# defoliation when in flower



## shhhmokey (Aug 15, 2015)

When a plant is flowering whitch leavs are ok to remove and what ones are not ok?


----------



## jemstone (Aug 15, 2015)

The brown dead leaves.


----------



## racerboy71 (Aug 15, 2015)

i just remove them all, who needs leaves, i just grow for bud, right?


----------



## CC Dobbs (Aug 15, 2015)

racerboy71 said:


> i just remove them all, who needs leaves, i just grow for bud, right?


Now this is some solid advice that you can take to the bank.


----------



## ButchyBoy (Aug 17, 2015)

When are people going to realize plants need leafs in order to grow...... If the plant did not need them it would not grow them!!!


----------



## ISK (Aug 17, 2015)

racerboy71 said:


> i just remove them all, who needs leaves, i just grow for bud, right?


you can't cut them all......ya got to save at least a few


----------



## shhhmokey (Aug 18, 2015)

Lol thanks all. Got it all figered out meow.


----------



## new007789 (Aug 19, 2015)

shhhmokey said:


> When a plant is flowering whitch leavs are ok to remove and what ones are not ok?


how can i choose the best quality seeds ?


----------



## vitamin_green_inc (Aug 19, 2015)

Hmm, modern studies of tomato production show that defoliation does not adversely effect harvest #'s or quality. It does however, reduce the risk for mold and allows for plants that have been defoliated to have more "marketable" fruits. The most recent study I read providing these results is from 2011 and there are many more older studies that collaborate this


----------



## ButchyBoy (Aug 20, 2015)

vitamin_green_inc said:


> Hmm, modern studies of tomato production show that defoliation does not adversely effect harvest #'s or quality. It does however, reduce the risk for mold and allows for plants that have been defoliated to have more "marketable" fruits. The most recent study I read providing these results is from 2011 and there are many more older studies that collaborate this


We are growing cannabis here right? I understand the whole other plants like it thing. I prune my apple, pear and cherry trees along with my tomatoes. I actually have done enough testing on the subject to have a understanding it doesn't work on cannabis plants. I currently have a defoliated plant growing to see how this strain reacts. I am positive it will be the same as the others.

Other than that, I am still watching to see others side by sides.. Hoping to see one actually make it all the way to harvest before the thread goes sideways LOL!!!


----------



## skunkd0c (Aug 20, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> We are growing cannabis here right? I understand the whole other plants like it thing. I prune my apple, pear and cherry trees along with my tomatoes. I actually have done enough testing on the subject to have a understanding it doesn't work on cannabis plants. I currently have a defoliated plant growing to see how this strain reacts. I am positive it will be the same as the others.
> 
> Other than that, I am still watching to see others side by sides.. Hoping to see one actually make it all the way to harvest before the thread goes sideways LOL!!!


picking some leaves off to keep them tidy is not such a crime
some plants are just too leafy imo 
although some plants are small and perhaps need all the leaves they can grow lol


----------



## ButchyBoy (Aug 20, 2015)

skunkd0c said:


> picking some leaves off to keep them tidy is not such a crime
> some plants are just too leafy imo
> although some plants are small and perhaps need all the leaves they can grow lol


I pick them off when touching them makes them fall off. I have enough air movement that I do not have PM issues ever (been there and not going back). I do have strains that are damn bushy in the center. As long as I don't have PM all of the leafs stay for the duration. My entire room is reflective so the lower leafs grow side ways and upside down collecting light from the lower walls and floor.

I know most growers want those lower flowers to be huge... Not me .... Those are the makings of bubble and budder for which there is a demand so I let them grow.

In fear of repeating myself... Plants grow what they need not what they don't need!!


----------



## skunkd0c (Aug 20, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> I pick them off when touching them makes them fall off. I have enough air movement that I do not have PM issues ever (been there and not going back). I do have strains that are damn bushy in the center. As long as I don't have PM all of the leafs stay for the duration. My entire room is reflective so the lower leafs grow side ways and upside down collecting light from the lower walls and floor.
> 
> I know most growers want those lower flowers to be huge... Not me .... Those are the makings of bubble and budder for which there is a demand so I let them grow.
> 
> In fear of repeating myself... Plants grow what they need not what they don't need!!


i agree with most of what you say, but i do not agree that all plants grow the perfect amount of leaves/branches suited to an indoor situation

in an ideal situation every leaf on every branch every leaf in evey cola would receive equal access to light but this does not happen in practice
especially with stationary overhead lights and branches all fighting for the same light
each branch is in competition for the space and light, allowing them to fight it out among themselves is not wise imo
they should be organised in some way plants require training imo, and some of this training could involve the removal of growth, leaves branches etc
that are healthy .

leaving plants to grow wild without any human intervention with the shape, canopy control etc, can result in lower yields
light can become trapped at the top of the canopy, in some cases plants will not elongate their colas too far out of the canopy
plants that have their colas trapped under a canopy of leaves look awful to me, i have seen a fair few grows from other growers like that
at the opposite end of the spectrum folk who pick almost all the leaves off their plants end up with horrible skinny stick colas, i do not agree with either extreme

i do try to keep as many leaves on my plants as possible without shading and overlap

peace


----------



## ButchyBoy (Aug 20, 2015)

skunkd0c said:


> i agree with most of what you say, but i do not agree that all plants grow the perfect amount of leaves/branches suited to an indoor situation
> 
> in an ideal situation every leaf on every branch every leaf in evey cola would receive equal access to light but this does not happen in practice
> especially with stationary overhead lights and branches all fighting for the same light
> ...



I hear you and appreciate your thoughts.... 

Through my own experiments and in my own opinion the plants left alone out performed the plants that I removed anything from. I did not read it and no one told me. I have a room full of ugly plants due to my experimenting. I am still learning like all of us are. My best grows have been untouched plants that get tap water only in large tubs of soil. All natural you could say!!!


----------



## vitamin_green_inc (Aug 20, 2015)

Hmm, I just want to point out that those studies agreed with your points about too extreme and actually clarified that the top 15% of foliage accounts for 80% of the photosynthesis that happens. 

I also want to point out that these are scientific studies down with controls and your anecdotal evidence while relevant is insinificant vs the studies I am talking about where thousands upon thousands of acres of plants have been run. 
I would also like to point out that Hightimes did a similar study and regardless of how mainstream their info is, it still applies...
I also want to point out that your argument? Is silly. Cannabis growing, again and again is proven to be just like every other crop, and to believe otherwise is to be the guy that spends more money on Advanced Nutrients that his crop


----------



## 2layz2p (Aug 26, 2015)

In flower "I" find I have a much better yield when I remove a fan leaf that is shading more then that leaf gets on it's own.... , so If I can get light to 10 square inch's and only removed 3 s.i then It's worth it. . I have buds almost the same size all the way down my entire branches.. I LST also, so I'm staying with a pretty much even canopy.....jmo


----------



## kiwipaulie (Aug 27, 2015)

My take on it is, outdoor plants, just leave them be. The sun is hot and penetrating. 

Indoors however. I have always had better yield on the plants I've trimmed in the past, so now I always trim at day 21 and then pluck away. If the stem on the leaf is over say 1 inch. It's gone. Weed isn't meant to be grown indoors, so to me the methods to do it also need to change. My 1k bulb cannot even come close to what the sun gives out.


----------



## Moonwalk (Sep 8, 2015)

I didn't do much to mine. 

When they were like 2-3 feet tall, I pinched them so they'd have more tops and branch out, but otherwise I haven't done any more than pick a yellow leaf off once in awhile.

They are about ten feet tall and dark green and bushy. A few split down the trunk, but all branches survived and are flowering. 

I started with about 25-30 plants, had a lot of males, some culled for poor health, so I have about 10-12 plants now. 

I guess I'm a lazy grower, but they seem to be doing okay without me messing with them. Mother Nature knows best I think.


----------



## Darth Vapour (Sep 8, 2015)

by end of second week you  should have all leafs taken off the plant and i mean all of them


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 9, 2015)

Did I do it right? I left a few


----------



## Darth Vapour (Sep 9, 2015)

whats really halarious is people buy into the fact that removing leafs will infact give them better yields when its really far from the truth ,, not only have you fucked up the plants respiratory, or breathing capabilities you also took away the plants c02 uptake i wonder where the stomata is on a plant ???? 
seriously i have tried leaf removal and it hurt yield and any lower buds that one thinks is going to gain still ended up small and SHAKE in reality so there is no real gains 
from my tests or side by sides it was day and night from untouched plant to touched plant 

Now with all this said Pruning can and will give you better yields but pruning in veg and defoliating in Flower are completely different 
you ever notice its the noobs or know bodies that try to push this tech forward and the Guru;s or the ones really growing and pounding out yields do not even bother at stupid threads like this 
If you want the best possible growth and yield keep her green and healthy that means leafs on train train train plant for most buds in a canopy area and you will yield way more then thinking your going to remove leafs and do better


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 9, 2015)

Darth Vapour said:


> whats really halarious is people buy into the fact that removing leafs will infact give them better yields when its really far from the truth ,, not only have you fucked up the plants respiratory, or breathing capabilities you also took away the plants c02 uptake i wonder where the stomata is on a plant ????
> seriously i have tried leaf removal and it hurt yield and any lower buds that one thinks is going to gain still ended up small and SHAKE in reality so there is no real gains
> from my tests or side by sides it was day and night from untouched plant to touched plant
> 
> ...


I love you


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 9, 2015)

Just so everyone knows.. That plant I posted a pic of turned yellow and defoliated itself after adding molasses to the water. Like within a week of adding 1/2 table spoon of molasses to 6 cups of water. Molasses = no bueno


----------



## DirtyEyeball696 (Sep 10, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> Did I do it right? I left a few
> View attachment 3496598


That plant looks scary. Single stalked plants suck


Bawse!


----------



## Milo 420 (Sep 10, 2015)

IMO, I think SELECT defoliation is very beneficial by select I mean removing one or two leaves that are completely blocking the light from getting to that bud after I did this some of my bottom buds almost tripled in size and got a lot more dense


----------



## DirtyEyeball696 (Sep 10, 2015)

Milo 420 said:


> IMO, I think SELECT defoliation is very beneficial by select I mean removing one or two leaves that are completely blocking the light from getting to that bud after I did this some of my bottom buds almost tripled in size and got a lot more dense


So true I've done it both ways & their is no comparison. Done at the 2 1/2 week period & the 4 week period works excellent. Remember that anything intense WILL shock your plants. That's why I spread the strip out. Remember those leaves still have nutritional value to the young bud and anything to drastic will affect the plant. I have a strict rule. Only big leaves then at week 4 I thin it out enough so I can see through the plant. Done it 3-4 different ways over the years & this method has not affected bud growth


Bawse!


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 10, 2015)

DirtyEyeball696 said:


> That plant looks scary. Single stalked plants suck
> 
> 
> Bawse!



Lol...

That plant is a cross I made using a Lemon OG and a Platinum Bubba.. That particular one got some molasses added to the water as an experiment and started yellowing over night. The others are doing just fine. After a week it looked like it does now. 
Are you calling it a single stalk plant because it wasn't topped?


----------



## Milo 420 (Sep 10, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> Lol...
> 
> That plant is a cross I made using a Lemon OG and a Platinum Bubba.. That particular one got some molasses added to the water as an experiment and started yellowing over night. The others are doing just fine. After a week it looked like it does now.
> Are you calling it a single stalk plant because it wasn't topped?


Haha no because it has a SINGLE stalk lol


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 10, 2015)

Milo 420 said:


> Haha no because it has a SINGLE stalk lol


Can you show me a multi stalk plant? Iv'e never seen a plant with two stalks however I have had a plant that split into two tops on its own which was awesome!!


----------



## DirtyEyeball696 (Sep 10, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> Can you show me a multi stalk plant? Iv'e never seen a plant with two stalks however I have had a plant that split into two tops on its own which was awesome!!








Bawse!


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 10, 2015)

DirtyEyeball696 said:


> Bawse!


Oh... Plants that have been topped when small. Gotcha! My Holy Grail and Platinum Bubbas look like that if I top them early in veg. Actually all of my strains look that way if topped early. Some I top some I don't it just depends on the day.


----------



## DirtyEyeball696 (Sep 10, 2015)

Well if you want a lot more bud you'll train yourself to do it all the time


Bawse!


----------



## Milo 420 (Sep 10, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> Can you show me a multi stalk plant? Iv'e never seen a plant with two stalks however I have had a plant that split into two tops on its own which was awesome!!


  
Here is a plant (purple power) which was topped and supercropped some LST it has many tops


----------



## Uncle Ben (Sep 10, 2015)

Darth Vapour said:


> you ever notice its the noobs or know bodies that try to push this tech forward and the Guru;s or the ones really growing and pounding out yields do not even bother at stupid threads like this


You ever noticed that it's always the next crop of noobs that are drawn to such gimmicks and are too damn lazy to do a search before starting a thread on the same old stupid practice.


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 10, 2015)

DirtyEyeball696 said:


> Well if you want a lot more bud you'll train yourself to do it all the time
> 
> 
> Bawse!


I don't grow to make money so there is no reason to try to increase yields. I do top and bend some plants as experiments but prefer to let the plants grow naturally. I also destroy others experimenting.
I grow for fun and to supply myself with some smoke at the same time. Everyone has there own thoughts on methods but the more research and experimenting you do the easier it is to see that these forums are full of bad info. Since I started shaving my junk the wife says it grows bigger and is stronger!!


----------



## ButchyBoy (Sep 10, 2015)

Milo 420 said:


> View attachment 3497124 View attachment 3497125
> Here is a plant (purple power) which was topped and supercropped some LST it has many tops


Nice looking plant! 

It still grew one stalk... Those are branches!


----------



## Milo 420 (Sep 10, 2015)

ButchyBoy said:


> Nice looking plant!
> 
> It still grew one stalk... Those are branches!


Haha yep but the thickness of the branches are as thick as the main!!


----------



## mid-western outdoor (Oct 27, 2015)

So with this bubba kush with the massive fan leaves I always leave them on because like many of you I think it's stupid to take the plants main solar panels would any of you remove these monster leaves? The cover up a lot of the plant because the branches don't grown out they grow directly up the stock


----------



## adower (Oct 28, 2015)

I don't defoliate but I do lollipop my plants. Removing 10 or so fan leafs to minimize any popcorn buds is not going to be the end of the world.

I think that indoor you need to do some form on canopy management. Outdoor I wouldn't touch a plants leafs at all.


----------



## hotrodharley (Oct 28, 2015)

Take thos


mid-western outdoor said:


> So with this bubba kush with the massive fan leaves I always leave them on because like many of you I think it's stupid to take the plants main solar panels would any of you remove these monster leaves? The cover up a lot of the plant because the branches don't grown out they grow directly up the stock


Take the big lower fan leaves at this point.


----------



## Canna_Man (Nov 9, 2015)

adower said:


> I don't defoliate but I do lollipop my plants. Removing 10 or so fan leafs to minimize any popcorn buds is not going to be the end of the world.
> 
> I think that indoor you need to do some form on canopy management. Outdoor I wouldn't touch a plants leafs at all.


Lollipopping is defoliation, you are removing foliage when you lollipop. I think the bigger issue is the term in itself. And removal of branches and leaves is defoliating.

Some people call it selective leaf pruning whatever you want to call it. Removing some interior site blocking fan leaves is fine. And lollipopping works if you are growing for sea of green or in densely packed rooms. The light just isnt going to penetrate and get to the bottoms so no good production occurs down there.

Timing is everything. You never want to stress your plants out or remove too many leaves or like mentioned many times will screw up the plants ability to breathe and regulate co2 and oxygen etc.. I never found anything wrong with removing a few leaves here and there or lollipopping so long as it is done at the right times and for a purpose. Good growing


----------



## medicalgrowguy (Nov 10, 2015)

ISK said:


> you can't cut them all......ya got to save at least a few
> View attachment 3481223


mono crop all day haha


----------



## Darth Vapour (Nov 10, 2015)

Like i said train your plants so you have as many buds sites at the light source is the only way to get yields ,, clean under carriage of its larfy useless buds clean some lower eas as to get decent air movement but leave it grow them leafs are there for a purpose i your not getting decent yields then add more light Light does travel through leafs so half way down the plant buds should normally be good anything lower should in fact been cut of and kept trimming off as them sucker buds take energy away from the pay zone


----------



## weedenhanced (Nov 10, 2015)

Uncle Ben said:


> You ever noticed that it's always the next crop of noobs that are drawn to such gimmicks and are too damn lazy to do a search before starting a thread on the same old stupid practice.


If u do research and google it there is many sites claiming that defoilation is good 
So by doing research u will Infact think it's good lol
There is many hi tech defoilation ect bullshit out there


----------



## BobCajun (Nov 28, 2015)

Something I've been thinking about is that when you get to the point where lower leaves are dying from lack of light, like about week 3 of flowering, maybe it would be good to remove a bunch of the large upper leaves so the lower ones won't die. It would be like sacrificing one for the other, no net loss just changing the location of the leaf canopy from top to bottom. 

I know it sounds crazy to remove healthy new upper leaves but consider the fact that only about a foot of canopy depth can get enough light to live anyway. Wouldn't it be better to have that foot of canopy at the bottom of the plants and above that have all the side buds fully exposed to the premium light? You would also trim off all the small shoots from the bottom canopy area, so it's a pure leaf zone with good ventilation so the sugar factories can do their job efficiently.

I would also top most of the upper shoots so that all those buds along the defoliated shoots would become like main buds. Powered by a canopy of old large leaves at the bottom, those buds would become fat. Eventually all the buds would probably fill in and shade the bottom canopy, at which point it would no longer be needed.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 28, 2015)

weedenhanced said:


> If u do research and google it there is many sites claiming that defoilation is good


Yes, when it comes to cannabis anecdotal evidence and self annointed experts.....

"a thousand flies on a pile of shit can't be wrong."


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 28, 2015)

BobCajun said:


> Something I've been thinking about is that when you get to the point where lower leaves are dying from lack of light, like about week 3 of flowering,


They die because folks screw them up by applying bloom foods. Has nothing to do with light.


----------



## mr sunshine (Nov 28, 2015)

Uncle Ben said:


> They die because folks screw them up by applying bloom foods. Has nothing to do with light.


How far into flower do you start using the bloom foods?


----------



## BobCajun (Nov 28, 2015)

Uncle Ben said:


> They die because folks screw them up by applying bloom foods. Has nothing to do with light.


No they die from lack of light alright. I just give em straight 2 part hydro nutes. There's no light down there so they're obviously going to get light green and die.

So anyway I just did a test of my little theory so we'll see. I took off the tops and all leaves from the upper 8-10". There was so much bottom leaf that light still can't get directly to the pot area so those upper leaves were apparently redundant. Right now the tops are sticks with little budlets along them, but in a few weeks the whole upper parts of the plants will be pure buds which are each almost the same size as the original top buds would have been. It'll be like probably 100 buds, each maybe 3-5 grams. This was about 3.5 weeks in. There was WAY too much leaf. I got a shopping bag full. As long as you don't take more than 50% of the foliage off you should be okay. That's what they found with cowpeas anyway, no reduction in yield.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 28, 2015)

mr sunshine said:


> How far into flower do you start using the bloom foods?


never


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 29, 2015)

BobCajun said:


> No they die from lack of light alright. I just give em straight 2 part hydro nutes. There's no light down there so they're obviously going to get light green and die.


If you're losing leaves (prematurely) it's because you have not dialed it in. Sure, I lose a few lower leaves but very few and my indoor plants were packed into a very confined area. How do you think I'm able to do a double harvest? You can't pull it off unless you have lower leaves left which drives bud production. Because of forum misguided paradigms, few will be able to do it unless they learn what makes a plant tick.

Here's part (probably 70%) of the main cola:



Here's the future secondary (double) harvest:


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 29, 2015)

Darth Vapour said:


> Like i said train your plants so you have as many buds sites at the light source is the only way to get yields ,,


That is simply not true. That is another one of those forum myths that "becomes the truth" because it's parroted by folks who don't understand plant processes.

Tell that to a peach, apple, pear, grape, pecan, etc. grower. You'll be laughed right out of the orchard.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 30, 2015)

Canna_Man said:


> Lollipopping is defoliation, you are removing foliage when you lollipop. I think the bigger issue is the term in itself. And removal of branches and leaves is defoliating.
> 
> Some people call it selective leaf pruning whatever you want to call it. Removing some interior site blocking fan leaves is fine.


Tell that to someone who is densely packing their garden. https://www.rollitup.org/t/fuck-working.891342/page-4#post-12110715


----------



## BobCajun (Nov 30, 2015)

Uncle Ben said:


> If you're losing leaves (prematurely) it's because you have not dialed it in. Sure, I lose a few lower leaves but very few and my indoor plants were packed into a very confined area. How do you think I'm able to do a double harvest? You can't pull it off unless you have lower leaves left which drives bud production. Because of forum misguided paradigms, few will be able to do it unless they learn what makes a plant tick.
> 
> Here's part (probably 70%) of the main cola:
> 
> ...


My plants tend to stretch quite high and are closely spaced so the lower leaves do indeed die. I'll see a few hanging limply or drying quite often, and if I don't pick them out they will breed mold. They didn't miss those upper leaves I removed at all. The remaining budlets just get leafy at the bottoms to make up the missing foliage. The fact that the roots had grown enough to feed a bunch of leaves that suddenly got removed means that those extra roots can then feed the upper budlets with extra nourishment, resulting in rampant growth.

I think that's why plants grow back so fast after defoliation, because of the high root to foliage ratio. They will quickly regain their former size and then go back to normal growth rate as the root/foliage ratio gets back in balance. But in the meantime, more bud sites got direct light. When those bud leaves also get big enough to shade lower buds it's time to hit em again.


----------



## BobCajun (Dec 3, 2015)

Actually, the stems I defoliated when they only had tiny budlets on them are slow to refoliate. The bottom leaf doesn't seem to be sending them much food. Maybe leaves only feed budlets that are very close by. Any closer budlets would scavenge all the nutrients before they could reach the ones at the top of the defoliated stem. I think I should have left one leaf at the top right beneath where I clipped the tip off at least.

Another idea is to cut off off the ends of the lobes of the leaves, about halfway from the tips like people sometimes do with cuttings to reduce transpiration. Cutting the leaf tips off doesn't seem to hurt the cuttings much and should be less stressful than full removal. It'll be laborious though, going around trimming each leaf.


----------



## greasemonkeymann (Dec 3, 2015)

Uncle Ben said:


> That is simply not true. That is another one of those forum myths that "becomes the truth" because it's parroted by folks who don't understand plant processes.
> 
> Tell that to a peach, apple, pear, grape, pecan, etc. grower. You'll be laughed right out of the orchard.


it's true to a degree man, sure outside maybe not so much, but inside? Sure.
How many orchard growers are using indoor lighting?
Especially if you use "flat" lights, t5s, leds, etc.
We all know the intensity of the light diminishes significantly with distance, so exposing more growing sites to the light at it's most intensity will get you more flowers.
Gotta remember fruit doesn't grow the same as flowers.
All those fruit trees you mentioned don't grow at the top of the trees either.

I humbly disagree though, and my statement sure isn't based on "forum myths"


----------



## purplehays1 (Dec 3, 2015)

some defoliation will help to produce a higher quality denser bud. In my trials i have found that not removing any foliage results in the highest yield, but also results in a varying quality of bud. If you defoliate and allow light to reach all flowers equally (or close) you end up with more consistent quality and density but lower yield. When i was growing professionally i would defoliate to produce the most top quality saleable product. Now that i grow only for myself i tend to not defoliate nearly as much as i dont mind having the product vary in quality slightly as i am smoking it myself and dont have to worry about it looking perfect for prospective customers.

additionally defoliation will cause HUGELY varied results depending on strain. I am currently growing DNA's OG LA Affie (not an og kush) and it is a pure indica and requires NO DEFOLIATION to get dense nugs even on the bottom of plants that get nearly no light. On a plant like this you would obviously not want to defoliate cuz all you would be doing is lowering your yield. On plants like an OG kush, that tend to be more finicky and harder to get a good yield, often require a lot more defoliation to get good results.


----------



## superbak3d (Dec 29, 2015)

From my experience, letting the plant do it own thing has the best results.

Leave the fan leaves alone, even the lowers. Just let the plant do it's thing. Removing those leaves is simply removing stored up energy the plant WILL use.

Even if those lower leaves aren't getting much light, the plant is still going to use the energy stored in them.

Besides, more leaves = more volume of space = less wasted light.

Do people forget that in like the last 2 weeks of flower, the flowers are going to suck all those leaves dry? That's when buds gain the most weight and density.

The less foliage you have, the less your buds are going to swell up in those last few critical weeks


----------



## Gquebed (Dec 29, 2015)

superbak3d said:


> From my experience, letting the plant do it own thing has the best results.
> 
> Leave the fan leaves alone, even the lowers. Just let the plant do it's thing.s




I have to agree. Ive tried lst and defol and supercropping and so on and i have noticed a significant difference in yield for any plants v3gged the same length if time. I dunno...maybe i wasnt doing any of it right.... still a noob.

What i do know is the less i fuck with them the happier they are and the heavier they get...

I


----------



## TommyDuhCat (Dec 30, 2015)

purplehays1 said:


> On plants like an OG kush, that tend to be more finicky and harder to get a good yield, often require a lot more defoliation to get good results.


I'm growing OG kush and have had a lot of lower leaves become limp, a little pale, and drop off. Would you suggest just letting the plant do its thing, or would it be a good idea to intervene and do a modest ammount selective trimming? If trimming is better, should i start at the bottom or top? This is my first grow still. I am most concerned with quality, but obviously want to minimize loss of yeild. I was thinking of trimming a few leaves here and there along the lower part of the plant with the expectation that the upper canopy and main bud sites will then get more of the plants energy. Im not too concerned with air flow in the lower canopy because i have a circulation fan near the pots constantly stirring fresh air into the lower part of the cabinet. Ill stop here before this post gets too long. Haha

For now i will keep letting the plant do its own defoliation, but im considering the options.

Thanks to anyone who provides input. This thread has been a good read.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 6, 2016)

TommyDuhCat said:


> I'm growing OG kush and have had a lot of lower leaves become limp, a little pale, and drop off.


"A lot" ? I bet you're using bloom foods. The plant is transferring N from the lower leaves to the upper.

People, study plant nutrition and stay away from cannabis forums. 90% of it is crap..


----------



## TommyDuhCat (Jan 6, 2016)

I shouldnt have said a lot. That day maybe 5 dropped per plant, maybe 5-10 per plant since.

Thanks for assuming i don't know anything about plants. I've got bonsai trees older than you.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 7, 2016)

TommyDuhCat said:


> I shouldnt have said a lot. That day maybe 5 dropped per plant, maybe 5-10 per plant since.
> 
> Thanks for assuming i don't know anything about plants. I've got bonsai trees older than you.


Sorry, but I automatically assume someone who defoliates doesn't know shit when it comes to plant culture and you did reveal this - "This is my first grow still." 

My conclusions is based on a forum thread track record in which 99% who defoliate are newbs feeling they have re-invented the wheel.  It's fun to watch them cut off their nose to spite their face.

Trust me, your bonzai's are not older than me.


----------



## lawlrus (Jan 7, 2016)

You should always remove the large fans that block airflow and light to interior budsights -- that's necessary regardless of what you think about "defoliation" as it is typically discussed on forums like this. I have tried the more extreme defoliation techniques (pinching close trim and sugar from colas) and noticed no difference whatsoever, but that's anecdotal obviously and not based on multiple tests because I don't have any reason to do so. 

You've got some interesting extremes of opinion in this thread, but very little actual information...right off the bat, on the one side, the folks who think that the idea of removing any leaf besides a dead one is so ridiculous that they are making jokes about it instead of providing answers (because they don't know enough to do so and prefer to muddy the waters of the conversation instead of learning themselves). Let's make sure we are differentiating between the extreme defoliation that is typically talked about by new growers and the necessary and important defoliation like I mentioned above.


----------



## theRealBlackBart (Jan 7, 2016)

Well i'm into defoliation on a religious zealot level. About mid way into flower i can slowly start and then eventually maliciously hack every fan leaf with a joint i can get at. The only difference i notice is tighter denser buds and WAY more light and air moving through the room.


