DIY led grow

stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
Positivity said:
Wouldn't warm white plus 660 be a higher cri than all of those valoya types. Not that i chase cri, but last i remember cri goes above 90.
Click to expand...
Maybe ,you 're wrong about that ...CRI changes of course ...
But CRI is an value ,for certain different color rendering and not just reds ..
For reds is R9 ,more spcifically ..
This Warm White +660 nm spectrum ,will affect the rendering of cooler colors like green and blue ...
And then the CRI ,probably does not get higher ,but actually lots lower ...


"
How is CRI Measured?
CRI is understood to be a measure of how well light sources render the colors of
objects, materials, and skin tones. How is the CRI number actually calculated? The test
procedure involves comparing the appearance of eight color samples (see upper right for
an approximation) under the light in question and a reference light source. The average
differences measured are subtracted from 100 to get the CRI.
So small average differences will result in a higher score,
while larger differences give a lower number.
Of all the colors possible, only these eight are measured.
Further, the samples used are pastels, not saturated
colors. CRI is calculated by measuring the difference between the lamp in question and a reference
lamp in terms of how they render the eight color samples. If the lamp to be tested has a
correlated color temperature (CCT) of less than 5000 Kelvin (K), the reference source is a
black body radiator (approximately like an incandescent lamp). For higher CCT sources,
the reference is a specifically defined spectrum of daylight. Therefore, light sources that
mimic incandescent light or daylight for the eight color samples are, by definition, the ones
that will score highest on the CRI.":

http://cool.conservation-us.org/byorg/us-doe/color_rendering_index.pdf


Positivity said:
Ns1 is a rgb type? With lots of green? Interesting, very close to warm white..
I would have chose 4k for my setup but i'm on a COB buying break for now. It's close enough in the spectra neighborhood that I'll stay with 3k for now. Very warm, and fertile...:joint:
Click to expand...
Valoya is not using Any RGB combo ,of what I'm aware of ..
Even the "red " leds ,I think that actually are phosphor conversion ones and not monochromatic red diodes .
They must had their resons for doing so ,eh ?
:wink:

4000°K +660 nm+730 nm ,is avery good spectrum for growing mj ...
3000° K alone is also very fine ...
5000°K +630 nm is also exceptional ...

3000°K + 660 nm is way warm ....
But still it can be very productive ...
Although ,my theory is that you just can't have those 660nm red diodes without any FR 730 nm monochromatics ,too..

Very strong absortion at 662 nm ,doesn not mean that the plant WANTS a lot of that wl...
(Human-centric logic that think that plants are ruled by thge laws applying for ..machines ...or computers ...)
It means that the plant is AFTER that wl ...
And well,it's kinda normal to expect that ...
There's not much of that wl (relatively to the rest PAR wls) in the Sun's light reaching the Earth's surface ...
(A % of these photons is absorbed by the atmosphere's water vapour )

At noon (March & September ) ,usually at equatorial and sub-equatorial regions ,
thta wl is at it's highest power ...And then mj lifts the leafs upwards ,in order to minimise the exposed leaf area to
sunlight .To protect it's photosynthetic systems from "overloading" ..Too many photons around then ...

i dunno ...
that's just my humble theory ...
I think in some cases,those, 660 nm red leds ,are just waste of energy ...
Plant's -seem to me,at least, that they "refuse " to "accept " that many 660 nm available photons ...
Yes,they are very well after them ..
But that's probably ,because they have learned ,through natural evolution practices (adaptation ),
that those photons are kinda hard to get ,at most of cases ...
And when it happens ,in certain places around the globe ,at certain seasons
and at certain time ,to have those photons available in excess ,then they just "lift" their leaves,to minimise exposure to light ..

Humans from the other hand,
especially some weirdos white-dressed ones ,that always look & inspect
the tree very closely and always neglecting the whole forest around ,saw once that a dilution of chlorophyll ,absorbs mostly at 662 nm ...
A dilution of Chlorophyll ...Not even the whole plant alive ...
And of course they thought ,the very next minute "Hey ,that 's exactly what plants want in order to thrive ! "
......
Two Things Are Infinite: the Universe and Human Stupidity.
(But ,I'm not quite sure about the former one ).

