Effects of Light Intensity on Plant Growth

Greetings, AFN members, OSP here. I’m a new AFN member moving in from another forum. After sneaking around a number of threads here looking for secret information, I’ve decided to start this thread. I want to evaluate the effects of light intensity on plant growth. More specifically, how lighting can be used to encourage or minimize plant stretch.
In the short time I’ve been a member here I’ve met a number of very knowledgeable growers, and I’m inviting each of you to participate or chime in as you see fit. Since I am new to AFN I’m sure I’ve missed a lot of interested parties. If you are reading this feel free to tag in anyone I’ve missed:
@fettled6 @912GreenSkell @bushmasterar15 @Waira @MedGrower @Son of Hobbes @Nosias @Screwauger @HemiSync @ChroToker @Need4Weed

I've grown photoperiods since forever under High Intensity Discharge (HID) lighting, and stretch has always been a thing to plan for. Several years ago I decided to experiment with an autoflower freebie, and since then I've completed (12) single-plant autoflower grows. To the point that I'm not doing photoperiods anymore. Maybe again one day. I have a Colombian Gold freebie that has brought back memories, but not today.
In the process of migrating from photoperiods to autoflowers, I also began a transition from HID to LED lighting. Over this period I began to see a pattern. With every one of my HID grows, all my autoflowers exhibited healthy stretch. It started quicker than photoperiods, but the overall effect was similar. Low Stress Training (LST) was effective, bud quality was very good and yield was very good to excellent. But with my LED grows, absolutely NONE of my autoflowers stretched. I had complete grows that never exceeded 10” in height.But with LED I can’t help but think much more is possible. Over 44+ years of growing I’ve seen well trained plants out-yield plants with no training every time. So I want the ability to encourage stretch in my plants.
For the sake of other AFN members, I believe the inverse of this stretch phenomena could be very beneficial to growers with a limited amount of grow space headroom. I want to prove or disprove, to some relative degree of certainty, that light intensity can be used to influence stretch when growing cannabis. But first I need to gather data on other growers’ experiences with plant stretch, and its association to light intensity during the plant’s lifecycle.

This is NOT an opinion piece of “is LED better than HID?” LED is certainly different, and in many respects (heat &efficiency) we all know it IS better. And this is NOT an attempt to compare LED lighting brands. There are numerous characteristics of LED lighting that determine light quality, and our most excellent site admin, @Son of Hobbes has started a thread on what parameters can be used to define those. His efforts may be reviewed here: https://www.autoflower.org/threads/what-should-be-on-a-grow-light-review.64857/ I’ve added a few well chosen thoughts on that topic - PAR watts, efficiency, most favored color spectrum, etc.. But I’m not smart enough to make that final differentiation so I’m happy to watch as SOH finishes that. The only facts I intend to present here are those I’ve experienced with my auto grows.

There are a number of other factors besides lighting that affect plant growth. In an effort to keep this thread focused on light intensity with no outside variables, I asked one of AFN’s most experienced members, MedGrower, for his input. His comments, and my follow up confirming those variables were addressed, can be found in his grow thread located at https://www.autoflower.org/threads/...-dwc-hs1-telos-0008.64718/page-2#post-1758834
In consideration to MedGrower, if you have any comments / questions, send them to me or post here. I don’t want to trash his grow thread with my conspiracy theory so I’m asking each of you to please share that consideration with me.

For the sake of this study I’d like to focus on the two main lighting factors that control intensity - light height throughout the grow cycle, and “power” of the light over the grow canopy; i.e. watts per sq.ft.. Light height is an easy factor to define as long as we document the variation during a plant’s growth cycle. Plant canopy area is an easy measure. Power consumption is an easy measure. I know, watts per sq.ft. is not the most meaningful measure of an LED’s efficiency. But until or if we ever reach consensus of an industry standard measure for all lighting types, I am using watts consumed at the wall, per square foot. No matter how much we insist this is not the best method (I agree), wattage consumed per square foot is the only readily available factor across all lighting types. And no matter how much we agree to disagree, it should provide a reasonable enough classification of small / medium / large lighting to support this study.

