liters of CO2, weighing a total of around 717g (about 1.58 pounds).

404 liters is a lot, but not that much. 106 gallons, or a little more than most bathtubs hold.

hotelindia



northernbrewer

5 Gallon Beer Recipe Kits​

Whether you're a seasoned homebrewer or just starting out, we offer an extensive range of 5-gallon beer kits to suit every beer lover's taste. From hoppy IPAs bursting with citrusy flavors, rich and robust stouts perfect for chilly nights, to refreshing wheat beers that embody summer vibes, our carefully crafted kits (available in extract and all-grain) have it all. With high-quality ingredients and easy-to-follow instructions, you'll be brewing like a pro in

 

[acespicoli]

The schematic, screenshots of representative resources and a user case of CannabisGDB. (a) The flow diagram showing design and construction of CannabisGDB. (b)The home page of CannabisGDB. (c)The ‘varieties module’ providing summary of cannabis genomes, detailed information of cannabis varieties and genome browser tool. (d) The ‘gene loci module’ showing detailed information of genes identified in this study. (e) The ‘metabolites module’ providing chemical phenotypes in various cannabis varieties. (f) The ‘proteins module’ presenting information of experimentally identified proteins. (g) A case study for the application of CannabisGDB. Dashed lines indicate linkages between different pages.

Plant Biotechnol J. 2021 Feb 4;19(5):857–859. doi: 10.1111/pbi.13548

https://gdb.supercann.net/index.php

 

[acespicoli]

The following tables list element nutrients essential to plants. Uses within plants are generalized.

Macronutrients – necessary in large quantities

Element	Form of uptake	Notes
Nitrogen	NO3−, NH4+	Nucleic acids, proteins, hormones, etc.
Oxygen	O2, H2O	Cellulose, starch, other organic compounds
Carbon	CO2	Cellulose, starch, other organic compounds
Hydrogen	H2O	Cellulose, starch, other organic compounds
Potassium	K+	Cofactor in protein synthesis, water balance, etc.
Calcium	Ca2+	Membrane synthesis and stabilization
Magnesium	Mg2+	Element essential for chlorophyll
Phosphorus	H2PO4−	Nucleic acids, phospholipids, ATP
Sulphur	SO42−	Constituent of proteins

Micronutrients – necessary in small quantities

Element	Form of uptake	Notes
Chlorine	Cl−	Photosystem II and stomata function
Iron	Fe2+, Fe3+	Chlorophyll formation and nitrogen fixation
Boron	HBO3	Crosslinking pectin
Manganese	Mn2+	Activity of some enzymes and photosystem II
Zinc	Zn2+	Involved in the synthesis of enzymes and chlorophyll
Copper	Cu+	Enzymes for lignin synthesis
Molybdenum	MoO42−	Nitrogen fixation, reduction of nitrates
Nickel	Ni2+	Enzymatic cofactor in the metabolism of nitrogen compounds

 

[acespicoli]

Plants 2022, 11(1), 129; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11010129

THC and CBD Fingerprinting of an Elite Cannabis Collection from Iran: Quantifying Diversity to Underpin Future Cannabis Breeding​

 

[acespicoli]

H. Japonicus @Sam_Skunkman thinking of trying this again

Humulus japonicus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Pollen Donor H. J

Front. Plant Sci., 10 December 2019
Sec. Plant Metabolism and Chemodiversity
Volume 10 - 2019 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2019.01438

Humulus lupulus​

Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Humulus_lupulus

Humulus lupulus, the common hop or hops, is a species of flowering plant in the hemp family, Cannabaceae. It is a perennial, herbaceous climbing plant.