Albert Einstein

Cheers.
:peace:
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
Although ,my theory is that you just can't have those 660nm red diodes without any FR 730 nm monochromatics ,too..

Very strong absortion at 662 nm ,doesn not mean that the plant WANTS a lot of that wl...
Click to expand...
This is what I think as well, but who's to say that the 3000k 80cri phosphor SPD is perfect? I do think that the amount of 660nm should be limited, and acts more as a signal than a primary source of food.

However, that being said, I suspect that a small amount of added 660nm light could be beneficial to morphology, and that there's no set in stone rule that says we already have the perfect amount of 660nm. I don't think anyone here is suggesting to blast it with 660nm until the walls are pink, but if shade avoidance effect seems too strong even when not shaded, more 660nm could be exactly what your spectrum needs.

I think a good spectrum should produce a large gradiant of %Pfr between the top canopy and lowest leaves on the plant, so shaded leaves stretch and unshaded leaves have as close to 85% Pfr as possible. Of course, we're all talking theory. I think my rule of thumb "yellow tinge good, pink tinge bad" has done a good job at providing me with herb so far.


stardustsailor said:
I think in some cases,those, 660 nm red leds ,are just waste of energy ...
Plant's -seem to me,at least, that they "refuse " to "accept " that many 660 nm available photons ...
Click to expand...
No argument here. I think you're painting a straw-man argument with this one.
 
Positivity

Positivity

Well-Known Member
I'll be switching between straight white and this light in the future. Whatever floats my boat the best will become my favorite...to put it simply. I thought i noticed a few large differences between white, light sprinkle of colors, and fired in reds. Could be wrong...but...this is all in fun for me. I'm not involved with universities, businesses, invested, etc. i'd personally love to run just white alone but i don't think its as complete a light source as it could be. My only rule, is to stay open minded as possible to all available options.
 
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
No argument here. I think you're painting a straw-man argument with this one.
Click to expand...
I've to agree on that one ...
Still ...

I will let GG do some talking ....

" As a whole the 4k panel is doing the best. Then the Apache.
Then the 3k. I will probably run a twin 3k light where the Apache is to see what I can do with 3k full sized. "

https://www.rollitup.org/t/greengenes-garden.839682/page-51#post-11497878

And then show this :
4000k.JPG


Not many of these photons in the light of 4000K COBs ,ain't that right ?
At least not as many as in 3000K .Right ?


And then to complete the straw-man painting :

(...)Both the number of small phyB-NBs and leaf angle responded to the irradiance of red light..(..)

http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/early/2014/06/18/pp.114.242438.full.pdf

& ...

(..)
Conclusion
The changes of petiole angle and the midrib angle
kept the young leaves more vertical in positions, which
reduced light intensity on the leaf surface; and the col-
laboration of leaf angle, photorespiration and thermal
dissipation depending on xanthophyll cycle success-
fully protected young leaves against high irradiance in field.
(...)
http://www.planta.cn/forum/files_planta/leaf_orientation_young_soybean_leaves_646.pdf

High irradiance= Plenty of photons ...
Easily achieved when using deep red leds ....

So ,when some or most of these deep red photons are not being even absorbed -from young leaves,older leaves are not capable enough to utilise these deep red photons efficiently -, in cases of excess Deep red light ,
or even worse whern they counteract the healthy and efficient photosynthesis rate ...

How do you call that ?

English is not my native language ..
Still I like to call it " waste of energy " ...

Cheers.
:peace:
 
Last edited:
Positivity

Positivity

Well-Known Member
Well, i like all the input regardless of whether it agrees with what i'm doing or not.

Will need to read this through again later..

I dunno...i'm pretty happy with the way this setup grows. For myself, i'll have two cabs going. One white, and another white with whatever. Constant stream of real time input..ask me in a few years whats my favorite....:razz:
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
(...)Both the number of small phyB-NBs and leaf angle responded to the irradiance of red light..(..)

http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/early/2014/06/18/pp.114.242438.full.pdf

& ...

(..)
Conclusion
The changes of petiole angle and the midrib angle
kept the young leaves more vertical in positions, which
reduced light intensity on the leaf surface; and the col-
laboration of leaf angle, photorespiration and thermal
dissipation depending on xanthophyll cycle success-
fully protected young leaves against high irradiance in field.
(...)
http://www.planta.cn/forum/files_planta/leaf_orientation_young_soybean_leaves_646.pdf

High irradiance= Plenty of photons ...
Easily achieved when using deep red leds ....

