Cynic
Well-Known Member
Thank you man! she doesn't know what the hell shes talking about.
First night of sleep ? (INDICA)
- Thread starter sllik
- Start date
gangjababy
Well-Known Member
The plants evolved into the light cycle becasue as the days get shorther it's signaling that winter is coming, thus triggering them into flowering. It has nothing to do with more efficient use of sugars that the plant produces. As I have said before the plants stretch because that's part of their life cycle...
Cannabis plants will stay in veg if they get enough light from a streetlight as well.
greenjumble
Well-Known Member
This discussion is silly. It's like watching George Bush and Nasa 
Seek the answers from scientists and people who tested and researched and had the answers already instead of talking nonsense
It's rare on this natural earth where there is light for 24hrs a day(and there are very specific adapted vegetation for those places as well) and so plants have adapted and use the night for specific processes.
I prefer a 20/4 cycle of light.
Wiki answers:
Plants do respire at night. It does not require light to take place. This is a process of releasing energy, kind of the opposite to photosynthesising. Photosynthesis is the preparation of the dinner, respiration is the dining process and the belching and flatulence that follows. When a plant respires, it releases carbon dioxide ( at a lower rate than it takes in ), oxygen, heat, water. It occurs on a cellular level with all living things.
Transpiration, on the other hand is the process by which plants release water through their leaves, stems, flowers and roots. It occurs during the process of photosynthesis and gets a break at nightime as plants need light to photosynthesize.
Chemistry World response to: What do plants do at night?
Plants can adapt their metabolism to make sugars during the hours of darkness.
Two related papers in Science and The Plant Journal by John Innes Centre (JIC) scientists report for the first time the mechanisms inside leaves that are responsible for the conversion of starch into sugars during the night. 'Photosynthesis is well understood, but our discovery is really exciting because it gives us a new insight into how plants control the use of the sugar that they produce,' notes Alison Smith, head of the Metabolic Biology Department at JIC.
The paper published in Science (2004, 303, 87) reports the discovery of a previously unknown maltose transporter (controlled by gene MEX1), in the chloroplast envelope membrane, which allows the chloroplast to export maltose produced by breakdown of starch.
In a related paper, published online in The Plant Journal on 12 January 2004 (DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2003.0212.x), the same researchers report a cytosolic glucosyltransferase (controlled by gene DPE2) the first step on a novel pathway to convert maltose to sucrose.
These discoveries were made using the plant model Arabidopsis, whose genome sequence was published in 2000, illustrating how such sequences are now being used to unravel vital biological processes.
Hamish Kidd
Seek the answers from scientists and people who tested and researched and had the answers already instead of talking nonsense
It's rare on this natural earth where there is light for 24hrs a day(and there are very specific adapted vegetation for those places as well) and so plants have adapted and use the night for specific processes.
I prefer a 20/4 cycle of light.
Wiki answers:
Plants do respire at night. It does not require light to take place. This is a process of releasing energy, kind of the opposite to photosynthesising. Photosynthesis is the preparation of the dinner, respiration is the dining process and the belching and flatulence that follows. When a plant respires, it releases carbon dioxide ( at a lower rate than it takes in ), oxygen, heat, water. It occurs on a cellular level with all living things.
Transpiration, on the other hand is the process by which plants release water through their leaves, stems, flowers and roots. It occurs during the process of photosynthesis and gets a break at nightime as plants need light to photosynthesize.
Chemistry World response to: What do plants do at night?
Plants can adapt their metabolism to make sugars during the hours of darkness.
Two related papers in Science and The Plant Journal by John Innes Centre (JIC) scientists report for the first time the mechanisms inside leaves that are responsible for the conversion of starch into sugars during the night. 'Photosynthesis is well understood, but our discovery is really exciting because it gives us a new insight into how plants control the use of the sugar that they produce,' notes Alison Smith, head of the Metabolic Biology Department at JIC.
The paper published in Science (2004, 303, 87) reports the discovery of a previously unknown maltose transporter (controlled by gene MEX1), in the chloroplast envelope membrane, which allows the chloroplast to export maltose produced by breakdown of starch.
In a related paper, published online in The Plant Journal on 12 January 2004 (DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2003.0212.x), the same researchers report a cytosolic glucosyltransferase (controlled by gene DPE2) the first step on a novel pathway to convert maltose to sucrose.
These discoveries were made using the plant model Arabidopsis, whose genome sequence was published in 2000, illustrating how such sequences are now being used to unravel vital biological processes.
Hamish Kidd
GrowSpecialist
Well-Known Member
Greenjumble, who are you to be accusing anyone of talking nonsense? All you did was went to wkipedia and C/Ped an article. That doesn't make your views any more relevant than anyone else's. That article is about plants in general (not cannabis specifically). Cannabis is different than other plants in many ways. You said that we should seek answers from people who've tested. Most of us HAVE tested... and obviously have had different results. I've tested both WITH a dark period and WITHOUT. My results have shown that plants grow more vigorously and bushier WITHOUT dark. We all have a right to post our views on the subject and NONE of us are talking nonsense. This is a healthy debate and you come in with your rude comments thereby tarnishing the debate. YOU are the only one who's talking nonsense.
greenjumble
Well-Known Member
"Did you look up photosynthisis? If you did you would have read that during the day plants convert sunlight into sugars. During the dark time they use those sugars to grow.
