Should i cut my fan leaves?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brick Top

New Member
Do not ever remove any fan leaves until they are ready to fall off. If a light tug or downward push is enough for them to drop off .. fine. If not, leave them where they are. While they may not appear to be serving any useful purpose to you, you are not the plant so you have no idea of what purpose they are still performing. Once they no longer perform a service, the plant will discard them.

HOW DO FAN LEAVES FUNCTION

The large fan leaves have a definite function in the growth and development of cannabis. Large leaves serve as photosynthetic factories for the production of sugars and other necessary growth substances. Most cannabis plants begin to lose their larger leaves when they enter the flowering stage and this trend continues on until senescence (death of the plant).

Fan leaves account for the greatest area for the reception of photons on a plant, thus they account for the majority of photosynthesis which occurs within a plant. Cells in the plant’s leaves, called chloroplasts, contain a green pigment called chlorophyll which interacts with sunlight to split the water in the plant into its basic components. Leaves only absorb about 15% of the solar energy that hits them, the other 85% passes through-- but they reflect all the green light, which means it looks darker below the leaf to a human than it does to the plant because our eyes are most sensitive to the green spectrum

Photosynthesis occurs in all green parts of plants. The process has two stages, the light reactions and the Calvin cycle, that convert water and carbon dioxide into sugar and oxygen. These sugars are later used to power all the processes in the plant, including the synthesis of THC and other cannabinoids. Fan leaves possess the greatest number of stomata, which are small pores or valves on the underside of the leaf which water vapor and carbon dioxide diffuse during transpiration and photosynthesis (carbon fixation). Carbon dioxide first enters the leaf through the stomata and combines with the stored energy in the chloroplasts through a chemical reaction (the Calvin cycle) to produce a simple sugar. This sugar is unloaded into the tissues and transported through tubes in the leaf to supply the synthesized food to other plant parts such as growing or respiring tissues like young leaves, roots, and flowers of the plant. meristems.

Removal of fan leaves will not only slow growth, but it will also hinder the plants ability to rid itself of toxic gases, and also hinder the regulation of the plants temperature via stomata. Changes in the plants chemical metabolism caused by fan leave removal causes the plant to work overtime to rid ?toxins? with less leaves, as a result the pant may allocate more growth hormones into growing more leaves to make up for what has been lost. Removing large amounts of fan leaves may also interfere with the metabolic balance of the plant. Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic imbalance.

There is a relationship regarding the amount of carbohydrates a leaf produces and CO2 intake relative to outside forces. When you have a situation whereby the leaf is no longer productive for the plant for whatever reason that may be - low light, old age, disease, insect attack etc, the plant will discard it.

Plants have two different kinds of vessels in their stems to move stuff around, xylem and phloem. Xylem runs from the roots up the stem carrying water and nutrients. Phloem runs both up and down to move sugars hormones, proteins, etc but mostly sugars. Each part of the plant can be either a sugar source or a sugar sink. Phloem moves from sources (areas of supply) to sinks (areas of metabolism or storage). Granted that the flowers can produce some photosynthate, but they are no where near as effective as fan leaves (resin glands significantly reduce light to the tissue they are found on). Flowers are sink tissues, leaves are source tissues. Sinks do not produce enough photosynthate, and are importers. Sources give photosynthate to sinks in closest proximity. Upper leaves bring sucrose to shoot apical meristem and young leaves while lower leaves bring goodies to roots. Remove the source and the sink will be affected.

The leaves at the top of a plant tend to supply the top growing shoots. The leaves at the bottom of the plant tend to supply the roots. The middle leaves can go either way as the demand changes. During flowering and fruiting, only the very bottom leaves supply the roots and the rest of the leaves try to get as much energy as possible to the flowers of fruits. For this reason, the more leaves are unshaded and in good light, the more chance the plant has of creating extra storage of energy that will ultimately go into yield.

Fan leaves store mobile nutrients, these stored nutrients are essential in the later stages of flowering. When flushing a plant the fan leaves will lose their color quickly. This is because the nutrients are being mobilized to the atypical meristem (grow tip, bud site). Draining your fan leaves with a flushing period will increase floral development. Fan leaves therefore serve as a nutrient deficiency buffer zone for the plant.

Nutrient burn usually causes bottom leaves begin to die however observed that if you do not remove the leaves then they will absorb damage as premature removal generally results in more leaf loss. However if growing hydroponically under ideal conditions it could be argued that fan leaves serve as a nutrient buffer is a moot point.

