defoliation when in flower

[Resinhound]

If I try to sell you a car and tell you it's in fine working order I am within my rights to call you a troll because you request a test drive.

Excuse me for ignoring your future posts of avoidance.

Look man he wasnt saying , "show me your grows or gtfo".What I heard him saying was , "until you can grow a healthy plant to harvest,you have more important things to focus on rather than pulling leaves of your plant".That just sounds like good advice to me no matter what side of the fence you are on man.

 

[Sativied]

If I try to sell you a car and tell you it's in fine working order I am within my rights to call you a troll because you request a test drive.

Defoliator logic...

Funny thing 5-year old kids are much smarter. They don't accept shifting the burden of proof. You should look that up. Somehow you lost your ability of critical thinking.

You continue to ask for factual info and links and evidence that there is a purple dragon in your garage, a claim you make. You claim there is the possibility that defoliating can help you or others increase your yields beyond what others get without defoliating and you could get with defoliating, and then ask others to disprove or prove it. That's just dumb trolling.

Excuse me for ignoring your future posts of avoidance.

The ignore feature works great for the ignorant.

 

[jacksthc]

Wow.... Stuck in limbo looking for cold wet fire.

Speaking of evasive answers, you haven't answered my question. Show me grow results from you in which there are not at least 3 things you could have done to improve yields long before even considering something like defoliation. Why argue defoliation if you can't finish a decent grow even if you wanted to.




https://www.rollitup.org/t/vegging-plants-under-40w-t5s.878481/#post-11807835
You can't even veg a seedling without the leaves dying so stfu ...

Oh wait, it gets better...
https://www.rollitup.org/t/vegging-plants-under-40w-t5s.878481/page-4

...you pulled 250 gram in 12 weeks from a 600watt (and before you mention the T5 and 400w, I veg under T8 and then usually roughly 10 days 400w too... Yet I pull over double the grams without removing leaves).

If you had more than half a brain you should realize that obviously means you should not give advice, argue for defoliation, and in general just stfu, get your head out of your ass, and learn from those who don't fail at growing cannabis.

you don't get it fellow, I was really short of money at that point in my live
so i had to cut corners every where i could and grow in an old rotten shed, flower room 3ft x 3ft and 4.5ft high ( so the room was small )
budget soil and nutes, hps bulbs 12 mouths old

I had less i had £100 to set the shed up and buy the seeds, soil etc
even turned the hps down to 400w for the first 3 weeks

just showing other member you can grow on a really low budget.

with a high yielding strain, good environment, new bulbs etc
you could double my yield but your setup and running cost going to cost you over double my budget

 

[Flowki]

Look man he wasnt saying , "show me your grows or gtfo".What I heard him saying was , "until you can grow a healthy plant to harvest,you have more important things to focus on rather than pulling leaves of your plant".That just sounds like good advice to me no matter what side of the fence you are on man.

He is assuming I am an avid defoliator out to prove it works. I'm not and have stated that multiple times. I have grown healthy plants and it is still irrelevant. I am looking at different techniques but also trying to find fact info other than ''look at my pic of buds I am right''.

I have searched many threads for side by sides or factual evidence for or against defoliation as a person on the fence about it to no avail. When he and uncle ben said it does not work i VERY SIMPLY asked them for why.. then they instantly take offense that I don't take their word for truth and go on childish shit storms instead of just linking me to some useful info. The only links I have received was from uncle ben linking to his other posts of him essentially saying he's right. Then this next guy has waded in with the same stance but again filing to give me a simple scrap of evidence so that I can say ''ok thnx m8 I see the proof now''.

Don't get me wrong, I have seen many vids and pics of growers who have completely raped the plant with extreme defoliation, I'm not interested in those and have similarly seen many people who don't defoliate have awful looking plants.

I am ofc referring to what appear to be very experienced defoliators who are getting good results. It is a contradiction to what the none defoliators are saying and while i've seen the evidence of healthy good yielding defoliated plants I am still yet to see the evidence that suggests a ''properly'' defoliated plant fairs significantly worse than a one untouched within an indoor setting.

Again I am not on either side but you can appreciate the curiosity that becomes more intense given how angry they are getting about a simple request. It is ironic that I am not worth their time to link proof yet they have spent more time and energy responding with anything but.

 

[DrGhard]

Here's a perfect example of his stupidity, a statement I clearly refuted showing the lower part of an outdoor grown plant which had "larf" or buds with very little tissue - "Leaf removal stimulates lower and mid bud growth by exposing those normally shaded out areas to premium light."




Here's a shot of (my usual) secondary harvest. The one done a few weeks after the bulky main colas are harvested. It received full sun from sunrise to sunset or to use his embellishment, it received "premium light". This is all lower bud, "larf", without much weight to it.