 

[acespicoli]

Cannabis Hops Hybrid Welcome To Jurassic Pot™​

• Max Montrose
• November 4, 2022

Welcome to JURASSIC POT. The first blog in this series details the background of a potentially new cannabis-hop hybrid, the story about the breeder, why we think these plants could be the real deal, and the testing we plan to do in the future.
The speciation of cannabis and its origins are challenging and highly debated topics. However, it is scientifically understood that cannabis and humulus (hops) are closely related as they diverged from their ancestral species millions of years ago. The family of Cannabaceae contains 170 species and eleven distinct genera. Cannabis and humulus are the only plants related to each other of all the Cannabaceae genera; they aren’t cousins – they’re siblings! For those that enjoy exploring the evolution, divergence, and research of cannabis and hops, I recommend Cannabis Evolution and Ethnobotany by Mark and Merlin. This extensive text goes the most in-depth on this niche subject matter.

Why cannabis and hops?​

For over a decade, I’ve had an affinity for beer and weed, especially when combining the two since they work and play together nicely. Early in my career, I was still unsure which area to focus on, but I eventually decided to develop Interpening instead of a THC-infused beer company in 2013. Still, I federally trademarked “Cannabrew” after consulting cannabis and beer industry experts on the product and name. I could go on forever about flavor profiles, plant characteristics, brew designs, alcohol-free THC beers; you name it.

Before diverging into the plant types, consider this. Have you ever experienced an IPA beer and weed that both tasted and smelled dank? The reason is because of the similarities between cannabis and hops, including the aromatic profiles they muster up. The plant bodies and root systems are different, but their leaf, flower, and chemical makeup are incredibly similar.
If cannabis and beer are so damn closely related, why hasn’t there been a hybrid type yet? The OG’s from back in the day tell me, “everyone has tried crossing cannabis and hops in the backyard since the 1970s, and it just doesn’t work”. And with today’s insane technology in any field, why don’t we smash these beauties together in a lab? What harm could that do – easy peasy – right? Except this is apparently where the Hop Latent Viroid originated. An unsuccessful hybridization between cannabis and hops is where the disease jumped over into cannabis and is wreaking havoc across the industry today.

Welcome to Jurassic Pot™​

Where did the little hybrid dino Jurassic Pot come from? It all started with a guy named Kaly from Germany who wanted to hide weed from a Karen next door by disguising it as a different-looking plant. Kaly tried breeding cannabis and hops together unsuccessfully until he came across an uncommon hops species with enough genetic material to cross over in the late 1990s. It was not Kaly’s goal to create a new species of cannabis. Instead, he aimed to create a unique smokable hop plant with THC and CBD.

I interviewed Kaly’s business partner and son, André, regarding how and why Kaly crossed hops with cannabis since Kaly doesn’t speak English. André sent me Kalys original notes with leaf presses of the early crosses, pictures of some of the first plants, and the seeds of five types. As someone who has grown and heavily researched cannabis and hops, the story, notes, and plants seem pretty telling, especially since there isn’t anything like them aside from the similar appearance of Ducksfoot.

Cannabis-Hops Skepticism?​

If you’re skeptical about these cannabis-hop hybrids, you’re not alone. After posting our first Instagram post about these plants, many people commented and privately messaged us, saying they don’t believe a cannabis hop hybrid is authentic, that Kaly is just another industry scam, and asked for the evidence. We want to take on the research about these plants because we aren’t 100% sure they are cannabis hop crosses either. To be sure, we will research their chemical and genetic profiles to understand better what these plants are and if they may have any valuable research to offer. Please share insights on “Kaly-types” or evidence for the cross in our comments below!

Jurassic Pot™ "new" ...​

 

[acespicoli]

Flemingia strobilifera (wild hops)​

Molecular phylogeny of wild Hops, Humulus lupulus L.. Heredity 97, 66–74 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.hdy.6800839

This study has shown the primary evolutionary divergence to be into European and Asian-North American clades and, although Chinese samples were limited in number, the geographic distribution suggests that this deep divergence occurred in China. Our study differentiated two clades, the European clade located in Western China and the Asian-North American clade in Eastern China, respectively (Figure 1). In addition to the haplotype distribution shown here, support for the origin of the genus Humulus and hops, H. lupulus, being in China, as hypothesized by Neve (1991) is provided by the presence of related species, H. japonicus and H. yunnanensis. These are indigenous only to Eastern Asia (Small, 1978; Neve, 1991) and are not found in North America.