----------



## xmatox (Jan 7, 2016)

theRealBlackBart said:


> Well i'm into defoliation on a religious zealot level. About mid way into flower i can slowly start and then eventually maliciously hack every fan leaf with a joint i can get at. The only difference i notice is tighter denser buds and WAY more light and air moving through the room.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 10, 2016)

Here's an idea, not defoliation but debudding. With grapes, they cut off all the suckers but one so they have about 20 leaves for one bunch of 30-40 grapes and nothing else on that branch. Well, with Cannabis you would remove all the little branches below the terminal cola of each branch but keep all the leaves. All those leaves would then be pumping juice into those main colas, like a prize pumpkin. The energy that would have gone into making larf buds then goes into making good top buds.


----------



## theRealBlackBart (Jan 10, 2016)

I'm going to be doing some side by side comparisons with one of my most stable and consistent strains pink lady. it would be worth it to add BobCajuns idea as a variable. the extreme opposite to defoliation. I will be doing 4 each (defoliated and non) both in soil and DWC. Any input that you think would be helpful in this would be appreciated.


----------



## xmatox (Jan 11, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> Here's an idea, not defoliation but debudding. With grapes, they cut off all the suckers but one so they have about 20 leaves for one bunch of 30-40 grapes and nothing else on that branch. Well, with Cannabis you would remove all the little branches below the terminal cola of each branch but keep all the leaves. All those leaves would then be pumping juice into those main colas, like a prize pumpkin. The energy that would have gone into making larf buds then goes into making good top buds.


lollipopping


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 11, 2016)

xmatox said:


> lollipopping


Lollipopping is removing everything from the bottom, including leaves. My method doesn't involve leaf removal unless they're dead or close to it. just the useless lower bud sites. In fact, you could leave the lower branches with their leaves on and just pick off the bud sites rather than remove the entire lower branches as with lollipopping. Removing leaves wouldn't help much, since then there would be more bud sites per leaf so they would all be underfed.


----------



## xmatox (Jan 11, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> Lollipopping is removing everything from the bottom, including leaves. My method doesn't involve leaf removal unless they're dead or close to it. just the useless lower bud sites. In fact, you could leave the lower branches with their leaves on and just pick off the bud sites rather than remove the entire lower branches as with lollipopping. Removing leaves wouldn't help much, since then there would be more bud sites per leaf so they would all be underfed.


it is interesting. I feel that lollipopping would be more effective. Why leave the leaves on the bottom? The point of getting rid of lower leaves and bud sites is to focus the energy to the cola's. So why is half ass better? Not saying you are wrong at all, just interested to how you got to your theory. Thanks


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 11, 2016)

xmatox said:


> it is interesting. I feel that lollipopping would be more effective. Why leave the leaves on the bottom? The point of getting rid of lower leaves and bud sites is to focus the energy to the cola's. So why is half ass better? Not saying you are wrong at all, just interested to how you got to your theory. Thanks


Well I mean if they're healthy lower leaves getting enough light. Maybe keep the lower leaves and stick some LED tubes (fluorescent replacements) through. It doesn't matter where the leaves are on the plant as long as they get enough light. With grapes the leaves that they keep are along the entire branch and they all feed sugar to the grape bunch at the end. Granted I don't know if weed buds are analogous to grape bunches, but maybe they are. Without the big stalk leaves all the buds have are little tiny leaflets. Anyway, it's just an idea. I haven't heard anyone else raise the idea. After reading an article about grapes it looked like something worth trying.


----------



## xmatox (Jan 11, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> Well I mean if they're healthy lower leaves getting enough light. Maybe keep the lower leaves and stick some LED tubes (fluorescent replacements) through. It doesn't matter where the leaves are on the plant as long as they get enough light. With grapes the leaves that they keep are along the entire branch and they all feed sugar to the grape bunch at the end. Granted I don't know if weed buds are analogous to grape bunches, but maybe they are. Without the big stalk leaves all the buds have are little tiny leaflets. Anyway, it's just an idea. I haven't heard anyone else raise the idea. After reading an article about grapes it looked like something worth trying.


Good thoughts for sure! I will have to try this.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 11, 2016)

xmatox said:


> it is interesting. I feel that lollipopping would be more effective. Why leave the leaves on the bottom?


This is why. Note the buds on the bottom are wider and thicker than those above.



This is not meant to be a put down, but some of you guys need to go back to school. 98% of the posts here are misguided.

....with every new crop of newbies.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 11, 2016)

lawlrus said:


> You should always remove the large fans that block airflow and light to interior budsights


No you shouldn't.


----------



## lawlrus (Jan 11, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> No you shouldn't.


What is your reasoning for saying this? I can't think of a single positive that could far enough outweigh the very real negative of having a huge mess of fan leaves blocking light and airflow to make it worth your while not to remove those fan leaves. Are you saying that you don't remove any leaves at all when you grow? Do you have any photos of anything that you have personally grown? I'm interested to see what your thoughts are on the subject supported with your actual experience. I'm certainly willing to adjust my opinion to match any facts to the contrary that you might be able to provide.


----------



## xmatox (Jan 11, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> This is why. Note the buds on the bottom are wider and thicker than those above.
> 
> View attachment 3583598
> 
> ...





Uncle Ben said:


> This is why. Note the buds on the bottom are wider and thicker than those above.
> 
> View attachment 3583598
> 
> ...


Couldn't you have just left it at the advice you gave? Nope, uncle ben to the rescue with his remarks.


----------



## lawlrus (Jan 11, 2016)

xmatox said:


> Couldn't you have just left it at the advice you gave? Nope, uncle ben to the rescue with his remarks.


To be fair, I can understand why someone with a background in the hard sciences, particularly plant-related ones, would take issue with 90% of the stuff posted on pot forums. He's right about most of it being bullshit or half-cocked anecdotal accounts at best, and since most people who post on pot forums are stoned all the time, they can't remember the finer details sometimes which might account for some misunderstandings. 

In that regard, he probably doesn't care much for me, because I have zero background in plant biology or any hard sciences (I sell real estate, I'm no horticulturalist, just a lifelong hobbyist) and literally everything I post on this forum as advice or guidance is based on my own personal experience. So with that said, I should have posted that "IN MY EXPERIENCE, you should always remove the large fans that block airflow and light to interior budsights -- that's necessary regardless of what you think about "defoliation" as it is typically discussed on forums like this." It should also be mentioned that I grow vertically and my requirements for my plants are different than what someone else may need, say, for example, someone like Uncle Ben who it appears grows larger plants to apical dominance under horizontal lighting. 

In my experience, it is critical to open up as much airflow in the grow space as possible, and I do so at the expense of whatever benefit may be gained from not trimming large fans and allowing them to remain. I'll post a photo to illustrate what I mean; the plants below probably had 20-30 or more large fans each removed throughout flowering, and had I not done so, I would have had an absolute mess of budrot and underdeveloped budsites in that 4x4 tent. 







In any case, again, understand the frustration to see misinformation spread and stoner science and red-eyed conjecture suck and really do muddy the waters...but you could probably approach it in a more effective and less abrasive way in the future. Take it easy.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 11, 2016)

I do trim to reduce shading by upper fan leaves, but rather than removing the leaves I cut off the outer half of the leaflets, meaning the tip and a couple inches of leaf. I just grab them in one hand bunching several leaflets together and clip them off with scissors, or even just sheer them off with my thumbnail while holding them in the same hand. It's just cleaner cuts with scissors. You can usually only grab the middle three longest leaflets but cutting those ones in half reduces the majority of the shading anyway. To the plant, it's like an animal did some grazing or some bugs ate some leaf. They put out extra leaf in case of that. When you trim some off, the remaining part stays perfectly healthy. The upper leaves put out the florigen that produces the buds so it's a bad idea to completely remove them.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 12, 2016)

From the soil and then upto around 6-10 inches of every plant (about 2 foot total) is a big shadow bushy area receiving no light. In that area are some stems that gre into it but at this point will never reach the canopy or light area. Is it a good idea to at-least cut away those few entire stems that never made it to the top?.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 12, 2016)

Flowki said:


> From the soil and then upto around 6-10 inches of every plant (about 2 foot total) is a big shadow bushy area receiving no light. In that area are some stems that gre into it but at this point will never reach the canopy or light area. Is it a good idea to at-least cut away those few entire stems that never made it to the top?.


Yeah I suppose there's no point in any foliage at all after a certain depth, unless you use bottom lighting.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 13, 2016)

lawlrus said:


> What is your reasoning for saying this?


Here we go again. No, I have never removed any leaves outdoors or in.

Early this morning I responded to another newbie about this issue at another forum. Since it has been discussed a thousand times at RIU, I spent 30 minutes of my time putting together links with photos and text. Here is that thread. READ



toker post: 308885 said:


> I'm just worried the buds covered by big fan leaves might not thicken up and get big. Hmmm.


Tell that to an apple grower.  Production is driven by a plant's ability to intercept light via its foliar canopy. Fan leaves are the most efficient receptors of that light. There is a "God given" reason why they stick out into space on long petioles and are such large light collecting "panels".

There is no real world value to getting light to bud sites. They just don't have enough "green" matter, photosynthesis production, to do any good.

* Don't get confused as to why a peach grower and vineyard manager might want to get sunlight to a tree's fruit, even if it's 10% dappled light. They are focused on customer market appeal so they want fruit with fine skin pigment, color, and size (dropping 60% of the new juvenile peach set off the tree). Vineyard managers want sunlight to the fruit for a different reason - to lower levels of a chemical which produces a vegetative or herbacecous taste in the finished wine.

Here's a few links that jest might soothe da soul. This is why I might get so damn grumpy. After 16 years of repeating myself I lose patience with every new crop of newbs that follow The Herd rather than learning botanical principles.

https://www.rollitup.org/t/no-lower-budsites-do-not-need-light-to-develop-get-educated.829061/
https://www.rollitup.org/t/giving-defoliation-during-flower-a-try.839655/page-31#post-10986496
https://www.rollitup.org/t/giving-defoliation-during-flower-a-try.839655/page-126#post-11165602
https://www.rollitup.org/t/lollipopping-any-scientific-evidence.846126/page-26#post-11001634
https://www.rollitup.org/t/lollipopping-any-scientific-evidence.846126/page-22
http://rollitup.org/t/giving-defoliation-during-flower-a-try.839655/page-128#post-11170543

....and the discussion continues - https://www.rollitup.org/t/no-lower-budsites-do-not-need-light-to-develop-get-educated.829061/page-2


----------



## Flowki (Jan 13, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Here we go again


I understand the concept you are getting at but answer me this. If the plant grows tall over it's veg cycle and/or bushes out, certain leaves that were once in light now no longer are due to poor indoor light penetration (particularly in a lst grow or with plants closer together). If a solar panel is no longer able to be a solar panel what happens next?. From what I've read the plant will try to keep the lower leaves alive or the leaf will give up it's stored nutrients when needed and die, like a savings account so to speak (or do they just die?). I don't know if either are true or if they both take place together, so I'm asking you.

Assuming both are true and take place. Is the enrgy the leaf gives back to the plant worth the energy the plant spent trying to keep it alive prior?. My take on lower leaves where that they are a early warning system to possible neut deficiency or that toward the end of flower they give up stored energy if the buds demand it. Ofc assuming they can survive that long with very little light?.

Also with ought getting into a debate over what form of growing is better Another question. I assume you still grow in the 4 cola system you pushed forward. But it has to be said, I've seen ALOT more popularity on scrog or basic LST type training. Your system does sure look like it would allow more light to the lower parts of the plant where as lst/scrog blanked the canopy blocking light to any lower leaves as I'm sure you're aware. Well, I think you are smart enough to see where I am going with that question.

Btw. I've only seen a few of your posts and a most of those were quite bitter. Yes I can understand repeating the same shit to newbs will be annoying but seriously, nobody is forcing you to read or post in response to us. As the old saying goes, if you got nothing nice to say. I'm just giving you a heads up because the first post I seen of yours was amazing info but the smug shit that followed, not so much.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 13, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> Yeah I suppose there's no point in any foliage at all after a certain depth, unless you use bottom lighting.


I seen a few vertical grows and the leaves look funky as hell. I guess it's logical since that's not a natural light source angle. I assume a bottom light would be even worse?. I can see how it could confuse the plants hormones or what not as it would be confused over gravity vs light direction.

Once I can produce a spherical equilibrium chamber, I will show you an interesting plant. Or maybe just a seed ^^.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 13, 2016)

Flowki said:


> ....nobody is forcing you to read or post in response to us.


...........


----------



## ArcticOrange (Jan 13, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Here we go again. No, I have never removed any leaves outdoors or in.
> 
> Early this morning I responded to another newbie about this issue at another forum. Since it has been discussed a thousand times at RIU, I spent 30 minutes of my time putting together links with photos and text. Here is that thread. READ
> 
> ...


They need to sticky a thread thats just quotes from you from every post asking this tired question. Fans are factories! I understand removing lower growth shoots that will never reach the canopy but i leave my lower fans until they drop off and die, i find them to be a good source of nutrition the plant can pull from if it feels it isnt being a productive leaf.


----------



## SPLFreak808 (Jan 13, 2016)

To all that attempt to try defoliation. just know, you we're not the first and many MANY have tried and failed including myself. If you say it works, you need to be successful with a journal first before attempting any bold statements.


----------



## puffdatchronic (Jan 13, 2016)

just no


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 13, 2016)

You linked a thread about lower buds not needing light. I find that the lower buds are less dense and lighter color. Your plants must have been widely spaced. I think there's a minimum light intensity for cosmetically appealing buds, probably about 200 ppfd.


----------



## ArcticOrange (Jan 13, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> You linked a thread about lower buds not needing light. I find that the lower buds are less dense and lighter color. Your plants must have been widely spaced. I think there's a minimum light intensity for cosmetically appealing buds, probably about 200 ppfd.


Thats what uncle ben was getting at when he was talking about orchards pruning peach trees for nothing but visual market appeal. Just didnt vonnect the dots to cannabis. Harvest the top, leave the bottoms for a few days longer. Youll get the effect youre looking for.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 13, 2016)

lmao this thread makes little to no sense

what about all the newbie growers out there with there t5's, low watt leds, hps in flower
They all need to keep the plants short, bushy and may need to remove some fan leaves in flower to keep the humidty low and make the best use of there lights

This thread makes you think its good to have large bushy plants in flower with low airflow.
Removing some fan leaves in early flower is a very effective way of controlling the canopy shape and slowing the strech down in flower.
If you run out of height in flower you can really mess your plants up.
a lot of the growers here that are against defoliation are more likly to have a few 1kw hps over some plants in a warehouse so they never run out of space and they want large bushy plant in flower

just read this post tell you

the top 15% of foliage accounts for 80% of the photosynthesis that happens




vitamin_green_inc said:


> Hmm, I just want to point out that those studies agreed with your points about too extreme and actually clarified that the top 15% of foliage accounts for 80% of the photosynthesis that happens.
> 
> I also want to point out that these are scientific studies down with controls and your anecdotal evidence while relevant is insinificant vs the studies I am talking about where thousands upon thousands of acres of plants have been run.
> I would also like to point out that Hightimes did a similar study and regardless of how mainstream their info is, it still applies...
> I also want to point out that your argument? Is silly. Cannabis growing, again and again is proven to be just like every other crop, and to believe otherwise is to be the guy that spends more money on Advanced Nutrients that his crop


That makes a lot of sense to me, why have a 5ft plant when you can pull the same yeild or higher off a 2ft plant

imo if the canopy is very dense, only the top few inches will recive good qualty light but if you remove a few fan leaves to thin the canopy out, more leaves will recive good qualty light and airflow
turning the light into more useable enegy to grow buds


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 13, 2016)

OP check this link out
https://www.rollitup.org/t/topping-went-wrong.887803/

loads of members jump on this thread and said his mate mess the plants up by defoliation, told her there all talking crap and your mates done a great job 

they all turned out great, a large level canopy full of buds


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 14, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> lmao this thread makes little to no sense
> 
> This thread makes you think its good to have large bushy plants in flower with low airflow.


That's the way I always grew with plants crammed on top of plants. My fans took care of the fungus pressures.

Stretch is caused by the use of high P foods, genetics and lighting aside. I have posted that data link many times. Again, with ever new crop of newbs......

Check out week 4 + https://www.rollitup.org/t/spin-out-for-chemical-root-pruning.9114/


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 14, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> they all turned out great, a large level canopy full of buds


Means nothing except that cannabis will replenish what is lost to a limited extent. He lost yield and time due to recovery.

"Great" is a subjective term. It's not scientific and without a control group and a 3 time identical run with every factor controlled, it's meaningless. 

"What if" he had left all leaves on?


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 14, 2016)

@Uncle Ben , Did you know Advanced Nutrients is now ripping you off too?


----------



## kmog33 (Jan 14, 2016)

Flowki said:


> I seen a few vertical grows and the leaves look funky as hell. I guess it's logical since that's not a natural light source angle. I assume a bottom light would be even worse?. I can see how it could confuse the plants hormones or what not as it would be confused over gravity vs light direction.
> 
> Once I can produce a spherical equilibrium chamber, I will show you an interesting plant. Or maybe just a seed ^^.


Plants don't understand up, the grow towards the light source. I've don't bottom lighting and what happened was the branches all grew towards whatever light was closest to them. It was really interesting to have branches growing off the the side at the ground. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kmog33 (Jan 14, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> You linked a thread about lower buds not needing light. I find that the lower buds are less dense and lighter color. Your plants must have been widely spaced. I think there's a minimum light intensity for cosmetically appealing buds, probably about 200 ppfd.


It has to do with light causing the thc to degrade faster where it has direct contact. It why lots of people say you should dry and cure in the dark and leave some fans on while hanging. Your observation is correct. And the post about leaving the bottoms a few days longer is also on point. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 14, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> That's the way I always grew with plants crammed on top of plants. My fans took care of the fungus pressures.
> 
> Stretch is caused by the use of high P foods, genetics and lighting aside. I have posted that data link many times. Again, with ever new crop of newbs......
> 
> Check out week 4 + https://www.rollitup.org/t/spin-out-for-chemical-root-pruning.9114/



This is what I expected you to say.
With a large setup your right but ever tried add 2 x16" fan to increase air flow in a standard 1m tent, it doesn't work.
Don't growers call it bud box or somthing when you try and put a small fan under the canopy and another one aimed down at the canopy so you fill the room and don't have any gaps 
your ideal are good in theory but hard to do in practice, also you need the 16" desk fans, 12" away from the plants or you get wind burn (twisted growth, leaves dry out to fast)


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 14, 2016)

I don't do tents. They are not practical.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 14, 2016)

chuck estevez said:


> @Uncle Ben , Did you know Advanced Nutrients is now ripping you off too?


Funny stuff. Years ago I saw a video of Aryan (Greenhouse Seeds) showing "us" how he created 4 main colas in his indoors garden, bush style too. That was about 8 years after I was playing with it and then finally posting the method in cannabis forums.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 14, 2016)

kmog33 said:


> Plants don't understand up, the grow towards the light source. I've don't bottom lighting and what happened was the branches all grew towards whatever light was closest to them. It was really interesting to have branches growing off the the side at the ground.


That is a hormonal response called phototropism.

Plants do indeed understand "up". That response is called gravitropism.


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 14, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Funny stuff. Years ago I saw a video of Aryan (Greenhouse Seeds) showing "us" how he created 4 main colas in his indoors garden, bush style too. That was about 8 years after I was playing with it and then finally posting the method in cannabis forums.


funny you should mention that


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 14, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Means nothing except that cannabis will replenish what is lost to a limited extent. He lost yield and time due to recovery.
> 
> "Great" is a subjective term. It's not scientific and without a control group and a 3 time identical run with every factor controlled, it's meaningless.
> 
> "What if" he had left all leaves on?


The plants would have streched as the light was too high above the canopy.
without any trainning the plants would have grown tall so there would have been tall plants under a low amount of light
this would have reduce the yeild
also the plants would all be diffent height, very unlevel canopy 

but will agrea the plants would have neede less time in veg


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 14, 2016)

chuck estevez said:


> @Uncle Ben , Did you know Advanced Nutrients is now ripping you off too?


never believed plants need anything but the basics good luck to all them growers buy there high priced stuff


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 14, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> never believed plants need anything but the basics good luck to all them growers buy there high priced stuff


Yet FOR YEARS, their scientific formula designed specifically for weed was SUPER high in P.
and he even says his partners are furious with him for letting this out, So what else have they been hiding? lol


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 14, 2016)

kmog33 said:


> It has to do with light causing the thc to degrade faster where it has direct contact. It why lots of people say you should dry and cure in the dark and leave some fans on while hanging. Your observation is correct. And the post about leaving the bottoms a few days longer is also on point.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


One thing I noticed is that the lower buds are more resinous than upper ones, or at least more "greasy" feeling, and have less woody matter in them and are therefore milder. Tests have also shown that bottom resin is as potent as upper resin. There's no low THC resin anywhere on the plant, from the article I read anyway. It said that intense light is apparently not required to produce THC, at least not right at the bud site.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 14, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> I don't do tents. They are not practical.


yer but this is my point, would it be fair to say 90% of growers on here, have flower room 4ft x 4ft or less ?


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 14, 2016)

there are a couple of argument in favor of defoliating during flowering. with many caveats hoewever, and should be done cautiosly.

first of all I would like to say that the argument "leaves are the power cells of plants" etc etc etc is not 100% correct. in indoor conditions, if leaves are not reached by optimal light irradiation they actually take up more sugars than they produce. this means that the more illuminated leaves have to cater for the maintenance of the worst illuminated ones (and thus focus less on growth or bud formation). this said, defoliation in early stages of flowering should be done only in extreme cases of overcrowdness, and mostly with indica strains (they respond better to defoliation and have bigger leaves which cover up each other much more). excess defoliation at the wrong time can severly reduce your plant growth and final yield.
again, this should be done only in indoor growth, when growth light doesnt have an optimal penetration. outdoor growths have no such issue and dont need defoliation.

the second one (and more imprtant) is that stress signals or damage signals trigger a response in plant. especially the damage signals (which mimicks the damage from herbivores) from removing few leaves trigger an increased production of defence compounds. most defence compounds produced in responce to damage are secondary metabolites. and guess to which category THC and CBDs belong? 
same goes to a certain extent when applying stress (like flushing the nutrients away for a week).
both techniques (defoliation and flushing) have the effect of increasing the production of THC and friends in the trichomes. this is hard to prove "at home" however because you cannot measure the THC/CBDs content by yourself (you can get an indication when you smoke it though hehe).

is true on the other hand that these techniques have a definite impact of growth. as such you should never defoliate or flush early in the flowering cycle, but rather towards the end of it, when buds are pretty much formed. and never exxagerate with both.
at a certain point in flowering however plants are not really investing energy into growth anymore, meaning that removing leaves will have little to no impact on bud growth, but will have a positive impact on potency.

in the end you dont really care of making 100g of less potent weed when you make maybe 95g of much more potent one through defoliation or fluching

cheers 

Dr Ghard


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 14, 2016)

With grapes they found that 20 leaves per bunch were optimal but cutting leaves off did not have a linear reduction in grape yield. They still got reasonable yields with 7 leaves, rather than less than half as expected. The remaining leaves became more efficient. Weird but true. You could remove half a plant's leaves and it would not make that big a difference, at least in grapes.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 14, 2016)

kmog33 said:


> Plants don't understand up, the grow towards the light source. I've don't bottom lighting and what happened was the branches all grew towards whatever light was closest to them. It was really interesting to have branches growing off the the side at the ground.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I've never seen a seed do anything but roots going down and shoot going up no matter what way the seed faces. It's too much to assume this happens by accident, especially when many seeds of all kinds are germinated in darkness.

On all the vertical grows I've seen where the main or only light source was in a unnatural location the leaves did not look normal or happy above the light source. I don't know the science behind it but I guess it's the plant in a confused survival state trying to fight the countless years in evolution of gravity down / light up.


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 14, 2016)

Flowki said:


> I've never seen a seed do anything but roots going down and shoot going up no matter what way the seed faces. It's too much to assume this happens by accident, especially when many seeds of all kinds are germinated in darkness.
> 
> On all the vertical grows I've seen where the main or only light source was in a unnatural location the leaves did not look normal or happy above the light source. I don't know the science behind it but I guess it's the plant trying to fight the thousands of years worth of instinct of gravity down / light up.


plants perceive gravity and light. when a plant germinates the roots grow down while the seedling grows up. the upwards growth of the seedling is just inverse gravitropism, ie the aerial part growing opposite of where the gravity stimulus (perceived in the roots) points to. the negative gravitropism of the young seedling only lasts until the chlorophyll is made and the cotyledons (the first 2 leaves) are open. at this stage phototropism takes over the aerial parts, which will grow always towards the light (even at a 90 degree angle). roots on the other hand follow gravitropism all the growth cycle.

cheers


----------



## kmog33 (Jan 14, 2016)

Flowki said:


> I've never seen a seed do anything but roots going down and shoot going up no matter what way the seed faces. It's too much to assume this happens by accident, especially when many seeds of all kinds are germinated in darkness.
> 
> On all the vertical grows I've seen where the main or only light source was in a unnatural location the leaves did not look normal or happy above the light source. I don't know the science behind it but I guess it's the plant in a confused survival state trying to fight the countless years in evolution of gravity down / light up.


There's a whole style of growing inverted, dunno how they start seeds, but I was talking more about foliar growth.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 15, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> There's no low THC resin anywhere on the plant, from the article I read anyway. It said that intense light is apparently not required to produce THC, at least not right at the bud site.


Best scientific data for this is Mel Frank's book.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 15, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> With grapes they found that 20 leaves per bunch were optimal but cutting leaves off did not have a linear reduction in grape yield. They still got reasonable yields with 7 leaves, rather than less than half as expected. The remaining leaves became more efficient. Weird but true. You could remove half a plant's leaves and it would not make that big a difference, at least in grapes.


Now you're really getting into my expertise as I have a small vineyard selling premium vinifera grapes to winemakers. I've attended many a professional growers workshop and never heard anything about this leaves "become more efficient" stuff. In general, it takes 13-15 leaves per cluster to ripen a cluster properly. Here, have some.....




You don't necessarily worry about balancing the cannabis crop with the canopy like you would for grapes or fruits. Your goal should be to provide the most healthy amount of root and foliage mass going into the flowering response as possible.

Uncle Ben


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 15, 2016)

I think they do need a certain amount of fan leaf near a developing bud, because when I removed upper leaves and the top at 3-5 weeks they grew the first couple sets of leaves, right at the bottom of each bud, larger than normal bud leaf size. I'd say that the first 4 bud leaves grow to about the same total area as the large fan leaf that had been removed. It does then produce big solid buds though.

When plants flower, it's the leaves nearby the flowers that produce the florigen for those particular flowers. They don't spread it around the whole plant. That's probably why they replace them like that. Even though I had left large leaves at the bottom of the plant, the buds still wanted leaf right nearby, or else they wouldn't have used the energy to grow those bud leaves much larger than normal.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 16, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Your goal should be to provide the most healthy amount of root and foliage mass going into the flowering response as possible.


http://www.growweedeasy.com/marijuana-defoliation-tutorial

This man is doing the exact opposite in terms of foliage. Those plants don't look shy on top and lower bud.

Now maybe you are right and your method is superior. From the pics in that link though, can't be by much?. You are making defoliating out to be yield killing witch craft, I've seen too many grows that say otherwise.

It would be nice to see a unbiased side by side of both techniques and a dry weight.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 16, 2016)

Flowki said:


> http://www.growweedeasy.com/marijuana-defoliation-tutorial
> 
> This man is doing the exact opposite in terms of foliage. Those plants don't look shy on top and lower bud.
> 
> ...


IMO is not a good example of defoliation, I defoliation all the larger fan leaves from the top of the canopy in early flower


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 16, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> IMO is not a good example of defoliation, I defoliation all the larger fan leaves from the top of the canopy in early flower
> 
> View attachment 3587079


just before harvest


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 16, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> I think they do need a certain amount of fan leaf near a developing bud,....


So you think the leaf's production of carbos is entirely localized and contained to that area only, eh?


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 16, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> just before harvest
> 
> View attachment 3587082


Even though photos are not the be-all, some constructive criticism if I may. Unless you have about 80% brown pistils they don't look ready to me. Also, there are quite a few yellowish and unproductive leaves. Although typical of most cannabis growers, it is not the way to go.

