Preflower Q

stoner1984

stoner1984

Active Member
Redeflect said:
The flaw in that logic stoner 1984 is that after "puberty" the plant doesn't go into pre-puberty after being re-vegetated. It can always be forced to flower. It isn't the change of hormones that makes preflowers, it's the change to hormones that promote the growth of flowers. Preflowers start to form again but the flowering hormones were always there... which leads to the conclusion that there would be other sorts of hormones/regulators that determine when the plant SHOULD flower aside from the basic ones which make the plant capable of flowering. After the initial seedling stage, the plant is always capable of flowering, but doesn't always contain the hormones in significant amounts that make it try to.
Click to expand...
Kinda what i was saying, i havnt experianced this myself, i'm a total noob to growing. i was thining that a pre flower is caused by a hormonal change that only occurs once in infancy of the plant but i'm not saying it the same hormone that causes the full flower.
 
seasmoke

seasmoke

Active Member
Thanks Redeflect, that was a great answer/theory. It makes perfect sense, a hormone that gets used up at the point of maturity.

Really dont get the point of this question/thread
Click to expand...
Well no point really, it's just that my friend calls preflowering "bullshit", and points to the fact that they don't preflower after budding as proof. I know better. There is something to it, and like Redeflect said, it could be due to a hormone.(not to mention my friend is a know it all, and I want to prove him wrong)And I'm curious, I don't have a lab, but it would be cool to know what hormone it is,....it may have benefits...
 
R

Redeflect

Well-Known Member
He's definitely wrong... plants revegged will start to preflower after some time. Also, preflowers noticably appear after a long time in veg, there can be no denying that either.
 
figtree

figtree

Active Member
stoner1984 said:
Its not something i have experiance of but at a guess i would say, and i expect to be corrected, that the pre flower is a sign of a change of infancy to maturty, a change in the makeup of the hormones at a certain age causing the preflower, like pubity in humans, if the plant survived the winter in the wild, it would expect to flower again however it doesnt have the change in hormones this time around so doesnt pre flower.

Any body got a better theory?
Click to expand...
very interesting.....
 
Gardener 09

Gardener 09

Active Member
ALRIGHT!!! i will shair my story, i receved a plant from a freind and it had already started to flower but bairly, and it was small so i vegged it agein, then when i went to flower it, it took a good 25 days just to start flowering, it seemed almost like it just took off out of nowear, it will happen it just takes extra time after it has already been in flowering stage and brought back. (I think, atleast this happend to me...)!
 
Brick Top

Brick Top

New Member
Redeflect said:
And then of course, from an evolutionary standpoint: The whole reason the plants can't flower in the first few weeks
Click to expand...

It isn’t that plants cannot flower earlier, as in they are not sexually mature enough yet to begin to flower but just that it takes a certain amount of time to see any visible signs.
　
From the moment a plant begins its life the hormone to trigger flowering is in the plant.

Regardless if its size or age when a photo-period plant senses nights/hours of darkness that are longer than 12 hours the plant will then begin the flowering process.
　
Now depending on the strain it can take 7 to 14 days before the hormone that triggers flowering will be fully activated.

Then it takes some time for physical growth so it can be see with the human eye.

So it is not like a new seedling cannot be put into flower or will not flower until it reaches some age or height or level or maturation.

It only appears that way because of the amount of time it can at times take before there is visible evidence of flowering.
　
Something else to factor in is hours of light energy allocation at different stages of growth.

A seedling may seem to shoot up nicely but then it sort of seems to drag its feet a bit and then it takes off nicely again.
　
During that somewhat of a lull period an increased amount of plant energy was transferred to root development.

At that stage in growth regardless of hours of light and dark plants will allocate more energy to root growth so there will be less to use for flowering, if flowering has been triggered, or for that fact vegetative growth if it were still being done, so that would further slow down any visible signs and maybe make someone believe the plant needed to reach some stage of sexual puberty or something before it would then flower when it is only a case of something that can take longer than expected then having that time period lengthened even more due to different energy allocation.
 
stoner1984

stoner1984

Active Member
so, technically a seedling would be in a position to flower if it wasnt using its energy to develop roots?

here's one for you guys, if you re veg a mature plant, will the nodes grow in pairs or in singles as i'm told this change in a plant is the first sign of maturity so in what state does it start its regrowth? Pairs or singles?

Does this occur in every plant?
 
ganjman

ganjman

New Member
The hormones in the plant are differnt in flowering and vegative. It's the hormones that are realeased that triggers flowering, and i assume the same for triggering vegative again. The hormones released depends on the darkness the plant recieves.
 
R

Redeflect

Well-Known Member
I disagree bricktop, seedlings that have been in 12/12 from the start, 3 weeks in can show decent growth but none of it is flowers. They grow vegetative growth, not calyxes. If they were capable of flowering immediately, after 2 weeks they would start forming calyxes because the hormones have peaked, not 4 weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top