View attachment 3587826

that's why defoliation sohuld be done (if needed) only in indoor growths. outdoor growths in places with lots of sun have no limitations in term of light, which instead happens with indoor lights, whose spectrum and intensity and irradiation will never match the "real thing"

 

[DrGhard]

The most obvious fact that is being ignored is that none of those defoliators produce more than many who don't remove a single leaf.


Hopeless... Still stuck on people being right or wrong... You are looking for factual info for or against whether cars drive better without tires, birds fly better with wings, blind people can see better... You are wasting your time looking for nonsense while you surely have a lot to learn that could help you. On that note, have you ever finished a decent run?

there is another parameter which determines the quality of a harvest, and is independent by the sheer grams of bud material: secondary metabolites content. unfortunately this is almost impossible to assess for the average grower. if you have a lower gram- per-Watt ratio but your buds have more THC/CBDs terpenes etc etc in the end your harvest is more desirable, especially for medical purposes.

 

[RM3]

Yet another entertaining defoil thread LMFAO

 

[Uncle Ben]

You showed bottom larf on a part of the plant that gets very little to no light even ''outdoor''.

So now you're calling me a liar?

You're not only hard headed, you're just a bit thick. You don't need a frickin' side by side. You need to get your retarded self into school and learn some botany starting with the function of a leaf. Then you'll be empowered to do what's right rather than what the herd says you should do.

I wrote this in response to a post you made & you still didn't get the drift --> ...........

That's it from me to you now on.

 

[Uncle Ben]

just showing other member you can grow on a really low budget.

Of course but that wouldn't make any sense. If you can't make this hobby as confusing and complicated as can be, then it's just not worth doing. Right?

First indoor garden was a white closet, white panels sandwiched between the front and back walls located on either side of the plants, slightly opended door lined with shiny side out aluminum foil, bag seeds from Mexican stash, 250 HPS lamp in a horizontal hood hung from the closet pole, Walmart foods. Had 2 females and it was some of the best weed you'd ever want. Great yields, dense colas (for a Mexican), excellent up high..... the kind that creeps and takes the top of your head off. Cost? Price of the light.

UB

 

[Sativied]

poor excuses

I think I got it all just fine jack. Not enough income then decides to grow cannabis with a half assed setup and then thinks he's in a position to help anyone because it produced smokeable bud. Absurd.

I've seen countless of first time growers with low budgets do a much better job simply for listening to or mimicking more seasoned growers. Getting such low yields (250gr from a 600w) is fine too... till you start giving others advice on how to increase yields (the premise all the defoliators share but word differently) cause you are clearly not in a position to do so.

Doubling the running and setup costs from 100 to 200 gbp to get 250grams more seems like a good deal. You are barking up the wrong tree regardless, I run a very simple, minimalistic and cheap setup and my running costs are as low as they get with hps. And low budget soil and nutes are generally better than the expensive crap anyway.

You have no valid points and are obviously making poor excuses. What did you achieve by doing so besides throwing reason aside... the very thing that could help you succeed at growing and life. You're not helping yourself become a capable grower and most certainly not any other members. Even when selling the harvest from one crappy run you can afford to finish your setup so your excuses work only once and is no way a valid argument for defoliation or the lack of results you get. Besides that, why even bother giving advice or disagreeing if you don't have a decent setup and never completed a decent run... Instead of arguing for defoliation, you should clearly focus on the basics, like watering..., pot size, humidity levels and temps, ventilation, air circulation, plant count and bud site spacing, etc etc

It's how thousands of small growers started in NL, with a cheap T5/250/400w setup and a bugdet similar to yours, then buy more grow gear from the harvest. By the end of the year they run a 600/1000watter pulling 1gpw, able to do that 5x per year.... Totalling 3-5 kilo per year, earning rougly $14-22K making budget a non issue. And that's just the folks running a single bulb closet or tent (Usually in humid sheds, basements and attics...). It doesn't take a genius to do that, just a willingness to learn and listen to those who've done that numerous times.

Prohibition put it in the hands of those growers, who based on the fact they do grow a good amount of money per year think they are good growers, many of them are, but don't really understand what they are doing. They often merely repeat a learned trick and generally confuse perception and intiution with reality and science, leading to a lot of misinformation, nutrient scams and forum myths. From that crap new crap was crapped: people who haven't even learned the basic trick yet pretend to be able to help others, increase yields, and argue with people who not only learned the basic trick but have a clue as well, or at the very least try to understand. It has held back the cannabis industry so much and so long, so many idiots concerned with growing money and epeen, that I personally can't wait to see professional farmers take over the industry.

Starting with a low budget is only more reason to not act stupid. Yeah I said "act". Surely if you would get passed your main obstacle, yourself, you can achieve great results too. Till then, what's the point in trying to pretend you can help others learn to run while you barely learned how to crawl yourself... Besides trolling...


