More THC testing – UVA vs UVB vs near-UV

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
I certainly can’t say it was a controlled test, but I did a couple of runs of Jamaican dream from clone in the same room with the same lights except I decided to try the Migro uvb T5 on the second run. After reading this thread and not wanting to ruin my crop I used it for the last two weeks starting at 15 minutes then 30 minutes after a few days but didn’t push it any longer. I felt it was an improvement on flavours and strength so I gave my friend a bud without saying that I added uvb, as he’s been smoking my last harvest. His response without me prompting was a phone call the next day asking “is this the same stuff? I swear it’s stronger” it’s no scientific proof, but certainly positive. Although I have always played with spectrum and find different strains can often prefer different spectrum tweaks so I might find it won’t be as good next time or it might be better? I must admit I saw and read about the highlight trial spectrums and would love a checkerboard of the high red and high near uv boards to tweak things. I did a few bigger rooms with a friend and a checkerboard of 4k CMH and HPS was great for this and we mostly only used the hps for around four weeks in the middle of flower without loss of yield.
 

Rocket Soul

Well-Known Member
I certainly can’t say it was a controlled test, but I did a couple of runs of Jamaican dream from clone in the same room with the same lights except I decided to try the Migro uvb T5 on the second run. After reading this thread and not wanting to ruin my crop I used it for the last two weeks starting at 15 minutes then 30 minutes after a few days but didn’t push it any longer. I felt it was an improvement on flavours and strength so I gave my friend a bud without saying that I added uvb, as he’s been smoking my last harvest. His response without me prompting was a phone call the next day asking “is this the same stuff? I swear it’s stronger” it’s no scientific proof, but certainly positive. Although I have always played with spectrum and find different strains can often prefer different spectrum tweaks so I might find it won’t be as good next time or it might be better? I must admit I saw and read about the highlight trial spectrums and would love a checkerboard of the high red and high near uv boards to tweak things. I did a few bigger rooms with a friend and a checkerboard of 4k CMH and HPS was great for this and we mostly only used the hps for around four weeks in the middle of flower without loss of yield.
Scientific or not, but really isnt the smoke test the actual best way of judging? If you can determine that 9 outta 10 think its stronger what would really a thc test add, apart from something to be able to quote on forums?
Personally i feel that a smoke test on a strain or cultivar that you know really well is one of the best tests if its personal use. If youre selling then that report can actually back up your claims to a client but if you and whoever else is smoking it notice that its stronger id say good enough
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
Scientific or not, but really isnt the smoke test the actual best way of judging? If you can determine that 9 outta 10 think its stronger what would really a thc test add, apart from something to be able to quote on forums?
Personally i feel that a smoke test on a strain or cultivar that you know really well is one of the best tests if its personal use. If youre selling then that report can actually back up your claims to a client but if you and whoever else is smoking it notice that its stronger id say good enough
Yeah, definitely seems nicer. If I hadn’t read all this information I’d have probably used it way too much and destroyed cannabinoids without knowing, this seems stronger and more taste without a proper cure yet. I’m reluctant to try more than half an hour in future, especially as in winter months I dim the leds and pop a 4k CMH in the middle for a little heat. I’m in the uk so I don’t think I would even look into getting a test for legal reasons.
 

Grow Lights Australia

Well-Known Member
Yeah, definitely seems nicer. If I hadn’t read all this information I’d have probably used it way too much and destroyed cannabinoids without knowing, this seems stronger and more taste without a proper cure yet. I’m reluctant to try more than half an hour in future, especially as in winter months I dim the leds and pop a 4k CMH in the middle for a little heat. I’m in the uk so I don’t think I would even look into getting a test for legal reasons.
Did you have the CMH running during the test? There is no doubt that UVB works but it seems it all comes down to timing as too much exposure in our experience (based on ongoing tests) shows a negative effect whereas a small amount of exposure seems to net much better results.
 

