Is it possible to flower with 5000k

Ninjabowler

Ninjabowler

Well-Known Member
Light has a profound effect on plant growth and development. Red and blue light best drive photosynthetic metabolism, so it is no surprise that these light qualities are particularly efficient in advancing the developmental characteristics associated with autotrophic growth habits. Photosynthetically inefficient light qualities also impart important environmental information to a developing plant. For example, far-red light reverses the effect of phytochromes, leading to changes in gene expression, plant architecture, and reproductive responses. Recent evidence shows that green light also has discrete effects on plant biology, and the mechanisms that sense this light quality are now being elucidated. Green light has been shown to affect plant processes via cryptochrome-dependent and cryptochrome-independent means. Generally, the effects of green light oppose those directed by red and blue wavebands. This review examines the literature where green light has been implicated in physiological or developmental outcomes, many not easily attributable to known sensory systems. Here roles of green light in the regulation of vegetative development, photoperiodic flowering, stomatal opening, stem growth modulation, chloroplast gene expression and plant stature are discussed, drawing from data gathered over the last 50 years of plant photobiological research. Together these reports support a conclusion that green light sensory systems adjust development and growth in orchestration with red and blue sensors.

http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/58/12/3099.full

Heres one from oxford. The title is Green light: a signal to slow down or stop.
That to me sounds like you dont know shit, besides how to use a thesaurus.
 
Ninjabowler

Ninjabowler

Well-Known Member
Leaf Structure

Photosynthesis is the process of converting light energy to chemical energy and storing it in the bonds of sugar. This process occurs in plants and some algae (Kingdom Protista). Plants need only light energy, CO2, and H2O to make sugar. The process of photosynthesis takes place in the chloroplasts, specifically using chlorophyll, the green pigment involved in photosynthesis.


Leaf Cross-Section
Photosynthesis takes place primarily in plant leaves, and little to none occurs in stems, etc. The parts of a typical leaf include the upper and lower epidermis, the mesophyll, the vascular bundle(s) (veins), and the stomates. The upper and lower epidermal cells do not have chloroplasts, thus photosynthesis does not occur there. They serve primarily as protection for the rest of the leaf. The stomates are holes which occur primarily in the lower epidermis and are for air exchange: they let CO2 in and O2 out. The vascular bundles or veins in a leaf are part of the plant’s transportation system, moving water and nutrients around the plant as needed. The mesophyll cells have chloroplasts and this is where photosynthesis occurs.


Chlorplast
As you hopefully recall, the parts of a chloroplast include the outer and inner membranes, intermembrane space, stroma, and thylakoidsstacked in grana. The chlorophyll is built into the membranes of the thylakoids.

Chlorophyll looks green because it absorbs red and blue light, making these colors unavailable to be seen by our eyes. It is the green light which is NOT absorbed that finally reaches our eyes, making chlorophyll appear green. However, it is the energy from the absorbed red and blue light that is, thereby, able to be used to do photosynthesis. The green light we can see is not/cannot be absorbed by the plant, and thus cannot be used to do photosynthesis.
 
Ninjabowler

Ninjabowler

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
This is interesting. Plants are green because they aren't absorbing green light... so what about when our plants turn purple? Makes you wonder... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130404142455.htm
Click to expand...
Nice study, looks to me like its claiming a very small usage of green light and it would only be when the plant is purpling at the very end if it turns purple that is. Theres no doubt in my mind that the green spectrum is absorbed and converted to a small amount of energy. I mean plants grow in the suns light and it contains it so id think theyve adapted with it in mind so to speak. But its not what the plant wants to grow and thats why we dont use it because that energy to availability ratio is so small.

Theres scientists with white coats designing grow lights all over, and if the benefits were great enough to make people money adding a green spike to the light output in grow lights, there would be green spikes in every light out there. But its not because its reflected and not the optimal photosynthesizing spectrum. Also known as a big ole waste of time, or money. Most lights would probably carry enough or more green to satisfy any needed green because the absorption is so minimal. So small that green lights are used when a plant sleeps without disturbing its sleep.