Happy harvest!

UB


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 16, 2016)

DrGhard said:


> there are a couple of argument in favor of defoliating during flowering. with many caveats hoewever, and should be done cautiosly.
> 
> first of all I would like to say that the argument "leaves are the power cells of plants" etc etc etc is not 100% correct. in indoor conditions, if leaves are not reached by optimal light irradiation they actually take up more sugars than they produce. this means that the more illuminated leaves have to cater for the maintenance of the worst illuminated ones (and thus focus less on growth or bud formation). this said, defoliation in early stages of flowering should be done only in extreme cases of overcrowdness, and mostly with indica strains (they respond better to defoliation and have bigger leaves which cover up each other much more). excess defoliation at the wrong time can severly reduce your plant growth and final yield.
> again, this should be done only in indoor growth, when growth light doesnt have an optimal penetration. outdoor growths have no such issue and dont need defoliation.
> ...


Cannadude,pik booster, welcome back. Thought you were going to do some experimenting and show us all some stuff. Guess you decided to just tuck tail then comeback as someone else,AGAIN. now please rant on how I am wrong..........


----------



## ISK (Jan 16, 2016)

chuck estevez said:


> Cannadude,pik booster, welcome back. Thought you were going to do some experimenting and show us all some stuff. Guess you decided to just tuck tail then comeback as some else,AGAIN. now please rant on how I am wrong..........


good call chuck....it will be the rant that will prove you right or not


----------



## Flowki (Jan 16, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Even though photos are not the be-all, some constructive criticism if I may. Unless you have about 80% brown pistils they don't look ready to me. Also, there are quite a few yellowish and unproductive leaves. Although typical of most cannabis growers, it is not the way to go.
> 
> Happy harvest!
> 
> UB


http://www.growweedeasy.com/marijuana-defoliation-tutorial

Can you respond to this directly in regard to defoliation being bad. He claims to be an experienced grower and has completely contradicted your statement. the pics from both of you speak for themselves but it's interesting to know why your opinion differs so much. They are actually important contradictions that will shape how I go about things.

Have you done a side by side of both styles or can you link my to old posts you may have made that counter his claims?. I'm asking this with all ego aside.

Pics do actually mean something, but it seems only when you want them to.


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 16, 2016)

Flowki said:


> http://www.growweedeasy.com/marijuana-defoliation-tutorial
> 
> Can you respond to this directly in regard to defoliation being bad. He claims to be an experienced grower and has completely contradicted your statement. the pics from both of you speak for themselves but it's interesting to know why your opinion differs so much. They are actually important contradictions that will shape how I go about things.
> 
> Have you done a side by side of both styles or can you link my to old posts you may have made that counter his claims?. I'm asking this with all ego aside.


what was your screen name at the time when you were butthurt by UB?


----------



## Flowki (Jan 16, 2016)

chuck estevez said:


> what was your screen name at the time when you were butthurt by UB?


(sry I meant this to uncle ben) 

I don't know who you think I am, I don't have a vendetta against you. You seem very experienced and while yes.. you come off as a complete asshole I am still very interested in your knowledge. We can talk through inbox or pm if that is possible, I have no care for what ever personal wars go on here. I just want to understand why two experienced growers are so opposed. Somebody or neither are wrong and I need to know.


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 16, 2016)

Flowki said:


> (sry I meant this to uncle ben)
> 
> I don't know who you think I am, I don't have a vendetta against you. You seem very experienced and while yes.. you come off as a complete asshole I am still very interested in your knowledge. We can talk through inbox or pm if that is possible, I have no care for what ever personal wars go on here. I just want to understand why two experienced growers are so opposed. Somebody or neither are wrong and I need to know.


I dont know who you are, thats why i asked what your screen name was at the time the butthurt took place. i might seem like an asshole because i am,but i also have glasses that see thru bullshit,thats why you think i am an asshole. cause i called you out on your bs.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 16, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Can you respond to this directly in regard to defoliation being bad. He claims to be an experienced grower and has completely contradicted your statement. *the pics from both of you speak for themselves *but it's interesting to know why your opinion differs so much. They are actually important contradictions that will shape how I go about things.


No. Pics mean shit by themselves. It's the text that makes you misinterpret the photos as an experiment, which it is not. Contradicting is easy, back it up with facts is something else...

Growweedeasy is a collection of popular forum nonsense and that entire article you linked to is just too dumb shit to refute like much of what the defoliators claim, and like many other 'techniques" is a result of prohibition putting cannabis growing in the hands of many uneducated idiots who failed at everything in life and resort to growing cannabis for a living. Money growers who fool themselves into thinking they will grow more money if they remove leaves... I say let them... Weeds out the idiots from the pro farmers who will take over the industry sooner or later.


----------



## unwine99 (Jan 16, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Weeds out the idiots from the pro farmers who will take over the industry sooner or later.


Can't wait either...I respect what 'cannafolk' have done for cannabis legalization and all but I'm so over the empty-headed high school dropouts with tie dyed weed leaf t-shirts representing the industry. _True _business professionals and _educated_ cannabis cultivators studying, perfecting, and putting forth a product, minus all the charlatanism and cliche cannabis culture that plagues the market today sounds like a tall glass of ice water on a hot summers' day to me.

I would love to see cannabis go the way of artisan wine and craft beer -- something _everyone_ can partake and enjoy without the idiot loser stigmatization.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 16, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Even though photos are not the be-all, some constructive criticism if I may. Unless you have about 80% brown pistils they don't look ready to me. Also, there are quite a few yellowish and unproductive leaves. Although typical of most cannabis growers, it is not the way to go.
> 
> Happy harvest!
> 
> UB


This crop was from a couple of years back but thanks for the advice

I live in the UK and basically if i get caught with low amount of plants in a basic setup, like this link 
could walk away without any problems, may just get a warning

a larger more expensive setup with more plants would be consisted as a commercial setup and I could do 5 years.

That's why i defoliation my plants to keep them small as i can and fill them with as much bud in a basic room with low air flow and control over temps/humidity.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 16, 2016)

Sativied said:


> No. Pics mean shit by themselves. It's the text that makes you misinterpret the photos as an experiment, which it is not. Contradicting is easy, back it up with facts is something else...
> 
> Growweedeasy is a collection of popular forum nonsense and that entire article you linked to is just too dumb shit to refute like much of what the defoliators claim, and like many other 'techniques" is a result of prohibition putting cannabis growing in the hands of many uneducated idiots who failed at everything in life and resort to growing cannabis for a living. Money growers who fool themselves into thinking they will grow more money if they remove leaves... I say let them... Weeds out the idiots from the pro farmers who will take over the industry sooner or later.


could you consider defoliation will help the small Percy growers after a few crops ?
removing a few fan leaves ( less than 20% on bushy plants)

1. will reduce humidity ( reduce the chance of bud rot)
2. increase airflow
3. reduces the stretch in early flower
4. can help to keep the canopy level in late flower


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 16, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> So you think the leaf's production of carbos is entirely localized and contained to that area only, eh?


I don't know about the carbs. I mean the florigen that causes flowering. Ed Rosenthal said if you put a dark covering over one branch for long nights then only that branch flowers.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 16, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> could you consider defoliation will help the small Percy growers after a few crops ?
> removing a few fan leaves ( less than 20% on bushy plants)
> 
> 1. will reduce humidity ( reduce the chance of bud rot)
> ...


Your question assumes defoliating is a technique or method that could in some way apply to cannabis which is where you get lost in nonsense already. Once upon a time I had very similar arguments for defoliating (yeah, I discussed it from all sides and angles)... 

1. I actually remove some leaves to reduce the risk of bud rot. Let me rephrase that: I use a crappy old exhaust sized for my previous closet with a clogged carbon filter I should replace, but instead remove a few large fans to reduce transpiration and thus humidity. It does not improve my yields, but potentionally prevents a bigger loss. Did I mention I do that in week 8-9 when they start to deteriorate and it actually matters...

Removing leaves early in flowering or even half way, whenever you clowns do it, for the sake of preventing budrot proves my point... Defoliators should work in a factory boxing consumer products or something else that does not require making decisions (nothing wrong with honest labor!) and stay far away from producing cannabis unless it's to trim... The plant and its consumers deserve better. 

Removing leaves, any form of pruning, increases the susceptibility to botrytis, PM and other diseases and viruses. If you get budrot before the last week or two you're really fucking it up and add to reasons to leave it to others, or at least stfu infecting others with idiocracy.

2. Get a better exhaust and a couple of proper fans. The airflow, humidy and budrot arguments have been refuted many times, for years, yet you insist on remaining ignorant. Airflow and humidity problems are grower errors, not plant errors. You'd be fired on the spot in any professional environment for talking such nonsense. Let's remove tires from cars so there are less traffic jams...

3. Proper plant spacing and avoiding crappy pollenchucked hybrids, and switching to 12/12 soon enough instead of growing trees as if they are outdoor, temp management, proper nutrient regime, proper lighting, and other valid sensible ways reduce stretch. Suggesting removing leaves reduces stretch is just.... well, if you could understand why it is inherently retarded to suggest you would no longer have to waste time and energy even thinking the word defoliation.

4. Ridiculous nonsense that made it to the list because you are desperate to be able to fool yourself you're not wrong. (Same reason point 1 and 2 aren't lumled together). Which is ironic, because gaining knowledge usually requires being wrong more than once. What you and other defoliators lack isn't intelligence but selfrespect. You are trying to win a neverending debate that should not be a debate at all. You should be searching for the truth, not grasp for bullshit to bullshit yourself.

1-4:
Your argument is essentially.that cannabis has too many leaves and to get max yields indoor some need to be removed. Not removing leaves will make it too humid, cause rot, stretch, grow too much fluff/popcorn, and all the other nonsense... Yet, at the same time, you do not grow more and better than thousands of growers who do not have to remove leaves to prevent such problems. And then you blame the plant. Just gtfo and stfu with the endless stupid defoliation nonsense. The way you defoliators discuss with your dumb arguments, endless fallacies, the cherry picking ("it works for species X too"', instead of posting all the research that for many species has shown the downsides) and general disregard for reason, logic, facts, botany and common sense is insulting not just to the plant but the human species. 

Nobody ever has and ever will prove defoliation is some gardening method that should be applies to cannabis, yet daily people prove all the supposed reasons to do so are simply invalid, factually retarded. 

_Define retard: to slow down the development or progress of (something)_

Imagine if everyone was as dumb as defoliators (see idiocracy for examples)... we'd still be in the Stone Age and you would not even have a means to communicate your nonsense.


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 16, 2016)

chuck estevez said:


> Cannadude,pik booster, welcome back. Thought you were going to do some experimenting and show us all some stuff. Guess you decided to just tuck tail then comeback as someone else,AGAIN. now please rant on how I am wrong..........


sorry i think you confuse me for someone else


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 16, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Your question assumes defoliating is a technique or method that could in some way apply to cannabis which is where you get lost in nonsense already. Once upon a time I had very similar arguments for defoliating (yeah, I discussed it from all sides and angles)...
> 
> 
> 
> Removing leaves, any form of pruning, increases the susceptibility to botrytis, PM and other diseases and viruses. If you get budrot before the last week or two you're really fucking it up and add to reasons to leave it to others, or at least stfu infecting others with idiocracy.



this is not 100% true. the damage signal from removing a leaf actually primes plants to defend themselves agains necrotrophic pathogens (or hemi-necrotrophic like botrythis). this means plants become actually a tad more resistant to certain pathogens.
the only condition which really maked botrythis take over your plant is humidity (and of bringing some spores over to your garden ofc). 

i work for a living with botrythis and many other plant pathogens, both biotrophs and necrotrophs, and despite minimal precautions taken when inoculating them at work (meaning that i sometimes accidentally spray them on myself etc.) i never had any contamination in my cannabis plants. and i do defoliate at specific stages of the cycle.

as i said again the main factor which contributes to the spread of those pathogens is humidity levels at the leaf surface.


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 16, 2016)

DrGhard said:


> sorry i think you confuse me for someone else


*LOL*


----------



## Flowki (Jan 16, 2016)

Sativied said:


> chill


So is the link I provided with defoliated plants that seemed to be yielding just as well as those not defoliated a lie?. On a side and unbiased note I also find your hate for defoliation ironic given how topping (being much the same thing relatively speaking) is considered to increase yields. It sounds double standards to say topping some 60% of an entire plant as with Ub style is fine yet removing leaves is bad, all be it in veg for either case.

I also seek the truth but so far I've seen pics from both sides and then A LOT of hot air. Please somebody on this seemingly useless egotistical driven forum link some side by side or factual evidence that completely sinks one argument or the other. No more bs side tracking ''I'm right coz said so''. Credible links. You said yourself you learned this, show me what you read so I can learn the same.

I want you to be right, it's less work.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 16, 2016)

DrGhard said:


> this is not 100% true. the damage signal from removing a leaf actually primes plants to defend themselves agains necrotrophic pathogens (or hemi-necrotrophic like botrythis). this means plants become actually a tad more resistant to certain pathogens.
> the only condition which really maked botrythis take over your plant is humidity (and of bringing some spores over to your garden ofc).


Another idiot who should just stfu pretending to know anything about plants and botrytis throwing around terms to project the illusion of knowledge should and start over from elememtary school or get a job that doesn't require having more than half a brain.

Just a quick example:
"often starts at a point of damage or on *any decaying tissue*. Fallen flower petals resting on leaves, and *pruning wounds on stems are examples of infection points*."

Every farmer, any kid fresh from an agricultural education knows this (damaged cells are much more like to become infection points for funghi than healthy cells). One of the reasons this is important is that harvesting in stages can be unwise. Doesn't matter for your grow, but a pro with a greenhouse can't afford to be an idiot. Well, for the next few years there will be pros with huge grows who do stupid forum nonsense to their plants, but they won't survive. Just like their unhealthy plants they end prematurely.

Thus, stfu posting stupid shit that is not only not "100% true" but just some dumb intuition based nonsense that would in a more professional environment expose you for someone who should stfu, could potentially be a risk to the succes of the company, cost a lot of money, and should instead flush the toilets or bring coffee to the pros.


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 16, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Another idiot who should just stfu pretending to know anything about plants and botrytis throwing around terms to project the illusion of knowledge should and start over from elememtary school or get a job that doesn't require having more than half a brain.
> 
> Just a quick example:
> "often starts at a point of damage or on *any decaying tissue*. Fallen flower petals resting on leaves, and *pruning wounds on stems are examples of infection points*."
> ...


im sorry, but where you quote that from? wikipedia? some books?

because as i mentioned before i have quite the experience with plant pathogens, including a doctoral degree and few pubblication in peer reviewed journals (which i cannot link for a reason of anonimity, as in my country is not exactly legal growing weed)

"often starts at a point of damage or on *any decaying tissue"
*
this can be true indeed, but i dont think anyone would remove leaves and then leave them to rot next to the growing plant. even if you are growing in organic soil (which is full of decomposing matter btw, but wont trigger any bothrytis infection). even so the infection won't spread to your plants if the infected cut leaves are removed before sporulation

"*pruning wounds on stems are examples of infection points"
*
this is a classical example of generalistic information (which makes me question where you get your informations). botrythis does not infect through wounds, because as i mentioned before a wounded plant becomes actually more resistant to certain types of pathogens. wounded plants produce Jasmonate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasmonate), which primes plant to be more resistant against necrotrophic pathogens (ie pathogens which feed on dead plant matter and thus kill their host). you can read a bit about here if you can open it, specifically against bothrytis (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176161710004116), but there is plenty of literature about this subject.

a pathogen which comes through entry wounds instead are for instance the Pseudomonas bacteria. those bacteria can actually infect through wounds because they thrive in plants which activate their JA defences. this because pseudomonas spp are non-necrotrophic bacteria, and the Jasmonate-dependant defence pathways of the plant have no effect on them.


last point: ofc there is difference between a home growth and a greenhouse, but if a greenhouse is set up properly it should be the same as a house growth. as soon as leaves surface humidity is under control you won't suffer any major infection from any leaf pathogen (unless you bring your plants in contact with some heavily-infected material).


----------



## Sativied (Jan 16, 2016)

Flowki said:


> So is the link I provided with defoliated plants that seemed to be yielding just as well as those not defoliated a lie?.


 A lie is a very simplistic choice of words in this case, but to keep it simple for you, yes, growweedeasy is a lie and the defoliation article is a good example. It is targetted to retards, and the popular opinion amongst retards is that "defoliation works". Growweedeasy cares about page views and click through rates, they are not in the business of helping you or others grow weed. In short, they wouldn't get that many visitors if they had an article explaining the idiocracy of defoliation. That would be like starting a christian site and deny jesus.



Flowki said:


> On a side and unbiased note I also find your hate for defoliation ironic given how topping (being much the same thing relatively speaking) is considered to increase yields. It sounds double standards to say topping some 60% of an entire plant as with Ub style is fine yet removing leaves is bad, all be it in veg for either case.


I don't have emotions towards defoliation.

"Defoliation when in flower", the topic tile, barely English but regardless of when you do it, defoliating and topping are completely different. If that really is too hard to understand you might as well skip the rest...



Flowki said:


> I also seek the truth but so far I've seen pics from both sides and then A LOT of hot air. Please somebody on this seemingly useless egotistical driven forum link some side by side or factual evidence that completely sinks one argument or the other. No more bs side tracking ''I'm right coz said so''. Credible links. You said yourself you learned this, show me what you read so I can learn the same.
> 
> I want you to be right, it's less work.


You seek the truth? If that is really true, I feel sorry for you cause you will never find it, as you are going about it all wrong. To suggest I have a double standard because I top my plants may have sounded clever in your head but is just creating another obstacle for yourself in your path to the truth. Especially if you're looking for less work... and avoid getting in a situation where you think leaves have to be removed... topping is the way to go, unless you run a sog (many single cola plants, which you can mimick with less plants combined with topping... ).

Factual evidence and credible links proving there is no purple dragon in your garage? Ever heard of shifting the burden of proof? Nobody who can provide factual info and is credible will ever even touch the subject because it's just too idiotic.

Got a link for you nonetheless:
_The Trivium is a systematic method of critical thinking used to derive factual certainty from information perceived with the traditional five senses: sight, sound, taste, touch, and smell. In the medieval university, the trivium was the lower division of the seven liberal arts, and comprised grammar, logic, and rhetoric (input, process, and output)._

The lower division... in medieval times... and you brainless 21st century fuck ups are arguing defoliation... Go back to school and go do something useful. Please.


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 16, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Growweedeasy cares about page views and click through rates, t


and they try to sell you their books as well.


----------



## SPLFreak808 (Jan 16, 2016)

Why is this thread still moving?
Just stop being a half ass grower with half ass buds and get better lights and better environmental control and you wont need to hack up plants! Being half ass wont get you anywhere especially with quality.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Sativied said:


> A lie is a very simplistic choice of words in this case, but to keep it simple for you, yes, growweedeasy is a lie and the defoliation article is a good example. It is targetted to retards, and the popular opinion amongst retards is that "defoliation works". Growweedeasy cares about page views and click through rates, they are not in the business of helping you or others grow weed. In short, they wouldn't get that many visitors if they had an article explaining the idiocracy of defoliation. That would be like starting a christian site and deny jesus.
> 
> 
> I don't have emotions towards defoliation.
> ...


So basically, insults and question dodge?. I linked you one single example of many more defoliated plants on the internet, youtube etc etc to show the pants are not ''infected'' ''dying'' ''low yielding'' when done right.

You talk about logic and so on. Logically, topping off 60% of an entire plants stem system and foliage seems more damaging than defoliating 20% of upper to mid level leaves. I am not saying that is true or false, but logically.. anybody pulled in off the street would assume you've just beheaded and killed your plant with UB's topping technique.

I smell so much BS I can't help but prod at you more until you give me something I can say ''yes, I get you now''. You've spent more energy raging over this topic than it would have took to just link some informative and factual articles. That is condemning, unless you are trolling me on a 20 post rampage so you can finally dangle some useful info and say ''hahahaha told you so''.

If you can't tackle the questions with ought childish overly defensive rage then don't bother responding, please.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Imagine if everyone was as dumb as defoliators (see idiocracy for examples)... we'd still be in the Stone Age and you would not even have a means to communicate your nonsense.


Excellent points, as usual. There are some common bro-science drills and psychological dynamics that play out in ALL of these defoliation threads. 

1. The most common - their lack of a botanical frame of reference aka general plant gardening experiences,

2. Certain psychological defense mechanisms at play such as denial, justification, etc. The practice is justified because it "increases airflow", "gets light to the budsites, "everyone is doing it because it works". 

We've heard it all. 

And "Flowki", if you think you're gonna come in here expecting a hand out after preaching to me, a seasoned gardener, with your smart ass entitlement attitude, this after calling me names in disrespect.....you got another thing coming. I linked you to some of the other defoliation threads.

You'll figure it out.

Uncle Ben


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> So basically, insults and question dodge?. I linked you one single example of many more defoliated plants on the internet, youtube etc etc to show the pants are not ''infected'' ''dying'' ''low yielding'' when done right.


He stated what every seasoned grower knows it's true. Weedeasy is another dumb ass cananbis website out to make money like the other dozens of dumb ass cannabis websites. They're a dime a dozen.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

DrGhard said:


> as i said again the main factor which contributes to the spread of those pathogens is humidity levels at the leaf surface.


Or any conditions that encourage their growth such as temperature, 60-75F.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> He stated what every seasoned grower knows it's true. Weedeasy is another dumb ass cananbis website out to make money like the other dozens of dumb ass cannabis websites. They're a dime a dozen.


Here's a perfect example of his stupidity, a statement I clearly refuted showing the lower part of an outdoor grown plant which had "larf" or buds with very little tissue - "Leaf removal stimulates lower and mid bud growth by exposing those normally shaded out areas to *premium light.*"






Here's a shot of (my usual) secondary harvest. The one done a few weeks after the bulky main colas are harvested. *It received full sun from sunrise to sunset or to use his embellishment, it received "premium light".* This is all lower bud, "larf", without much weight to it.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> snip


I seen some of your photos and one in particular showed bud sites from top of plant (although you claimed it to be lower growth). Added with your topping style that seems like a logical dense bud growth pattern and depth of significant light penetration/growth from all I've read. Your particular topping style seems like it needs little defoliation because of the way the stems reach up and spread out inviting light directly down where what would have been the main stem. But, what of the outer edges of those stems and leaves in contact with the stems from other side by side plants?. If you only have 1 plant under one light the light penetrates directly down and that would not be an issue with correct plant spacing. However if you have multiple plants under one light those on the outer perimeter are going to get angular shadowing from the plant directly under the light or basically any light trying to penetrate on the angle from source to the furthest and lowest outer points of those plants.

My 600w light is said to cover 3sqr foot of quality light across the canopy. I would assume half of that figure would be true in penetration from light to floor and ofc spreading in a spherical pattern under and across the lower canopy. As you keep the light some 6+ inches from canopy depending on cool tubes or light strength etc it would seem 1 foot worth of quality light penetration is possible from light source spherically spreading down through the canopy. Although I understand it will ofc travel further the light quality degrades.

What I'm getting at I guess, is that if you have a plants 2 foot in length with a stem before first nodes of about 6 inches it could be beneficial to ensure light is able to penetrate the canopy upto a foot depth. So light targeted defoliation of upper to mid leaves to ensure that spherical light can penetrate within that distance set could be beneficial. No leaves below or on the outer edges of that spherical range to be removed?. Defoliating more would degrade in effect since the lower quality of light is not picked up on account of removing lower bigger fan leaves that were actually using it on account of being that big. With light defoliation above those leaves they should in theory get even more light and while being so big, can make good use of it. the closer a fan leave is to the light source, then the bige rthe shadow it will case. 1 top fan leaf could block light to 5 mid level fan leafs. Question is, does that 1 leafe closest to the most intense light do more for the plant than the 5 mid level leaves would with degraded light strength?.

http://rollitup.org/t/giving-defoliation-during-flower-a-try.839655/page-128#post-11170888

I also did see that post and it's the type of factual info for or against I am looking for. Not matter how experienced a person is I will not take their word on something because they said so. They can be wrong (not saying you are).


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> I also did see that post and it's the type of factual info for or against I am looking for. Not matter how experienced a person is I will not take their word on something because they said so. They can be wrong (not saying you are).


Are you fuckin' blind?


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Are you fuckin' blind?


What are you saying?. You gave the lowest larf extra light after shocking the plant by initial harvest, giving it two more weeks it still produced low yielding bud. That then proves that 2ft indoor plants going from a few inch to a foot canopy penetration from selective top defoliation allowing mid areas to receive ''premium'' light over 90% of the flower duration has no effect on mid level bud on the plant?. I don't care about the bottom few inches of larf that will never amount to anything.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> What are you saying?. You gave the lowest larf extra light after shocking the plant by initial harvest, giving it two more weeks it still produced low yielding bud.


No, and stop reading into this what you want to see. Nothing got "extra light" at any time. Ever walked around outdoors? Noticed that your flip flops were as bright as that pointy little head of yours? 

That plant had full sun, TOP TO BOTTOM, from sunrise to sunset. Like this plant did also.



Do you get it?


----------



## SPLFreak808 (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> I seen some of your photos and one in particular showed bud sites from top of plant (although you claimed it to be lower growth). Added with your topping style that seems like a logical dense bud growth pattern and depth of significant light penetration/growth from all I've read. Your particular topping style seems like it needs little defoliation because of the way the stems reach up and spread out inviting light directly down where what would have been the main stem. But, what of the outer edges of those stems and leaves in contact with the stems from other side by side plants?. If you only have 1 plant under one light the light penetrates directly down and that would not be an issue with correct plant spacing. However if you have multiple plants under one light those on the outer perimeter are going to get angular shadowing from the plant directly under the light or basically any light trying to penetrate on the angle from source to the furthest and loA t outer points of those plants.
> 
> My 600w light is said to cover 3sqr foot of quality light across the canopy. I would assume half of that figure would be true in penetration from light to floor and ofc spreading in a spherical pattern under and across the lower canopy. As you keep the light some 6+ inches from canopy depending on cool tubes or light strength etc it would seem 1 foot worth of quality light penetration is possible from light source spherically spreading down through the canopy. Although I understand it will ofc travel further the light quality degrades.
> 
> ...


http://rollitup.org/t/giving-defoliation-during-flower-a-try.839655/page-128#post-11170888 
did you actually attempt this yet? Because a good majority of us RIU users have and it doesn't work. When and or if you attempt it, start a journal so we can see the progress and tell you i told you so.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 17, 2016)

SPLFreak808 said:


> http://rollitup.org/t/giving-defoliation-during-flower-a-try.839655/page-128#post-11170888
> did you actually attempt this yet? Because a good majority of us RIU users have and it doesn't work. When and or if you attempt it, start a journal so we can see the progress and tell you i told you so.


I've been trying to find those photos of the RIU member growing in a tall tunnel type greenhouse in the NW. It clearly proves the point that side lighting and/or defoliating is pointless. It's back in the Politics's "Fuck the police" thread about 2-3 months ago if any one wants to search. Shows these huge bushy "trees" with good bud production almost to the ground, packed together probably10 across, one walking aisle down the middle and the ONLY side light those greenhouse plants are getting is those grown at the greenhouse perimeter.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Do you get it?


I am not reading what I want to read. You showed bottom larf on a part of the plant that gets very little to no light even ''outdoor''. You can even see on that plant you just linked the area near the pot (where you also showed your larf) is in shadow. And then once again.... I am not talking about lowest stem larf anyway.

Then you are comparing 1 single plant in ample space with superior sun penetration, ofc it's going to get optimal light exposure and penetration over a typical indoor setup. That would suggest it is optimal to only flower 1 plant per light indoor. A grower who done that for years said he gets 20% more yield putting 4 plants under one light than just one plant but he does one for the hobby. Basically why are you comparing out door along with your mashed up efforts to use the irrelevance of lowest stem larf as an argument. You are avoiding the real question I asked, read it again and stay in context with the multiple plants, light and even canopy.

I will look for this green house link, it will hopefully exhibit more factual info than your full gone conclusion of always being right.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 17, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Are you fuckin' blind?


Blind for facts and reason aka ignorant.

I used the word for decades but it wasn't until I joined grow forums that I really started to appreciate the word. The "ignore" portion of ignorant says it all.



