Katatawnic
Well-Known Member
^^^ Basic & moderate trimming of a plant... i.e., maintainence. It was not a misconception.
Sent from my MID_Robin using Rollitup mobile app
Why would defoliation increase stretch rate
- Thread starter goskya
- Start date
Sent from my MID_Robin using Rollitup mobile app
Fresh 2 De@th
Well-Known Member
lol, yes you did. it seems like you, too, like to take what you want and apply it while leaving out the rest. since you're so much into facts, i decided to go even further for you.
[TD="align: left"] prune[SUP] 2[/SUP] (pr
2. To remove or cut out as superfluous .
3. To reduce: prune a budget. v. intr. To remove what is superfluous or undesirable.
[/TD]
su·per·flu·ous
so͞oˈpərfləwəs/
adjective
[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]
- 1.
unnecessary, esp. through being more than enough.
[COLOR=#878787 !important]"the purchaser should avoid asking for superfluous information"[/COLOR]
[TABLE="class: vk_tbl vk_gy"]
[TR]
[TD="class: lr_dct_nyms_ttl"]synonyms:[/TD]
[TD]surplus (to requirements), nonessential, redundant, unneeded, excess,extra, (to) spare, remaining, unused, left over, in excess, waste More[COLOR=#878787 !important][/COLOR]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
now let you tell it, all leaves are needed, so to sit here and say that, but yet prune and act as if defoliating is any different, just prove how much you and the rest just talk to talk and are nothing but walking contradictions of you'll selves.
taking off, tops, lower branches, lower nodes or leaves blocking or preventing light are considered pruning or defoliating.
Dogenzengi
Well-Known Member
Please do some reading on basic plant physiology before you start advocating this defoliation insanity. When you defoliate you remove the engines that drive plant growth........ period. There is much attention paid to light reaching all of the leaves which is only a part of the function of a leaf.
Please note the activity indicated by the red letters, CO2 in and O2 out. This capturing of carbon ONLY takes place in the leaves of your plant. Carbon is the building block for all complex carbohydrates required for growth, trace elements that complete the process are what you provide by fertilization. When you defoliate, the "growth spurt" you notice is your plant desperately trying to repair the damage you have done to the system it has crafted to collect energy and provide for eventual reproductive growth (buds). Please do not confuse defoliation with pruning which is often necessary especially with indoor crops to provide for proper ventilation to prevent mold.
In addition to this there are structures called guard cells that serve to regulate water retention/loss depending on the heat and humidity in the environment. Removing leaves inhibits the plants ability to respond to variations in heat and moisture levels.
Without proper respiration and transpiration any living thing suffers......basic biology folks, learn how to walk before you try to run or you will fall on your face. Good luck
Thank You Caretakerdad!
do not defoliate unless you have dead or diseased leaves.
And the NPK ratios have little to nothing to do with why they work. the fact is the active ingredients on these BANNED products are PGR's and have NOTHING to do with the nutrient NPK values. Watered down NPK values at that, on products that contain PGR's that WERE NEVER INTENDED for human consumption.
Use them on your fucking rose bushes, where they belong.
It's a scientific FACT that nutrients high in phosphorous add to the stretching of the plant, genetic make up or not. No one is disputing genetics or topping or training methods here. You can help control the stretch by using correct NPK profiles, not what the fucking hydro shop or the next "big" cannabis specific bull shit nutrient line is trying to sell to all the noobs.
Fresh 2 De@th
Well-Known Member
i see you still fell to recognize the fact that not only is it only used during bloom, but it actually induces bloom. that's even without the npk (mind you the npk value is definitely indicative of a bloom based supplement) value.
i will post pictures of plants being fed from a modified flora series nute regimen that's based on a high N feed, that will blow holes through you weak source of botany. i mean plants in 5 ltrs of coco that went in bloom at 33" that currently stands at 44" in just 9 days.
What contradiction? These supplements work not because of some watered down NPK ratios, they work because they are loaded with PGR's. You know, the MAIN ACTIVE ingredients in them.
How do you even attempt to dispute that high phosphorus plant food adds to the stretch of the plant? It's been proven. Talk about ignorance to prove your point in a debate....
How do you even attempt to dispute that high phosphorus plant food adds to the stretch of the plant? It's been proven. Talk about ignorance to prove your point in a debate....
Fresh 2 De@th
Well-Known Member
huhhhh, there you go again.
as i stated, those supplements works due to the fact that they induce the onset flowering at a faster rate, which cuts back on the stretch/veg/transitional stage. hence the reason they also promoted that plants will finish faster when these type of supplements were applied. so once again, it's a supplement (paclobutrazol) that not only inhibits stretch and induces flowering, marketed as a bloom supplement with bloom ratio's (no matter how water down it maybe), but also shortens the flowering period. and you still think that phosphorous promotes stretch?
once again, you sound good and prove that you have no idea of what you're talking about with the shit that spewing from your mouth. i guess you overloaded on the botany and lost all you common sense. or could it be that is what botany all about?
Nullis
Moderator
...
...
