Please can I get good advice

whitebb2727 said:

Its basic botany dude. Leaves make fruit. If any light hits the soil it is wasted. Leaves don't block light.

If I am wrong show me where you have done side by side with identical clones and the ones with removed leaves did better. Show me a pic of a plant you removed leaves from and lets see how it did.

Maybe one from under your bed.

Seems you like to put together a little project and then arguing with the guys been doing it for a while.

I do know you have a lot to say, lets see some pics to back it up.

Click to expand...

Feel free to look at my last run in my thread. I had three fem auto beans same strain didn't do anything to one and defoliated and topped the other two, the two that were defoliated and topped grew taller and yielded more.

I will go on a limb here for my next statement but it is my belief. I think these MJ plants can "learn". And of course like anything else I believe it's strain dependent how well some react vs others. One thing I have learned is there are no blanket statements that are valid when discussing growing these plants. For example, how can I grow the same strain in no till adding only water vs hydroponics where the plant has to learn to eat what I give it vs taking what it wants from the soil. This is "learned" from seedling. It is of my opinion that defoliation goes down the same route. And I have proven the benefits of it on autos which people say you should ":never" train to begin with. Everything has it's benefits, but there's also a line of overkill. It's a balance of learned behaviors and what the plant wants to be happy once it goes down a certain path of life.

I will not argue that defoliation at the wrong times can do more harm than good, but to write it off as having no value is just ignoring facts.

Just my $0.02

Surprised with the rock stars that have posted here already that none have mentioned Leaf Tipping " taking less than 50% of leaf mass". It's what I've done for years in scrog. And I believe it works.
Yeah, ideally you don't want to cut anything but in scrog I feel it's necessary especially on a single plant 6' by 2.5' screen. Just my faded 2 pennies here

luv2grow said:

Surprised with the rock stars that have posted here already that none have mentioned Leaf Tipping " taking less than 50% of leaf mass". It's what I've done for years in scrog. And I believe it works.
Yeah, ideally you don't want to cut anything but in scrog I feel it's necessary especially on a single plant 6' by 2.5' screen. Just my faded 2 pennies here

Click to expand...

I typically only do this when cloning, i dont have any links handly, but its supposed to greatly reduce transpired water as the plant protects itself. Im not sure what happens next tho, especially in a flowering plant. Clones always do fine though.


Can you share then anicdotal info youve gathered? Any info you can share about this is likely going to be a lot of help to some noobies looking to take the whole leaf off.

Kronickeeper said:

Leaves do block light. have you never seen the bud sites at the bottom who are shriveled, light green and pale looking because they aren't getting any light? Remove a leaf or two that's blocking the light and expose it to air and light and watch how it turns around.

Click to expand...

Wrong. That means you are growing your plants too big for your light.

Come on. Whip it out. Lets see pics of a plant where you removed leaves.

It would be better to just cut those lower limbs of or harvest in stages and leave the bottoms at the end.

Evil-Mobo said:

Feel free to look at my last run in my thread. I had three fem auto beans same strain didn't do anything to one and defoliated and topped the other two, the two that were defoliated and topped grew taller and yielded more.

I will go on a limb here for my next statement but it is my belief. I think these MJ plants can "learn". And of course like anything else I believe it's strain dependent how well some react vs others. One thing I have learned is there are no blanket statements that are valid when discussing growing these plants. For example, how can I grow the same strain in no till adding only water vs hydroponics where the plant has to learn to eat what I give it vs taking what it wants from the soil. This is "learned" from seedling. It is of my opinion that defoliation goes down the same route. And I have proven the benefits of it on autos which people say you should ":never" train to begin with. Everything has it's benefits, but there's also a line of overkill. It's a balance of learned behaviors and what the plant wants to be happy once it goes down a certain path of life.

I will not argue that defoliation at the wrong times can do more harm than good, but to write it off as having no value is just ignoring facts.

Just my $0.02

Click to expand...

I said identical clones. Dude come one. We both know that autos vary wildly. I'm not disputing topping autos. Some take to it really well.

Evil-Mobo said:

Feel free to look at my last run in my thread. I had three fem auto beans same strain didn't do anything to one and defoliated and topped the other two, the two that were defoliated and topped grew taller and yielded more.

I will go on a limb here for my next statement but it is my belief. I think these MJ plants can "learn". And of course like anything else I believe it's strain dependent how well some react vs others. One thing I have learned is there are no blanket statements that are valid when discussing growing these plants. For example, how can I grow the same strain in no till adding only water vs hydroponics where the plant has to learn to eat what I give it vs taking what it wants from the soil. This is "learned" from seedling. It is of my opinion that defoliation goes down the same route. And I have proven the benefits of it on autos which people say you should ":never" train to begin with. Everything has it's benefits, but there's also a line of overkill. It's a balance of learned behaviors and what the plant wants to be happy once it goes down a certain path of life.

I will not argue that defoliation at the wrong times can do more harm than good, but to write it off as having no value is just ignoring facts.

Just my $0.02

Click to expand...

a topped plant should yield more. one that is defoliated takes time to recover from the stress.

