is co2 worth getting?

xtsho

Well-Known Member
Lots of good information on using Co2. I've thought about it but I don't want or need to deal with using it. I'm already giving half or more of my harvests away to friends for free so I'm not concerned with the amount of increase in yield I might experience. For me it just doesn't make any sense to bother with it.
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
No argument here. Simply stating that if you can provide enough light 1800+ ppm has shown to increase benefits and of course this was done in a lab study (with the amount of papers i have read on it it would take me some time to try and find it) It was simply a statement not a recommendation. Lets be honest Co2 is not really a good commercial option where production cost/yield is the goal. I was keeping it simple but i do understand how Co2 and the cavlin cycle work. I'm trying to communicate in as simple terms as possible and always encourage people to check multiple sources.
Understood! I respect that too.

But, I had to point out that "ability to" thing for the masses that don't understand it. Someone will read that 1800 is better then 1500 (which he shouldn't try either) go set his ppm to that...
How many here can actually do the math and know the real numbers behind pairing ppm's to light energy?

Just giving them "the rest of the story"....:hug:
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
Highly likely I'm jumping the gun here but does that also imply that another rout (maybe not as desirable) is to reduce light intensity so that lower (or more optimal) saturation reduces lost growth time?. Maybe you don't get as much yield but total room gpw efficiency goes up?.

I guess I mean it from the angle where you are providing too much light for ambient co2 levels but don't really have the desire for sealed room+co2.
No, doesn't work that way.... Once you have what you need to grow properly (light energy delivery) you will have the saturation point.

I asked a form of your question in a class (Bot.). The answer from the prof was that "The plants have not evolved all the way, in relation to the sun.....The sun has been around much longer. The plants are trying to catch up...."

I liked his answer..
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
Understood! I respect that too.

But, I had to point out that "ability to" thing for the masses that don't understand it. Someone will read that 1800 is better then 1500 (which he shouldn't try either) go set his ppm to that...
How many here can actually do the math and know the real numbers behind pairing ppm's to light energy?

Just giving them "the rest of the story"....:hug:
Your absolutely right. That's how a lot of misinformation gets started. I don't know the precise numbers but have a grasp on what works and the principles behind it. I am by no means an expert but personally 1200ppm works for me and my light is about 1500ppfd. I don't seem to need more than that and maybe could use less but it works for me. I have done countless hours of research over the past year and tweaking and still find myself with lots to learn and some info to pass on to others just getting going
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
Would it not only reduce the growth rate occurring after the light saturation point (unknown). You would still get a normal growth rate until that point, and then a reduction in growth after that point which would still total more growth. At least until the point where damage to the leaves is occurring.

Got me thinking and doing some digging on the light saturation and came across this. While all species are different this paper is about as close of research as i can find generically speaking about cannabis and doesn't answer my question but it provides some interesting data. A lot of this stuff i am aware but was surprised at the Co2.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3550641/pdf/12298_2008_Article_27.pdf

Without Co2 supplementation at 30C there are increased rates of photosynthesis up to 1500ppfd although clearly the benefits past 1000ppfd are reduced and this study does not show the reduction once the saturation point has been reached. I could not for the life of me find a study that would come close to giving me a light saturation point in cannabis. Probably because one does not exist yet. It also shows that Co2 has a larger effect than i previously thought even at lower levels in those conditions, but since it stops at 750ppm you can't tell how much it increases beyond this point since it would again be on a curve. And because of the duration of light this study doesn't provide a good overall picture of how many ppm Co2 above 750ppm in relation to differing ppfd will increase photosynthesis or not over a full 18 or 12 hr cycle.
Not really. It still balances out to pretty much the make up of lost growth vs. the saturation point..
A cpl of us did simple experiments with pea's, squash and broccoli on the same line as the question you asked....That's what we could get.

Do you use Google scholar to search papers? You'll do better there.
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
Your absolutely right. That's how a lot of misinformation gets started. I don't know the precise numbers but have a grasp on what works and the principles behind it. I am by no means an expert but personally 1200ppm works for me and my light is about 1500ppfd. I don't seem to need more than that and maybe could use less but it works for me. I have done countless hours of research over the past year and tweaking and still find myself with lots to learn and some info to pass on to others just getting going

Nother big :hug:

You settled in at about the best effective ppm...1200. You're saving money in the long run that way!