_Ignorance is a state of being uninformed (lack of knowledge). The word ignorant is an adjective describing a person in the state of being unaware and is often used to describe individuals who *deliberately* ignore or disregard important information or facts._
The most obvious fact that is being ignored is that none of those defoliators produce more than many who don't remove a single leaf. 



Flowki said:


> I also did see that post and it's the type of factual info for or against I am looking for. Not matter how experienced a person is I will not take their word on something because they said so. They can be wrong (not saying you are).


Hopeless... Still stuck on people being right or wrong... You are looking for factual info for or against whether cars drive better without tires, birds fly better with wings, blind people can see better... You are wasting your time looking for nonsense while you surely have a lot to learn that could help you. On that note, have you ever finished a decent run?


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Sativied said:


> The most obvious fact that is being ignored is that none of those defoliators produce more than many who don't remove a single leaf.
> 
> You are wasting your time looking for nonsense while you surely have a lot to learn that could help you. On that note, have you ever finished a decent run?


Do you have some credible side by side experiments that I can put this to rest with?.

I am not wasting my time looking for nonsense, no more than uncle ben when he was looking for a growing style better than 1 top cola. I've seen clear cut evidence he was right in that venture but have still not seen credible evidence against experienced defoliation vs none defoliation, growing style superiority aside. So far it is a mess of contradiction and half baked experiments (if ever finished) by either side with something to prove. I'm entirely on the fence but seem to be inviting nothing but personal insult and evasive answers with every question.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 17, 2016)

All your going to get on this site is opinions against defoliation



Uncle Ben said:


> No, and stop reading into this what you want to see. Nothing got "extra light" at any time. Ever walked around outdoors? Noticed that your flip flops were as bright as that pointy little head of yours?
> 
> That plant had full sun, TOP TO BOTTOM, from sunrise to sunset. Like this plant did also.
> 
> ...


lmo this plant has less fan leaves than mine, looks like he took all the large fan leaves off in flower 
and all that's left is a large amount of bud leaves 

good job at defoliation UB


----------



## Sativied (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Do you have some credible side by side experiments that I can put this to rest with?.


Wow.... Stuck in limbo looking for cold wet fire.

Speaking of evasive answers, you haven't answered my question. Show me grow results from you in which there are not at least 3 things you could have done to improve yields long before even considering something like defoliation. Why argue defoliation if you can't finish a decent grow even if you wanted to. 



jacksthc said:


> All your going to get on this site is opinions against defoliation
> 
> lmo this plant has less fan leaves than mine, looks like he took all the large fan leaves off in flower
> and all that's left is a large amount of bud leaves
> ...




https://www.rollitup.org/t/vegging-plants-under-40w-t5s.878481/#post-11807835
You can't even veg a seedling without the leaves dying so stfu ...

Oh wait, it gets better...
https://www.rollitup.org/t/vegging-plants-under-40w-t5s.878481/page-4

...you pulled 250 gram in 12 weeks from a 600watt (and before you mention the T5 and 400w, I veg under T8 and then usually roughly 10 days 400w too... Yet I pull over double the grams without removing leaves).

If you had more than half a brain you should realize that obviously means you should not give advice, argue for defoliation, and in general just stfu, get your head out of your ass, and learn from those who don't fail at growing cannabis.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Wow.... Stuck in limbo looking for cold wet fire.
> 
> Speaking of evasive answers, you haven't answered my question. Show me grow results from you in which there are not at least 3 things you could have done to improve yields long before even considering something like defoliation. Why argue defoliation if you can't finish a decent grow even if you wanted to.


You don't need to concern yourself with me personally as it is irrelevant. I have nothing to prove because I have not claimed any grow style as superior or inferior fact.. If you need to use me personally as an excuse in order to dodge backing up your statement fine. If you can in fact stop side tracking I'm still on the fence, waiting for credible info other than you know best. Everyone claims to know best with nothing but hot air when asked to prove it, see my predicament?.

You waded into the conversation blurting insults and how you know this and that not to be true but then don't back it up with any links?. Why bother posting mate, get to the point otherwise.

Seriously I'm not trying to prove anybody wrong. I'm simply asking for those who say X is superior and Y is inferior to show me why that is true so I can make my own changes.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> You don't need to concern yourself with me personally as it is irrelevant. I have nothing to prove because I have not claimed any grow style as superior or inferior fact.. If you need to use me personally as an excuse in order to dodge backing up your statement fine. If you can in fact stop side tracking I'm still on the fence, waiting for credible info other than you know best. Everyone claims to know best with nothing but hot air when asked to prove it, see my predicament?.
> 
> You waded into the conversation blurting insults and how you know this and that not to be true but then don't back it up with any links?. Why bother posting mate, get to the point otherwise.


Ok, you got me, didn't actually realize you were trolling till now... Good job


----------



## Flowki (Jan 17, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Ok, you got me, didn't actually realize you were trolling till now... Good job


If I try to sell you a car and tell you it's in fine working order I am within my rights to call you a troll because you request a test drive.

Excuse me for ignoring your future posts of avoidance.


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> If I try to sell you a car and tell you it's in fine working order I am within my rights to call you a troll because you request a test drive.
> 
> Excuse me for ignoring your future posts of avoidance.


Look man he wasnt saying , "show me your grows or gtfo".What I heard him saying was , "until you can grow a healthy plant to harvest,you have more important things to focus on rather than pulling leaves of your plant".That just sounds like good advice to me no matter what side of the fence you are on man.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 17, 2016)

Flowki said:


> If I try to sell you a car and tell you it's in fine working order I am within my rights to call you a troll because you request a test drive.


Defoliator logic...

Funny thing 5-year old kids are much smarter. They don't accept shifting the burden of proof. You should look that up. Somehow you lost your ability of critical thinking. 

You continue to ask for factual info and links and evidence that there is a purple dragon in your garage, a claim you make. You claim there is the possibility that defoliating can help you or others increase your yields beyond what others get without defoliating and you could get with defoliating, and then ask others to disprove or prove it. That's just dumb trolling.



Flowki said:


> Excuse me for ignoring your future posts of avoidance.


The ignore feature works great for the ignorant.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 18, 2016)

Sativied said:


> Wow.... Stuck in limbo looking for cold wet fire.
> 
> Speaking of evasive answers, you haven't answered my question. Show me grow results from you in which there are not at least 3 things you could have done to improve yields long before even considering something like defoliation. Why argue defoliation if you can't finish a decent grow even if you wanted to.
> 
> ...


you don't get it fellow, I was really short of money at that point in my live
so i had to cut corners every where i could and grow in an old rotten shed, flower room 3ft x 3ft and 4.5ft high ( so the room was small )
budget soil and nutes, hps bulbs 12 mouths old 

I had less i had £100 to set the shed up and buy the seeds, soil etc
even turned the hps down to 400w for the first 3 weeks

just showing other member you can grow on a really low budget.

with a high yielding strain, good environment, new bulbs etc
you could double my yield but your setup and running cost going to cost you over double my budget


----------



## Flowki (Jan 18, 2016)

Resinhound said:


> Look man he wasnt saying , "show me your grows or gtfo".What I heard him saying was , "until you can grow a healthy plant to harvest,you have more important things to focus on rather than pulling leaves of your plant".That just sounds like good advice to me no matter what side of the fence you are on man.


He is assuming I am an avid defoliator out to prove it works. I'm not and have stated that multiple times. I have grown healthy plants and it is still irrelevant. I am looking at different techniques but also trying to find fact info other than ''look at my pic of buds I am right''.

I have searched many threads for side by sides or factual evidence for or against defoliation as a person on the fence about it to no avail. When he and uncle ben said it does not work i VERY SIMPLY asked them for why.. then they instantly take offense that I don't take their word for truth and go on childish shit storms instead of just linking me to some useful info. The only links I have received was from uncle ben linking to his other posts of him essentially saying he's right. Then this next guy has waded in with the same stance but again filing to give me a simple scrap of evidence so that I can say ''ok thnx m8 I see the proof now''.

Don't get me wrong, I have seen many vids and pics of growers who have completely raped the plant with extreme defoliation, I'm not interested in those and have similarly seen many people who don't defoliate have awful looking plants.

I am ofc referring to what appear to be very experienced defoliators who are getting good results. It is a contradiction to what the none defoliators are saying and while i've seen the evidence of healthy good yielding defoliated plants I am still yet to see the evidence that suggests a ''properly'' defoliated plant fairs significantly worse than a one untouched within an indoor setting.

Again I am not on either side but you can appreciate the curiosity that becomes more intense given how angry they are getting about a simple request. It is ironic that I am not worth their time to link proof yet they have spent more time and energy responding with anything but.


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 18, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Here's a perfect example of his stupidity, a statement I clearly refuted showing the lower part of an outdoor grown plant which had "larf" or buds with very little tissue - "Leaf removal stimulates lower and mid bud growth by exposing those normally shaded out areas to *premium light.*"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



that's why defoliation sohuld be done (if needed) only in indoor growths. outdoor growths in places with lots of sun have no limitations in term of light, which instead happens with indoor lights, whose spectrum and intensity and irradiation will never match the "real thing"


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 18, 2016)

Sativied said:


> The most obvious fact that is being ignored is that none of those defoliators produce more than many who don't remove a single leaf.
> 
> 
> Hopeless... Still stuck on people being right or wrong... You are looking for factual info for or against whether cars drive better without tires, birds fly better with wings, blind people can see better... You are wasting your time looking for nonsense while you surely have a lot to learn that could help you. On that note, have you ever finished a decent run?



there is another parameter which determines the quality of a harvest, and is independent by the sheer grams of bud material: secondary metabolites content. unfortunately this is almost impossible to assess for the average grower. if you have a lower gram- per-Watt ratio but your buds have more THC/CBDs terpenes etc etc in the end your harvest is more desirable, especially for medical purposes.


----------



## RM3 (Jan 18, 2016)

Yet another entertaining defoil thread LMFAO


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 18, 2016)

Flowki said:


> You showed bottom larf on a part of the plant that gets very little to no light even ''outdoor''.


So now you're calling me a liar?

You're not only hard headed, you're just a bit thick. You don't need a frickin' side by side. You need to get your retarded self into school and learn some botany starting with the function of a leaf. Then you'll be empowered to do what's right rather than what the herd says you should do.

I wrote this in response to a post you made & you still didn't get the drift --> ...........

That's it from me to you now on.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 18, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> just showing other member you can grow on a really low budget.


Of course but that wouldn't make any sense. If you can't make this hobby as confusing and complicated as can be, then it's just not worth doing. Right?

First indoor garden was a white closet, white panels sandwiched between the front and back walls located on either side of the plants, slightly opended door lined with shiny side out aluminum foil, bag seeds from Mexican stash, 250 HPS lamp in a horizontal hood hung from the closet pole, Walmart foods. Had 2 females and it was some of the best weed you'd ever want. Great yields, dense colas (for a Mexican), excellent up high..... the kind that creeps and takes the top of your head off. Cost? Price of the light.

UB


----------



## Sativied (Jan 18, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> poor excuses


I think I got it all just fine jack. Not enough income then decides to grow cannabis with a half assed setup and then thinks he's in a position to help anyone because it produced smokeable bud. Absurd.

I've seen countless of first time growers with low budgets do a much better job simply for listening to or mimicking more seasoned growers. Getting such low yields (250gr from a 600w) is fine too... till you start giving others advice on how to increase yields (the premise all the defoliators share but word differently) cause you are clearly not in a position to do so.

Doubling the running and setup costs from 100 to 200 gbp to get 250grams more seems like a good deal. You are barking up the wrong tree regardless, I run a very simple, minimalistic and cheap setup and my running costs are as low as they get with hps. And low budget soil and nutes are generally better than the expensive crap anyway.

You have no valid points and are obviously making poor excuses. What did you achieve by doing so besides throwing reason aside... the very thing that could help you succeed at growing and life. You're not helping yourself become a capable grower and most certainly not any other members. Even when selling the harvest from one crappy run you can afford to finish your setup so your excuses work only once and is no way a valid argument for defoliation or the lack of results you get. Besides that, why even bother giving advice or disagreeing if you don't have a decent setup and never completed a decent run... Instead of arguing for defoliation, you should clearly focus on the basics, like watering..., pot size, humidity levels and temps, ventilation, air circulation, plant count and bud site spacing, etc etc

It's how thousands of small growers started in NL, with a cheap T5/250/400w setup and a bugdet similar to yours, then buy more grow gear from the harvest. By the end of the year they run a 600/1000watter pulling 1gpw, able to do that 5x per year.... Totalling 3-5 kilo per year, earning rougly $14-22K making budget a non issue. And that's just the folks running a single bulb closet or tent (Usually in humid sheds, basements and attics...). It doesn't take a genius to do that, just a willingness to learn and listen to those who've done that numerous times.

Prohibition put it in the hands of those growers, who based on the fact they do grow a good amount of money per year think they are good growers, many of them are, but don't really understand what they are doing. They often merely repeat a learned trick and generally confuse perception and intiution with reality and science, leading to a lot of misinformation, nutrient scams and forum myths. From that crap new crap was crapped: people who haven't even learned the basic trick yet pretend to be able to help others, increase yields, and argue with people who not only learned the basic trick but have a clue as well, or at the very least try to understand. It has held back the cannabis industry so much and so long, so many idiots concerned with growing money and epeen, that I personally can't wait to see professional farmers take over the industry.

Starting with a low budget is only more reason to not act stupid. Yeah I said "act". Surely if you would get passed your main obstacle, yourself, you can achieve great results too. Till then, what's the point in trying to pretend you can help others learn to run while you barely learned how to crawl yourself... Besides trolling...


"even turned the hps down to 400w for *the first 3 weeks*"



jacksthc said:


> I used 400w hps *for the first 10 days* in flower and then started using 600w hps


Why do you do that? Lie to yourself, be intellectually dishonest. Things are what they are, bullshitting isn't helping you. I run 400w for a week or two as well as I already pointed out, and then you choose to remain ignorant by lying to yourself and pretending you still have a valid argument. No wonder you can't afford a proper setup, as I pointed out earlier, being so blatantly ignorant like you and the other defoliators are would get you fired on the spot in a professional setting.

It's so ironic you are all so concerned about who knows best. It's obstructing yourself. You are not less of a person or less intelligent if you don't understand (knowing is overrated, try to understand) what some others do. Some times when people take the time and effort to show you are wrong it doesn't mean he wants to be right and you to be wrong, he wants you to understand so you can make the best decision.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 18, 2016)

lmao

what are you lot talking about, with a budget strain, setup.
my yield is less than normal, that's just the way it is

This is the last crop i did in my old setup, good strain, setup etc
my yield from the 4 plants was very high for a single 600w hps










That's a 10ltr storage box under all the bud

sorry but i have not seen any pic's that make me think you can pull a higher yield than me


----------



## Sativied (Jan 18, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> with a budget strain


So you changed your premise to: defoliation increases yields in cheap setups and with "budget strains" only? Or is that just another poor excuse.



jacksthc said:


> my yield from the 4 plants was very high for a single 600w hps


 "very high" probably means something else to you than me. Talk oz, or grams, or pounds, or stfu. Actually, just stfu because you've already made it very obvious you have no problem lying to fool yourself and quantifying it properly won't make it any less bullshit. I bet that 10ltr container is filled with more than bud before you took the pic. I count nuggets only, trimmed clean, not including trim, branches, leaves etc, not the barely dried harvest.



jacksthc said:


> sorry but i have not seen any pic's that make me think you can pull a higher yield than me


I don't think there's any pic that will magically grant you the ability to think... Instead of realizing your entire premise that defoliation can result in higher yields than not defoliating is proven false already by the obvious fact defoliators don't grow more than thousands who don't, you are going to fool yourself some more by pretending you can pull higher yields than I do?

Let's be specific, you claim you can pull more from a 600w with defoliating than I can do without, but not really because you use a low ... and crap genetics, then think those prematurely finished horrible looking plants mean something? It looks pretty... disgusting, including the plants in the back, I hope for the sake of others you smoke that all by yourself. And as usual, you clearly wouldn't be able to keep the leaves on even if you wanted to... don't pretend you even have a choice in defoliating. I was referring to retarded in the strict sense of the word earlier but damn man... why on earth would you hold yourself back so much... you obviously suck at growing, not realizing that only helps you continue sucking at growing.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 18, 2016)

Sativied said:


> So you changed your premise to: defoliation increases yields in cheap setups and with "budget strains" only? Or is that just another poor excuse.
> 
> 
> "very high" probably means something else to you than me. Talk oz, or grams, or pounds, or stfu. Actually, just stfu because you've already made it very obvious you have no problem lying to fool yourself and quantifying it properly won't make it any less bullshit. I bet that 10ltr container is filled with more than bud before you took the pic. I count nuggets only, trimmed clean, not including trim, branches, leaves etc, not the barely dried harvest.
> ...


I have found defoliation works well in small setups, i do get and understand that leaves are the plants solar panels and by removing selected leaves you can control how fast parts of the plants grow 

Also understand that a leave only absorb 15% of the light so in theory you could have 5 leaves under the top leaf in a row and they would all absorb light, which turns into energy and this will help the plant grow more shoots or buds depending what stage there in 

Also all lights indoors have a limit to how far the light can penetrate the canopy, 600w hps can penetrate the canopy 18" 
so my ideal is to keep the plants short and bushy in veg, topping, removing leaves to control the canopy shape,

so in flower the canopy level and full of cola's

Relatively low levels of nitrogen in the late flowering stage helps promote proper cannabis bud development and will increase your yields

Fellow you can say i suck at growing but tbh i have been very happy with my result and you can wind yourself up as much as you want to. 

I believe everything is good in moderation, top the plant, lst and remove a few fan leaves and flower,
just gives me a good canopy shape in flower with less stretch.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 18, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> Relatively low levels of nitrogen in the late flowering stage helps promote proper cannabis bud development and will increase your yields


Not at the expense of leaves which drives bud production. 

That's some pretty stupid "logic".


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 19, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Not at the expense of leaves which drives bud production.
> 
> That's some pretty stupid "logic".


you right there about bud production but when i first learn t to grow i was lead to believe that letting the plant run out of food in the last week of flower was good.
as it gives you a better quality bud.

a lot of plants i have see on this sites have yellow leaves in late flower 

maybe i got this wrong, thanks for the advice


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 19, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> you right there about bud production but when i first learn t to grow i was lead to believe that letting the plant run out of food in the last week of flower was good.
> as it gives you a better quality bud.
> 
> a lot of plants i have see on this sites have yellow leaves in late flower
> ...


Look at it this way man,the plant is going to use the stored sugars in those leaves like mad to build flowers.You just need to keep them stocked and watch your buds grow


----------



## Flowki (Jan 19, 2016)

Resinhound said:


> Look at it this way man,the plant is going to use the stored sugars in those leaves like mad to build flowers.You just need to keep them stocked and watch your buds grow


In lst the top and mid level canopy is evenly spread over the grow area and dense. The lowest fan leaves are getting no light and showing it. They droop as if over watered. On the one hand people scream to 'leave them alone. On the other, those lowest fan leaves are a burden to the rest of the plant and will not give back more energy than they are currently taking to stay alive.

Then the secondary problem is light penetration to the middle section of the plants. With the dense top canopy light is only making to the mid section in small peep holes (the mid section starts about 6-8 inches into the canopy on the scale of the plants, 2foot tall from soil to top). Each plant has around 6 to 10 tops. ''Some'' upper fan leaves are blocking the light of 3 to 4 lower mid section leafs. The mid section leaves do however look more active than the lowest bigger fan leafs but I suppose they take priority being higher up the plant and younger (basically they are still not getting enough light although certainly more than the bottom). It is 8 plants spaced within the the recommended 3sgr foot per 600w, 2 lights in a 6f by 3f layout. 2nd week of flower.

So what would you do.

A: Remove the bottom fan leaves.
B: Don't touch lower fan leaves, selectively remove some top fan leaves that allow light exposure to multiple mid section leaves.
C: Don't do anything.
D: Experiment with four plants going either the A or B route while going route C with the other four.


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 19, 2016)

The problem is your whole argument is based on the assumption that leaves can be a burden to the plant.If a leaf becomes a burden,not getting enough light or what have you,the plant will drop it on its own,and without a wound.Leaves are not a burden and if they are the plant will remove it.So ya unless its diseased or something,theres just no reason to selectivley cull leaves.

TLDR:leaves dont block light,active leaves arent a burden,if they are the plant will cull them.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 19, 2016)

Resinhound said:


> The problem is your whole argument is based on the assumption that leaves can be a burden to the plant.If a leaf becomes a burden,not getting enough light or what have you,the plant will drop it on its own,and without a wound.Leaves are not a burden and if they are the plant will remove it.So ya unless its diseased or something,theres just no reason to selectivley cull leaves.
> 
> TLDR:leaves dont block light,active leaves arent a burden,if they are the plant will cull them.


Ah ok so the burden thing is yet another myth. If this does not offend you (as it does others ;p) do you have a good factual link I can further read into?.

''4. Food Storage. The leaves serve as food storage organ of the plant both temporarily and on long-term basis. Under favorable conditions, the rate of photosynthesis may exceed that of translocation of photosynthates toward other organs. During the daytime, sugars accumulate in the leaves and starch is synthesized and stored in the chloroplasts. At nighttime, the starch is hydrolyzed to glucose and respired or converted to transportable forms like sucrose. 

It has been demonstrated also that food is stored in the leaves until they senesce. This food is exported to the stem before leaf fall and utilized in the subsequent shoot development.'' 

It seems to indicate natural leaf loss over light deprived. I'm assuming it's a key difference as it does not talk about the process the plant goes through before it decides the ''healthy but light deprived'' leaf is not worth keeping. At-least looking at mine, those lowest leaves have been in that state of limbo for weeks.

I did read other experiments where a covered section of leaf stopped photosynthesis, I assume that means heavily shaded leaves will also do the same or close and not converting and storing energy other than what it already has.

further more, is it possible the heavily shaded leaf uses it's own currently stored energy to stay alive (in hope of finally getting some light to get going again) and once that is depleted the plant says ''well, good bye m8''.


----------



## srt8666 (Jan 19, 2016)

jesus. yet another bitch fest. 

hey jack.....your plant looks tight man. nice work...nice yield. love the coloring


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 19, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Ah ok so the burden thing is yet another myth. If this does not offend you (as it does others ;p) do you have a good factual link I can further read into?.


*Abstract*
Net photosynthesis $({\rm P}_{{\rm N}})$ and regrowth of 60-day old Agropyron smithii Rydb. plants were examined over a 10-day period following defoliation to simulate grazing. Plants grown hydroponically in full strength Hoagland's solution were moderately defoliated (1/2 tillers clipped at 5 cm), heavily defoliated (3/4 tillers clipped at 5 cm), or left as unclipped controls. Thirty minutes after clipping, ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ rates of the youngest fully expanded leaf of a remaining undamaged tiller had declined by 6%-7% in both groups of defoliated plants. Rates of ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ were subsequently monitored on the same leaves at 2-day intervals. By Day 2, ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ (per unit of leaf area) of both defoliated groups had increased to rates 5-10% higher than those preceding treatment, while ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ of control plants had decreased about 6%. From Day 2 through Day 10, ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ rates of control plants averaged 90% of their preclipping ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ rates, while ${\rm P}_{{\rm N}}$ rates of moderately and heavily defoliated plants averaged 106% and 114% of their preclipping rates, respectively. Defoliation had no significant effect on tiller production over this 10-day period. *While total new biomass production of controls was almost twice that of either of the defoliated groups * , the proportion of the new growth allocated to shoots, crowns and roots did not differ among the three groups.

Now this one is referring to grasses ofc.

And for more reading pleasure..

http://agrilifecdn.tamu.edu/briske/files/2014/03/Briske-Richards-SRM-CHAPTER95.pdf


----------



## Flowki (Jan 19, 2016)

srt8666 said:


> snip
> 
> http://agrilifecdn.tamu.edu/briske/files/2014/03/Briske-Richards-SRM-CHAPTER95.pdf


Thnx for all that, I will have to go out soon but will read it and respond later. Thnx again.


----------



## RM3 (Jan 19, 2016)

Sativied said:


> From that crap new crap was crapped: people who haven't even learned the basic trick yet pretend to be able to help others, increase yields, and argue with people who not only learned the basic trick but have a clue as well, or at the very least try to understand. It has held back the cannabis industry so much and so long, so many idiots concerned with growing money and epeen, that *I personally can't wait to see professional farmers take over the industry*.


Amen Brother !!!

Disp weed in Colorado is barely better than swag 

So many clueless people have no idea how good weed can actually be


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 19, 2016)

RM3 said:


> So many clueless people have no idea how good weed can actually be


Ironically they run towards the hype and gimmicks rather to a book on plant culture. "Designer" seed strains, rocket fuels.....lots of bullshit.

Some of the best pot I've ever grown regarding quality and pretty damn good yields was from Mexican bagseed. Mel Frank who is or was my guru confirms this with his statement in the strains by country section - "Mexican can be some of the best weed you can grow".


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 19, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> Ironically they run towards the hype and gimmicks rather to a book on plant culture. "Designer" seed strains, rocket fuels.....lots of bullshit.
> 
> Some of the best pot I've ever grown regarding quality and pretty damn good yields was from Mexican bagseed. Mel Frank who is or was my guru confirms this with his statement in the strains by country section - "Mexican can be some of the best weed you can grow".
> 
> View attachment 3589147







*Sativas* are just about the opposite of Indicas. They are tall, thin plants, with much narrower leaves and grow a lighter green in color. They grow very quickly and can reach heights of 20 feet in a single season. They originally come from Colombia, Mexico, Thailand and Southeast Asia. Once flowering has begun, they can take anywhere from 10 to 16 weeks to fully mature. Flavors range from earthy to sweet and fruity. Sativa's higher THC than CBD equals cerebral, soaring type of high, more energetic which can stimulate brain activity and may produce hallucinations.
*Sativa* plants are taller, take longer to mature, have less chlorophyll and more accessory pigments (accessory pigments protect the plant from excessive sunlight). As Sativa strains have less chlorophyll than Indica they take longer to grow, mature, and *require more light*.

*Sativa* typically takes longer to germinate and flower also, and grows more gangly then Indica breeds.

Yield is usually lower than Indica, but is very potent. Thai Sativa grows taller and has a longer flowering period, *so they are better suited for outdoors*.

This is just common sense, a pure Sativa strain is not a good plant to grow indoors under light because of the height they can grow.
seed banks have spent years crossing sativa and indica strains to get short high yielding plants 
with a strong mellow high


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 19, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> *Sativas* are just about the opposite of Indicas. They are tall, thin plants, with much narrower leaves and grow a lighter green in color. They grow very quickly and can reach heights of 20 feet in a single season. They originally come from Colombia, Mexico, Thailand and Southeast Asia. Once flowering has begun, they can take anywhere from 10 to 16 weeks to fully mature. Flavors range from earthy to sweet and fruity. Sativa's higher THC than CBD equals cerebral, soaring type of high, more energetic which can stimulate brain activity and may produce hallucinations.
> *Sativa* plants are taller, take longer to mature, have less chlorophyll and more accessory pigments (accessory pigments protect the plant from excessive sunlight). As Sativa strains have less chlorophyll than Indica they take longer to grow, mature, and *require more light*.
> 
> *Sativa* typically takes longer to germinate and flower also, and grows more gangly then Indica breeds.
> ...


There are alot of techniques availiable to control the height of your plant,I dont get what you are suggesting,dont grow sativas indoors?


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 19, 2016)

Resinhound said:


> There are alot of techniques availiable to control the height of your plant,I dont get what you are suggesting,dont grow sativas indoors?


read this link fellow 

*Sativa plants* are tall, loosely branched and have long, narrow leaves. They are usually grown outdoors and can reach heights of up to 20 feet.

*Indica plants* are short, densely branched and have wider leaves. They are better suited for growing indoors.

*sativa* plants are very hard to grow indoors 

*hybird* thats why seed banks have crossed indica with sativa so you can grow them indoors


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 19, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> read this link fellow
> 
> *Sativa plants* are tall, loosely branched and have long, narrow leaves. They are usually grown outdoors and can reach heights of up to 20 feet.
> 
> *Indica plants* are short, densely branched and have wider leaves. They are better suited for growing indoors.


and your point is?...sativas are grown indoors all the time,Im not understanding your argument here or what it has to do with defoilating during flower


----------



## Sativied (Jan 19, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> I have found defoliation works well in small setups,
> 
> 
> > So your claim is not only that in small setups you get more yield with defoliating than others (who you should learn from) who don't defoliate but also "found" it is true. Bullshit.
> ...


