A Theory: Using Infrared Light to Drastically Reduce Dark Time of Flowering Plants

phyzix

Well-Known Member
the '57 study was red and far red not infrared (atleast thats all i have been able to read) which doesnt even matter because my point was absolutely missed. your web posting just confirms what this guy is asking. yet, you wanna look smart over 3 years? well if being told your right makes your day Merry Christmas! Your right there? you havent really said nething to make you right but i think, nay, believe you are right. Have a nice day.
I just tried to post documented scientific research that is relevant to the topic.

I didn't post an opinion, so I'm not sure what's bothering you.
 

supaleeb

Active Member
well if being told your right makes your day Merry Christmas! Your right there? you havent really said nething to make you right but i think, nay, believe you are right. Have a nice day.
What is your deal, man? Chill the fuck out and stop being an obstructionist.
 

karr

Well-Known Member
Any more thoughts on this? I have been thinking about using this theory in conjunction with a regular timer on a 6/6 cycle. Dastically reducing light I know, but your getting two days every day. The speed might be worth the drop in yield. Figure multiply a yield by 2 and you might be close to a normal 12/12 run.
 

KronDonSmoker

Active Member
There is a member on GC already doing this and flowering a plant with 2 hours of dark.
any chance you have a link that us lazy people can just click on to look at instead of dealing with the inconvenience of googling it. <-- although just to post my post i went through the inconvenience of asking my phone how to spell inconvenience to make sure I wouldnt Inconvenience anyone else by confusing them on what word I was trying to spell...........What am I posting about again? :blsmoke: :joint:
 

pro grow

Active Member
Whatd ya use like IR reptile bulb or get the LEDs with the ideal incubation energy IR spectrum? And make a little IR circuit with sensor/timer computer robot?

NASA said if a plant grows too fast new growth becomes calcium deficient and they said they could not do anything to fix this besides regulating the conditions. Apparently the new leaves had brown spots.
 

Micromaster

Active Member
thanks for the link lots o info. pretty bad ass to see it done.
ye I mean obviously hes had problems but thats because hes making EVERYTHING automated to have the least biased experiment he can. Even with all the problems he still got the plant to flower with ~2 hours of darkness. And since its the first run bugs in the system are bound to happen. Its more of a "beta" run lol I dont know if he still has it posted over there but look for the stuff where he talked about genetically engineering tomatoes plants to produce trichs on the leafs and stems, so it can be grown outside and no one would ever know. I personally wouldnt smoke tomato leafs but you could grow them in your garden and make hash out of it.
 

Stoner Smurf

Active Member
Hey everybody. Sorry I made this post and then disappeared, been alternating between very busy and very sick. Neither of which gives me much computer time. Thanks for all the info guys and keeping this thread going.

Micromaster thank you for that link, that is exactly what I was thinking. I haven't got a chance to yet, but I am very excited to read that thread. In Ed Rosenthal's Marijuana Grower's Handbook there is a tid bit about using IR to "jump start flowering". But it's very short and it says it can only be used to get rid of 2 hours of darkness (14/10). So I am excited to see someone flowering a plant successfully with 2 hrs of dark. I am going to be following along over there at GC. He had the same idea as me but he actually acted on it.
 

Jay7t5

Well-Known Member
It's called the Emerson effect, Robert Emerson way back in 1957 he discovered what your all talking about, thought I'd put my 2 cents in even though I'm 7 years too late lol
 

vostok

Well-Known Member
So I have a little theory, not exactly sure if it will work so hopefully someone with more expertise on the area can confirm if the theory is sound. +Rep for any insightful conversation for sure. For those of you whom this is not your area of expertise, you are probably going to want to know what the hormone Phytochrome is. Photochrome is responsible for the flowering of marijuana plants.

So my theory is infrared light can be used instead of dark periods during flower. My logic is as follows:
The following statements are true:
-Flowering of a plant is controlled by the ratio of the two isoforms of Photochrome.
-Pr converts to Pfr in the presence of red light, and Pfr converts to Pr in the absence of red light.
-A high level of Pr causes plants to flower.
-Pfr also converts to Pr in the presence of far-red light or infrared light.
-The process of Pfr converting to Pr in the dark is slow.