So ,when some or most of these deep red photons are not being even absorbed -from young leaves,older leaves are not capable enough to utilise these deep red photons efficiently -, in cases of excess Deep red light ,
or even worse whern they counteract the healthy and efficient photosynthesis rate ...
Click to expand...
Given that the top leaves are smaller and tilted upward with a higher exposure to red, here's my theory as to what the extremes are. Sorry for my crappy drawing skills. With no red, shade avoidance just happens... evenly. Internode space is more even. With abundant red, internode spacing becomes higher the farther down the plant, and the leaves become bigger, and more likely to have no petiole tilt.

theory.jpg

Given that I think my plants look like it's too close to the one on the left, that is the case I would like to correct for. Again, I know this is all theory, but I haven't seen positivity's reds really hurt anything either. White and white+red both seem to do a great job. Like positivity said, it will take a few years to find the perfect spectrum, if there really is one. I'm happy with just whites alone.. but if 660nm would "fix" the shape by making the top leaves smaller, that could be of some benefit to me.
 
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
Positivity said:
Well, i like all the input regardless of whether it agrees with what i'm doing or not.

Will need to read this through again later..

I dunno...i'm pretty happy with the way this setup grows. For myself, i'll have two cabs going. One white, and another white with whatever. Constant stream of real time input..ask me in a few years whats my favorite....:razz:
Click to expand...
Pos,please let me clarify better where exactly I stand ,regarding the deep red LEDs ...

As i've mentioned : " in certain cases " ..."excess deep red photon availability " ...etc ...
I trust that the 3000K COBs/LEDs already have plenty of these deep red photons ...

As ,also for certain species -like Cannabis - excess of these photons either do not seem to have such an effect or even worse-combined with the total absence of FR photons -,they can pose a serious threat to the PS systems ...


Let me show you an article ...

Expanded Product Range for Horticultural Lighting with a “Far Red” Version

Osram Opto Semiconductors is expanding its LED product range for horticultural lighting with a new type of the well-proven Oslon SSL. In addition to the existing hyper red (660 nm) and deep blue (450 nm) versions, the high-tech company developed a far red Oslon SSL LED with a wavelength of 730 nm. For certain plants such as tomatoes, pepper or roses, it is exactly this wavelength which leads to better growth. Customers now have a better coverage of the color spectrum for their horticulture applications. The new far red Oslon SSL will be available immediately .

http://www.led-professional.com/products/leds_led_modules/expanded-product-range-for-horticultural-lighting-with-a-201cfar-red201d-version


And now allow me to deposit my thoughts about it ..
Or how personally interpret this article :

"Dear customers,we-or at least our white-dressed lab junkies -
at Osram we're the first ones to make highly efficient deep red diodes.
We're amongst the first ones to cultivate this deep-red hype ,regarding LED horticulture .
Well ,things are not exactly as we firstly thought ...
It seems that most leafy plants-like lettuce - do grow well with the deep -red & blue LEDs combo ..
But some other plant species -like Cannabis,for example - are facing some trouble doing so ...
So we've made a FR led to come along with our famous deep red LEDs .
It' is well known that most plants either reflect and transmit those FR photons ..
Still ,you need them along with the deep reds ,to avoid any phytochrome & photosynthesis "mishappens" ..
Dear customers ,in order for some species to grow healthy and be productive ,is not enough to bombard them
with 660 nm photons .You 've to supply enough FR photons ,to counteract the -adverse- effects of the former.
"

Moreover ...Greengenes ,showed to our community ,that our beloved plant can be still productive ,
without many of these "660 +730 nm combined " photons ...

Still seeing things ,through a monochromatic perspective ?
I'm not saying that those 660 nm leds are not good for growing ..
They are ,of course ..But they need a specific "company" in order to be efficient growth -wise ...
That's why I think that i.e. a 4000K +660 nm +730 nm combo is far better than the 3000K+660 nm one ..
In more than one aspect ..
It's not only photosynthetic rates ,we're after ...
Not one tree..
But the whole forest ..
Meaning that phytochrome action ,leaf angle,photoinhibition ,saturated PS systems,young vs old leaves ,
static high irradiances and many more should be taken into account ..
And supplying lots of 660 nm light ain't the solution ..
Probably it makes things even more complicated ..
As we 're not growing lettuce or carrots ,but a more complex plant species ...

