Balls to the Wall grow, Riddleme Gets Serious

SensiStan

SensiStan

Well-Known Member
DaveCoulier said:
I came across that link earlier when googling :).

Im not sure where I mentioned heat in that post you quoted. Plus infrared does generate heat, or were you referring to near infrared?
Click to expand...
Was reffering to near infra-red, and going back over what i wrote last night i cant help but notice you havent said anything about heat. I think i replied to 2 posts in one while high lol.
 
skunkushybrid01

skunkushybrid01

Well-Known Member
Infra red is heat. Infra red is quite literally just another name for heat. when we say... oh, it's hot today... what we actually mean is that we are receiving lots of infra red from the sun.

I wrote a thread a few years ago now on how blue light is actually preferred by plants than red. Each blue photon is worth more to the plant than a red one is. Blue photons are more potent, each blue photon will give a plant far more energy than a red one.

Plants have never preferred red light to flower, indeed plants had to evolve a relationship with chlorophylls to harvest the red light as they do not do it naturally. Chlorophylls are also adept at handling blue light too, it is believed that plants only gained this symbiotic relationship with the chlorophylls (nobody knows exactly where the chlorophylls came from) as the sun puts out a lot of red light. red light is weak, but plentiful... so plants adapted to harvest it too. Doesn't mean they prefer it... just means that there is more red light in the plants natural habitat.

a 400w MH is of more value than a 400w HPS photon for photon... the only difference from our perspective is that a MH lamp puts out more heat and the bulbs don't last as long. The thing to remember is that blue light equals light quality, red light equals light quantity. Red has more lumens but they are much weaker lumens.


at the end of the day though.. a photon is a photon... and so long as the plant is getting enough for optimum growth then it will grow optimally, no matter if it is red, blue or a mixture. However, i would suggest that some green light is needed as it has been proven that seedlings grow better with supplemented green light. The green light apparently offsets completely the slight irradiance caused by the effects of blue and red light, either or. Of course this irradiance is normally counteracted by the benefits of photosynthesis, but it is still an irradiance that makes a difference on growth.

Of course i'm now steeled, ready for all the newbs at this site to start screaming that i don't know what i'm talking about.
 
gumball

gumball

Well-Known Member
skunkushybrid01 said:
Infra red is heat. Infra red is quite literally just another name for heat. when we say... oh, it's hot today... what we actually mean is that we are receiving lots of infra red from the sun.

I wrote a thread a few years ago now on how blue light is actually preferred by plants than red. Each blue photon is worth more to the plant than a red one is. Blue photons are more potent, each blue photon will give a plant far more energy than a red one.

Plants have never preferred red light to flower, indeed plants had to evolve a relationship with chlorophylls to harvest the red light as they do not do it naturally. Chlorophylls are also adept at handling blue light too, it is believed that plants only gained this symbiotic relationship with the chlorophylls (nobody knows exactly where the chlorophylls came from) as the sun puts out a lot of red light. red light is weak, but plentiful... so plants adapted to harvest it too. Doesn't mean they prefer it... just means that there is more red light in the plants natural habitat.

a 400w MH is of more value than a 400w HPS photon for photon... the only difference from our perspective is that a MH lamp puts out more heat and the bulbs don't last as long. The thing to remember is that blue light equals light quality, red light equals light quantity. Red has more lumens but they are much weaker lumens.


at the end of the day though.. a photon is a photon... and so long as the plant is getting enough for optimum growth then it will grow optimally, no matter if it is red, blue or a mixture. However, i would suggest that some green light is needed as it has been proven that seedlings grow better with supplemented green light. The green light apparently offsets completely the slight irradiance caused by the effects of blue and red light, either or. Of course this irradiance is normally counteracted by the benefits of photosynthesis, but it is still an irradiance that makes a difference on growth.

