LOLLIPOPPERS.....Food for Thought

lilroach

lilroach

Well-Known Member
I brought up a couple G13's Pineapple Express plants to harvest this evening and before I got started I stopped to admire these plants. It was then that I realized that had I lollipopped these plants I would have lost some yield.

How much? Well, I decided to find out.

I made the assumption that someone would trim the bottom two nodes when lollipopping and that's what I did with one of the two plants.





Yes, there was a minimum of popcorn...but there was a lot that wasn't.



Over 130 grams of wet buds



I'll do the math for you. Typically dried weight ranges from 20%-30% of wet weight. I split that down the middle and went with 25% which comes out to 33 grams dry.

I would have lost an ounce of yield had I lollipopped this plant.

Now I can hear some of you say "What you lost at the bottom you would have gained on top".

You tell me....



Here's the total weight weight (it took two full mixing bowls to weigh)




That is a total of 610 grams X .25 = 5.44 ounces.....from a plant that was less than 30" tall. I topped it once in veg and it took 7 weeks in 12/12.

I'm not trying to say that this is some sort of chart-topping yield, but what I am trying to say is that I really doubt that I would have gained over an ounce overall had I lollipopped the plant when most people do. Odds are I would have less yield...not more.

The only time I like the idea of lollipopping is when I have to water a plant......it can be a bitch when the whole container and soil is covered in branches. But then I think about what I get for an ounce and I quit bitching.

I'm sure that there's strains that benefit from lollipopping...none that I have grown though.

I'm just putting this out there for those of you on the fence about this practice. I suggest if you have two similar plants that you lollipop one of them and not the other and see which way works best for your growing style.
 
Gaberlunzie

Gaberlunzie

Well-Known Member
lilroach said:
I brought up a couple G13's Pineapple Express plants to harvest this evening and before I got started I stopped to admire these plants. It was then that I realized that had I lollipopped these plants I would have lost some yield.

How much? Well, I decided to find out.

I made the assumption that someone would trim the bottom two nodes when lollipopping and that's what I did with one of the two plants.





Yes, there was a minimum of popcorn...but there was a lot that wasn't.



Over 130 grams of wet buds



I'll do the math for you. Typically dried weight ranges from 20%-30% of wet weight. I split that down the middle and went with 25% which comes out to 33 grams dry.

I would have lost an ounce of yield had I lollipopped this plant.

Now I can hear some of you say "What you lost at the bottom you would have gained on top".

You tell me....



Here's the total weight weight (it took two full mixing bowls to weigh)




That is a total of 610 grams X .25 = 5.44 ounces.....from a plant that was less than 30" tall. I topped it once in veg and it took 7 weeks in 12/12.

I'm not trying to say that this is some sort of chart-topping yield, but what I am trying to say is that I really doubt that I would have gained over an ounce overall had I lollipopped the plant when most people do. Odds are I would have less yield...not more.

The only time I like the idea of lollipopping is when I have to water a plant......it can be a bitch when the whole container and soil is covered in branches. But then I think about what I get for an ounce and I quit bitching.

I'm sure that there's strains that benefit from lollipopping...none that I have grown though.

I'm just putting this out there for those of you on the fence about this practice. I suggest if you have two similar plants that you lollipop one of them and not the other and see which way works best for your growing style.
Click to expand...
:roll::sleep:
 
Uncle Ben

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
Nice job Roach. You're trying to persuade with facts, figures and measurements but in today's society, that kind of logic doesn't hold much water. It's not much different than those who still do their drama drills on the internet spewing shit that the landing on the moon was staged or 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush administration.

I have been preaching a double harvest drill on forums for over 15 years but many can not pull it off. Why? Because you have to have healthy leaves left when you take the bulked up main colas/nuggets out. Many parrot that it's normal for the leaves to yellow (which it's not). Most folks have either removed them or are not capable of growing until the end without inducing premature leaf drop because of the application of bloom foods or other poor plant management applications. This secondary harvest dates back to 2002.