"even turned the hps down to 400w for the first 3 weeks"

I used 400w hps for the first 10 days in flower and then started using 600w hps

Why do you do that? Lie to yourself, be intellectually dishonest. Things are what they are, bullshitting isn't helping you. I run 400w for a week or two as well as I already pointed out, and then you choose to remain ignorant by lying to yourself and pretending you still have a valid argument. No wonder you can't afford a proper setup, as I pointed out earlier, being so blatantly ignorant like you and the other defoliators are would get you fired on the spot in a professional setting.

It's so ironic you are all so concerned about who knows best. It's obstructing yourself. You are not less of a person or less intelligent if you don't understand (knowing is overrated, try to understand) what some others do. Some times when people take the time and effort to show you are wrong it doesn't mean he wants to be right and you to be wrong, he wants you to understand so you can make the best decision.

 

[jacksthc]

lmao

what are you lot talking about, with a budget strain, setup.
my yield is less than normal, that's just the way it is

This is the last crop i did in my old setup, good strain, setup etc
my yield from the 4 plants was very high for a single 600w hps










That's a 10ltr storage box under all the bud

sorry but i have not seen any pic's that make me think you can pull a higher yield than me

 

[Sativied]

with a budget strain

So you changed your premise to: defoliation increases yields in cheap setups and with "budget strains" only? Or is that just another poor excuse.

my yield from the 4 plants was very high for a single 600w hps

"very high" probably means something else to you than me. Talk oz, or grams, or pounds, or stfu. Actually, just stfu because you've already made it very obvious you have no problem lying to fool yourself and quantifying it properly won't make it any less bullshit. I bet that 10ltr container is filled with more than bud before you took the pic. I count nuggets only, trimmed clean, not including trim, branches, leaves etc, not the barely dried harvest.

sorry but i have not seen any pic's that make me think you can pull a higher yield than me

I don't think there's any pic that will magically grant you the ability to think... Instead of realizing your entire premise that defoliation can result in higher yields than not defoliating is proven false already by the obvious fact defoliators don't grow more than thousands who don't, you are going to fool yourself some more by pretending you can pull higher yields than I do?

Let's be specific, you claim you can pull more from a 600w with defoliating than I can do without, but not really because you use a low ... and crap genetics, then think those prematurely finished horrible looking plants mean something? It looks pretty... disgusting, including the plants in the back, I hope for the sake of others you smoke that all by yourself. And as usual, you clearly wouldn't be able to keep the leaves on even if you wanted to... don't pretend you even have a choice in defoliating. I was referring to retarded in the strict sense of the word earlier but damn man... why on earth would you hold yourself back so much... you obviously suck at growing, not realizing that only helps you continue sucking at growing.

 

[jacksthc]

So you changed your premise to: defoliation increases yields in cheap setups and with "budget strains" only? Or is that just another poor excuse.


"very high" probably means something else to you than me. Talk oz, or grams, or pounds, or stfu. Actually, just stfu because you've already made it very obvious you have no problem lying to fool yourself and quantifying it properly won't make it any less bullshit. I bet that 10ltr container is filled with more than bud before you took the pic. I count nuggets only, trimmed clean, not including trim, branches, leaves etc, not the barely dried harvest.

I don't think there's any pic that will magically grant you the ability to think... Instead of realizing your entire premise that defoliation can result in higher yields than not defoliating is proven false already by the obvious fact defoliators don't grow more than thousands who don't, you are going to fool yourself some more by pretending you can pull higher yields than I do?

Let's be specific, you claim you can pull more from a 600w with defoliating than I can do without, but not really because you use a low ... and crap genetics, then think those prematurely finished horrible looking plants mean something? It looks pretty... disgusting, including the plants in the back, I hope for the sake of others you smoke that all by yourself. And as usual, you clearly wouldn't be able to keep the leaves on even if you wanted to... don't pretend you even have a choice in defoliating. I was referring to retarded in the strict sense of the word earlier but damn man... why on earth would you hold yourself back so much... you obviously suck at growing, not realizing that only helps you continue sucking at growing.

I have found defoliation works well in small setups, i do get and understand that leaves are the plants solar panels and by removing selected leaves you can control how fast parts of the plants grow

Also understand that a leave only absorb 15% of the light so in theory you could have 5 leaves under the top leaf in a row and they would all absorb light, which turns into energy and this will help the plant grow more shoots or buds depending what stage there in

Also all lights indoors have a limit to how far the light can penetrate the canopy, 600w hps can penetrate the canopy 18"
so my ideal is to keep the plants short and bushy in veg, topping, removing leaves to control the canopy shape,

so in flower the canopy level and full of cola's

Relatively low levels of nitrogen in the late flowering stage helps promote proper cannabis bud development and will increase your yields

Fellow you can say i suck at growing but tbh i have been very happy with my result and you can wind yourself up as much as you want to.

