Late flower uvb

polyarcturus said:

@dwelzel ; phillips is awesome and the CMH is super nice spectrum wise but out of all HID it throws the least UVB.

everything else you said i pretty much right on point.
@pj; what brand t5 flouro where you using? if it was a zilla i know why, you need an arcadia, but personally i will only use the MV and MH bulbs.

@cues; im only kidding around i wasnt trying to be an asshole. as usual i have bad communication skillz,all the stuff ive learned about as far as the bulbs go has mostly come from reptile peeps and a couple growers on here, and besides that all the emails to manufacturers and research papers off google.

Click to expand...

not trying to be pomp or anything but cmh does have the most uvb just not enough,followed badly by mh and of no import hps

so that's why some people flower with a mh?i dont know if i will try it but i am thinkingabout adding a blue after they swell up a bit

jojodancer10 said:

ok i know my plants put on weight in week 5-8 so thats when i add co2. now, you telling me to add a uvb light ? im in a 4*4 tent with a 1000watt hps. i do have a 1000 watt mh. can i use that or should i buy the sunmasyet 10k 1000Wtt for the last 3 weeks.? i really want to learn thanks for the response

Click to expand...

wow... you need to run co2 the whole time or not all.. better for the plants and your just wasting gas doing it that way.

Kite High said:

not trying to be pomp or anything but cmh does have the most uvb just not enough,followed badly by mh and of no import hps

Click to expand...

ive seen tests with the CMH most all of them come out zero higher qaulity lamps so "better" glass i guess you may be correct its been a while since ive looked at things im allowed to be wrong

also the megarays.... they are making them now and i have learned new things, as i said this thread is old.

polyarcturus said:

wow... you need to run co2 the whole time or not all.. better for the plants and your just wasting gas doing it that way.

Click to expand...

had a problem with the regulater bought a new one with another tank

*with UVB being supplemented in-regards to indoor setups, you are merely trying to mimic what the plant gets exposed to under 'outdoor' conditions, sunlight includes uvb

--@Kite, which CMH bulbs are you referring to?

cannawizard said:

*with UVB being supplemented in-regards to indoor setups, you are merely trying to mimic what the plant gets exposed to under 'outdoor' conditions, sunlight includes uvb

--@Kite, which CMH bulbs are you referring to?

Click to expand...

Good catch wiz btw how have you been my friend? haven't seen u in quite a while

400 watt retro hps ballast driven Philips cmh

To help imagery here is a description of what my chamber is

5'x5'x9'h
2 400 watt cmh on movers overhead
1 400 watt cmh/veg 10000mh for stretch period, hps for flower vertical in a cool tube for the lower/center
4 twin 46"T5 HO 1 set each corner, 1 actinic 450nm 1 10000k in 2 corners, 1 actinic 450nm and 1 Arcadia 12% uvb in the other two for veg, then all the Actinics are swapped out with Aquamedic pinks 650 nm
2 mv megaray zoo uvb bulbs overhead focused on 1/2 of the space
for 4 plants
9500 btu minisplit
Titan 3 co2 controller
60 pint /day dehumid

Only one side of it is uv irradiated so as to allow for comparison testing. Has always produced a pronounced diff in sats and to a lesser degree with indies.

Next summer will add uvb to the other side as I prefer the ratios of cannabinoids it causes and I will have enough data for my uvb lamp supplier.










But I was referring to the 400 watt retro whites by Philips

@Kite, im good bro just not really that active anymore on the boards, nice chamber setup hope all is well..cheers

cannawizard said:

@Kite, im good bro just not really that active anymore on the boards, nice chamber setup hope all is well..cheers

Click to expand...

a lil glimpse

Here is my 02.

First I want to start off by saying this is my opinion, I'm not insinuating that anyone is wrong or giving bad information, this is just what I have learned over the years from other accomplished growers and my own experience.

Like many on this thread have said, it is a fact that UVB light contributes to the production of THC, no argument there.
But the real question is, is it cost effective to run supplemental UVB lights? And from all the information I've came across from the many growers I know, the answer is no. The reason I say this is, most of these growers (myself included) have all experimented with it at one time or another and none of them are still using it. The benefits don't out way the cost and the time, simple as that.

One of my closest friends is a commercial grower who supplies many of the cannabis clubs in the Bay Area, he also owns a hydroponic store, the guy has more money than he knows what to do with and on top of that he gets all of his supplies at wholesale costs.