Light efficiency decreases with distance. The inverse squared light rule states that illuminance is inversely proportionate to the square of the distance from the light source.

Removing the largest area of photosynthesis that is closest to the light source simply to benefit smaller leaves growing out of the but sites that are further away is not logical when growing indoors.

Cultivating outdoors under the sun, the fan leaves don’t create nearly as much shade as they do indoors. This is consistent with the inverse squared light rule; the sun is 149,597,890 km away so a few feet has no real effect on intensity. This suggests that a trimming benefit could be achieved outdoors as opposed to indoors however leaves only absorb about 15% of the solar energy that hits them, the other 85% passes through except for green light which is reflected, therefore removal of fan leaves would only provide a 15% increase light transmission outdoors.

Excessive leaf trimming and branch pruning will cause the plant to use extra energy to repair itself. However, trimming must be done from time to time, for the longer a plant is left untrimmed, the more material must be removed at one time, therefore the greater the damage that the plant will need to repair.
 

rob1234

Member
Do not ever remove any fan leaves until they are ready to fall off. If a light tug or downward push is enough for them to drop off .. fine. If not, leave them where they are. While they may not appear to be serving any useful purpose to you, you are not the plant so you have no idea of what purpose they are still performing. Once they no longer perform a service, the plant will discard them.

HOW DO FAN LEAVES FUNCTION

The large fan leaves have a definite function in the growth and development of cannabis. Large leaves serve as photosynthetic factories for the production of sugars and other necessary growth substances. Most cannabis plants begin to lose their larger leaves when they enter the flowering stage and this trend continues on until senescence (death of the plant).

Fan leaves account for the greatest area for the reception of photons on a plant, thus they account for the majority of photosynthesis which occurs within a plant. Cells in the plant’s leaves, called chloroplasts, contain a green pigment called chlorophyll which interacts with sunlight to split the water in the plant into its basic components. Leaves only absorb about 15% of the solar energy that hits them, the other 85% passes through-- but they reflect all the green light, which means it looks darker below the leaf to a human than it does to the plant because our eyes are most sensitive to the green spectrum

Photosynthesis occurs in all green parts of plants. The process has two stages, the light reactions and the Calvin cycle, that convert water and carbon dioxide into sugar and oxygen. These sugars are later used to power all the processes in the plant, including the synthesis of THC and other cannabinoids. Fan leaves possess the greatest number of stomata, which are small pores or valves on the underside of the leaf which water vapor and carbon dioxide diffuse during transpiration and photosynthesis (carbon fixation). Carbon dioxide first enters the leaf through the stomata and combines with the stored energy in the chloroplasts through a chemical reaction (the Calvin cycle) to produce a simple sugar. This sugar is unloaded into the tissues and transported through tubes in the leaf to supply the synthesized food to other plant parts such as growing or respiring tissues like young leaves, roots, and flowers of the plant. meristems.

Removal of fan leaves will not only slow growth, but it will also hinder the plants ability to rid itself of toxic gases, and also hinder the regulation of the plants temperature via stomata. Changes in the plants chemical metabolism caused by fan leave removal causes the plant to work overtime to rid ?toxins? with less leaves, as a result the pant may allocate more growth hormones into growing more leaves to make up for what has been lost. Removing large amounts of fan leaves may also interfere with the metabolic balance of the plant. Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic imbalance.

There is a relationship regarding the amount of carbohydrates a leaf produces and CO2 intake relative to outside forces. When you have a situation whereby the leaf is no longer productive for the plant for whatever reason that may be - low light, old age, disease, insect attack etc, the plant will discard it.

Plants have two different kinds of vessels in their stems to move stuff around, xylem and phloem. Xylem runs from the roots up the stem carrying water and nutrients. Phloem runs both up and down to move sugars hormones, proteins, etc but mostly sugars. Each part of the plant can be either a sugar source or a sugar sink. Phloem moves from sources (areas of supply) to sinks (areas of metabolism or storage). Granted that the flowers can produce some photosynthate, but they are no where near as effective as fan leaves (resin glands significantly reduce light to the tissue they are found on). Flowers are sink tissues, leaves are source tissues. Sinks do not produce enough photosynthate, and are importers. Sources give photosynthate to sinks in closest proximity. Upper leaves bring sucrose to shoot apical meristem and young leaves while lower leaves bring goodies to roots. Remove the source and the sink will be affected.

