Should some leafage be pruned to let light penetrate canopy

should i prune a small amount of leafage away to allow light in


  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .

Snow Crash

Well-Known Member
Snow, what you are forgetting is light penetration. although it may LOOK to your eyes that the smaller lower leaves arent getting light they are. the light you can see is mostly green light, which the plant cannot use. Also, what are you pertaining to moving nutrition? you need to clarify that.
I am not forgetting penetration (what you really mean to reference is leaf transparency). I'm still waiting for someone to place a ppfd meter beneath a leaf to determine the loss of energy. I don't have one so I cannot confirm what you are stating as fact is true. Still, what you are IGNORING are the results. You just don't get it dude.

Transport... Okay. The large leaves, from stalk to leaf tip, can be a very great distance. To move water and nutrients from the root zone, up the plant, to the ends of these large leafs requires work. Work requires energy. It's physics. The large leafs MUST dedicate a deal of their energy to this transport of water and nutrition so they can remain healthy.

Smaller leaves are MUCH closer to their respective side-branches. This means that less work/energy is required to move the water and nutrition to them. It also means that the energy they do produce requires less over-head, and is better located, because it is closer to the new growths. If what you are saying is true, then the 15% or so of energy lost by removing the larger upper leaf evens out when you consider that less energy is now required just to sustain that leaf.

At the end of the day it's a wash. Defoliated plants and untouched plants both do just fine. Look at the results man. I mean, I cannot make it any more clear.
 

OZUT

Active Member
Here's the thing, flowers with a fan leaf attached to it will still grow. They'll still produce, no one is arguing that. But the plant, overall won't be as healthy and the bud will not not grow to it's full potential, neither will the plant.

Here are a couple of statements made that aren't fully expanded on, both in this thread and several others.

1) Pruning plants has been done for ages. What makes cannabis different? - Pruning has been done for ages, but not removing fan leaves. Topping is a form of pruning. When you top the main stem, you redirect hormones to points below the topped location. I strongly doubt anyone will dispute this FACT. Topping is a form of pruning. You will get the same results with super cropping and with FIMing or other types of training. Also, if anyone has ever grown or knows anything about bonzai trees, you know that on certain species, it's highly recommended to strip the tree of all it's leaves every couple of years. Difference between bonzai trees or trees and cannabis in general, is the tree or bonzai continues to grow and age. A cannabis plant dies at the end of it's cycle (unless you rejuvinate it and reveg it) but very few people do that. Point is, you don't have a years to work with a cannabis plant and the cycle is so short that it doesn't have time to recover and give you what you expect of it.

2) Scrogger and SOGers all do it and get the results claimed. - This was also mentioned on this thread by Dlively. Scroggers don't trim fan leaves. What they do, is they train their plants in veg to get a lot of tops through a trellis. What they trim is everything below the trellis. They don't discriminate between leaves or flowers. Everything below it goes. They leave everything above the trellis. So what does that tell you? They could very easily train their plants, and instead of trimming out everything below the trellis, they could trim out the leaves above the trellis to get "light penetration" below it to maximize their yield. They don't do that because yield and quality would suffer. Scogging and SOGing is very similar. Their difference is the Scrogger spends the time in veg to get multiple tops and only grow tops and the SOGer skips the veg and goes from clone to flower and grows 1 cola per plant.

3) Trimming fan leaves is like lollipopping. - It's not. The people that lollipop (trim out the bottom 1/3 of a plant) do so because indoor conditions, as optimum as you can get it, most of the time doesn't allow you to get light that far down in a vertical lighting situation to make it worth growing out the bud down there. Again this goes back to actual pruning. Just as topping redirects hormones to point below the topped location, cutting out stems and growth at the bottom of the plant, redirects those hormones to the other branches. You basically focus your and your plants efforts into the area that has value.

4) You can get over 35grams per plant on a SOG setup by trimming all the fan leaves otherwise it's not possible. - 1st off, I'll call BS on this claim (mostly). Unless you're growing something like Big Bud, you're not going to get that weight growing a single cola going from clone straight to flower. I don't care how dialed in your environment and nutes are. Can anyone (other than Dlively) HONESTLY say they can get over 35 grams on a single cola with absolutely no veg, going from clone straight to flower with a quality OG strain or any quality strain for that matter? This isn't even about removing fan leaves. This is nothing more that an exaggeration.



