Trellis advice

Ydoineedtoregister

Ydoineedtoregister

Member
Hi.

I'm not sure how to go about getting the most from the trellis in my 32x32x63.

I know i have many leaves that are not getting much light and are right on or underneath others that might create humidity pockets, or so I've read.

Today is 5th day of flowering and day 3 i defoliated a bit of the yellowish leaves. Maybe too many?

Either way she's OK now and i think i need to get rid of more unneeded leaves to get her to use her energy for stretching to hold the buds. Am i correct?

Other places i read to wait till after stretch but i feel like it's so crowded already and if i keep tucking under trellis it will get worse. And when i was tucking the other day it seems as if anywhere i tuck is already crowded.

Should i wait until higher growth to tuck under net or as soon as the are able to be meaning just slightly above trellis level.

I think my airflow is pretty good. 2 6" oscillating fans one blowing at light and other at just below canopy level. Plus my aerolight 200se blows air from above.

6" exhaust fan.

I think the pictures is all that's needed really but gave some info anyway.

Ty
 

Attachments

FmSwayze

FmSwayze

Well-Known Member
Ydoineedtoregister said:
Hi.

I'm not sure how to go about getting the most from the trellis in my 32x32x63.

I know i have many leaves that are not getting much light and are right on or underneath others that might create humidity pockets, or so I've read.

Today is 5th day of flowering and day 3 i defoliated a bit of the yellowish leaves. Maybe too many?

Either way she's OK now and i think i need to get rid of more unneeded leaves to get her to use her energy for stretching to hold the buds. Am i correct?

Other places i read to wait till after stretch but i feel like it's so crowded already and if i keep tucking under trellis it will get worse. And when i was tucking the other day it seems as if anywhere i tuck is already crowded.

Should i wait until higher growth to tuck under net or as soon as the are able to be meaning just slightly above trellis level.

I think my airflow is pretty good. 2 6" oscillating fans one blowing at light and other at just below canopy level. Plus my aerolight 200se blows air from above.

6" exhaust fan.

I think the pictures is all that's needed really but gave some info anyway.

Ty
Click to expand...
You 100% correct. Strip it down, typically you would have done this right before the flip. But do it now, they will recover. You will probably have to don't again week 3 to 5. Good work, beautiful plants. Take notes.
 
Ydoineedtoregister

Ydoineedtoregister

Member
2WorldsFrog said:
I usually strip off the bottom 1/3 of everything closest to the main stalk. It keeps air flowing and eliminates the nutrient sucking underbuds.
Click to expand...

Yea I realized i should have done that before flip.

I have been defoliating a bit and pruned a few small bottom branches. I just hope i didn't stress her too much.

I feel like she hasn't stretched much in this first week though.

Anyway.. I think there is enough air flow although there are definitely leaves touching other leaves and blocking other leaves still...
Think im going to wait until after stretch to finish pruning and defoliation
 

Attachments

D

Delps8

Well-Known Member
The only time I defoliate is when leaves are damaged/dying or when they're blocking air flow. In mid-flower, or so, I'll remove branches at the bottom of the plant that are "thinner than a pencil" because those branches tend to have very few buds and those buds don't develop (they're larf). Generally speaking, I don't remove healthy leaves because the plant will attempt to replace the healthy leaves that I just cut off instead of growing new branches and leaves. A plant can only generate a finite amount foliage so my preference is to have that energy go to creating new foliage rather than replacing the foliage that I've cut off.

The idea of removing leaves at the canopy to "expose bud sites" so that they can mature assumes that bud sites need light to mature. I don't have any reason to think that is the case. Bud sites have very little chlorophyll so they have very limited ability to carry out photosynthesis so what exactly is the benefit of removing canopy leaves, that are photosynthetically efficient, to expose "bud sites"? That's the issue of generating glucose but what about buds not maturing without light? If that was the case, do cannabis plants not survive when grown in the shade?

I think there's merit in the idea that plants react to stress in a positive way, meaning that they generate more growth and/or more secondary metabolites and that would be an interesting study but I've seen no research that touches on that topic.

The only research I've seen on the topic of defoliation is attached. I've had this paper for some time but haven't undertaken the "two defol" strategy that provided the best results in this study. I only do two grows per year (I don't grow in the summer heat here in Southern California) so I simply forgot to read the paper again and put that approach into practice. With a grow that just went into flower, I intend to do the second defol of the "two defol" strategy.