Nice
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
A smart controller would allow you to add CO2 according to a schedule, like right at lights on and then off an hour or two before lights out, allowing the plants to use the excess and avoiding the need to vent.

Another consideration; research has shown that plants adapt to a given level of CO2 by varying the density of stomata on the leaves grown under those conditions. High concentration result in leaves with few stomata, limiting the effectiveness of supplementation.

I got around this by varying the CO2 level throughout the day; if let it drop to 400ppm, then blast it up to 1800ppm and let the plants eat it down. It had the same benefits and my tanks lasted longer.
BINGO! No one brought this fact up yet either!

Nice one my friend!
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
Not a fact , but if it works for you that is awesome!
Might not be "needed" in some ways..

But I do better then you guys with 24/7 lighting..

I run a chiller system for cooling and the air handlers that convert the chilled water to cool air are very effective at dehumidification. I have 2 of 215 pint dehumidifiers in each of my flower rooms and they only come on when the lights are out.

In regards to c02 in the veg room, I have sealed rooms including the veg room, so the c02 has to be supplemented regardless to 400 ppm. Not much of a cost difference to run higher ppm’s as the rooms are insulated with spray foam so they are really nicely sealed without any leakage.

I have read where using c02 in veg really accelerates the growth especially with veg lights on 24/7.

Trying to learn as much about c02 as I can to maximize my rooms.
Ok, yes it increases growth but, not the kind of growth that helps much! Your going to find increased node spacing and that does not go away in bloom! The stretch is a bitch that way!
Topping can help but, still, in the end reduces cost effectiveness vs. yields.

Now then. IF you have industrial sized ceiling heights. And, the lighting needed to do a 12ft+ plant.....Try it...

Plants do a lot of biological things with the lights out......I strongly suggest a lights out period...
 

TintEastwood

Well-Known Member
Have any of you experienced low Oxygen levels in your rooms?

(When running sealed room with AC and controller regulated tank Co2.)

I'm considering a hand held ambient o2 meter so i can confirm o2 levels.
 

a mongo frog

Well-Known Member
Ok i should say beneficial to have a dark period
Definitely not a fact but if it works for you thats awesome! I do both. Moms on 18/6, clones 24 hours for 3 weeks then 1 week of 18/6 than blast off.
There is no right answer bro. We've been debating this for a decade here on this site. You will see every now and again a veg lighting thread starts. Every one starts throwing their dick around pics start getting posted people start telling lies. Good times though.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
Definitely not a fact but if it works for you thats awesome! I do both. Moms on 18/6, clones 24 hours for 3 weeks then 1 week of 18/6 than blast off.
There is no right answer bro. We've been debating this for a decade here on this site. You will see every now and again a veg lighting thread starts. Every one starts throwing their dick around pics start getting posted people start telling lies. Good times though.
Fair enough, not throwing pics or swinging dicks. Not a professor and self read on the topic. If you know something i don't i would appreciate the info just for knowledge. Why do i get the feeling this has more to do with debating whether the plant is C3 or C4. Science changes over the years and I'm good with that. I learned differently.

I get you may not want to type it all out but can you at least point me in the direction so i can read the research on it.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
Definitely not a fact but if it works for you thats awesome! I do both. Moms on 18/6, clones 24 hours for 3 weeks then 1 week of 18/6 than blast off.
There is no right answer bro. We've been debating this for a decade here on this site. You will see every now and again a veg lighting thread starts. Every one starts throwing their dick around pics start getting posted people start telling lies. Good times though.
Not pushing anything just some very recent information on the subject you may be interested in. Good argument about the microbes. Your 24 hr then 18/6 not gonna lie kinda peeks my interest but still not convinced.

I know fucking youtube... I never accept info from youtube as its usually just regurgitated crap but this has some credibility. If it was just the dude yakkin I would have discounted it.

 
Last edited:

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Not pushing anything just some very recent information on the subject you may be interested in. Good argument about the microbes. Your 24 hr then 18/6 not gonna lie kinda peeks my interest.

