-
ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Why go 24 hours lights on??
- Thread starter thcrefugee
- Start date
Did anyone in this thread even understand what Spurr has said? If you increase your DLI, you can actually reduce your hours of lights on. Why is that so hard for people to grasp? Id much rather give my plants X amount of light in 18 hours than the same X in 24, by just making a few changes to my grow equipment. Spend some money and upgrade your equipment, reduce electrical consumption, save money in the end.
Has anyone in this thread even calculated their DLI besides me and Spurr? Knowing how much light my plants are getting in X amount of hours is alot more important than knowing how many hours of light they are getting.
Has anyone in this thread even calculated their DLI besides me and Spurr? Knowing how much light my plants are getting in X amount of hours is alot more important than knowing how many hours of light they are getting.
Yeah Rumple, that's why I wanted to find out some details of what you were talking about. So you saved 4 days veg, and used 24hrs more light for your example.
I dont run hydro systems and I do not see any signifcant benefit with organic soil as much as you probably see with your hydro setup. My 6-8 week veg strains I run from seed for example might have a several extra inches at best with the extra 6 hours of light each day over those weeks in soil. Even from clone, some of my strains take at least 5 weeks or more in soil before flower. If your only vegging 2 weeks or less, then I would not think it would be a big deal to run 24/0 either.
I dont run hydro systems and I do not see any signifcant benefit with organic soil as much as you probably see with your hydro setup. My 6-8 week veg strains I run from seed for example might have a several extra inches at best with the extra 6 hours of light each day over those weeks in soil. Even from clone, some of my strains take at least 5 weeks or more in soil before flower. If your only vegging 2 weeks or less, then I would not think it would be a big deal to run 24/0 either.
@ Dave,
I got your email about DLI and Maxima, I will email you back tomorrow. Thanks bro
@ Rumpleforeskin
Ed Rosenthal and Jorge Cervantes are very poor references, they are wrong more than they are right, as well as G.Green from what I have seen of his book. I asked J.Cervantes earlier today why he doesn't offer any references for claims (aka conjecture and hearsay and anecdotal evidence) he makes in his book. I have yet to hear back from him, and by his last PMs to me, I doubt he will respond with a worthwhile answer...
I got your email about DLI and Maxima, I will email you back tomorrow. Thanks bro
@ Rumpleforeskin
Ed Rosenthal and Jorge Cervantes are very poor references, they are wrong more than they are right, as well as G.Green from what I have seen of his book. I asked J.Cervantes earlier today why he doesn't offer any references for claims (aka conjecture and hearsay and anecdotal evidence) he makes in his book. I have yet to hear back from him, and by his last PMs to me, I doubt he will respond with a worthwhile answer...
Rumpleforeskin
Member
Opposing viewpoints was censored.
Well that's sort of what i was just saying to Spurr above ( & god I love those techno geeks & especially spurr ) and agreeing with him gently while modifying it . Have i measured my DLI lately ? No , cause its a fricken holiday in the US & were all busy drinkin a bit & overeating , then running out to buy stuff on sale ...but measuring my DLI will be the first thing i do on Monday i promise... & scouts honor !
What does DLI mean again ? Hell even my Answers dot com comes up with some wierd chit, must remember were just Boho , stoned-out , moderately challenged IQ grow freaks out here & probably don't even own a measuring device that deals with it ... (just kidding)
Btw , whomever brought up Ed Rosenthal as a end all source for anything , please be aware i got him laid for his first time when he was 15....think her name was Lenny Schwendinger & he was scared shitless, lol. And last time we got him high on Ganja milk the little nerd almost passed out & was incoherent , lmao.
DLI ??? Doesn't it mean daylight savings time ???
.....hmm, maybe it means :
Dalat, Vietnam
Date Last Insured
Defense Language Institute
Del Labs Inc
Dialed Line Identification
Donor Leukocyte Infusion
Donor Lymphocite Infusion
have a sense of humor guys , life (24hrs in a day ) is too short ....really .
You may think you know more then Ed or the guy who wrote The Cannabis Grow Bible, but I am not convinced you do.