Rocket Soul

Well-Known Member
Yeah, definitely seems nicer. If I hadn’t read all this information I’d have probably used it way too much and destroyed cannabinoids without knowing, this seems stronger and more taste without a proper cure yet. I’m reluctant to try more than half an hour in future, especially as in winter months I dim the leds and pop a 4k CMH in the middle for a little heat. I’m in the uk so I don’t think I would even look into getting a test for legal reasons.
Energy control is an organization that do discreet drug testing for users safety around here in spain. Maybe you have them aswell in uk. Ymmv
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
Did you have the CMH running during the test? There is no doubt that UVB works but it seems it all comes down to timing as too much exposure in our experience (based on ongoing tests) shows a negative effect whereas a small amount of exposure seems to net much better results.
I didn’t run the CMH as it’s only just getting cooler so I’ll start using it on the next cuts going in. As I said, I was very cautious on the timing and it was half an hour max because I’d read all this information. I’m quite experimental but a bit haphazard sometimes so I’m sure without this information I’d have cooked my plants. The only lights I used were 4x highlight 420 boards off two xlg-200 and about 80w of 4000k side lighting.
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
We've just sent a couple of samples away comparing the current High Light 420 boards with a test board that had double the amount of UVA and violet (400-420nm). Hopefuly we'll have the results soon as we're working on a couple of things that may hinge on the outcome.
i almost asked if you had any spare of these boards, but it would be more practical to save money waiting for the PC blue buddies.
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
If you get relevant results then please share. But perhaps a bit much to ask as you would need 2 samples to compare for that to make much sense. In any case happy if it helps you
I might look into it, although if I haven’t anything from the last grow and my mates out I’ll have to do it again and the cooler weather means the CMH is on and won’t be as controlled? I would love to see some results myself so a possibility of splitting the room or a temporary separate room with the same lights, cuts and nutes? Got me thinking now…
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
AA1C7368-2C0B-4DE3-9768-3F5D79DFA120.jpeg
Just for information, here’s the uvb bulb spectrum I used in the last grow. It’s actually a T8 although I think I said T5 earlier? I confused it with the reptisun 10.0 T5 that I almost brought, although that spectrum looks good too.
 

Grow Lights Australia

Well-Known Member
That's a pretty strong UVB bulb. Here is an Arcadia 14% UVB reptile bulb for comparison. UVB fluorescent bulbs are all pretty much the same with the only difference being the amount of phosphor conversion. The Migro would appear to have less phosphor so that equals more UVB emission., so I'm not surprised you only need a small amount.

1637720447440.png

i almost asked if you had any spare of these boards, but it would be more practical to save money waiting for the PC blue buddies.
We only had the two test boards, which are currently being used by a grower. But we do have a new spectrum coming out in a couple of weeks that includes more UVA and a little more Far Red. It's more of a tweak to the current High Light 420 spectrum than a new spectrum as we got hold of some nice Nichia 405nm diodes that over over 70% efficient.
 
Last edited:

Grow Lights Australia

Well-Known Member
The interesting thing is that if you follow Shane (Migro) on Instagram, he posted a video recently claiming that UVA and Far Red "don't have any effect". It's at about 12:45 of this video: http://instagr.am/p/CUMo4eNFhvn/
We obviously had a lot to say about that!

However the Migro Arrays don't have any violet, UVA or Far Red in them so you can understand why he would say that. The only other thing we would take issue with is that Migro is yet another lighting manufacture that claims its lights are "full spectrum" when they are not. Full spectrum is 400-700nm – if your fixtures have no light below about 440nm, then that's over 10% of the PAR spectrum missing. We would even argue that 400-700nm PAR doesn't tell the full picture either, as Far Red has such an impact on photomorphogenic response that it can't be ignored.
 

grotbags

Well-Known Member
That's a pretty strong UVB bulb. Here is an Arcadia 14% UVB reptile bulb for comparison. UVB fluorescent bulbs are all pretty much the same with the only difference being the amount of phosphor conversion. The Migro would appear to have less phosphor so that equals more UVB emission., so I'm not surprised you only need a small amount.

View attachment 5034118


We only had the two test boards, which are currently being used by a grower. But we do have a new spectrum coming out in a couple of weeks that includes more UVA and a little more Far Red. It's more of a tweak to the current High Light 420 spectrum than a new spectrum as we got hold of some nice Nichia 405nm diodes that over over 70% efficient.
i seen them new nichia diodes they were crazy dear...
any comparison pics between the spd's that i can look at?.
 
Last edited:

jimihendrix1

Well-Known Member
Solacure uses the T12 bulb, and says the size of the T12 is a critical aspect of creating higher energy levels of UVB. They said theyve tried T5-T8 and they dont measure up.
They also state their bulb is 20-50x more powerful than the best Reptile Bulbs, which is probably the Arcadia Desert Reptile 54w.

Then theres the UVR8 protein receptor. Which I think is on of the most critical aspects of using UVB lighting.

Science says the only way to activate the UVR8 receptor in plants, not just weed, is to supply UVB at the 285nm level.