Patent Grant PP31477
U.S. patent number PP31,477 [Application Number 15/932,529] was granted by the patent office on 2020-02-25 for humulus yunnanensis plant named `kriya`. This patent grant is currently assigned to BOMI, LLC. The grantee listed for this patent is Bomi, LLC. Invention is credited to Bomi Joseph.

---

United States Patent​	PP31,477​
Joseph​	February 25, 2020​

---

Humulus yunnanensis plant named `Kriya`

Abstract
A new humulus plant named `Kriya` is disclosed. The leaves of this new humulus plant contain a cannabinoid level of .about.15-23 mg/g and the inflorescence of this new humulus plant contain a cannabionoid level of .about.124-142 mg/g.

---

Inventors:​	Joseph; Bomi (Los Gatos, CA)​
Applicant:​	Name​ City​ State​ Country​ Type​ Bomi, LLC Los Gatos CA​ US​ ​
Assignee:​	BOMI, LLC (Reno, NV)​
Family ID:​	67842819​
Appl. No.:​	15/932,529​
Filed:​	March 12, 2018​

---

Prior Publication Data

---

​	Document Identifier​	Publication Date​
​	US 20190281744 P1​	Sep 12, 2019​
​

---

Current U.S. Class:​	PLT/236​
Current CPC Class:​	A01H 6/00 (20180501); A01H 6/28 (20180501); A01H 5/02 (20130101)​
Current International Class:​	A01H 5/02 (20180101); A01H 6/28 (20180101); A01H 6/00 (20180101)​
Field of Search:​	;PLT/226,236​

Other References

Trademark to the name `Kriya` for unprocessed hops, serial No. 88068180, filed Aug. 7, 2018. cited by examiner.

Primary Examiner: Grunberg; Anne Marie
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Pepper Hamilton LLP

---

Claims

---

What is claimed:

1. A new and distinct humulus plant as illustrated and described herein.

---

Description

---

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a new and distinct Humulus plant. The plant is botanically known as Humulus yunnanensis var kriya.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

The new and distinct humulus plant originated from a cross hybridization of feral H. yunnanensis variants collected from the Pekong area within the Arunachal Pradesh region of India. Various H. yunnanensis samples were collected for analysis from various regions of India, including the groves in Puging, Singing, and Pekong, as well as in Mouling National Park, Kaying, and Lipo. H. yunnanensis male and female saplings with roots were collected, along with male and female flowers. All collected samples were tested for the presence of cannabinoids using standard methods known in the art (see Korte. F. and Sieper. H., J. Chromatoqr. 13:90 (1964), which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety). Only 5.2% of the H. yunnanensis samples collected had detectable levels of cannabinoids. The average cannabinoid level in the inflorescence of the H. yunnanensis plants containing cannabinoids was 2.1 mg/g.sup.1. The cannabinoid level in plant tissue as described throughout this application is provided as milligrams of cannabinoid per gram of freeze dried plant material.

The Pekong strains of H. yunnanensis were identified as having unusually high cannabinoid content, with detectable levels of cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabielsoin (CBE) and cannabidivarin (CBDV) found. The content of cannabidiol, cannabichromene and cannabigerol was high, usually >85-90% of the carboxylated cannabinoids and >65-70% of the uncarboxylated cannabinoids. No trace amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol were detected in the Pekong strains.

Table 1 (below) summarizes the inflorescence size and cannabinoid level of six of the H. yunnanensis plants collected from the Pekong region. The cannabinoid levels are reported as milligram cannabinoid per gram of freeze-dried plant tissue. Of these samples, samples 3, 4, and 6 were selected for breeding based on their high cannabinoid content. All of these samples were negative for the presence of tetrahydrocannabinol.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Characteristics of Pekong H. yunnanensis Pekong #1 Pekong #2 Pekong #3 Inflorescence 3.7 cm 4.8 cm 7.4 cm size (length in cm) Inflorescence 22 mg/g 26 mg/g 56 mg/g Cannabinoid (mg/g) Leaf 6.3 mg/g 6.3 mg/g 7.5 mg/g Cannabinoid (mg/g) Pekong #4 Pekong #5 Pekong #6 Inflorescence 6.2 cm 5.9 cm 6.6 cm size (length in cm) Inflorescence 41 mg/g 32 mg/g 42 mg/g Cannabinoid (mg/g) Leaf 5.3 mg/g 6.1 mg/g 4.8 mg/g Cannabinoid (mg/g)