What the heck are you even talking about, Fresh?
bird mcbride
Well-Known Member
Fact is if all the leaves are gone the plants stretchen wondering where the hell the light went to.
Fresh 2 De@th
Well-Known Member
haha, you again?
being that you seem to pick and choose what suits you best to prove your point, i'll expound a lil more on what the heck i am even talking about.
just like you, he went to wiki, copy and pasted something that he thought would make him seem more enlighten on the topic, but failed to leave out the rest. if you google Paclobutrazol and it's overall effects, you will easily come to the conclusion why he chose to leave out pertinent info that i gladly decided to fill in.
you're a follower of nephew ben and believe whatever he says, without ever challenging the shit he quote's, so i definitely don't expect you to understand where the heck i am coming from or what the heck i am talking about.
Fresh 2 De@th
Well-Known Member
hmm, nice try but anybody with sense could see through your feeble attempt. just following the context of the topic, we know that only to deprive (a plant, tree, or forest) of leaves
but let you tell it, this is what this topic was about--> to destroy or cause a widespread loss of leaves (an area of jungle, forest, etc.) as by using chemical sprays or incendiary bombs, in order to deprive enemy troops or guerrilla forces of concealment. am i right? because you did highlight it.
adjective 4. (of a tree) having lost its leaves, especially by a natural process (e.g. Autumn, when trees loose all of their leaves) was just a poor example, because let's face it, most people grow shrubs, not trees. even if that was the case, who grows a plant to the point that it loses all its leaves naturally? oh i get it, you do. am i right?
i think you you meant this one of all, because it fits.
to strip (a tree, bush, etc.) of leaves
am i right? ok lets see.
[TD="align: left"] strip[SUP] 1[/SUP] (str
b. To deprive of (clothing or covering).
2. To deprive of honors, rank, office, privileges, or possessions; divest.
3. a. To remove all excess detail from; reduce to essentials.
b. To remove equipment, furnishings, or supplementary parts or attachments from.
4. To clear of a natural covering or growth; make bare: strip a field. 5. To remove an exterior coating, as of paint or varnish, from: stripped and refinished the old chest of drawers. 6. To remove the leaves from the stalks of. Used especially of tobacco.
7. To dismantle (a firearm, for example) piece by piece.
8. To damage or break the threads of (a screw, for example) or the teeth of (a gear).
9. To press the last drops of milk from (a cow or goat, for example) at the end of milking.
10. To rob of wealth or property; plunder or despoil.
11. To mount (a photographic positive or negative) on paper to be used in making a printing plate.[/TD]
take a look at 3.a. it fits the context of the topic, don't it.
look at #6, it says "to remove leaves from the stalks of" but doesn't say remove all or most. you see where i am coming from?
it seems as if you and the rest want to take the word defoliate, put it in a box and make it seem like it only has 1 meaning. just because you'll have a poor interpretation of the word, doesn't mean everyone else does. there are multiple levels to defoliation, just like with topping, lst'ing, pinching or any form of training. if you applying too much at one time, from anything or any form of training, you will see, more often than not, negative effects.
bird mcbride
Well-Known Member
I selectively defoliate my budders(SOG) and my moms(hedge) for various reasons. I feel that this topic is really not worth discussion as people that grow mj will eventually figure these reasons.
No you just prove that you are ignorant to scientific fact. All the bullshit supplements you posted are full of PGR's which is why they do what they do. It has zero to do with the NPK ratios in them.
Read the fucking link and learn something: http://www.marijuanagrowershq.com/plant-growth-regulators-poison-marijuana/
These bullshit companies have been lying to you. These products have ZERO to do with the NPK make up, it's all about the PGR's that were banned for human consumption. I know what they do. They work. But they have NOTHING to do with the phosphorus content in them. If you can't get that through your thick skull, it's your fucking problem.
http://www.manicbotanix.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=27&Itemid=14 Oh WOW, look at the end of the article. It backs up exactly what I am saying about using low P during the "stretch".
It's all deceptive marketing, and you obviously fell for it hook, line and sinker.
Nullis
Moderator
What the hell are you talking about, AGAIN? And what did he (plaguedog) "choose to leave out"? That's what I am not getting.
And I really don't know what your problem is brother. I am not a "follower" of anybody, I don't even read Uncle Ben's posts, subscribe to any of his threads, or otherwise hold any favor or regard for him. Don't know where you get that from.
I am of the mind that the term 'defoliation' is traditionally a word used to describe widespread or total loss of leaves, as in trees\shrubs during Autumn; or the effect of a defoliant, which causes loss of leaves (deprives plants of leaves). I fail to understand why some people are so hell bent on using the term 'defoliate' as a synonym to 'prune'.
While you could prune (remove leaves) in order to defoliate (cause widespread leaf loss), the goal of most pruning and sensible pruning is not to defoliate. This is the point I was trying to illustrate. Otherwise why doesn't the term 'defoliate' truly have any synonyms? Defoliate was not intended to be synonymous with 'prune'. Check out a thesaurus for the words 'prune' and 'defoliate'. There aren't really any other English words for defoliate. Note the 'related words': leafless, bare, denude, denudate. Denude means to make bare.