What is the function of UVR8 in plants?
UVR8 is involved in controlling aspects of leaf growth and morphogenesis in response to UV-B, is required for normal progression of endocycle and has a regulatory role in stomatal differentiation. Is required for plant circadian clock response to photomorphogenic UV-B light, partly through the transcriptional activation of responsive clock genes.

UV-B specific signaling component that acts as UV-B photoreceptor and plays a key role in establishing UV-protective responses in plants. Upon UV-B irradiation, UVR8 undergoes an immediate switch from homodimer to monomer, accumulates in the nucleus, interacts with the photomorphogenic repressor COP1 and regulates the expression of the transcription factor HY5 by associating with chromatin (through histone H2B binding) in the HY5 promoter region. UVR8 is involved in controlling aspects of leaf growth and morphogenesis in response to UV-B, is required for normal progression of endocycle and has a regulatory role in stomatal differentiation. Is required for plant circadian clock response to photomorphogenic UV-B light, partly through the transcriptional activation of responsive clock genes. Promotes photosynthetic efficiency at elevated levels of UV-B. Plays a role in mediating the effects of UV-B radiation on pathogen resistance by controlling the expression of the sinapate biosynthetic pathway. The two tryptophans, Trp-285 and Trp-233, serve collectively as the UV-B chromophore.
In the case of UVR8, a set of biochemical and genetic data strongly indicated that an intrinsic tryptophan, namely tryptophan-285 (Trp-285 or W285), functions as a chromophore for UV-B perception (Rizzini et al. 2011). In agreement, purified UVR8 dimer devoid of any form of prosthetic chromophore is able to perceive UV-B and monomerize in vitro (Christie et al. 2012, Wu et al. 2012).
Tryptophan is a naturally UV-absorbing aromatic amino acid. Sequence analysis shows that UVR8 is particularly enriched in tryptophans, which can be found 14 times in UVR8 versus only 4 times in human RCC1 (Regulator of Chromosome Condensation), which is structurally related to UVR8 (Kliebenstein et al. 2002, Rizzini et al. 2011, Wu et al. 2011). Trp-285 was shown to be essential for UVR8 monomerization as mutation of Trp-285 to phenylalanine (UVR8W285F) rendered UVR8 as a constitutive dimer whereas Trp-285 to alanine (UVR8W285A) resulted in a constitutive UVR8 monomer (Rizzini et al. 2011). However, it should be noted here that the constitutive monomer form of UVR8m285A is apparent with gel electrophoresis of nonboiled protein extracts from yeast and plants (Rizzini et al. 2011, O'Hara and Jenkins 2012). In contrast with these gel-based assays, size exclusion chromatography showed that purified UVR8W285A is a dimer in vitro that does not monomerize in response to UV-B (Christie et al. 2012, Wu et al. 2012). However, the available data suggests that UVR8W285A is a weak dimer and that the mutant protein very likely exists as a monomer in vivo (Rizzini et al. 2011, O'Hara and Jenkins 2012). Notwithstanding this, further structural and biophysical studies have since confirmed and further detailed the importance of Trp-285 in UV-B perception (Christie et al. 2012, Wu et al. 2012).