To initiate the generation of `Kriya`, Pekong #3 plant was crossed with Pekong #6 plant to produce 128 female progeny. The cannabinoid level in female inflorescence of each plant was assessed. Of the 128 progeny, 74 of the plants did not contain a significant cannabinoid level. Twenty-three of the progeny had longer inflorescence (>6 cm), but the level of cannabinoid in the inflorescence was less than 20 milligrams per gram of freeze dried tissue. Twenty-four of the progeny had medium inflorescence (between 4 and 6 cm in length) and a medium inflorescence cannabinoid level (between 25 and 35 mg/g). Seven of the offspring had inflorescence greater than 7 cm in length and a cannabinoid level greater than 70 mg/g. From this analysis it was surmised that the presence of cannabinoids is a recessive trait in Humulus yunnanensis.

In parallel with the cross of Pekong #3 and Pekong #6, Pekong #3 was independently crossed with Pekong #4 plant to generate 128 progeny. The cannabinoid level in the female inflorescence was also assessed in these progeny. Eight plants having an inflorescence cannabinoid level between 66 mg/g and 73 mg/g were identified.

First generation plants produced by the cross between Pekong #3 and Pekong #6 and the cross between Pekong #3 and Pekong #4 having the highest cannabinoid level were selected for crossbreeding to produce second generation plants (n=7 plants from the Pekong #3/Pekong #6 cross; n=8 plants from the Pekong #3/Pekong #4 cross). The offspring of these crosses were bred to produce third and fourth generation offspring. The fifth generation yielded female plants having an average cannabinoid content of 128 milligrams cannabinoid per gram of freeze dried inflorescence and 16 milligrams cannabinoid per gram of freeze dried leaves and "trims". Of these female plants, one plant was chosen for asexual propagation. This new variety of high cannabinoid content plant was named Humulus yunnanensis var kriya or `Kriya`.

Further propagation of female `Kriya` was carried out using in-vitro culture starting on Mar. 14, 2017 in Nainital, Uttarakhand, India. The hypocotyl and the newly germinating buds of the female `Kriya` plant were micro-propagated. Sterile plant tissues were removed from an intact plant. A small portion of plant tissue was placed on B5 medium to half its ionic strength (B5/2). The medium was thickened with agar to create a gel which supported the explant during growth.

The tissue samples produced during the first stage were multiplied to increase overall number. The tissue was grown into small "plantlets". Offshoot production was induced by hormone treatment. All propagules of `Kriya` have been observed to be true to type in that during all asexual multiplication, the inflorescences and globose of the original plant have been maintained. After the formation of multiple shoots, these shoots were transferred to rooting medium with a high auxin\cytokinin ratio.

The `Kriya` plantlets were transferred to the soil, with vermicompost, from the plant media. After a few days the plantlets were "hardened" and transferred to the field to grow to full maturity.

BRIEF DESCRIPTIONS OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a photograph of the `Kriya` plant growing in a greenhouse in Ooty, India in July 2017.

FIGS. 2A-2B show the Humulus yunnanensis var kriya leaf. FIG. 2A is a photograph of a seven-lobed `Kriya` leaf and FIG. 2B is a drawing of a five-lobed `Kriya` leaf.

FIG. 3 is a drawing of a young Humulus yunnanensis var kriya female inflorescence.

FIGS. 4A-4B are photographs of the Humulus yunnanensis var kriya inflorescence at different stages. FIG. 4A is a picture of a `Kriya` inflorescence during the mid-vegetative growth state. FIG. 4B is a picture of a `Kriya` inflorescence during the late reproductive stage.