PimpDaddy's2ndHarvest.jpg

Those still on the fence need a course in Botany 101.

Uncle Ben
 
Uncle Ben

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
Next, to show how terrible topping is, you should cut off all the tops, measure them, then assume that weight wouldn't have been there had you cut those tops off.

It really is the same exact reasoning. Lollipopping is topping at the bottom, not lopping off giant buds.
Click to expand...
It's not the same reasoning due to very different plant processes at the bottom versus the top which are controlled by hormones, plant resources and where they are directed and the effect of apical dominance.
 
Gaberlunzie

Gaberlunzie

Well-Known Member
*Sigh* Well OK, food for thought, fair enough, but should I begin with the most glaring examples as to why this post reeks of religiosity and all that is intangible?

lilroach said:
It was then that I realized that had I lollipopped these plants I would have lost some yield.
Click to expand...
How do you know? Based on what?
lilroach said:
I would have lost an ounce of yield had I lollipopped this plant
Click to expand...
How do you know? Based on what?
lilroach said:
but what I am trying to say is that I really doubt that I would have gained over an ounce overall had I lollipopped the plant when most people do. Odds are I would have less yield...not more.
Click to expand...
How do you know? Based on what?
lilroach said:
I'm sure that there's strains that benefit from lollipopping...none that I have grown though.
Click to expand...
How do you know? Based on what?

Reasonable people who've actually tried lollipopping will most likely tell you that there are circumstances where lollipopping would be unnecessary. When I have small plants or if my room isn't at capacity it would be foolish for me to lollipop and not just open my plants up. Conversely, when my room is crammed with big plants, I 100% notice a substantial increase in bud yield and quality when I lollipop compared to when I haven't.

I could go on and rattle off about a dozen university citations explaining how light penetration is important for quality self-sustaining(not mostly reliant upon translocation from the top portions of the canopy) flower and fruit production of the lower canopy of various fruit trees but I already know how this conversation ends because I've had it at another forum. They say that it's different with fruit trees but can't explain why or offer any evidence to the contrary other than their religious beliefs. :rolleyes:
 
A

az2000

Well-Known Member
IMO this topic misses the real problem: lack of light reaching bottom growth. Add sidelighting in flower and your air buds will be real buds.

I think that creates a potential for the OP to talk past respondents. The height of his plants, penetration of his light, etc. For example, if his are 2' tall and he uses HPS, while someone else has 3' tall and uses T5HO, you guys will be arguing about different things forever.

I agree with the OP. If you're not happy with your lower growth, don't cut it off. Add sidelight. I agree with lollipopers if they've considered sidelight but it's not feasible for some reason (number of plants?). If you can't get enough light to them, cut it off.
 
lilroach

lilroach

Well-Known Member
By no means am I saying my little experiment is scientific and my comments are just my opinion. I even suggested that other's should do a side-by-side comparison and determine what works best for their type of growing techniques.

Plants like my Blue Dream grows in a way where the bottom nodes actually stretch to almost even with the top of the plant and are as productive as the upper nodes. Had I lollipopped them I would lose yield...no doubt about it in my opinion.

Golden Goat has very robust lower branches (bottom two nodes) and the whole plant yields well. I honestly cannot imagine whatever gains the top of the plant would get from lollipopping would compensate the loss of what I end up harvesting from the lowest nodes. The Pineapple Express's lower nodes gave me an ounce dry (estimate)......when looking at that plant I just can't see an extra ounce being added to the top as the buds were plentiful, dense, and of good size.

If you click on the link to my grow journal you will see numerous plants and strains that were not lollipopped and if you look close, the lower branches are fruitful.

Those of you that are convinced that lollipopping is the way to go.....I'm not here to talk you out of how you prune your plants. What I am trying to do is get those that are on the fence to try growing both ways and in my opinion will find the non-lollipopped plants to out yield those that have lost the bottom two nodes.
 