It's a fact that SOG growers double, triple, quadruple the number of plants in a given space and get less weight per plant, but overall will get more weight in that space. Doesn't mean the quality is better, just means the weight is more. The weight is more simply because you're growing 4-6 times more plants even if you're getting less per plant. Again, this depends on the respective grower and all that other good stuff, but SOG growers mainly grow for weight. Does it mean the bud from a SOG grow won't get you high, no it doesn't.

Dlively has been turning blue trying to claim SOG growers get the weight and quality because they trim the leaves and they do it for light penetration. Has anyone considered the fact that removing those leaves is not as much about light penetration as it is about not creating a mold situation and allowing for airflow? Could you imagine a 4x4 area with 64 plants all loaded with leaves? There would be zero air movement and just an invite for pests. The benefit you get from removing those leaves is not the benefit that's being claimed by people removing the leaves. Now for those about to jump on me for having said this last thing, let me explain a little more. I'm not arguing both positions. What I'm trying to say is that removing the leaves is a sacrifice you make to get a benefit from elsewhere. The sacrifice is full bud potential and the benefit is you're able to grow more bud in a smaller area. It's a sacrifice because you lose something to gain something else. It's not pure benefit as people are trying to make it out to be.

At the end of the day, growing style is a preference and dependent on individual preferences and limitations, or lack of. What people like Dlively (not singling you out dude) are trying to do is make it sound that removing big bad fan leaves, gives you deeper light penetration and result in bigger better yield. That's not accurate. But whatever makes you feel good about what you do...
 

Tamerlane

Active Member
I let the plant tell me what to prune. If the leaf is less than 50% green I prune it (As stated in Jorge Cervantes Growers Bible). You know the leaf is ready to be taken off the plant because its super easy to pull from the plant... comes off like butter... if on the other hand I pull a leaf and it does not want to come off then I leave it on and recheck it a day or 2 later to see if the leaf turned more yellow and/or its easier to pull off.

If the leaf is green then dont prune it. Its creating energy for the plant silly. The plant tells you what it can and cannot use effectively instead of the other way around ;)

T
 

dlively11

Well-Known Member
Take notes Dlively, this is how you have an intelligent conversation and come to a conclusion, whatever that conclusion may be.

Also, as mentioned above about the light penetration, almost 80% - 85% of the light that hits a leaf, penetrates through it to the next leaf. It doesn't just bounce off it or get blocked. So even the leaves that are being "blocked" by that big bad fan leaf are still getting light. And for those that want to argue that the flowers themselves need light to hit them, then rest assured that the fan leaf is not preventing that either. Again, scientific, proven, experimented, solid concrete fact. Just because human eyes can't see that light, doesn't mean it's not there.

Btw, I'm done arguing with you Dlively...post however you wanna post man, I just think you should cool down a little if you wanna be taken serious and not treated like a troll
Predictable and expected. So you are wrong but now you are right somehow ? LOL. okay. You actu like Mini Me , Mini Uncle Ben. You are just reusing his material over and over now. Only ones acting like trolls in this entire thread were you and UB. Both of you argue very indirectly and skirt around the issues being presented like a politician at times.

I spent countless posts posting good legit info an had to deal with mostly people taking a sh*t all over them. Had to listen to countless posts about "pictures dont prove anything" "I believe my books not my eyes". "He must be a liar trying to prove his BS on a pot forum " etc etc etc I stated many many times that there was a time and place for leaf removal. A couple posts before you I specifically went over how a plant by itself wouldn't yield more with leaves removed but rather it was the high numbers you are able to achieve with removing them that give the higher yields. Then you come and post more insults and name calling towards me and even try and argue the very thing I just posted that you agreed on. Bizarre to say the least. It makes so little sense it is hard to write it and have it make sense. Luckily people can just read it for themselves and have a good old laugh at your expense =) you arent arguing with me you are just arguing.

FYI pay more attention in threads before you going around blindly bashing people. I already posted that a single leaf may not make a huge difference but with zero leaf removal you are going through MANY layers of leaves. By the time you get to the boom the leaves can be blocking 90% or more of the usable light.Hence why YOU have popcorn buds and I dont =)

Please troll on and argue about something else we agree on lol
 

dlively11

Well-Known Member
4) You can get over 35grams per plant on a SOG setup by trimming all the fan leaves otherwise it's not possible. - 1st off, I'll call BS on this claim (mostly). Unless you're growing something like Big Bud, you're not going to get that weight growing a single cola going from clone straight to flower. I don't care how dialed in your environment and nutes are. Can anyone (other than Dlively) HONESTLY say they can get over 35 grams on a single cola with absolutely no veg, going from clone straight to flower with a quality OG strain or any quality strain for that matter? This isn't even about removing fan leaves. This is nothing more that an exaggeration.