The leaves at the top of a plant tend to supply the top growing shoots. The leaves at the bottom of the plant tend to supply the roots. The middle leaves can go either way as the demand changes. During flowering and fruiting, only the very bottom leaves supply the roots and the rest of the leaves try to get as much energy as possible to the flowers of fruits. For this reason, the more leaves are unshaded and in good light, the more chance the plant has of creating extra storage of energy that will ultimately go into yield.

Fan leaves store mobile nutrients, these stored nutrients are essential in the later stages of flowering. When flushing a plant the fan leaves will lose their color quickly. This is because the nutrients are being mobilized to the atypical meristem (grow tip, bud site). Draining your fan leaves with a flushing period will increase floral development. Fan leaves therefore serve as a nutrient deficiency buffer zone for the plant.

Nutrient burn usually causes bottom leaves begin to die however observed that if you do not remove the leaves then they will absorb damage as premature removal generally results in more leaf loss. However if growing hydroponically under ideal conditions it could be argued that fan leaves serve as a nutrient buffer is a moot point.

Light efficiency decreases with distance. The inverse squared light rule states that illuminance is inversely proportionate to the square of the distance from the light source.

Removing the largest area of photosynthesis that is closest to the light source simply to benefit smaller leaves growing out of the but sites that are further away is not logical when growing indoors.

Cultivating outdoors under the sun, the fan leaves don’t create nearly as much shade as they do indoors. This is consistent with the inverse squared light rule; the sun is 149,597,890 km away so a few feet has no real effect on intensity. This suggests that a trimming benefit could be achieved outdoors as opposed to indoors however leaves only absorb about 15% of the solar energy that hits them, the other 85% passes through except for green light which is reflected, therefore removal of fan leaves would only provide a 15% increase light transmission outdoors.

Excessive leaf trimming and branch pruning will cause the plant to use extra energy to repair itself. However, trimming must be done from time to time, for the longer a plant is left untrimmed, the more material must be removed at one time, therefore the greater the damage that the plant will need to repair.

First and most importantly you are going back on your own stance about if leaves should be removed in your last paragraph and secondly no one.....well at least i am not saying to remove them all just take an educated approach to trimming the leafs and become an investment planner and make cuts to promote growth in a certen place or of course to give the lower buds some light

and finally dude im pretty sure after all the arguing and discussion on this thread ppl know how leafs function there is no need for a mile long post.
 

choempi

Well-Known Member
I have no real stance on this, I guess what I see that I do not like is knee jerk posts. What started a bunch of BS was somene saying "try one and see what your results are."
When things become unassailable dogma, progress and new teks don't see the light of day.
Case in point-the evolution of fractals
 

Brick Top

New Member
First and most importantly you are going back on your own stance about if leaves should be removed in your last paragraph
I believe you missed something in that paragraph.

Excessive leaf trimming and branch pruning will cause the plant to use extra energy to repair itself. However, trimming must be done from time to time, for the longer a plant is left untrimmed, the more material must be removed at one time, therefore the greater the damage that the plant will need to repair.
It is a double edged sword resulting in a loss of production rather than an increase. Whenever you remove healthy leaves a plant will attempt to replace them somewhere on the plant. Energy that would otherwise go to bud growth ends up instead going to replacing lost foliage.

Even though it did not spell it out, the same goes for just one single healthy leaf being removed. Be it one or five or ten or fifty, if they were healthy the plant will then redirect energy for the replacement of what was removed. You do not end up with a net gain in energy going to bud production, you end up with a loss instead.

You are also ignoring how plants attempt to keep as close as possible of a 50/50 balance/ratio between overall root-mass area and above soil foliage and also the affects removing healthy leaves have on auxin and cytokini.

Removing healthy plant leaves throws off the natural balance and natural functions of plants. That does not create positive results.

Something else that is not known by many, or at least ignored by most who do know it is there are different forms of chlorophyll, A, B, and in other types of plant life, C, D and E. They each react to a different light spectrum.

The most efficient most highly productive form of chlorophyll is found in the large fan leaves.

Buds and branches and stems will perform photosynthesis but not nearly as efficiently so they cannot make up for what is lost when fan leaves are removed.