DETAILED BOTANICAL DESCRIPTION

The present invention relates to a new and distinct humulus plant. The plant is botanically known as Humulus yunnanensis var kriya.

The following description of `Kriya`, unless otherwise noted, is based on observations made during June through November 2017. These measurements and ratings were taken from `Kriya` plants planted in March 2017.

COMPARATIVE CANNABINOID CHARACTERISTICS

`Kriya` is distinguishable from its originating parents and other related varieties of Humulus yunnanensis based on the cannabinoid content in its leaves and inflorescence. Table 2 below details the number and type of H. yunnanensis samples collected from various regions in and around India, and the number of these samples that contained detectable levels of cannabinoids. As indicated in Table 2, many of the H. yunnanensis samples contained no detectable level of cannabinoids, i.e., H. yunnanensis plants collected from Ooty, Puging, Singing, Kaying, and Bomdeling did not contain detectable levels of cannabinoids.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Comparison of Cannabinoid Content in Samples of H. yunnanensis Collected From India and Bhutan Ooty.sup.1 Samples with Puging.sup.2 Samples Cannabinoids Samples Samples collected ("CB") collected w/CB Flowers 19 0 23 0 Shoot tips 11 0 18 0 Leaves 23 0 36 0 Stem 15 0 11 0 Bark 9 0 8 0 Roots 6 0 3 0 Total Collected 83 99 Samples w/C8 0 0 Singing.sup.3 Pekong.sup.4 Samples Samples Samples Samples collected w/CB collected w/CB Flowers 41 0 69 14 Shoot tips 32 0 36 8 Leaves 67 0 103 13 Stem 24 0 43 0 Bark 20 0 29 0 Roots 8 0 15 0 Total Collected 192 300 Samples w/C8 0 35 Mouling.sup.5 Kaying.sup.6 Samples Samples Samples Samples collected w/CB collected w/CB Flowers 31 4 29 0 Shoot tips 23 2 21 0 Leaves 47 2 35 0 Stem 12 0 11 0 Bark 8 0 6 0 Roots 0 0 4 0 Total Collected 121 106 Samples w/C8 8 0 Lipo.sup.7 Bomdeling.sup.8 Samples Samples Samples Samples collected w/CB collected w/CB Flowers 19 4 18 0 Shoot tips 14 2 14 0 Leaves 35 6 33 0 Stem 18 0 14 0 Bark 11 0 8 0 Roots 8 0 8 0 Total Collected 105 100 Samples w/C8 12 0 Nanda Devi.sup.9 Samples Samples collected w/CB % with CB Flowers 11 2 Shoot tips 15 2 Leaves 25 2 Stem 8 0 Bark 7 0 Roots 2 0 Total Collected 68 1174 Samples w/C8 6 61 5.20% Ooty.sup.1: Ooty village in Tamil Nadu, Southern India Puging.sup.2: Puging village in Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh India Singing.sup.3: Singing village in Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh India Pekong.sup.4: Pekong village in Upper Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh India Mouling.sup.5: Mouling National Park in Arunachal Pradesh India Kaying.sup.6: Kaying village West Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh India Lipo.sup.7: Lipo village West Siang district of Arunachal Pradesh India Bomdeling.sup.8: Bomdeling Wildlife Sanctuary in Bhutan Nanda Devi.sup.9: Nanda Devi National Park in Himachal Pradesh, India

The presence of cannabinoids was most frequently detected in samples collected from the Pekong region. Table 1 above shows the cannabinoid levels in the six Pekong plants identified as having the highest cannabinoid levels, including the originating parent plants of `Kriya`. Table 3 below shows average cannabinoid content in the inflorescence and leaves of first, second, third, and fourth generation.sup.2 offspring of crossed Pekong samples, as well the average cannabinoid content in the inflorescence and leaves of `Kriya`. The average cannabinoid level in `Kriya` inflorescence is 133.5 mg/g.+-.8.62 mg/g. This level is >2-fold higher than the inflorescence cannabinoid level of the original Pekong parental variants (41 mg/g-56 mg/g). This level is also significantly greater than the average inflorescence cannabinoid level found in first, second, third, and fourth generation plants. First generation plants are progeny of the cross between Pekong #3 and Pekong #6 plants, and the progeny of Pekong #3 and Pekong #4 plants. Second generation plants are progeny of Pekong #3/Pekong #6 offspring crossed with Pekong #3/Pekong #4 offspring. Third generation plants are progeny of second generation crosses, and fourth generation plants are progeny of third generation crosses.