Dlively has been turning blue trying to claim SOG growers get the weight and quality because they trim the leaves and they do it for light penetration. Has anyone considered the fact that removing those leaves is not as much about light penetration as it is about not creating a mold situation and allowing for airflow? Could you imagine a 4x4 area with 64 plants all loaded with leaves? There would be zero air movement and just an invite for pests. The benefit you get from removing those leaves is not the benefit that's being claimed by people removing the leaves. Now for those about to jump on me for having said this last thing, let me explain a little more. I'm not arguing both positions. What I'm trying to say is that removing the leaves is a sacrifice you make to get a benefit from elsewhere. The sacrifice is full bud potential and the benefit is you're able to grow more bud in a smaller area. It's a sacrifice because you lose something to gain something else. It's not pure benefit as people are trying to make it out to be.

At the end of the day, growing style is a preference and dependent on individual preferences and limitations, or lack of. What people like Dlively (not singling you out dude) are trying to do is make it sound that removing big bad fan leaves, gives you deeper light penetration and result in bigger better yield. That's not accurate. But whatever makes you feel good about what you do...

You start making sense and then you go back to not making any, oh well. As for the 35 grams per plant. I stated I averaged 30 grams per plant not 35 and that was ONLY with Chronic White Widow AKA Fruity Chronic. Yes its and extremely high yielder in fact I can more off it then Big Bud. I also never stated I went right from clone to bloom. Mine usually veg for a good week under a 600 watt prior to going to bloom room and are , as stated, 6-8 inches when switched. They are taking 1000 PPM nutes before going to bloom as well. I can still get 2.5 to 3 lbs with other high quality strains as well. Cheese, Super Skunk, Sweet Tooth, Bubble Gum and a few others which is closer to 20 grams per plant. If you are going to try and argue about other peoples posts at least get your facts straight as to what they posted in the first place.


Seems apparent you have never done a full SOG. Light penetration IS the huge factor. It couldnt be easier to see when you grow in this fashion. Yes 85% of the light goes right through the "big bad fan leaf" only 15% lost so why bother? Not that 15% loss isnt bad enough but there are MANY layers of leaves to go though to even get to the center of the plant in a full grow like this. Three leaves and you have just lost 50% of your usable light. I dont know about you but I like to grow under 1000 watts not 500 watts. Thing is for a full SOG you would be choking off a whole lot more then that to much of the plant. The bottom third would get between 15-30% of the usable light with no leaf removal. Kind of hurts yields a touch. Having a stationary HPS light is a huge part of the problem.

You really might want to actually have experience with something you are arguing about if you want to come across as intelligent but maybe that is just me. *shrug*
 

Brick Top

New Member
Transport... Okay. The large leaves, from stalk to leaf tip, can be a very great distance. To move water and nutrients from the root zone, up the plant, to the ends of these large leafs requires work. Work requires energy. It's physics. The large leafs MUST dedicate a deal of their energy to this transport of water and nutrition so they can remain healthy.

What you do not understand is leaf hydraulic conductance in the whole plant system. If you did understand such things you would not have said what you did. Your inaccurate beliefs and growing practices cause breaks and choke points in the hydraulic system in the plants that move nutrient rich moisture and essential carbohydrates and other elements throughout the plant.

You simply do not understand what actually causes the moisture and nutrients and various elements to move the distances you referred to. It is not plant energy being used. It is transpiration where the loss of water through evaporation in plants, especially through stomata draws, pulls, hydraulically pumps a corresponding amount of water up through the roots and up through plants in a process in which the water vapor escapes through the plant via its stomata and lenticels into its external environment, the atmosphere, the air.

You also ignore, or totally fail to understand, the extreme importance of the linkage between plant hydraulics and the extremely important gas exchange that needs to occur. When you limit or stop one, the exact same happens to the other.