Cheers.
:peace:
 
Last edited:
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
Given that the top leaves are smaller and tilted upward with a higher exposure to red, here's my theory as to what the extremes are. Sorry for my crappy drawing skills. With no red, shade avoidance just happens... evenly. Internode space is more even. With abundant red, internode spacing becomes higher the farther down the plant, and the leaves become bigger, and more likely to have no petiole tilt.

View attachment 3393576

Given that you think your plant looks like it's too close to the one on the left, that is the case I would like to correct for. Again, I know this is all theory, but I haven't seen positivity's reds really hurt anything either. White and white+red both seem to do a great job. Like positivity said, it will take a few years to find the perfect spectrum, if there really is one. I'm happy with just whites alone.. but if 660nm would "fix" the shape by making the top leaves smaller, that could be of some benefit to me.
Click to expand...
Now,you're talking !
Yes...That is right .
You're correct ..
660 nm light mainly affects photomorphogenesis ..
Meaning leaf shape and size ,it's angle ,whole plant shape ,shade avoidance ,ChA/ChB ratios
and many-many more ...
But not the photosynthetic rates of either single leaf level or whole plant level ..

660 nm LEDs are probably meant to use as "fine tunning " or "morphology enhancers " ..
Still,there's still long way before we end up with certain conclusions ,about their exact effects ..
(Keep in mind : Not for lettuce and/or other leafy species ...For Cannabis Sativa L ,is the whole "fuss" done about ..)

Cheers.
:peace:
 
C

CellarDweller

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
Now,you're talking !
Yes...That is right .
You're correct ..
660 nm light mainly affects photomorphogenesis ..
Meaning leaf shape and size ,it's angle ,whole plant shape ,shade avoidance ,ChA/ChB ratios
and many-many more ...
But not the photosynthetic rates of either single leaf level or whole plant level ..

660 nm LEDs are probably meant to use as "fine tunning " or "morphology enhancers " ..
Still,there's still long way before we end up with certain conclusions ,about their exact effects ..
(Keep in mind : Not for lettuce and/or other leafy species ...For Cannabis Sativa L ,is the whole "fuss" done about ..)

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
But for vegetables and tomatoes etc, this is not true??? I smell a "oh fuck we have a LOT of lights out there that we still need to shift, so why don't we say they're still good for some of the growers.....but not all of them" :)

Or maybe I am just a jaded cynic. Either way - I think there is a place for 660 and 730 supplementation of a well mixed warm/cool white light baseline. 660 in the first and final hours of the light cycle and 730 in the 5-10 minutes after lights out.

This is based on absolutely no experience, but the learnings from Positivity and many many other studies......oh and countless hours trawling the deep-interweb looking at the spectral analysis of sunlight all around the globe at different hours of the day.....from points in the sea off the coast of the Azores, to sitting above the Antarctic ice cap, to places in the Brazilian and Columbian jungle to studies in Bangladesh.

They all show pretty much the same things as regards spectral distribution and timings of year/day/DLI correlation. It's almost like there's some "laws of light" out there ;)
 
C

CellarDweller

Well-Known Member
By that cryptic post I meant:

1) LED Professional has advertisers to keep happy so maybe they're not the last word in scientific fact (maybe) (like certain MJ Growing mags out there that like KIND, etc)
2) Almost every single study I have seen has postulated a bell curve shaped DLI graph for the year and then a bell curve shape for colour temp over the course of a day (y axis being from 2700 to 10/15k depending on the study and x axis being hour of the day)
3) DLI seems to fit into a bell curve.....albeit a weirdly shaped one (still bell-like) ......though if you show spot photon flux / wavelength distribution measurements, then the graphs become very weird
4) Finally, perhaps you should be considered what strain of MJ you are growing....I say this because:

a) Weather conditions for local area of your strain will drive how much water in the air (i.e. how much certain wl are absorbed)
b) Altitude will also affect how much wl will reach your plants (some UV are more prevalent at higher altitude for example)

those are just 2 factors......but I am sure you can think of others :) rather than just assuming an Afghan strain will be the same as a Columbian vs a genetically modified hybrid.....perhaps some thought should go into that FIRST.....THEN look at the light that the plant may have developed around in the first place.