I believe everything is good in moderation, top the plant, lst and remove a few fan leaves and flower,
just gives me a good canopy shape in flower with less stretch.

 

[Uncle Ben]

Relatively low levels of nitrogen in the late flowering stage helps promote proper cannabis bud development and will increase your yields

Not at the expense of leaves which drives bud production.

That's some pretty stupid "logic".

 

[jacksthc]

Not at the expense of leaves which drives bud production.

That's some pretty stupid "logic".

you right there about bud production but when i first learn t to grow i was lead to believe that letting the plant run out of food in the last week of flower was good.
as it gives you a better quality bud.

a lot of plants i have see on this sites have yellow leaves in late flower

maybe i got this wrong, thanks for the advice

 

[Resinhound]

you right there about bud production but when i first learn t to grow i was lead to believe that letting the plant run out of food in the last week of flower was good.
as it gives you a better quality bud.

a lot of plants i have see on this sites have yellow leaves in late flower

maybe i got this wrong, thanks for the advice

Look at it this way man,the plant is going to use the stored sugars in those leaves like mad to build flowers.You just need to keep them stocked and watch your buds grow

 

[Flowki]

Look at it this way man,the plant is going to use the stored sugars in those leaves like mad to build flowers.You just need to keep them stocked and watch your buds grow

In lst the top and mid level canopy is evenly spread over the grow area and dense. The lowest fan leaves are getting no light and showing it. They droop as if over watered. On the one hand people scream to 'leave them alone. On the other, those lowest fan leaves are a burden to the rest of the plant and will not give back more energy than they are currently taking to stay alive.

Then the secondary problem is light penetration to the middle section of the plants. With the dense top canopy light is only making to the mid section in small peep holes (the mid section starts about 6-8 inches into the canopy on the scale of the plants, 2foot tall from soil to top). Each plant has around 6 to 10 tops. ''Some'' upper fan leaves are blocking the light of 3 to 4 lower mid section leafs. The mid section leaves do however look more active than the lowest bigger fan leafs but I suppose they take priority being higher up the plant and younger (basically they are still not getting enough light although certainly more than the bottom). It is 8 plants spaced within the the recommended 3sgr foot per 600w, 2 lights in a 6f by 3f layout. 2nd week of flower.

So what would you do.

A: Remove the bottom fan leaves.
B: Don't touch lower fan leaves, selectively remove some top fan leaves that allow light exposure to multiple mid section leaves.
C: Don't do anything.
D: Experiment with four plants going either the A or B route while going route C with the other four.

 

[Resinhound]

The problem is your whole argument is based on the assumption that leaves can be a burden to the plant.If a leaf becomes a burden,not getting enough light or what have you,the plant will drop it on its own,and without a wound.Leaves are not a burden and if they are the plant will remove it.So ya unless its diseased or something,theres just no reason to selectivley cull leaves.

TLDR:leaves dont block light,active leaves arent a burden,if they are the plant will cull them.

 

[Flowki]

The problem is your whole argument is based on the assumption that leaves can be a burden to the plant.If a leaf becomes a burden,not getting enough light or what have you,the plant will drop it on its own,and without a wound.Leaves are not a burden and if they are the plant will remove it.So ya unless its diseased or something,theres just no reason to selectivley cull leaves.

TLDR:leaves dont block light,active leaves arent a burden,if they are the plant will cull them.

Ah ok so the burden thing is yet another myth. If this does not offend you (as it does others ;p) do you have a good factual link I can further read into?.

''4. Food Storage. The leaves serve as food storage organ of the plant both temporarily and on long-term basis. Under favorable conditions, the rate of photosynthesis may exceed that of translocation of photosynthates toward other organs. During the daytime, sugars accumulate in the leaves and starch is synthesized and stored in the chloroplasts. At nighttime, the starch is hydrolyzed to glucose and respired or converted to transportable forms like sucrose.

It has been demonstrated also that food is stored in the leaves until they senesce. This food is exported to the stem before leaf fall and utilized in the subsequent shoot development.''

It seems to indicate natural leaf loss over light deprived. I'm assuming it's a key difference as it does not talk about the process the plant goes through before it decides the ''healthy but light deprived'' leaf is not worth keeping. At-least looking at mine, those lowest leaves have been in that state of limbo for weeks.

I did read other experiments where a covered section of leaf stopped photosynthesis, I assume that means heavily shaded leaves will also do the same or close and not converting and storing energy other than what it already has.

further more, is it possible the heavily shaded leaf uses it's own currently stored energy to stay alive (in hope of finally getting some light to get going again) and once that is depleted the plant says ''well, good bye m8''.

 

[srt8666]

jesus. yet another bitch fest.

hey jack.....your plant looks tight man. nice work...nice yield. love the coloring