The attached paper describes seven defol strategies and compares them to a control. Some of the strategies were clearly counter productive but it showed that the "BBLR" - bottom branch and leaf removal - had no impact on yield and caused a minimal reduction in cannabanoids.

In contrast, the researchers state the following, in part, about the "double prune" method:

"The highest cannabinoid yield was achieved by the increased inflorescence yield in the “Double prune” treatment, more so than by the increase in cannabinoid concentrations in the defoliation treatments. This demonstrates that in spite of the expected diluting effect due to growth, the additional inflorescence tissue benefited whole plant cannabinoid production more so than the induced increases in tissue concentrations. This conclusion can be utilized for optimization of production schemes for specific production goals."

One thing I'd recommend when reading this paper is to print before starting to read it. That was helpful to me because it let me refer to the pictures of the plants while reading through the descriptions and results of the study.

If anyone has any other research on pruning techniques, I'd love to read it. Based on the data in this paper, I plan on doing a defol in a couple of weeks but if there's other research out there that has a better approach, I'd love to have the opportunity to read it.
 

Attachments

cat shit

cat shit

Well-Known Member
Ydoineedtoregister said:
Yea I realized i should have done that before flip.

I have been defoliating a bit and pruned a few small bottom branches. I just hope i didn't stress her too much.

I feel like she hasn't stretched much in this first week though.

Anyway.. I think there is enough air flow although there are definitely leaves touching other leaves and blocking other leaves still...
Think im going to wait until after stretch to finish pruning and defoliation
Click to expand...
I just remove bud sites that dont have a chance of developing under canopy i remove very little leaves from the canopy only a few to help airflow.
 

Attachments

D

Delps8

Well-Known Member
cat shit said:
I just remove bud sites that dont have a chance of developing under canopy i remove very little leaves from the canopy only a few to help airflow.
Click to expand...
That grow on the left is an incredibly uniform canopy. Nicely done!
 
Ydoineedtoregister

Ydoineedtoregister

Member
Delps8 said:
The only time I defoliate is when leaves are damaged/dying or when they're blocking air flow. In mid-flower, or so, I'll remove branches at the bottom of the plant that are "thinner than a pencil" because those branches tend to have very few buds and those buds don't develop (they're larf). Generally speaking, I don't remove healthy leaves because the plant will attempt to replace the healthy leaves that I just cut off instead of growing new branches and leaves. A plant can only generate a finite amount foliage so my preference is to have that energy go to creating new foliage rather than replacing the foliage that I've cut off.

The idea of removing leaves at the canopy to "expose bud sites" so that they can mature assumes that bud sites need light to mature. I don't have any reason to think that is the case. Bud sites have very little chlorophyll so they have very limited ability to carry out photosynthesis so what exactly is the benefit of removing canopy leaves, that are photosynthetically efficient, to expose "bud sites"? That's the issue of generating glucose but what about buds not maturing without light? If that was the case, do cannabis plants not survive when grown in the shade?

I think there's merit in the idea that plants react to stress in a positive way, meaning that they generate more growth and/or more secondary metabolites and that would be an interesting study but I've seen no research that touches on that topic.

The only research I've seen on the topic of defoliation is attached. I've had this paper for some time but haven't undertaken the "two defol" strategy that provided the best results in this study. I only do two grows per year (I don't grow in the summer heat here in Southern California) so I simply forgot to read the paper again and put that approach into practice. With a grow that just went into flower, I intend to do the second defol of the "two defol" strategy.

The attached paper describes seven defol strategies and compares them to a control. Some of the strategies were clearly counter productive but it showed that the "BBLR" - bottom branch and leaf removal - had no impact on yield and caused a minimal reduction in cannabanoids.

In contrast, the researchers state the following, in part, about the "double prune" method:

"The highest cannabinoid yield was achieved by the increased inflorescence yield in the “Double prune” treatment, more so than by the increase in cannabinoid concentrations in the defoliation treatments. This demonstrates that in spite of the expected diluting effect due to growth, the additional inflorescence tissue benefited whole plant cannabinoid production more so than the induced increases in tissue concentrations. This conclusion can be utilized for optimization of production schemes for specific production goals."

One thing I'd recommend when reading this paper is to print before starting to read it. That was helpful to me because it let me refer to the pictures of the plants while reading through the descriptions and results of the study.

If anyone has any other research on pruning techniques, I'd love to read it. Based on the data in this paper, I plan on doing a defol in a couple of weeks but if there's other research out there that has a better approach, I'd love to have the opportunity to read it.
Click to expand...