To put it into a form you might be able to understand, if you had a small bucket of water with a rag half in the water and half out of the water, water would wick up through the rag and the water in the portion of the rag that is out of the bucket would evaporate and that would draw more water up from the bucket, up through the rag to also be evaporated until the small bucket of water would be empty, it would be dry. The rag would not be expending any energy whatsoever, it would be simple evaporation, which basically is what plant transpiration is.

A plants system is far more intricate and elaborate but it is still the same basic function. What moisture is drawn out of a plant through transpiration draws more moisture up through the plant.

What you consider to be unnecessarily used energy, or wasted energy, is, in simple plain language, actually much needed hydraulic pumping stations powered by transpiration performing highly important tasks to keep the flow/movement/relocation of nutrient rich moisture and stored carbohydrates and other elements maximized throughout the entire plant.

Your beliefs totally ignore things like the basics of phloem transport, the generation of hydraulic pressure gradient in collection phloem, the maintenance of hydraulic pressure gradient in transport phloem, the manipulation of hydraulic pressure gradient release phloem throughout the entire plant ..... and you also ignore, or do not know of, much, much more. Those functions, along with others, rely on the functions of the very leaves that you believe to be not only unimportant but also a total waste of energy and objects that block light rays. You wrongly believe that energy is used, wasted in your words, to transport, to move, to relocate moisture and nutrients, starches/carbohydrates from what you like to give the impression are extremely long distances from one location on a plant to another location on a plant requiring the use of large amounts of energy that could better be used for other more productive purposes. But in fact those elements are drawn to the various areas they are needed and used through natural transpiration.

Those functions rely on leaf transpiration to draw moisture nutrients/sugars/carbohydrates up through plants, all the way from the plants roots right up to the very top of the highest leaf/stem or cola. When you remove leaves you highly limit a plants capability to do that. You greatly damage, by reducing the size and capabilities of, or totally removing, the plants natural hydraulic system.

Plants are extremely intricate structures where each separate part, each separate but highly interconnected function, no matter how minor you may personally happen to believe them to be, are highly important and extremely reliant on each other and the reduction of any capabilities, or the total loss/removal of any of the many, many extremely important interconnected functions, is highly detrimental to the proper function and maximum functionality of the plant as a whole.

I fully realize that all of that is way over your head, and I fully realize that you will refuse to accept those facts, so this is my last comment on the subject because I will waste no more time on someone who absolutely refuses to accept scientifically proven botanical facts. But realize it or not, accept it or not, your personally chosen beliefs have just been proven to be both incorrect and inferior to what others, like Uncle Ben, have preached for ages and ages and what others, including myself, have also said.

Unlike your self concocted and or personally chosen beliefs, the above is actual botany, put in as simple of language as possible and still be able to explain how plants actually work.

Thus endeth the lesson.
 

Snow Crash

Well-Known Member
I understand what you are saying, thank you for so kindly insulting my intelligence. Shows just how much of a sandy vagine you are. See, that's me outright saying it. You = Sandy Vagine.

Portland Oregon. Come find some. I'm waiting. Or you could not insult me and stop acting a troll.

I understand how capillary motion works by using molecular bonds. Still, a larger plant uses more energy to keep itself healthy than a smaller plant. You'd have to be completely retarded to think otherwise.

I spoke about cellular health along with transport. Producing cells, keeping cells happy, this requires energy. If plants didn't need energy for transport, or energy for cellular maintenance and production, then what the fuck is all this energy for???

I have a degree in Information Technology, so my mindset is on networks, and I have gorgeous defoliated plants with this mindset. Like yourself, I don't have a degree in botany, but I also don't claim to be an expert. Maybe my mental exercise wasn't perfect, maybe it was closer than you're forcing others to believe with your compelling walls of text are. Maybe...

Site everything you want, anything you want, it doesn't change the fact that what the other side espouses DOES NOT CORRELATE with the VERY OBVIOUS RESULTS.

I've said this to you before, and I'll say it again, you are using a HYPOTHESIS!!!

I have provided the RESULTS of the EXPERIMENT and the CONCLUSION does not match your HYPOTHESIS.

You'd think someone with a brain like yours would be able to examine the evidence. In fact, I think you do see the evidence and avoid acknowledging it, and I think you are doing this to purposefully mislead growers. I think it's rotten and I think its a shwoog ass move that'd get you popped if someone could prove it. The only reason to ignore this simple fact, to claim you're still right when the evidence proves otherwise, is pure narcissism. Eventually you'll figure that out.

