is plant rotation really necessary?

It is unfortunate when some of the community resorts to name calling, but it is also an indicator of credibility. I have to agree with something said about swinginging those babies around round round lol, they will be more uniform. Your post was well scrutinized and we have determined ,with our 25+ years of combined vertical growing knowledge, that our points were well made. It would help to legitimize your argument in the future if when someone agrees with you on a topic (such as training&pruning) you don't make accusations and throw insults.We are trying to give sound advice on flower weight as opposed to uniformity. So our advice is geared toward dry weight. It does not help when trying to make a point to combine aspects of other topics (aka. reaching for straws). FYI people who develop products are marketers at heart they want you to buy the next thing. It doesn't matter if the product produces desired results; just that it generates revenue. Im done for now. BTW I have been growing every way under the artificial sun and have tried almost everything.I grow "HEATH style" as they call it now. With comparable results to the HEATH ROBINSON flooded tube journal.I have been doing flooded tubes for years.Solid colas is the most productive according to my experience.

Hiddenface said:

It is unfortunate when some of the community resorts to name calling, but it is also an indicator of credibility. I have to agree with something said about swinginging those babies around round round lol, they will be more uniform. Your post was well scrutinized and we have determined ,with our 25+ years of combined vertical growing knowledge, that our points were well made. It would help to legitimize your argument in the future if when someone agrees with you on a topic (such as training&pruning) you don't make accusations and throw insults.We are trying to give sound advice on flower weight as opposed to uniformity. So our advice is geared toward dry weight. It does not help when trying to make a point to combine aspects of other topics (aka. reaching for straws). FYI people who develop products are marketers at heart they want you to buy the next thing. It doesn't matter if the product produces desired results; just that it generates revenue. Im done for now. BTW I have been growing every way under the artificial sun and have tried almost everything.I grow "HEATH style" as they call it now. With comparable results to the HEATH ROBINSON flooded tube journal.I have been doing flooded tubes for years.Solid colas is the most productive according to my experience.

Click to expand...

So...Are you for it or against it? Sounds like you can't rotate?

Rotating is definitely out of the question for the flooded tube. I do rotate my plants if they are donator/mothers in a Waterfarm or soil, but not everyday . I want all of the potential cuttings to be relatively uniform. I must apologize to Dboi87; I believe it to be rude and disrespectful for any members to focus on anything other than the primary topic of a thread. Common sense told me that. I only hope we have been able to help.

Sir.Ganga said:

Rotating you plants does two things for any room, 1st. it allows for a more even plant all the way around and second and most important IMO is space. Clones may all come from the same mom but will all grow differently depending on where you took them, by rotating them equally you will eventually know how many actually fit in your grow and be able to max out the area every time without overgrow. Good Luck

Click to expand...

Yeah . . . nah . . . sorry. While rotating may make your plants more "even" or "uniform", you simply end up with more uniform underdeveloped buds on all sides. That's my experience. And I guess I've been growing vertically long enough to know how many plants of which type I can fit in my cabinet, so that's not something I take into account either.

Like all growing, it's what you learn along the way that determines how you continue to develop. A lot of us started out rotating our plants when we first went vertical but - for whatever reason - you won't find many growers who have been doing it long who still rotate their plants. (Actually, there is a reason - but I guess people need to learn for themselves.)

For example, here's my very first 600w DWC vertical grow from early 2004. I rotated my plants religiously during this grow and you can see how even the plants are on all sides. All I got for my trouble were some nice top colas and some pretty average bud the rest of the way around. After growing like this a couple of times I stopped rotating and - lo and behold! - my yields actually improved. Instead of growing lots of airy buds I now had fewer, denser buds that had received the full benefit of 12 hours of intense light each and every day.

And bugger me - it was a lot less work!

Prawn Connery said:

Yeah . . . nah . . . sorry. While rotating may make your plants more "even" or "uniform", you simply end up with more uniform underdeveloped buds on all sides. That's my experience. And I guess I've been growing vertically long enough to know how many plants of which type I can fit in my cabinet, so that's not something I take into account either.

Like all growing, it's what you learn along the way that determines how you continue to develop. A lot of us started out rotating our plants when we first went vertical but - for whatever reason - you won't find many growers who have been doing it long who still rotate their plants. (Actually, there is a reason - but I guess people need to learn for themselves.)

For example, here's my very first 600w DWC vertical grow from early 2004. I rotated my plants religiously during this grow and you can see how even the plants are on all sides. All I got for my trouble were some nice top colas and some pretty average bud the rest of the way around. After growing like this a couple of times I stopped rotating and - lo and behold! - my yields actually improved. Instead of growing lots of airy buds I now had fewer, denser buds that had received the full benefit of 12 hours of intense light each and every day.

And bugger me - it was a lot less work!

