well, i've never had to do this before so i think i'll toss this up and see what you guys think.

i just got a new job that keeps me away from the house during the day so i'll be unable to tend my girls during flower. the lights are on 6 am - 6 pm and i'll be gone in the morning before they are on and not home until later when i won't have enough time to do whatever needs to be done by 6 pm...

so what i'd like to do is switch my on times from 6 pm till 6 am and have the lots off while i am gone. i'm two weeks into flower. i'd like to do this now and just give them 24 hrs of dark to fix the light schedule. does anyone have any experience with this, and does it cause any ill effects? thank a lot.

__________________

i had to do this on my last grow. just pick a day and give it 18 hours of light and 18 hours of day and that will fix it. you wont see any problems less the girls may be a day late to bloom.

a few light mess up in one flower period will not hurt your plant.

__________________
Last Grow 12/12 From seed to Harvest (1 oz Honies)

Randy's FAQ's for New Growers

Adding light to the schedule can be harmful. Subtracting light is what you want to do.
Just leave the lights off until the beginning of your first 6pm-6am schedule then kick on the schedule from there. You won't stress the plant at all.
Good luck!

__________________
"haha you guys play world of wackcracft? cant really fuck with that game if you guys wanna get the girls" - Mysticlown150
http://tinyurl.com/l65ybp

Absolutely disagree.. Do not tanper with the 12hrs dark, adjust the light hours.. Doing it over a couple days can't hurt, but if needed give them 24hrs light, then normal 12hrs dark..
This is based on the fact that a chemical called phytochrome drives the plant's response to day length, (or rather night length).. Phytochrome exists in two states, typically denoted pR and pFR.. pR likes red light, and when it absorbs it it converts it to pFR which likes far red light (think of far-red light as darkness since is just teetering on infrared).. The signal to flower is induced by pR, so acceptable levels of this must be maintained within a day cycle, which happens when there is sufficient dark hours..
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ult...periodism.html
Now too much light isn't exactly good either.. If your intensity is high, perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to raise the lights so the plants aren't really absorbing twice the normal number of photons before resting.. I have a pretty in depth bio-chem pdf about reactions of photosynthesis that explains pretty well the risks/defenses of a plant absorbing both too much light over-all, and abnormal amounts of light in a given period.. Its a 1.2MB pdf, if you want it pm me with an email that can accept that because I can't attach it on the board unfortunately..

Looks like I've done been proved wrong! Thanks for the info, born2killspam. That's a great read!
I've based my statement off of my own observations. I ran an experiment a couple of years ago with a strain (Nirvana's Snow White) that I've found to be very sensitive to both lighting schedule interruptions as well as light leaks.
I setup two flowering rooms that were on the same 12/12 schedule for 3 weeks of flowering. I changed the lighting schedule by 6 hours in each of the rooms. Room 1 I left the lights on until the start of the new schedule, exposing the plants to 6 additional hours of light.
Room 2, I modified my timer so that the plants received 6 less hours of light.
About 10 days later I started to notice some male flowers growing on 60% of the females in room 1 and no male flowers in room 2.
Mind you, obviously, this is an admittedly unscientific testing method. I just tried it for the proverbial "shits and giggles".

__________________
"haha you guys play world of wackcracft? cant really fuck with that game if you guys wanna get the girls" - Mysticlown150
http://tinyurl.com/l65ybp

It is definately specific to genetics, hell look at autos.. Two things I would fear are stalling the flower growth without being able to extend flowering weeks, or herming obviously.. Both may or may not happen with a given degree of light stress..
Heck, if they're clones that have been light stressed worse on previous crops without any consequences, then its likely safe not to give a damn about the science..

And contrary to popular belief, anecdotes are critical to science.. They are the foundation for hypotheses.. Besides, don't be so harsh on your methodology.. MythBusters call their farces science ; experiments like yours, compounded with others done by trustworthy growers can actually yield usable data.. Look at the progress made since indoor growing began..

Excellent points! I agree about genetics playing into the equation quite a bit.
I've grown strains that will grow male flowers if you use a flash while taking pics during the dark period ...and I've grown strains that are completely impervious to light leaks of great severity. When I started noticing traits like that is when I started testing.
It's funny; I always think of MythBusters every time I run one of my little tests. I feel akin to their testing techniques, i.e. patently flawed but potentially interesting to the lowest common denominator.
I'm running one right now to see if (given my particular environmental conditions) there are any negative effects to growing in translucent plastic pots. I feel like I've been told for years that it will harm my plants so I've been afraid to bother trying.
Cheers to Cannabis MythBusting!

__________________
"haha you guys play world of wackcracft? cant really fuck with that game if you guys wanna get the girls" - Mysticlown150
http://tinyurl.com/l65ybp

Yea, when MythBusters get positive results, things can be interesting, it just pisses me off when they declare something impossible because they couldn't get the million little nuances to come together in their three meager attempts.. Salsa escape, and poppy-seed bagels are my favorites I think.. Are you running a control plant(s) with thislight-poisoning trial?? I always meant to run the same test when I was actively growing, but never got around to it.. I do know that clones really don't like sitting in cubes too long with light getting to the popped roots though..
Uncle Ben ran some cool experiments on root pruning via various methods.. (A few of his experiments have been stolen and published in books.. ) Perhaps he's played around with light at the roots too.. He's a master grower, and respects the scientific method, so I trust his results as much as any data I find on LinkingHub/SpringerLink etc..

Oh, and some sativas are pretty much monocious, they herm under the bestest conditions.. Perhaps because they evolved in an area where its close to 12/12 all year.. Male/Female in plants is new to evolution (and a bad description of the way things are at that.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabi..._determination), so all plants have a history of hermism that they can still revert to..

Blah blah.. Personally I agree with the dude you thinks wrong. Leave it off till the next cycle. But that's personal..I feel giving too much light would possible stress it to veg and more dark promotes more flower.. To an extreme that was my logic. But whatever you decide just do it, plant ate forgiving and one change won't effect them in the scheme of the cycle.
Also I leave mine off 8am-8pm.. Close to yours... It's off during the day , when possible a meter man is checking the needle or you may need something repaired in the house.. On in the evening when your home from work to tend to the garden, seems to work for me anyways.

I quoted the wrong dude..meant to quote the guy who knows everything, sorry.