Positivity
Well-Known Member
That's what I thought...you have nothing to show..
See ya later alligator. Gots to go
See ya later alligator. Gots to go
Invasion of Red and Blue LEDs: Humble Beginnings
- Thread starter PetFlora
- Start date
Red1966
Well-Known Member
BML will happily add more red if you like. Same price even. Their SPYDR1000 should be available pretty soon. My only concern with them is the lack of cooling fins on their extrusions.
Greengenes707
Well-Known Member
I'm clearly wasting my time with all this white/red shenanigans...
Greengenes707
Well-Known Member
I have tested a few spectrums. Nasa plant physiologist designed spectrums at that. In addition to the larger yields and growth rates...potency and plant expression are an other benefit of white dominate/based spectrums.
AT120 W3/R2
AT120 R/B
AT120 W3/R2
AT120 R/B
Last edited:
Pass it Around
Well-Known Member
I have plenty to show, however I asked for proof first. You are the one who has to prove, than I can counter your claims.
guod
Well-Known Member
plants are Ninja´s when it comes to light
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Plants acclimate and adapt to sun and shade
Shady habitats can receive less than 20% of the PAR available
in an exposed habitat; deep shade habitats receive less
than 1% of the PAR at the top of the canopy.
Some plants have enough developmental plasticity to respond to a
range of light regimes, growing as sun plants in sunny
areas and as shade plants in shady habitats.
-/ sun and shade also differs in spectrum /-
We call this acclimation, a process whereby the newly produced leaf
has a set of biochemical and morphological characteristics
that are best suited for a particular environment.
In some plant species, individual leaves that develop
under very sunny or very shady environments are often
unable to persist when transferred in the other type of habi-
tat (see Figure 9.5). In this case, the mature leaf will be
abscised and a new leaf develop better suited for the new
environment.
For example, what happens when you take
a plant that has developed indoors and transfer it out-
doors? After some time, if it’s the right type of plant, it
develops a new set of leaves better suited to high sunlight.
However, other species of plants are not able to acclimate
when transferred from sunny to shade environments, but
instead they are adapted to a sunny environment or to a
shade environment.
For example, when plants adapted to
deep shade conditions are transferred into full sunlight, the
leaves experience chronic photoinhibition and leaf bleach-
ing, and they eventually die, as will be discussed later in
this chapter.
Sun and shade leaves have some contrasting biochemi-
cal characteristics:
•
Shade leaves have more total chlorophyll per reaction
center, have a higher ratio of chlorophyll b to chloro-
phyll a, and are usually thinner than sun leaves.
•
Sun leaves have more rubisco and a larger pool of
xanthophyll cycle components than shade leaves (see Chapter 7).
Contrasting anatomic characteristics can also be found in
leaves of the same plant that are exposed to different light
regimes. Figure 9.1 shows some anatomic differences
between a leaf grown in the sun and a leaf grown in the
shade. Sun-grown leaves are thicker and have longer pal-
isade cells than leaves grown in the shade.
Even different parts of a single leaf show adaptations to their light
microenvironment (Terashima 1992).
These morphological and biochemical modifications are
associated with specific functions. Far-red light is absorbed
primarily by PSI, and altering the ratio of PSI to PSII or
changing the light-harvesting antennae associated with the
photosystems makes it possible to maintain a better bal-
ance of energy flow through the two photosystems (Melis
1996).
These adaptations are found in nature; some shade
plants show a 3:1 ratio of photosystem II to photosystem
I reaction centers, compared with the 2:1 ratio found in sun
plants (Anderson 1986).
Other shade plants, rather than altering the ratio of PSI to PSII,
add more antenna chlorophyll to PSII.
These adaptations appear to enhance light
absorption and energy transfer in shady environments,
where far-red light is more abundant.
Sun and shade plants also differ in their dark respiration
rates, and these differences alter the relationship between
respiration and photosynthesis, as we’ll see a little later in
this chapter."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://ehleringer.net/Jim/Publications/352.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" Plants acclimate and adapt to sun and shade
Shady habitats can receive less than 20% of the PAR available
in an exposed habitat; deep shade habitats receive less
than 1% of the PAR at the top of the canopy.