My light ratings are 62.5W/sq.ft. for HID and 65W.sq.ft. for LED. As to other influences on plant stretch, my grow techniques with HID and LED are as close to identical as one can get for environmental control and nutrient regimen. So enough intro, let’s kick this in the ass as I describe my experiences with autoflowers to date.

My starting system for HID is a 250W cooltube and batwing reflector with a metal halide bulb for veg and a high pressure sodium for bloom. The tent is a 4 sq. ft. system (2' X 2' X 5’3") by Secret Jardin. I configured it with (2) 4” 170CFM centrifugal fans, one for light cooling and the other for odor control through a 12” X 4” Phresh carbon filter). My nutrient regimen is General Hydroponics’ expert recirculating formula with some strength and slight ingredient tweaks. This regimen has not changed between HID and LED grows.
I grow hydroponically, and my system is configured for a single plant in a DIY 4 gallon Ebb ‘n Gro net pot with hydroton clay pebbles. The system floods automatically every two hours for 15 minutes. I call this DIY because I do not rely upon the complex valves and fittings normally associated with commercially available ebb and grow systems. Those systems rely upon multiple pumps, flow control valves and timers opening and closing with each flood cycle to deliver and recover nutrients to/from the plant. A strength of these commercial systems is they enable the reservoir to sit at the same height as the grow containers. Negatives are they are complex and expensive. My system relies upon a passive DIY manifold sitting on top of the reservoir, and the only moving part is an inexpensive and very reliable 170 gph hydro pump. Total ebb n’grow component cost with four net pot buckets was under $100. I bought four net pot buckets to simplify plant positioning changes throughout my grows, and to run parallel grows in separate tents. My DIY manifold does raise system height by the height of the reservoir, but the entire reservoir, tent and plant container system comes in under 7’ tall. It’s a quality system with all the right parts, and it fits in a closet if it has to (mine doesn’t).

I’m going to drift off topic for a moment as I’ve been known to do. I’ve used all types of hydro systems for many years and this is my favorite. It re-oxygenates the root zone after each flood every two hours. Supply to the net pot is positive pressure flow, while draining is passive / gravity, so aggressive root growth is pushed back into the net pot and will never cause a clog in the system’s hydro line. And even if a clog were to somehow mysteriously occur, overflow is not possible due to the design of the manifold. The system is fully automated - I recently took an eight day trip with no worries that the system would stay fully functional until I returned, and it did. A separate reservoir (I use 12 to 14 gallons) from the grow container makes nutrient changes and maintenance simple, and the added capacity gives me plenty of “headroom” in the nutrient mix as the plant drinks.
Here’s a pic of the original HID tent. The manifold is the white bucket to the left outside the tent. The ebb ‘n Gro bucket is slightly out of position on the shelf behind the tent:

IMG
 
Help me understand - the 600 and 485 were together over the same canopy or two separate concurrent grows? And this grow - 80 and 350 - same question.
And what were the square footages of each grow?

Seperate grows about 2.5 ft from dirt. 4x4 area
 
I think the red in the 3200k cobs will induce stretch mate. Or so someone tried to explain to my little brain.

I would think / hope, but I haven't seen it. My LED has specs of LED's of 440nm, 630nm & 660 nanometers, combined to present a light range of 2700k-3000 degrees kelvin, and this is where I'm not seeing stretch. "Old days" grows under 5000-5500K metal halide stretched; and transition and bloom under 2900K encouraged the plants to continue stretch. My LED has a veg-only mode that shuts off red and fires all blue, 460nm, neither mode stretches.
This is why I am chasing light intensity rather than spectrum. If that doesn't prove true, I'll wait for someone else to chase spectrum. My head hurts if I try to follow more than one technical thought at a time.
:dizzy:
 
You're not that far off so please stay with us. My understanding of COB's is (a) they are more efficient and (b) can be focused more "intensely" because multiple LED's share the same lens. And smaller wattages by design cover a smaller area, but multiple light sources are more efficient. For example, if you hand a single lamp in the center of a tent, the light must travel further (and lose intensity) to reach the side of the tent. But put four COB's in the same footprint and intensity loss is less to get to the plant, or edge of its coverage area. That's exactly what I'm chasing. A more intense light (by focus or strength) can be expected to either be further away from the canopy to encourage stretch ( the light expands over a wider area thereby weakening the per-sq.ft. strength of coverage). Or it can be maintained closer to the plant canopy to encourage less stretch and more dense growth.
I don't know the science behind some of this - I recall reading somewhere, many years ago, that light intensity drops 50% per foot traveled. That's where multiple light sources totaling same strength will always outperform a single source light.