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 20, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Ah ok so the burden thing is yet another myth. If this does not offend you (as it does others ;p) do you have a good factual link I can further read into?.
> 
> ''4. Food Storage. The leaves serve as food storage organ of the plant both temporarily and on long-term basis. Under favorable conditions, the rate of photosynthesis may exceed that of translocation of photosynthates toward other organs. During the daytime, sugars accumulate in the leaves and starch is synthesized and stored in the chloroplasts. At nighttime, the starch is hydrolyzed to glucose and respired or converted to transportable forms like sucrose.
> 
> ...


that is absolutely true. and not only that: better illuminated leaves supplement lower illuminated leaves with sugars to sustain them, that's why leaf senescence does not happens only when the leaf start yellow and dies, but weeks earlier. the yellowing and falling off is only the final stage of a long nutrient-recycling process


----------



## Flowki (Jan 20, 2016)

DrGhard said:


> that is absolutely true. and not only that: better illuminated leaves supplement lower illuminated leaves with sugars to sustain them, that's why leaf senescence does not happens only when the leaf start yellow and dies, but weeks earlier. the yellowing and falling off is only the final stage of a long nutrient-recycling process


So in essence, as long as your useless leaves have dropped before significant bud formation then no energy is being wasted/diverted on keeping useless foliage alive?. Or, would the plant kill off those light deprived leaves in favor of sending all available energy to bud sites regardless?. Sorry if this is obvious 101 stuff.


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 20, 2016)

funny how jack is pro Defoliation, YET, he has no leaves to defoil, He fried the fuck out of them.


ANYONE who says his plants look great, needs their eyes checked!!!!


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 20, 2016)

Flowki said:


> So in essence, as long as your useless leaves have dropped before significant bud formation then no energy is being wasted/diverted on keeping useless foliage alive?. Or, would the plant kill off those light deprived leaves in favor of sending all available energy to bud sites regardless?. Sorry if this is obvious 101 stuff.


The plant will always prioritize bud sites,thats its whole agenda here.It will use leaves for storehouses (self sustaining) if they are shaded,if they become a burden the plant will drop them.Cannabis has had a few million years to adapt and learn this stratagy for surviving in the wild.The plant really doesnt need help learning how to grow its own flowers.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 20, 2016)

srt8666 said:


> jesus. yet another bitch fest.
> 
> hey jack.....your plant looks tight man. nice work...nice yield. love the coloring


thanks fellow


----------



## Ponk (Jan 26, 2016)

Hey, UB and Sativied,

Why don't you leave this thread instead of insulting everybody who doesn't think like you???

I think that everybody knows what you think of defoliation, now!!!

JP.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 26, 2016)

Ponk said:


> Hey, UB and Sativied,
> 
> Why don't you leave this thread instead of insulting everybody who doesn't think like you???
> 
> ...


ponk there's no point feeding the trolls 
they want an endless debate about defoliation and will never stop till everyone grows there way.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 26, 2016)

I see the great defoliation wars are still raging. Here's what I did recently, when I could see that there was only a couple weeks left I stripped off the vast majority of big leaves. Anything with a long petiole on it was a target. I just pinched em off where the leaflets joined the petioles to avoid having to dig around in the buds for the bases.

So my objective was to let all the established buds get lots of light and air circulation, and also have an over-rooted situation, in which there is a lot more root to vegetation from all those removed leaves not needing roots anymore. I figure that once buds have their own little leaves established they probably don't need to rely on the stem leaves anymore so they're excess baggage which is reducing airflow and putting out a lot of water vapor, causing mold. I'm afraid they had to go so their roots could be used by the more deserving buds, assuming that those extra roots won't die, at least for a while.


----------



## Indagrow (Jan 26, 2016)




----------



## Flowki (Jan 26, 2016)

BobCajun said:


> I see the great defoliation wars are still raging. Here's what I did recently, when I could see that there was only a couple weeks left I stripped off the vast majority of big leaves. Anything with a long petiole on it was a target. I just pinched em off where the leaflets joined the petioles to avoid having to dig around in the buds for the bases.
> 
> So my objective was to let all the established buds get lots of light and air circulation, and also have an over-rooted situation, in which there is a lot more root to vegetation from all those removed leaves not needing roots anymore. I figure that once buds have their own little leaves established they probably don't need to rely on the stem leaves anymore so they're excess baggage which is reducing airflow and putting out a lot of water vapor, causing mold. I'm afraid they had to go so their roots could be used by the more deserving buds, assuming that those extra roots won't die, at least for a while.


Isn't it more likely in your theory that the roots, if continuing to uptake the same amount of neuts will in fact over feed and burn the leaves they are redirecting too?, if that does not happen then it's likely the roots are not diverting as you suggest. With less foliage to evaporate water isn't it also likely that you will go longer between watering = less feeding?, amounting to a 6 and two 3's kind of deal.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 26, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Isn't it more likely in your theory that the roots, if continuing to uptake the same amount of neuts will in fact over feed and burn the leaves they are redirecting too?, if that does not happen then it's likely the roots are not diverting as you suggest. With less foliage to evaporate water isn't it also likely that you will go longer between watering = less feeding?, amounting to a 6 and two 3's kind of deal.


I think nute burn is the roots getting injured from too high a salts concentration. I don't think it's possible for roots to harm shoots by sending to much nutrients. I've never heard of that. Longer between waterings doesn't sound bad to me. They get plenty of nutes, I'm sure.


----------



## Thorhax (Jan 26, 2016)

about a year and a half ago i did a side by side test with Super lemon haze to see if defol works for myself. BTW i know leaves do the photosynthesis... so even though it went against my common sense i tried it anyways...

some KEY observations in my opinion. 

1. After each Defoliation (2 weeks into flowering and 3 weeks before harvest) the plants seamed to slow down all types of growth.

2. (same genetics, same 5 gal smart pot, same EVERYTHING) The plant i defoliated needed a lot more trimming than the plant i didn't. seams to me like because i took off all the big healthy leaves, the plant decided to make the smaller leaves and sugar leaves grow bigger and with less frost. 

3. The plant i defoliated also burned a little bit, where the one with all her leaves was fine.(same nectar of the gods mix i use)

4. defol plant yielded 3.2oz and the natural beauty 4.3oz. each plant finished about 4ft and had 12 main colas. i cut out the bottoms (lollipop) on both plants.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 26, 2016)

Thorhax said:


> about a year and a half ago i did a side by side test with Super lemon haze to see if defol works for myself. BTW i know leaves do the photosynthesis... so even though it went against my common sense i tried it anyways...
> 
> some KEY observations in my opinion.
> 
> ...


I noticed before also that buds will grow their first couple sets of leaves quite large if the stem leaves are all cut off and if they are also topped. At least plants that are mostly Indica. Numerous people have stated that they did get considerably lower yields with defoliation so it must be true. It just looks bad with all those big leaves causing shade. It's hard to resist removing them.


----------



## RM3 (Jan 27, 2016)

*Truth About Removing Fan Leaves *

I am probably one of the most outspoken members here when it comes to removing leaves from our plants, I want to share this little ditty from 


marijuana Botany
An Advanced Study: The Propagation and Breeding of Distinctive Cannabis
by Robert Connell Clarke




Leafing is one of the most misunderstood techniques of drug Cannabis cultivation. In the mind of the cultivator, several reasons exist for removing leaves. Many feel that large shade leaves draw energy from the flowering plant, and therefore the flowering clusters will be smaller. It is felt that by removing the leaves, surplus energy will be available, and large floral clusters will be formed. Also, some feel that inhibitors of flowering, synthesized in the leaves during the long noninductive days of summer, may be stored in the older leaves that were formed during the noninductive photoperiod. Possibly, if these inhibitor-laden leaves are removed, the plant will proceed to flower, and maturation will be accelerated. Large leaves shade the inner portions of the plant, and small atrophied floral clusters may begin to develop if they receive more light.

In actuality, few if any of the theories behind leafing give any indication of validity. Indeed, leafing possibly serves to defeat its original purpose. Large leaves have a definite function in the growth and development of Cannabis. Large leaves serve as photosynthetic factories for the production of sugars and other necessary growth sub stances. They also create shade, but at the same time they are collecting valuable solar energy and producing foods that will be used during the floral development of the plant. Premature removal of leaves may cause stunting, because the potential for photosynthesis is reduced. As these leaves age and lose their ability to carry on photo synthesis they turn chlorotie (yellow) and fall to the ground. In humid areas care is taken to remove the yellow or brown leaves, because they might invite attack by fungus. During chlorosis the plant breaks down substances, such as chlorophylls, and translocates the molecular components to a new growing part of the plant, such as the flowers. Most Cannabis plants begin to lose their larger leaves when they enter the flowering stage, and this trend continues until senescence. It is more efficient for the plant to reuse the energy and various molecular components of existing chlorophyll than to synthesize new chlorophyll at the time of flowering. During flowering this energy is needed to form floral clusters and ripen seeds.

Removing large amounts of leaves may interfere with the metabolic balance of the plant. If this metabolic change occurs too late in the season it could interfere with floral development and delay maturation. If any floral inhibitors are removed, the intended effect of accelerating flowering will probably be counteracted by metabolic upset in the plant. Removal of shade leaves does facilitate more light reaching the center of the plant, but if there is not enough food energy produced in the leaves, the small internal floral clusters will probably not grow any larger. *Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic change.*
If leaves must be removed, the petiole is cut so that at least an inch remains attached to the stalk. Weaknesses in the limb axis at the node result if the leaves are pulled off at the abscission layer while they are still green. Care is taken to see that the shriveling petiole does not invite fungus attack. 


whole thing available here
http://www.mellowgold.com/portugese/...nabotany2.html

I wonder if the trend of pruning leaves would change if folks knew it could cause hermies


----------



## RM3 (Jan 27, 2016)

*The Truth About Shade Leaves *

Everyday here at RIU some one ask should I trim the leaves? here lately it seems more and more members are getting it and telling the new growers NO, which is a good thing!

What would you say if I said that those shaded leaves are actually more productive for the plant?

Before I explain, let me say that we tend to call the leaves of our beloved MJ plant FAN leaves cause they are shaped like a fan. But in reality there are two types of leaves SUN leaves (the ones in the light) and SHADE leaves (the ones in the shade). Also please understand that it is the leaves that make the bud, the buds do not use light the same way that the leaves do and a plant without it's leaves will not yield big buds, period!

Getting back to my statement about leaf production, here is a quote from a texas aggie site,,,,,,,



Research done in Florida in the late 1970's revealed an interesting phenomenon. Tropical plants grown in full sun have leaves (so called sun leaves) which are structurally different from the leaves of plants grown in shade (shade leaves). Sun leaves have fewer chloroplasts and thus less chlorophyll. Their chloroplasts are located deep inside the leaves and the leaves are thick, small and large in number. Shade leaves have greater numbers of chloroplasts and thus more chlorophyll, are thin, large and few in number. When plants are grown in strong light they develop sun leaves which are photosynthetically very inefficient. *If these same plants are placed in low light*, they must either remake existing sun leaves or drop their sun leaves and grow a new set of *shade leaves which are photosynthetically more efficient. * 

Now armed with these two terms we can do a simple google for the term sun leaves versus shade leaves and get a whole bunch of great info

this quote is about trees but carries very important info with regard to how the different types of leaves help the plant,,,,,



Trees need tremendous amounts of water on a daily basis. Even though it may not rain every day, a trees' roots spread through the ground absorbing water. A mature oak tree needs 40-60 gallons of water every day. Trees have ways of conserving water, because water is very precious to a tree. One way in which a tree helps to conserve water is to develop two kinds of leaves. There are sun leaves and shade leaves. Sun leaves are small, with less surface area, which reduces the amount of exposure to the sun and wind. A shade leaf is large, with greater surface area, which increases the amount of area exposed to the sun. Remember, it is important for a tree to have its leaves exposed to the sun so that photosynthesis (food making) can take place, but not so much that it loses too much water. 


And from the same site a bit of explanation,,,,,,,,



Every tree or plant has a daily need for water. The cell, as the basic unit of life, is 75% water. Therefore, if a tree is to live, its cells must have enough water. A tree loses water by a process known as evapo-transpiration. Evaporation of water is increased by heat and wind. Transpiration is the movement of water from the roots through the stem to the leaves where evaporational losses can be high. The leaves must have a continuous supply of water to avoid dehydration and to carry out photosynthesis. 

The effect of heat and wind on leaf water loss is greatest at the top of the tree. A tree, or any other plant, has several strategies to reduce the inevitable loss of water. There is a waxy covering (cuticle) on the leaf to reduce desiccation. Stomata (leaf openings which are necessary for gaseous exchange, but do enhance evaporation) are concentrated on the underside of the leaf so as not to be directly exposed to the sun. Stomata guard cells close when evaporation conditions are most intense. 
Shade leaves and sun leaves are different. Surface area is a key consideration in reducing water loss. The less surface area that is in contact with wind or heat, the less water is lost. In other words, small is good when in direct contact with the sun. When considering the entire set of leaves on the tree, one notices that some of the leaves receive direct exposure to the sun, and other leaves receive indirect sun because of shading by other leaves. Sun leaves are found on the top part of the crown. Shade leaves are found on the bottom part of the crown especially on the north side, and have a larger surface area. Determining a ratio between shade leaves and sun leaves on a tree helps a forester or arboriculturist determine its tolerance or intolerance to shade. A tree that has a high ratio of shade leaves to sun leaves indicates it is tolerant to shade. In other words, the tree does not mind growing in the shade and is a species that is able to grow as a sapling under a dense forest canopy. 


There will be a few folks that will hollor that this info is not about MJ but it relates to all plants and is based in simle botany that applies to all plants

which leads us to my favorite quote,,,,,,,,,



Abstract.Light gradients were measured and correlated with chlorophyll concentration and anatomy of leaves in spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.). Light gradients were measured at 450, 550 and 680 nm within thin (455 μm) and thick (630 μm) leaves of spinach grown under sun and shade conditions. The light gradients were relatively steep in both types of leaves and 90% of the light at 450 and 680 nm was absorbed by the initial 140 μm of the palisade. In general, blue light was depleted faster than red light which, in turn was depleted faster than green light. Light penetrated further into the thicker palisade of sun leaves in comparison to the shade leaves. The distance that blue light at 450 nm travelled before it became 90% depleted was 120 μm in sun leaves versus 76 μm in shade leaves. Red light at 680 nm and green light at 550 nm travelled further but the trends were similar to that measured at 450nm. The steeper light gradients within the palisade-of shade leaves were caused by increased scattering of light within the intercellular air spaces and/or cells which were less compact than those in sun leaves. The decline in the amount of light within the leaf appeared to be balanced by a gradient in chlorophyll concentration measured in paradermal sections. Progressing from the adaxial epidermis, chlorophyll content increased through the palisade and then declined through the spongy mesophyll. Chlorophyll content was similar in the palisade of both sun and shade leaves. *Chloroplast distribution within both sun and shade leaves was relatively uniform * so that the chlorophyll gradient appeared to be caused by greater amounts of chlorophyll within chloroplasts located deeper within the leaf. *These results indicate that the anatomy of the palisade may be of special importance for controlling the penetration of photo-synthetically active radiation into the leaf.* Changing the structural characteristics of individual palisade cells or their arrangement may be an adaptation that maximizes the absorption of light in leaves with varying mesophyll thickness due to different ambient light regimes. 


Seems like every day I tell some one that plants do not see/react to light the same way we do, I hope that I have better explained for everyone now. Why it is so important to give your plants the proper spectrum of light as opposed to tons of lumens


----------



## RM3 (Jan 27, 2016)

Those are both repost of things I posted here over 5 years ago 

Science will always trump forum rhetoric


----------



## Mowgli Ma-Fên (Jan 27, 2016)

RM3 said:


> *The Truth About Shade Leaves *
> 
> Everyday here at RIU some one ask should I trim the leaves? here lately it seems more and more members are getting it and telling the new growers NO, which is a good thing!
> 
> ...


 good one.
but stomata are also on the upper side of leaves, at least in most plants


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 27, 2016)

Thorhax said:


> about a year and a half ago i did a side by side test with Super lemon haze to see if defol works for myself. BTW i know leaves do the photosynthesis... so even though it went against my common sense i tried it anyways...
> 
> some KEY observations in my opinion.
> 
> ...



ye, you shouldnt defoliate sativa-dominat strains like the super lemon haze. anyhow the shading is not as bad the big fan leaves of the indica-dominant strains


----------



## SPLFreak808 (Jan 27, 2016)

Thorhax said:


> about a year and a half ago i did a side by side test with Super lemon haze to see if defol works for myself. BTW i know leaves do the photosynthesis... so even though it went against my common sense i tried it anyways...
> 
> some KEY observations in my opinion.
> 
> ...


I know you've tried it because i was having the exact same issues and ive tried 3 times with 6 clones with a day 22 strip and day 45 strip.
Mid way through flower my tops (from the defoliated plant) ended up with leafy as fuck new growth that shaded bottom growth even more then its sister clone. *defoliation experts claim fat undergrowth nugs

after stripping, the plant sits there with extremly slow growth for about 3-6 days.*defoliation experts claim they dont miss a beat!

After stripping i will need to drop my feed all the way back to 1/4 - 1/3 or it will burn the fuck out of the entire plant. *defoliation experts do not mention this not even once!

After stripping it was easy to over-water as the plant seemed to drink water 50% slower. *defoliation experts also do not mention this!

We must be doing something wrong  lol


----------



## Thorhax (Jan 27, 2016)

DrGhard said:


> ye, you shouldnt defoliate sativa-dominat strains like the super lemon haze. anyhow the shading is not as bad the big fan leaves of the indica-dominant strains


I also delof'ed on an LSD and thc bomb but i didn't do a side by side so i didn't mention them. YOUR NOT SUPPOSE TO DEFOL ANYTHING


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 28, 2016)

SPLFreak808 said:


> I know you've tried it because i was having the exact same issues and ive tried 3 times with 6 clones with a day 22 strip and day 45 strip.
> Mid way through flower my tops (from the defoliated plant) ended up with leafy as fuck new growth that shaded bottom growth even more then its sister clone. *defoliation experts claim fat undergrowth nugs
> 
> after stripping, the plant sits there with extremly slow growth for about 3-6 days.*defoliation experts claim they dont miss a beat!
> ...


After you top a plant the same thing can happen, it depends on the environment, soil, light and the skill of the grower 
defoliated is for advanced growers


----------



## Resinhound (Jan 28, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> After you top a plant the same thing can happen, it depends on the environment, soil, light and the skill of the grower
> defoliated is for advanced growers


Lol.well not everyone has mastered the "defoilate by nutrient" technique yet jack.
Btw topping does not cause the plants to grow a stupid amount of leaves in your buds..then they cry about harsh bud and claim you need to starve the plant in the bulking phase.The plant knows wtf its doing man,you dont have to teach it how to make buds dude.Thats the plants whole agenda,stop thinking you know better.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 28, 2016)

RM3 said:


> *Truth About Removing Fan Leaves *
> 
> I am probably one of the most outspoken members here when it comes to removing leaves from our plants, I want to share this little ditty from
> 
> ...


With every new crop of newbies that don't know plant culture. People like jack will have to learn the hard way since they aren't a student of horticulture, just forum hype. They're gonna fuck it up come hell or high water.

We had this discussion during the very first cannabis forum on the internet. That was at Marihemp aka cannabis.com, a site I modded for a while. A website where all the heavy weights hung out including The Bros. Grimm (Cinderalla 99 breeders), Vic High, me, etc. Here's a part of that discussion between a dozen of us then....*like 17 years ago! *I have archived many such discussions for 17 years across a dozen different websites. They are all the same.

_In his book "marijuana botany" Robert Connell Clarke states that:_

_Leafing is one of the most misunderstood techniques of drug cannabis cultivation._

_He states that there are 3 common beliefs:_

_1.) large shade leaves draw energy from the flowering plant and by removing the large fan leaves_


_surplus energy will be available and larger floral clusters will be formed_



_2.) Some feel that the inhibitors of flowering , synthesized in the fan leaves during the long_


_noninductive days of summer, may be stored in the older leaves that were formed during the_


_noninductive photoperiod. Possibly, if these inhibitor-laden leaves are removed, the plant will_


_proceed to flower more quickly when the shorter days of fall trigger flowering_



_3.)Large fan leaves shade the inner portions of the plant, and small, atrophied, interior floral clusters_


_may begin to develop if they receive more light._

_Few, if any, of the theories behind leafing have any validity. _


_The large fan leaves have a definite function in the growth and development of cannabis. Large_


_leaves serve as photosynthetic factories for the production of sugars and other necessary growth_


_substances.They do create shade, but at the same time thay are collecting valuable solar energy and_


_producing foods that will be used during the floral development of the plant. _


_premature removal of the fan leaves may cause stunting because the potential for photosynthesis is_


_reduced._


_Most cannabis plants begin to lose their larger leaves when they enter the flowering stage and this_


_trend continues on until senescence (death of the plant)_


_He also states that removing large amounts of fan leaves will also interfere with the metabolic_


_balance of the plant. Leaf removal may also cause SEX REVERSAL resulting from a metabolic_


_imbalance_

_he goes on to say that cannabis grows largest when provided with plentiful nutrients, sunlight, and_


_water, and left alone to grow and mature naturally. It must be remembered that any alteration of the_


_natural life cycle of cannabis will affect productivity._

_This book has served me very well in my 12+ years of growing--I would have to side with RC on_


_this one--those sunleaves are there for a reason--they dont grow just for show--leave them on_


_there and let that plant grow naturally_

_Good Luck_


_Thunderbunny _

Uncle Ben


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 28, 2016)

RM3 said:


> *Truth About Removing Fan Leaves *
> 
> I am probably one of the most outspoken members here when it comes to removing leaves from our plants, I want to share this little ditty from


I would have to respectfully disagree.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 28, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> defoliated is for advanced growers


Priceless!


----------



## Flowki (Jan 28, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> After you top a plant the same thing can happen, it depends on the environment, soil, light and the skill of the grower
> defoliated is for advanced growers


Has to be said jack the more and more I read into things the less it makes sense to ''heavily defoliate'' at any point. Looking at posts and reasoning behind why people defoliate so much they all seem to follow the same trend of having very short plants with lower leaves very close to the soil and pot form very early lst. That low down and near the pot is going to have heavier shadow or make irrigation a problem in access and/or spillage onto the lower leaves and burning them. At that point it seems beneficial to cut them off.

Perhaps it's technique error leading toward the need for defoliation in a lot of cases. I understand people may have very limited over head space thus need to keep plants short and close to the pot but perhaps their is another growing method that better suites that condition?. It would appear UB's topping approach (for example) would better suite short plants as the V shape will push most foliage up toward the middle and top, clear of the soil/pot shadow area. that is assuming the soil level is high enough in the pot to push the plant clear of over shadowing.

I dunno, just speculating. But it would seem that the more leaves you can hold onto through the best suited technique for you or the execution of it, the better.

On the other hand I see people who have tall large plants in a lst or scrog type of setup. I guess I can see why they may loli indoor on those plants because at that height and canopy density you can clearly see no light is getting a few feet down to the base of the plant.


----------



## chuck estevez (Jan 28, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Has to be said jack the more and more I read into things the less it makes sense to ''heavily defoliate'' at any point. Looking at posts and reasoning behind why people defoliate so much they all seem to follow the same trend of having very short plants with lower leaves very close to the soil and pot. That low down and near the pot is going to have heavier shadow or make irrigation a problem in access and/or spillage onto the lower leaves and burning them. At that point it seems beneficial to cut them off.
> 
> Perhaps it's technique error leading toward the need for defoliation in a lot of cases. I understand people may have very limited over head space thus need to keep plants short and close to the pot but perhaps their is another growing method that better suites that condition?. It would appear UB's topping approach (for example) would better suite short plants as the V shape will push most foliage up toward the middle and top, clear of the soil/pot shadow area. that is assuming the soil level is high enough in the pot to push the plant clear of over shadowing.
> 
> ...


and I'll say it for the hundreth time, if you grow plants to big for your light, you do things like defoil and lollipop to try and make up for it.
like the short dude with the huge truck.


----------



## Flowki (Jan 28, 2016)

chuck estevez said:


> and I'll say it for the hundreth time, if you grow plants to big for your light, you do things like defoil and lollipop to try and make up for it.
> like the short dude with the huge truck.


I don't think they were growing them that big by accident. Seemed like they preferred one big plant under one light rather than four smaller ones etc.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 28, 2016)

Flowki said:


> Has to be said jack the more and more I read into things the less it makes sense to ''heavily defoliate'' at any point.


This is a perfect example of my point. If you were educated in botany, plant processes, this would not be an issue.


----------



## fjbudboy (Jan 28, 2016)

I appreciate the posts by Uncle Ben and RM3, very informative. I am new have only learned from the web or what the grow shop guys are willing to offer me on knowledge (I was surprised at different opinions from different locations). I've seen some really nice looking plants(photos) that have been defoliated. The way I figured though (bro-science) if terpines and things are evaporated away wouldn't shade leaves keep your pistils and trichs and everything nice a bit protected from direct uv while photons will do work to the bud sites indirectly as well as catching more overall photons for the plant as possible? There was this one time in biology class we talked about cells, photosynthesis, and energy I can't remember for sure though but 'energy is energy' may have been drilled into my head. Well in any case this thread just dropped a bunch of knowledge bombs just in case the grow shop guy across town convinces me his 'cut all fan leaves off at 5 weeks flower' is something I should try. So, thank you.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 28, 2016)

Resinhound said:


> Lol.well not everyone has mastered the "defoilate by nutrient" technique yet jack.
> Btw topping does not cause the plants to grow a stupid amount of leaves in your buds..then they cry about harsh bud and claim you need to starve the plant in the bulking phase.The plant knows wtf its doing man,you dont have to teach it how to make buds dude.Thats the plants whole agenda,stop thinking you know better.




Plants are meant to grow outside and as the sun goes over the Christmas shape plant, most leaves only receive about 5 hours of direct light as the other side starts to get shaded ( nodes don't grow long in a short time of direct light but if shoots don't get any direct light, they start to stretch )

often animals will eat some of the leaves or eat the top of the plant (topping) 

receiving 12 hours of direct light causes the long node spacing between the nodes ( last thing i want) 

removing a few fan leaves at the right time can stunt the shoots and keep the node space short ( no different to an animal eating a few large fan leaves) 

I don't starve the plant, just don't over feed them and have soil that drains well


----------



## SPLFreak808 (Jan 28, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> After you top a plant the same thing can happen, it depends on the environment, soil, light and the skill of the grower
> defoliated is for advanced growers


Yeah no, i have NEVER seen a topped plant miss a beat. Why? Because we do it in veg not flower! Nice try though about thd advanced grower bullshit lol i top every plant.


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 28, 2016)

I topped these plants and removed a few fan leaves every few days in early veg 
The results in less than 4 weeks, very healthy, short bushy plants, level canopy with at least 4 main shoots under 40w of light.
I do most my training in veg, sometimes i will do a little defoliation in early flower to reduce the plants stretch in flower 





on this plant I did a lot of defoliation in veg and she loved it, don't she look happy ?
I could have taken over 60 cutting off a 18" x 18" plant ( not a bad ideal as a mother plant)


that's try this on a large plant and harvest it 8 weeks later, let all the buds grow vertical into each other, the results where amazing 

 

and another plant 

 

fellow I know defoliation works 

but you can keep thinking what you like


----------



## RM3 (Jan 29, 2016)

Those of you that defoil should go right ahead and do so, but I post in these threads so that new growers trying to learn will get the science/botany side of the argument.

let me share a few pics from my first book 

this is one plant, that was 3 feet tall under a 400 watt light
.


----------



## RM3 (Jan 29, 2016)

It is from a chapter in the book that teaches how to grow for yield, I even said before it started, gonna show ya how to get a lb off 2 plants.

To prove that is one plant here is another pic
.


----------



## RM3 (Jan 29, 2016)

and the harvest pics, note the leaves 
.