Click to expand...

This made up my mind on it. However just for academic intreset, Lets say you were in a 8x8x7 with 8 plants around it. and each was on a electric rotating display. It makes 1 rev\40s. Would a constant turn Change this dynamic at all? or would a timed half or quarter turn a few times a day change this. Say 6 hours, half turn, 6 hours rotation?

One problem with auto-rotation is that you need to have enough space between each plant to rotate it (automatically) without interfering with the plant next to it - otherwise, as the plants rotate, their branches just get tangled up and broken. However, if you leave space between each plant for it to rotate without hitting the plant next to it, you waste light by having dead space between each plant.

It is much more efficient to "fan out" each plant and weave their branches in and out of the cage around the light so that they mesh together and use up all the available vertical space. This is called vertical scrogging, and it works the same as horizontal scrogging.

There really is no need to rotate plants to give them "even" light distribution. In nature, plants never have even light distribution because the sun is always arcing on the northern (southern hemisphere) or southern (northern hemi) horizon. Natural plants are side-lit all the time - except around midday on or near the equator.

Go outside and have a look at any plant in your garden and see how it is lit. Now, have you rotated any of them lately? I didn't think so

Prawn Connery said:

One problem with auto-rotation is that you need to have enough space between each plant to rotate it (automatically) without interfering with the plant next to it - otherwise, as the plants rotate, their branches just get tangled up and broken. However, if you leave space between each plant for it to rotate without hitting the plant next to it, you waste light by having dead space between each plant.

It is much more efficient to "fan out" each plant and weave their branches in and out of the cage around the light so that they mesh together and use up all the available vertical space. This is called vertical scrogging, and it works the same as horizontal scrogging.

There really is no need to rotate plants to give them "even" light distribution. In nature, plants never have even light distribution because the sun is always arcing on the northern (southern hemisphere) or southern (northern hemi) horizon. Natural plants are side-lit all the time - except around midday on or near the equator.

Go outside and have a look at any plant in your garden and see how it is lit. Now, have you rotated any of them lately? I didn't think so

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. in my mind rather then cagging the bulb, cage each plant. like a cylinder. So each plant would be its own rotating scrog. Making it a full cylinder thats rotating allowing you to push the tops back under the screen. It would also allow you access to the bulb side of the scrog rather then the back side.

Now dont get me wrong. I have no doubts in my mind that this would reduce over all yield. I grow for me. and grow plenty enough for myself to do whatever. So I think about it like this. Eventually this thing we do will be fully federally legal here in the states. MTV's Pimp My Grow Room will be a number one show. JUST SAYING. Hosted by Cheech. There will be spinning tvs with never ending running loops of Cypress Hill and Bone Thugs Pot songs from the last 20 years... I could go on. Its spinnin bitches, its spinnin... lol

That would work.

after reading.. and trying.. it seems that in horizontal grows.. it just slows down things while your plant uses more energy moving your fan leaves toward the lights then anything else.. honestly.. it felt like the usual 75 days i go in flower... went to 85-90.. and i was fucking pissed.. because i pull on when my trichomes are ready and were i like em to be.. but i did see a lil increase in yields.. but i think your better off adding more light wether its side lighting.. or maybe even something above.. like i said in the last post i made.. my next run will be a 1000w on a light mover or flip flop horizontal. and the rest will be vert.. its tough to keep cool with barebulbs,.. and took the glass out of my hoods to increase yield in winter.. but i always need to put my glass back in during the summer or else i need to run too much AC.. so it saves cash in summer.

I've built my silo system on the premise of aiming the plant inward at the light and treating 'outside' exactly like 'down'; don't light it, and trim off anything growing there.

It's very productive this way, and easy to manage. Consistent results are easier as well.

listen to tystikk lol hes been doing vert longer then i have.. but.. from what ive seen and tried... vert is nice to do vertical scrogs. and what they call the wall of buds. i mean honestly. some of these dudes are pulling up to 3-4 pounds a light.. with the light amount of veg.. and lights.. and genetics makes a difference too.. but still people are running 4-5 plants around a 1000w vert. veg till its a full room of nugs depending on stretch.. and cleaning it up .. and shit.. i want to make a vertical box. that i can put hinges on.. and open the circle for Easier maintenence thats my only issue with vert.. i have to turn the bulb off.. turn a few cfls on.. and Crawl into my room LOL. and then do my work lol .

best answer depends and depends and depending . so yes and no . I think it will make a difference if your lights are very strong on one side but not the other so if you turn the plant every day at least you get equal buds on each side. total waste of time using a 250 hps or stronger . I think its a total waste of time all together . like those light movers .

m4s73r said:

I agree 100%. in my mind rather then cagging the bulb, cage each plant. like a cylinder. So each plant would be its own rotating scrog. Making it a full cylinder thats rotating allowing you to push the tops back under the screen. It would also allow you access to the bulb side of the scrog rather then the back side.