Also in the case of buds where trichome production is denser than on fan leaves they do shade the buds and they do block light, their job in nature is to protect the plant, so in the case of buds they are even less efficient at performing photosynthesis. So why rely on them rather than on the most efficient most effective part of a plant, the large fan leaves? By doing so you again have a net loss.



and secondly no one.....well at least i am not saying to remove them all just take an educated approach to trimming the leafs and become an investment planner and make cuts to promote growth in a certen place or of course to give the lower buds some light
All the information still pertains to why someone who might believe that some removal of leave or the removal of many leaves would be doing the incorrect thing by removing them.


and finally dude im pretty sure after all the arguing and discussion on this thread ppl know how leafs function there is no need for a mile long post.
I would bet that few know more than the basics of leaf functions. I highly doubt that but a few know, or previous to my message knew the following.

Plants have two different kinds of vessels in their stems to move stuff around, xylem and phloem. Xylem runs from the roots up the stem carrying water and nutrients. Phloem runs both up and down to move sugars hormones, proteins, etc but mostly sugars. Each part of the plant can be either a sugar source or a sugar sink. Phloem moves from sources (areas of supply) to sinks (areas of metabolism or storage).
Many may have known bits of it, just the basics, but not all of it.

Not necessarily in this thread but almost on a daily basis, and on some days it is said numerous times in numerous threads, how fan leaves shade lower leaves and buds so they should be removed so light can penetrate. Repeatedly I have stated that a leaf will only absorb roughly 15% of the light that strikes is and the remaining roughly 85% passes through to strike the lower portions of plants. That is a proven fact. Still, as I said, almost on a daily basis, and on some days it is said numerous times in numerous threads, how fan leaves shade lower leaves and buds so they should be removed so light can penetrate.

At times things need to be repeated because not everyone reads every single message.

What else is pertinent is that if the lower portions of someone's plant(s) are not receiving enough light, the problem is not shade from fan leaves higher up the plant. The problem is inadequate lighting. Since the true cause for loss of growth or poor growth on the lower portion of plants is inadequate lighting the the inverse squared light rule is proof that removing leaves will not solve the problem of inadequate lighting.

Inverse Square Law, Light

As one of the fields which obey the general inverse square law, the light from a point source can be put in the form
where E is called illuminance and I is called pointance.


Even without a few or some or many or most fan leaves the distance to the lower portion of plants is still the same distance, hence less light intensity at the lower portion of plants and when inadequate lighting is used, that does not raise up or bring the lower portions of plants any closer to the source of light.

As for the length of the message, well if you do not have a desire to become educated by reading scientifically proven horticultural facts, then do not read much of what I post.
 

phxfire

New Member
I would cut... Your plants look short and bushy... You need all the light you can get... The fan leaves are just wasting energy for nothing... If you cut a few fan leaves other leaves will get energy and begin to grow.... CUT THE FAN LEAVES..
 

Brick Top

New Member
Originally Posted by Japanfreak This is a pic of a plants which had almost all of their fan leafs removed during the grow. According to people who don't have experience and just repeat shit they've heard this shouldn't be possible.

I always have to laugh at people who attempt to redefine scientifically proven horticultural facts as being nothing more than; "shit they've heard."

Rather than rely on the opinions of a bunch of Beavis & Buttheads why don't you go ask someone with a PhD in horticulture and find out what they tell you so you can begin to become educated in plant facts rather than being an expert in voodoo growing methods, myths, urban legends, misconceptions, half-truths, flat out lies and old hippie folklore.
 
ur fan leaves draws all the lite in 4 the plant to grow if u cut the fan leaves ur plate cant grow = if u did cut ur fans just turn off ur light and throw ur plants away couse thier fucked
 

John12

Well-Known Member
Here are some new pics from today, well yesterday. One of the fuks turned herm on me (the indica) and is growin lil sacs on a couple of the lower branches! Took all of them off that i cud see for the day. Man that sucks! But she still looks like some GREAT :joint:. Has anyone had this happen to them before, and if so, what was your outcome of the :joint:
 

Attachments

John12

Well-Known Member
Removing fan leafs is like sacrilege to most people, they were told never to do it so they are compelled to tell others. Doesn't matter if they've actually had any experience they are going to say like it's the word of god.