----------



## DrGhard (Jan 29, 2016)

Thorhax said:


> I also delof'ed on an LSD and thc bomb but i didn't do a side by side so i didn't mention them. YOUR NOT SUPPOSE TO DEFOL ANYTHING


is all about on how, when and especially how much you do (like everything)


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 29, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> Plants are meant to grow outside and as the sun goes over the Christmas shape plant, most leaves only receive about 5 hours of direct light as the other side starts to get shaded


That is not true especially under windy conditions. All parts of the plant receive full or dappled light throughout the day. Got any pix of your outdoor grown plants?



> receiving 12 hours of direct light causes the long node spacing between the nodes ( last thing i want)


Wrong. The forum paradigm is long days decreases internode spacing. I have grown exclusively under HPS and not had long internodes, see my avatar.

Long internodes are driven by genetics and high P foods.


----------



## Sativied (Jan 29, 2016)

@Uncle Ben check this out for a laugh:

http://www.amazon.com/Aptus-Plant-Tech-Fasilitor-500-ml/dp/B0094WHERC

$450 for 1L. It's called Regulator in NL, where it's roughly $280 per liter.

I've been discussing this popular hyped product with some botanically-challenged money-growers in a Dutch forum. Secret recipe, no good laws on mandatory ingredient labeling, but enough hints in the description to figure out it's obviously Potassium Silicate.

Ingredients (from several sources including guaranteed analysis from Cali and Washington):
0.6 Potash
0.1 Boron
0.001-0001 Molybdenum
1.4 Si

According to one of those sources (state of Washington) it's 2x as concentrated in K as Dyna-gro Pro-Tekt also based on potassium silicate. Basically, it's 7-8x more expensive than protekt.

And that is just one of the many bottles, the most expensive, but the rest is stupid priced too. Like a K boost, a P boost, or CaMg boost... The amount of money some clowns here spend on plant "food" is stupid on a whole new level. Plenty actually see improvements but subscribe that to 'aptus regulator' and not its actual contents so they praise it and the herd follows. That dutch site dyna-groW I mentioned once is gone by the way, seems there is currently no Dyna-gro in NL available.

If I was looking for yet another job I'd import a sea container of Agsil 16H...


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 29, 2016)

RM3 said:


> Those of you that defoil should go right ahead and do so, but I post in these threads so that new growers trying to learn will get the science/botany side of the argument.
> 
> let me share a few pics from my first book
> 
> ...


you have a large plant with a low amount of fan leaves (great example lol ).
All this proves is you can pull a large yield from a plant with a low amount of fan leaves, thanks as this really helps me put my point across

A large 3ft plant under a 400w hps with large buds 3ft down in the canopy, looks like most growers got it wrong, why lolpop, scrog or even do a sog as it would be a waste of your time as you can grow buds 2-3ft long under a 400w hps

you must be growing 5ft long cola's under a 1000w hps on a 6ft plant and pulling 2.5lbs per light

don't think many growers are going to full for this mate, 1 lb of high quality bud from a 3ft x3ft plant under a 400w hps, the canopy is not even level lmao

now that get back to the real world fellow

400w hps can give you lots of 10" long cola's on a 3ft (w) x 2ft (H) plant if the canopy is level, that's why growers do sog and scrog to pull the best yield

topping and lst works well to give you a level even canopy


----------



## jacksthc (Jan 29, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> That is not true especially under windy conditions. All parts of the plant receive full or dappled light throughout the day. Got any pix of your outdoor grown plants?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ok i don't grow weed out doors but have grow loads of different plants outside in my back garden
loads of things affect the amount of light the plants get, clouds often cause plants to receive less direct light, building trees and many other things causes shade on the plants as the end of the summer draws in, the days get shorter maybe the daylight gets down to 9-10 before you harvest the plants 

while genetics and high P foods may cause Long internodes, low light will cause nodes to stretch, any grower can see this on the lower part of the plant


here the first pic i found in google pics 

 

very well grown plants but look a very stretched shoot at the bottom of the plant


----------



## Uncle Ben (Jan 29, 2016)

Sativied said:


> @Uncle Ben check this out for a laugh:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Aptus-Plant-Tech-Fasilitor-500-ml/dp/B0094WHERC
> 
> ...


These shysters have no shame. That is hilarious!


----------



## RM3 (Jan 30, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> you have a large plant with a low amount of fan leaves (great example lol ).
> All this proves is you can pull a large yield from a plant with a low amount of fan leaves, thanks as this really helps me put my point across
> 
> A large 3ft plant under a 400w hps with large buds 3ft down in the canopy, looks like most growers got it wrong, why lolpop, scrog or even do a sog as it would be a waste of your time as you can grow buds 2-3ft long under a 400w hps
> ...


Nice how you make assumptions LOL

each plant had a 400 watter over it, so 2, 400 watters and they were CMH bulbs, I have never owned an HPS 

These days, I flower under T5's 

as far as folks fallin for it, there were witnesses to the harvest as I said it's pulled from my 1st book and for what its worth I missed it by 7 grams


----------



## BobCajun (Oct 2, 2016)

I find that some leaf trimming is necessary at about 6 weeks flowering. I remove most of the upper leaf that has no trichs on it. There's more than enough leaf on the bottom parts to intercept all light. Those leaves were getting starved before and the lower buds were fixin to become fluff buds. A week after the trimming those bottom buds had darkened and started triching up. Worthless bottom bud had been turned into pretty much top bud. It's not a matter of randomly plucking leaves, it's surgical pruning to make best use of available light. 

Besides, you can take off a good third of a plant's leaves and all that happens is that the remaining ones become more efficient. They expect to get partially eaten by animals and insects so they put out extra leaf. As long as you don't see a lot of light penetrating to the soil level it's all being used. The bottom leaves just green back up instead of getting lighter and dropping off. There's no net loss, or very little. They just lose some from the top instead of the bottom. The amount of leaf actually gets pretty ridiculous by week 6. Growing leaf is a waste of space.


----------



## BobCajun (Oct 22, 2016)

What I did with my latest batch was to cut off pretty much all leaf from the top colas at the end of week 8. You could call it live manicuring practically. That's exactly what it was like, all leaf poking out from the cola had to go. I did that because I could see that those leaves, even the small ones, were shading calyxes right below them. I left bottom leaves on but it was pretty thorough deleafing on the upper parts.

So what happened was that those colas got very fat and heavy, actually the heaviest I ever got. I also reduced the hours of light to 8 for the final week. It ripened them up by the end of week 10, when with 12/12 they always still had lots of white pistils and were foxtailing. I don't know if it was the photoperiod, the deleafing or both combined that did it, but it was a bumper crop and solid buds all the way to the bottom. So I'll be using the same routine every time now. I also put reptile UV CFLs in for the final week. I also gave them 36 hours of continuous light right at the end. Could say I gave em the works.

BTW, I do recommend 10 weeks. Big difference in yield between 9 and 10 weeks, like night and day. At 9 they're usable, but at 10 they're monsters. After getting all the way to week 9 might as well go one more and get the full potential in yield. I harvested at 8 weeks a couple crops ago, due to necessity, and they were quite inadequate. No comparison between 8 and 10 weeks. 9 is an absolute minimum for usable bud density imo and 10 is optimal.

Also here's a tip on how to go 10 weeks using a 3 week harvest system (3 flowering chambers 3 weeks apart). Every third harvest you let the whole system go an extra week. Then you get a full 10 weeks with 3 week harvest frequency. So it's like 3,3,4. It's mostly 3 weeks between harvests. Just it's 4 weeks now and then.


----------



## BobCajun (Oct 23, 2016)

Forgot to mention that this was also the first batch where I had pruned the roots when I transplanted the clones. That may also have been a factor in the monster yield. The next batch also looks a lot more vigorous than before I started the root pruning. It just consisted of pulling the roots down so they were straight and cutting them off just below the main root ball. 

Also I said I gave my last batch 36 hours continuous light at the end but come to think of it the total was 42 hours. I would recommend 48 but 42 happened to be at the most convenient time to start chopping.


----------



## BobCajun (Oct 24, 2016)

After processing that, I think they could have been denser. Next time I won't defol so drastically and I won't use 8 hour days for the last week. Probably use 10 hours for the 3-4 days before the 48 hours continuous at the very end. Days never get lower than about 10 hours in Afghanistan anyway, the absolute lowest is just under 10, so I doubt there's any strain that would benefit from less. Still got a pretty good batch though even with only 8 hours.


----------



## Trippyness (Nov 1, 2016)

I have run defoliation side by side twice.
Once under Hydro HPS and once under COCO LED.
I have found that defoliation helps get more light to lower growth and I have had an increased yield.
First test was
32 plants SOG deoliated and second side was 32 SOG non.
Defoliated won by quite abit.
Coco version the defoliated side had much larger nugs down lower.
I always defoliate now.
Very helpful for me.
I would say do your own test on what strains you have, but for me it works.
I pulled a monster 6OZ plant in Coco defoliated 30 day Veg.
Amazing nugs.
Ill find the pic if I can 
I defoliate in veg and flower about every 2 weeks except for stretch. I wait until stretch is done then I defoliate.


----------



## PSUAGRO. (Nov 1, 2016)

RM3 said:


> It is from a chapter in the book that teaches how to grow for yield, I even said before it started, gonna show ya how to get a lb off 2 plants.
> 
> To prove that is one plant here is another pic
> .
> View attachment 3596367


Hotshot no pest strip in the flower room, classy.............hope you don't sell your grows


----------



## DirtyEyeball696 (Nov 2, 2016)

ButchyBoy said:


> When are people going to realize plants need leafs in order to grow...... If the plant did not need them it would not grow them!!!


Lazy growers leave all the leaves


Kush Is My Cologne


----------



## Trippyness (Nov 2, 2016)

DirtyEyeball696 said:


> Lazy growers leave all the leaves
> 
> 
> Kush Is My Cologne


I have done side by sides both in hydro and in Coco, defoliation is very helpful.
It takes quite a bit of time, but well worth it.
I really cant stand when people argue the point " its not natural"... we are growing indoors mates. We are trying to get the best yield and best plants possible. We are not looking for the most earth friendly natural way.
As for defoliation, I recommend you give it a test. Youll be surprised with the results like I was.


----------



## OrganicGorilla (Nov 3, 2016)

Leave them all alone unless they are yellow and about to fall off on their own.


----------



## Odin* (Nov 5, 2016)

jacksthc said:


> Plants are meant to grow outside and as the sun goes over the Christmas shape plant, most leaves only receive about 5 hours of direct light as the other side starts to get shaded ( nodes don't grow long in a short time of direct light but if shoots don't get any direct light, they start to stretch )
> 
> often animals will eat some of the leaves or eat the top of the plant (topping)
> 
> ...




^This, right here, is the reason I browse through these weird threads. Not to be rude, but I got a good laugh from this, thank you.




In an effort to emulate Death Valley, I don't water my plants, ever. Then I don't have to defoliate, because the leaves fall off on their own. When I think they're ready I "flush", but not with water, I use Brawndo! (It has electrolytes)


----------



## Pig4buzz (Nov 5, 2016)

Defoliated plants. These plants are 5wks flip. I have defo during veg, 1st week of flower, mostly bottom stuff. As the flowers begin to show I have plucked shade leaves to help light penetrate to lower nugs. Stripped no just shade leaves blocking light. I also place spacers after stretch to help light penetrate. 

So yes I defo at veg, earlier flower, mid flower yet all are limited i think these look ok. Matter of fact if you didn't know I defo/trimmed these you would probably never know.


----------



## mauricem00 (Nov 5, 2016)

this is and old ideal that keeps popping up. I tried it 2 years ago and yield was reduced.there were people then that swore by this technique but it has never caught on. a bad ideal that just won't die


----------



## Odin* (Nov 5, 2016)

Pig4buzz said:


> Matter of fact if you didn't know I defo/trimmed these you would probably never know.


No, we probably wouldn't (without adequate documentary/pics divulging "healed wounds"), but you would, if you were to learn how to grow a plant that develops rock hard icy buds from it's 7'+ top, to the "random twigs that sprout from below soil" bottom. If you were to and then do a side-by-side, you would wish for an alternate universe/dimension "you" to bitch slap you for your past transgressions.


----------



## Pig4buzz (Nov 5, 2016)

Thanks. Prick. Not going to get in A argument with a immature 36yr old. I guess I could of loaded this post with 30.40 pics to confirm but I am not a dick as you to corrupt I thread with your childlike comments. Here is my other room 7+ icy sticky bitches. Lol. 39 days since flip ff lol


----------



## Pig4buzz (Nov 5, 2016)

All 6 in one room moved them. Not going to load this up with pic but a couple. Now in two separate rooms. 
Defo/supercrop whatever you want to call it
One of each of the above.


----------



## Odin* (Nov 6, 2016)

@Pig4buzz Butthurt much. (Not a question, the answer is clear)


----------



## Odin* (Nov 6, 2016)

Odin* said:


> ...if you were to learn how to grow a plant that develops rock hard icy buds from it's *7'+ top*, to the "random twigs that sprout from below soil" bottom.


7'+ top=7 feet tall or more. You confused this as (
"7 or more icy plants/tops", which explains your "smug" remark...



Pig4buzz said:


> View attachment 3823849Here is my other room 7+ icy sticky bitches. *Lol*. 39 days since flip ff *lol*View attachment 3823849


Those plants are not anywhere near 7'+, so I'm positive that I am correct in my assumption.

Sorry to burst your bubble, not impressed.


----------



## Pig4buzz (Nov 6, 2016)

Your ignore and reported no time for your immaturity n sarcastic child play.


----------



## chchhazed (Nov 6, 2016)

Just read this thread from start to end, yeeehaaa that was a good bit of entertainment . Keep it comming.


----------



## Uncle Ben (Nov 9, 2016)

chchhazed said:


> Just read this thread from start to end, yeeehaaa that was a good bit of entertainment . Keep it comming.


I always get a big laugh when someone posts that for some reason they think buds are capable to a large degree of conducting photosynthesis, and that only if light is allowed to infiltrate to the buds will they develop/bulk properly.

I can always tell a noob when I see one......

https://www.rollitup.org/t/no-lower-budsites-do-not-need-light-to-develop-get-educated.829061/


----------



## greasemonkeymann (Nov 9, 2016)

Uncle Ben said:


> I always get a big laugh when someone posts that for some reason they think buds are capable to a large degree of conducting photosynthesis, and that only if light is allowed to infiltrate to the buds will they develop/bulk properly.
> 
> I can always tell a noob when I see one......
> 
> https://www.rollitup.org/t/no-lower-budsites-do-not-need-light-to-develop-get-educated.829061/


flushing, defoliating, high pk bloom "busters"...
good times.


----------



## Odin* (Nov 9, 2016)

@Uncle Ben @greasemonkeymann 

Did I do it right?


----------



## Odin* (Nov 9, 2016)

Doubled down.


----------



## backtracker (Nov 13, 2016)

Food for thought. When marijuana grows wild at first it establishes a large root mass that feeds/grows microbes etc, that is what the plant uses the big sun leaves for at first then it gets its size and after the plant is mature and ready to flower it no longer needs the bigger leaves now it's going to use the energy from the roots system to make flowers. In the wild many of the big leaves would have been eaten or knocked off by flowering time and it would have used the readily available nutrients. I have never tried it but have seen a few people have good luck doing it, It's in timing the leaf removal and feeding the microbes during flowering, maybe get the guts to try it who knows.


----------



## taylo dordun (Nov 23, 2016)

Brothers dear me .. i have confesion to make .. takin' off fan leaves (indoor growth) it's must do brothers always take the fan leaves off i can show you pic' of 5 week flower 16 plants 1200 watts hps hardcore growth ! Dont lisetn to all those fuck's that tell you not to do so . And take them off it is ok if you leave the upper leaves alone they wont buder the light penetrating down the plant .. air circulation not less important .. indoor growth much difrent from outdoor remember this all the time brothers ..


----------



## Growgettah (Jan 4, 2017)

Old thread, first post by noob here, but I want to make sure my understanding is sound....

Basically removing any leaf will cause a reaction in the plant because that leaf had a job? Be it the job it originally grew for, or for a job it matured into, it still had a job or function and after it has completed its function it yellows, withers, and eventually falls off? 

If this statement is true, then it begs the questions, if we defoliate how do we determine what that leafs' function was when it was removed and what the plant had to do to compensate for the loss of function beyond what we can see? Also, not knowing what the function is at that specific point in that leafs life when it is removed, how do we know we have not broken a chain of functions for which the plant has to compensate, be it bud production or cannabinoid production, and thus expend extra time and energy to replace?. Obviously, if the leaf is yellow and withered its function is complete, so removal is not an issue, but a healthy green leaf, if my understanding is correct, is doing something even if its just feeding the leaf that grew above it so that that leaf can perform its function, and by removing it we may break a chain of functions that can not be duplicated again and finished by the new growth due to the plants' maturity or the same components not being readily available at this point ( ie. the components being stored in the removed leaf that is maturing).

I am a big time defoliator, always have been and thought I always would be, producing great product and lots of it and would have argued about how great it is to do so, based on my personal experience. Now I wonder if I haven't sold myself short all this time, due to my lack of real understanding. That what I produced, no matter how big, good, or potent it was, could have been exponentially better if I had just stuck to early topping and left the leaves alone in flower. That the plants only grew the way they did because of the genetics, the soil, and my ability to keep my plant healthy, not defoliation, and if I left it alone during flowering, because of all the things I do right, I could have had so much more The big mistake in my thinking that all the leaves were doing the same job, but from what I have read here though, they can be storing the same components(or different) at the same time (or different times) to be released at the same time (or different times) in the plants flowering cycle to produce the best possible representation of the plant. Not even realizing that each leaf evolves on its own and can be doing a different job at that moment based on the plants needs and leaf maturity, even though side by side with another leaf, they appear to the eye, to be the same type of leaf performing the same job. Thinking that the plant wasted energy producing leaf instead of bud, when its actually the plant producing leaf so the leaf can produce the energy to grow the bud.

A big pill to swallow for me, how much more I could have had. Basic botany to others here I guess. I think I am having a Homer Simpson moment, hopefully the first of many at this site.

DOH! (slaps forehead)


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 5, 2017)

I find that removing all upper fan leaves at about 4 weeks flowering is beneficial. At that point they have finished most stretching and lower leaves are dropping due to lack of light. But while stretching, the plants have put out numerous bud sites along the main stems. All you have to do to exploit them is to remove those upper fan leaves so they can get decent light. Then you have converted from getting a flat layer of good buds on top and pretty much nothing below to getting a 3 dimensional array of buds a couple feet deep. Those buds will simply expand their lowest leaves as much as required to make up for the removed fan leaves. The root system is already in place to supply the removed leaves so they don't need to grow new roots right away, which is why they rebound so quickly. As far as I'm concerned, the fan leaves' purpose is to establish buds and once they've done that they're actually a hindrance.

If the enlarged bud leaves also get too shady I'll trim off the worst offenders as required. Sometimes I only need to clip off the tips of some leaves, as is commonly done with cuttings. No point removing an entire leaf if it's not necessary. It's hard to even get at the base of some bud leaves and if you leave leaf stems in place they will grow mold.


----------



## GrandfatherRat (Jan 5, 2017)

Reading the replies in this thread reawakens my appreciation and joy of discovery around this amazing plant. They truly are magnificent and complex creatures.


----------



## Growgettah (Jan 6, 2017)

Hey BobCajun I get it brother.Trust me you are singing my song, but it sounds like your defoliation is for maintaining a healthy plant. Mine is different. My defoliation starts in pre-flower I cut the leaf at every node with any growth except the last node and top on every branch and then every 2 weeks in flower any leaf that has a stalk to snip. I know this sounds stupid to some here (and starting to for me as well), but please folks, no flames, we are all here to learn, it has worked for me for awhile. My last grow I filled a case of mason jars (that's 12 jars) off two four and a half foot tall plants not even counting what I gave away and burned up during harvest and drying and get things ready to cure. Sorry I don't have exact weights, measurements, and pictures like most here do, I am old school, that stuff is called evidence. Way outside my comfort zone already.

I guess I always thought of my herb plant as being like old computer code. Like some old Clutch 10001110101. I thought the plant was talking to the bud going through its list, if yes do this, if no do this, as far as distribution of growth material and bud material and cannabinoid material.


----------



## Growgettah (Jan 6, 2017)

Hmmmm....half my post was lost...here it is..woohooo copy and paste is great

I thought a leaf was just one more thing the plant had to keep alive when it should be concentrating on growing bud. I mean if the plants' buds needed those mature leaves why would the buds have sugar leaves? But after reading this I have to ask myself what leaf functions did I screw up by removal. In other words, if the plant asks the bud what it needs and then tells the mature leaf to give the bud the component it needs and that mature leaf isn't there what chain of functions (size, taste, smell, or potency) did I break by that mature leaf not being there? Even further down that path of thought different parts of the bud may need different components at different times, not to mention those components might even be stackable as well, to get the best genetically possible results. If that mature green leaf isn't there to provide what the bud is screaming for then the plant has to make a new leaf to provide it and even then the plant may not come back and ask that part of the bud what it needs to be completely finished genetically, because it has moved on to the next phase of its' (and the buds) growth and maturity, be that size, smell, taste, or potency, even though what I see and harvest looks good, smells good, and tastes great with a great long lasting high, it was still not even close to what the plant was truly genetically capable of producing. Then again, I could be completely wrong, and need to go back to school to work on my reading comprehension.

Sorry to bring up this old thread, not trying to rehash old debates or reinvent the wheel just wanting validation I guess of a new thought process for me, old hat to others. Its funny though, on the one hand I find this disheartening, this new understanding that all my grows could have been so much better and on the other hand I am happy as a mule eating green briar because my genetics were still good enough to produce some great smoke even after all I seemingly did to screw it up.

I am very excited for this coming grow season.


----------



## jacrispy (Jan 6, 2017)

tldr


----------



## gr865 (Jan 6, 2017)

jacrispy said:


> tldr



Can you tell me what that means?


----------



## jacrispy (Jan 6, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Can you tell me what that means?


too long didn't read.


----------



## gr865 (Jan 6, 2017)

jacrispy said:


> too long didn't read.


----------



## Growgettah (Jan 6, 2017)

jacrispy said:


> too long didn't read.


Fair enough. Thanks for the input. I now have another acronym I can use to make complete sentences. 

Something like this....Idk smh tldr lol.


----------



## BobCajun (Jan 6, 2017)

I've tried leaving all leaf on and it resulted in mediocre yields. When I trimmed I got better yields. I always try to make sure there's enough leaf left that no light makes it directly down to the pots though. If you take off more than that you're just wasting light.


----------



## gr865 (Jan 6, 2017)

Though I do defo, first I tuck. I tuck the fan leaves through the screen, leaving them in tack to catch what light they can and they do catch light. Only after the node where that fan leaf is located put out additional leaf grow do I trim that fan.

 

You can see some of the fans behind the screen, most of them will turn back towards the light and be able to continue it function on the plant.

GR


----------



## Tim Fox (Jan 6, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Though I do defo, first I tuck. I tuck the fan leaves through the screen, leaving them in tack to catch what light they can and they do catch light. Only after the node where that fan leaf is located put out additional leaf grow do I trim that fan.
> 
> View attachment 3869632
> 
> ...


Rad Vert,, very nice


----------



## Growgettah (Jan 6, 2017)

.I think i should have made my first post in the "new grower" threads. Not that I am a new grower it just seems my questioning is basic.

I do have to agree with part of what you said Bobcajun, about the yield, it seems the plant doubles up if a leaf is removed and that's why i do it. I am just trying to process the new information I am gathering about leaf function beyond photosynthesis especially as it relates to cannabinoid production and what was stored in the leaf I removed, that could have been a precursor to higher THC levels and Terp production. I think the Robert Clarke quotes speak volumes if I read between the lines and make some intelligent (debatable i know) inferences. I will know for sure come November.

gr865 that is one more lovely plant you have there.

Thanks guys for not flaming me.


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 6, 2017)

Defoliate... especially the indica strains. They love it. I've tried both ways. Always come out better for me especially for my lower buds.


----------



## gr865 (Jan 6, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Defoliate... especially the indica strains. They love it. I've tried both ways. Always come out better for me especially for my lower buds.



Pics my friend, show the world what defo is good for. 

GR


----------



## Bakersfield (Jan 6, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Defoliate... especially the indica strains. They love it. I've tried both ways. Always come out better for me especially for my lower buds.


What's the latest into flower you'd recommend defoliation? I'm willing to give it a try.


----------



## ShLUbY (Jan 6, 2017)

Growgettah said:


> Hmmmm....half my post was lost...here it is..woohooo copy and paste is great
> 
> I thought a leaf was just one more thing the plant had to keep alive when it should be concentrating on growing bud. I mean if the plants' buds needed those mature leaves why would the buds have sugar leaves? But after reading this I have to ask myself what leaf functions did I screw up by removal. In other words, if the plant asks the bud what it needs and then tells the mature leaf to give the bud the component it needs and that mature leaf isn't there what chain of functions (size, taste, smell, or potency) did I break by that mature leaf not being there? Even further down that path of thought different parts of the bud may need different components at different times, not to mention those components might even be stackable as well, to get the best genetically possible results. If that mature green leaf isn't there to provide what the bud is screaming for then the plant has to make a new leaf to provide it and even then the plant may not come back and ask that part of the bud what it needs to be completely finished genetically, because it has moved on to the next phase of its' (and the buds) growth and maturity, be that size, smell, taste, or potency, even though what I see and harvest looks good, smells good, and tastes great with a great long lasting high, it was still not even close to what the plant was truly genetically capable of producing. Then again, I could be completely wrong, and need to go back to school to work on my reading comprehension.
> 
> ...





a leaf is a solar panel, okay? solar panels make energy, and a good canopy of leaves means lots of energy to do reactions (chemistry) inside the plant to.... make sugars and amino acids and all kinds of shit to grow. the plant pulls carbon out of the air and soil, and the more carbon it can pull, the more it can grow. leaves have stomata that take in air during photosynthesis (only photosynthesis opens stomata). extra energy is used to make extra things that get stored in, you may have guess it.... LEAVES. also stored in the buds, and in the roots! 

to put it simply.... leaves are important. yes, removing a few can be beneficial to let some more light into the lower section. but big leaves move a lot of water. and if you have a plant with thick sturdy stalks and strong vascular systems, more water moved (transpiration) means more uptake. more uptake means better growth.


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 6, 2017)

Bakersfield said:


> What's the latest into flower you'd recommend defoliation? I'm willing to give it a try.





gr865 said:


> Pics my friend, show the world what defo is good for.
> 
> GR


Latest. Shit whenever. I did mines at the mid mark of flower. Now I didn't pull every single fan leaf either. Strategically removing leaves is what I practice and it works. My lower buds have grown almost twice the size in a week... they aren't monster buds.. trust me. But it makes all the difference in the end. I don't have to chop tops and wait for lowers to finish.


----------



## Bakersfield (Jan 6, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Latest. Shit whenever. I did mines at the mid mark of flower. Now I didn't pull every single fan leaf either. Strategically removing leaves is what I practice and it works. My lower buds have grown almost twice the size in a week... they aren't monster buds.. trust me. But it makes all the difference in the end. I don't have to chop tops and wait for lowers to finish. View attachment 3870121


That looks nice! I have a few I'd like to practice on.


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 6, 2017)

Bakersfield said:


> That looks nice! I have a few I'd like to practice on.


Definitely man. Especially if you have more than 3 plants you're growing like most do. Trial and error. Every strain is different. Some like shit others don't and vise versa. I like doing shit nobody thinks is right anyways lol. Fuck it.


----------



## Bakersfield (Jan 6, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Definitely man. Especially if you have more than 3 plants you're growing like most do. Trial and error. Every strain is different. Some like shit others don't and vise versa. I like doing shit nobody thinks is right anyways lol. Fuck it.


I've seen where some people have went way overboard with the defoliation but that looks good.
I've got a jungle with lots of buds under the canopy.


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 6, 2017)

Bakersfield said:


> I've seen where some people have went way overboard with the defoliation but that looks good.
> I've got a jungle with lots of buds under the canopy.View attachment 3870151


Nice man!! Yea don't go awol... pull the ones blocking all the sunshine and everyone is happy. Plants look healthy too.


