I've come to the conclusion that there's a lot more theoretical experts on this issue than real ones, and most of those who have even tried it a little give extremely mixed reviews, mostly negative. Doesn't seem worth the added dangers to me.
-
ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
UVB bulbs...
- Thread starter dontstepongrass
- Start date
N707
Member
UV leds are pretty cheap and very available on ebay. I have made several types of uv flashlights to find scorpions. I have also used and wired some high power uv leds (3 watt) with mag lites....the wiring is uber basic and very straight forward. Just froogle "high power uv led". I think us is certainly worth throwing in the mix. I have used UVB lampss on my critters tanks for years now, no ill effects on surrounding plastics or furniture, belongings, ect. from spillover UV light. The nicer 10.0 cfl's put out the correct UV spectrum noted to be useful (correlating nm's). Also, just thought UIld throw in there that the first actual high power leds were released within the last year, and are not yet present in ANY commercial applications on the consumer level due to price. They go from 25-100 watts on ONE led.....no joke. Though they are oexorberantly expensive they are on the horizon...finally my friends. http://cgi.ebay.com/100W-White-LED-...0|66:2|65:12|39:1|240:1318|301:1|293:1|294:50 I list this to show the high wattages available, not to advert,....I will remove this if it violates any policy.
I highly doubt supplementing with moderate amounts of UV will harm anythign, especially ifit is kept within relativley natural ranges.
that is a fair assessment.
N7 - doing a few preliminary searches i was unable to locate any uvb leds. unless uvb is contained in some of the uv leds you are referring to, this may be apples and oranges. not to be a dissenter... :wink:
eb - i am one of those pot snobs you speak of, watch yourself lol
so what is the opportunity cost of adding uvb's that would counter what you would gain (presumably more trichs and sooner) ?
i am thinking that the extra power usage would be minimal (if not almost negligible), especially if there is truth to it shortening flower times. what else gets ruined faster? i mean, obviously uvb should be switched off when one is in the room as has been discussed BUT what else (besides plants) are in the room that are being aged prematurely? is the labels on equipment fading or is there some actual damage involved.
i believe these are the types of ?'s we need to cover and once we have compiled the list, and allowed the masses to weigh the risks THEN hopefully more and more will conduct experiments which would lead to the absolute answer being known. personally, i feel there is not anything concrete on this subject and like was mentioned it feels like most "knowledge" is just hypothetical conjecture at best (for those who have tried it, please ignore that last remark)
UV-B is actually pretty destructive to plastics. All the power cables, all the Mylar, all the planters(especially plastic ones). It also makes fluoro tubes glow, since UV is what they use inside fluoro tubes to excite the phosphors, but the amount of glow from a small reptile light is not major. Still, this is technically driving those phosphors some on top of what they are already running, so it could hypothetically shorten their lifespan somewhat. Plastic timers, hydro equipment, and many other grow room items are susceptible to UV damage. Even my regular fluoro tubes bleach out the color on any plastics present.
I figure it's all that weighed against the 1 out of 10 master growers who "think" they see a difference, and who may indeed actually see SOME difference, but they've already got everything locked in and can play around for a little extra gain. Most growers are going to benefit a lot more from spending that extra time and money on something more useful, like more regular light, or better soil, or better hydro gear.
I figure it's all that weighed against the 1 out of 10 master growers who "think" they see a difference, and who may indeed actually see SOME difference, but they've already got everything locked in and can play around for a little extra gain. Most growers are going to benefit a lot more from spending that extra time and money on something more useful, like more regular light, or better soil, or better hydro gear.
if your setup correctly, power cables should for the most part be tied up and ran above the lights so that it is not a hazard when spills occur (and they do)
the remaining equipment: fans, dehumidifiers, etc. how long do you think the lifespan is on these pieces of equipment? do you really think that the power cable is going to age sufficiently enough that it no longer functions (and wouldn't you think electrical tape an easy enough fix?) before a SINGLE internal component goes bad. i say this, because that is what it takes for an electronic device to no longer function. and the assumption that we aren't talking about electronic majors who can do their own troubleshooting/repairs without having to pay for it. since repair costs are usually high enough to warrant a purchase of a new item.
the more i think about it the more i think it would only affect your hoses running to each pot in a hydro setup. can't we brain storm a way to minimize that damage too? c'mon potheads, someone can macgyver something...
the remaining equipment: fans, dehumidifiers, etc. how long do you think the lifespan is on these pieces of equipment? do you really think that the power cable is going to age sufficiently enough that it no longer functions (and wouldn't you think electrical tape an easy enough fix?) before a SINGLE internal component goes bad. i say this, because that is what it takes for an electronic device to no longer function. and the assumption that we aren't talking about electronic majors who can do their own troubleshooting/repairs without having to pay for it. since repair costs are usually high enough to warrant a purchase of a new item.
the more i think about it the more i think it would only affect your hoses running to each pot in a hydro setup. can't we brain storm a way to minimize that damage too? c'mon potheads, someone can macgyver something...