Alienwidow

Alienwidow

Well-Known Member
Hey roach, i tried not undercutting one of my lights last run. Smallest buds ive ever had from the strain and the plant grew differently. No mesurements but theres my two cents. I was in a debate with ub and the other dont touch the branches guys and i figured id do it on one light to see and i hated it. The key like you said at the end of your post is to test your strains. I always like to not touch them the first time and then decide what should have been taken off for the health of the top of the plant. The thing these outdoor growers dont flippin understand, no matter how many times you try and tell them, is that we have limited room and want maximum yield so sometimes we want to focus on the tops. Im running jillybean through for a first run right now and all the fanleaves below the top 2/3s of the plant all just died off naturally because they arent getting any light. The plant took off like a bat outta hell and then stretched like crazy after flip. Its huge and its not alone under that light so the light is not penetrating down to the bottom so the leaves just died off down there. The plant figured out that it wasnt getting enough energy from those solar panels and it dropped them because they were of no use to the plant. Indoor and outdoor are totally different beasts. If your space, plant count, or lighting situation demands it, you may need to "lollypop" to an extent depending. There is no one right answer and anyone who says otherwise is a fool.
 
Gaberlunzie

Gaberlunzie

Well-Known Member
lilroach said:
What I am trying to do is get those that are on the fence to try growing both ways and in my opinion will find the non-lollipopped plants to out yield those that have lost the bottom two nodes.
Click to expand...
There you go again......

How do you know? Based on what?
 
Alienwidow

Alienwidow

Well-Known Member
az2000 said:
IMO this topic misses the real problem: lack of light reaching bottom growth. Add sidelighting in flower and your air buds will be real buds.

I think that creates a potential for the OP to talk past respondents. The height of his plants, penetration of his light, etc. For example, if his are 2' tall and he uses HPS, while someone else has 3' tall and uses T5HO, you guys will be arguing about different things forever.

I agree with the OP. If you're not happy with your lower growth, don't cut it off. Add sidelight. I agree with lollipopers if they've considered sidelight but it's not feasible for some reason (number of plants?). If you can't get enough light to them, cut it off.
Click to expand...
Side lighting could be impossible for many reasons. Lack of amps is a big one. Theres so many guys at max amps because they havent got an electrician out. Also just lack of space. Some guys cram so many plants onto a 4x8 table that the ones in the middle wouldnt benifit from the side light. And then theres the guys who run multiple light strings next to each other and dont want bare bulbs that low to the ground and watering level because of burn hazards and electrical hazards.
I agree 100% with you on the side lighting but its hard to pull it off in anything besides a barebulb setup or a smaller space.
 
calicocalyx

calicocalyx

Well-Known Member
Not only with side lighting, but canopy is relative to where the light is, so not to be thought of in only top or bottom terms but inside of plant and outside of plant. Likewise if I have the room not as full and the light footprints overlap, I'll leave more side branches, cause they'll thicken up nicely. The other point to contend with is time. I like big uniform mature buds to be harvested together. It's more efficient and I have a veg room full, so waiting another 2 weeks for bottom buds to mature might not be worth it. I'm not disagreeing on yield, there may be more on the unthinned plant, but that could translate to more time and labor, both of which add up. Definitely certain strains will be denser and so you can get away with more lower buds.
 
A

az2000

Well-Known Member
Alienwidow said:
bare bulbs that low to the ground and watering level because of burn hazards and electrical hazards..
Click to expand...
The new LED bulbs sold at Home Depot don't burn like CFLs do. There's also SMD5730 strips that run at 12v and can be made into little "panels" to surround a plant with light. They're more efficient than T5HO.

I agree that it's work. But, it is possible to drop things like that down between plants. Also, regarding maxed out circuit loads, I'd say that's a conscious choice to place all the amps at the top of the plants. If those amps were redistributed to bathing plants from multiple angles, side light, etc, I believe the yeild per amp would be better.

But, I do agree that it's not feasible past a 4x4 space. It's some work at 4x4.
 