I know fucking youtube... I never accept info from youtube as its usually just regurgitated crap but this has some credibility. If it was just the dude yakkin I would have discounted it.

I ran 6 hours on in veg and 2 hours off continuously in veg and the plants dug it.

My theory is that plants usually grow more vigorously in the first 6 hours than the rest of the day, so I just give them that time and a break and repeat. I did not do an exacting side by side so my results are subjective.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
I ran 6 hours on in veg and 2 hours off continuously in veg and the plants dug it.

My theory is that plants usually grow more vigorously in the first 6 hours than the rest of the day, so I just give them that time and a break and repeat. I did not do an exacting side by side so my results are subjective.
Yeah i have considered a similar method in the past. I wish i was allowed more plants so i could actually experiment more with side by sides. What i do works for me but that doesn't mean there is not more effective ways. My self educated feeling is plants have a sort of internal clock that can be manipulated from seed (much like people adapt to different sleep patterns etc.). Its not a 24 clock, its what you make it but changing it likely will stress the plant to a degree. With small changes having the least impact and large changes having more. It only makes sense to me that all living things have the ability to adapt relatively quickly to some degree. I always change 1 thing at a time for 2 reasons, avoid stressing the plant and so i can be sure what i changed is responsible for the reaction i see.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
Also feel that there is a lot more to the lights on/off in relation to temperature during those periods. 24hr light with same temp. I have a hard time wrapping my head around. I'm am always skeptical and set in my ways... until i can prove it to myself. I admit i can be quite stubborn
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Also feel that there is a lot more to the lights on/off in relation to temperature during those periods. 24hr light with same temp. I have a hard time wrapping my head around. I'm am always skeptical and set in my ways... until i can prove it to myself. I admit i can be quite stubborn
This was another advantage to the schedule I mentioned above; the temperature swings were far less extreme than 18/6. That might account for the results, there's no way I would know.

Again, empiricism; it worked for me so I went with it.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
This was another advantage to the schedule I mentioned above; the temperature swings were far less extreme than 18/6. That might account for the results, there's no way I would know.

Again, empiricism; it worked for me so I went with it.
Yeah i thought about it before but did't want to ruin a small crop since that all i can do atm. My concern was the time frame it takes the plant to change processes and get back up to speed in those process. There just wasn't enough info that i could find on it so i ditched it. When i retire I think i'm going to go back to school. I can say I missed the boat having a career really peaked my interest in life. I have been growing shit and breeding shit of all sorts since i was a teen and still not bored with it. If i do i just switch to something else. Cannabis serves a duel purpose for me though its a recreation and a hobby :) Not to mention Its a medicine for me... literally not just the fact it has medicinal purposes.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Yeah i thought about it before but did't want to ruin a small crop since that all i can do atm. My concern was the time frame it takes the plant to change processes and get back up to speed in those process. There just wasn't enough info that i could find on it so i ditched it. When i retire I think i'm going to go back to school. I can say I missed the boat having a career really peaked my interest in life. I have been growing shit and breeding shit of all sorts since i was a teen and still not bored with it. If i do i just switch to something else. Cannabis serves a duel purpose for me though its a recreation and a hobby :)
It's the kind of hobby that can easily pay for itself; fucking prescription prices are ridiculous these days!
 

a mongo frog

Well-Known Member
Not pushing anything just some very recent information on the subject you may be interested in. Good argument about the microbes. Your 24 hr then 18/6 not gonna lie kinda peeks my interest but still not convinced.

I know fucking youtube... I never accept info from youtube as its usually just regurgitated crap but this has some credibility. If it was just the dude yakkin I would have discounted it.

Im not sure what to say. I would rather take all the info off this site and do my own tests then some university study on marijuana. This site grows millions of marijuanas. Most people in this thread right now have posted many many pics with lab results on this site. Go to the quality bud thread on this site Ive got some sexy droppers on there. Not sure what will convince you that 24/7 veg works. I promise to god himself that it works. You must know this though. I feel funny even talking about it. It is even in every single grow bible.
 
Top