I now stop typing to allow you all to throw monkey shit at me and my postulations........I can't believe I just did this......I wrote something as a NOOB using logic as a guide, kind of like throwing pig shit into oysters....hoping you'll all make pearls out of my rambling.
 
PSUAGRO.

PSUAGRO.

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
Maybe ,you 're wrong about that ...CRI changes of course ...
But CRI is an value ,for certain different color rendering and not just reds ..
For reds is R9 ,more spcifically ..
This Warm White +660 nm spectrum ,will affect the rendering of cooler colors like green and blue ...
And then the CRI ,probably does not get higher ,but actually lots lower ...


"
How is CRI Measured?
CRI is understood to be a measure of how well light sources render the colors of
objects, materials, and skin tones. How is the CRI number actually calculated? The test
procedure involves comparing the appearance of eight color samples (see upper right for
an approximation) under the light in question and a reference light source. The average
differences measured are subtracted from 100 to get the CRI.
So small average differences will result in a higher score,
while larger differences give a lower number.
Of all the colors possible, only these eight are measured.
Further, the samples used are pastels, not saturated
colors. CRI is calculated by measuring the difference between the lamp in question and a reference
lamp in terms of how they render the eight color samples. If the lamp to be tested has a
correlated color temperature (CCT) of less than 5000 Kelvin (K), the reference source is a
black body radiator (approximately like an incandescent lamp). For higher CCT sources,
the reference is a specifically defined spectrum of daylight. Therefore, light sources that
mimic incandescent light or daylight for the eight color samples are, by definition, the ones
that will score highest on the CRI.":

http://cool.conservation-us.org/byorg/us-doe/color_rendering_index.pdf




Valoya is not using Any RGB combo ,of what I'm aware of ..
Even the "red " leds ,I think that actually are phosphor conversion ones and not monochromatic red diodes .
They must had their resons for doing so ,eh ?
:wink:

4000°K +660 nm+730 nm ,is avery good spectrum for growing mj ...
3000° K alone is also very fine ...
5000°K +630 nm is also exceptional ...

3000°K + 660 nm is way warm ....
But still it can be very productive ...
Although ,my theory is that you just can't have those 660nm red diodes without any FR 730 nm monochromatics ,too..

Very strong absortion at 662 nm ,doesn not mean that the plant WANTS a lot of that wl...
(Human-centric logic that think that plants are ruled by thge laws applying for ..machines ...or computers ...)
It means that the plant is AFTER that wl ...
And well,it's kinda normal to expect that ...
There's not much of that wl (relatively to the rest PAR wls) in the Sun's light reaching the Earth's surface ...
(A % of these photons is absorbed by the atmosphere's water vapour )

At noon (March & September ) ,usually at equatorial and sub-equatorial regions ,
thta wl is at it's highest power ...And then mj lifts the leafs upwards ,in order to minimise the exposed leaf area to
sunlight .To protect it's photosynthetic systems from "overloading" ..Too many photons around then ...

i dunno ...
that's just my humble theory ...
I think in some cases,those, 660 nm red leds ,are just waste of energy ...
Plant's -seem to me,at least, that they "refuse " to "accept " that many 660 nm available photons ...
Yes,they are very well after them ..
But that's probably ,because they have learned ,through natural evolution practices (adaptation ),
that those photons are kinda hard to get ,at most of cases ...
And when it happens ,in certain places around the globe ,at certain seasons
and at certain time ,to have those photons available in excess ,then they just "lift" their leaves,to minimise exposure to light ..

Humans from the other hand,
especially some weirdos white-dressed ones ,that always look & inspect
the tree very closely and always neglecting the whole forest around ,saw once that a dilution of chlorophyll ,absorbs mostly at 662 nm ...
A dilution of Chlorophyll ...Not even the whole plant alive ...
And of course they thought ,the very next minute "Hey ,that 's exactly what plants want in order to thrive ! "
......
Two Things Are Infinite: the Universe and Human Stupidity.
(But ,I'm not quite sure about the former one ).

Albert Einstein

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
stardustsailor said:
Pos,please let me clarify better where exactly I stand ,regarding the deep red LEDs ...

