Trichomes, THC and UVB light.....

Yes, during the veg' stage... but the plant can triple in height during the flower stage and has to do much more. That's what I meant when I said trich's are there to harness dwindling light.

I'm assuming that the trich's are a response to this...

The cannabinoids are a different subject, at least to my mind. Obviously light of varying spectrum is needed to create them, and there are two cells inside the trich that do two different things... or release two different chemicals.

I believe though that the two main chemicals of cannabis are THCV and CBN. These two chemicals seem the most likely to actually be produced within the plant itself. It then pushes these chemicals into the two cells of the trichome. These react with the two different spectrums, creating THC and CBD.

I'm not sure on the CBN-CBD part. It may well be the other way around... unless CBN reacts quicker to turn into CBD, and THCV slower to turn to THC.

I'm struggling with this, as I believe that the chemicals were originally an attractant for prey. It makes sense then that THCV was used to entice the prey in, and then CBD used to knock the prey out...

yes...interesting....your thought are then rather logical...regarding the growth evolution of the plants physical structure and chemical mechanisms and processes.....so we still need to figure out what/when/how much....is it possible that if we bombard the plant in late vege, and into flowering budding, that the plant will say wait....we don't actually need to produce so many trichomes? because if the function is to take the most from dwindling light and we provide the plant with more than enough light...then the plant may adapt and alter its trichome production because it senses it doesn't really need to have that "magnification" that the trichomes may function as?

Its also possible that uvb will only increase the thc level marginally.
So say a plant that produces 18% thc normally may produce 19-20% thc with uvb being present.

Its highly unlikely that we as smokers of large amounts on a daily basis would notice this unless we chemically analyzed the thc content from as near identical clones as possible grown in different rooms.

I think it is more likely that uvb can make a big difference to strains that usually produce only about 5-10% thc and that this can cause the lower thc producing strains to produce a more noticeable and significant increase than the already high thc strains as its probable that the cannabis strain will never be able to get above 40% thc as it requires a certain amount of plant matter to live and the genetics are mostly maxed out at the moment with 22% so i think that uvb would appear to make little if any difference to these kind of strains as they are genetically incapable of producing any more thc than they already do at this moment in time.

However there is more room for improvement on the lower thc producers and i think that they will react to it more as they probably originated in areas of the planet that had naturally low levels of uvb anyway so they produce more as they are fighting against something that there genetics is not used to and i think obviously that is highly probable that the higher thc strains come from areas of the planet that were naturally high in uvb and have already developed the higher thc levels to compensate for this anyways so they obviously will not produce much more than they already do as they don't actually need to whereas other strains do.

Anyway i am totally caned today so i may even be talking a load of old shit,who can tell lmfao

hey thanks Nat. What I have floating in my mind is the question - if what you are saying is in fact the way things are - then how do we reconcile the whole aspect that the UVB is the functional link and mechanism to the production of THC. Maybe the little amounts of UVB that come from our various attempts at lighting these gro ops is sufficient, and this effort of increasing UVB is not a critical item in THC production....that we are already at a sufficient level of UVB radiation that any amount will only result in the assumed incremental amounts that you reference. However, that would then take me to the question of the oldtimers (myself included) that used to smoke the outdoor weed thirty years ago...and as good as ANY indoor stuff is,.......it does not compare to the outdoor gro?

tahoe58 said:

yes...interesting....your thought are then rather logical...regarding the growth evolution of the plants physical structure and chemical mechanisms and processes.....so we still need to figure out what/when/how much....is it possible that if we bombard the plant in late vege, and into flowering budding, that the plant will say wait....we don't actually need to produce so many trichomes? because if the function is to take the most from dwindling light and we provide the plant with more than enough light...then the plant may adapt and alter its trichome production because it senses it doesn't really need to have that "magnification" that the trichomes may function as?

Click to expand...

Maybe this is why the plant keeps growing at night... it stores the light, then works through it slowly in the dark. To grow much bigger during flower, the more trich's it gains in the dark will magnify more of the sunlight during the day.

I think the actual trich' development itself is something we can only magnify by giving extended dark periods during certain points of flower. Then increase photoperiod to help the plant catch up in potency, and size. So if you give 12 hours light, increase to 12.30 for example. But this may just still all even out in the end...

interesting....thanks for sharing those thoughts. so do you mean that the introduction of UVB then may not have any measureable difference and it is the photoperiod that has the more cirtical path to both trichome concentration (density) and therefore THC and potency?

Yes nat', that fits in perfectly with my feeling that there is only one original strain of cannabis, and that various environmental factors have caused the genetics of the plant to change, almost, completely.