I remember six or seven years back when he first started seriously growing, he had every new contraption known to the growing world. He had the best LED's money could buy at the time, co2 generators, UVB lighting, light movers, used AN nutrients, you name it and this guy had it.

After years in the growing business, the only changes I've seen in his set ups is that he's made things more simple, that's it!
No more co2, no more UVB lighting, all T5 and HPS lighting, his grows are much less complicated and are super dialed in.
The only thing he concentrates on now is genetics and rightfully so.

^^ I figured commercial and large scale growers were not using uvb cause of the cost and hassle. If it does not make the pot twice as potent and the buzz is more 'complete', but many can not tell the difference anyways, well?

I am using it to bring out all the terpenes and chemical changes possible from the plant. I did not think it would make it greatly more potent, and I just have a micro grow, so....

*each to his own , until they have PHDs putting real R&D on this plant, all these variables will remain questionable.. but i agree with those who put emphasis on genetics

yesum said:

^^ I figured commercial and large scale growers were not using uvb cause of the cost and hassle. If it does not make the pot twice as potent and the buzz is more 'complete', but many can not tell the difference anyways, well?

I am using it to bring out all the terpenes and chemical changes possible from the plant. I did not think it would make it greatly more potent, and I just have a micro grow, so....

Click to expand...

I'm not claiming there are no large scale or serious growers not using UVB lighting, just the ones I know.

A while back we were messing around with an awesome OG X that was just covered in trichs, frosty as hell.
Two of us ran a small cycle, a friend of mine was using co2 and UVB supplemental lights, I ran my typical program.
He had both samples tested, I can't remember the exact numbers but we were both let down to say the least.
I believe the THC content from his sample was in the mid 13% range and mine was a high 12%.
The stories we heard from the guy that came up with this cut was that the THC % was in the mid 20 range, lol totally exaggerated.

With all the claims of how UVB increases THC, I find it hard to believe that in certain situations that it doesn't.
Perhaps different strains react more to the supplemental light than others.
I say if it's working for you, run with it bro!

ive seen em they exist.... just ask scooby dooby doo!

uvb does make the difference, but theres alot that plays into it. my buds have not been better since ive added UVB... but thats just my opinion.

i used to run co2 and would like too again, for simple health reasons, plants are much easier to propagate and gro-, er mature faster, but more air is just as good IMO.

and definitely it does effect some strains more than others.

Until you actually try it dont knock it or even have a bunk theory about it. Uvb from any air cooled light is useless first of all, and second, dont you remember science projects? Have a control plant(s) under regular lighting and a plant under supplemental lighting if your serious about finding out, it cost me 180.00 to add 60watts (the recommended 10% of light already in place) i run it 10 of the 12 hours the hids are on. I have no research or link to whack off too its all trial and error in the end, but the girls under supp lighting VISIBLY have 30 to 50% more trics than the controls. I cant test to be sure but i think if you are a true lover of mj and All she has to offer then do it! I wouldnt try it if you are needing to turn a profit cause its just adding more overhead to your crop. I use (2) 3ft t5 reptisun 30 watt 10.0 uvb bulbs NO SCREEN OR GLASS in a zoo med fixture on both sides of my hfarm 600 roughly 8 - 10 inches from canopy. Again if you have the space, time and $ try it you wont be disappointed! However i must say just like regular lighting you need high amount to make dense compact buds same applies to uvb you need a high amount to get anything beneficial from them since they only are effective up to 20 inches. Nice thread tho, can anyone weigh in on when to stop in the last week? I heard trics amber up TOO fast under uvb in the last days?

yes they can amber up pretty fast under UVB but you can use that to your advantage with some proper timing or you can just put them out of the direct UVB light for the last 2 weeks which is something i also do.

but the amber is just on the outer portions

Sativas and sat dom react to a larger degree than indicas or indie dom

Best in lab results was 10% increase in thc, 7% increase in thcv and this occurred with the Malawi Gold strain

And yes it should be well known by all that genetics are the biggest influence of all...all our climate rooms can do is achieve the environment to best bring out what the genetics contain...but NEVER can environment bring it pass the genes...but if breeding then those genetics will come to be best developed in your environment and then the real magic of keeper plants from seeds for your climate room occurs

I do not find the cost of uvb supplementation to be that high and definitely worth it for the outcome mostly because it manipulates the ratios to more suit my taste in highs

Also have found that side illumination with uvb more effective than overhead alone but overhead and side together to be most effective along with uvb sources being on the same lighting schedule as the main lighting