flowering 24/12

It should at least add up to circa diem... This experiment is pointless.

Indoor growing is not about mimicking nature/outdoor. We'd all be starving... and adjusting the schedule daily to reduce the photoperiod by minutes. Growing under high intensity artificial light is also not easy per se, especially when you grow in soil. Reducing the light period with an hour will make it a little easier on plants in suboptimal conditions. So I'm sure 11/13 can seem to work better for some. It's even easier when you grow under T5 or a 315w cmh. First thing a hps grower should do when a plant has problems is raise the light till the real problem/bottleneck is identified...

The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day. In veg (yield per time) and flower (yield per space/flower). This has been tested for cannabis by philips in cooperation with several botanists and photobiologists many years ago for the guy who created the 600w hps ballast thereby introducing hps to our homes. the reason we run 12/12 is simply because it's the maximum duration of light period in which virtually every strain gets enough dark period (per circa diem... Circadian rythm...) to flower. If however you have a strain that will flower as fast on 13/11, running 13/11 is better than 12/12 or 11/13.

Ever wondered why vegging cannabis is so easy...

Sativied said:

It should at least add up to circa diem... This experiment is pointless.

Click to expand...

Yo Sativied, thanks fo joining in

Lemme jus start by saying everything is pointless yo. Thats what makes life so entertaining.

Yur right. Indoor growing isnt necessarily "natural", but plants can adapt. As long as it feels like the above average (as optimal as i can maintain it) conditions i have set for it are acceptable, its all good.

Thats why im thinking since the plant has only ever known light, that there will be no need to change that and only a need to add a chunk of dark in there at some point in its continous light.

Now let me make this clear if it was not already. Im no botanist. And my medicinal growing skills are average at best.
Im the guy who grows a terribly inefficient 3ft plant that yields an ounce... Except i realize thats garbage. No back patting yet. Long way to go. Coco has been a nice change.

Even still, i love to try things and am easily swayed into giving something a go. I like to root for the under dog so to speak. I tried glr, defol, vert, and cmh bulbs without question. Just read a little, and cud literally change my whole grow on a whim
Ive had to start over many times because of this.

I doubt there will be any stress. Either they'll flower, or they'll jus veg. Cant really stress a vegging plant by messing with the light. A flowering plant wont b happy and may hermie or reveg. I think itll b gravey

fwiw i use 400 cmhs.
Trying to upgrade to some 860 cdms.
Also got a bunch of hps. I mix them with the cmhs throughout flower.

Sir KK

Kush Killington said:

Lemme jus start by saying everything is pointless yo. Thats what makes life so entertaining.

Click to expand...

On the grander scale of things perhaps and in ways that is probably not a bad attitude at all but life is short man, best to make use of the little time in ways that uhm... lol let's say some things are more pointless than others. My point is that there are many experiments you could do instead that could result in more useful data for either you or others (something like 13/11 from seed with an indica dom... or debunk that silly gas lantern routine).

Kush Killington said:

Indoor growing isnt necessarily "natural", but plants can adapt.

Click to expand...

Yeah but that's a lot of adapting you expect in this case. If you were to plant hundreds, thousands perhaps, you might at some point stumble on a mutant that thrives under 24/12 and use that to sort of acclimatize an entire population of plants over many generations... still highly unlikely but at least plausible.

I expect they will throw preflowers from maturity but won't fully flower but I'm not sure and am curious to see the results. Though just because they don't noticeably hermie in veg doesn't mean you can't stress them in veg.

Kush Killington said:

Cant really stress a vegging plant by messing with the light.

Click to expand...

On the contrary, you can't avoid stress to a plant at any stage by messing with the light. That's the whole thing. You simply can't actually run 24/12. Running 24/12 comes down to running a different schedule every day, which obviously is not good and isn't going to get desirable results. Day 1 12on/12off, day 2 12on/12on, day 3 12off/12on, and repeat... You definitely are stressing them by running 24/12. If you had a control group running under normal lighting schedule you would have likely noticed differences.

"The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day"

Youre mistaken

What? Light intensity, environment, nutrition, strain all contribute to the highest yields.

"as long as possible per day"? Lol you mean 24 hrs? GTFOH.

Debunk GLR? Please explain how glr doesn't have the effect it claims to exert on flowering plants?

Well, while GLR is done in green houses for things like poinsettia's (They are a good fit for GLR). Cannabis is ,,,, hmm,,,more unstable as per the breeding practice has tended to move them in that direction.....There's lots to be said on that subject but, to be short,,,,,,For some strains GLR can work well......The unknown/known instability traits that can be expressed by employing the GLR will make them surface easier....Take a look at the Nelson's Greenhouse guide.....Um,, chapter 12 I think is the GLR part....to learn more about that.

http://www.amazon.com/Greenhouse-Operation-Management-7th-Edition/dp/0132439360

GLR is rather stressful to cannabis.....I've tried it, don't care for the results......It's like lowering bloom times down to even 6/18. It works but you loose too much yield in the long run. The ways to combat that problem can be costly and still don't really get acceptable results till around 9-10 on.....