Of course i'm now steeled, ready for all the newbs at this site to start screaming that i don't know what i'm talking about.
Click to expand...
Very interesting post! I would not say you don't know what you are talking about, as I don't know either!! But the "newbs" should not either and shouldn't call u out on it. What your post did do is get the minds of us open minded growers that are not afraid of going against the grain to thinking about how accurate your post is. The CMH bulb and its use for the full life cycle gives your post a little more credence because it has a lot more blue (from what I have seen), puts off more energy, and provides as good of results as the red lighted HPS while producing less light output, but yet more "useable energy" for the plant. The green light really intrigued me. I could run a test of a seedling undder nothing but green, and one under blue and see the difference, would be interesting.
 
skunkushybrid01

skunkushybrid01

Well-Known Member
gumball said:
Very interesting post! I would not say you don't know what you are talking about, as I don't know either!! But the "newbs" should not either and shouldn't call u out on it. What your post did do is get the minds of us open minded growers that are not afraid of going against the grain to thinking about how accurate your post is. The CMH bulb and its use for the full life cycle gives your post a little more credence because it has a lot more blue (from what I have seen), puts off more energy, and provides as good of results as the red lighted HPS while producing less light output, but yet more "useable energy" for the plant. The green light really intrigued me. I could run a test of a seedling undder nothing but green, and one under blue and see the difference, would be interesting.
Click to expand...

Yeah i know i'm not the most accurate of people, i don't have a background in sciences. I find sharing what i do know encourages others to share what they know and this in itself can often teach me something new. I fully realise my understanding of things could be slightly skewed.

I've been wanting to do a green light grow for quite some time now. plants in the ocean have adapted to harvest green light, even plants on the floor of deep forests. as the canopies are so high this blocks out a lot of the light, so plants lower down learn to scavenge whatever photons they can. Even going so far as to harvest reflected green light from other plants.

the test i'm talking about though was done a few years ago and it proved that plants vegetated with supplemental green light alongside blue or red light off set the irradiance caused by red and blue light and plants grew better, stronger. I can't find that actual paper again now but here's something i just dug up from springerlink:

We report on the response of dry plant seeds to their irradiation with intense green light applied at biostimulatory doses. Red and near-infrared light delivered by lasers or arrays of light emitting diodes applied at such doses have been shown previously by us to have effects on mammalian cells. Effects include cell proliferation and elevation of cell vitality, and have practical applications in various biomedical fields. Growth processes induced by photoreceptor stimulation (phytochromes and cryptochromes) in plant seeds with green light were described so far only for imbibed seeds. In this paper, we show that irradiation of dry cress, radish and carrot seeds with intense green light (laser or arrays of light emitting diodes), applied at biostimulatory doses, resulted in a significant increase in biomass—14, 26, and 71 days after seeding, respectively. In the case of radish and carrot, the irradiation led to important changes in the root-to-foliage surface ratio. Seeds with a potential to grant growth acceleration could be of special interest in agricultural applications, and could even compensate for shorter growth seasons caused by climate change.
Click to expand...
 
DaveCoulier

DaveCoulier

Well-Known Member
skunkushybrid01 said:
Infra red is heat. Infra red is quite literally just another name for heat. when we say... oh, it's hot today... what we actually mean is that we are receiving lots of infra red from the sun.

I wrote a thread a few years ago now on how blue light is actually preferred by plants than red. Each blue photon is worth more to the plant than a red one is. Blue photons are more potent, each blue photon will give a plant far more energy than a red one.

Plants have never preferred red light to flower, indeed plants had to evolve a relationship with chlorophylls to harvest the red light as they do not do it naturally. Chlorophylls are also adept at handling blue light too, it is believed that plants only gained this symbiotic relationship with the chlorophylls (nobody knows exactly where the chlorophylls came from) as the sun puts out a lot of red light. red light is weak, but plentiful... so plants adapted to harvest it too. Doesn't mean they prefer it... just means that there is more red light in the plants natural habitat.

a 400w MH is of more value than a 400w HPS photon for photon... the only difference from our perspective is that a MH lamp puts out more heat and the bulbs don't last as long. The thing to remember is that blue light equals light quality, red light equals light quantity. Red has more lumens but they are much weaker lumens.


at the end of the day though.. a photon is a photon... and so long as the plant is getting enough for optimum growth then it will grow optimally, no matter if it is red, blue or a mixture. However, i would suggest that some green light is needed as it has been proven that seedlings grow better with supplemented green light. The green light apparently offsets completely the slight irradiance caused by the effects of blue and red light, either or. Of course this irradiance is normally counteracted by the benefits of photosynthesis, but it is still an irradiance that makes a difference on growth.