Just printed and looking forward to reading it..

Thanks for post
 
D

Delps8

Well-Known Member
cat shit said:
Its not me lol the ks 3000 made it so! Great light
Click to expand...
It has a good PPFD map but those plants are Kansas-level flat. That'll work out really well in flower.

Just to nudge you - with a 12" hang height and 100%, that's a good amount of light for cannabis in ambient CO2 (or maybe 11"). You are running it at 12", aren't you? :-)
 
Last edited:
cat shit

cat shit

Well-Known Member
Delps8 said:
It has a good PPFD map but those plants are Kansas-level flat. That'll work out really well in flower.

Just to nudge you - with a 12" hang height and 100%, that's a good amount of light for cannabis in ambient CO2 (or maybe 11"). You are running it at 12", aren't you? :-)
Click to expand...
My last run of autos the light was 16" from the canopy i had a main cola at 12" and it got a little stressed it produced an imature seed ive got rhe ks on the pinneapples at 18 atm and ebery gew days ill lower it and monitor leaf conditions and of course liase with my grow buddy the uni-T lux meter. Im getting nice bud density :bigjoint:
 

Attachments

cat shit

cat shit

Well-Known Member
Delps8 said:
It has a good PPFD map but those plants are Kansas-level flat. That'll work out really well in flower.

Just to nudge you - with a 12" hang height and 100%, that's a good amount of light for cannabis in ambient CO2 (or maybe 11"). You are running it at 12", aren't you? :-)
Click to expand...
I have a photoperiod under a ks2000 in a 2/2 at 16" at 100 per cent as the flowers develop ill lower to 12" i find that 16" seems to be a good base distance without foxtails etc
 

Attachments

D

Delps8

Well-Known Member
cat shit said:
I have a photoperiod under a ks2000 in a 2/2 at 16" at 100 per cent as the flowers develop ill lower to 12" i find that 16" seems to be a good base distance without foxtails etc
Click to expand...
Can't find anything about a KS2000.

16" to 12" will make quite a difference in PPFD.

And foxtails, one grow. There are three plants in the tent with one just taking over the tent. I canted the light to try to light up all three plants. The only way I could get decent light on the small plants was to raise the PPFD on the big one…to 1300 or so.

Don't do that. :-(

Front View.jpeg

The big plant ended up fox tailing and I ended up having to get a light for the little plants anyway.

Gelato.jpg
 
Last edited:
FmSwayze

FmSwayze

Well-Known Member
cat shit said:
My last run of autos the light was 16" from the canopy i had a main cola at 12" and it got a little stressed it produced an imature seed ive got rhe ks on the pinneapples at 18 atm and ebery gew days ill lower it and monitor leaf conditions and of course liase with my grow buddy the uni-T lux meter. Im getting nice bud density :bigjoint:
Click to expand...
What was your max lux in flower?
 
cat shit

cat shit

Well-Known Member
Delps8 said:
Can't find anything about a KS2000.

16" to 12" will make quite a difference in PPFD.

And foxtails, one grow. There are three plants in the tent with one just taking over the tent. I canted the light to try to light up all three plants. The only way I could get decent light on the small plants was to raise the PPFD on the big one…to 1300 or so.

Don't do that. :-(

View attachment 5437536

The big plant ended up fox tailing and I ended up having to get a light for the little plants anyway.

.View attachment 5437537
Click to expand...
My bad not ks2000 its the xs2000 model. Its been a good light for me for a few grows. I like it because the dimmer is fully adjustable from 0 - 100 percent. The ks 3000 are preset at 25 50 75 100. The xs 2000 flowered these two photoperiods at 18" from canopy i added an xs1500 in the last few weeks for the plant in the front. If i knew then what i know now the lights would have been much closer.
 

Attachments

cat shit

cat shit

Well-Known Member
Delps8 said:
Can't find anything about a KS2000.

16" to 12" will make quite a difference in PPFD.

And foxtails, one grow. There are three plants in the tent with one just taking over the tent. I canted the light to try to light up all three plants. The only way I could get decent light on the small plants was to raise the PPFD on the big one…to 1300 or so.

Don't do that. :-(

View attachment 5437536

The big plant ended up fox tailing and I ended up having to get a light for the little plants anyway.

View attachment 5437537
Click to expand...
My bad not ks2000. xs2000 good light, the dimmer is fully adjustable not preset like the ks3000 or the xs1500.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top