I have evidence. You have scientific theory. Science is theory, not law, and any scientist that deals in laws and "facts" has very little to work with. Science is about the pursuit of knowledge, not regurgitating ideas that don't match up with results.

You consistently fail to recognize the results, or provide compelling physical evidence that would support the written theories. Over and over again you site your science, you claim my plants should be totally fucked, and yet they aren't... You have no explanation as to why!!!

Where are these destroyed plants that have been defoliated?
Where are the masses of people who have done it and know that it doesn't work???
What I find are people who have done it, love it, and continue to do it berated and insulted (if even intelligently by innuendo) by bunch of haters who don't do it, hate it, and will never try it.

And you trust the haters? You are a hater? JFC...

Defoliation works. It very, very obviously works. Evidence is readily available for rational people to make up their minds on it. If it didn't work then all of us wouldn't be doing it. Perhaps you should take a step off that high horse and come to the conclusion that you don't know everything and that something is going on you don't understand.

You're going on ignore anyway. I'm so very tired of you and it's not like I need your advice. My garden is perfect the way I'm running it without you, your theory or advice.

I'm also going to remove myself from this thread. Probably good for me to take a break from this place all together. Too many ass wipes around this place for me to try and be civil with.
 

OZUT

Active Member
You start making sense and then you go back to not making any, oh well. As for the 35 grams per plant. I stated I averaged 30 grams per plant not 35 and that was ONLY with Chronic White Widow AKA Fruity Chronic. Yes its and extremely high yielder in fact I can more off it then Big Bud. I also never stated I went right from clone to bloom. Mine usually veg for a good week under a 600 watt prior to going to bloom room and are , as stated, 6-8 inches when switched. They are taking 1000 PPM nutes before going to bloom as well. I can still get 2.5 to 3 lbs with other high quality strains as well. Cheese, Super Skunk, Sweet Tooth, Bubble Gum and a few others which is closer to 20 grams per plant. If you are going to try and argue about other peoples posts at least get your facts straight as to what they posted in the first place.



Seems apparent you have never done a full SOG. Light penetration IS the huge factor. It couldnt be easier to see when you grow in this fashion. Yes 85% of the light goes right through the "big bad fan leaf" only 15% lost so why bother? Not that 15% loss isnt bad enough but there are MANY layers of leaves to go though to even get to the center of the plant in a full grow like this. Three leaves and you have just lost 50% of your usable light. I dont know about you but I like to grow under 1000 watts not 500 watts. Thing is for a full SOG you would be choking off a whole lot more then that to much of the plant. The bottom third would get between 15-30% of the usable light with no leaf removal. Kind of hurts yields a touch. Having a stationary HPS light is a huge part of the problem.

You really might want to actually have experience with something you are arguing about if you want to come across as intelligent but maybe that is just me. *shrug*
You've got no clue man...I'll do my thing and you just do yours
 

SOGfarmer

Well-Known Member
Growing the same clone both ways, i get much more grams per watt when heavily pruned and or topped. That's that.
 

Brick Top

New Member
I've said this to you before, and I'll say it again, you are using a HYPOTHESIS!!!.

I said I was done with this thread but I do have to make one last statement. Just because you wish to attempt to define the facts I have presented, facts that have been scientifically proven, as being nothing more that "a HYPOTHESIS"it will never transform the proven facts into being "a HYPOTHESIS" and regardless of how many times you repeat your self created non-scientifically proven personal belief it will never become a scientifically proven fact. Never.

Oh ... and what was with the "Portland Oregon. Come find some. I'm waiting" thing supposed to be .... some kind of typical hollow internet tough guy threat or something? Pardon me while I take a moment to lock my front door and my kitchen door and my five sliding glass doors on my 2,750 sq. ft. home for fear that you might show up here tonight and teach me some sort of lesson.

Oh heck .... I know I don't have to bother to lock any of my doors. I'm sure that you couldn't afford the price of a Greyhound Bus ticket to N.C. anyway so I know I'm safe.

I am finished with attempting to teach puppies to sit and stay and roll over when all they are interested in doing is chasing their tails and licking their butts and balls so if you want to troll me with more typical hollow internet tough guy threats .... have at it. You can come off as tough as you like to all your little minions who know as little as you do. I am positive they will be highly impressed by your typical hollow long distance internet tough guy routine.