The average cannabinoid leaf content of `Kriya` is 19.28.+-.3.75 mg/g. This is also >2-fold higher than the leaf cannabinoid content of the originating Pekong parental variants (4.8 mg/g-7.5 mg/g). This level is also significantly greater than the average leaf cannabinoid level found in the first, second, third, and fourth generation plants.

Cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene (CBC), and cannabigerol (CBG) make up >98% of the cannabinoids present in the inflorescence and leaves of `Kriya`. Trace amounts (<2%) of cannabielsoin (CBE) and cannbidivarin (CBDV) are also present. As with the parent strains, no tetrahydrocannabinol is present in `Kriya`.

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Characteristics of `Kriya` and its Predecessors Inflorescence Length Mean Standard Plant N (cm) Deviation Variance 1st Generation 76 5.767 1.325 1.755 2nd Generation 62 5.933 1.294 1.675 3rd Generation 47 6.15 1.319 1.739 4th Generation 52 6.783 0.861 0.742 Humulus kriya 36 8.233 0.857 0.735 Inflorescence Cannabinoid Mean Standard Plant N (mg/g) Deviation Variance 1st Generation 76 33.167 8.06 64.967 2nd Generation 62 34.667 8.335 69.467 3rd Generation 47 46.334 7.23 52.267 4th Generation 52 78.333 8.123 66.967 Humulus kriya 36 133.5 8.62 74.3 Leaf Cannabinoid Mean Standard Plant N (mg/g) Deviation Variance 1st Generation 83 1.78 0.342 0.117 2nd Generation 73 2.24 0.623 0.388 3rd Generation 48 3.4 0.678 0.46 4th Generation 51 6.48 1.105 1.222 Humulus kriya 46 19.28 3.749 14.057

`Kriya` is also distinguishable from its originating parental plants based on average .beta.-caryophyllene content in the inflorescence and leaves. The average .beta.-caryophyllene level in `Kriya` inflorescence is 53.11 mg/g.+-.7.73 mg/g (milligrams of .beta.-caryophyllene per gram of freeze-dried plant tissue). This level is >4-fold higher than the inflorescence .beta.-caryophyllene level of the original Pekong parental variants (3 mg/g-11 mg/g). As shown in Table 4 below, the level of .beta.-caryophyllene is also markedly different than the average inflorescence .beta.-caryophyllene level found in first, second, third, and fourth generation plants.

The average .beta.-caryophyllene leaf content of `Kriya` is 10.63.+-.1.99 mg/g. This is almost 10-fold higher than the leaf .beta.-caryophyllene content of the originating Pekong parental variants (0.8 mg/g-1.6 mg/g). This level is also markedly different from the average leaf .beta.-caryophyllene level found in the first, second, third, and fourth generation plants.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 .beta.-Caryophyllene Content of `Kriya` and its Predecessors Inflorescence Beta Caryophyllene Mean Standard N (mg/g) Deviation Variance 1st Generation 76 26.77 6.41 41.11 2nd Generation 54 28.52 4.80 23.06 3rd Generation 63 36.52 7.81 61.08 4th Generation 47 42.42 8.33 69.54 Humulus kriya 73 53.11 7.73 59.82 Leaf Beta Caryophyllene Mean Standard N (mg/g) Deviation Variance 1st Generation 67 2.09 0.411 0.168 2nd Generation 73 2.77 0.52 0.28 3rd Generation 59 4.17 0.54 0.29 4th Generation 71 7.9 1.87 3.49 Humulus kriya 82 10.63 1.99 3.98

`Kriya` is also distinguishable from its originating parental plants based on average inflorescence size. As indicated in Table 3 above, the average length of the inflorescence of `Kriya` is 8.233.+-.0.875 cm, which is distinctly longer than the size of the inflorescence of the originating parent plants (range 6.2 cm-7.4 cm).