Some plants have enough developmental plasticity to respond to a
range of light regimes, growing as sun plants in sunny
areas and as shade plants in shady habitats.
-/ sun and shade also differs in spectrum /-
We call this acclimation, a process whereby the newly produced leaf
has a set of biochemical and morphological characteristics
that are best suited for a particular environment.
In some plant species, individual leaves that develop
under very sunny or very shady environments are often
unable to persist when transferred in the other type of habi-
tat (see Figure 9.5). In this case, the mature leaf will be
abscised and a new leaf develop better suited for the new
environment.
For example, what happens when you take
a plant that has developed indoors and transfer it out-
doors? After some time, if it’s the right type of plant, it
develops a new set of leaves better suited to high sunlight.
However, other species of plants are not able to acclimate
when transferred from sunny to shade environments, but
instead they are adapted to a sunny environment or to a
shade environment.
For example, when plants adapted to
deep shade conditions are transferred into full sunlight, the
leaves experience chronic photoinhibition and leaf bleach-
ing, and they eventually die, as will be discussed later in
this chapter.
Sun and shade leaves have some contrasting biochemi-
cal characteristics:
•
Shade leaves have more total chlorophyll per reaction
center, have a higher ratio of chlorophyll b to chloro-
phyll a, and are usually thinner than sun leaves.
•
Sun leaves have more rubisco and a larger pool of
xanthophyll cycle components than shade leaves (see Chapter 7).
Contrasting anatomic characteristics can also be found in
leaves of the same plant that are exposed to different light
regimes. Figure 9.1 shows some anatomic differences
between a leaf grown in the sun and a leaf grown in the
shade. Sun-grown leaves are thicker and have longer pal-
isade cells than leaves grown in the shade.
Even different parts of a single leaf show adaptations to their light
microenvironment (Terashima 1992).
These morphological and biochemical modifications are
associated with specific functions. Far-red light is absorbed
primarily by PSI, and altering the ratio of PSI to PSII or
changing the light-harvesting antennae associated with the
photosystems makes it possible to maintain a better bal-
ance of energy flow through the two photosystems (Melis
1996).
These adaptations are found in nature; some shade
plants show a 3:1 ratio of photosystem II to photosystem
I reaction centers, compared with the 2:1 ratio found in sun
plants (Anderson 1986).
Other shade plants, rather than altering the ratio of PSI to PSII,
add more antenna chlorophyll to PSII.
These adaptations appear to enhance light
absorption and energy transfer in shady environments,
where far-red light is more abundant.
Sun and shade plants also differ in their dark respiration
rates, and these differences alter the relationship between
respiration and photosynthesis, as we’ll see a little later in
this chapter."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://ehleringer.net/Jim/Publications/352.pdf
FranJan
Well-Known Member
You'll love this one then
;White LED MMJ growing is to super-soil as multi spectrum mono MMJ growing is to coco growing.
