Sickmeds William's Wonder: grow journal. review and all things Wiliams Wonder

colocowboy

Well-Known Member
Ya, I don't think heat is adding anything either I suspect it's more of a "cooking" kind of thing.

I used to chop like that too, sparsing out the water at the end then breaking down the plant and plucking the shade leaves right away to speed up drying and get it in the jar pronto. I have found that slowing down the dry smooths out the end product. There are some that advocate actually drowning the plant by submersion 7-10 days prior to harvest, it is said to start the cure (conversion of chlorophyll) prior to actually curing. There is a thread on here somewhere about it, I been doing a slightly less intensive version for a few years now. I'll try to find that thread and post it for you, I think you would find it interesting at least.
 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
Ya, I don't think heat is adding anything either I suspect it's more of a "cooking" kind of thing.
This doesn't really make sense to me. When you smoke, you're hitting temps of at least 450F, and potentially quite a bit hotter than that. For example, the center of a cigarette "cherry" can exceed 1000F during inhale, and I think something like a forced air bong hit can probably get even hotter.

How hot do you think it can get in your pocket, 130F? Even that's probably pushing it. In the grand scheme of things, that's not much hotter than room temp, and it shouldn't be hot enough to do any real chemical conversions or release anything that won't be released in ordinary smoking. Just the hot smoke passing through the rest of the unsmoked weed in a bowl or joint undoubtedly heats things hotter than they could ever get in your pocket.

To be clear, I believe your story, I'm just saying that other than my speculation about change in humidity, I don't have a good explanation for what actually happened. If it were possible to consistently improve the taste or effect of cannabis by simple warming/heating before smoking, this would be common knowledge, and everyone would be doing it.

There are some that advocate actually drowning the plant by submersion 7-10 days prior to harvest, it is said to start the cure (conversion of chlorophyll) prior to actually curing. There is a thread on here somewhere about it, I been doing a slightly less intensive version for a few years now. I'll try to find that thread and post it for you, I think you would find it interesting at least.
Sure, I'd love to see that.

I can tell you right off that if overwatering helps, it has to be for other reasons than early breakdown of chlorophyll. There is no way that by itself overwatering a plant (even "drowning" it) causes breakdown of chlorophyll. Water surplus is a pretty common natural condition and plants can handle it without self-destructing their feeding mechanism! As some food for thought, if this were really true, something like deep water culture would be impossible.

To be clear, there is quite a bit more to a cure than just chlorophyll breakdown. That's part of it, but there is also breakdown of larger organic molecules into smaller ones, breakdown of starches into sugar, depletion of sugars, and equilibration of water throughout the plant material. There is also some decarboxylation of cannabinoids, and (possibly) minimal conversion of some into others.

I can think of a couple reasons why overwatering prior to harvest might help; its not specifically because of chlorophyll.

By itself overwatering is a flush, and that may aid the final product by washing out salts or other water-soluble compounds. Overwatering a plant may cause some sort of metabolic "stress" reaction, and that may be at play here. If you reduce the plants ability to feed, its may deplete stored nutrients faster. Also, just having more water present inside the plant may prolong post-harvest metabolic processes, and maybe that's at play here.

Note that plants are actually still alive for a while after being chopped, and they are carrying on metabolic activity for a while thereafter. That's one reason why you're supposed to do your drying in the dark. . .so that the plants use up stored sugars instead of making more via photosynthesis. Some people give plants a 1-2 day dark period prior to harvest, and part of it is for the same reason. The plants will use up sugars, instead of making more, plus absence of light should allow light-sensitive cannabinoids to build up to higher levels.
 

colocowboy

Well-Known Member
Yep, yep, and yup! lol
That's why I like talking to you, you actually think about things with a base of knowledge in your head. ;)

Here is RiddleMe's study https://www.rollitup.org/blogs/blog1231-harvesting-drying-curing-research-study.html, and the thread I saw it on https://www.rollitup.org/harvesting-curing/357460-drowning-plant-prior-harvest.html. I know there is a lot more to it that converting chlorophyll but like I told you before I am a lazy bastard and don't like educating people so I don't post often. ;)

puff, puff, pass....
bongsmilie
 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
Yep, yep, and yup! lol
That's why I like talking to you, you actually think about things with a base of knowledge in your head. ;)

Here is RiddleMe's study https://www.rollitup.org/blogs/blog1231-harvesting-drying-curing-research-study.html, and the thread I saw it on https://www.rollitup.org/harvesting-curing/357460-drowning-plant-prior-harvest.html. I know there is a lot more to it that converting chlorophyll but like I told you before I am a lazy bastard and don't like educating people so I don't post often. ;)
Thanks, I always like learning more.