I used to veg (from a rooted clone) 14 days, to get a harvest height of 4.5'. Now I am able to get the same size plant but only veg 10 days.
If grow journals will help you, I can dig a few up for ya.
It's been ten days. She is all set for flowering. Switched bulbs and nutrients then changed the program on my timer.
Mon ami , ur a genius ...that plants defnitely ready to go do her thing .
Biggest secret on 'te block is --->vegging is just for chics ,
flower that girl asa . She'll do the rest
Ps: nice looking girls btw , u got it dialed there can tell from here ...keep
doing it bro.
highestground
Member
just read an interesting article which suggested 12 hours light, 5.5 hours dark, 1 hour light, 5.5 hours dark, repeat.
for flowering, 11 hours light 13 dark for 2 weeks, then 10.5 light 13.5 dark for 2 weeks, then 10 hours light 14 hours dark for 2 weeks, 9.5 and 12.5 for 2 weeks, then 9 and 15 for 2 weeks.
Treating Yourself Issue 25 page 77, www.treatingyourself.com
for flowering, 11 hours light 13 dark for 2 weeks, then 10.5 light 13.5 dark for 2 weeks, then 10 hours light 14 hours dark for 2 weeks, 9.5 and 12.5 for 2 weeks, then 9 and 15 for 2 weeks.
Treating Yourself Issue 25 page 77, www.treatingyourself.com
bobman
Member
All right spurr i did some reading and now I am going to tell you why you are wrong or at least not right. I must admit it is an interesting subject. First, Spurr you assume what DLI is optimal for marijuana plants. Different plants do like different levels of dli. There is no set number for all plants. It is also stated that the more dli the more growth. During summer months dli can reach 60 mol outside under no shade. I doubt this number can be achieved by hps inside. In one of your post you put the dli number at 12 mol per day. There are many plants that thrive at much higher numbers. At the end of the day its going to take a serious test to test these numbers on marijuana to prove the point one way or another. So until these tests are done you can not say one way or another just as I can not. I can only go with my observations and use the observations of experienced growers It would not surprise me, after seeing so many plants like completely different things, that some plants may like a rest. Or that in certain environments it may be necessary. Again I am always looking for ways to lessen my power bill and would love to cut out a few hours a day. So please prove it to me, but you must back up claims with numbers. I am asking anyone with a light meter to help in this experiment. If we can figure what the DLI is for a 1000 watt hps at a distance of 2 feet we could go a long way to figuring this out for ourselves.
Asil
Member
Rumple, Just was reading thru this thread and I seen those pictures. I thought that that grow room looked familiar. I hope that all is well and u are still rocking that room out.
Just to clarify, I have followed some of rumples grows and he knows how to maximize his space and gets fantastic yields. LOL he was the one that inspired me to run hydro!
Keep it Green
Just to clarify, I have followed some of rumples grows and he knows how to maximize his space and gets fantastic yields. LOL he was the one that inspired me to run hydro!
Keep it Green
The concept is pretty simple.
Plant = storage tank
CFL = Straw
1000W= 6" fire hose.
Obviously you can fill the tank faster with the fire hose. at some point too much light is a problem.
Its a very interesting theory and it seems to make sense. The problem with alot of the claims of better success with 18/6 or 24/0 is not many are stating what kind of light, distance etc
From what I gather, there seems to be so many variables such as light intensity, type of light, distance etc to make any definitive conclusion.
A controlled test is needed, pure and simple. 5-10 clones in each room, feeding off the same res, sharing the same air etc, with the only difference being the light they get.
I read this whole thread and dont remember this being discussed. Dont plants move stuff from the roots to the leaves, then when the lights go off, stuff goes from the leaves to the roots? Or vice versa?
One other tidbit. I read in a book I was glancing through that MJ plants stop photosynthesis at 5500 lumens, and anything above that is a waste. I found that kind of odd, and have meant to do more reearch on it but have not. Figured this was a good place to throw it out there.
Plant = storage tank
CFL = Straw
1000W= 6" fire hose.
Obviously you can fill the tank faster with the fire hose. at some point too much light is a problem.