What I mean is, (besides the fact that there is no best and there is plenty of room on board for all styles and makes of LED growing), is that growing MMJ with monos is closer to something like pharmacology than phosphor based whites can be. What's so great about that? Here's a section from this paper,
The effects of light-emitting diode lighting on greenhouse plant growth and quality by Margit Olle and Akvilė Viršilė;
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.ojs.tsv.fi/index.php/AFS/article/download/7897/6303&sa=U&ei=qm_2U__oN8-pyAT4lAI&ved=0CDEQFjAI&usg=AFQjCNFNNoaonCWYYCyc8C5TcVEkWzbNZA
"Far red LED light (700 and 725 nm) was demonstrated to be too far beyond the photosynthetically active region range to support suitable lettuce photosynthesis and growth (Goins et al. 2001). However, when applied in combination with red LEDs (Stutte et al. 2009) or cool white fluorescent light (Li and Kubota 2009) far red LEDs had pronounced effect on lettuce growth characteristics: increased biomass, leaf length but negatively affected chlorophyll, anthocyanin and carotenoids concentration. Lettuce growth promotion under supplemental far red lighting was associated with the increase in leaf area and consequently improved light interception (Kubota et al. 2012)"
Okay, okay it's lettuce but see how increasing FR helps and hinders? That's the important part. Now when you're growing with a "white" LED do you have that kind of control over your FR? To turn it off? Do you have it over your green? No, so you are now at the mercy of the LED make, chance and your own skills. White LED, for the most part, is Blue with Red and Green phosphors. 3 "colors", right? They have big heel sections on the graph and how much is useful to a plant is completely debatable. Now you can make white light the same way with mono LEDs but now you can tweak it to get whatever predominate spectra you want, for whatever time in a plants life. So if it's a seedling give it green and FR, then tweak down the FR and up your blue. Switching to flower? Turn that nasty FR off and that red down for the next week or so. See? Something like that. That's why, to me, now it's more important than ever to explore monos, not have someone like PF try to pull the wool over some peeps eyes, so then he can get some name for himself and sell "whites" for whatever company gives him a panel.
Right now white is king in our world it seems but that damn clock is always ticking and monos are getting better. That paper quotes a source that states red leds will have double the efficiency of HPS by 2020. Remember there's a energy loss in whites from the phoshor conversion. Now if whites can come up with COB technology every so often and with CREE defying some accepted truths white just might always be the defacto king, but for our needs we should not be ignoring monos. Ever.
PetFlora
Well-Known Member
I solved it using a 12" house fan. I put it up on a stand with half aimed at the canopy, the rest cooling the fins on my SPYDR 600
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
While I understand the point you're trying to make with your analogy, I really think you should avoid making comparisons between organics and inert mediums in the LED section.
The LED section is full of organic zealots who are so into their voodoo, they call feeding with synthetics as "poisoning" and our product as "inferior" just because it's not organic. Making an analogy to organic vs hydro is likely to cause a voodoo vs "chemicals" flame war, even if it wasn't the intended purpose of your post.
(long story short, even though it may not be your point, people will read "yep... whites are like super soil.. they kick ass..", not that i have anything against supersoil.)
The LED section is full of organic zealots who are so into their voodoo, they call feeding with synthetics as "poisoning" and our product as "inferior" just because it's not organic. Making an analogy to organic vs hydro is likely to cause a voodoo vs "chemicals" flame war, even if it wasn't the intended purpose of your post.
(long story short, even though it may not be your point, people will read "yep... whites are like super soil.. they kick ass..", not that i have anything against supersoil.)
You'll love this one then
White LED MMJ growing is to super-soil as multi spectrum mono MMJ growing is to coco growing.
What I mean is, (besides the fact that there is no best and there is plenty of room on board for all styles and makes of LED growing), is that growing MMJ with monos is closer to something like pharmacology than phosphor based whites can be. What's so great about that? Here's a section from this paper,
The effects of light-emitting diode lighting on greenhouse plant growth and quality by Margit Olle and Akvilė Viršilė;
https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.ojs.tsv.fi/index.php/AFS/article/download/7897/6303&sa=U&ei=qm_2U__oN8-pyAT4lAI&ved=0CDEQFjAI&usg=AFQjCNFNNoaonCWYYCyc8C5TcVEkWzbNZA
"Far red LED light (700 and 725 nm) was demonstrated to be too far beyond the photosynthetically active region range to support suitable lettuce photosynthesis and growth (Goins et al. 2001). However, when applied in combination with red LEDs (Stutte et al. 2009) or cool white fluorescent light (Li and Kubota 2009) far red LEDs had pronounced effect on lettuce growth characteristics: increased biomass, leaf length but negatively affected chlorophyll, anthocyanin and carotenoids concentration. Lettuce growth promotion under supplemental far red lighting was associated with the increase in leaf area and consequently improved light interception (Kubota et al. 2012)"
Okay, okay it's lettuce but see how increasing FR helps and hinders? That's the important part. Now when you're growing with a "white" LED do you have that kind of control over your FR? To turn it off? Do you have it over your green? No, so you are now at the mercy of the LED make, chance and your own skills. White LED, for the most part, is Blue with Red and Green phosphors. 3 "colors", right? They have big heel sections on the graph and how much is useful to a plant is completely debatable. Now you can make white light the same way with mono LEDs but now you can tweak it to get whatever predominate spectra you want, for whatever time in a plants life. So if it's a seedling give it green and FR, then tweak down the FR and up your blue. Switching to flower? Turn that nasty FR off and that red down for the next week or so. See? Something like that. That's why, to me, now it's more important than ever to explore monos, not have someone like PF try to pull the wool over some peeps eyes, so then he can get some name for himself and sell "whites" for whatever company gives him a panel.
