Stop cutting your clone stems at a 45! There's a better way to get a white beard growing.

Cannaclysmic Events

Cannaclysmic Events

Well-Known Member
TheWholeTruth said:
The key with clones is to get them to push out as much root sites all over as possible on everything under the ground insted of one line. Its going to feed heavyier with many roots.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the goal, and the reason I called it an effort at optimization. Of course the underlying biomechanics are the same as they have always been, I didn't say I found a new way to create roots, I said the method could optimize distribution. It's a little fucked up how distorted that gets as each negative voice projects they're strawman into the mix. Let me walk this down one more time as it seems there is some folks here that can see it for what I intended, and alot still very confused as to why their efforts to piss on it keep landing on their feet.
Sometime ago I noticed the standard method of cutting a 45 and scarification left many clones with nothing more than dead tissue where all these roots were supposed to be; the idea to increase the rooting surface area by 45 degrees was failing in practice, despite it being repeated as the best known method. I have yet to see a pic of roots spawning from this area to even suggest it has merit outside of theory.
So I thought about the optimal arrangement of any other circular attachment or fastener and no matter the application, a similar pattern was always at work, concentric distribution evenly spaced . So I figured this could work 3 dimensionally with a little strategy applied to cut and location.
First cut is clean and perpendicular to the stem. This preserves the target tissue and prevents rot. Each subsequent cut is made perpendicular also, but these are only cut to a depth so that the outer layer of bark is crimped and 'punctured' for lack of a better word. These are spaced out evenly form the bottom up so that there are two or three in the buried section, and one flush at the media surface. This configuration, and type, of cuts provides inherent consistency and repeatability effectively negating the notion of chance as a fundamental mechanism. Cuts made in this way damage the tissue in a manner that is minimaly invasive and heals thoughly, yet triggers callous formation and ultimately roots. These clones continue to grow while rooting and will leave the cloner lush and ready to rock. The roots spawn predictably out of each cut, including the bottom, after the entire area swells and thickens. The result is a robust anchor that continues to develop and will propagate a container evenly without spiraling. Particularly effective for small container coco grows.
I typically dip the stem in clone gel prior to making the cuts and root in peat or coco plugs suspended over a heated, wet, mat under a dome. A cheap RH/temp controller with output to the mat easily automates the process and allows for fairly precise environmental control. Relay is set to power the mat so humidity doesn't drop below 98% for a few days, then dialed back 5-10% every few days until the hood can come off.
This method is simple, yet well thought out, each principle supports the next with no fluff. It can do a fine job of cutting through extraneous and complicated procedures that hinder some folks from routinely making copies, while bolstering the root zone in mass and quality.
Again, this is an optimization of the part genetics doesn't answer for. I'm also well aware you can get roots in dog shit or whatever you dropped a twig in mistakenly, we're way past that, have been for a minute now.
 