They're ALL correctable problems. The question isn't if they can be fixed, it's just "are they worth fixing?". I know we all want tropical magic rays to max out our bud and make it kick our asses, but I just don't think the verdict is even slightly clear on this one, but the dangers of eye damage, and damage to plants definitely is there. Used carelessly, they can definitely burn plants, much easier than a regular fluoro light of equivalent power could. Add to that the fact that just adding that much more wattage in actual growth light is a more proven strategy than adding UV-B.
People should experiment with it, but only if they're comfortable enough to. New growers, and growers looking for definite results should probably avoid UV-B for now and just focus on maximizing what they already have.
At best UV-B is like CO2; Not really needed, but maybe beneficial under certain specific conditions
People should experiment with it, but only if they're comfortable enough to. New growers, and growers looking for definite results should probably avoid UV-B for now and just focus on maximizing what they already have.
At best UV-B is like CO2; Not really needed, but maybe beneficial under certain specific conditions
good debate. i believe at this point i may concur in lieu of any new evidence.
I ran NL5x Haze.Twice.
I used 4 60w remote ballasted UV spotlights on a light mover, far more potent than the little flouro ones most folks use.
I have been growing and smoking for over 30 yrs.
This is not worth any extra time, energy or money.
Or added heat.
If I thought it was, it was, this stuff would NOT be gathering dust in a box somewhere.
( Hey! Wanna buy some UV lights? They will double your potency! LOL
)You are FAR BETTER OFF spending money on something that really works.
SD
Last edited:
Co2 will kick it's ass.
Thanks Sunnydog, I'm pretty sure that adding UVB is of no benefit. I have my own testing of white widow clones where everything was the same except one got uvb resulted in no difference in the smoke. I have what Sam the Skunkman said where he tested several strains (and his opinion is highly weighted). And now Sunnydog and his NL5xHaze.
I tried the experiment thinking that perhaps I had been smoking inferior weed all these years - lacking its full potential of THC. I was actually pleased to know that the uvb did not make a difference considering what a bitch it is.
I tried the experiment thinking that perhaps I had been smoking inferior weed all these years - lacking its full potential of THC. I was actually pleased to know that the uvb did not make a difference considering what a bitch it is.
This gets me thinking about that you tube video with Marijuana Man talking about uvb needed for the final step in creating Thc. I think seeing that video is what made me go out buy a uvb bulb. I seems to me that Marijuana Man should be able to get some test results from uvb versus non uvb crops. He should post some kind of update because he is leading people to believe that uvb will increase thc when it seems pretty clear to me and others who have tried the experiment that NO it does not increase thc.
sunny dog- were those uv bulbs or uvb bulbs? and if so, what percentage is uvb? don't think we should concern ourselves with any uv spectrum band that isnt uvb. perhaps this is why it seems so unnecessarily expensive is because money is being spent to power the wrong spectrums as opposed to only the specific (supposedly beneficial) wavelengths.
From website;
Mega-Ray® EB 60 watt Flood UVB Lamp Kit - 120 volt
120 volt flood lamp complete with matching ballast box
This is the lamp we've all dreamed of. This lamp is our top-of-the-range unique 60 watt EB Par-38 Narrow Flood Lamp which has been shown in tests to produce similar amounts of UVB to natural sunlight at the recommended distances! This Mac Industries/Westron Lighting original design provides the necessary UVB for your UVB-dependent basking reptiles.
Our 60-watt EB Par-38 Narrow Flood Lamp produces dynamic UVA and UVB, has a significantly reduced decay rate, and comes equipped with a long-life external ballast that reduces bulb failures. This Mac Industries/Westron Lighting original design is found nowhere else in the world!
More UVB - But Safer
This lamp produces more UVB than any other true Mercury Vapor Flood, yet is safer for owners! How? Our design directs the majority of the UVB from the face of the bulb, rather than diffuse it across a 180° angle.
Longer Useful LifeUsing cutting edge technology coupled with five years of dedicated research and testing, we have conquered and significantly reduced the huge decay rates so common in other Mercury Vapor lamps. While other bulbs decay as much as 80%, our newly designed SB bulbs decay less than 30% over the life of the bulb. This is unseen in the industry.
Most people with UVB meters
are getting 18+ months use out of our EB bulbs.
Plus:
If you have unusual requirements, we may be able to offer you a specially-rated EB lamp with higher or lower UVB output than standard, for a small extra charge. Again, contact us for details.