Even though we're getting WAY away from Williams Wonder, I think this is interesting. Here's my take.

There all sorts of stories/myths about overwatering/underwatering, flushing, starving, stressing, defoliating, light-depriving, UV-light adding, and other things you're supposed to do right before harvest to increase potency or final quality. Most of these things come down to somehow stressing the plant prior to harvest, with the idea that this is going to improve the final product. Without addressing the others, to me, this overwatering thing falls into the same category.

In a nutshell, the idea is that by immersing your plants roots in standing water for a week or so prior to harvest, you'll suffocate the plant, and it will start undergoing anaerobic respiration. In that particular metabolic state, while alive, the plant will start carrying out some of the same intracellular processes that would have been part of a normal cure, only earlier. By the time you cut down the plant, its already gotten a "head start" on curing, so to speak.

I don't like this idea at all, and here's why:

-I'm pretty sure that contrary to what many in internet-world seem to believe, cannabis plants, like just about every other leafed plant on the planet, are perfectly capable of breathing air through the stomata on their leaves. Drowning their roots in water may not be good for them (eg it promotes root rot), but it won't change oxygen availability to the buds. In other words, the whole premise here is faulty.

-Even if choking the roots somehow did cause O2 starvation in the buds, any anaerobic respiration related activity that you might have gotten a head start on this way would probably have taken place within a short time after harvest anyway. The majority of the other important processes of the cure, are still going to take several weeks to be done in any case. So even if you did get this "head start" you're still not going to hit the "finish line" of a faster cure sooner.

-In my opinion, deliberately increasing humidity (eg by putting your plants roots in a bucket of water) the week before harvest is an invitation for mold at the worst possible time.

Again, I do think there may be multiple advantages to harvesting your plant "wet", so to speak; I mentioned some last post. I just don't think "preharvest cure" is one of them.
 

colocowboy

Well-Known Member
I realize it seems highly suspect, I would probably recommend against it if mold is already an issue as well. It's dry as a popcorn fart where I am and it is simply not an issue. I personally don't go to the extreme of complete suffocation though I am certain it would only improve the result at this point. lol It's counter intuitive I know. I will also quit mucking up your thread but it's pretty interesting and I wouldn't proselytize something without having put the paces down.

If you do read that thread you will be surprised methinks. Anywho, the implications are particularly interesting for commercial but I attest under penalty of flame the results of this even if just keeping saturated for even a couple days makes a marked improvement. Sorry for driving your thread off topic :D
 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
Trying to get back to Williams Wonder.

For the curious, below is a bud shot of the "old" Williams Wonder (left) vs the new Sickmeds Chemical Wonder (right); you can read more about the Chemical Wonder here.

 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
I realize it seems highly suspect, I would probably recommend against it if mold is already an issue as well. It's dry as a popcorn fart where I am and it is simply not an issue. I personally don't go to the extreme of complete suffocation though I am certain it would only improve the result at this point. lol It's counter intuitive I know. I will also quit mucking up your thread but it's pretty interesting and I wouldn't proselytize something without having put the paces down.
I'm skeptical on first principles about the drowning, but there's theory and then there's practice. Maybe soaking the plants in water for a week does help; I haven't actually tried it, let alone done some sort of controlled experiment to tell the truth.

I just don't think it the explanation given in that thread is good, that's all.

When I said "myth" by the way, I didn't mean to imply that all these things are necessarily false, just that the stories spread, get distorted, and may or may not have any real evidence to back them up. Apparently UVB supplementation really may increase potency for some strains, and I think its actually been proven with real lab analysis that some strains respond well to light deprivation prior to harvest. There may be something to these things, but the devil is in the details.