The strongest strains that grow on this planet, are most likely genetically the strongest plants on this earth. Yet if we try and grow that strain indoors, we will not achieve the potency. Using UV may get us closer to the actual strength of the plant we are trying to grow.

Co2 may also boost potency.

tahoe58 said:

interesting....thanks for sharing those thoughts. so do you mean that the introduction of UVB then may not have any measureable difference and it is the photoperiod that has the more cirtical path to both trichome concentration (density) and therefore THC and potency?

Click to expand...

Yes photoperiod is critical, but then so is quality of light. Just because a strain says 27.5%thc, doesn't mean that when you grow it, this is what you'll get. The strain has a genetic potential, but it is our job to help it get there.

yuk...I hate when this happens....it had been getting a little clearer for me....and now its going back the otehr way again...more unclear..... I need a toke real bad.....oh yea....I still have a couple of months wait! grrrrrrrr.

skunkushybrid said:

Yes photoperiod is critical, but then so is quality of light. Just because a strain says 27.5%thc, doesn't mean that when you grow it, this is what you'll get. The strain has a genetic potential, but it is our job to help it get there.

Click to expand...

I don't know tahoe, I think I'm starting to see things much more clearly now. When I said the trich's are a response to low light levels, I suppose this means the plant uses energy stored during the day to produce the trich's. Also that these trich's are not very potent.

It takes quality of light to give them potency.

I still think potency is down to light intensity. Whether that be red or blue, except for the far ends of the spectrum. Although important too they are going to take much more management.

It seems the more intense the blue, the more THC we get. The more intense the red, the more cbd. There are two chemicals in the trich head that react to light...

thanks man....I appreciate you being paitent with me and taking the time to recover those thoughts. Maybe I need to go read the chemical ecology of cannabis again...

skunkushybrid said:

I don't know tahoe, I think I'm starting to see things much more clearly now. When I said the trich's are a response to low light levels, I suppose this means the plant uses energy stored during the day to produce the trich's. Also that these trich's are not very potent.

It takes quality of light to give them potency.

I still think potency is down to light intensity. Whether that be red or blue, except for the far ends of the spectrum. Although important too they are going to take much more management.

It seems the more intense the blue, the more THC we get. The more intense the red, the more cbd. There are two chemicals in the trich head that react to light...

Click to expand...

On the red and blue light notes i can confirm that mixing blue fluorescent lights and hps light whilst flowering gives better and stronger weed

thanks Nat....I'm gonna take a closer look at the light physics associated with that combination. I'm working with some folks right now on combining LED with HPS and they're running trials....should be interesting.

natmoon said:

On the red and blue light notes i can confirm that mixing blue fluorescent lights and hps light whilst flowering gives better and stronger weed

Click to expand...

This is brilliant-marijuana man very clear. He mentioned the the light rating as between I think 266-300nm, I believe this to be in the black light range, as I have a UVB light designed for curing reactive resins that emits 366nm and this is about as dark a light as I have seen. I wonder if any harm can be done by exposing well developed plant (within a few days of harvest) to this light? Can anyone help with this?

I think we want to be pretty careful with the aplication of this source of light as we know it is biologically destructive....it is used in wastewater treatment systems, and it causes sunburn....so I think we just have to be a little smart about it all.....there has been a lot of info posted to this thread...some good experiences, some neutral, and others bad.....lets all be careful....

*Shopping List*

Personal UV meter - check
TestProducts.com | National Safety Products, Inc. | 877-412-3600 | <-

UV Safety Goggles - check
UV Safety Goggles - Science Gifts - Edmund Scientific
Uvex Stealth Goggle w/ Clear Lens - Safety Goggles

UV Safety Film - check
HanitaTek

I'm getting ready

g'morning YGF....getting ready eh....good for you...how much snow did you get?

psyclone said:

He mentioned the the light rating as between I think 266-300nm, I believe this to be in the black light range, as I have a UVB light designed for curing reactive resins that emits 366nm and this is about as dark a light as I have seen.

Click to expand...

A change of 66nano meters on a scale of 366 is a significant % change. I believe,

Did you look at the light without any glasses on?

*Sidebar - airline pilots have a high incidence of cataracts and skin cancers. Think sitting, even behind 2 layers of tempered glass, at those high uv levels for hours on end has/had anything to do with it? I do.
http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/reprint/123/8/1102.pdf

Here's a real good wake & bake thought.

Maybe plants can see. If so, maybe the THC is 'sunglasses' for the plant.

Great frigging weed....gag, cough, seeing stars.

awesome thought YGF...I like it....I'm gonna digest that one..... churn it around a little! hope you're ok.....and survived your choking....