T

TheWholeTruth

Well-Known Member
Cannaclysmic Events said:
Yeah, that's the goal, and the reason I called it an effort at optimization. Of course the underlying biomechanics are the same as they have always been, I didn't say I found a new way to create roots, I said the method could optimize distribution. It's a little fucked up how distorted that gets as each negative voice projects they're strawman into the mix. Let me walk this down one more time as it seems there is some folks here that can see it for what I intended, and alot still very confused as to why their efforts to piss on it keep landing on their feet.
Sometime ago I noticed the standard method of cutting a 45 and scarification left many clones with nothing more than dead tissue where all these roots were supposed to be; the idea to increase the rooting surface area by 45 degrees was failing in practice, despite it being repeated as the best known method. I have yet to see a pic of roots spawning from this area to even suggest it has merit outside of theory.
So I thought about the optimal arrangement of any other circular attachment or fastener and no matter the application, a similar pattern was always at work, concentric distribution evenly spaced . So I figured this could work 3 dimensionally with a little strategy applied to cut and location.
First cut is clean and perpendicular to the stem. This preserves the target tissue and prevents rot. Each subsequent cut is made perpendicular also, but these are only cut to a depth so that the outer layer of bark is crimped and 'punctured' for lack of a better word. These are spaced out evenly form the bottom up so that there are two or three in the buried section, and one flush at the media surface. This configuration, and type, of cuts provides inherent consistency and repeatability effectively negating the notion of chance as a fundamental mechanism. Cuts made in this way damage the tissue in a manner that is minimaly invasive and heals thoughly, yet triggers callous formation and ultimately roots. These clones continue to grow while rooting and will leave the cloner lush and ready to rock. The roots spawn predictably out of each cut, including the bottom, after the entire area swells and thickens. The result is a robust anchor that continues to develop and will propagate a container evenly without spiraling. Particularly effective for small container coco grows.
I typically dip the stem in clone gel prior to making the cuts and root in peat or coco plugs suspended over a heated, wet, mat under a dome. A cheap RH/temp controller with output to the mat easily automates the process and allows for fairly precise environmental control. Relay is set to power the mat so humidity doesn't drop below 98% for a few days, then dialed back 5-10% every few days until the hood can come off.
This method is simple, yet well thought out, each principle supports the next with no fluff. It can do a fine job of cutting through extraneous and complicated procedures that hinder some folks from routinely making copies, while bolstering the root zone in mass and quality.
Again, this is an optimization of the part genetics doesn't answer for. I'm also well aware you can get roots in dog shit or whatever you dropped a twig in mistakenly, we're way past that, have been for a minute now.
Click to expand...
Maybe I as well as others may have misinterpreted what was being presented in the thread. It seemed to be portrayed as if the 45° angle cut was some exact long-term scientific method that had made it no longer valid by a new scientific method that had been developed that actually caused a cutting to lay down a tap root now. From your reply I can see that isnt the case and what youve done is just found a way that for your method of cloning (eg soil, bubbler, airoponic, coco ect what ever method you use) you have just developed the cut to give better results than you were getting in your cloning system. I agree were way past just dropping clones in dog poo or what ever methods as cloning has come to the stage were plerific rooting can be achieved from tiny samples of the plant via invirto methods. They dont even need to cut any 45° angles and can achieve massive rooting from tiny samples of plant matter and with adjusting the strength and dose of the hormones in the gel used.
The 45° cut was just a broad method designed to help people with cloning with using many different methods of media across the board, such as in soil, water, bubbler, airoponic, ebb and flow ect. Personally myself in certain flood and drain systems using nothing but hydroton as media I could just snap of branches not even worrying about how the tip was cut, and due to the massive amounts of humidity around the grow pebbles area and huge amounts of oxygen and the constant pushing and pulling of fresh air and repeated rapid suction of water when draining, the movement of the grow pebbles during flooding and draining I could achieve rooting extremely fast and massive root shooting out of the cut very very quickly to force anchor them in, with the roots quickly extending due to being drawn and sucked via the drain cycle. For me personally it was one of the most fastest rooting methods I seen that would very very quickly cause the bottom of the stem to burst open shooting out massive thick roots.

Id be intrested to see how your method of preparing the clone end works vs a cut with a 30° angle or a 50° angle or just a straight cut in a warm well lit ideal environment in a bubble cloner or airoponic cloner were the water is constantly kept at 22°c.to 24°c with a heating element rooted bare root with zero media only clone colars.
When done right in most media methods, regardless of angle cut the end of the stem should split open sometimes up to a inch or two bursting out with roots and the lower part of the clone should get thicker and bulge out from roots pushing out.
I will take a better read of the thread so I can more understand whats being presented.
Thanks for your reply and clarification.
 