But...I have far better expression of all genetic potential at 11/13.....My opinion....

Testiclees, don't get testie with Satived - He knows lighting pretty damn well.....

Doc

@Sativied
"On the grander scale of things perhaps.."

Haha im still pretty young, but ive done alot of reading on life and reality and quantum mechanicy stuff. I actually plan to go back to school to be a physicist.
I was jus being funny thou. There are definately alot of... Unecessary acts that happen. But to each their respective own.

"Yeah but that's a lot of adapting you expect in this case. If you were to plant hundreds, thousands perhaps, you might at some point stumble on a mutant that thrives under 24/12 and use that to sort of acclimatize an entire population of plants over many generations... still highly unlikely but at least plausible."

Key word is plausible.
Anythings possible so why not go against the grain from time to time. I always hated "cookie cutter builds" anyway.

"I expect they will throw preflowers from maturity but won't fully flower but I'm not sure and am curious to see the results. Though just because they don't noticeably hermie in veg doesn't mean you can't stress them in veg."

Thats what im thinking worse case. They'll jus continue to veg and mature.

And i wasnt saying yu cant stress a vegging plant, jus that they arent light sensitive in the way a flowering plant is.

Sir KK

Dr. Who said:

Well, while GLR is done in green houses for things like poinsettia's (They are a good fit for GLR). Cannabis is ,,,, hmm,,,more unstable as per the breeding practice has tended to move them in that direction.....There's lots to be said on that subject but, to be short,,,,,,For some strains GLR can work well......The unknown/known instability traits that can be expressed by employing the GLR will make them surface easier....Take a look at the Nelson's Greenhouse guide.....Um,, chapter 12 I think is the GLR part....to learn more about that.

http://www.amazon.com/Greenhouse-Operation-Management-7th-Edition/dp/0132439360

GLR is rather stressful to cannabis.....I've tried it, don't care for the results......It's like lowering bloom times down to even 6/18. It works but you loose too much yield in the long run. The ways to combat that problem can be costly and still don't really get acceptable results till around 9-10 on.....

But...I have far better expression of all genetic potential at 11/13.....My opinion....

Testiclees, don't get testie with Satived - He knows lighting pretty damn well.....

Doc

Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up doc. Ive encountered Sat before. That bombastic know it all tone is unmistakeable.

As far as I know GLR is not intended to be a best practice rather it's just a practice that can be effective. Debunk doesn't really enter into it in my view.

This however is straight up nonsense delivered stoner professor style: "The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day". Citing a lighting company's claim and then generalizing it into stoner dogma uh uh come again

testiclees said:

"The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day"

Youre mistaken

Click to expand...

That first statement you quoted obviously doesn't even imply light is the only factor. Not what I said, and a rather dumb and simplistic interpretation that shows you should GTFBTS (that's back to school...)

testiclees said:

"as long as possible per day"? Lol you mean 24 hrs? GTFOH.

Click to expand...

Again, dumb and simplistic interpretation. Obviously 24 hrs isn't going to fly during flowering... if you had half a brain, you could have figured that out.

Not sure who you are trying to impress with your"bold" statements and hostility but it's not working out kid...

GLR for cannabis is silly and literally a waste of time. Every minute you're not running light you are wasting time and carbon uptake and "plant". The claims about shorter nodes is bogus too. 24hrs light during veg gives me shorter nodes than anything. No light = more stretch, something everyone can clearly observe unless you got your head up your ass. The bud sites are formed during the transition to flowering, short nodes during veg means little by itself.

testiclees said:

Ive encountered Sat before

Click to expand...

And your testicles still haven't recovered from shrinking... probably haven't dropped yet either.

Bro dumb and simplistic is how you roll. That's the point of my rebuke. Your sentence "The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day" is dumb and simplisitic.

You react like a juvenile bitch. It's what I expect from a deluded know-it-all.

testiclees said:

"The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day"

Youre mistaken

What? Light intensity, environment, nutrition, strain all contribute to the highest yields.

"as long as possible per day"? Lol you mean 24 hrs? GTFOH.

Debunk GLR? Please explain how glr doesn't have the effect it claims to exert on flowering plants?

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood him, he was saying the maximum yield is created when you have the plant exposed to the maximum amount of daytime, assuming that time doesn't make the plant lose its circadium rhythm.
in other words if the plant doesn't start getting confused until you start adding more than 12 hours of light a day, then 12 hrs is the maximum amount of time for that plant to achieve photosynthesis.
some strains flower even at 14-16 hrs of light a day, so for those 14 hrs would be optimal. Some don't care especially once triggered, but some strains are finicky as hell.
shit I had a damn sugarpunch from sannies that continued to flower under 24 hours of light, it flowered for another 25-30 days after being under constant light, and as far as I know, there isn't any damn ruderalis in the sugarpunch.
"as long as possible" was said with the caveat that "as long as possible, without interrupting the flowering cycle"
Make sense?
I've done the 11/13, 12/12, 13/11 cycles and the best it seems is the 12/12.
if you do landraces or sativa it may help to do a 11/13.
Really was hard to decipher between the three in regards to the actual end product.
if it's worth anything I just went to a 12/12 after that.