Specifications
The Mega-Ray® EB flood is a 60-watt EB Par-38 True Frosted Flood Lamp, the only one of its kind in the world. A true flood lamp, it will disperse usable UVB in a 30" circumference at a 20" distance.
MINIMUM distance setting of 12" will produce 150-200 microwatts per square centimeter (uW/cm2) of UVB and 900-1200uW/cm2 of UVA.
MAXIMUM distance setting of 20" will produce 50-75 microwatts per square centimeter (uW/cm2) of UVB. (Distance is measured from lamp face to basking spot or reptile for optimum UVB and heat.)
Warning: Very Little Heat
This 60-watt energy-efficient bulb produces very little heat. Be sure your reptile is heated properly and if necessary, increase the heat at the basking spot using a good heat source like our Mega-Ray® Heat Projector. ALWAYS triple check the temperature at the basking spot - never risk burning your reptile.
Warranty
This bulb is warranted for one full year to produce a minimum of 50 microwatts (uW/cm2) at 12" and our initial testing shows even higher readings. Our external ballast is warranted for one year, and we believe it will last much longer.
The product will be replaced with the remaining one-year purchase time covered. For example: If the lamp fails at 9 months, you will receive a replacement item with the remaining 3 months on the warranty.
Not sure if this is the right bulb for you?
Please read our FAQ page. If still confused, email or phone us and let us know:
Your enclosure size & type
Distance from lamp to reptile (or basking area)
Type of reptile
Ambient air temperature in your house.
Phone consultations are the best form.
How Much is Too Much?
Some other new mercury vapor products currently on the market can be deemed dangerous to reptiles, emitting up to 3 times more than the sun does, yet many others emit very little UVB. Basically it comes down to this:
50-250 uW/cm2 mimics the natural environment enough to keep your UV-dependent BASKING reptiles healthy, depending on the species, according to the latest research. At Mac Industries, we choose to be responsible in our approach to high-output UVB-emitting Mercury Vapor lamps. Your reptile's health is just as important to us as the customer service we provide.
www.reptileuv.com has the best UVB technology right now.! Microwatt for microwatt, you get the best bulb for your buck. I just received the EB version and set it up. I'm getting a 60 reading at 24" after initial start up.
Rusty Trichome
Member
With regards to increasing THC, I don't know if adding a UVB source works or not.
With regards to increasing aromas and flavors...IDK...but I have a strong inkling.
But what I do know, is that yes, Marijuana Man is right, that there is a cause and effect for all things growing. For many generations cannabis evolved outdoors, and has always been subjected to varying degrees of UVB. If it hadn't learned to deal with the sun, (and by extention, UVB) it wouldn't have survived. Nor would it have developed the exact compounds that get us high. But does this mean that without this interaction, there is no action...?
Did the plant develop a means of dealing with the heat, which formed these compounds to be available to the plant, for what...defense from insects and vermin...defense against moisture loss...defense against the full spectrum of sunlight...? Or was it a self defense measure in response to the the UVB?
Did the plant develop it's trichome structure in the shape of a light collecting sphere to reflect the damaging rays, or did it develop to collect the rays?
Is it curently possible for a cannabis strain to retain latent responses pre-programmed in the genes, and express itself weirdly when exposed to artificial sunlight sans UVB? (HID's)
Does UVB degrade THC during growth? (is it degrading the THC, or is it helping to make the THC?)
Does it degrade CBN's or CBD's during growth?
Would this degradation be the ratio necessary to form those compounds responsible for a proper couchlock?
I guess I'm confused, but my 7w self-ballasted UVB reptile bulb got here last week, and have had it on a 5 hour schedule ever since. Not that I don't trust any of the opinions previously expressed, but I haven't heard one peep about evolutionary cause and effect that may have triggered this plants initial genetic reasoning behind it's ability to fuck us up, nor any talk of latent expressions hiding in the recesses of the genes, which may help understand the issue...Seems to me we are missing half of the discussion.
Or, I'm on the wrong track, but have a new experiment to satisify my curiosity and boredom.
With regards to increasing aromas and flavors...IDK...but I have a strong inkling.
But what I do know, is that yes, Marijuana Man is right, that there is a cause and effect for all things growing. For many generations cannabis evolved outdoors, and has always been subjected to varying degrees of UVB. If it hadn't learned to deal with the sun, (and by extention, UVB) it wouldn't have survived. Nor would it have developed the exact compounds that get us high. But does this mean that without this interaction, there is no action...?
Did the plant develop a means of dealing with the heat, which formed these compounds to be available to the plant, for what...defense from insects and vermin...defense against moisture loss...defense against the full spectrum of sunlight...? Or was it a self defense measure in response to the the UVB?