Cannaclysmic Events

Cannaclysmic Events

Well-Known Member
TheWholeTruth said:
Maybe I as well as others may have misinterpreted what was being presented in the thread. It seemed to be portrayed as if the 45° angle cut was some exact long-term scientific method that had made it no longer valid by a new scientific method that had been developed that actually caused a cutting to lay down a tap root now. From your reply I can see that isnt the case and what youve done is just found a way that for your method of cloning (eg soil, bubbler, airoponic, coco ect what ever method you use) you have just developed the cut to give better results than you were getting in your cloning system. I agree were way past just dropping clones in dog poo or what ever methods as cloning has come to the stage were plerific rooting can be achieved from tiny samples of the plant via invirto methods. They dont even need to cut any 45° angles and can achieve massive rooting from tiny samples of plant matter and with adjusting the strength and dose of the hormones in the gel used.
The 45° cut was just a broad method designed to help people with cloning with using many different methods of media across the board, such as in soil, water, bubbler, airoponic, ebb and flow ect. Personally myself in certain flood and drain systems using nothing but hydroton as media I could just snap of branches not even worrying about how the tip was cut, and due to the massive amounts of humidity around the grow pebbles area and huge amounts of oxygen and the constant pushing and pulling of fresh air and repeated rapid suction of water when draining, the movement of the grow pebbles during flooding and draining I could achieve rooting extremely fast and massive root shooting out of the cut very very quickly to force anchor them in, with the roots quickly extending due to being drawn and sucked via the drain cycle. For me personally it was one of the most fastest rooting methods I seen that would very very quickly cause the bottom of the stem to burst open shooting out massive thick roots.

Id be intrested to see how your method of preparing the clone end works vs a cut with a 30° angle or a 50° angle or just a straight cut in a warm well lit ideal environment in a bubble cloner or airoponic cloner were the water is constantly kept at 22°c.to 24°c with a heating element rooted bare root with zero media only clone colars.
When done right in most media methods, regardless of angle cut the end of the stem should split open sometimes up to a inch or two bursting out with roots and the lower part of the clone should get thicker and bulge out from roots pushing out.
I will take a better read of the thread so I can more understand whats being presented.
Thanks for your reply and clarification.
Click to expand...
Thanks dude. If you look over it all you'll see some folks just shitting on anything that isn't the bro science they were taught in their buddie's uncle's basement. It gets old, I'll never understand people that aren't willing to explore new ideas. Some work, some don't, some reveal to be impractical when a more seasoned voice chimes in, but an idea should never be ignored out of complacency. Frankly, the only people that are always 100% sure of what they're doing are typically idiots, and their arguments usually end up in Ad Hominen attacks and strawman retorts. You'll see alot of that. It should be obvious to anyone with an open mind this method optimizes root arrangement which allows them grow in the most efficient manner for quantity and quality. The key component is found in the type and placement of the cuts. Done in this fashion let's the plant heal and form new tissue consistent with the natural growth plane the cells use, while minimizing the damage so that it is a stimulation without excessive trauma. That's essentially where the magic happens. An angled cut only serves to make the plant repair itself on a plane not natural to it's inherent symmetry, so it just dies off until the natural plane is established. People see new roots spawning everywhere but the terminal cut and mistakenly conclude that it doesn't matter how it's cut because they don't start there anyway. This has effectively proven that notion to be flawed. New roots are consistently formed at the terminal cut with no loss of tissue when cut clean across. I would be comfortable stating any angle works against the plant's natural growth plane. There are plenty of DIY experiments exploring splitting the stem, none are conclusive, none showed any repeatable enhancement the way a single, clean, callous forming cut does.
As far as a new tap development, that's undetermined. I noted not long ago it would take some histology work to compare cell type and arrangement to a seed tap root. Functionaly, I have witnessed many turn the terminal end into one continuous root that develops strikingly similar to one.
 