BOTANICAL DESCRIPTION

The following botanical description of the new humulus cultivar will vary somewhat depending upon cultural practices and climatic conditions, and can vary with location and season. Quantified measurements are expressed as an average of measurements taken from a number of individual `Kriya` plants. The measurements of any individual plant or any group of plants of the new cultivar may vary from the stated average. The color chart used was The Royal Horticulutural Society Colour Chart (5.sup.th ed. 2007).

`Kriya` is a perennial vine that is 4-8 feet long, branching occasionally (see FIG. 1). The twining habit of `Kriya's` stems allow this vine to climb adjacent vegetation and fences. The rather stout stems are light green and longitudinally ridged. Along the ridges of each stem, there are rows of stiff prickly hairs. A pair of opposite leaves occur at intervals along each stem.

The plant has dormant stage (December-February) where the plant sheds all its leaves and only the dried pods remain. The dormant stage is followed by a growth stage (February-May), a vegetative stage (June-August), and flowering stage (August-October), after which the plant starts gradually going dormant again. As referred to herein, a "young" plant refers to a plant in the early growth stage (i.e., February to May), and a "mature" plant refers to a plant at the late flowering stage (i.e., August to October).

`Kriya's` leaves are opposite and cordite, and can grow up to 6 inches long and 6 inches wide. The leaves are palmate, generally divided into 5 lobes with toothed margins; however leaves containing 7 and 9 lobes have been observed. Upper leaves are normally 3 lobed and develop to five to seven lobes as they mature. Each lobe is oblanceolate or elliptic in shape with coarsely serrated margins. The upper surface of each leaf is medium green and moderately covered with short rough hairs (subglabrous and membranous). The lower surface has stiff prickly hairs along the major veins.

`Kriya` normally grows to cover large areas of open ground. It overgrows shrubs and small trees and can choke them off. It grows rapidly in summer and forms dense foliage several feet deep. It twines around shrubs and trees causing them wither. It can displace native vegetation. It is a bushy vine that can be trained to be conical. It takes a conical appearance when it climbs a trellis or a small tree.

The normal adaxial surface of the leaves are normally subglabrous and membranous. The normal leaf isn't blistered or curled. During a humid and rainy growing season and cases of "Downy Mildew" caused by Pseudoperonospora humuli have been observed. The infected leaves become brittle and have downward curling leaves. A yellow color affects the infected leaves and the spores then appear as purple to black blotches on the abaxial (underside) of infected leaves.

The rather stout petioles of `Kriya` are as long as, or a little shorter than, the leaves. These petioles are light green and covered with stiff downward pointing prickly hairs.

The young female `Kriya` inflorescence is a short spike of flowers with bracts and bracteoles that are ovate-orbiculate. This spike becomes globose and large with age and tends to nod downward, spanning about 5-10 cm long. Flowers originate as pistillate bracts in the leaf axils. The appearance of each spike is dominated by several overlapping pistillate bracts. At the base of each bract, there is a pair of inconspicuous female flowers. Initially, the pistillate bracts are narrowly deltoid in shape, but enlarge in size to 6-9 mm long and become deltoid with recurved tips and are pilose. These bracts are light to dark green, hairy, and strongly ciliate along their smooth margins. These bracts turn a yellowish brown when mature (see FIG. 4). The bracteoles are more prominent in the young plant, and do not have a flower at the base. Each female flower has a divided style and an inconspicuous calyx that surrounds the developing ovary; there are no petals (see FIG. 4).