Can you imagine the poor plant that has been flushed of all its nutes, deprived of new ones for 2-4 weeks, then had all its fan leaves picked off, a nail driven through its mainstem, stuck under cancer-causing levels of UVB radiation, then soaked in water for 10 days? Is that plant really going to be better than one given light organic nutes and normal watering until the end? Its sort of funny putting it that way, but people do each one of these things separately, why not all together?

If you do read that thread you will be surprised methinks. Anywho, the implications are particularly interesting for commercial but I attest under penalty of flame the results of this even if just keeping saturated for even a couple days makes a marked improvement. Sorry for driving your thread off topic :D
I've read it, considered it, and explained above why I reject this "drowning" idea.

I'm not at all upset that you're posting about it here. I invited it, responded to it, and I like to see (hopefully) intelligent discussion. I just wonder (cough) how much anyone coming here to read about Williams Wonder cares, that's all. But realistically, I'll just assume that anyone who wanted to know anything about the actual strain got hopefully got their info several pages ago.

On your experience, again, I'm not at all doubting that you've had great results this way. I'm just questioning WHY, that's all.
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Trying to get back to Williams Wonder.

For the curious, below is a bud shot of the "old" Williams Wonder (left) vs the new Sickmeds Chemical Wonder (right); you can read more about the Chemical Wonder here.



I see those MALE banana's in the W.W., just like mine. I haven't seen any seeds though, and although it was a rocky start on 2 of my plants, the male pods didn't cause any issues- I'm guessing they are harmless. I'm a week away from harvest- 3 plants are further along then the other 5, by maybe a week or so. I'll decide what to do as I get closer.......pic's when I have a chance later today maybe.
 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
I see those MALE banana's in the W.W., just like mine. I haven't seen any seeds though, and although it was a rocky start on 2 of my plants, the male pods didn't cause any issues- I'm guessing they are harmless. I'm a week away from harvest- 3 plants are further along then the other 5, by maybe a week or so. I'll decide what to do as I get closer.......pic's when I have a chance later today maybe.
Great, I'd love to see those.

On this topic, please check out my Chemical Wonder grow, if you haven't already. Its a pretty short report, and should take more than at most 3-4 minutes to read the whole thing (plus it has its own soundtrack now!). That plant also threw out full true male pollen sacs week three of flowering, which (unexpectedly) simply stopped appearing by week 5 and never returned with no apparent issues after that.

Comments there are welcome.

I've written on this upthread, but for those just reading now, I've now grown Williams Wonder multiple times now from different se-eds and clones of same, and although every single plant has had at least a few nanas, I've still never seen a single bean. I've always assumed this was just because the nanas come out just the last few weeks of flowering. By they time they are mature enough to make pollen, the vast majority of the plants flowers have withered pistils and are non viable, and even for the few that may still be viable, there just isn't enough time to build se-eds.

Since I've seen at least one other poster say they HAVE seen a few immature beans in their buds, I would still assume that these nanas are at least potentially fertile. Probably not an issue unless you're seeing them early in your grow (which I personally haven't), or you have other younger female plants present as well.

In terms of numbers of nanas, the range has been from a limited number only on a few buds, to lots of them on almost every bud on the plant. The above dried bud mage is one of the ones that had the most. I'm completely convinced now that this is genetic, because two different plants grown side by side under the exact same conditions put out different numbers of nanas, and clones of these plants also tended to put out the same amount of nanas as the mothers. For what its worth, the "high nana" plant also seemed to be the most potent. . .so I guess its not all bad!
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Well, I'll know more after I start breaking up dried buds to smoke but I don't think they are fertile. I haven't seen any seeds popping thru, which I normally do when the pods show themselves early in flowering, like they did in my plants. Overall, I'm happy to report it really didn't turned into an issue I thought it might be.
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
My most done plant, today at day 58. This one and 2 other plants should be close to done in another 5-7 days, while the others have up to a week longer than that. No nutes now for at least a week, I like them to really yellow up at the end so just plain water.
 

Attachments

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Pretty dam strong, that's for sure.... a perfect late night smoke. It's about 6 hours later, the bud is almost gone. Almost ready for bed......
 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
Pretty dam strong, that's for sure.... a perfect late night smoke. It's about 6 hours later, the bud is almost gone. Almost ready for bed......
OK, its been some more time now.