Did the plant develop it's trichome structure in the shape of a light collecting sphere to reflect the damaging rays, or did it develop to collect the rays?
Is it curently possible for a cannabis strain to retain latent responses pre-programmed in the genes, and express itself weirdly when exposed to artificial sunlight sans UVB? (HID's)
Does UVB degrade THC during growth? (is it degrading the THC, or is it helping to make the THC?)
Does it degrade CBN's or CBD's during growth?
Would this degradation be the ratio necessary to form those compounds responsible for a proper couchlock?
I guess I'm confused, but my 7w self-ballasted UVB reptile bulb got here last week, and have had it on a 5 hour schedule ever since. Not that I don't trust any of the opinions previously expressed, but I haven't heard one peep about evolutionary cause and effect that may have triggered this plants initial genetic reasoning behind it's ability to fuck us up, nor any talk of latent expressions hiding in the recesses of the genes, which may help understand the issue...Seems to me we are missing half of the discussion.
Or, I'm on the wrong track, but have a new experiment to satisify my curiosity and boredom.
Rusty, I agree 100% with you. There is a whole lot more to this issue, especially when it comes to breading selections. And let me say that Marijuana Man is great and I wish him and Marc Emery and Michelle Rainey all the best with their upcoming legal issues. I've thought quite a bit about all those things you've mentioned but of course the most important issue is - do I get higher? Just like you, I had to find out for myself.
Also, I question the use of a 7W bulb. I'm afraid that you will have a hard time getting a usable amount of uvb out of that. Maybe if you just focus the light on one branch or a small clone.
Also, I question the use of a 7W bulb. I'm afraid that you will have a hard time getting a usable amount of uvb out of that. Maybe if you just focus the light on one branch or a small clone.
Rusty Trichome
Member
My initial focus is on a single cola. The light is focused on just one of my favorite indica dom's. A stable strain I'm very familiar with, so should any differences in characteristics occur...I'm pretty sure I'll notice. Been smokin and growing the stuff for a few years now. The lower branches on this one are seeded, so am curious what expressive effects the UVB light might bring forward from the genetics. Especially after many generations without exposure to UVB. Doubtful a single season would show results, but the bulb is supposed to last a year, lol.
Working on distance and schedule right now. I have it at 8", and will work my way in over time. No hurry though, I don't really consider this a race.
I am doubtful that any technique will add to the quantity of trichomes, tho. I'm guessing the only way would be to change/alter the genetics. (breeding) IMHO, the best we can hope for would be to increase size, or quality. Perhaps I'm wrong, but for me, I equate it to this:
There are a set number of hair folicles (trichome portals) on your arm. Genetics, time and enviornment have combined to get a working result. If for some lame reason, I decided that women found more follicles sexier, could I do anything to increase my follicle count? I could make my hair grow faster with diet and proper health...I can add chemicals to make it thicker, or more managable, but I can not increase the number of follicles per square inch, without altering my genetics. (or surgery)
I'm winging it here, as I definately have more supposition than validation. Guess time will tell.
Working on distance and schedule right now. I have it at 8", and will work my way in over time. No hurry though, I don't really consider this a race.
I am doubtful that any technique will add to the quantity of trichomes, tho. I'm guessing the only way would be to change/alter the genetics. (breeding) IMHO, the best we can hope for would be to increase size, or quality. Perhaps I'm wrong, but for me, I equate it to this:
There are a set number of hair folicles (trichome portals) on your arm. Genetics, time and enviornment have combined to get a working result. If for some lame reason, I decided that women found more follicles sexier, could I do anything to increase my follicle count? I could make my hair grow faster with diet and proper health...I can add chemicals to make it thicker, or more managable, but I can not increase the number of follicles per square inch, without altering my genetics. (or surgery)
I'm winging it here, as I definately have more supposition than validation. Guess time will tell.
Rusty - this is excellent! please record every last detail for us...
Rusty Trichome
Member
Okey dokey...
I've got some Pokerface clones (heavily Indica) in the wings. Will start a log or something when they go 12/12, and see if I can do a side-by-side.
How do I take a picture of aroma, flavor, effects and aftertaste...? Now that would be a breakthrough worth patenting. Plus it would be pretty cool to be the first Canna PhotoScentologist.
<sigh> Guess I'm stoned, lol.
I've got some Pokerface clones (heavily Indica) in the wings. Will start a log or something when they go 12/12, and see if I can do a side-by-side.
How do I take a picture of aroma, flavor, effects and aftertaste...? Now that would be a breakthrough worth patenting. Plus it would be pretty cool to be the first Canna PhotoScentologist.
<sigh> Guess I'm stoned, lol.
well, do u have peeps who can do double-blind testing?
if you have that then that solves that dilemma.
if you have that then that solves that dilemma.