T

TheWholeTruth

Well-Known Member
Cannaclysmic Events said:
Thanks dude. If you look over it all you'll see some folks just shitting on anything that isn't the bro science they were taught in their buddie's uncle's basement. It gets old, I'll never understand people that aren't willing to explore new ideas. Some work, some don't, some reveal to be impractical when a more seasoned voice chimes in, but an idea should never be ignored out of complacency. Frankly, the only people that are always 100% sure of what they're doing are typically idiots, and their arguments usually end up in Ad Hominen attacks and strawman retorts. You'll see alot of that. It should be obvious to anyone with an open mind this method optimizes root arrangement which allows them grow in the most efficient manner for quantity and quality. The key component is found in the type and placement of the cuts. Done in this fashion let's the plant heal and form new tissue consistent with the natural growth plane the cells use, while minimizing the damage so that it is a stimulation without excessive trauma. That's essentially where the magic happens. An angled cut only serves to make the plant repair itself on a plane not natural to it's inherent symmetry, so it just dies off until the natural plane is established. People see new roots spawning everywhere but the terminal cut and mistakenly conclude that it doesn't matter how it's cut because they don't start there anyway. This has effectively proven that notion to be flawed. New roots are consistently formed at the terminal cut with no loss of tissue when cut clean across. I would be comfortable stating any angle works against the plant's natural growth plane. There are plenty of DIY experiments exploring splitting the stem, none are conclusive, none showed any repeatable enhancement the way a single, clean, callous forming cut does.
As far as a new tap development, that's undetermined. I noted not long ago it would take some histology work to compare cell type and arrangement to a seed tap root. Functionaly, I have witnessed many turn the terminal end into one continuous root that develops strikingly similar to one.
Click to expand...
No problem man, im all for good experimentation with a aim and goal in mind. If no one had ever stepped outside the box we all would still be at square 1 still. Im all for good experimentation and someone trying different things themselves. Its how we learn and grow within ourselves and for ourselves. Keep logging and documenting what you find as it may also help someone else or spark someone else to think outside the box.
Some of the negative reaction is probably due to missunderstang . But like I said it would be good to see how your method works in repeated documted tests. With bare root cloning we can all see the stem end better throughout its stages of development. So itl help us all see abit more indepth on what your working at vs the normal methods and how it behaves in repeated tests. Good luck.
 
G

goyum

Active Member
Cannaclysmic Events said:
Thanks dude. If you look over it all you'll see some folks just shitting on anything that isn't the bro science they were taught in their buddie's uncle's basement. It gets old, I'll never understand people that aren't willing to explore new ideas. Some work, some don't, some reveal to be impractical when a more seasoned voice chimes in, but an idea should never be ignored out of complacency. Frankly, the only people that are always 100% sure of what they're doing are typically idiots, and their arguments usually end up in Ad Hominen attacks and strawman retorts. You'll see alot of that. It should be obvious to anyone with an open mind this method optimizes root arrangement which allows them grow in the most efficient manner for quantity and quality. The key component is found in the type and placement of the cuts. Done in this fashion let's the plant heal and form new tissue consistent with the natural growth plane the cells use, while minimizing the damage so that it is a stimulation without excessive trauma. That's essentially where the magic happens. An angled cut only serves to make the plant repair itself on a plane not natural to it's inherent symmetry, so it just dies off until the natural plane is established. People see new roots spawning everywhere but the terminal cut and mistakenly conclude that it doesn't matter how it's cut because they don't start there anyway. This has effectively proven that notion to be flawed. New roots are consistently formed at the terminal cut with no loss of tissue when cut clean across. I would be comfortable stating any angle works against the plant's natural growth plane. There are plenty of DIY experiments exploring splitting the stem, none are conclusive, none showed any repeatable enhancement the way a single, clean, callous forming cut does.
As far as a new tap development, that's undetermined. I noted not long ago it would take some histology work to compare cell type and arrangement to a seed tap root. Functionaly, I have witnessed many turn the terminal end into one continuous root that develops strikingly similar to one.
Click to expand...
Did you happen to read the article I posted in this thread about 1% improvements leading to gold medals in olympics? That article is worth reading 20 times. My gift to you for what you presented. Also I have another useful bit, on overgrow you can search by forum member. Search for Shag and go through all his stuff. He's smart like you.
 