Any comments on the rest of this? Yield? Scent? Flavor? Total harvest times?

And how's those Northern lights going?
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Well, I spent a 1/2 hour last night finally writing a review, comments, etc and just as I finished, RIU locked me up and made me re-sign in......so I lost everything. Too frustrated now to redo but maybe over the w/e.......
 

Jogro

Well-Known Member
very interested in this as well. I got 2 females over a month in veg now (w/3 c99's).
I'd love to hear your impressions of this one does in comparison to C99. Whose version of that do you have?

Well, I spent a 1/2 hour last night finally writing a review, comments, etc and just as I finished, RIU locked me up and made me re-sign in......so I lost everything. Too frustrated now to redo but maybe over the w/e.......
Ouch. . .been there done that. . .I feel your pain.

After having been "burned" this way more than once, now for my reviews and such, I type them first into a text editor, then cut and paste them into RIU when I'm done. Its really only one more step, and well worth it. Also, that way if I get interrupted, or have to come back later, its easy.

Anyway, if you really can't bring yourself to retype a long review, how about just a general thumbs up/thumbs down, or any comments on notable features (scent, yield, potency)? Did it live up to your expectations? Would you grow it again? Any thoughts about this vs NL5?

Some guy just posted in the DNA/reg thread that he thought the Sickmeds posted cannabinoid numbers were false. . .his post and my response here:
https://www.rollitup.org/seed-strain-reviews/753398-has-dna-genetics-seeds-stopped.html#post9867793

In short, I can see a number of reasons why someone might not like this strain (scent, flavor, nanas, couchlock effect, etc), but I don't think lack of potency is one of them!
 

Shaker1

Active Member
I'd love to hear your impressions of this one does in comparison to C99. Whose version of that do you have?


I have KOS's (skunk mag. editor...?)version of c99. not much info I can find on his quality or breeding skills. everyone just refers back to the bros. grimm description. I have one that looks diff. in structure and hoping its a special one..lol...we'll see.
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Well, after a Volcano bag of some W.W., I'm ready to try this again. I'll do it in parts, so be patient. My C99 comments first.

I grew Mosca's C99 for a few crops, which I believe is a Bros. Grim X Reeferman genetics (C99 X C99). Reeferman's was a heavy yielder, and the Bros Grimm was the "Flagship" C99 that most people refer back to. I actually still own some of these seeds, they were the 1st release seeds by Mosca. I think I won them at auction. He's done it a few more times by now. It was only average potency, a good day-time smoke to give you some energy, all head buzz. At night I barely felt it when it was smoked. It yielded very well for this strain, golf ball size (or slightly larger) nugs with good density. The smell and taste was a light lemon/floral/sweetness. No body to it, just mild in both departments. I think I let them go around 65-67 days. It just wasn't potent enough for me..........I've heard good things about Dr. GreenThumbs too.
 

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
Now on to the N.L. #5. This was a staple for me about 10 years ago for 2+ years. I really liked it back then. Easy to grow, yielded very well, and devastatingly potent indica. The were done by British Columbia Seeds. Wherever I was getting these seeds from back then, ran out and I couldn't get them anywhere. Remember, it was 2002 and not too many vendors were selling to the U.S. and SELLING this company's beans.

Now they are basically everywhere, and easy to get. I bought some, and finally got around to doing them. I think I started 10, but only ended up with 3 healthy females. I don't remember the details now. These still yielded well and were done at 65 days. Nice resin production, very large center cola and similar appearance to what I remember. The high now has more sativa in it- a different "blend" I guess you can say. I'd say before it was 90/10 indica/sativa- now it's probably 60/40. Didn't expect that. Pretty low odor too in all stages. It's still curing, but has nice appeal and it has a nice spicyness to it when I chop a bud up. Glad I did it, and I'll be keeping few jars of this around for winter fun! Pic's of this and everything else up tomorrow.

By the way, I have pic's and some comments up on Mosca's thread somewhere on the C99. I think if you do a google on SHZZ with C99, it's there someplace. I think the thread is like 1500 comments or I would look myself.
 
Top