As i've mentioned : " in certain cases " ..."excess deep red photon availability " ...etc ...
I trust that the 3000K COBs/LEDs already have plenty of these deep red photons ...

As ,also for certain species -like Cannabis - excess of these photons either do not seem to have such an effect or even worse-combined with the total absence of FR photons -,they can pose a serious threat to the PS systems ...


Let me show you an article ...

Expanded Product Range for Horticultural Lighting with a “Far Red” Version

Osram Opto Semiconductors is expanding its LED product range for horticultural lighting with a new type of the well-proven Oslon SSL. In addition to the existing hyper red (660 nm) and deep blue (450 nm) versions, the high-tech company developed a far red Oslon SSL LED with a wavelength of 730 nm. For certain plants such as tomatoes, pepper or roses, it is exactly this wavelength which leads to better growth. Customers now have a better coverage of the color spectrum for their horticulture applications. The new far red Oslon SSL will be available immediately .

http://www.led-professional.com/products/leds_led_modules/expanded-product-range-for-horticultural-lighting-with-a-201cfar-red201d-version


And now allow me to deposit my thoughts about it ..
Or how personally interpret this article :

"Dear customers,we-or at least our white-dressed lab junkies -
at Osram we're the first ones to make highly efficient deep red diodes.
We're amongst the first ones to cultivate this deep-red hype ,regarding LED horticulture .
Well ,things are not exactly as we firstly thought ...
It seems that most leafy plants-like lettuce - do grow well with the deep -red & blue LEDs combo ..
But some other plant species -like Cannabis,for example - are facing some trouble doing so ...
So we've made a FR led to come along with our famous deep red LEDs .
It' is well known that most plants either reflect and transmit those FR photons ..
Still ,you need them along with the deep reds ,to avoid any phytochrome & photosynthesis "mishappens" ..
Dear customers ,in order for some species to grow healthy and be productive ,is not enough to bombard them
with 660 nm photons .You 've to supply enough FR photons ,to counteract the -adverse- effects of the former.
"

Moreover ...Greengenes ,showed to our community ,that our beloved plant can be still productive ,
without many of these "660 +730 nm combined " photons ...

Still seeing things ,through a monochromatic perspective ?
I'm not saying that those 660 nm leds are not good for growing ..
They are ,of course ..But they need a specific "company" in order to be efficient growth -wise ...
That's why I think that i.e. a 4000K +660 nm +730 nm combo is far better than the 3000K+660 nm one ..
In more than one aspect ..
It's not only photosynthetic rates ,we're after ...
Not one tree..
But the whole forest ..
Meaning that phytochrome action ,leaf angle,photoinhibition ,saturated PS systems,young vs old leaves ,
static high irradiances and many more should be taken into account ..
And supplying lots of 660 nm light ain't the solution ..
Probably it makes things even more complicated ..
As we 're not growing lettuce or carrots ,but a more complex plant species ...

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
So what your saying is that my c3 annuals don't stand a chance next week, as they are going under a very heavy 660nm specd fixture:eyesmoke:

"pulled me out of retirement".....................lol

001.JPG ......we will see
 
Last edited:
stardustsailor

stardustsailor

Well-Known Member
PSUAGRO. said:
So what your saying is that my c3 annuals don't stand a chance next week, as they are going under a very heavy 660nm specd fixture:eyesmoke:

"pulled me out of retirement".....................lol

View attachment 3393793 ......we will see
Click to expand...
You know very well ,that I'm not saying that ,you silly-willy !
:P..
All I'm saying is that there might be a good chance that you're just wasting some energy ..

And/or that the plants could do same as good without them ....

And/or that your plants might face some trouble ...

But not that they do not absolutely stand a chance ..
Of course they do ...
They will acclimate to do ...
:wink:..

Cheers.
:peace:
 
PSUAGRO.

PSUAGRO.

Well-Known Member
stardustsailor said:
You know very well ,that I'm not saying that ,you silly-willy !
:P..
All I'm saying is that there might be a good chance that you're just wasting some energy ..

And/or that the plants could do same as good without them ....

And/or that your plants might face some trouble ...

But not that they do not absolutely stand a chance ..
Of course they do ...
They will acclimate to do ...
:wink:..

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...

ha......of course:wink:................your quote ^^^ will be very relevant friend
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top