Weather Report

Weather Report

Active Member
Screenshot_20240127_192352_Chrome~2.jpg
I got a cent
Taproot comes inside the seed, it's the radicle growing to be a root with a pair of seed leaves, the cotyledons. The only way to have a taproot is growing from the seed.
But one can define taproot as a simple main root, which is not accurate. In the end everyone knows there is a difference from clone to seeds cuz its a biological stuff and both may be very beautiful plants.
 
conor c

conor c

Well-Known Member
Weather Report said:
View attachment 5365119
I got a cent
Taproot comes inside the seed, it's the radicle growing to be a root with a pair of seed leaves, the cotyledons. The only way to have a taproot is growing from the seed.
But one can define taproot as a simple main root, which is not accurate. In the end everyone knows there is a difference from clone to seeds cuz its a biological stuff and both may be very beautiful plants.
Click to expand...
That is why clones will never have tap roots that is correct mate alot of folk just mix em up as a main root but its not like you said only seedplants have them
 
Cannaclysmic Events

Cannaclysmic Events

Well-Known Member
goyum said:
Did you happen to read the article I posted in this thread about 1% improvements leading to gold medals in olympics? That article is worth reading 20 times. My gift to you for what you presented. Also I have another useful bit, on overgrow you can search by forum member. Search for Shag and go through all his stuff. He's smart like you.
Click to expand...
Thanks brother! I love the spirit you bring to the dialog. That article is very telling about something we all overlook all too often. I have heard that it only takes a 1% shift in belief to set an entire culture on a new course. It's an empowering concept that we can see at work throughout history, probably the most famous and arguably most important to date is the Civil Rights movement. I don't know that it was 1% exactly, but the concept still seems to fit. I also heard a legislator speak to a campus collective urging people to write their congressman about any injustice we encounter. He went on to say we have been deceived as to how powerful that simple action can be. Really make you think
 
Cannaclysmic Events

Cannaclysmic Events

Well-Known Member
Weather Report said:
View attachment 5365119
I got a cent
Taproot comes inside the seed, it's the radicle growing to be a root with a pair of seed leaves, the cotyledons. The only way to have a taproot is growing from the seed.
But one can define taproot as a simple main root, which is not accurate. In the end everyone knows there is a difference from clone to seeds cuz its a biological stuff and both may be very beautiful plants.
Click to expand...
That's a nice bit of delineation between similiar structures. I can surely appreciate that. Going forward I'll refer to the observation as a main root or perhaps a terminal extension to keep the anatomy consistent with known and approved nomenclature. Either of those terms should be a good descriptor that speaks to the potential advantage of the new tissue if any is shown to exist.
 
Cannaclysmic Events

Cannaclysmic Events

Well-Known Member
TheWholeTruth said:
No problem man, im all for good experimentation with a aim and goal in mind. If no one had ever stepped outside the box we all would still be at square 1 still. Im all for good experimentation and someone trying different things themselves. Its how we learn and grow within ourselves and for ourselves. Keep logging and documenting what you find as it may also help someone else or spark someone else to think outside the box.
Some of the negative reaction is probably due to missunderstang . But like I said it would be good to see how your method works in repeated documted tests. With bare root cloning we can all see the stem end better throughout its stages of development. So itl help us all see abit more indepth on what your working at vs the normal methods and how it behaves in repeated tests. Good luck.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Need all the luck one can muster! I think you have a valid point and great suggestion there. I'm thinking an aerocloner would be imperative to document any further experiments to get a comprehensive observation of development. I've always had the ability to pry the pellet open but it never translates that well when photographed. I went back to media rooting a while back because I felt the media allowed the roots to develop with the fine absorbent hairs protected and more intact, but that can be pulled from consideration to examine the idea at hand. Great input
 
Cannaclysmic Events

Cannaclysmic Events

Well-Known Member
Budzbuddha said:
51.5 same as Egyptian Pyramids

View attachment 5361412
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to be a dick, honestly, but im guessing this is vote for cutting at 45⁰ or at least a vote for the 'who gives a shit, it doesn't matter' crowd. I would be remiss to ignore that Trumpesque comb over. I mean they're great, really great, so great they only need one side, but an even plug is what I'm after. Get it, plug
 

Attachments

Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top