Starting from 0 Part 1

• Output Range: 400 ppm to 60,000 ppm
• Resolution: Avg. 11 ppm. Refer to datasheet for specifics

SparkFun Air Quality Sensor - SGP40 (Qwiic) - SEN-18345 - SparkFun Electronics

The SparkFun SGP40 Air Quality Sensor provides a measurement of the quality of the air in your room or house.

www.sparkfun.com

SparkFun Environmental Combo Breakout - ENS160/BME280 (Qwiic) - SEN-22858 - SparkFun Electronics

The SparkFun ENS160/BME280 Environmental Combo Breakout covers all your atmospheric-quality sensing needs with the popular ENS160 and BME280 ICs.

www.sparkfun.com

CO₂ Humidity and Temperature Sensor - SCD30 - SEN-15112 - SparkFun Electronics

The SCD30 from Sensirion is a high quality NDIR based CO₂ sensor capable of detecting 400 to 10000ppm with an accuracy of ±(30ppm+3%).

www.sparkfun.com

SDS_GR said:

I have not read the whole thread ,in order to have a more complete picture of what was discussed about the effects of UV light on cannabis ,but since it has been somewhat of a “holy grail “ as long as I can remember ,there has been plenty of research in the past also .
At your post there are pretty interesting things stated .
Facts, actually .

In another relative thread I ‘ve read something about UVC lamps used .
That’s pretty weird ,because there’s absolutely no UVC reaching the surface of the Earth ,as it ...was blocked by the ozone layer of the atmosphere.Absolutely not a natural thing to irradiate the poor plants with UVC ...It will fry their cell DNA within minutes ...The effects won’t change using less power.Simply the affected area will be smaller.
Anyway ...

I’m not going to support that few watts of light within the region from 280 nm to 420 nm are not beneficial
to the quality of the final product.
But ,I’m going to unfold an alternative theory ,based on the spirit of your post.
Of course ,is not my theory ,not a creation of my mind.
It’s just that this alternative version of the UV tale seems to be neglected completely .

This theory dictates that the use of UV lights has a noticeable positive effect on the terpene,cannabinoid,flavonoid and other antioxidants that the plant produces ,but the difference is not
really to write home about .Tests and researches done at past ,revealed that the antioxidants increased in
total mass about 10%_if I remember correctly-(Edited) by increased trichome production .They concluded that UV supplementation is too much trouble ,
for the given final results.
Another interesting conclusion were that most probably it’s the actual genetics that play the first role when it comes to antioxidant profile and concentration.
Plants are already genetically prepared to deal with certain stress factors.
For some of those stress factors ,they will respond only if they are "triggered" ,like in the case of insect bites.
It costs a lot energy and resources to the plants to keep their active "defence systems against insect attack" operating all the time ,
without an actual threat.
From the other hand other stress factors are to be expected as definite .
Like UV radiation from the sun.
In this case the plants start the operation "UV radiation defence systems",from being still seedlings !
They expect that UV radiation will be there,no matter what !
When they do not find it there (like inside a grow tent with ordinary white LEDs ) ,
the "UV defence systems" start to " get a bit lazy",( energy and resource shavings= efficiency ) but it's only few months until life cycle is completed.
They do not have the amount of time needed to get "too lazy" or even shut down completely ..

Those thousands of years of adaptation & evolution must be doing the trick !

Which led to yet another set of questions ...
Researching further ,answers followed.
Genetic drift.
That’s where the most profound effects of UV light are to be found.
Breeding exotic plants at moderate climates will cause the species to genetically drift from really potent (simply put )to less potent,generation after generation.And that’s where UV lights come to the rescue.
Experiments have shown that not only
the genetic drift is inhibited with UV light supplementation , but from generation to generation exotic species from really potent went to
“are you nuts?” potent !
You can say it acts as a rather crude
method of genetic manipulation.
Using an external stress factor
( called “trigger” by the white collars),
to cause genetic mutations and then pick the “successful” ones.
With selective breeding methods along with “UV treatments” of alien to Earth’s natural environment output powers,
rumors say that they have bred plants with quite abnormal terpene and cannabinoid profiles.Something like
34% Δ9THC along with 13% THCV,for example.

Unfortunately ,those interesting theories which actually cost me quite few bucks to read about ,( paid for every research pdf ) got forever lost when my laptop was stolen .
Still ,they can be found on the web,I guess.

Click to expand...

SDS_GR said:

> Image source <

Mimic nature ?
Pulsing UV ?
Switch ON for 5 minutes ?
Calculate total power per day (DLI) and then average it per hour and dose the plants ?

In what way should the UV irradiation be used ?

Severe damage is very easy to be done to the plants ,when playing with such high energy photons.
There's a lot not studied ,not fully understood and some maybe remain still unknown .
Last but not least ...
The human eye ,unable to sense this kind of light ,can not respond to a possible high output power.
Eye lids won't close as a reflex to strong light ...
Meanwhile, the high energy photons will be nuking the cornea of the eye ...
( Has anybody here had a severe incident of " welding arc eyes " before ? )

For sure ,UV supplementation is quite tricky of a thing ...

Edit:
Almost forgot that one ...
The one million dollar question !

So,if THC and/or other cannabinoids
serve as sunscreen for the seeds ...
Or as insect repellent or even insecticide...
How come hemp (same species )that grows nearby with a resinous indica or a potent sativa ,under the exact same sun and exposed to the same crawling and flying threats ,will never produce significant amounts of THC ?
Still, hemp thrives without it nevertheless...

Is it that the UV radiation is really the trigger for THC biosynthesis or maybe not ?

Click to expand...

SDS_GR said:

Frontiers | An Update on Plant Photobiology and Implications for Cannabis Production

This review presents recent developments in plant photobiology and lighting systems for horticultural crops, as well as potential applications for cannabis (...

www.frontiersin.org

What I would personally like is a
phosphor conversion UV LED.
Consisting of a 285 nm excitation source and a phosphor peaking at 385 nm .With a SPD curve resembling the shape of the one of 3000K 80Ra a pc white LED has.
So,in a single LED device both the UVB & UVA response triggering peaks will be included ,at a nice ratio between them .
That’s what I would like to use ...

Click to expand...