----------



## Bakersfield (Jan 6, 2017)

Thanks @rickyrozayyy. I burnt their tips during veg with a ph fluctuation but she's been humming along ever sense. I just tried something different and packed them in a bit tight.


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 6, 2017)

Burning tips or fan leaves sometimes is a showing of pushing your plants. Which isn't bad either. Especially running higher nutes or boosters. Just like a body builder taking roids. Juice those mfz. And any time bro @Bakersfield


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 9, 2017)

I know plants...I watch my plants closely every day...I watch how they react to everything I do n don't do to em...
I am the Plant Whisperer...
On a plant being grown indoors w an ABUNDANCE of leaves that's hindering airflow and light penetration to lower bud sites and... if u will... lower fan leaves...
It makes no sense whatsoever NOT to remove those larger fan leaves that are obstructing light and the movement of air throughout the body of the plant... Idk what's goin on in y'all's garden or w ur plants...But in my garden and w my plants I remove leaves...Often and many...And my plants show thier appreciation in many ways...W explosive growth and nicer fuller buds thru out the plant...What was once one day a struggling weak little budsite destined to produce shit bout a third of the way down the branch lingering in the shade is now a thriving thickening budsite well on its way to producing a nice thick dense resinous juicy bud now that it's umbrella from the light above has been removed...
Defoliate... It's the new wave... Everybody who knows anything is doin it....Get with it or get left behind...


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 9, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> I know plants...I watch my plants closely every day...I watch how they react to everything I do n don't do to em...
> I am the Plant Whisperer...
> On a plant being grown indoors w an ABUNDANCE of leaves that's hindering airflow and light penetration to lower bud sites and... if u will... lower fan leaves...
> It makes no sense whatsoever NOT to remove those larger fan leaves that are obstructing light and the movement of air throughout the body of the plant... Idk what's goin on in y'all's garden or w ur plants...But in my garden and w my plants I remove leaves...Often and many...And my plants show thier appreciation in many ways...W explosive growth and nicer fuller buds thru out the plant...What was once one day a struggling weak little budsite destined to produce shit bout a third of the way down the branch lingering in the shade is now a thriving thickening budsite well on its way to producing a nice thick dense resinous juicy bud now that it's umbrella from the light above has been removed...
> Defoliate... It's the new wave... Everybody who knows anything is doin it....Get with it or get left behind...





MrVega2 said:


> I know plants...I watch my plants closely every day...I watch how they react to everything I do n don't do to em...
> I am the Plant Whisperer...
> On a plant being grown indoors w an ABUNDANCE of leaves that's hindering airflow and light penetration to lower bud sites and... if u will... lower fan leaves...
> It makes no sense whatsoever NOT to remove those larger fan leaves that are obstructing light and the movement of air throughout the body of the plant... Idk what's goin on in y'all's garden or w ur plants...But in my garden and w my plants I remove leaves...Often and many...And my plants show thier appreciation in many ways...W explosive growth and nicer fuller buds thru out the plant...What was once one day a struggling weak little budsite destined to produce shit bout a third of the way down the branch lingering in the shade is now a thriving thickening budsite well on its way to producing a nice thick dense resinous juicy bud now that it's umbrella from the light above has been removed...
> Defoliate... It's the new wave... Everybody who knows anything is doin it....Get with it or get left behind...


Thank you!!! Lol. Jesus H Christ


----------



## gr865 (Jan 9, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> I know plants...I watch my plants closely every day...I watch how they react to everything I do n don't do to em...
> I am the Plant Whisperer...
> On a plant being grown indoors w an ABUNDANCE of leaves that's hindering airflow and light penetration to lower bud sites and... if u will... lower fan leaves...
> It makes no sense whatsoever NOT to remove those larger fan leaves that are obstructing light and the movement of air throughout the body of the plant... Idk what's goin on in y'all's garden or w ur plants...But in my garden and w my plants I remove leaves...Often and many...And my plants show thier appreciation in many ways...W explosive growth and nicer fuller buds thru out the plant...What was once one day a struggling weak little budsite destined to produce shit bout a third of the way down the branch lingering in the shade is now a thriving thickening budsite well on its way to producing a nice thick dense resinous juicy bud now that it's umbrella from the light above has been removed...
> Defoliate... It's the new wave... Everybody who knows anything is doin it....Get with it or get left behind...



Pictures are proof, post them, show the world!


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 9, 2017)

Why is that so hard to believe? @gr865


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Pictures are proof, post them, show the world!


In the pics attached Defoliation was practiced allowing many lower branches to become Tops participating in the canopy... Without Defoliation this could have never been achieved...

The Plant Whisperer has spoken...

Haha...


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> In the pics attached Defoliation was practiced allowing many lower branches to become Tops participating in the canopy... Without Defoliation this could have never been achieved...
> 
> The Plant Whisperer has spoken...
> 
> Haha...


Well done. Those look great bro!!!


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Well done. Those look great bro!!!


Thanks man...
Jus a closet n some CFLs...ha


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

Seriously!! Dope... I'm seeding some pre 98 bubba right now. I hope to grow them at home with a small setup.. I'll pick your brain then as to how to go about it. @MrVega2


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Seriously!! Dope... I'm seeding some pre 98 bubba right now. I hope to grow them at home with a small setup.. I'll pick your brain then as to how to go about it. @MrVega2


Cool bro... I'll help anyway I can...I jus keep it real simple man...I mix my own soil kinda like a Super Soil I guess n jus add tap water thru the grow...My current plants been runnin like 50days now on tap water only... Depending on plant size I average round 300-400 actual CFL watts per plant...I've mixed in a couple LED bulbs this grow jus cause they caught my eye...Less watts less heat...Seem good so far...Mixed spectrum always...Bout 50/50...Keep my temps n airflow in check....Here's a couple pics of my current plant and some other closet CFL set ups I've had jus as examples...


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

Right on bro... I'm seriously amazed as to what CFLS do... the Plant in full flower looks great!!! I've never ran soil before. Only coco and dwc... I have access to lights ballasts whatever I need. I do wanna try something collet in temp tho and it's obviously gonna be for a way smaller space. Probably my closet. Which is 3x3 with a 9 foot ceiling


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Why is that so hard to believe? @gr865


 Not hard to believe, but pics would be nice


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Not hard to believe, but pics would be nice


Scroll up bro. He replied to your pic demand....


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Right on bro... I'm seriously amazed as to what CFLS do... the Plant in full flower looks great!!! I've never ran soil before. Only coco and dwc... I have access to lights ballasts whatever I need. I do wanna try something collet in temp tho and it's obviously gonna be for a way smaller space. Probably my closet. Which is 3x3 with a 9 foot ceiling


Cool...U can def pull somthin worth while off in the closet...All I've ever worked w is soil so if u have any ?'s jus hit me up...I've never dealt w any kinda hydro grow... Never dealt w HID lighting either...All I've ever had to work w is small spaces n CFLs seem to do the trick...For me anyway...I tried LEDs once n was great for Veg n produced mad resin but I was disappointed in bud size so went bk to CFL... i think HID lighting in a closet would b a constant battle w temps unless u ran ducting n all that...Imo CFLs for small spaces is the way to go...


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

Okay cool. What type of wattage and bulb are you using exactly. Ima go scout for supplies today... 


MrVega2 said:


> Cool...U can def pull somthin worth while off in the closet...All I've ever worked w is soil so if u have any ?'s jus hit me up...I've never dealt w any kinda hydro grow... Never dealt w HID lighting either...All I've ever had to work w is small spaces n CFLs seem to do the trick...For me anyway...I tried LEDs once n was great for Veg n produced mad resin but I was disappointed in bud size so went bk to CFL... i think HID lighting in a closet would b a constant battle w temps unless u ran ducting n all that...Imo CFLs for small spaces is the way to go...


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Scroll up bro. He replied to your pic demand....


Hey bro,
your post was the first I read and responded too. And it was not a demand, a request yes.
If you look you will see I like the pics and post of MVaga
Please I am not looking for argument here, and I hope your not. I am here to learn and pics are a good teaching tool.
GR


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

There's two diff spectrums of CFL...I mix em 50/50 during Veg and flower...And they come in all diff wattages...I've used em all at one point or another... Mainly I spread out the 23watters w "y" splitters and the 42watters are nice too...Not much bigger in actual size but pack almost double the wattage/lumens... Keep em close...Round 6 inches give or take a couple inches here n there...Spread out evenly


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Hey bro,
> your post was the first I read and responded too. And it was not a demand, a request yes.
> If you look you will see I like the pics and post of MVaga
> Please I am not looking for argument here, and I hope your not. I am here to learn and pics are a good teaching tool.
> GR


What's up man...
Nah it's all good bro...
No offense taken...
I don't take anything too seriously...I may argue n talk shit to entertain myself sometimes...Ha...But never any hard feelings...
I like pics n learn from em too...


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> What's up man...
> Nah it's all good bro...
> No offense taken...
> I don't take anything too seriously...I may argue n talk shit to entertain myself sometimes...Ha...But never any hard feelings...
> I like pics n learn from em too...



My reply was not focused at you, I was just commenting on Ricky's postings. 
Yes all is good, I totally am impressed with your grow, thumbs up to you.
GR


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

I have 130 plants in flower. What would you like to see @gr865 .... if you wanna see or watch people defoliate. Youtube it..   I will do several rounds of defoliation... this was the first. I will do another at week 6. Then at week 8.


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

alien og that I strategically pulled leaves from. Will also defoliate twice more... @gr865


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

Heated debates on RIU/Facebook 4 growers are entertaining and ammusing... There's at least 100ways to skin a cat...But I promise my way is the best...Ha...I've witnessed a few showdowns on here...I was actively participating on this site a few years ago...We had diff labels for our alias's then for example instead of "well known member" it was "Mr Ganja" or sumthin like that...U got rep points for things such as advice given... Pics of ur Plants/Grow...And ur status name changed accordingly... Anyway I can remember this certain fellow member having a lengthy heated debate/argument w that Subcool guy who at the time had his own section of this forum and he was a moderator of the site...It all started over some seeds the guy had ordered that got smashed by customs while being delivered...I guess that SubFool guy makes his own seeds n sells em or some shit like that n coincidentally the seeds that were smashed were TGA seeds...I guess that Sub guy took offense to the guy talkin abt it publicaly... Maybe he felt like it was bad for business or sumthin idk but he popped in bein smart n talkin shit...They went at it bk n forth for a few days...That Sub dude was so heated he used his Mod powers/privileges to go in and change the dudes posts/comments....He showed his Tru colors...And they weren't purple n neon green...ha...I think they took his mod powers away after that n he eventually fell off the site completely ...I haven't seen him around since I've been back anyway...
I kinda rambled on n got off subject...It's just a story


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> View attachment 3872819 alien og that I strategically pulled leaves from. Will also defoliate twice more... @gr865


That's awesome Bro...It's cool that ur in a position to grow on that scale... Growing is my passion I eventually wanna do it for a living


----------



## budman111 (Jan 10, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Pictures are proof, post them, show the world!


@rickyrozayyy is all talk, look at my sig...


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> I have 130 plants in flower. What would you like to see @gr865 .... if you wanna see or watch people defoliate. Youtube it.. View attachment 3872812 View attachment 3872815 I will do several rounds of defoliation... this was the first. I will do another at week 6. Then at week 8.


Not sure what I did to piss you off, but I am sorry what ever it was.
I hope you accept that!


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

I'm trying to work on my shitty attitude bro. No apology needed but mines


gr865 said:


> Not sure what I did to piss you off, but I am sorry what ever it was.
> I hope you accept that!


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> That's awesome Bro...It's cool that ur in a position to grow on that scale... Growing is my passion I eventually wanna do it for a living


Mee too man. That's why i get so hyped up in these rooms lol. I've made a living growing for almost 2 years now. Best job I've ever had bro


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> Heated debates on RIU/Facebook 4 growers are entertaining and ammusing... There's at least 100ways to skin a cat...But I promise my way is the best...Ha...I've witnessed a few showdowns on here...I was actively participating on this site a few years ago...We had diff labels for our alias's then for example instead of "well known member" it was "Mr Ganja" or sumthin like that...U got rep points for things such as advice given... Pics of ur Plants/Grow...And ur status name changed accordingly... Anyway I can remember this certain fellow member having a lengthy heated debate/argument w that Subcool guy who at the time had his own section of this forum and he was a moderator of the site...It all started over some seeds the guy had ordered that got smashed by customs while being delivered...I guess that SubFool guy makes his own seeds n sells em or some shit like that n coincidentally the seeds that were smashed were TGA seeds...I guess that Sub guy took offense to the guy talkin abt it publicaly... Maybe he felt like it was bad for business or sumthin idk but he popped in bein smart n talkin shit...They went at it bk n forth for a few days...That Sub dude was so heated he used his Mod powers/privileges to go in and change the dudes posts/comments....He showed his Tru colors...And they weren't purple n neon green...ha...I think they took his mod powers away after that n he eventually fell off the site completely ...I haven't seen him around since I've been back anyway...
> I kinda rambled on n got off subject...It's just a story


It is my understanding that TGA seeds is Subcool's company. I have some people that buy from him and I purchased and grew out some of his Querkle, Urkle/Space Queen, hybrid. It was a short but nicely structured plant, good flavor and a good high also. Got some good medicine out of it, for my back spasms.
That was in 2011 or 2012 and I had no problem getting the seeds, all germed and produced about 2+ zips a plant.
I have seen some really bad trolling on here and other sites as well. They try and troll me and I will just ignore them. Never had it happen and hope I don't but ignore is the best way.
Be nice, be happy, share your knowledge and use these sites as a learning tool.

GR

This is this springs grow set up.
 

This was my fall 16 grow, I have increased the size of my screens and did not have anymore SS wire so this next grow I am using the plastic fencing.


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 10, 2017)

gr865 said:


> It is my understanding that TGA seeds is Subcool's company. I have some people that buy from him and I purchased and grew out some of his Querkle, Urkle/Space Queen, hybrid. It was a short but nicely structured plant, good flavor and a good high also. Got some good medicine out of it, for my back spasms.
> That was in 2011 or 2012 and I had no problem getting the seeds, all germed and produced about 2+ zips a plant.
> I have seen some really bad trolling on here and other sites as well. They try and troll me and I will just ignore them. Never had it happen and hope I don't but ignore is the best way.
> Be nice, be happy, share your knowledge and use these sites as a learning tool.
> ...


That's a cool technique ya got goin there... Always cool to see diff stuff...

And yeah that's the only way to deal with a Troll... Ignore them...


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> That's a cool technique ya got goin there... Always cool to see diff stuff...
> 
> And yeah that's the only way to deal with a Troll... Ignore them...



I will have a 315W CMH as my top light and a 400W HPS as the bottom light, both will be vertical in the tent with the screens around them. That way, instead of only 16 sq ft of floor space I have about 28 sq ft to work with. I am awaiting some clones and will start my new grow, if they do not get here soon I will be planting Barneys Farm G13 for this vertical grow.
GR
You can check my sig to get to this springs journal.


----------



## gr865 (Jan 10, 2017)

rickyrozayyy said:


> Mee too man. That's why i get so hyped up in these rooms lol. I've made a living growing for almost 2 years now. Best job I've ever had bro



Ricky, I don't sell, just try and grow my own meds, I am 69 years old, been smoking pot since 1963, grown off and on over the years but now I grow all my own meds. Been about 7 yrs now and progressively building on my system after yrs of trying to half ass it. The state I am in is not cannabis friendly so I have to watch my butt.
130 plants, now that is work. I hope the quality is as good as the looks of them plants. Guessing all clones from single parent? Good work.

GR


----------



## rickyrozayyy (Jan 10, 2017)

Clones were purchased bro. We go thru purple city genetics... I'm definitely lucky to be in the position I'm in. It's not what you know.. but who you know lol. 


gr865 said:


> Ricky, I don't sell, just try and grow my own meds, I am 69 years old, been smoking pot since 1963, grown off and on over the years but now I grow all my own meds. Been about 7 yrs now and progressively building on my system after yrs of trying to half ass it. The state I am in is not cannabis friendly so I have to watch my butt.
> 130 plants, now that is work. I hope the quality is as good as the looks of them plants. Guessing all clones from single parent? Good work.
> 
> GR


----------



## DirtyEyeball696 (Jan 14, 2017)

Strip every motha lovin leave in week 2. You'll love the outcome 
I call growers who don't strip Lazy



OG#18


----------



## Antgotaclue (Jan 15, 2017)

I took a load of on my last run an it seems to have not done them to good but they was under cfl this time I've got hps and there bushy as fuck took a few of other day and I'm going bk up today to take more of as the middle of the plants are a lighter green then the rest


----------



## Antgotaclue (Jan 15, 2017)

This was the other day b4 I took some leafs of


----------



## MrVega2 (Jan 15, 2017)

Antgotaclue said:


> This was the other day b4 I took some leafs of


That's a good lookin plant...


----------



## Antgotaclue (Jan 15, 2017)

Thanks dude first time I've done lst


----------



## gr865 (Jan 15, 2017)

Antgotaclue said:


> This was the other day b4 I took some leafs of



Healthy, should recover in no time from defo.

GR


----------



## Haze the maze (Jan 15, 2017)

MrVega2 said:


> In the pics attached Defoliation was practiced allowing many lower branches to become Tops participating in the canopy... Without Defoliation this could have never been achieved...
> 
> The Plant Whisperer has spoken...
> 
> Haha...


Super buds. That looks great!
P.S. Even the growers are listening


----------



## 2Ton (Jan 22, 2017)

shhhmokey said:


> When a plant is flowering whitch leavs are ok to remove and what ones are not ok?


I use topping, lst and defoliation techniques all the way through the veg and flower. Although i only tend to remove the large fan leaves to expose the lower popcorn buds to get golf ball sized buds down there this pick is just entering week 3 of flower... look 

https://www.rollitup.org/attachments/tmp_20352-20170116_1925251895114368-jpg.3877724/

https://www.rollitup.org/attachments/tmp_20352-20170116_1925432034160184-jpg.3877727/


----------



## GreenthumbQC (Jan 28, 2017)

Approx 3rd week - flower defoliation. days 1-7 after defoliation.


----------



## Haze the maze (Jan 28, 2017)

Oh that is a beautiful plant...


----------



## 2Ton (Jan 28, 2017)

GreenthumbQC said:


> Approx 3rd week - flower defoliation. days 1-7 after defoliation.


They look great mate... these are from today... iam on week 5 of flower with incredible bulk. Loads of bud sites and covered in resin!!


----------



## BobCajun (Feb 24, 2017)

I tried cutting all leaf from growing buds at week 8. They came out lacking density. Even though there was leaf on the bottoms of the plants and no significant amount of light was getting through to the pots the upper buds that I clipped seemed deflated. They looked big but when cleaned down you could feel that they were sort of hollow.

Then recently I used 13 hours on some plants for weeks 3 and 4 of flowering to try to increase overall size and what I found was that the leaves on colas got considerably larger than under constant 12/12 and when I went back to 12/12 from weeks 5 on the buds came in huge, due to the bigger leaves. So it seems to me that this is a good method. 

I also tried 13/11 for the whole flower cycle before and the buds came out much different, fairly thin with medium yield. This batch with the two weeks of 13/11 have buds that look blown up, like Big Bud strain type buds. They were big even at 8 weeks. Anyway, something to try sometime, 13/11 early to leaf up then 12/12 after that. Could probably do the 13/11 for the whole first 4 weeks, I just used 12/12 for the first two to try to get a quick and solid flowering response.


----------



## BobCajun (Feb 26, 2017)

I guess I should clarify that the buds with the big leaves didn't get freaky big or anything, just noticeably bigger than with 12/12 all the time. The plants also had a lot more size to them overall.


----------



## gr865 (Feb 27, 2017)

Just finished day 21 of 12/12 and did a good defo, not total but enough that it should recover in a few days.
Super Citrus Haze, it has a bit of heat stress, my new drip system did not work yesterday, doing three watering a day with nutes. So I give it a big watering to day at about 50% runoff, running DTW.

Side shot You can really see the stress from the side. She has already recovered, no more leaf turn under.
 

WW from the top


WW from the side.


----------



## GreenthumbQC (Feb 28, 2017)

2Ton said:


> They look great mate


Thanks, I just harvested. Here is what the final girl looked like.


----------



## gr865 (Feb 28, 2017)

Just want to show that the Super Citrus Haze was not harmed by the drip timer problem. Here she is this morning. I was amazed at how rapidly she recovered. Was with out water for over 16 hrs. Perked up in about two hrs.

GR


----------



## Odin* (Mar 1, 2017)




----------



## BobCajun (Mar 5, 2017)

My last batch, which I didn't defol except for right at the end, like the last 3 days, I got a bigger yield than when I defoled more and earlier. But much of the extra yield is fluff bud from the lowers. Got more good bud too though. That was also one where I used 13/11 during early flowering so that may have also been a factor. 

So you would likely get more total THC yield with minimal defol except right at the end if at all, but much of it would be in the form of extracts of fluff bud. Still, THC is THC regardless of its source, and more of it is better. The bottoms of these plants were quite dense btw. I did no bottom trimming at all.


----------



## Flowki (Mar 6, 2017)

My opinion is that it entirely comes down to the growing technique you use and skill at it to see significant yield results, including environment. Defoliation has little to do with yield increase.

If you do two natural plants, let one plant grow and then do a side by side defo you ''may'' get a little more yield due to the natural plants shape and indoor lighting not making the most of it. More yield from a natural shaped plant is a moot result though, from the perspective of increased yields indoor (the very point of defoliation advocates). The increase won't be much on a natural if at all, say 10% as my personal estimate.

If you channel the urge to defoliate into an actual technique (topping for 4 as example) you will at least double the light to leaf surface area at a height where the intensity is highest, you also get more light hitting buds if that's what floats your boat. The yield results of a topped plant vs a natural one have been proven substantial, double or more. Far more than any of the defoliation claims that are subjective at best. If you are not getting the most out of a particular topping/fimming style yet are defoliating your plants you are utterly wasting time and energy mastering the wrong thing that gives marginal increase even if it works.

If you wanted to defoliate a topped plant and compare it to a topped plant that did not get defoliated that's your choice. Other skilled experienced growers have done it and stated it does not work (reduces yield). Some skilled experienced growers have stated it does work but I've never personally seen the side by sides of those, ''take my word for it'' kind of deal. Those growers also say that to make it work you have to know what you are doing and only take the right amount at the right time yada yada. Ask yourself this, why bother trying to find out what the right amount is at the right time (getting it wrong lowers yields) just for the chance at a slight yield increase that such growers have not really shown much evidence exists?.

Cutting big leaves off the top allows more light to get to the middle of plant this is true.. but the light reaching those mid leaves is less intense and you've guaranteed reduced photosynthesis out put levels because of it. The bigger upper leaves that you should have left on (and actually made more of them with a topping technique) will take in the most intense light while any light that does reach down into mid canopy (some light penetrates through leaves) will get caught by the mid level leaves. Using a topping technique will increase your photosynthesis rate far more than targeted defoliation. So you want more upper leaves not less.. you get more by topping in veg, not by removing them in flower ;p.

TLDR:
Topping plants is easy, repeatable and reliable while it is also done in veg so no stress during flower and doubles yield at-least. Defoliation will certainly lower yield if you do it too much while doing it the right way is overly difficult for a yield increase that is not proven or completely blown out of the water compared to topping even if it is.


What i would like to finish on though is some reasons defoliation may increase yield, I think it may be a luck thing. Defoliating would reduce humidity in the room (it may have been dangerously high) meaning the plants could potentially dry out faster> drink more nutes > increase yield slightly. This or something of this nature is where I believe some of the defo yield increases may have came from. How ever, get a dehumidifier, keep the leaves, they drink more and also use more light, even more yield.

Other than that that some people put too many plants too close together and it smothers them. Defoliation in that case is going to allow them to breath better and feel less cramped/stressed for them. That defoliation may increase yields too, but marginally. If you had the right amount of plants with the right amount of spacing you would not need to defoliate and the yield would blow the above out the water. How ever I know that doing lots of small plants in a SOG setup does require defoliation but even they state that it is to reduce bud rot rather than increase yield. The trade off is that they have far more plants/root systems that are quicker to put into flower, so the yield comes from having more harvests per year.


----------



## gr865 (Mar 6, 2017)

Flowki said:


> My opinion is that it entirely comes down to the growing technique you use and skill at it to see significant yield results, including environment. Defoliation has little to do with yield increase.


I do believe that it has to do with growing technique.
I have been using Vertical growing and defo is definitely a plus. My last grow, even though I had some major problems, my fault, I still got more yield. I believe it has to do with grow space, I grow in a 4x4 tent = 16 sqft floor space, in vertical using a 5 - 40"x22" screens = 30.5 sqft. Here is one of the plants from that grow. This was a five plant grow, with one 400W HPS.

My next grow will also be a five plant vertical grow but I am going to use stacked lights for the grow, a 315W CMH and the lower light will also be a 315, if I can get the right price on it, if not the lower light will be a 400W HPS.
A pic of the screen set up, and the second pic is of the lower light stand, the 315W will hang directly above the lower light, no reflectors just bare bulb.
  ]

Check out some of the vertical grow here
https://www.rollitup.org/f/vertical-growing.126/
Have seen some great grow using this method.

Over crowding is never a good idea, humidity is one of the biggest factors causing problems, and the lower grow usually results in fluffy popcorn.

So, IMHO, there is a time for defo and many times that are not right for defo.

GR


----------



## Flowki (Mar 6, 2017)

gr865 said:


> I do believe that it has to do with growing technique.
> I have been using Vertical growing and defo is definitely a plus. My last grow, even though I had some major problems, my fault, I still got more yield. I believe it has to do with grow space, I grow in a 4x4 tent = 16 sqft floor space, in vertical using a 5 - 40"x22" screens = 30.5 sqft. Here is one of the plants from that grow. This was a five plant grow, with one 400W HPS.
> View attachment 3900764
> My next grow will also be a five plant vertical grow but I am going to use stacked lights for the grow, a 315W CMH and the lower light will also be a 315, if I can get the right price on it, if not the lower light will be a 400W HPS.
> ...


Not saying that a defoliated plant will not go on to produce but I don't think I'll ever side with the notion that if two plants have the ideal environment, the defoliated one will produce more. I would say that if you are having to defoliate (not saying you personally) it is because the environment is not good enough. Yes it may give more yield in that environment but you would get more yield over all in a better environment if untouched, is the point. It makes more sense to improve the environment/topping technique above all else.

On your pic for example, their are many gaps in the trellis. Those gaps in an ideal grow would all be filled with leaves> Not saying I could do it but just that this would be the priority. It looks like you are losing about 1sqr foot of potential light capture from it. You could plant a small topped plant to fill 1sqr light print and get one or two ounce, maybe more. So if you can fill in your trellis entirely you already gained an ounce per plant at least. For your setup, maybe that means replacing the one pot with two so that both plants will hopefully fill out the entire trellis evenly. If the plants out grew and over lapped each other too much then only at those points a little light defoliation could be done for rot/airflow issues. As long as you didn't veg far too long and have a overlapping mess, that type os slight defoliation would be acceptable to me since it's obviously hard to completely predict growth/fill rate and that slight defoliation is still leaving you with a full trellis/canopy. Basically maintenance.

For a normal flat grow this is my opinion but it I'd look to get the plants as close as safely possible to each other with minimal top leaf overlap and the tops even level for best light intensity. If I look at the canopy I don't want to see through it to the ground, anytime you can it's lost yield (slight gaps aside). So basically weather you are using a trellis, net, stakes w/e, you are trying to get a scrog/sog type canopy. That is why UB topping for 8 is so useful, the lower branches move out in a V shape for good lower canopy airflow while the top canopy spreads out to fill it in (some help with stakes etc can be given to achieve it). Would really recommend any flat grower to stop defoliating and try that technique instead.