Of course i'm now steeled, ready for all the newbs at this site to start screaming that i don't know what i'm talking about.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you'll probably be labeled a heretic for saying plants use green light, but its true folks!

I came across an excerpt from a study recently that documented chloroplasts actually reorienting themselves towards a green light source after it was moved from over head to along side the leafs.

I think a buddy did a writeup about green light, but unfortunately its only available at a site that is very strict on who can become a member. If I can get a copy of it from him, I will share it with you.
 
skunkushybrid01

skunkushybrid01

Well-Known Member
DaveCoulier said:
Yeah, you'll probably be labeled a heretic for saying plants use green light, but its true folks!

I came across an excerpt from a study recently that documented chloroplasts actually reorienting themselves towards a green light source after it was moved from over head to along side the leafs.

I think a buddy did a writeup about green light, but unfortunately its only available at a site that is very strict on who can become a member. If I can get a copy of it from him, I will share it with you.
Click to expand...
Yeah that'd be great. I only bother with 2 sites now and this is the second one. Are you talking about canna cabanna? I had an account with those years ago but i can't remember the handle there now. Back then they were trying to hide unsuccessfully from google. i didn't really participate at the site much though. so maybe they just deleted my account when they had the shake up.
 
DaveCoulier

DaveCoulier

Well-Known Member
skunkushybrid01 said:
Yeah that'd be great. I only bother with 2 sites now and this is the second one. Are you talking about canna cabanna? I had an account with those years ago but i can't remember the handle there now. Back then they were trying to hide unsuccessfully from google. i didn't really participate at the site much though. so maybe they just deleted my account when they had the shake up.
Click to expand...
Yeah thats the same site. He's a hell of a smart guy and really contributes to any site he's at. He's got some good threads there, but I can't access them since he's got to be a member for 6 months before I can be nominated by him :(.
 
BIGDAVE

BIGDAVE

Member
subscribed. Riddleme, I have been following your "I make it rain" posts and have gainded a wealth of knowledge. Thanks
 
riddleme

riddleme

Well-Known Member
Until I see sex, there is no reason to name them so will just number them in the order they went into the garden, so far we have 1,2 & 3 with the NL special getting to be #4 tonight and I will get some more pics up

the one I have been calling the runt still not doing anything and the other seed I put down seems to be acting the same way (tap root popped but then nothing?)

#1 was planted a full day before #2 and #2 was planted 12 hours before #3 but both 2 & 3 have caught up to #1 in terms of growth and size they all 3 now have the start of thier 2nd node, I am waiting to see how internode spacing looks with the CMH?

they are still on 16/8 at the moment and light is 32 inches away
 
cowboylogic

cowboylogic

Well-Known Member
Sometimes those runts end up being asskickers............ And being its the balls to the wall journal. Maybe the wives names of the members of AC/DC?
 
riddleme

riddleme

Well-Known Member
Well I'll leave em go another few days, to see if anything happens???

and it's not easy getting an update with all the conversations going LOL
 
Danielsgb

Danielsgb

Well-Known Member
I swear the node spacing on my veg table is closer under the CMH vs. MH. Riddleme, you have me SOLD on them.
Daniels
 
gumball

gumball

Well-Known Member
I agree daniels. I am starting my 2nd node since switching to CMH, and 4th node total and it is less than an inch from top to bottom of growth, and I still have solid green coty's at 14 days old! Thanks again riddle, for all you do. I'll +rep but it will never give you the thanks you deserve!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top