Alienwidow

Alienwidow

Well-Known Member
az2000 said:
The new LED bulbs sold at Home Depot don't burn like CFLs do. There's also SMD5730 strips that run at 12v and can be made into little "panels" to surround a plant with light. They're more efficient than T5HO.

I agree that it's work. But, it is possible to drop things like that down between plants. Also, regarding maxed out circuit loads, I'd say that's a conscious choice to place all the amps at the top of the plants. If those amps were redistributed to bathing plants from multiple angles, side light, etc, I believe the yeild per amp would be better.

But, I do agree that it's not feasible past a 4x4 space. It's some work at 4x4.
Click to expand...
Hehehe....4x4. ;)

Do you have any postable examples of drop in leds? Im kinda interested now.
 
lilroach

lilroach

Well-Known Member
I spent about six months doing a TON of side-lighting in my flower room. T5's and CFL's.....I think I had over 300 watts blazing the bottom halves of my flowers.

I had as many popcorn buds after all that as I do now without the side-lighting. If you follow UB's line-of-thought (most often backed up by science) popcorn buds are not due to lack of light, but just lack of age.

As I understand it (and I'm no expert...but do follow people I feel know what they're talking about) a plant works more like a collective in regards to storing and using "energy" than a leaf or leaves only feed the branches they reside. Yes leaves on the bottom are typically the first to turn yellow and die as it's the plant deciding on if it's useful in the collective or not....or it decides it's not getting the correct or enough nutrition and feeds from the lower leaves first.

Again I refer to my grow journal linked below. You will see green leaves all the way down only because of proper feeding and not because of lack of light. Most of the plants I've taken pictures of were jammed into a 4x6 room with no less than 9-11 30+" plants. If anyone was going to have an issue of lack of light causing yellowing leaves....it would be me.

I'll say it again, I'm no expert, but I DO see what works in my grow room and what I found to be myths . It's all about reading and understanding your plants.
 
lilroach

lilroach

Well-Known Member
Here's a picture of five plants at various stages of flower that were in a 4'x6' with four other plants of similar size. If the lack of light getting down to the bottom were to cause yellowing leaves, it would be evident with these plants.

.....and I never plucked one leaf from these plants.



The plant on the far right ended up giving me 7.75 ounces dry. The rest were 6+ ounces each.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ISK
lilroach

lilroach

Well-Known Member
Here's another plant that wasn't lollipopped. Please note the apparent results of the bottom branches:

 
  • Like
Reactions: ISK
Alienwidow

Alienwidow

Well-Known Member
lilroach said:
Here's a picture of five plants at various stages of flower that were in a 4'x6' with four other plants of similar size. If the lack of light getting down to the bottom were to cause yellowing leaves, it would be evident with these plants.

.....and I never plucked one leaf from these plants.



The plant on the far right ended up giving me 7.75 ounces dry. The rest were 6+ ounces each.
Click to expand...
Ya man, nice plants, kinda small but nice. See, if you had six bigger than that under one light....i bet youd see your yellowing. I had no idea the JB was going to get so big. But it did. And yes, im still just using the grow nutes on them at three weeks into flower.
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
Uncle Ben said:
It's not the same reasoning due to very different plant processes at the bottom versus the top which are controlled by hormones, plant resources and where they are directed and the effect of apical dominance.
Click to expand...
When you top the bottom, you prevent shade avoidance hormones from being created and thus prevent lateral stretching. (lowest branches stretching so it's top can reach canopy level)

However, cutting the branches off after they've reached canopy level is one of the stupidest things you could do. They spent enormous amounts of energy trying to reach canopy level, and now you're going to chop them?

I don't think it's a fair experiment to wait until harvest day to "lollipop", although I do get your point, and even agree that lollipopping is often/usually counter-intuitive. The point of lollipopping is not to chop off branches you don't want, but to chop off young growth tips you don't want to become branches. In this case, you'd be doing it because you have enough plants (center colas) to not need any more branches.

Lollipopping may cause less yield per plant, but not THAT much less.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top