To paraphrase what "Montjoy" said to "King Harry" in "Henry V," And so fare thee well: Thou never shalt hear Brick Top any more, in this thread.
 

jewgrow

Well-Known Member
Here's the thing, flowers with a fan leaf attached to it will still grow. They'll still produce, no one is arguing that. But the plant, overall won't be as healthy and the bud will not not grow to it's full potential, neither will the plant.

Here are a couple of statements made that aren't fully expanded on, both in this thread and several others.

1) Pruning plants has been done for ages. What makes cannabis different? - Pruning has been done for ages, but not removing fan leaves. Topping is a form of pruning. When you top the main stem, you redirect hormones to points below the topped location. I strongly doubt anyone will dispute this FACT. Topping is a form of pruning. You will get the same results with super cropping and with FIMing or other types of training. Also, if anyone has ever grown or knows anything about bonzai trees, you know that on certain species, it's highly recommended to strip the tree of all it's leaves every couple of years. Difference between bonzai trees or trees and cannabis in general, is the tree or bonzai continues to grow and age. A cannabis plant dies at the end of it's cycle (unless you rejuvinate it and reveg it) but very few people do that. Point is, you don't have a years to work with a cannabis plant and the cycle is so short that it doesn't have time to recover and give you what you expect of it.

2) Scrogger and SOGers all do it and get the results claimed. - This was also mentioned on this thread by Dlively. Scroggers don't trim fan leaves. What they do, is they train their plants in veg to get a lot of tops through a trellis. What they trim is everything below the trellis. They don't discriminate between leaves or flowers. Everything below it goes. They leave everything above the trellis. So what does that tell you? They could very easily train their plants, and instead of trimming out everything below the trellis, they could trim out the leaves above the trellis to get "light penetration" below it to maximize their yield. They don't do that because yield and quality would suffer. Scogging and SOGing is very similar. Their difference is the Scrogger spends the time in veg to get multiple tops and only grow tops and the SOGer skips the veg and goes from clone to flower and grows 1 cola per plant.

3) Trimming fan leaves is like lollipopping. - It's not. The people that lollipop (trim out the bottom 1/3 of a plant) do so because indoor conditions, as optimum as you can get it, most of the time doesn't allow you to get light that far down in a vertical lighting situation to make it worth growing out the bud down there. Again this goes back to actual pruning. Just as topping redirects hormones to point below the topped location, cutting out stems and growth at the bottom of the plant, redirects those hormones to the other branches. You basically focus your and your plants efforts into the area that has value.

4) You can get over 35grams per plant on a SOG setup by trimming all the fan leaves otherwise it's not possible. - 1st off, I'll call BS on this claim (mostly). Unless you're growing something like Big Bud, you're not going to get that weight growing a single cola going from clone straight to flower. I don't care how dialed in your environment and nutes are. Can anyone (other than Dlively) HONESTLY say they can get over 35 grams on a single cola with absolutely no veg, going from clone straight to flower with a quality OG strain or any quality strain for that matter? This isn't even about removing fan leaves. This is nothing more that an exaggeration.



It's a fact that SOG growers double, triple, quadruple the number of plants in a given space and get less weight per plant, but overall will get more weight in that space. Doesn't mean the quality is better, just means the weight is more. The weight is more simply because you're growing 4-6 times more plants even if you're getting less per plant. Again, this depends on the respective grower and all that other good stuff, but SOG growers mainly grow for weight. Does it mean the bud from a SOG grow won't get you high, no it doesn't.

Dlively has been turning blue trying to claim SOG growers get the weight and quality because they trim the leaves and they do it for light penetration. Has anyone considered the fact that removing those leaves is not as much about light penetration as it is about not creating a mold situation and allowing for airflow? Could you imagine a 4x4 area with 64 plants all loaded with leaves? There would be zero air movement and just an invite for pests. The benefit you get from removing those leaves is not the benefit that's being claimed by people removing the leaves. Now for those about to jump on me for having said this last thing, let me explain a little more. I'm not arguing both positions. What I'm trying to say is that removing the leaves is a sacrifice you make to get a benefit from elsewhere. The sacrifice is full bud potential and the benefit is you're able to grow more bud in a smaller area. It's a sacrifice because you lose something to gain something else. It's not pure benefit as people are trying to make it out to be.