Now dont get me wrong. I have no doubts in my mind that this would reduce over all yield. I grow for me. and grow plenty enough for myself to do whatever. So I think about it like this. Eventually this thing we do will be fully federally legal here in the states. MTV's Pimp My Grow Room will be a number one show. JUST SAYING. Hosted by Cheech. There will be spinning tvs with never ending running loops of Cypress Hill and Bone Thugs Pot songs from the last 20 years... I could go on. Its spinnin bitches, its spinnin... lol

Click to expand...

I have just employed this model myself with a view to a perpetual system, 2 plants in and out every 2 weeks. I have 3 stacked 600's in cool tubes but only ever have 2 running at any given time(Lets not get into the cool tube thing here) with the added bonus of an extra bare 600 with a hood on the outside for added boost if you like. I am plan using the extra bare bulb for the last 2 weeks of flower but will experiment over time with the best use for bud developement ie first 2 weeks or 3rd and forth week blah blah. Each pot has its own mesh and makes training very easy. You force branches out of the scrogg or easily tie em back into the screen if they are getting to wide. I have high hopes for this method as organising ya scrogg and maximising canopy space is a doddle. No need to strip any leaves at all if you have spread your canopy well they have all the room they need. What I have done is completely stripped the inside of the plant other than the top third and any light that does penetrate through the front canopy is picked up by the back of the plant. I do rotate a quater turn every day, its quick and its easy as each plant is caged in its own right.

I will try and get some pics together but there is not alot to see right now, my first 2 plant are only just at the end of week one flower, vegged for 4 weeks . It pains me to see the unused grow space but needs must for a perpetual vertivcal grow. So for me, I rotate to make best use of the extra bare bulb on the outside of the grow. TIme and numbers will tell. Oh and just for the books, my last grow with 3 full time stacked cool tubes (no extra light) was 47 z's of 7 plants and I only vegged em for 3 weeks.

I just reread the comments about rotating plants, and I can say that trying to move the plants once they've entered their flowering phase is a zero sum game. Rather try to light the plant from the back half the time, that seems to work better.

I don't want to mess with back lighting or rotating plants at all, and that's saying something coming from the guy who bolted a mountain bike to the ceiling and used it as a light rotator! The bottom line is that I'm after keeping things simple, and lighting from inside only is just better. WHY?

It's my contention that placing the bulb in the middle and the plants against the outside of the round trellis manages the all-important bulb to bud distance better than other approaches, and this is the ultimate source of its efficiency.

ttystikk said:

that's saying something coming from the guy who bolted a mountain bike to the ceiling and used it as a light rotator! .

Click to expand...

Hahahahaha Funny shiz

HydroGp said:

Hahahahaha Funny shiz

Click to expand...

I bet you thought I was kidding, huh?

Awesome! Hahaha

ttystikk said:

I bet you thought I was kidding, huh?

Click to expand...

Not me, sounded too crazy to make up. That image deserves a dedicated thread

I have just one question: why?

Sativied said:

Not me, sounded too crazy to make up. That image deserves a dedicated thread

I have just one question: why?

Click to expand...

Well, I used it to reduce the distance between the bulb and the buds, while moving the light fast enough to keep anything from burning. It worked really well with an adjust-a-wing style reflector, and not worth a shit with that sealed and vented box hood.

There is merit to parts of this concept and I may return to it at some point. The silo system I'm using now is far more efficient than this ever was, making it an interesting but ultimately futile blind alley.

ttystikk said:

I just reread the comments about rotating plants, and I can say that trying to move the plants once they've entered their flowering phase is a zero sum game. Rather try to light the plant from the back half the time, that seems to work better.

I don't want to mess with back lighting or rotating plants at all, and that's saying something coming from the guy who bolted a mountain bike to the ceiling and used it as a light rotator! The bottom line is that I'm after keeping things simple, and lighting from inside only is just better. WHY?

It's my contention that placing the bulb in the middle and the plants against the outside of the round trellis manages the all-important bulb to bud distance better than other approaches, and this is the ultimate source of its efficiency.

Click to expand...

I agree to an extent but being able to rotate depends on the grow method you apply. My last grow was a single (silo) cage approx 12" around the bulbs and my plants growing into the cage. No chance at all of rotating, This time round I have caged each plant individually and the plant grows out of it. I find this very easy to manage and rotating takes all of 2 seconds per plant.I try yo keep the middle of the cage bald for greater air circulation and tie back any unruley growth outside the cage, This is giving me a perfect cylinders of growth, uniform growth and very easy to maintain. I can also move branches about during the early stages to maximise light use and stop branches encroaching on each others light making training very easy. It also makes for easy management of a perpetual system.