When lights are on 24 hours a day and the plants get no dark time, they end up converting sugars but not being able to actually use them.
Plants need those hours of darkness to grow the way they've evolved to grow for millions of years. People who insist that their plants grow better with no dark period are fighting against nature."
Your saying this isn't relevant based on what you're seeing in your grow room vs. the science he subsequently spoke too and which is pasted so that you can see there are many people out there aware of the research.
Most living things use night for repair and reorganization on a cellular level.
But when you can take measurements of all the microscopic processes occurring and show me the results as too which is a healthier plant we can call all the other scientists and tell them their wrong and your right based on what you saw in your grow room.
What I take issue with is people saying "I see this so this is what is" vs. a calculated study in which people take care in understanding and documenting their understanding of something and discovering some new and important process about the natural world.
Thats the important point and so when you say no to scientific study vs. you grow room I saw nonsense.
When lights are on 24 hours a day and the plants get no dark time, they end up converting sugars but not being able to actually use them.
Plants need those hours of darkness to grow the way they've evolved to grow for millions of years. People who insist that their plants grow better with no dark period are fighting against nature."
Your saying this isn't relevant based on what you're seeing in your grow room vs. the science he subsequently spoke too and which is pasted so that you can see there are many people out there aware of the research.
Most living things use night for repair and reorganization on a cellular level.
But when you can take measurements of all the microscopic processes occurring and show me the results as too which is a healthier plant we can call all the other scientists and tell them their wrong and your right based on what you saw in your grow room.
What I take issue with is people saying "I see this so this is what is" vs. a calculated study in which people take care in understanding and documenting their understanding of something and discovering some new and important process about the natural world.
Thats the important point and so when you say no to scientific study vs. you grow room I saw nonsense.
GrowSpecialist
Well-Known Member
Ok, well rather than going to wikipedia, lets have a look at what some cannabis cultivation pros have to say about this. Here are just a FEW links from an infinite amount of pages on the net that support the 24/0 light regimen. If you don't believe me, simply google "24/0 vs 18/6" and you will see that about 90% of the articles and discussions all believe in the 24/0 light cycle being the better way to go. I think I'll put my trust in people like Ed Rosenthal as opposed to some general botanist."Did you look up photosynthisis? If you did you would have read that during the day plants convert sunlight into sugars. During the dark time they use those sugars to grow.
When lights are on 24 hours a day and the plants get no dark time, they end up converting sugars but not being able to actually use them.
Plants need those hours of darkness to grow the way they've evolved to grow for millions of years. People who insist that their plants grow better with no dark period are fighting against nature."
Your saying this isn't relevant based on what you're seeing in your grow room vs. the science he subsequently spoke too and which is pasted so that you can see there are many people out there aware of the research.
Most living things use night for repair and reorganization on a cellular level.
But when you can take measurements of all the microscopic processes occurring and show me the results as too which is a healthier plant we can call all the other scientists and tell them their wrong and your right based on what you saw in your grow room.
What I take issue with is people saying "I see this so this is what is" vs. a calculated study in which people take care in understanding and documenting their understanding of something and discovering some new and important process about the natural world.
Thats the important point and so when you say no to scientific study vs. you grow room I saw nonsense.
Advanced Marijuana Growing Guide
Light cycle - Cannabis Culture/Ed Rosenthal
Marijuana Lighting Tips by Concept420.com
Cannabis Seeds and Marijuana
Photosynthesis explained 24/7 vs 18/6 - The Garden's Cure
misshestermoffitt
New Member
Just because you got an infraction for acting like a child and talking a lot of shit on a different discussion a couple of weeks ago, is no reason to make statements like this.
Fine run your lights 24 hours a day 7 days a week, keep on telling newbies that this is correct.
Go ahead and call people names for providing scientific facts that present the same evidence.
Go ahead and say that photosynthisis is crap. Do what you will I don't give a shit if your plant produces anything. I was just trying to explain to a new person that they might want to rethink the advice they were getting. I was encouraging research and learning.
Just because you know you never have an intelligent statement to make so you must call people names and rely on personal attacks. I'd much rather believe someone who had scientific evidence that someone who says do this "cause I say it works"
Damn, flouride in the water really does lower peoples IQ's.
Fine run your lights 24 hours a day 7 days a week, keep on telling newbies that this is correct.
Go ahead and call people names for providing scientific facts that present the same evidence.
Go ahead and say that photosynthisis is crap. Do what you will I don't give a shit if your plant produces anything. I was just trying to explain to a new person that they might want to rethink the advice they were getting. I was encouraging research and learning.
Just because you know you never have an intelligent statement to make so you must call people names and rely on personal attacks. I'd much rather believe someone who had scientific evidence that someone who says do this "cause I say it works"
Damn, flouride in the water really does lower peoples IQ's.