So the problem with this is that lots of new growers hear about 'defoliation' and already have a preconceived obsession with the buds, and think oh well my plant doesn't need any mature leaves.
And I really don't know what your problem is brother. I am not a "follower" of anybody, I don't even read Uncle Ben's posts, subscribe to any of his threads, or otherwise hold any favor or regard for him. Don't know where you get that from.
I am of the mind that the term 'defoliation' is traditionally a word used to describe widespread or total loss of leaves, as in trees\shrubs during Autumn; or the effect of a defoliant, which causes loss of leaves (deprives plants of leaves). I fail to understand why some people are so hell bent on using the term 'defoliate' as a synonym to 'prune'.
While you could prune (remove leaves) in order to defoliate (cause widespread leaf loss), the goal of most pruning and sensible pruning is not to defoliate. This is the point I was trying to illustrate. Otherwise why doesn't the term 'defoliate' truly have any synonyms? Defoliate was not intended to be synonymous with 'prune'. Check out a thesaurus for the words 'prune' and 'defoliate'. There aren't really any other English words for defoliate. Note the 'related words': leafless, bare, denude, denudate. Denude means to make bare.
So the problem with this is that lots of new growers hear about 'defoliation' and already have a preconceived obsession with the buds, and think oh well my plant doesn't need any mature leaves.
CaretakerDad
Well-Known Member
Could we skip the semantics and stop abusing our plants. Thank You
Nullis
Moderator
Not really. Sorry, but your logic just isn't following. You're failing to see the forest from the trees. Context is a wonderful thing, but most words in the English language best hold their meaning when used in the proper context. For instance, in the first part of the definition the important part is the fact that widespread loss or destruction of leaves occurred... chemical sprays or incendiary bombs as a matter of depriving troops of concealment is just a particularly notable means of said leaf loss. And hence where the term 'defoliant' comes in, an agent which causes widespread leaf-loss.Second part, the point is that during Autumn trees/shrubs naturally defoliate... e.g. loose their leaves (go bare). Again the important thing is that the leaves (the foliate) went away (prefix de- meaning not, opposite and therefore not foliate or"not decorated with leaves").
Maybe that is why it's part of the definition! What is the excess detail? The leaves, in this case. I suppose the 'essentials' would be the stem, calyxes and some immature leaves only. Still, to me, definition 1.b. (to deprive of leaves) andespecially 4. fit defoliate better.i think you you meant this one of all, because it fits.
to strip (a tree, bush, etc.) of leaves
am i right? ok lets see.
[TD="align: left"] strip[SUP] 1[/SUP] (strp) v. stripped , strip·ping , strips v. tr. 1. a. To remove clothing or covering from.
b. To deprive of (clothing or covering).
2. To deprive of honors, rank, office, privileges, or possessions; divest.
3. a. To remove all excess detail from; reduce to essentials.
b. To remove equipment, furnishings, or supplementary parts or attachments from.
4. To clear of a natural covering or growth; make bare : strip a field. 5. To remove an exterior coating, as of paint or varnish, from: stripped and refinished the old chest of drawers. 6. To remove the leaves from the stalks of. Used especially of tobacco. [/TD]
take a look at 3.a. it fits the context of the topic, don't it.
Take a look at this more general definition of the word "strip".
[TABLE="width: 600"]
[TR]
[TD]strip
verb: strip; 3rd person present: strips; past tense: stripped; past participle: stripped; gerund or present participle: stripping
1. remove all coverings from.
2. leave bare of accessories or fittings.
synonyms: empty, clear, clean out, plunder, rob, burgle, burglarize, loot, pillage, ransack, despoil, sack[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
So given this and the aforementioned examples, doesn't it stand to reason that "to strip of leaves" in the context of defoliate means the majority or all of the leaves?
It also says "used especially of tobacco" (context). Now as far as stripping tobacco goes, in this context it basically means to process it for sale. Tobacco crop has been harvested, dried and cured: leaves are removed (all of them) from the stalks, sorted and graded.
It essentially does have one meaning, as evidenced above! And everyone else does apparently have a poor interpretation of the word, and perhaps the entire English language. Otherwise, why not be more specific? What is the problem with saying you prune some branches/leaves or why not say you strip some leaves? Does that just make too much sense? Am I right? Am I right? Am I right?
Am I right?
harris hawk
Well-Known Member
Thanks, for your advice will do. Don't you feel defoliatiom helps yields? but i hate to take off leaves because like you said the plant needs them for growth, ect, defoliated (completely)a plant and it produced small buds that only came from the main stalk, no side branches, maybe two hands full. What's you thoughts on CO2 bags?
stankyyank
Active Member
Had to read up to see if anyone answered this or not... I concur, Mcbride. There is more to a plant than just the basic functions of cell growth through processes such as photosynthesis. I believe that leaves themselves do contain useful hormones which can vary throughout the growth cycle of the plant. In the past (during flowering), removing too many leaves has induced stretching for me. Search the internets for plant hormones related to growth, "auxins" are a good start.
Similar threads
