Pruning - When do you take all the leaves off?

Uncle Ben said:

Many people mistake observation and data as supporting a conclusion when there are other factors which could be responsible for the observed phenomenon and data. It's a correlation/causation mistake.

Like I said before, over my many years of posting at cannabis forums, I have yet to see anything remotely valid when it comes to a bonafide empirical study using a control group, proper standarized testing techniques, proper methods, etc. If it's a legitimate, non-partisan, non-agenda based study done by say.....a university, I'll buy into it. But, it's more like seeing what you choose to see, expecting results that you want, being suckered in by anecdotal evidence, parroting (erroneous) popular opinion and such.

IC Mag is just another cannabis forum with a huge share of marijuana nerds and noobs.

UB

Click to expand...

Ay man i've always read that taking the leaves off will HURT your harvest. This is just showing me that people are pulling GREAT yeilds while removing ALL the leaves. I'm not saying this is some miracle technique..it might not even be worth it. But its def proving a lot of what i read wrong. As far as IC Mag i've learned just a much there as i have here...rollitup and ic mag are both great sites!

Uncle Ben is absolutely right, this was never a comparable argument and for most strains I am betting that a cola will not outgrow a full grown plant in the same position. You guys are arguing nonsense and Uncle Ben is absolutely right, he even told you it isn't a comparable argument in the first place and that you would lose if it were in the second place.

But I say Uncle Ben and dlively11 go head to head.. Same strain, he goes cola and Uncle Ben goes 2 or 4 main colas with no leaf removal. The arguing is boring and Uncle Ben won this 3 pages ago or something like that.

Uncle Ben said:

Many people mistake observation and data as supporting a conclusion when there are other factors which could be responsible for the observed phenomenon and data. It's a correlation/causation mistake.

Like I said before, over my many years of posting at cannabis forums, I have yet to see anything remotely valid when it comes to a bonafide empirical study using a control group, proper standarized testing techniques, proper methods, etc. If it's a legitimate, non-partisan, non-agenda based study done by say.....a university, I'll buy into it. But, it's more like seeing what you choose to see, expecting results that you want, being suckered in by anecdotal evidence, parroting (erroneous) popular opinion and such.

IC Mag is just another cannabis forum with a huge share of marijuana nerds and noobs.

UB

Click to expand...

So results arent enough for you I gather. My 5 years of indoor grows just arent enough real world experience and scientific enough for you either. Back to back trays in the same room with the same exact nutrients same exact conditions and same exact strains resulting in over 2X the yield of the ones with no leaf removal doesnt mean a darn thing.... If thats the case why dont you do a controlled experiment yourself over the next year and post your results instead of coming in threads like this like you actually have any real input on the matter. Then we can all shit all over your shared information as well. Seems fair enough....

You and some other ultra stubborn ultra arrogant growers posting in here just cant come up with a single valid reason how your bullet proof botanical science would allow anyone to yield this much if they are cutting the leaves. Take the whole scientific has to be perfect experiment out of the equation. Simply explain how the yields could be this high. The yield matters very much in this debate. You claim that removing the large fan leaves hurts production yet I have pics and final weights on harvest that TOTALLY debunk this. You cant which is why you keep falling back on your same old BS over and over instead of actually offering anything of real value yourself. Proof is in the putting and you have neither..........

MeJuana said:

Uncle Ben is absolutely right, this was never a comparable argument and for most strains I am betting that a cola will not outgrow a full grown plant in the same position. You guys are arguing nonsense and Uncle Ben is absolutely right, he even told you it isn't a comparable argument in the first place and that you would lose if it were in the second place.

But I say Uncle Ben and dlively11 go head to head.. Same strain, he goes cola and Uncle Ben goes 2 or 4 main colas with no leaf removal. The arguing is boring and Uncle Ben won this 3 pages ago or something like that.

Click to expand...

He won nothing at all. He didnt offer any proof at all other then quote from some ancient book. We on the other hand have offered pictures and final weights completely disproving what he is parroting when it comes to this style of growing. He can have any strain and any growing conditions he wants and he wont come anywhere close to my yields with his style of growing period.

That is a great idea do you think I can do it with DWC, 1 plant of any of my strains? I don't wanna waste my time what strain do you recommend I don't like candy tasting weed I like a hybrid.

P.S. You read me a little wrong that is my honest opinion, I have no desire to argue any of these old school growing methods and I am completely open minded. I could be alone in my opinion too lol

Sorry, catching the tail end of this. I read back 2 pages of arguing. What's the verdict, leaves on or off?

420God said:

Sorry, catching the tail end of this. I read back 2 pages of arguing. What's the verdict, leaves on or off?

Click to expand...

On........

There's no verdict only information.. dlively11 uses a technique to use the growing tip (the cola) to be an entire plant. In this respect the plants can be close together he covers all of the available area with growing tips!!! Hard to beat on a gram per watt perspective and requires a lot of plants to achieve those numbers, you can do this without veg I have seen. Uncle Ben is saying you shouldn't trim your leafs because they are large storage tanks, solar panels basically (quick poor interpretation) and as it has also been stated light penetrates farther than you can see. In this respect one would be limited to just a certain amount of plants and you are trying to yield the most available from that plant. Both are very powerful ideas, it is just a stand off at this point.