At the end of the day, growing style is a preference and dependent on individual preferences and limitations, or lack of. What people like Dlively (not singling you out dude) are trying to do is make it sound that removing big bad fan leaves, gives you deeper light penetration and result in bigger better yield. That's not accurate. But whatever makes you feel good about what you do...
This SHOULD be the end of this post. You just summed up the whole entire thread. I don't think much else needs to be said but it's semi-fun to argue with close minded people. So SOG farmer, I am contributing because while yes, its true I don't have YEARS of growing experience, I still know what I am talking about. I am an environmental horticulture/turfgrass major so I do have a basic knowledge of plants. I pick up knowledge relatively quickly, so I do not need the years you claim I need to make a post of my opinion on a marijuana cultivation forum. Dlivley stfu about uncle ben already he hasn't posted for about half of this thread so yeah....OZUT said it and said it right...get over it.
 

ElectricPineapple

Well-Known Member
ah! thank you brick for explaining how water is moved through out the plant. i was about to post it when read your post on it. couldnt have said it better myself.
and to Snow, ya at one point in time, everything we are saying WAS a hypothesis, but through scientific process and experimentation, it was proven to be correct and it is all based on what we KNOW about plants and botany. we arent just pulling this out of our asses to sound smart. Go read a book about botany, and then see if you still think you are right. Dont come back posting that what we know about botany doesnt pertain to cannabis since its illegal, and there has been no formal research on it. thats the most BS line i have ever heard, and i hear it all the time from people arguing about techniques that contradict simple botany. botany pertains to the processes of ALL plants.

I now see that this is a futile effort, but please do us all a favor, and leave your technique to yourself. if yu think it works, then fine. but dont try to persuade people that raping your plants is better for them.
 

GibbsIt89

Well-Known Member
this is rediculous i dont even want to read this wow lol.. should i prune them or not, this being throughout the grow.

from my experience on one plant i topped it then LST'd it and had 4 huge tops i had stretched out horizontally.. the middle grew out and everything, i pruned this plant throughout and it grew awsome. but i dont have a yeild comparison becuz i ended up having to get rid of it due to spider mites (had lots of other plants growing so i sacrificed it)... i have pruned 2 autogrowers and harvested a quarter off each, not that it really matters in comparison to anything, plus they are autogrowers but i pruned them during flowering (first plants ever harvested).

i am curious whether i should or shouldnt, i like the idea of pruning to let other shoots grow, thus creating bigger budds in the end? (more potential main colas?) there can be many ways to study this so it all depends on how long u veg and if u LST or SOG or what.. etc etc. but generally if u prune a few once a week i dont see the harm in it... when flowering tho i would understand that you dont want to prune becuz they are the "sunleaves" that take in as much sun as possible. hense the idea to LST or SOG, so that you get the most out of the light/plant.. or you would have to provide side lighting. so this being in veg i guess i state my question.. i figure its fine to prune at the beginning to get your plant set up for what you want.. to keep it clean and etc. SOG probly dont want to prune after a certain point becuz u dont veg for long.. LST you might want to prune a bunch at the beginning to get those shoots growing and stretched out and have new growth before you flower so its evenly spaced for each cola. either way the idea is to get the cola the attention when flowering, thus you need "sunleaves" but also dont want to block other potential colas of equal individual yeild.

answered my own question haha.. sorry i didnt read any of the important stuff on the thread, just the BS, but i guess that not really my fault lol.. everyone experiments if you want to get into it then do that on your own time with your own proof.. pretty simple.
 

Vento

Well-Known Member
fuck ! ...are we still talking about this ?

I have an idea ... All the people FOR pruneing ... prune ....and all the people AGAINST it dont prune ... Agree to disagree and move along .

I'm with the people who say its personal choice ... the argument is solid on both sides ... ( Even if one side has not been documented by some egghead ) just do your own thing and get the results that echo your actions :)

Heres a tip ... increase the peace ... love eachother ... and be happy ( Sounds a bit stoner hippy i know ... but lets give it a go )

How about we stop the talking .... Come together .... and do a controlled experiment .... same strain same enviroment ( as close as it can be ) and lets see the results ?


After reading this thread for a while now i decided to try for myself on my current grow ...i will be happy to post results and compaire with others results :)

Just sayin ...
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
Is that what I posted...
IC Mag and Grasscity? Yeah, now there's two high tech and honorable websites. The former hawking knockoffs of knockoff genetics with all the bullshit that goes along with the seed biz (i.e. BOG, Rezdog, Mr. Nice, etc.), the latter site who has some self annointed Pot god (and enablers) knocking off some of my work, trying to pass it off as their own. http://forum.grasscity.com/indoor-marijuana-growing/215941-never-ending-abuse-phosphorous-enhance-flowering.html

I've posted to about 10 different cannabis forums, from the smallest membership to the largest (OG), for over 15 years, and they're all have pretty much the same tenets and feel.