A leaf is a sink or a source, if it isn't making food, it stores it for when it needs it.


http://www.dummies.com/education/science/biology/how-plants-send-sugars-from-sources-to-sinks/

Sugar sinks that store carbohydrates can become sugar sources for plants when the plants need sugar. Starch, a complex carbohydrate, is insoluble in water, so it acts as a carbohydrate storage molecule. Whenever a plant needs sugar, like at night or in the winter when photosynthesis doesn’t occur as well, the plant can break down its starches into simple sugars, which allows a tissue that would normally be a sugar sink to become a sugar source.

The success people who defoliate are reporting could be the result of fixing a poor air circulation condition.

growingforfun said:

I typically only do this when cloning, i dont have any links handly, but its supposed to greatly reduce transpired water as the plant protects itself. Im not sure what happens next tho, especially in a flowering plant. Clones always do fine though.


Can you share then anicdotal info youve gathered? Any info you can share about this is likely going to be a lot of help to some noobies looking to take the whole leaf off.

Click to expand...

Treat it pretty damn close to cloning. Just take off as much as you need but no more than 50% of that leaf's mass. Over 50% mass left remains a beneficial leaf to the plant. There has been a lot of studies for years in horticulture that have tested this theory with different genius's. If I get some time this afternoon, I'll go search out the sources and send ya what I find.
With all that said, It's always the best practice to leave it alone if it's ideal.

Now these guys defoliating is a different deal entirely. It's a stress based form of training in short. They are over stressing a flowering plant which enables a survival instinct or overload of hormones to push as hard as possible to keep their genes in the race of life. It's a interesting approach since most have been taught through the years that anything stress based is bad. All plants respond differently under different environmental conditions. So honestly I've been enjoying reading and watching some people do it. If no one pushes the boundaries. Then we are stagnate. I've never done it myself...

Sorry for the rambling on your thread OP

whitebb2727 said:

I said identical clones. Dude come one. We both know that autos vary wildly. I'm not disputing topping autos. Some take to it really well.

Click to expand...

Autos vary wildly? Lol. The Mephisto strains I have grown have been my most stable genetics to date of anything I have grown from seed.............

Evil-Mobo said:

Autos vary wildly? Lol. The Mephisto strains I have grown have been my most stable genetics to date of anything I have grown from seed.............

Click to expand...

I think this is a telling statement. If you cant see the reason to compare clone to clone, then you shouldnt be a part of this discussion.

First, we arnt even talking about autos.... second its important to compare known variables to know if its the genetics of the plant, or whatever your doing that have the impact. Seeds very too wildly to give any kind of indication on a sample size of 3. Thats a joke to real growers and a pretty laughable one. Do a sample size of 5 one each side of clones, or a sample size of 10 on each side for seeds and you MAY get a better indication of whats really going on.

So many little things make a huge differance in yield your likely overlooking.

growingforfun said:

I think this is a telling statement. If you cant see the reason to compare clone to clone, then you shouldnt be a part of this discussion.

First, we arnt even talking about autos.... second its important to compare known variables to know if its the genetics of the plant, or whatever your doing that have the impact. Seeds very too wildly to give any kind of indication on a sample size of 3. Thats a joke to real growers and a pretty laughable one. Do a sample size of 5 one each side of clones, or a sample size of 10 on each side for seeds and you MAY get a better indication of whats really going on.

So many little things make a huge differance in yield your likely overlooking.

Click to expand...

Yes sir!

And even at the rate of 10 clones per experiment it would really take at least 25 times re done with data collected and reviewed before any real scientific test has been done.

growingforfun said:

I think this is a telling statement. If you cant see the reason to compare clone to clone, then you shouldnt be a part of this discussion.

First, we arnt even talking about autos.... second its important to compare known variables to know if its the genetics of the plant, or whatever your doing that have the impact. Seeds very too wildly to give any kind of indication on a sample size of 3. Thats a joke to real growers and a pretty laughable one. Do a sample size of 5 one each side of clones, or a sample size of 10 on each side for seeds and you MAY get a better indication of whats really going on.

So many little things make a huge differance in yield your likely overlooking.

Click to expand...

Not missing the point of clones but since my opinion is not wanted I will gladly withdraw. No need on my end to put up with such rudeness lol.

Me and my "fake" growing will go about our business

Evil-Mobo said:

Not missing the point of clones but since my opinion is not wanted I will gladly withdraw. No need on my end to put up with such rudeness lol.

Me and my "fake" growing will go about our business

Click to expand...

Hey brother. I only agree that you can't even really test results with one or two side by sides and not really with seed plants.

Not that you shouldn't be part of the discussion. I missed that he wrote that. It was rude! Of course you should be part of the discussion.

A small smaple of seeds shouldnt be submited as evidence. Thats all i ment by it. I could pop 3 seeds of anything but it would he impossible to draw any conclusions from it, no matter what factor i was trying to test.

If i offended anyone by that... well... i guess thats fair... but thats my opinion i guess so whatever.

Evil-Mobo said:

Autos vary wildly? Lol. The Mephisto strains I have grown have been my most stable genetics to date of anything I have grown from seed.............