----------



## gr865 (Mar 6, 2017)

Flowki said:


> Not saying that a defoliated plant will not go on to produce but I don't think I'll ever side with the notion that if two plants have the ideal environment, the defoliated one will produce more. I would say that if you are having to defoliate (not saying you personally) it is because the environment is not good enough. Yes it may give more yield in that environment but you would get more yield over all in a better environment if untouched, is the point. It makes more sense to improve the environment/topping technique above all else.
> 
> On your pic for example, their are many gaps in the trellis. Those gaps in an ideal grow would all be filled with leaves> Not saying I could do it but just that this would be the priority. It looks like you are losing about 1sqr foot of potential light capture from it. You could plant a small topped plant to fill 1sqr light print and get one or two ounce, maybe more. So if you can fill in your trellis entirely you already gained an ounce per plant at least. For your setup, maybe that means replacing the one pot with two so that both plants will hopefully fill out the entire trellis evenly. If the plants out grew and over lapped each other too much then only at those points a little light defoliation could be done for rot/airflow issues. As long as you didn't veg far too long and have a overlapping mess, that type os slight defoliation would be acceptable to me since it's obviously hard to completely predict growth/fill rate and that slight defoliation is still leaving you with a full trellis/canopy. Basically maintenance.
> 
> For a normal flat grow this is my opinion but it I'd look to get the plants as close as safely possible to each other with minimal top leaf overlap and the tops even level for best light intensity. If I look at the canopy I don't want to see through it to the ground, anytime you can it's lost yield (slight gaps aside). So basically weather you are using a trellis, net, stakes w/e, you are trying to get a scrog/sog type canopy. That is why UB topping for 8 is so useful, the lower branches move out in a V shape for good lower canopy airflow while the top canopy spreads out to fill it in (some help with stakes etc can be given to achieve it). Would really recommend any flat grower to stop defoliating and try that technique instead.


This was my first vertical grow and yes I could have filled in the screen better, I will get better at it. Also being my first grow I did not provide enough light to the plant, the lamp during flower is about 1/2 to 1 foot below the canopy line, so the lower plant did not get the light needed. Next grow will be a 5 plant vertical grow with screens with the stacked lighting.

I have seen vertical grows where they went way overboard on the defo and got shitty results, but I have seen some personally that are spectacular with nice buds from top to bottom, no popcorn at all. What was popcorn was the size of a fist. His grow got 1.5 g/W. My best in a horizonal grow, using canopy control was .7 g/W, but I also had inferior lighting, tried making a 400W HPS cover a 4x4. 
I have not tried a SCROG yet, maybe someday and when I do I hope you chime in on my grow.

What size is your grow area, don't you have to have a lot of room to do a SCROG, to be able to get around the plant for training?

GR


----------



## Flowki (Mar 6, 2017)

gr865 said:


> This was my first vertical grow and yes I could have filled in the screen better, I will get better at it. Also being my first grow I did not provide enough light to the plant, the lamp during flower is about 1/2 to 1 foot below the canopy line, so the lower plant did not get the light needed. Next grow will be a 5 plant vertical grow with screens with the stacked lighting.
> 
> I have seen vertical grows where they went way overboard on the defo and got shitty results, but I have seen some personally that are spectacular with nice buds from top to bottom, no popcorn at all. What was popcorn was the size of a fist. His grow got 1.5 g/W. My best in a horizonal grow, using canopy control was .7 g/W, but I also had inferior lighting, tried making a 400W HPS cover a 4x4.
> I have not tried a SCROG yet, maybe someday and when I do I hope you chime in on my grow.
> ...


I'm really not trying to put your grow down you've done good. Also hope I don't come off as if I know everything but as said it's of my opinion that no matter what style you grow with, trying to fill out the canopy evenly with as many leaves possible is the best way to increase yields. The right lighting and distance, room control and feed are also big parts of it that should be improved on as priority's, we all do that in our own way and at our own speed/ability. Defoliating a plant that isn't filling out it's footprint I just don't see how that will increase yields. I've seen people who run vertical trellis with reflective sheeting on the back of it so that any light that does penetrate the canopy gets reflected back. That imo is fking genius and will stand more chance of increasing yield over cutting off leaves.

The people who take off too much have shown in pics how bad the plant done. The people who don't take off very much, it's my opinion that they simply have not took enough of the vital leaves off to seriously impact yield. I read once that a person takes off leaves because it forces the plant into some kind of panic/survival mode and makes it put out even more smaller leaves. That could be true but I don't like the idea of doing that to the plant in flower, force it to panic? and spend time/energy on recovering back the leaf area you cut off, rather than being happy and just producing buds the whole time. I've read that stress increases flower time too, so maybe what they say if true is offset by extra time for it to finish flower.

You are basically already doing scrog, it's not worlds apart. When not using a scrog net, topping techniques or lst they are still trying to get a more even canopy like found in your trelis/scrog but ''eyeing'' it up rather than having a physical barrier.

People are able to do scrogs in pretty cramped areas but I think you are right, access looks like a nightmare. And the issue is that when the plant is stretching they seem forced to keep on it and keep tucking. But the reward is a very even filled in canopy.

An easier approach is topping for 8 and using as many plants required to fill in the area. You stake them, 4 stakes per pot and the stakes used to spread/hold out the 4 main branches to spread the canopy and fill in the entire area at flip. After that you need not mess around any more and just feed. You won't have as flat a canopy as with scrog net, maybe get less yield too but the work involved is not near as intensive. However I wonder if it would allow a quicker finish as their is minimal to no stress in flower that way.

One thing I do question over scrog net to a more free flow stake setup as above is light penetration. In scrog they cut off almost everything under the net so if any light does indeed penetrate through leaves theirs no leaves there to make use of it. Aside form that when a fan osculates over canopy it will move leaves around and momentarily create light cracks down the canopy (theory). If you have mid level leaves as with the staked example then you will make use of that light. It may end up swings and roundabouts though, maybe the yields end up similar but trimming mid level buds will take longer so you end up putting in the extra work anyway. Still, would rather be on my ass cutting than on my knees crawling and cutting ;p.


----------



## Karah (Mar 6, 2017)

I defoliated my last crop, the last 4 weeks of flower. I pulled over 6 lbs from 6 plants. Might just have been dumb luck, or perhaps not. Will defoliate the last 4 weeks of my next crop (putting into bloom in 1 week).


----------



## gr865 (Mar 6, 2017)

Karah said:


> I defoliated my last crop, the last 4 weeks of flower. I pulled over 6 lbs from 6 plants. Might just have been dumb luck, or perhaps not. Will defoliate the last 4 weeks of my next crop (putting into bloom in 1 week).


pictures please


----------



## gr865 (Mar 6, 2017)

Flowki said:


> I'm really not trying to put your grow down you've done good. Also hope I don't come off as if I know everything but as said it's of my opinion that no matter what style you grow with, trying to fill out the canopy evenly with as many leaves possible is the best way to increase yields. The right lighting and distance, room control and feed are also big parts of it that should be improved on as priority's, we all do that in our own way and at our own speed/ability. Defoliating a plant that isn't filling out it's footprint I just don't see how that will increase yields. I've seen people who run vertical trellis with reflective sheeting on the back of it so that any light that does penetrate the canopy gets reflected back. That imo is fking genius and will stand more chance of increasing yield over cutting off leaves.
> 
> The people who take off too much have shown in pics how bad the plant done. The people who don't take off very much, it's my opinion that they simply have not took enough of the vital leaves off to seriously impact yield. I read once that a person takes off leaves because it forces the plant into some kind of panic/survival mode and makes it put out even more smaller leaves. That could be true but I don't like the idea of doing that to the plant in flower, force it to panic? and spend time/energy on recovering back the leaf area you cut off, rather than being happy and just producing buds the whole time. I've read that stress increases flower time too, so maybe what they say if true is offset by extra time for it to finish flower.
> 
> ...


I am able to remove the emitter and pull the plants out to work on them, much easier then crawling. 
The key IMHO, is to remove growth slowly giving time for recovery.


----------



## Karah (Mar 6, 2017)

gr865 said:


> pictures please


I posted this pic in a different thread as well but this is maybe 2 weeks before I started chopping. The only leaves I left on my ladies were right around the trellis and towards the underside.


----------



## gr865 (Mar 6, 2017)

Karah said:


> I posted this pic in a different thread as well but this is maybe 2 weeks before I started chopping. The only leaves I left on my ladies were right around the trellis and towards the underside. View attachment 3901101


Where do I find info on you grow, look great!


----------



## Karah (Mar 6, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Where do I find info on you grow, look great!


Thanks  

I joined this forum right in the middle of bloom and had no idea grow journals were a thing so I wasn't able to document that grow BUT I've started a grow journal since then. Titled "here w3 go." I'm still pretty new to growing so it's all been trial and error.


----------



## Krippled (Mar 6, 2017)

I done some light defoliation my first indoor plant, I'm not suggesting to do so.. but no big harm with this plant as top pic date is Jan-7th, middle pic date is Jan-21st, 14 days later, big change... Last pic taken Feb-18th...


----------



## BobCajun (Mar 10, 2017)

My last batch where I hardly defoled at all actually turned out to be about the same dry weight as when fairly heavily top defoled with lower leaves left on. Which is better, I don't know at this point. I guess better air flow and less water transpiration would be good things though. Same root space all going to the flowers seems advantageous, at least when growing in containers of medium.

I'll take entire leaves from the middle parts of the stalks, big resinless fan leaves, but I prefer to just take the tips off the leaves that are supplying top buds, like half of the leaflet. That's usually enough to reduce shading of other buds. Leaves are normally way too long but it's best to leave at least some of a top leaf rather than none. I mean leaves with some resin on them somewhere. They still get use out of even little stubs as long as there's some leaf part left. I think they're evolved in such a way that the tips can get eaten by animals and the rest of the leaf still stays completely functional.


----------



## visajoe1 (Mar 11, 2017)

I defol as needed. First 2-3 weeks of flower I'm training as needed, removing shoots that wont reach canopy, removing larf, leaves blocking areas I want to have light, and leaves so dense condensation collects on them (recipe for pm). By day 21 she's in her final form. Some fan leaves may need to be removed around this time (day 21), but only the ones blocking bud sites is removed. Dead/damaged leaves are removed when they arise. Around day 47 I'll revist defol for anything blocking buds that I cant tuck out of the way.


----------



## gr865 (Mar 11, 2017)

In my vertical grows, I use screens and soft ties to tie the plants to the screens. I do some defo but where I can I will tuck the leaves back thru the screen, I remove them after the leaves get big enough to take over their job of providing energy to that bud site. I do remove fans that block light and larf.


----------



## gr865 (Jun 13, 2017)

Did a medium defo on 6/1, and started 12/12 on 6/3 
Before 6/1

After 6/1
 
6/5, 4 days later 
 
6/10 Day 7 of 12/12
In those 5 days the plants stretched/grew beyond the screens. So we removed the plants from the tent and began Super Cropping, main stem and some of the other upper branches. Also remove some of the tucked fans, tucked some more and removed fans blocking bud sites.
  
6/12 Day of 9 12/12
I pulled the ladies from the tent and all the areas that had been SC'ed had turned up toward the lights, did some tieing of the SC main stem and branches and did a medium defo. Moving bud sites around to fill in voids on the screen, this will continue until the screen is full. Will continue removing fan that can't be tucked behind the screen and are blocking bud sites and on day 21 will do a heavy defo and further SC'ing as needed.
Before defo
 
After


Will take a pic when I pull them out of the tent again in a few days to see how they are responding to the abuse, LOL My ladies in a nutshell! "Whip me, beat me, call me Edna" by Fijensen
Funny Shit, 





GR


----------



## Fogdog (Jun 13, 2017)

Flowki said:


> My opinion is that it entirely comes down to the growing technique you use and skill at it to see significant yield results, including environment. Defoliation has little to do with yield increase.
> 
> If you do two natural plants, let one plant grow and then do a side by side defo you ''may'' get a little more yield due to the natural plants shape and indoor lighting not making the most of it. More yield from a natural shaped plant is a moot result though, from the perspective of increased yields indoor (the very point of defoliation advocates). The increase won't be much on a natural if at all, say 10% as my personal estimate.
> 
> ...


Thank you. This post made sense.


----------



## gr865 (Jul 3, 2017)

Day 30 12/12

Minor defo day, hand water with nutes and Great White.
Buds forming nicely, except the Critical Kush, it is a stretcher and from when I grew it before it puts on buds starting around week four so it is just starting.

Critical Kush 
My lady is 5'7" 

G13 - 2


g13 - 4


To Be Con't


----------



## gr865 (Jul 3, 2017)

Day 30 12/12 con't

G13 1

G13 3


The profile view is fairly standard for the 5 plants and most are pulling the screens away from the frames. Did some more tieing to the screen, removed all the fans from the backs of the screens I did remove some of the bindings on some plants
Will be doing defo into the 6th we of flower, all minor defo now. The day I start flush I will be striping them bare of any leaf with has a 3/4" stem.

GR


----------



## Haze the maze (Jul 5, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Day 30 12/12 con't
> 
> G13 1
> 
> ...


Those pots are tiny. Won't that dwarf your plants and lower your overall yield?
Great looking plants though. I'm curious about your vertical grow so I'll have a look.

 Peace


----------



## gr865 (Jul 5, 2017)

Haze the maze said:


> Those pots are tiny. Won't that dwarf your plants and lower your overall yield?
> Great looking plants though. I'm curious about your vertical grow so I'll have a look.
> 
> Peace


Those are 2 gallon SmartPots, For the type of grow I am doing 2 gallon is plenty big enough. I have been growing in two and three gallons SP's for a number of yrs now, both vertical and horizontal grows. The SP's, being fabric, tend to root prune, preventing them from becoming root bound. My last grow was a horizontal grow in 3 gallon smart pots, I really noticed no difference in plant size, I got 15 zips of two plants.
 This was taken a week before I harvest the plant on the right and just over two weeks for the one on the left.

Thanks for the comment, Yes please check out my grow there are a number of people there that grow in coco and can explain it better than I can. And I can always use good suggestions and comments.

GR


----------



## Yzfirecat (Jul 11, 2017)

Hi im new to defoliation. I have a autoflower by mephisto that is crazy thick with leaf. A pain to water. Would anybody suggest a lil defoliation in this situation. 2wk of flower currently. In a 5g airpot


----------



## xmatox (Jul 11, 2017)

Yzfirecat said:


> Hi im new to defoliation. I have a autoflower by mephisto that is crazy thick with leaf. A pain to water. Would anybody suggest a lil defoliation in this situation. 2wk of flower currently. In a 5g airpot
> View attachment 3976046 View attachment 3976047


no


----------



## xmatox (Jul 12, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Day 30 12/12
> 
> Minor defo day, hand water with nutes and Great White.
> Buds forming nicely, except the Critical Kush, it is a stretcher and from when I grew it before it puts on buds starting around week four so it is just starting.
> ...


No one mentions the MILF... Shame...


----------



## gr865 (Jul 26, 2017)

xmatox said:


> No one mentions the MILF... Shame...


She is a lovely woman!
Did last defo 10 days ago, am 52 days into 12/12, and will be starting flush early next week, plan on harvest around day 70 for the 4 G13's and day 60 for the Critical Kush. The kush is not going to be a decent yielder
  

GR


----------



## gr865 (Aug 25, 2017)

Very productive weekend,
Saturday morning pulled the plants out to give them a good check up, they had a good low ppm flush twice and had their water stopped on Thursday morning so the pots had been drying in the pots for two days, I scoped them and found at least 60% cloudy, 20+% clear and the rest just beginning to turn amber. Turned to my GF and told her to get the trimming sizzors and we got busy. Harvested that Critical Kush earlier last week so this weekend GF and I did the G13 Haze.
Total wet weight, 4596 all plants, had around 450 grams of small buds and leaf that will go in the oil also, the G13's averaged 999 g wet weight and the CK was 600 g. Not sure what that will be dry but being conservative and using a 15% wet to dry ratio it comes to 24.62 zips of good medicine (but never count those chickens and all that crap). Should be able to get enough CO for my treatment, I hope so anyway.
Ladies just before chop.

















First two rows hanging in the tent.






All nine rows, lined up and smelling so nice.






My little helpers comment, I don't want to take this leaf off it has so much white crystals all over it. My comment, remove it, it is going to be added to everything when we make oil. 




..
Well I will post dry weight when it happens, not totally happy, the Critical Kush will not be grown again and the entire plant is going to make oil. I would have done well weight wise had it not been for that bitch. Second time to try her but won't grow it again.
Guess I will continue to use the stacked 315's, very pleased with the lights.

GR

https://www.rollitup.org/t/grs-stacked-315w-cmh-vertical-g13-haze-2017.939488/

Any comments I make are totally false and a figment of my imagination.
Be at peace in your life!
Love freely and be happy!
gr865, Aug 14, 2017


----------



## gr865 (Aug 25, 2017)

Final final,

They are in the cure jars, weight has not changed since Sat..
Total of the four G13 Haze plants = 23.5 Zips (658g) of smokeable/medical
Shake, sugar leaf/leaf (168g), G13 under sized buds, smokable but would be too much work to trim (56g), the entire grow of Critical Kush (70g) = (296g) 10.5 Zips
Total = 35 + Zips



And just over a G/W of medical goodness, plus the good Cannabis Oil the rest will make, Yay, 

As for the smoke, last night G/F and I had a couple of bowls and it was very delightful I must say. Uppy high, kept us awake for a bit (at least till we smoked a a couple of more bowls), light and thoughtful. Hell I even played some guitar which I have not done in a while. Cool beans!

I am making Cannabis Oil today and using all the shake, Critical Kush, the non workable G13 and 3.4 Zips of the smokable G13 Haze. That give me a total of 17.3 Zips for the oil. Hoping to make 45 plus grams of oil. If I were using all bud I would expect 60 + but with the shake and way the Critical Kush turned out, very disappointed, can't expect much.

Here's the 20 Zips of my medicine!






GR

Last edited: Monday at 8:12 PM
https://www.rollitup.org/t/grs-stacked-315w-cmh-vertical-g13-haze-2017.939488/

Any comments I make are totally false and a figment of my imagination.
Be at peace in your life!
Love freely and be happy!
gr865, Monday at 4:30 PM


----------



## InTheValley (Aug 29, 2017)

I did 2 rounds of GML leaf strip, at day 15 of flip, and day 34. 

This is a totally experimental round. several tests done,. Using a 125 watts. 

One thing we dont want to do, is induce stress to the plant. So I did a few things to see reaction thru various defoliation methods, from removing single pedals, to cutting off entire leaves, and leaving just the entire stem.


----------



## Heil Tweetler (Aug 29, 2017)

gr865 said:


> Final final,
> 
> They are in the cure jars, weight has not changed since Sat..
> Total of the four G13 Haze plants = 23.5 Zips (658g) of smokeable/medical
> ...


Bro when you mentioned 15oz from a couple of 3 gal SP was that with a good yielding strain or is that your average when using the vert technique?


----------



## gr865 (Aug 31, 2017)

Heil Tweetler said:


> Bro when you mentioned 15oz from a couple of 3 gal SP was that with a good yielding strain or is that your average when using the vert technique?


9 zips of Super Citrus haze, and 6 zips of White Widow, was not grown vert, but that was my best until this last grow. 
That .hwas 0.6 g/w, latest grow was 1.1 g/w of smokable buds.


----------



## Heil Tweetler (Aug 31, 2017)

gr865 said:


> 9 zips of Super Citrus haze, and 6 zips of White Widow, was not grown vert, but that was my best until this last grow.
> That .hwas 0.6 g/w, latest grow was 1.1 g/w of smokable buds.


Nice work. Ive got a small space and usually use 7 or 10 gals. Ive got a 3 and a 5gal going right now. Wondering how it might shape up.


----------



## gr865 (Aug 31, 2017)

Are you using smart pots, 
SP and coco are the tits!


----------



## gr865 (Sep 2, 2017)

Heil Tweetler said:


> Bro when you mentioned 15oz from a couple of 3 gal SP was that with a good yielding strain or is that your average when using the vert technique?


Here are the two strains
White Widow 6 zips

Super Citrus Haze

Once the stakes were removed


GR


----------



## atriumfall1 (Sep 5, 2017)

Yes this does work. I have tried it. Now i do it every time. Just increase sugars and carbs. You will definately get 2lbs a light of premium quality og


----------



## zypheruk (Sep 6, 2017)

@gr865 seems like a really nice harvest, I see you make oil, is there any chance you could post details on your method of making the oil. 
Much appreciated.


----------



## gr865 (Sep 6, 2017)

zypheruk said:


> @gr865 seems like a really nice harvest, I see you make oil, is there any chance you could post details on your method of making the oil.
> Much appreciated.


https://www.facebook.com/BigMikeWise?hc_ref=ARQqR-4lNz1ZFCDeA0uGgeu-3eVtRlkbBtVaVTfQoUO0SwS6Cyfzxg1gp-Uw25Jhnhk&fref=nf
I do use an oil distiller instead of a rice cooker, but everything else is the same.
That is the main method I use, I also use a method to produce the oil via a frozen method.




Depends on who I am making the oil for. The last batch of oil I made tested at 82% THC,
The main thing is to use FECO, Full Plant Extract Cannabis Oil, use multiple strains of mainly Indica dom plants.
The next batch of oil I make is for a lady with myalgia, it will be for pain management. They are supplying the product to make approx 100 grams of oil. It should take about 3 to 5 liters of 190 proof to make the oil. I will mix this one to one with CBD oil, I finally found a good source for CBD oil, it is good for pain management. It is best for pain management and cancer treatment to use multiple Indica strains. For pain management I use CBD oil along with CO. For cancer, 1 to 2 grams of CO per day. Depending on your condition, mico dose 1/3 to 1/2 of the total during the day and at night the remainder in a suppository. 
I will make oil for anyone who will supply the materials for making the product.
Hope this helps.

GR


----------



## InTheValley (Sep 11, 2017)

77 days from seed, GML stripped at 15 days flip, then 30 days flip, day 47 since flip total, about 160 bud sites, also seems i have a calcium problem. Upped the calmag today, Upped Bloom+3ml, reduced Micro-8ml, ( PH PERFECT AN )


----------



## Cracken4114 (Sep 13, 2017)

I grow outside so mould is always a concern. Once my plants have reached the 5 week mark and most of the fan leaves are turned yellow I strip all the fans and trim any leaves covering my buds so I can expose them to sunlight. I started doing this when i lost half my crop to mould a few years ago. Since then no issues.


----------



## gr865 (May 7, 2018)

Question!

I have always used pruning/defo on my plants.
On this grow, which is a Monster Crop plant, taking at day 33 of flower and re-vegged, and this is new to me. I did a heavy prune/defo a week prior to flip, took everything below the 4 node.
 

What a twisted web she weaves!
 

And here she was 8 days later. The start of 12/12.
 

Now here she is 7 days later. The third and forth nodes have grow 6 to 8 inches, some of the inner bud sites are being shielded from the light and need to be exposed, I did raise them in height tonight. I have been removing large fans daily, few a day to reduce shock, but this bitch is absolutely a Monster. 
 
Every few days I move the bud sites around to get the best light and fill holes like the one in the 8 o'clock position in the above picture.


This is one branch, you can see the third and forth nodes that have grown at least 8 inches in the past 7 days.
 

So my question is, do more daily lite pruning prior to the 21st day or wait and just do a massive prune on that day? Remove the large third and forth nodes or let them go?
Have not had this situation before so some thoughts would help.

GR


----------



## Pig4buzz (May 7, 2018)

gr865 said:


> Question!
> 
> I have always used pruning/defo on my plants.
> On this grow, which is a Monster Crop plant, taking at day 33 of flower and re-vegged, and this is new to me. I did a heavy prune/defo a week prior to flip, took everything below the 4 node.
> ...


Take off all those big fans at 21-22 days. Clean the bottom larf you want be disappointed. Check my grow defo at 21 days pigs grow. Massive bud growth will happen.


----------



## gr865 (May 8, 2018)

Pig4buzz said:


> Take off all those big fans at 21-22 days. Clean the bottom larf you want be disappointed. Check my grow defo at 21 days pigs grow. Massive bud growth will happen.


Thanks for the comment man, yes that is how I have done it for years but this plant is growing like nothing I have grown before. Sometime in the near future I will be doing a pure Indica and I will take clones at around day 21 to 26. I really want to see how it will monster crop.

As you can see in pic 1 above all larf was removed a week before flower, and yes anything growing at day 21 that would be considered larf it will be history. 
My main concern was the original 3rd and 4th nodes that have just gone nuts in growth, For just over two weeks growth they are becoming major players in this grow and I was wondering if I should take them or leave them, today or at day 21. The mass of the plant is truly surprising and over welling.
The root mass of this plant is drinking very well, water/nutes times are 9:10 pm @ 3 minutes, 9:30 am @ 2 minutes, 5 am @ 2 minutes, 5:30 pm @ 2 minutes. When the lights come on at
9 pm the pot is barely damp to the touch, with roots growing out the sides of the smart pots.

I am hoping I can move the branches around enough to prevent shading and wondering if I should leave the 3rd and 4th nodes after day 21, as I know they will produce 6 plus inch spear shaped buds.
Well I am going to leave it alone for now, maybe only remove the massive fans but leave everything else.

GR


----------



## Pig4buzz (May 8, 2018)

Your in good shape


----------



## mmcma17 (Apr 10, 2020)

You should try a experiment with slowly removing only inward facing leaves that block lower nodes. I seem to have good results. Not leaf stripping, and not leaving alone either.... More like manicuring.


----------



## ketamine_disposal_unit (Sep 25, 2022)

I'm currently in a pickle about this

First pic is of this plant taken roughly same time (early wk 6) when I grew it from seed



These next pics are the same strain from clone, taken about the same time of flower. which I defoliated very heavily. I'm feeling it's quite a ways behind the plants in the first pic. The buds are smaller and also a lot of them don't have many pistils and are quite hard.


It's hard to say exactly that defoliation is the cause but there's a couple of variables;

1. It's been very cold, coming out of winter, and tent night time temps have been colder. First pic was grown through summer and tent was basically too hot most of the time. Plants thrived, no heat stress signs and monster yield. Second pics were grown throughout end of winter just coming into spring now.

2. Didn't use Mammoth P (supposedly microbials accessing more Phosphorus) in the second pics

3. Defolatiated the living shit out of plants in the bottom photos

4. In the first pic the plants were getting blasted with 100% light which would have been over 1100-1200 ųmols and even more at the top colas. second pic has had lights down about 750-1000ųmols across the canopy (also growing a strain alongside that doesn't like intense light)



pH and EC have been spot on and virtually identical for both grows, minus the Mammoth P in second group. There is zero tip burn, canoes or deficiencies/toxicities showing

So... I am hoping the buds fatten up a lot from here as I have just added the bloom booster.

Also, I had a thought the other day.... with a canopy of foliage, it can only catch so much light "fallint" from above, so if you defoliate but there Is still a lot of light falling on some form of plant before it hits the floor, the plants still catching the same amount of light, right? Or am I wrong?

Edit: here's before and after defoliation



I'm going to run tbis strain again, I will try a side by side experiment but we are going into warm weather again and I'll probably use Mammoth P again but can still see.


----------



## mudballs (Sep 25, 2022)

You did that to your plants...voluntarily??


----------



## ketamine_disposal_unit (Sep 25, 2022)

mudballs said:


> You did that to your plants...voluntarily??


call me fallen prey to misinformation about defoliation perhaps


----------



## mudballs (Sep 25, 2022)

ketamine_disposal_unit said:


> call me fallen prey to misinformation about defoliation perhaps


I'll concede there is something to simulating an animal grazing and triggering hormones/signals by yanking a few leafs off....that is a thing....but that full strip overkill seems decisively non-productive.


----------



## ketamine_disposal_unit (Sep 25, 2022)

mudballs said:


> I'll concede there is something to simulating an animal grazing and triggering hormones/signals by yanking a few leafs off....that is a thing....but that full strip overkill seems decisively non-productive.


Yeah. I'm beginning to think so. I've been seeing lots of seemingly succesful grows with just as much if not more defoliation. I'll try a side by side next grow.

I didn't remove all the fans. There's still like a few fans on each branch I just cleared anything that was covering another top or throwing shade on lowers


----------



## Retired engineer (Sep 25, 2022)

Sure, why not?


----------



## gr865 (Sep 26, 2022)

ketamine_disposal_unit said:


> I'm currently in a pickle about this
> 
> First pic is of this plant taken roughly same time (early wk 6) when I grew it from seed
> 
> ...


When did you do that, 21 days into flower and then at day 42?


----------



## Grow Monster (Sep 30, 2022)

Im thinking of doing same thing to mine. Guy on youtube did a side by side comparison. Yield and bud size came out the same. Just got better air flow and light penetration. That strain he used suggested heavy defoliation for best results.


----------