For those who are not afraid to learn something new you can google "defoliation cannabis" and find guides on a way some people have found to increase their yields (higher than the people in this thread who brag about their yields and are against removing leafs)




the one on the left was defoliated, the one of the right untouched. Not asking for people to believe or do it, just to keep an open mind. Many people on pot boards don't want you to keep an open mind because they themselves are scared little people.

nice comparison. id say the one with no leaves looks like the buds have matured faster than the non trimmed one. id go with the trimmed lol
 

John12

Well-Known Member
Well im gonna agree with japan he needs a little support here

Lets start by defining "defoliation" in the context of this technique. The term has negative connotations as Cannabis has been the target of defoliation by the Feds using Paraquat chemical defoliants. This is not what this is about.

This technique is about leaf removal by hand. It is employed to relieve shading in crowded conditions. It is a substitute to the popular technique of removing lower branches.

Defoliation encourages branching in vegging plants in the same way as nipping the leader. The benefit of this technique is that the leader is retained to continue to create branches. It also shortens nodal length creating a more compact specimen.

This is how the following plants are capable of yielding as much as 12 oz. in an allotted space measuring 32" cubed.

Leaves are removed starting in veg stage when they are about 6" tall with a couple of sets of fans. Leaves are removed again every 2-3 weeks or whenever things get a little shady.

3 decades of experience with this technique reveal that bud growth benefits more from light exposure than whether the corresponding fan leaf is present.

The idea with this method is to not remove any bud sites like in the aforementioned technique of lower branch removal. Bud sites produce bud. Do not remove. This method allows light to penetrate to all bud sites, not just the top buds.

This technique should not be done on plants that have not been prepared by defoliation from the beginning.


Observers will be shocked at the nakedness of a fully plucked skeleton of a barely flowering shrub. They will be even more shocked at the results after a few weeks. These results will debunk any insistence that big shading leaves are necessary for good bud production. Besides are we producing buds or leafs.
Good stuff Rob. Thanks. Basically if im gonna cut the leaves it shud be brought up gettin chopped from the get go right?
 

Brick Top

New Member
Originally Posted by Japanfreak
Removing fan leafs is like sacrilege to most people, they were told never to do it so they are compelled to tell others. Doesn't matter if they've actually had any experience they are going to say like it's the word of god.

For those who are not afraid to learn something new you can google "defoliation cannabis" and find guides on a way some people have found to increase their yields (higher than the people in this thread who brag about their yields and are against removing leafs)




the one on the left was defoliated, the one of the right untouched. Not asking for people to believe or do it, just to keep an open mind. Many people on pot boards don't want you to keep an open mind because they themselves are scared little people.

Like I often say about pictures of a grow used as evidence of something, they are not scientific testing performed under exacting controlled conditions using multiple control groups and the tests repeated until a fact can be and is proven.

In someone's basement or closet or shed or greenhouse etc., which are anything but truly controlled environments when compared to what scientific testing is performed under and totally lacking any control groups, any number of anomalies can occur that can result in a false belief being the result.

As for plants stripped or nearly stripped of leaves appearing to have more impressive bud development. If you're a guy and haven't done it, shave your nutsack and around your weasel and it will look larger and more impressive than before too ... but defoliating it did not make it any larger, it only removed what was around it that made it look smaller.

Many times I have taken mature plants and removed all the leaves while they were still standing and only then cut the stem or removed branches to begin hanging to be dried. Once the leaves were off they always look incredible, they looked like there were more buds and that the buds were larger than when the leaves were still on the plants. No new buds had grown and no buds had grown larger. They only appeared to be larger because all that had been on the plants that made them look smaller had been removed, just like shaving your nutsack and around your weasel.

When people with PhD's who specialize in cannabis research and perform true scientific testing reverse their current position and explain why, then I will have to believe removing leaves is beneficial to bud development.

But as long as all I see is the occasional picture of a basement or closet or shed or store-room or spare room or backyard greenhouse or backyard grow used in an attempt to refute actual scientific findings, I will have to continue to believe the actual scientific research findings instead.

Many others might feel totally opposite than I do, but then many people on pot boards are ignorant gullible sheep and lemmings who will fall for any voodoo growing method that someone claims to be better. Normally that is because they have extremely limited education in horticulture and also because many of them have very limited experience in numbers of years, or decades, growing cannabis plants and because they are so desperate to find a way to end up with a few more grams that they are willing to attempt anything some snake oil salesman tells them is the latest and the greatest.