Right now white is king in our world it seems but that damn clock is always ticking and monos are getting better. That paper quotes a source that states red leds will have double the efficiency of HPS by 2020. Remember there's a energy loss in whites from the phoshor conversion. Now if whites can come up with COB technology every so often and with CREE defying some accepted truths white just might always be the defacto king, but for our needs we should not be ignoring monos. Ever.
Last edited:
FranJan
Well-Known Member
^^^Thanks for the warning but I'm immune to my analogies getting ripped to shreds around here. Being told to suck a dick in 3.2.....
And exactly CH, whites, (or the right ones), kick ass. Especially in the hands of someone like GG707 and a few others. It's what works till the next thing that makes us all go OMG. I guess what I really just should of said is; "IMHO don't put all your eggs in one basket at this stage of the game." Would of saved a lot of typing. DOH.
Here you really want me to piss them organics boys off? "I think Medi-One is the best organics I can buy!" LOL I'm doomed.
Hey you can't have bread without a little yeast.
And exactly CH, whites, (or the right ones), kick ass. Especially in the hands of someone like GG707 and a few others. It's what works till the next thing that makes us all go OMG. I guess what I really just should of said is; "IMHO don't put all your eggs in one basket at this stage of the game." Would of saved a lot of typing. DOH
.Here you really want me to piss them organics boys off? "I think Medi-One is the best organics I can buy!" LOL I'm doomed.
Hey you can't have bread without a little yeast.
jimmer6577
Well-Known Member
FOR THE WIN!
I read this whole thread and he is the only one that showed proof that I believe. If your lights are better, show me YOUR buds, you grew with said lights. I can find information disputing or proving just about anything I want to if I look, due to a lot of bullshit facts on the internet. I'm pretty interested in possibly switching to LED's but reading the forums for any advice is like watching a soft porn on T.V., a lot of talk and pretend action but doesn't show the goods. I can read graphs, but I don't think my plants have learned to read graphs yet, so they might not believe it either. Point is, pictures speak louder and stronger than any words or graphs that are just copied.
Swiller
Well-Known Member
Light is food. Photosynthesis, plants produce their own food, the rest of us are parasitical. We must learn wisdom and show respect.
For theory, I would go as far as to say that different plants, animals, and especially HUMANS, all use and convert the various energy wavelengths of the sun differently. We tend to make things easy and simple to understand, nature is much more queer than you can imagine.
The last I checked, the suns energy wavelengths can cause genetic changes (evolution). Does UV not affect DNA?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Direct_DNA_damage.png
For theory, I would go as far as to say that different plants, animals, and especially HUMANS, all use and convert the various energy wavelengths of the sun differently. We tend to make things easy and simple to understand, nature is much more queer than you can imagine.