Structural basis of UVR8 dimer formation and UV-B-dependent monomerization
Several recent works have revealed much about how UVR8 exists as a homodimer capable of monomerization upon UV-B exposure. These publications present UVR8 predictive models arising from biochemical and structural analysis followed up by systematic mutational analysis of key residues. Of the 14 UVR8 tryptophans mentioned above, six (plus 1 tyrosine) are located within the protein core contributing to maintain the β-propeller structure, one is situated in the C-terminal part that was not included in the core structure, and seven are found at the homodimeric interface (Christie et al. 2012, O'Hara and Jenkins 2012, Wu et al. 2012) (Figure 5). Amongst the tryptophans at the dimer interface, mutational analysis showed that Trp-233, Trp-285, Trp-337 and Trp-94 of the opposing UVR8 monomer contribute to exciton coupling within the structure (Christie et al. 2012). These four residues were thus proposed to form a cross-dimer “tryptophan pyramid” involved in UV-B sensing (i.e. two “pyramids” per UVR8 homodimer) (Christie et al. 2012). Indeed, previous work mentioned above highlighted the importance of Trp-285 in maintaining the UVR8 homodimer, as UVR8W285A rendered UVR8 as a monomer that constitutively interacted with CONSTITUTIVELY PHOTOMORPHOGENIC 1 (COP1; At2g32950) in yeast (Rizzini et al. 2011). However, whether each of the four “pyramid” tryptophans play a role in UV-B perception is unclear. Whereas UVR8W285F prevented UV-B-mediated monomerisation of the UVR8 homodimer, Trp-337 to phenylalanine (UVR8W337F) did not (Rizzini et al. 2011, Christie et al. 2012). Furthermore, an independent study also showed that mutation of Trp-337, as well as Trp-94, to phenylalanine (UVR8W337F, UVR8W94F) did not affect UV-B perception (Wu et al. 2012). A follow up comprehensive analysis described transgenic plants where each of the 14 tryptophan residues within UVR8 were mutated (O'Hara and Jenkins 2012). This study confirmed that Trp-285 in particular as well as Trp-233 play important roles in UV-B perception, and that Trp-337 contributes to but is not essential for this same process. Concurrently, mutation of Trp-94 did not affect UVR8 monomerisation upon UV-B indicating that a tryptophan “pyramid” structure per se is not required for UV-B perception. Interestingly, UVR8W285F was found to be weakly responsive to UV-C in vitro which is not the case for wild type UVR8 (Christie et al. 2012). This is in accordance with the absorption properties of phenylalanine versus tryptophan.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=3711356_f05_01.jpg
The UVR8 UV-B Photoreceptor: Perception, Signaling and ...
Jun 11, 2013 · UVR8 is a 440-amino-acid protein whose β-propeller structure is described above. Proven mutant alleles that abolish COP1 interaction include uvr8–15 (UVR8 G145S), uvr8–9 (UVR8 G202R) (Favory et al. 2009, Rizzini et al. 2011), UVR8 G197A and UVR8 G199A (O'Hara and Jenkins 2012) as well as uvr8–2 (UVR8 δC40) (Cloix et al. 2012).
  • Cited by: 236
  • Publish Year: 2013
  • Author: Kimberley Tilbrook, Adriana Beatriz Arongaus, Mela
Isreal also did a study on the Red spectrum some 2o-30 years ago. They did a side by side comparison with flowers/tissue cultured flowers. They infused one greenhouse with Red, and the other with nothing, and the Red infused flowers were twice, or more as big vs the non Red infused.



UVR8 - Wikipedia
https://www.bing.com/search?q=uvr8&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=uvr8&sc=8-4&sk=&cvid=F58ED0F633924E5EBCCCB863059AA146#
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
That's a pretty strong UVB bulb. Here is an Arcadia 14% UVB reptile bulb for comparison. UVB fluorescent bulbs are all pretty much the same with the only difference being the amount of phosphor conversion. The Migro would appear to have less phosphor so that equals more UVB emission., so I'm not surprised you only need a small amount.
to be honest, the reptisun 10 was similar spectrum but I thought I’d the Migro’s designed for plants it’s a safer option.
I’ll attach the reptisun 10 for information, it’s actually quite good for plant uv, worth trying out as it’s got a lot bump at 310nm and 365nm then what looks like 405nm and 430nm in the visible spectrum.

DE62D0FB-A8E0-4583-A725-D3B0750F2D3E.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
Solacure uses the T12 bulb, and says the size of the T12 is a critical aspect of creating higher energy levels of UVB. They said theyve tried T5-T8 and they dont measure up.
They also state their bulb is 20-50x more powerful than the best Reptile Bulbs, which is probably the Arcadia Desert Reptile 54w.
I’ll be honest, I need to read that again later with more time, but it looks interesting information.
 

Speedtriplebbc

Well-Known Member
The interesting thing is that if you follow Shane (Migro) on Instagram, he posted a video recently claiming that UVA and Far Red "don't have any effect". It's at about 12:45 of this video: http://instagr.am/p/CUMo4eNFhvn/
We obviously had a lot to say about that!

However the Migro Arrays don't have any violet, UVA or Far Red in them so you can understand why he would say that. The only other thing we would take issue with is that Migro is yet another lighting manufacture that claims its lights are "full spectrum" when they are not. Full spectrum is 400-700nm – if your fixtures have no light below about 440nm, then that's over 10% of the PAR spectrum missing. We would even argue that 400-700nm PAR doesn't tell the full picture either, as Far Red has such an impact on photomorphogenic response that it can't be ignored.
Funny how he’s effectively saying blurples should be great for growing. Although my early led investments in the infamous blurples did show a great increase in quality when mixed with HPS, that kinda shows up how they weren’t working but adding to what hps offered does improve things. And he’s saying we don’t need the uvb lights he sells? Strange as a lot of his videos are very informative and accurate.
 
Top