Kush Killington said:

[
Key word is plausible.

Click to expand...

The keywords were population and many generations. A plant can adapt only so much. A population over many generations can be much more adaptive. That's also why I posted long ago that the best light schedule is the one the breeder used during his or her selections. That's usually 12/12, and that goes for the parents of those plants too, and their parents, till you come at the classics that have been grown and bred for decades under 12/12. In other words, if you want to get better results under 24/12, you'd have to find or breed plants that prefer that schedule first.

Kush Killington said:

[
Anythings possible so why not go against the grain from time to time. I always hated "cookie cutter builds" anyway.

Click to expand...

Sure, but then still I think it would be more productive to run something more realistic. And not being a botanist doesn't exclude you from reading botany. For example, try "Life: The Science of Biology" for some interesting test/experiments with photoperiods.

Love sugar punch. Ran it 11/13 both times, came out great.

testiclees said:

Bro dumb and simplistic is how you roll. That's the point of my rebuke. Your sentence "The highest yield however comes from running the light as long as possible per day" is dumb and simplisitic.

You react like a juvenile bitch. It's what I expect from deluded know-it-all.

Click to expand...

Nope, still not impressed. Just another butthurt idiot at trollitup...

Sugar Punch on 12.5/11.5, organic soil, water only...





Harvest time:


Far over a pound, from 3x4' running 400w during veg and transition, 600 during flowering.

Sativied said:

Sugar Punch on 12.5/11.5, organic soil, water only...

View attachment 3486437

View attachment 3486438

Harvest time:
View attachment 3486440

Far over a pound, from 3x4' running 400w during veg and transition, 600 during flowering.

Click to expand...

what light?

Sativied said:

That first statement you quoted obviously doesn't even imply light is the only factor. Not what I said, and a rather dumb and simplistic interpretation that shows you should GTFBTS (that's back to school...)

Again, dumb and simplistic interpretation. Obviously 24 hrs isn't going to fly during flowering... if you had half a brain, you could have figured that out.

Not sure who you are trying to impress with your"bold" statements and hostility but it's not working out kid...

GLR for cannabis is silly and literally a waste of time. Every minute you're not running light you are wasting time and carbon uptake and "plant". The claims about shorter nodes is bogus too. 24hrs light during veg gives me shorter nodes than anything. No light = more stretch, something everyone can clearly observe unless you got your head up your ass. The bud sites are formed during the transition to flowering, short nodes during veg means little by itself.

And your testicles still haven't recovered from shrinking... probably haven't dropped yet either.

Click to expand...

Love ya man, but I disagree with the
no-light= stretch
comment.
in my experience it's low-light or low quality light (like bad bulbs) that make stretch.
I've done the 24 hrs of light, and couldn't tell the difference when I went to a 20/4.
Why waste that 4 hrs if I can't see a difference is what my reasoning says.
that's a lot of energy over the course of a yr.

How would you even know if a plant can handle 13/11 if it has already started flowering... Wait for re veg symptoms?

View attachment 3486437

View attachment 3486438

Harvest time:
View attachment 3486440

Far over a pound, from 3x4' running 400w during veg and transition, 600 during flowering.[/QUOTE]
beautiful sugarpunch by the way. Those are some fat girls ya got there man.
mine was smaller and purple.
I had three phenos, that looks like the one I lost
what do you run in your soil for your nutrients?
those are some fatties..

Indagrow said:

How would you even know if a plant can handle 13/11 if it has already started flowering... Wait for re veg symptoms?

Click to expand...

There are successful gardeners that start 12/12 or 11/13 and increase to 13/11 mid flowering and then back to 11/13. A grower in the RIU LED section has nice buds using that pattern.

Sativied said:

The keywords were population and many generations. A plant can adapt only so much. A population over many generations can be much more adaptive. That's also why I posted long ago that the best light schedule is the one the breeder used during his or her selections. That's usually 12/12, and that goes for the parents of those plants too, and their parents, till you come at the classics that have been grown and bred for decades under 12/12. In other words, if you want to get better results under 24/12, you'd have to find or breed plants that prefer that schedule first.

Click to expand...

Hahaha yeah yur probably right there. Perhaps my keywords jus differ from yurs lol.
Breeding a plant jus so i can run 24/12 sounds hardly worth my efforts. I jus wanna see if it can be done or not not even really wasting time since they are still growing nicely :/\)

Sativied said:

Sure, but then still I think it would be more productive to run something more realistic. And not being a botanist doesn't exclude you from reading botany. For example, try "Life: The Science of Biology" for some interesting test/experiments with photoperiods.

Click to expand...

Knowledge is power. But books are inconvenient. They need to event a way to absorb knowledge instantly. Like thru supplements. Blended up chemistry books with blueberries

Sir KK