New Grower Does Light Shining On Buds Increase Their Potency? Fact or Fiction?

[pop22]

Damn, are you always so fractious and argumentative or does something about this topic make you feel all specially butt-hurt? Anyway it goes, you should work on your piss-poor reading comprehension. I did my own "research" into what others said since I picked up a solar storm 440 at a steep discount as a refurbished unit and it has a UV-b booster. I don't know if it works or not. I just know that it is a hot "theory" about how to do nor'easter potency and since that was the topic of this discussion, your animosity is a little unwarranted.

its not meant to be an argument and I'm sorry you take it that way. I figure if you want a discussion you need to hear both sides. It was not meant to be offensive. I am however, concerned with safety for us all, is that so wrong.

Or are only yes men allowed to respond? Seriously, what's wrong with my post? I come to these threads looking for information. And I'm very adamant and outspoken when it comes to the many myths surrounding the growing of cannabis ( or anything you grow) Your more than welcome to believe whatever you like, but at least give my words some serious consideration before reacting emotionally!

I'll say no more, I am not here to create any issues and I'm sorry my words disturb you so.

 

[gardenhackle]

I couldn't care less whether you believe it works, believe it doesn't, or like me, just don't know. Unless you can prove it is a myth, you're talking out your ass when you imply it is. The topic was about light on buds increasing potency and so I contributed something that hadn't been discussed. If everyone dismissed every idea or hypothesis that didn't have "conclusive evidence", there would never be "conclusive evidence". The funny thing here is that neither of us know if it works but you sound convinced that you know the answer. If you want to be scientific, be scientific. If you don't have proof it doesn't work, all you can say, LOGICALLY, is that you are unconvinced because you haven't seen sufficient evidence to support it. That's my position; the rational one.

 

[pop22]

Does Light Shining On Buds Increase Their Potency? Fact or Fiction? is this, or is it not the title of the thread?

Hmmm I see the word fact in the title, but none in the thread..... so by your reasoning if science had never proved otherwise, it would be ok to believe the Sun revolves around the Earth and we are the center of the Universe.....after all, that "theory" was based on subjective conclusions.
Nicolaus Copernicus was scorned for his pursuit of scientific answers also.

Ok, lets skip the scientific approach mostly. I'm open to the possibility that it may work. How will we know? please, this is a serious question.

Unless those posting online have SOMETHING to support the claim it WORKS or DOESN'T who's talking out their asses?
And no, I can't prove it doesn't, nor do I care to. Yet, that doesn't mean I'm not curious. As I said, I'm looking for answers also.So I look forward to your posting of a grow with your Solar Storm light. Maybe you can shed some light on the subject.

"If everyone dismissed every idea or hypothesis that didn't have "conclusive evidence", there would never be "conclusive evidence" If everyone supported every hypothesis with subjective "proof" only, we'd still be living in the dark ages!

 

[gardenhackle]

Lighten up, Francis. Or at least if you insist on taking your "science" so seriously, learn how to think scientifically. Unless you know every study that has been done on uv-b and cannabis, you can't make a statement that no study ever blah blah blah blah blah reckon' blah". For god's sake learn how to disagree without being so feckin' disagreeable in the process.

You could always have just said, I'm skeptical and don't think the risk of uv exposure makes it worthwhile to experiment. Kinda makes me wonder how those reptile lovers survive after using uv bulbs for their critters. You're entitled to your opinion just like everyone else but if you want to flex what you laughably think are your might intellectual muscles you're really better off picking someone that less capable of handing you your intellectual ass on a platter.

I said there is evidence UV-b increases potency of buds exposed to it. That was all. When asked, I posted a link to one of the articles I pread and commented on it.

I didn't say it was my study
I didn't vouch for the uv-b theory personally
I said I can neither prove nor disprove the theory (any more than you can)

What I said was quite reasonable and rational. Your personal crap challenging me as though it was my personal theory, my personal study. Etc, is the irrational part. Light up a feckin' bowl and mellow out. You will live longer if you believe the science about the effects of stress on humans. . And you'll be infinitely more likable to boot.

Oh p.s. I'm going to use the uv-b as the mfg intended And thanks for the suggestion to post some kind of grow journal but I'm not posting any pictures or studies (at least not unless I get more comfortable with this site) because, as you SHOULD have known, it, too, would be nothing more than anecdotal evidence and not even very good anecdotal evidence since I'm not doing a parallel "control". I just. Want to grow some decent smoke in a small hobby grow. I don't want to get into some penis measuring contest with you. I don't aspire to be the ultimate authority on cannabis growing. I don't want to be "the guy who proved uv-b light increases potency". I just want to enjoy the fellowship of other cannabis aficionados and hobbyists that don't have ego issues they try to resolve on the Internet with "the new guys" on some forum I participate in. I've always tried to be a little more friendly than that to forum newbies. But, I suppose that's just because I'm comfortable in my own skin. Maybe you will be someday, too, pops.