So when flappy McChirpy stated that theres enough green spectrum to make things happen like its a necessary spectrum and needs to be present for anything to grow, well thats stupid. Green spectrum is not a staple in photosynthesis, just another color that hits the leaf and does almost nothing. Whomp whoooomp :(
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Ninjabowler said:
Nice study, looks to me like its claiming a very small usage of green light and it would only be when the plant is purpling at the very end if it turns purple that is. Theres no doubt in my mind that the green spectrum is absorbed and converted to a small amount of energy. I mean plants grow in the suns light and it contains it so id think theyve adapted with it in mind so to speak. But its not what the plant wants to grow and thats why we dont use it because that energy to availability ratio is so small.

Theres scientists with white coats designing grow lights all over, and if the benefits were great enough to make people money adding a green spike to the light output in grow lights, there would be green spikes in every light out there. But its not because its reflected and not the optimal photosynthesizing spectrum. Also known as a big ole waste of time, or money. Most lights would probably carry enough or more green to satisfy any needed green because the absorption is so minimal. So small that green lights are used when a plant sleeps without disturbing its sleep.

So when flappy McChirpy stated that theres enough green spectrum to make things happen like its a necessary spectrum and needs to be present for anything to grow, well thats stupid. Green spectrum is not a staple in photosynthesis, just another color that hits the leaf and does almost nothing. Whomp whoooomp :(
Click to expand...
Indoor horticulture of this kind is all extremely new, in 20 years the lights will make the best stuff we use today look like incandescents. My guess is that most of them WILL include some green spectrum. I think the research into green light comes from looking into why white LEDs perform better than just Red and Blue LEDs (Which is why a lot of top of the line LEDs, as well as many of the best DIY LED rigs, are beginning to favor white) and it looks like some of that benefit can be attributed to the additional green content of the lights.
" In strong white light, therefore, the quantum yield of photosynthesis would be lower in the upper chloroplasts, located near the illuminated surface, than that in the lower chloroplasts. Because green light can penetrate further into the leaf than red or blue light, in strong white light, any additional green light absorbed by the lower chloroplasts would increase leaf photosynthesis to a greater extent than would additional red or blue light. Based on the assessment of effects of the additional monochromatic light on leaf photosynthesis, we developed the differential quantum yield method that quantifies efficiency of any monochromatic light in white light. Application of this method to sunflower leaves clearly showed that, in moderate to strong white light, green light drove photosynthesis more effectively than red light."(http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full)
 
Ninjabowler

Ninjabowler

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
Indoor horticulture of this kind is all extremely new, in 20 years the lights will make the best stuff we use today look like incandescents. My guess is that most of them WILL include some green spectrum. I think the research into green light comes from looking into why white LEDs perform better than just Red and Blue LEDs (Which is why a lot of top of the line LEDs, as well as many of the best DIY LED rigs, are beginning to favor white) and it looks like some of that benefit can be attributed to the additional green content of the lights.
" In strong white light, therefore, the quantum yield of photosynthesis would be lower in the upper chloroplasts, located near the illuminated surface, than that in the lower chloroplasts. Because green light can penetrate further into the leaf than red or blue light, in strong white light, any additional green light absorbed by the lower chloroplasts would increase leaf photosynthesis to a greater extent than would additional red or blue light. Based on the assessment of effects of the additional monochromatic light on leaf photosynthesis, we developed the differential quantum yield method that quantifies efficiency of any monochromatic light in white light. Application of this method to sunflower leaves clearly showed that, in moderate to strong white light, green light drove photosynthesis more effectively than red light."(http://pcp.oxfordjournals.org/content/50/4/684.full)
Click to expand...
Grow lights already have green spectrum in them. You posted a chart on the last page showing it. The plants arent using it all, but its there. I guess those lettuce plants must be the wave of the future. Just like the LEDs right? Why dont you LED guys just throw a blue diode and a yellow diode next to each other. Wouldnt that make green?
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Ninjabowler said:
Grow lights already have green spectrum in them. You posted a chart on the last page showing it. The plants arent using it all, but its there. I guess those lettuce plants must be the wave of the future. Just like the LEDs right? Why dont you LED guys just throw a blue diode and a yellow diode next to each other. Wouldnt that make green?
Click to expand...
Visually perhaps, but not really. There is a difference between our visual perception of color and the actual wavelength of the light. Take for instance the colors Violet and Purple. Violet is an actual color of light that falls within a certain wavelength (380–450nm), whereas Purple is not actually a color of light, it is red and blue light perceived in combination by us appearing as purple, there is no wavelength of purple light. So, putting one yellow diode next to one blue diode might appear to our eyes to cast green light, it would in fact be casting two separate wavelengths of light, one yellow one blue, not one light with a wavelength of green. Thus, it would not have the same effect as green light. That is why, in the first study I posted, they were evaluating the difference between very specific wavelengths of green light (510nm, 524nm, 532nm) with differing Photosynthetic Photon Flux density (100, 200, 300), and each slight shift in wavelength and PPF had drastically different results. So, adding lights that LOOK green would have little to no beneficial effect, but adding lights that cast the exact wavelength of light that is beneficial (510nm with band width at half peak height of 18nm, and PPF 300) would have striking rewards (Increased shoot and root growth, higher leaf photosynthetic rate). Also, the lighting chart I posted was just color spectra of CFL lights, not LED, HID, or other specifically designed grow lights, most of which have much narrower bands of color.
 