Many growers, mainly those with less experience, tend to see whatever is new as being better. That can be seen in many ways, one of them in the breeders many pick and the strains they pick. There is always some new one hit wonder breeder or 'flavor of the month strain' that people on sites like this rave on and on about ... not knowing that there are strains that can be six, eight, ten years old or older that only won a 2nd place or 3rd place Cup, let alone 1st place or 1st, 2nd or 2rd overall, that are better than any and every 'flavor of the month' strain, and the breeders who created them are higher skilled breeders the the one hit wonder breeders people go on and on about, including some who have never come anywhere even half close to winning anything but are masters of self promotion and marketing.

Other times we see it in cases like this where a voodoo method of growing is seen as being innovative and progressive and those that fall for it like to believe that proven facts have expiration dates on them and that those dates have passed and the facts are now old and out of date and out of touch with current reality and they no longer apply and that at some point plant hormones and plant functions magically and mystically completely altered what thousands and thousands of years of evolution or God or Mother Nature or Yahweh or whoever or whatever put into their chain of DNA, that their genetic coding, for reasons that are totally inexplicable, suddenly overnight did a complete about face and cannabis plants then began to react to things in a way they never did before.
 

rob1234

Member
Good stuff Rob. Thanks. Basically if im gonna cut the leaves it shud be brought up gettin chopped from the get go right?
im not gonna say im an expert on this but from how i understand it yes from the get go keep her nice and tidy.
but not all of the leafs of course just the larger unruly ones.
 

Nullis

Moderator
Many growers, mainly those with less experience, tend to see whatever is new as being better. That can be seen in many ways, one of them in the breeders many pick and the strains they pick. There is always some new one hit wonder breeder or 'flavor of the month strain' that people on sites like this rave on and on about ... not knowing that there are strains that can be six, eight, ten years old or older that only won a 2nd place or 3rd place Cup, let alone 1st place or 1st, 2nd or 2rd overall, that are better than any and every 'flavor of the month' strain and the breeders who created them are higher skilled breeders the the one hit wonder breeders people go on and on about, including some who have never come anywhere even half close to winning anything but are masters of self promotion and marketing.

Other times we see it in cases like this where a voodoo method of growing is seen as being innovative and progressive and those that fall for it like to believe that proven facts have expiration dates on them and that those dates have passed and the facts are now old and out of date and out of touch with current reality and they no longer apply and that at some point plant hormones and plant functions magically and mystically completely altered what thousands and thousands of years of evolution or God or Mother Nature or Yahweh or whoever or whatever put into their chain of DNA, that their genetic coding, for reasons that are totally inexplicable, suddenly overnight did a complete about face and cannabis plants then began to react to things in a way they never did before.
Right on about the shaving of the nut-sack, it's been a secret of mine for some time.

Seriously though, you're spot on. Your new aspiring cannabis growers, your 'average' grower and others seem either to turn a blind eye to or are just plain ignorant of the fact that botany is a science. Plant physiology is a sub-field of botany (itself a sub-field of biology) that revolves around detailing/explianing the life processes and functioning of plants in line with the scientific method. Where ever a science is concerned there is supposed to be objectivity (as opposed to subjectivity) and definite, repeatable results. If you do A, B will happen... always.

Aside from science there is something I like to call common sense. Mine tells me that a fully evolved plant which has been growing on this Earth for hundreds of thousands if not millions of years has a much better handle on its appendages, resources and general physiology than I do or ever could. Common sense tells me that if the plant has leaves they must be there for a reason. I know that when any part of a plant leans towards going vestigial, the plant will extract what resources it can from it and put it towards more promising growth. A leaf cell must be able to produce enough energy to support itself, plus a similarly sized root cell.

And furthermore, if there is so much damned concern about fan leaves shading light from 'the buds' why not just position the leaf so that it doesn't or incorporate some side lighting? Why go to the extreme of ripping all of those leaves (which the plant has expended energy to grow) off, forcing the plant to expend more energy into replacing the lost foliage?

Don't get me wrong, anyone can do whatever they want to their plants so far as I am concerned. It is just best to try getting solid information from a variety of different sources; the best of which are fully educated and experienced botanists, horticulturists and/or master gardeners. Otherwise, even if you assume you're being objective the suggestions of the ill-informed may alter your perspective; and as Brick Top pointed out it is not uncommon for people to misinterpret the results of their home experiments, or simply see things that are not there.
 

phyzix

Well-Known Member
Plants on the left are CLEARLY weeks ahead on flowering compared to the right side. I can't believe this would even be presented as evidence for something.

Edit: It's a perpetual operation. Stage 1 plants are in the middle (youngest). State 2 plants on the right. Stage 3 plants on the left (oldest).

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top