Click to expand...

I agree but don't forget Ive been growing them also. Take the Heisenberg. There are a few phenos. Some small some big. For you to say that topping and removing leaves made them bigger is anecdotal evidence. Its not any kind of proof.

Sorry but the only way to say yes it works is to use identical clones. Several sets from different plants.

I don't doubt a bit that topping autos gave more yield. Hondagrower was doing that a while back before anyone else.

Basic botany say otherwise for removing leaves. Uncle ben did a test on it. He removed whole limbs to let lower buds get light. It didn't help. Popcorn is popcorn.

I can think of very few reasons to remove leaves.

Evil-Mobo said:

Not missing the point of clones but since my opinion is not wanted I will gladly withdraw. No need on my end to put up with such rudeness lol.

Me and my "fake" growing will go about our business

Click to expand...

No reason to leave the discussion.

Its just, as said, that seeds are not a good comparison. Phenotype, watering or a screw up on a plant. Plant location. A lot of variables to just say removing leaves made the plants bigger or yield more.









Its like if I shave my pubes off my pecker looks bigger. Its still the same size.




There is just so much bs on cannabis forums its crazy. I always tell new growers they are better off learning from basic horticulture books or sites. Not so say that there are not some tricks of the trade that will be different for cannabis. Not many though. Basic botany is the way to go.


Its like I said farmers are not out cutting leaves off. Someone said it wasn't practical to do so. They do it with tobacco. I remove suckers from my corn plants. That's a little different from removing leaves. Just saying if it improves yields, farmers would find a way to do it.

Personally I would remove the lanky branches with larf and leave the big limbs and leaves alone.

whitebb2727 said:

. For you to say that topping and removing leaves made them bigger is anecdotal evidence. Its not any kind of proof.

Click to expand...

Didnt you make the first claim in the thread to not touch the leaves and after others offered differing viewpoints you decided to call them out? Shouldnt the burden of proof be on you?

But more importantly, is his anecdotal evidence really of no use? I mean are you going to claim that his plants did worse because he defoliated? If so do you have any ideas on how much it may affect yields? And evidence floating around the interwebs?

Not to mention "defoliation" is about as broad of a term as you can find in growing... Can encompass removing a couple leaves here and there, to removing all fan leaves. Maybe we should be more specific before we assume shit...

Shugglet said:

Didnt you make the first claim in the thread to not touch the leaves and after others offered differing viewpoints you decided to call them out? Shouldnt the burden of proof be on you?

But more importantly, is his anecdotal evidence really of no use? I mean are you going to claim that his plants did worse because he defoliated? If so do you have any ideas on how much it may affect yields? And evidence floating around the interwebs?

Not to mention "defoliation" is about as broad of a term as you can find in growing... Can encompass removing a couple leaves here and there, to removing all fan leaves. Maybe we should be more specific before we assume shit...

Click to expand...

Nope. I was down the list a bit about not taking the leaves.

You guys are claiming increases with it. That's your claim. So explain it and show some pics comparing the different techniques.

No reason to remove leaves. That's what drives a plant. Why remove it?

Maybe remove the lowers that don't amount to anything.

It is common to do different types of pruning on different types of crops and fruit trees. That said, the ones that get pruned there are set steps and guidelines for doing it.

All we got here is anecdotal evidence and a pissing match.

I'm waiting for the ones that made the claim to back it up and provide the info on how to select what to be removed.

whitebb2727 said:

Wrong. That means you are growing your plants too big for your light.

Come on. Whip it out. Lets see pics of a plant where you removed leaves.

It would be better to just cut those lower limbs of or harvest in stages and leave the bottoms at the end.

Click to expand...

No it doesn't mean the plants are grown to big for the light. I think your problem is when you think of defoliation you think of extreme defoliation which I don't do or reccomed personally. you probably wouldn't be able to tell it was defoliated if I posted a picture because it's not extreme defoliation.

Kronickeeper said:

No it doesn't mean the plants are grown to big for the light. I think your problem is when you think of defoliation you think of extreme defoliation which I don't do or reccomed personally. you probably wouldn't be able to tell it was defoliated if I posted a picture because it's not extreme defoliation.

Click to expand...

Then show a pic and enlighten me.

Fyi, I also prune and clean various plants up for various reason. With the right light and setup with proper training there is no need to remove much.

Lets see it then. A pic and show what parts you removed and why.

Its one thing to claim to do it. Its another to show it and explain why.

I'm not against various pruning's for various reason. I've learn when and why and how to do it. One being to prevent pm or mold. There are a couple other reasons to do it.

If a plant doesn't need it, it will shed it.

What I have a problem with is people telling new growers to hack on their plants with no rhyme or reason. No guidance. Cutting the wrong parts can cause more harm than good.

So the ones that say yea take the op's pic and circle what you would remove and why.


@Kronickeeper

Yes a plant can be grown too big for the light. If you don't out grow the penetration ability of your light then you don't get a lot of shitty buds. Light actually passes through leaves.

You can figure the penetration on any light. Don't out grow it.