bryleetch

bryleetch

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
Visually perhaps, but not really. There is a difference between our visual perception of color and the actual wavelength of the light. Take for instance the colors Violet and Purple. Violet is an actual color of light that falls within a certain wavelength (380–450nm), whereas Purple is not actually a color of light, it is red and blue light perceived in combination by us appearing as purple, there is no wavelength of purple light. So, putting one yellow diode next to one blue diode might appear to our eyes to cast green light, it would in fact be casting two separate wavelengths of light, one yellow one blue, not one light with a wavelength of green. Thus, it would not have the same effect as green light. That is why, in the first study I posted, they were evaluating the difference between very specific wavelengths of green light (510nm, 524nm, 532nm) with differing Photosynthetic Photon Flux density (100, 200, 300), and each slight shift in wavelength and PPF had drastically different results. So, adding lights that LOOK green would have little to no beneficial effect, but adding lights that cast the exact wavelength of light that is beneficial (510nm with band width at half peak height of 18nm, and PPF 300) would have striking rewards (Increased shoot and root growth, higher leaf photosynthetic rate). Also, the lighting chart I posted was just color spectra of CFL lights, not LED, HID, or other specifically designed grow lights, most of which have much narrower bands of color.
Click to expand...
I think he was just screwing with you. Pretty sure he understands how the light spectrum works
 
Ninjabowler

Ninjabowler

Well-Known Member
Ace Yonder said:
Visually perhaps, but not really. There is a difference between our visual perception of color and the actual wavelength of the light. Take for instance the colors Violet and Purple. Violet is an actual color of light that falls within a certain wavelength (380–450nm), whereas Purple is not actually a color of light, it is red and blue light perceived in combination by us appearing as purple, there is no wavelength of purple light. So, putting one yellow diode next to one blue diode might appear to our eyes to cast green light, it would in fact be casting two separate wavelengths of light, one yellow one blue, not one light with a wavelength of green. Thus, it would not have the same effect as green light. That is why, in the first study I posted, they were evaluating the difference between very specific wavelengths of green light (510nm, 524nm, 532nm) with differing Photosynthetic Photon Flux density (100, 200, 300), and each slight shift in wavelength and PPF had drastically different results. So, adding lights that LOOK green would have little to no beneficial effect, but adding lights that cast the exact wavelength of light that is beneficial (510nm with band width at half peak height of 18nm, and PPF 300) would have striking rewards (Increased shoot and root growth, higher leaf photosynthetic rate). Also, the lighting chart I posted was just color spectra of CFL lights, not LED, HID, or other specifically designed grow lights, most of which have much narrower bands of color.
Click to expand...
I guess you missed the sarcasm in that post. The relevant comment was that what the plants are actually using and what the lights are providing in terms of green light.....well lets just say that theres some extra green bouncing around the flower room. You like posting charts right? Find one of the green absorption rates of flowering plants (not lettuce) cause theres a big difference between leafy plants and flowery plants just so ya know. Then find one of the output of the 1000w MH lamp (the standard in our industry for veg growth) i think you may find the absorption rates a liiiiiiiitle lower than the output. Unless the absorption is right up there with blue. But you and i both know it aint. So lets stop wasting the readers time on wasted light ;)
 