 

[BII]

Pushing discussion back to the original topic:
a) Does light shining on buds increase their potency?
b) Is leaf tucking, plucking, etc. to expose buds to more direct light productive, counter-productive, or what (in terms of increasing bud THC content, not general plant health/appearance)?
c) What physiological mechanism could possible support this? Is there such a thing as a bud-localized make-more-essensial oils response to bud-localized light exposure?

How about people describing any experience they have had with side-by-side grows of plants with and without leaf tucking, plucking, etc.?

 

[Tetra9]

You can not isolate THC production or potency in a plant, just like you can't isolate fat loss in the human body. Do you see what I'm saying ? I can't diet and do side bends until I burn off my love handles, all the fat comes off evenly, over-all, and over time. Much the same with THC production.
Tucking and defoliation are helpful because light diminishes exponentially. It's not about exposing bud sites, it's about exposing the foliage and canopy to as much light as possible.
You know how Christians say "the only way to God is through Christ and the cross" ? Same concept. The only way to increase bud THC content is through overall plant health and well being - not localized lighting. Respectfully. IMO.

 

[BII]

You can not isolate THC production or potency in a plant, just like you can't isolate fat loss in the human body. Do you see what I'm saying ? I can't diet and do side bends until I burn off my love handles, all the fat comes off evenly, over-all, and over time. Much the same with THC production.
Tucking and defoliation are helpful because light diminishes exponentially. It's not about exposing bud sites, it's about exposing the foliage and canopy to as much light as possible.
You know how Christians say "the only way to God is through Christ and the cross" ? Same concept. The only way to increase bud THC content is through overall plant health and well being - not localized lighting. Respectfully. IMO.

Yes, as you state, until someone can even suggest a mechanism or put out some support otherwise, localized light-induced THC production in buds seems unlikely (or rather, does not exist). But there presumably must be some good reasons for the very common belief that leaf tucking, plucking, etc. increases now-more-direct-light-exposure-induced bud THC production.

But I don't fully understand the physics and plant physiology that would, as you apparently indicate, support assuming that tucking and defoliation (removing leaves) increases plant foliage and canopy light exposure, and that this is good (increases THC in buds or overall). Yes, the lower foliage, including buds, get more direct light than if they were blocked, but the light is weaker and the plant parts, e.g., buds, with light shining on them are not as efficient at capturing light as leaves. Presuming leaves considered for removal are blocking buds, meaning the leaves are closer to the light, the leaves are getting stronger (more photons per area) light, while anything below is catching much less (inverse square relationship) total light. Also, leaves are broad, long, flat and designed to be solar arrays, while buds are not optimized for this. Leaves simply have to be more efficient and productive at photosynthesis (making and storing sugars). In this context, removing leaves to stop them from casting shadows on other plant parts, whether lower leaves or buds, seems likely to be non-productive.

So, how does more exposure of lower buds and other foliage to more direct (but less intense) light help bud-specific THC production. Or am I misunderstanding something? Or does leaf tucking and plucking just simply improve overall health of the plant in some way? Or is leaf tucking/plucking, making buds more visible, really just a matter of the plants looking way better with more visible buds?

 

[Chester]

When I grow I like lots of light up to a point ... the research I've done says that light degrades THC (no I don't have a link) ... now when I have my buds all fattened up I reduce the intensity of the light (last week or two) ... In my OPINION this allows the plant to pack on the trichs and then they ripen w/o a whole lot of light degrading the THC ... no idea if this works and the testing while fun would be expensive and time consuming ... I also think it may have resulted in airier buds on my last grow but I'm so stoned most of the time I only know that when heated the buds take me to a happy place. My last light intensity reduction was from 360 watts LED to 120 watts LED in the same space ... all LEDs used were Advanced LED lights so I know they had all the right wavelengths ...

 

[MisterHarpy]

Yes but the leaves don't grow the thc, the bud does so removing or tucking leaves you expose the buds allowing them to try to reach and stretch for the light.
In return a bigger bud causes more weight to my yield, and in my mind I believe that hopefully since its bigger bud it can try to put out more thc, and if not at least I.get a bigger bud.

 

[Reedroguez]

Pop's first post has the right answer as far as I know. You expose the buds to light for them to get bigger.
It's about a bigger yield, not about more potency.