P.S. These are both old school ideas

MeJuana said:

There's no verdict only information.. dlively11 uses a technique to use the growing tip (the cola) to be an entire plant. In this respect the plants can be close together he covers all of the available area with growing tips!!! Hard to beat on a gram per watt perspective and requires a lot of plants to achieve those numbers, you can do this without veg I have seen. Uncle Ben is saying you shouldn't trim your leafs because they are large storage tanks, solar panels basically (quick poor interpretation) and as it has also been stated light penetrates farther than you can see. In this respect one would be limited to just a certain amount of plants and you are trying to yield the most available from that plant. Both are very powerful ideas, it is just a stand off at this point.

P.S. These are both old school ideas

Click to expand...

Thank you.

MeJuana said:

There's no verdict only information.. dlively11 uses a technique to use the growing tip (the cola) to be an entire plant. In this respect the plants can be close together he covers all of the available area with growing tips!!! Hard to beat on a gram per watt perspective and requires a lot of plants to achieve those numbers, you can do this without veg I have seen. Uncle Ben is saying you shouldn't trim your leafs because they are large storage tanks, solar panels basically (quick poor interpretation) and as it has also been stated light penetrates farther than you can see. In this respect one would be limited to just a certain amount of plants and you are trying to yield the most available from that plant. Both are very powerful ideas, it is just a stand off at this point.

P.S. These are both old school ideas

Click to expand...

Pretty much

dlively11 said:

Well right here you said it isnt great. Also if someone was actually getting over 2 lbs with 240 watts of CFLs that would be great but it isnt going to happen. Look I think you and I werent understanding each other perhaps as I can see you havent been flat out bashing like others have. Yes it is more of a PITA doing 6 plants a light and I miss the ease of growing 12-16 plants in that space. The only reason I do it is becuase I am able to get a much higher yield which was the point of this discussion. Cutting ;leaves helps on this type of grow maybe not others.

Peace ?

Click to expand...

Actually I didn't bash your removal of leaves or your grow at all...If anything I said that in your operation you NEED to remove those leaves....The only thing I've been arguing with you on is your position on grams per watt in that it's not the only way to judge a grow and you must consider other factors...

At the end of the day, I don't really care much to argue with you or anyone else or compare 1 grow to another....So yeah, peace man....

dlively11 said:

He won nothing at all. He didnt offer any proof at all other then quote from some ancient book. We on the other hand have offered pictures and final weights completely disproving what he is parroting when it comes to this style of growing. He can have any strain and any growing conditions he wants and he wont come anywhere close to my yields with his style of growing period.

Click to expand...

You haven't offered anything other than opinion.

UB

Uncle Ben said:

You haven't offered anything other than opinion.

UB

Click to expand...

Then you lack basic reading comprehension and the ability to believe your own eyes when it doesn't agree with your own beliefs. I offered a whole hell of a lot more to this thread then your parroting of old school books and such. Please continue to ignore the facts presented in front of you, I am sure you scared a some of sheep off with your antics. I guess I'll just remain one of the elite growers a little longer so thank you.
It has gone something like this

UB " I read a book that says trees dont respond well to this technique"

DL " I have done numerous side by side comparisons with all things being equal and have shown this technique increase peach size over 200% "

UB " Sorry my book says this just isnt possible"

DL " Here are numerous pictures showing the peaches didnt fall off the tree with this technique but instead they are over twice as big"

UB "Sorry this is just an opinion not fact science wont allow it so it just cant be true"

DL " 5 years of growing peaches and doing side by side grows of the same peaches in the same orchard from the same mother tree and all the ones I did this too have peaches twice as large as the ones next to them and it means nothing at all and is just an opinion ?! "

UB " Yup pretty much , I am right because you must be wrong according to my book. Pictures dont mean anything, those peaches may look 200% bigger but science wont allow it so it can't be true. Besides if it was true it would mean me and my old dust covered book are wrong and I wont allow that. Once you get another one or two thousand grows under your belt and document it with details and pictures I might consider it a possibility. Well actually no I wont because again it would mean I was wrong. "


DL " SIGH"

UB " By the way, did I mention my book was about growing potatoes ? "

dlively11 said:

I offered a whole hell of a lot more to this thread then your parroting of old school books and such.

Click to expand...

What you claim too be nothing more than the "old school books and such" is actually the sharing of facts, which is something you have not done. You have made claims and shared your own beliefs, none of which have been factually proven as Uncle Ben's information has been.

I am always amazed how some people can willingly allow themselves to totally reject proven facts and instead totally accept opinions and beliefs.

It becomes even more amazing when those people need to believe that there is some magical mystical disconnect between cannabis plants and other types of plants, therefore making proven fact not applicable to cannabis plants.

(In my best Billy Mays voice) But wait, there's more!