The last I checked, the suns energy wavelengths can cause genetic changes (evolution). Does UV not affect DNA?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Direct_DNA_damage.png
Last edited:
jimmer6577
Well-Known Member
I run 1000 and 600 hps in flower, but I run a perpetual grow so my pics aren't impressive in a group shot because of different stages. Here is a bud shot of what I'm harvesting today.Well c'mon then Jimm. Put up or.... Nah I'm fucking with you. And there's very few people, if any, in the LED world running what GG's got going. Ain't no comp when GG707 whips those big things out and all the girls, (and pretenders
I'm seriously interested in LED's for solar reasons to recover cost on clear sunny days.
stardustsailor
Well-Known Member
Guod,(and Pet along ) , now I'm going to 'spank ' you !
Plants do not feed from anything ...
They produce their food ...
Ya know that ...
As you know that actually the 'energy' from light particles aka E/M waves aka photons aka quanta aka vibrating fields
(phewww! ) is actually transformed (stored ) into chemical energy(carbonhydrates -glucose), which is used to fuel further the protein & enzyme biosynthesis pathways ,etc ..
Or if to be 'polymerized' into carbohydrate chains (lignin,cellulose ,etc ) and used as 'construction' materials ...
Plants absorb CO2 and assimilate water and several minerals ,in order to turn E/M energy into chemical one and also
'mass' (matter ....
Guod posted a very interesting pdf about adaptability ...
(the spectrum you posted Guod ,is really the most minimal but efficient spectrum for certain cases ..
Like bed or floor -grown green leafy vegetables like lettuce or spinach or even some fruits like strawberries .
If used always as a standalone light source and not as supplemental to sunlight ...
Great spectrum for space applications ..
But I'm having serious doubts ,
if that spectrum can actually deliver cannabis plant(s) to their full genetic potential ,
regarding certain characteristics ,
other than photosynthesis alone .
Like taste,aroma ,potency ,cannabinoid variability & occurance ,etc ...
For sure it's capable of very efficient (electrical energy wise ) plant growing ,using leds ...
Greatest proof ever ,is the Han's panels ,which utilises a similar (enough ) spectrum ...
FranJan underlined the importance of monos .
White light- out of leds available on market ,is for human use and not for plant growth ...
(Except the few dedicated - and proprietary - ones from Illumitex,Valoya ,etc ...)
White leds is the ..'easy' way ,of doing the job ...
Not the most efficient ..
Not the most 'growth and/or characteristic attribute 'enhancing ...
Not the best ...
It's easy (now with COBS / arrays got even easier ) ...
And it works by itself ....
Do not expect any magical white leds from here and on ...
Their spectrum per CCT and CRI ,is by now pretty much 'standardised ' ...
Simply they will get more efficient and more powerful ...
Monos ,from now on (along with some 'core white' ) will be making the difference in so many aspects ...
FranJan gave a good example with lettuce ..
Do not forget ..
Cannabis is a wild weed ..Or at least used to be ...
("originates from" ,should I say ? I do not know that good english ...And I can't spell shit,anyway ..)
It produces resin and terpenes (at least that is our main interest..) ....
It adapts RAPIDLY to almost any enviromental change (light,water availability ,temperature,humidity,atm.pressure,etc )..
It 'alters' totally in any tested aspect, within just few generations ....
If you need 'more output' from your plant(s),
you got to provide 'more input'.
Energy -wise ....
Regarding Quantity {power} , Quality {spectral distribution }& Duration of energy {light } given ...
Leds are the future in artificial environment horticulture ....
Equally ,all different 'led freak schools' and led types ..
Power of Unity .
Cheers .
Last edited:
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
SUCK A DICK!!! lol.
jk jk
jk jk
^^^Thanks for the warning but I'm immune to my analogies getting ripped to shreds around here. Being told to suck a dick in 3.2.....
And exactly CH, whites, (or the right ones), kick ass. Especially in the hands of someone like GG707 and a few others. It's what works till the next thing that makes us all go OMG. I guess what I really just should of said is; "IMHO don't put all your eggs in one basket at this stage of the game." Would of saved a lot of typing. DOH
Here you really want me to piss them organics boys off? "I think Medi-One is the best organics I can buy!" LOL I'm doomed.
Hey you can't have bread without a little yeast.