Using flimsy deductive logic I come to the following conclusion:
-The presence of light causes the hormone photochrome to change between it's two isoforms much more rapidly than the total absence of light.
-Infrared light can be used in conjunction with the absence of visual light to greatly reduce the necessary dark time for the plant.

Here is why this is intriguing. If you could flower non-auto-flower plants under 18(HPS)/6(Infrared) you would be giving your plants 50% more light. More light equals more yield. Getting more yield per plant is very very important to a lot of us legal growers who grow under silly plant restrictions. Since you are quickly raising the Pr to the 'critical point' each night and letting it sit there for 6 hours, the plant is spending just as much time with the Pr beyond the 'critical point' as a plant in nature, maybe even longer. In natural total dark settings it takes the plant 10-12 hours to reach that critical point. It varies strain to strain, but every strain needs at least 10-12 hours of darkness to flower.

One problem is I don't know much about infrared. I know it has uses in photography, and there are such things as infrared LEDs. Infrared LEDs appear to give off a lot of visible light, and I thought infrared was invisible to the naked eye. In order for this to have any hope of working I'd imagine the light would have to be only far-red light and absolutely no red light.

So anybody with a good understanding of plant biology out there. Is this theory sound? It looks good to me! :) But I by no means have a degree in horticulture or biology. Anybody know where I can get some good infrared lights to give this a shot? Unless someone much smarter than I comes along and pisses in my corn flakes, I don't see why I shouldn't give this a shot, small scale. Kinda broke right now, but hopefully one day in the near future I can afford to set up 2 small side by side grow cabs. One cab, one plant. 150 watt HPS each, one plant gets the traditional 12/12, the other 18/6 with infrared. Should be a pretty straight-forward experiment.

So what's everyone think? +Rep for anyone who brings anything interesting to the table.
Stoner Smurf,Dec 22, 2010

Late:
I have used Uv a and b to finish off many winter crops in the last 2 weeks before harvest

I caution UV can fuck with your eyes so infra red is a lot safer ..??? I should think

I side with the guys that say thc and its oils are a defensive mechanism to protect the plant

in high altitude areas from the uv you get up their in the mountains

but the plant has to make this stuff so sugars and normal sunlight are needed first

good luck....worth a try
 

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
It's called the Emerson effect, Robert Emerson way back in 1957 he discovered what your all talking about, thought I'd put my 2 cents in even though I'm 7 years too late lol
The Emerson effect is something different. That's where 660nm and 700nm together will increase the efficiency of photosynthesis.

Using 730nm to reduce Pfr is unrelated.
 

Pinkosaurus

Member
This is a 10 year old thread but I want to say that you guys are incredible, absolute pros…I’m going to buy a reptile heat bulb and try this out. I took one plant out of my greenhouse and got a cheap little 5x5x6.5 pop-up to try and induce flowering early. I tarped up 2 1/2 sides to block morning and evening light and threw a 600w HPS bulb in there, to compensate the north side of the plant. But also my hope is that by providing it an “artificial sunset” I can trick it into sleeping sooner… instead of the sun slowly setting and decreasing in intensity, a huge and sudden decrease will put it to sleep even though it’s still civil twilight. After reading this I’m going to add a reptile heat bulb to that “sunset” effect. If anybody’s still kicking around this thread, do you think that’ll work? Any advice on the exact timing I should use it? My plan is to turn it on about 30 minutes before shutoff each night and have it turn off with the light.
 

HydoDan

Well-Known Member
This is a 10 year old thread but I want to say that you guys are incredible, absolute pros…I’m going to buy a reptile heat bulb and try this out. I took one plant out of my greenhouse and got a cheap little 5x5x6.5 pop-up to try and induce flowering early. I tarped up 2 1/2 sides to block morning and evening light and threw a 600w HPS bulb in there, to compensate the north side of the plant. But also my hope is that by providing it an “artificial sunset” I can trick it into sleeping sooner… instead of the sun slowly setting and decreasing in intensity, a huge and sudden decrease will put it to sleep even though it’s still civil twilight. After reading this I’m going to add a reptile heat bulb to that “sunset” effect. If anybody’s still kicking around this thread, do you think that’ll work? Any advice on the exact timing I should use it? My plan is to turn it on about 30 minutes before shutoff each night and have it turn off with the light.
Research: www.rollitup.org/t/the-far-red-thread.867665/
 
Top