Its a very interesting theory and it seems to make sense. The problem with alot of the claims of better success with 18/6 or 24/0 is not many are stating what kind of light, distance etc
From what I gather, there seems to be so many variables such as light intensity, type of light, distance etc to make any definitive conclusion.
A controlled test is needed, pure and simple. 5-10 clones in each room, feeding off the same res, sharing the same air etc, with the only difference being the light they get.
I read this whole thread and dont remember this being discussed. Dont plants move stuff from the roots to the leaves, then when the lights go off, stuff goes from the leaves to the roots? Or vice versa?
One other tidbit. I read in a book I was glancing through that MJ plants stop photosynthesis at 5500 lumens, and anything above that is a waste. I found that kind of odd, and have meant to do more reearch on it but have not. Figured this was a good place to throw it out there.
Increase in veg height means you don't have to veg as long. Glad I could clear that up for ya. It also means you don't have to run your lights as many days.
Ed Rosenthal claims you won't save a dime on your power bill using a dark cycle. If you have to veg 33% longer to get the same growth, it will be a wash, except you lost a few days.
You may think you know more then Ed or the guy who wrote The Cannabis Grow Bible, but I am not convinced you do.
I used to veg (from a rooted clone) 14 days, to get a harvest height of 4.5'. Now I am able to get the same size plant but only veg 10 days.
If grow journals will help you, I can dig a few up for ya.
Day One:
Five days later. Things seem normal:
It's been ten days. She is all set for flowering. Switched bulbs and nutrients then changed the program on my timer.
From an old grow journal, I can post up the whole thing if you like?
I do the same plant year after year in the same room. A small change in light cycle made a big enough difference for me to notice. It changed my mind. I grew for years using a dark cycle, not any more.
Need more details?
Whatever you are doing, it seems to be working very well for you. Plants look very good and you cant argue with the growth rate.
bobman
Member
Good points Marshall. As far as light cycle I think plants develop there own circadian rhythms. I think some plants perform dark functions in light. I am not a biologist and do not want to do further research but I think that certain plants create there own time frame of doing things regardless of light or dark but do not quote me on that.
I base my DLI suggestions on over 4 studies all looking at ideal PPFD for cannabis that provides highest rate of photosynthesis. Thus, I stand by my data.
Of course it can, using a high wattage HPS (or MH) one can easily provide more light than the sun in terms of PPFD, and especially in terms of DLI because outside, unlike inside, PPFD is on a bell curve. And rarely is the DLI outside at 60 mol/m^2/day (on a 12 hour day; or 16 hour day)...I think you still don't underatnd how to calculate to DLI.
No I did not. At least get it right if you try to claim I am wrong. I wrote 46-48 mol/m^2/day for cannabis. In a 12 hour day that equals ~1,000-1,000 PPFD all day long. And for cannabis, ~1,500 PPFD gives the highest rate of photosynthesis in a single time frame.
Also, you need to look into "midday depression of photosynthesis", as well as "multipeak photosynthesis".
They have been done, see what I wrote in my first paragraph
I don't just pull numbers out of think air! I have over 4 different studies all looking at ideal PPFD for cannabis (i.e. ~1,500). Then I used data that provided near the same PPFD around noon (peak during day time; from Hawaii) to calculate ideal DLI for cannabis using the natural bell curve of PPFD found in nature. If we used 1,500 PPFD all day (ex. 12 hours, 18 hours, etc) we would be giving too much DLI and would hinder rate of photosynthesis and cause photoinhibition (again, look into midday deperssion of photosynthesis to understand what I mean). Fine, you go with observation, I will go with proven analytical data from many well conducted studies on strains from a few varieties and races of cananbis using quantum sensors and photosynthesis meters/charmers. Which of us do you think is correct
(hint: it's a trick question, it's obvious my data is far superior to your conjectural observations)You don't understand basic principles of light quantum physics, good thing I do. First, you need a quantum sensor, second, you need to understated that a 1,000watt HID at 2 feet won't give the same PPFD for all growers dependent upon type of lamp, reflector and ballast, also age of lamp.
You could use foot candles or lumens to find Lux, and use Lux to find PPFD, but that is a very inaccurate method. The DLI datum found using PPFD datum found by converting Lux datum into PPFD will be at least 10% inaccurate. I could explain why (i.e. Lux is weighted photons but PPFD is not), however, I am sure you would try to claim I am wrong without understanding the basic principles involved.
There is no conversion from Lux to PPFD with accuracy unless one uses a "spectroradiometer", and even then, the conversion from Lux to PPFD is not valid. Because the Lux (in terms of SPD [Spectral Power Distribution] of the lamp) changes as the lamp ages; thus the past conversion from Lux to PPFD is no longer valid as the lamp ages (and SPD, along with irradiance changes).
What I will say is that I need to conduct more testing with various DLI, but for now, what I have written is as good as anyone in the cannabis world is able to provide. What I am writing about has never been written about before in the cannabis world, I am the only source of this info AFAIK. Others have written about PPFD, but some of them, like Knna, are wrong in their flawed claims that ~700-800 PPFD is ideal...
Great analogy.
Controlled experiments have been done, using PPFD, I have been writing about them this whole time. We should be using PPFD, and not using foot candles, lumens or Lux. PPFD counts photons in PAR range (i.e. 400-700 nm) and does not weight them, the same is not true for foot candles, lumens or lux.
I just haven't posted the studies, but I could if anyone would like to read them. Ideal PPFD for cannabis to reach highest rate of photosynthesis, and for highest yield, and Co2 fixation, is ~1,500. However, if we provided 1,500 PPFD all day long we would be giving too much light, thus I used the best example from natural diurnal PPFD bell curve found in nature, with peak PPFD of 1,500-1,800, to calculate ideal DLI for cannabis.
The whole PAR range, incl. green, dive rate of photosynthesis very well. Blue, green and red drive rate of photosynthesis in close enough levels that it means we don't need to account for blue vs. red. vs. green (a la "Quantum Flux Density", or "Yield Photon Flux"; that is, weighting the photons according to the Action Spectra of Photosynthesis by K.McCree). Also, as recently proven a few times, green light under strong (high irradaicne) white light drives rate of photosynthesis more than blue light, and even more than red light. Thus, K.McCree's Action Spectra of Photosynthesis is flawed (he used monochromatic lighting; i.e. not white light).
I have plans to create the first Action Spectra of Photosynthesis of cananbis using an "integrating sphere" and spectroradiometer. But a good integrating sphere costs ~$20-25K, so it will take me a year or more to create the Action Spectra of Photosynthesis for cannabis...however, that topic is far, far beyond the thrust of this thread, so I won't post more about it, or explain it further at this time.
No not quite, ex. translocation from root to shoot happens in the day and the night.
You can't use Lumens to find when plants stop photosynthesis, you are referring to "light saturation", aka "EEE". Cannabis will reduce it's rate of photosynthesis (not come to dead stop) once PPFD exceeds ~1,600 PPFD. Look into "midday depression of photosynthesis" for info on this topic of too much irradiance hindering rate of photosynthesis (i.e. photoinhibition). Any cannabis book author that claims using lumens or Lux is a good method for quantifying (measuring) light level (irradiance at canopy) is an idiot; we should be using PPFD. And once I make an Action Spectra of Photosynthesis (and account for green light) and update the "Quantum Flux Destiny" (QFD) from K.McCree, we should use my updated QFD. I plan to contact Keith and try to work with him to update of QFD.
All in all, I liked your post and your analytical mind
bobman
Member
I know I don't know shit the problem you think you do. Where did you site a source that said DLI level for marijuana. PPFD and DLI are 2 different things. All you need is a fucking light meter to calculate DLI you spazz.
PPFD- is how much light is hitting a certain area at a certain time.
DLI- is how much light is collected during an entire day.
Why are you trying to make this so complicated. You have proven zero buddy absolutely zero. So stop pretending you have. Anyone can take 5 minutes and read through stuff and tell your full of shit How the fuck dare you come here and say guys that started this business dont know shit and you know the answer when you have backed nothing. I repeat copy and paste some data proving your point.
PPFD- is how much light is hitting a certain area at a certain time.
DLI- is how much light is collected during an entire day.