Ace Yonder

Ace Yonder

Well-Known Member
Ninjabowler said:
I guess you missed the sarcasm in that post. The relevant comment was that what the plants are actually using and what the lights are providing in terms of green light.....well lets just say that theres some extra green bouncing around the flower room. You like posting charts right? Find one of the green absorption rates of flowering plants (not lettuce) cause theres a big difference between leafy plants and flowery plants just so ya know. Then find one of the output of the 1000w MH lamp (the standard in our industry for veg growth) i think you may find the absorption rates a liiiiiiiitle lower than the output. Unless the absorption is right up there with blue. But you and i both know it aint. So lets stop wasting the readers time on wasted light ;)
Click to expand...
Lettuce was only used in one of the studies. The study showing that green light drove photosynthesis more effectively that red light in bright white light was conducted on Sunflowers, which as far as I know are still considered Flowering Plants.
 
giggywatts

giggywatts

Well-Known Member
op yes you can run 5000k lights and you can flower with them too, but would do better with 2700k or 6000k even better would be a mix of 2700k and 6000k. from my last true indoor grow i had 5000k and 2700k light mix, lets just say that the plants were all over the 2700k bulbs and showed that they didn't like the 5000k bulbs at all. so needless to say i have a house with lots of 23 watt 5000k bulbs, they look really good to the eye just not the plants. in my thoughts the green light is a waste, but some people swear by it to help. i look at it this way if it works for you then do it but no more green lights in my box. peace
 
Last edited:
Prince4118

Prince4118

Well-Known Member
Andre K_ said:
I did a CFL grow from start to finish a few years ago with only 5000k lighting and it was a success. Good luck
Click to expand...
Ace Yonder said:
It will definitely work. Fluorescent bulbs all have very broad spectra, and the K measure of color temperature is a very simple one based only on the perceived color of the light. As opposed to HID lights, which have very narrow spectra of light, with flourescents a 5000K bulb and a 2700K bulb both have substantial amounts of the same colors of light, it's just the ratios that differ.
View attachment 3275509
You use 2700K because it has more red, but as you can see even a 6400K still has about 40% as much red light, and conversely a 2700K still has about 45% as much blue light as a 6400K. Also, by using the 5000K you add in a bit of UV-B that the 2700K lacks almost entirely, and that can have a positive effect on development. So yeah, you should be fine with your 5000K
Click to expand...
Andre K_ said:
I did a CFL grow from start to finish a few years ago with only 5000k lighting and it was a success. Good luck
Click to expand...
It's been under the light for 2 weeks tomorrow and still no sign of sex how long have you guys had plants take
 
TheChemist77

TheChemist77

Well-Known Member
Prince4118 said:
It's been under the light for 2 weeks tomorrow and still no sign of sex how long have you guys had plants take
Click to expand...
is it under a 12/ 12 light cycle? some plants will not show gender for months in veg however if it under a 12/ 12 light sced it should start showing gender soon normally within 3 weeks max.
 
TheChemist77

TheChemist77

Well-Known Member
Prince4118 said:
Yea it's under 12/12
Click to expand...
Hold tight, grab your magnifying glass i use a 30x and you should see either a hair or a ball very soon,, dont be hasty, ive thought i saw a ball, waited a few more days and hairs came out of it,, i think its called a stipule.. every plant is different if its a long flowering strain it may not show till 3 weeks into flower,, but normally its right around that 2 week mark...
 
giggywatts

giggywatts

Well-Known Member
i have had plants take as long as three weeks to show preflower after the switch. wait it will come. good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top