I just love it when those people try to convince others that proven facts have an expiration date on them and are "old school," in hopes that what they say will not be seen for what it actually is, that of course is being incorrect.

The icing on the cake is when those people attempt to make it appear as if what they believe they might have observed while growing in their basement or closet or attic or in a growbox or maybe a greenhouse or in their backyard is scientific proof and what highly educated people whose life work is the scientific research of plants, performed in controlled environments using the highest tech equipment available, could not possibly be more correct than what they believe they observed when growing in their basement or closet or attic or in a growbox or maybe a greenhouse or in their backyard.

So Professor Hawking, in your best robot voice, how about backing up your position with scientifically proven facts, rather than relying on your own personal beliefs and opinions, and factually proving Uncle Ben to be wrong?

I have seen many people attempt to refute Uncle Ben's facts, but I have yet to see so much as one single person come close to succeeding.

So, are you feeling lucky?

Is it possible that pruning most the leaves off might trigger the roots to grow more? Or maybe that the plants grow way more leaves then they actually need? just thinking in nature there is a lot of things that would naturally prune trees. Wind,branches falling,bugs ect. Maybe a plant over produces leaves to make up for that? idk just stoned thoughts..someone recomend me a couple books on plants grow i want to know them better.

Civil.Dis0bedience said:

Is it possible that pruning most the leaves off might trigger the roots to grow more?

Click to expand...

No, quite the opposite. The roots don't just magically appear. They are produced (driven) according to how much simple and complex carbos are manufactured by the leaves with subsequent protein, enzyme, hormones production, etc.

I'm not getting on your case, but your question clearly shows you don't understand botany or plant part functions and it's your type that gets sucked in by inaccurate info and hype so prevalent in cannabis forums. You need to get away from cannabis forums and into a public library seat. Learn nutrition, the function of plant parts, and the influence of hormones. Plant material doesn't produce more leaves than "it needs", it's dumb. Plant material finishes out according to how well all factors come together and how outside influences (it's environment) plays into the situation. It's all in The Balance. If a pecan tree loses half of its leaves in August due to hurricane force winds, the crop will suffer greatly. Same with cannabis or any other plant.

Roots, flowers, all plant material in fact is directly driven by the amount of healthy foliage. I learned many years ago, starting with a commericial greenhouse orchid op, that the more foliar mass I had going into a fall - spring flowering response, the more production I got. It's just simple, common botanical sense. For example, I had a very large phalaenopsis (aka the wedding flower) with about 11 healthy, large green leaves that would produce up to 3 spikes having about 45, 4.5" flowers on each. Those flower spikes would last most of the year. This isn't about books (although that's a good start), it's about experience and learning what makes a plant tick.



UB

Hey Uncle Ben,

You really need to tone it down a little bit. I am not the one to post very much on this or that cannabis forum(my last post was maybe more than a year ago) but you wrong attitude and factual observations have compelled me.
Defoliation when done right(read at the right time during flowering) does indeed work to increase yields dramatically!
This i do not say from hearsay but actual experimentation(yes with untreated controls) throughout the years.
All those who say that it cannot work because it is botanically impossible need to do some more actual on the field word instead of just parrotting Uncle Ben who is cleary wrong on this matter.

Uncle Ben, of course we all know that leaves' primary function is to capture light and co2 so this can be turned into sugars(carbohydrates). But guess what, the whole marihuana plant is made of carbohydrates(leaves, buds, stems...).
So your focus on buds is not shared by the plant. Your theory on fan leaves being the primary engines for bud production can therefor easiliy be debunked if it can be shown that the photosynthesis they produce is not (primarily) used for bud production. For me the proof of the pudding is in the eating. i.e. through extensive experimentation.

This was point number 1.

Number 2 concerns the efficiency in the photosynsthesis proces. Again your theory that fan leaves are the biggest leaves so they must have the biggest photosynthesis capability is a weak hypothesis. It can easily be rebuffed by suggesting that the ''sugar" leaves are far more efficient in transforming the capured light en co2 in what we all crave for i.e. buds. Again as with point no. 1 the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

My suggestion for Uncle ben is please stop being an ignorant grower and open your eyes and learn. And if you have any questions you can ask the in a rational way, because you are clearly mistaken when it comes to fan leaves and pruning.

kind regards.

....and now we have the trolls.

This troll owns your bases, Uncle Ben !

All you do is come in here with NOTHING of your own to add to this thread. Others like myself have given very definitive results and pictures to go along with them. You two are unreal with your science this science that with no proof of your own other then quoate from some old book.. If doing controlled side by side grows with not subtle but huge increases in yields means nothing then you guys are clearly blinded by your own arrogance. Stick to your books and dont try anything on your own. We all know that everything you read has to be true in every circumstance don't we ? LOL . Try to actually address many of the posts on this thread instead of just listening to each other . Who knows maybe you two will learn something new. Open your eyes the world isnt flat. What you feel so certain is fact isnt. Reality is this method can kick ass in terms of yield which was the whole point to begin with. I cant remember the last time I heard so much side stepping outside of politics.