Why are you trying to make this so complicated. You have proven zero buddy absolutely zero. So stop pretending you have. Anyone can take 5 minutes and read through stuff and tell your full of shit How the fuck dare you come here and say guys that started this business dont know shit and you know the answer when you have backed nothing. I repeat copy and paste some data proving your point.
Plants works a 24 hour circadian rhythm, yes, they can adjust it to some degree. Also, there are no "dark functions", there are "light independent reactions".
That's the smartest thing you have yet written, kudos!
you guys love dueling with each other, i read this stuff for the entertainment now... as you both say each other is wrong , but who is right ... you decide?
Ok boobman, I hope this is my last post trying to straighten you out:
DLI is found via. PPFD. DLI is not found with lumens or lux. Thus, the DLI data I wrote (i.e. 46-48 mol/m^2/day) is from the PPFD data from the studies I wrote about. Like I wrote, I am the only person in the cannabis world who is writing about DLI using proven PPFD (from studies on cannabis) while accounting for diurnal bell curve of PPFD under the sun to prevent photoinhibition from too high PPFD over the whole day.
PPFD = umoles/meter^2/second
DLI = moles/meter^2/day
Both PPFD and DLI count photons in PAR range (i.e. 400-700 nm)...
^^^ That is correct, what you wrote is not correct. If you look at what DLI means (i.e. moles/meter^2/day) it's obvious you find DLI via. PPFD. Like I wrote already, below is how you find DLI, there is no other way to find DLI in terms of plants, using lumens or lux isn't correct because they (foot candles, lumens and lux) are not light measurements for plants:
I am not, I am simply explaining these issues. You misunderstand them, then make flawed claims based on your misunderstanding, and then get mad at me for correcting you. Crazy much!?!
If people would like to read studies on cannabis looking at levels of PPFD providing highest rate of photosynthesis I can post them, or you can search online for them using Google Scholar or Scirus.
Oh yea, J.Cervanteis, G.Green, M.Frank, E.Rosenthal, et al., are idiots and full of BS if they claim using lumens or lux is ideal. There is a vast sea of BS in their books I try to correct on a daily basis, and then people like you think they are correct simply because they wrote a book and are popular. Again you are using logical fallacies, ex. "appeal to common belief" and "appeal to popularity". Time for you to study up buddy, and STOP USING LOGICAL FALLACIES.
DLI is found via. PPFD. DLI is not found with lumens or lux. Thus, the DLI data I wrote (i.e. 46-48 mol/m^2/day) is from the PPFD data from the studies I wrote about. Like I wrote, I am the only person in the cannabis world who is writing about DLI using proven PPFD (from studies on cannabis) while accounting for diurnal bell curve of PPFD under the sun to prevent photoinhibition from too high PPFD over the whole day.
PPFD = umoles/meter^2/second
DLI = moles/meter^2/day
Both PPFD and DLI count photons in PAR range (i.e. 400-700 nm)...
^^^ That is correct, what you wrote is not correct. If you look at what DLI means (i.e. moles/meter^2/day) it's obvious you find DLI via. PPFD. Like I wrote already, below is how you find DLI, there is no other way to find DLI in terms of plants, using lumens or lux isn't correct because they (foot candles, lumens and lux) are not light measurements for plants:
(PPFD x 3,600 x hours per day)/1,000,000
I am not, I am simply explaining these issues. You misunderstand them, then make flawed claims based on your misunderstanding, and then get mad at me for correcting you. Crazy much!?!
Those who copy/paste either don't understand what they are copy/pasting, or are to lazy to put it into their own words. I would not copy/paste when I can put it into my own words; have you ever heard of plagiarism before?
If people would like to read studies on cannabis looking at levels of PPFD providing highest rate of photosynthesis I can post them, or you can search online for them using Google Scholar or Scirus.
Oh yea, J.Cervanteis, G.Green, M.Frank, E.Rosenthal, et al., are idiots and full of BS if they claim using lumens or lux is ideal. There is a vast sea of BS in their books I try to correct on a daily basis, and then people like you think they are correct simply because they wrote a book and are popular. Again you are using logical fallacies, ex. "appeal to common belief" and "appeal to popularity". Time for you to study up buddy, and STOP USING LOGICAL FALLACIES.
