Old Wives' Tales Die Hard

**PetFlora** · 05-24-2012, 08:09 AM

Over the years I see light and nutrient questions answered by people who simply regurgitate bad intel (411).

Lighting schedules, much like NPK ratios are full of disinfo. Those who are followers do so without bothering to do their own research, so they get what they deserve- less than great results

Lighting Schedules

18/6 & 12/12 light schedules, which are old wives tales based on...who the fuck knows? Plants can only utilize ~ 14 hours of light energy per day. To give them more is simply a waste of electricity ($$$);

12/12 is confusing to the plant as it needs more dark period during flower. Will it flower? Of course, but is it ideal? NO! I drop from 14/10 to 12/12 for ~ 5 days, then drop to 11/13 to finish. I plan to add IR on a separate timer to give them ~ 10- 30 minutes (wattage dependent) immediately at lights off. This fools the plant to continue growing without wasting electricity/ bulb life.

NPK

First, people use way more nutes than plants require. Bloom boosters are just another way to rob uneducated growers of their hard earned cash. Yes plants require 'more' PK during flower, BUT not from boosters, and nowhere near the ridiculous amounts of booster products.

Rule of thumb for hydro/aero is < 400ppms during veg. I bumped this to ~600 once the plants hit 12"; without changing to flower nutes or changing the light schedule; within 7 days the plants began sexing!, so I dropped back < 400 and sexing stopped

What was different? The percentage of PK was increased (~ 30%), but in proportion to N requirements. Plus it can't be emphasized enough, mj does not need higher P than N. Doing so sets up the possibility of nutrient lock out. How often have you seen cries for help "What's wrong with my plants? Especially in RDWC

i recently found out about a dry mix on an RIU thread to use for both Veg and Flower. The science he uses is the science I learned in the last 2 years from studying/researching DIY nutes. www.hydro-research.com.

Both of these will save you money and improve on your plants health/yield.

You can follow me doing these in my current journal

**Wondrboy** · 05-24-2012, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by PetFlora

I plan to add IR on a separate timer to give them ~ 10- 30 minutes (wattage dependent) immediately at lights off. This fools the plant to continue growing without wasting electricity/ bulb life.

You can follow me doing these in my current journal

Interested - definitely will check out your journal

**PetFlora** · 05-27-2012, 03:36 PM

Here's an led wives tale put to rest

Ed R speaking about LED spectrums and NASA study on Green LEDs (Nov 2010) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P31l6...eature=related

Of course green is amply covered in newest generation Cree Warm/Cool Whites, as are other important spectrums, like yellow and orange

Nutes: I decided to bring home my largest plant with Veg & Bloom. She is now 3ft tall, with a snapped main branch that is already ~ 12", more than 10 side branches > 12" each with ~ 6 budding nodes. This should be a hoot

**PetFlora** · 06-03-2012, 07:49 AM

In the few weeks since I have switched 2 of my systems from DM Gold to Hydroponic Research Veg + BLOOM (dry nutes), I have noticed increased bud production, way outperforming my Dutch Master Gold nutrients, which are doing quite well, too.

The 2 pics are from my HPA system, both plants from the same F1 cross. I finally snapped the taller one as it was outgrowing the 2 systems under my HO T5 Bad Boy: the other is my 21st Century F & D. The root pic is from the smaller plant; both are covered with root hairs, which are the most efficient means of nutrient uptake. Both are loaded with bud sites, just lacking in side branches- due to genetic expressions

IMG_0981.jpg IMG_0987.jpg

**BlueBalls** · 06-03-2012, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by PetFlora

Plants can only utilize ~ 14 hours of light energy per day. To give them more is simply a waste of electricity ($$$)

Could you please provide a reference for this.
My research shows that Cannabis photosynthesizes continuously when there is light.

Here is and article by Ed Rosenthal that confirms this.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/3127.html

**PetFlora** · 06-04-2012, 06:56 AM

Sorry I don't save the articles. Ed has been rebooted before as newer ideas/studies become available. As you can see, that article goes back farther than 2003

**Harrekin** · 06-04-2012, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by PetFlora

Sorry I don't save the articles. Ed has been rebooted before as newer ideas/studies become available. As you can see, that article goes back farther than 2003

Cannabis doesn't need a rest cycle, it's one of a specific group of plant that doesn't. 24/7 light makes cannabis plants grow 24/7, their constant recordable CO2 consumption also indicates this.

Your point on light cycles is about as useful as a chocolate teapot, plants are either flowering or not, it's like simple binary, 0 is veg and 1 is flower...if the light cycle you're using causes the plant to flower, it's just as good as any other cycle that causes the plant to flower...except yours. By providing 2 hours less light you're giving your plants 1/6 less light overall in flowering. Not exactly smart.

Youre way over thinking this, plants have inputs and then resulting outputs, give them a good consistent enviroment, feed them complete ferts, provide their roots water, loads of light and sufficient air exchange.

**PetFlora** · 06-04-2012, 07:26 AM

I did not 'invent' the light cycles I use.

I read published studies and follow results from others, then make a value judgement.

Once upon a time I used to follow people like you, but being a student not just a follower, eventually I learned there were more efficient ways to grow.

If you disagree, that's your prerogative. I chose not to be stuck in 20th century 'truths'.

Now, since this is MY thread, and you have already said your peace (worthless as it is), please do not respond further. I will have the mods delete it

**Harrekin** · 06-04-2012, 02:32 PM

Originally Posted by PetFlora

I did not 'invent' the light cycles I use.

I read published studies and follow results from others, then make a value judgement.

Once upon a time I used to follow people like you, but being a student not just a follower, eventually I learned there were more efficient ways to grow.

If you disagree, that's your prerogative. I chose not to be stuck in 20th century 'truths'.

Now, since this is MY thread, and you have already said your peace (worthless as it is), please do not respond further. I will have the mods delete it

Linkage to your "research" or you're full of shit. Also this is a public forum, and if you try to spread speculative crap you better back it up. Are you a noob to the site? Think you're special or something?

Back up what you say, don't just cry to the mods, it removes all credibility.

EDIT: And btw, if you think "following nature" is the best way then just lol.

**LearyRed** · 06-04-2012, 06:34 PM

Have to say, if 12/12 works, it's not an old wives tale. You're just saying 11/13 works better, can anyone give support to this? Ever had more bud production as a result of 11 hours?

I've tried the 24 vs 18, and the plants vegged for 24 hours are always a lot bigger, a lot quicker.

Under 16 hours of light has been reported to trip some strains, just saying.

And ya, following nature should be a starting place, then you should be attempting to push nature to its limits, which is basically what everyone here does, even without being completely aware of it.

Old Wives' Tales Die Hard

General Marijuana Growing

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Display

Old Wives' Tales Die Hard

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions