Latest UVA vs UVB cannabinoid test results

Artmann11

Artmann11

Active Member
Prawn Connery said:
I use coco coir, so it's as easy as growing in soil (I would actually say easier) but (almost) as fast as other hydroponic systems. I'm not sure I would go full organic in an aeroponic system, as misters can be easily blocked by organic matter, but you could certainly use organic nuttients in DWC and recirculating systems that don't use sensitive misters.
Click to expand...
I use Jack's now but also use micos and beneficial bacteria. I also added fulvic acid this reservoir change.
 
Artmann11

Artmann11

Active Member
Prawn Connery said:
And that's why I think it is the height of arrogance to believe that science is always best. Like sunlight, science is dynamic - what we know now will change in the future as our understanding of the world around us improves. I'm not saying we should give up on science, but I am saying that science needs to respect the ultimate arbiter of innovation – Mother Nature.
Click to expand...
I grow NASA style in hydroton and love the results. I think science can vastly improve on nature. Inside growing shows that.
The thought of mixing guano, worm castings or any other feces or compost based nutrients or using them in my house gives me the creeps. Outside? Maybe.

I want to know what's going into my buds. As far as mother nature? There's room for that style of growing if it rings your bell. There is also room for my style. I don't even want coco coir. I recycle my rocks. It's what I like to do.

I would love to compare results.
 
F

f.r

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
I would agree. And genetic manipulation (mutation) happens all the time in nature. Although it is tested over much longer periods than centuries. You could argue that GM is just speeding up nature. You could also argue that we have ignored a lot of what nature has been teaching us while we have forged ahead thinking we know better. Land clearing and chemical fertilisers have certainly increase food production. But how sustainable has it been? We have huge issues now with soil erosion and salinity in Australia.

We have lost vast swathes of arable land by clearing it and pouring salts on it for over 100 years. And what have we learnt? That we can keep doing what we're doing because we'll "science" our way out of it.

How's that been going for the environment?
Click to expand...
Yeh, as mentioned in this thread population pressures is a big issue, now I don't agree with roundup ready crops. But large portion of Australian soils in the middle are remnants of an Ancient inland ocean and are very salty naturally and un farmable. Imagine if work could be done on crops to allow them to be grown, organically or otherways on incredibally pooor naturally salty soils, i remember from my uni days that I think it was chinese researchers working on at the time tomatoes to be grown on essentially beach front soil.. I just don't think the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater personally.

I don't disagree that pouring large amounts of chemicals onto the soils and spraying large amounts of pesticides without any concern for the environment is a bad thing. If i'm not mistaken it's more so the over use of these chemicals that have lead to the issues we face, and the blayze nature we had in the past taken to these powerful chemicals. There should be an even larger shift to closed loop hydroponic greenhouse production. Reality is that is the most sustainable form unless you are growing the produce in your backyard or local community with locally sourced organic amendments, and not enough people do that or can't.
 
Meanmonsoon

Meanmonsoon

Active Member
Prawn Connery said:
Those products are already out there. But why not just put everytoing on one channel with one driver and save on the expense and complexity (more things to go wrong)?

A la High Lights :bigjoint:
Click to expand...
I have 4 channels of strips to try replicate GLA spectrum in a low-ceiling cab and man I wish you guys had the strips at the time… would have saved me a lot of time and money. I just want to dim the lights without tuning ratios for once! finding out the drivers I had won’t dim the minis low enough for veg and now I have to spend more money to have full control so I can dim either of the 2 panels independently for when im growing too close to a panel. Its also sending me down the arduino pwm rabbit hole and I dont have a desire or mental capacity for that.
The far red buddies are so powerful from 20 days of flower I put them over my plants with uva aswell and the plants finished to within about 20cm or less of the far red buddies and had a 60 day clone take about 50 days with little to no yield loss but my 68 day clone is busy stretching to stack in that stage and lost about 1/3 yield 2 weeks earlier and the resin was extreme for that clone. Thank you both for the light recipe and look foward to the strips and anything else in the works.
 
hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
I have a couple of Budget LED lights from Elevated Lighting with that UV chip and her Transitions glasses went dark right now under them. Just a note.
All of the white and white+ spectrums are quite similar and so far different and better than any HID.
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
ANC said:
I agree on UV, but I prefer it on a separate channel/board or as a discrete bulb... you get some nice 3W ones.
Click to expand...
What about Far Red?

Do you agree that different wavelenghts are responsible for different photomorphogenic responses in plants? And if you do, how does that not affect photosynthetic yield? All "white light" is not the same – as you know – so are you suggesting we treat it the same when it comes to growing plants?

I'm not saying typical CRI80 3000K samsung diodes (or whatever) can't grow decent plants, but I have certainly noticed lots of differences growing under different types of light. Have you not noticed the same?
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
hillbill said:
I have a couple of Budget LED lights from Elevated Lighting with that UV chip and her Transitions glasses went dark right now under them. Just a note.
All of the white and white+ spectrums are quite similar and so far different and better than any HID.
Click to expand...
They are when just about all horticultural lighting manufacturers copy each other. I mean, there is a reason for it: the most efficient way to make a "full spectrum" (bullshit) grow light is to combine a bunch of CRI80 5000K (with or without 3000K) 3030 diodes with some under-driven 660nm 3535s, but that doesn't necessrily mean it is the best light to grow under – only the most efficienint in terms of umol/j.

Such light formulas – effic ient as they are – do not guarantee the greatest yields or best quality product.
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
f.r said:
Yeh, as mentioned in this thread population pressures is a big issue, now I don't agree with roundup ready crops. But large portion of Australian soils in the middle are remnants of an Ancient inland ocean and are very salty naturally and un farmable. Imagine if work could be done on crops to allow them to be grown, organically or otherways on incredibally pooor naturally salty soils, i remember from my uni days that I think it was chinese researchers working on at the time tomatoes to be grown on essentially beach front soil.. I just don't think the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater personally.

I don't disagree that pouring large amounts of chemicals onto the soils and spraying large amounts of pesticides without any concern for the environment is a bad thing. If i'm not mistaken it's more so the over use of these chemicals that have lead to the issues we face, and the blayze nature we had in the past taken to these powerful chemicals. There should be an even larger shift to closed loop hydroponic greenhouse production. Reality is that is the most sustainable form unless you are growing the produce in your backyard or local community with locally sourced organic amendments, and not enough people do that or can't.
Click to expand...
I've often wondered, if you cut a canal into Australia's former inland sea to make it a large, perpetual salt-water lake again, would this change the climate to provide more rain (through evaporation) to drier parts of the country? Could we farm fish in the lake?

I guess the counter-argument to your tomato study is there are already edible crops that can be grown in salty conditions, so why not just switch to those? The humble coconut (for example) is one of the most useful plants on earth.

Look at all these edible plants that grow on the beach: https://tuckerbush.com.au/dont-forage-native-sea-vegetables-grow-instead/

Sure, you can GM tomatoes to grow in salty conditions, but what advantage would there be over other edibles?

Forgetting about plants for a moment, my point can clearly be seen if we were to apply it to eating meat in this country. We have already bred beef to be more drought tolerant but if we all ate kangaroo meat instead, not only would it be much better for the environment, but much more healthy for ourselves. Kangaroo is lean and full of protein. It uses a fraction of the amount of water and fodder used to produce the same amount of beef. It is also a native animal adapted to the environment that does not upset the natural balance of things. You can make leather out of kangaroo, too.

Or what about camel meat? Tastes the same as beef (I've eaten my fair share!) and also uses less water. They are a destructibe, invasive species but there are literally millions of them in the Australian outback. But people turn their noses up at things like camel and kangaroo because culturally, we are not used to eating them.

So instead of GMing crops that have no traditional place in their landscapes, why not start eating natives that have already adapted to their environments over millions of years?

This is what I mean about Nature already having answers to man-made problems.
 
Prawn Connery

Prawn Connery

Well-Known Member
Artmann11 said:
I grow NASA style in hydroton and love the results. I think science can vastly improve on nature. Inside growing shows that.
The thought of mixing guano, worm castings or any other feces or compost based nutrients or using them in my house gives me the creeps. Outside? Maybe.

I want to know what's going into my buds. As far as mother nature? There's room for that style of growing if it rings your bell. There is also room for my style. I don't even want coco coir. I recycle my rocks. It's what I like to do.

I would love to compare results.
Click to expand...
For the most part (GM aside), science doesn't really "improve on" nature, it merely exploits it. The potential was always there, but by controlling conditions – as you can do indoors – you can exploit a plant's natural potential by giving it optimal light or nutrient and/or removing diseases and pests. That's all you're doing.

I will add that not everything organic is smelly. Compost isn't smelly. Potash isn't smelly.

Recycling media is fine, but cleaning hydroton or rocks after every grow is not my idea of fun! :bigjoint:
 
F

f.r

Well-Known Member
Prawn Connery said:
I've often wondered, if you cut a canal into Australia's former inland sea to make it a large, perpetual salt-water lake again, would this change the climate to provide more rain (through evaporation) to drier parts of the country? Could we farm fish in the lake?

I guess the counter-argument to your tomato study is there are already edible crops that can be grown in salty conditions, so why not just switch to those? The humble coconut (for example) is one of the most useful plants on earth.

Look at all these edible plants that grow on the beach: https://tuckerbush.com.au/dont-forage-native-sea-vegetables-grow-instead/

Sure, you can GM tomatoes to grow in salty conditions, but what advantage would there be over other edibles?

Forgetting about plants for a moment, my point can clearly be seen if we were to apply it to eating meat in this country. We have already bred beef to be more drought tolerant but if we all ate kangaroo meat instead, not only would it be much better for the environment, but much more healthy for ourselves. Kangaroo is lean and full of protein. It uses a fraction of the amount of water and fodder used to produce the same amount of beef. It is also a native animal adapted to the environment that does not upset the natural balance of things. You can make leather out of kangaroo, too.

Or what about camel meat? Tastes the same as beef (I've eaten my fair share!) and also uses less water. They are a destructibe, invasive species but there are literally millions of them in the Australian outback. But people turn their noses up at things like camel and kangaroo because culturally, we are not used to eating them.

So instead of GMing crops that have no traditional place in their landscapes, why not start eating natives that have already adapted to their environments over millions of years?

This is what I mean about Nature already having answers to man-made problems.
Click to expand...
As just a short answer, something I can't say is 100% certain but bringing it back to population density it might come down to nutrient density of food being able to grown on these soils.

I don't disagree with your points, following natures lead is integral. But I think concessions need to be made about the fact that at no point in the earth's history there has been this many humans on it.

I agree with you about meat as well, insects great source of protein as well.
 
C

calyxico

Active Member
Is there a reason you chose not to run the UV light away/or shielded from the control sample? From the pictures posted, both samples received ultraviolet radiation. In the future, maybe a piece of cardboard between the two so that both samples are not receiving UV.
 
C

calyxico

Active Member
MidnightSun72 said:
We need a multi channel UVA/Violet, 660nm And FR strips that we can add to any white light build.
Click to expand...
There are multi-channel cob's that can do that. The issue is that each channel requires a separate driver. But if those drivers have individual dimming, you would have crazy control. There is actually one on Ebay now.
www.ebay.com

80W Grow Light, 4 Channel COB chip for Horticulture, Aluminum Substrate | eBay

Drivers with PWM dimming, combined with an Arduino work well with this chip.
www.ebay.com
Also Crescience ( a German company) does peice-meal strips that can run from one controller. They use LM301H's for the broad spec, and red, far red, blue, and UV can come on smaller supplemental boards.
 
MidnightSun72

MidnightSun72

Well-Known Member
calyxico said:
There are multi-channel cob's that can do that. The issue is that each channel requires a separate driver. But if those drivers have individual dimming, you would have crazy control. There is actually one on Ebay now.
www.ebay.com

80W Grow Light, 4 Channel COB chip for Horticulture, Aluminum Substrate | eBay

Drivers with PWM dimming, combined with an Arduino work well with this chip.
www.ebay.com
Also Crescience ( a German company) does peice-meal strips that can run from one controller. They use LM301H's for the broad spec, and red, far red, blue, and UV can come on smaller supplemental boards.
Click to expand...
Interesting chips on that cob but a strip style is more what I am looking for in terms of spread.
Ya I've checked out the cre science site. Very nice looking strips.

pretty tempted to get some cutter strips since they use legit diodes.
 
C

calyxico

Active Member
Thanks! There is another scientific review that shows some similar results. It was done by the University of Guelph in Canada and seemed to indicate that additional Uv light actually decreased the levels of several terpenes. But it also suggested that adding more light altogether seemed to do that, but had a direct increase in flower mass in exchange. I apologize if this has already been mentioned. I found this thread 2 days ago, and haven't read all of the entries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top