If you want to know what a botanist thinks about butchering cannabis, all you need to do is check out one of the greats - R.C. Clarke's Marijuana Botany.

Happy gardening,
UB
 

dlively11

Well-Known Member
Bricktop and Uncle Ben are birds of a feather. Atleast Uncle Ben isnt quite as insulting. I can not even begin to imagine why he came at you like he did after your very informative post. another grower just hiding behind his books and clearly jealous in some form or another even if he himself doesnt realize it. No other excuse to act this way. FYI they came into these threads talking the same way from the get go hence my very frank posts to them.


Site everything you want, anything you want, it doesn't change the fact that what the other side espouses DOES NOT CORRELATE with the VERY OBVIOUS RESULTS.

I've said this to you before, and I'll say it again, you are using a HYPOTHESIS!!!

I have provided the RESULTS of the EXPERIMENT and the CONCLUSION does not match your HYPOTHESIS.

You'd think someone with a brain like yours would be able to examine the evidence. In fact, I think you do see the evidence and avoid acknowledging it, and I think you are doing this to purposefully mislead growers. I think it's rotten and I think its a shwoog ass move that'd get you popped if someone could prove it. The only reason to ignore this simple fact, to claim you're still right when the evidence proves otherwise, is pure narcissism. Eventually you'll figure that out.

I have evidence. You have scientific theory. Science is theory, not law, and any scientist that deals in laws and "facts" has very little to work with. Science is about the pursuit of knowledge, not regurgitating ideas that don't match up with results.

You consistently fail to recognize the results, or provide compelling physical evidence that would support the written theories. Over and over again you site your science, you claim my plants should be totally fucked, and yet they aren't... You have no explanation as to why!!!

Where are these destroyed plants that have been defoliated?
Where are the masses of people who have done it and know that it doesn't work???
What I find are people who have done it, love it, and continue to do it berated and insulted (if even intelligently by innuendo) by bunch of haters who don't do it, hate it, and will never try it.

And you trust the haters? You are a hater? JFC...

Defoliation works. It very, very obviously works. Evidence is readily available for rational people to make up their minds on it. If it didn't work then all of us wouldn't be doing it. Perhaps you should take a step off that high horse and come to the conclusion that you don't know everything and that something is going on you don't understand.

You're going on ignore anyway. I'm so very tired of you and it's not like I need your advice. My garden is perfect the way I'm running it without you, your theory or advice.

I'm also going to remove myself from this thread. Probably good for me to take a break from this place all together. Too many ass wipes around this place for me to try and be civil with.
clap clap clap clap clap
 

dlively11

Well-Known Member
ah! thank you brick for explaining how water is moved through out the plant. i was about to post it when read your post on it. couldnt have said it better myself.
and to Snow, ya at one point in time, everything we are saying WAS a hypothesis, but through scientific process and experimentation, it was proven to be correct and it is all based on what we KNOW about plants and botany. we arent just pulling this out of our asses to sound smart. Go read a book about botany, and then see if you still think you are right. Dont come back posting that what we know about botany doesnt pertain to cannabis since its illegal, and there has been no formal research on it. thats the most BS line i have ever heard, and i hear it all the time from people arguing about techniques that contradict simple botany. botany pertains to the processes of ALL plants.

I now see that this is a futile effort, but please do us all a favor, and leave your technique to yourself. if you think it works, then fine. but dont try to persuade people that raping your plants is better for them.
Gotta love mindless people who think a one dimensional book means everything for growing and experiments / results mean nothing.... you guys are really coming off like a joke now no offense. NONE of these so called scientifically proven botanical facts in any shape way or form are taking into account a full sog grow period. None of them take into account a stationary HPS light and a seriously crowded grow. Anyone who thinks there isnt a time and a place for pruning and leaf removal is blinded by their own ignornace/arrogance. You guys are like 1970s Nascar drivers telling present day Formula One drivers how they should drive and win the race. Yeah you guys know about growing/driving but have presented ZERO knowledge of the type of growing we are referring to. Just stop making yourselves look so bad it is embarrassing.
 
Top