The mature female inflorescences are leafy cone-like catkins or strobiles. As noted above, when fully developed, the strobiles are about 5-10 cm long, oblong in shape and rounded, consisting of a number of overlapping, green bracts, attached to a separate axis. If these leafy bracts are removed, the axis will be seen to be hairy and to have a zigzag path (see FIG. 4). Each of the bracts enfolds at the base a small fruit (achene). The fruit is an ovoid achene which is about 1/4 inch in diameter, roundish, rough, light brown and speckled. The fruit and bract have translucent glands, which secrete a waxy substance. `Kriya` does not secrete the powdery Lupulin which gives the "hops" plant (Humulus lupulus) its distinctive flavor. Disease susceptibility: Aphids, spidermites, powdery mildew, downy mildew, black root rot, hop mosaic virus, and apple mosaic virus. Aroma: Woody aroma, soft complex spice, mild cananga/cinnamon. Use: Medicinal. Time of flowering: Single flowering season; Autumn. Leaves: Leaf arrangement.--Opposite. Immaure leaf shape.--Cordate. Mature leaf shape.--Usually a palmate shape, lobed (5-7 lobes). Sometimes simple leaf, also lobed. Leaf apex shape.--Acutely acuminate. Leaf base shape.--Cordate. Abaxial surface.--Rigid spinulose hairs on veins. Abaxial surface color.--140D young plant; 140A mature plant. Adaxial surface.--Densely pubescent. Adaxial surface color.--129D young plant; 130C mature plant. Margin.--Serrate. Average length.--5-15 cm. Average width.--4-15 cm. Cannabinoid content.--15-23 mg/g. Petiole: Average petiole length.--4-10 cm. Average diameter.--5 mm. Average circumference.--2 cm. Color.--185A. Inflorescence: Leafy cone-like catkins or strobiles. Arrangement.--Spicate. Shape.--Ovaloid. Average length.--5-10 cm. Average width.--2-4 cm. Strobiles.--Color 153D, 153C, 153B, 153A, 152D, 152C, 152B. Bracts and bracteole.--Subglabrous and membraneous; abaxial surface has prominent veins. shape: initially narrowly deltoid; with maturation become enlarged and deltoid with recurved tips. size: 1.5 cm to 3 cm. color: immature bract is light to dark green 140D, 140C, 140B, 140A, mature bract is yellowish brown, 162D, 162C, 162B, 162A. bract apex length: 0.05-0.80 inch. Cones per node at the side shoot.--Middle of the plant: 1-3 cones. Upper third portion of the plant: 0-1 cones. Total cones per side shoot.--Middle of the plant: 4-16 cones. Upper third portion of the plant: 0-7 cones. Total cones per plant.--220-840. Achene.--Size: 3 to 9 cm. Shape: flat. Color: 200D. Cannabinoid content.--124-142 mg/g. Flowers.--Color: 149D, 149C. Main shoot anthocyanin coloration.--144C, 144B.

USPP31477P3 - Humulus yunnanensis plant named ‘Kriya’ - Google Patents

A new humulus plant named ‘Kriya’ is disclosed. The leaves of this new humulus plant contain a cannabinoid level of ˜15-23 mg/g and the inflorescence of this new humulus plant contain a cannabionoid level of ˜124-142 mg/g.

patents.google.com

 

[acespicoli]

Only 5.2% of the H. yunnanensis samples collected had detectable levels of cannabinoids. The average cannabinoid level in the inflorescence of the H. yunnanensis plants containing cannabinoids was 2.1 mg/g.sup.1. The cannabinoid level in plant tissue as described throughout this application is provided as milligrams of cannabinoid per gram of freeze dried plant material.

The Pekong strains of H. yunnanensis were identified as having unusually high cannabinoid content, with detectable levels of cannabigerol (CBG), cannabichromene (CBC), cannabidiol (CBD), cannabielsoin (CBE) and cannabidivarin (CBDV) found. The content of cannabidiol, cannabichromene and cannabigerol was high, usually >85-90% of the carboxylated cannabinoids and >65-70% of the uncarboxylated cannabinoids. No trace amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol were detected in the Pekong strains.