Are you aware of the autocob and cobshop.net? Recently had a great sale. $100 for one autocob. Great lights.You'd have a heck of a time experimenting with autocobs.
 
Just to reiterate for the benefit of all. If I try to chase too many parameters at the same time, I know I will end up with analysis paralysis and never come to a conclusion on light intensity. It's happened to me before :shrug:.
Yes, these other things have an effect, absolutely. But I have compared these "other things" in my grow methods and I'm relatively certain they are close enough to not be the determining factor in my stretch experiences. So I have to target the area I think has the most effect on stretch.

To simplify - sometimes my brain needs that:
If I hang a 10 horsepower light 10 feet above my plant, I expect it to have the same effect as a 5 horsepower light hung 5 feet above the canopy.
If the 10 horsepower light allows healthy stretch at 10 feet, I would expect it to discourage stretch at 5 feet.
If the 5 horsepower light allows healthy stretch at 5 feet, I would expect it to discourage stretch at 2.5 feet.
The 10 horsepower light could encourage stretch over a 10 square foot area, but discourage it over a 5 square foot area.
The 5 horsepower light could encourage stretch over a 5 square foot area, but discourage it over a 2.5 square foot area.
Horsepower and light height (heh heh ... how high you are ....) to be reported by your grower experience.

Or without the shitty analogy - p
ower matters. And I expect less power can be accommodated by moving closer to the plants, and/or decreasing the coverage area the light is projecting upon. I want to see what light height allows stretch at what given strength, given the fact light intensity increases as the light is positioned closer to the plant canopy. AND light intensity increases as the coverage area is reduced.

In order to do this effectively, I need to know your grow experience based upon the
power of your light, its varied
heights through your grow cycle, and the square footage of your grow area. Every other parameter matters to whichever one of you volunteers to track that. I'll play!!!

Oh... I asked for Breeder / yields. Those are a curiousity in case you get an OG Kush like I got back when. It could be Arkansas Polio Weed (Indica dominant) or Ceremonial Aztec Trip Weed (sativa dominant); that doesn't matter as long as it stretched - or didn't.
:frog:
 
Your example about horsepower/distance/light strength is not correct. Light intensity does NOT obey the linear rule, it is subject to the inverse square rule...doubling the distance, decreases the intensity by the SQUARE of the distance (ie 4 times less ) and so on.
 
Are you aware of the autocob and cobshop.net? Recently had a great sale. $100 for one autocob. Great lights.You'd have a heck of a time experimenting with autocobs.

What color is it?
Just kidding.... I'm not buying until we come up with a standardized method of comparing lights. Which might mean I hope my current lights last a long time :crying:
If I were rebuilding I'd mos'def' go COB's today. But I'm happy with the results my lights provide. One of the things about my small footprints is that its easier to cover with a single light source. Well, 140 sources to be exact, if I count all the LED's.
:chef:
 
What color is it?
Just kidding.... I'm not buying until we come up with a standardized method of comparing lights. Which might mean I hope my current lights last a long time :crying:
If I were rebuilding I'd mos'def' go COB's today. But I'm happy with the results my lights provide. One of the things about my small footprints is that its easier to cover with a single light source. Well, 140 sources to be exact, if I count all the LED's.
:chef:

A new benchmark may be how many grams per LED. Like I got 0.2 g/led! I should patent that before its too late!
 
Are you aware of the autocob and cobshop.net? Recently had a great sale. $100 for one autocob. Great lights.You'd have a heck of a time experimenting with autocobs.
A basement 600w HID is not much more than a single CoB to be honest and by the time you matched the performance of a simple 600w HID with CoBs it would take a lot of hours to "break even" through power saving..

That said, CoBs or LED is a smarter choice! HID is and for a long time will be the gold standard pretty much anything is compared to!

OSP, myself and most long time growers know HID, many newer growers have an amazing and confusing array of options and we see people make mistakes all the time!

If in doubt and on a budget, just go MH/HPS in the 400-600w range. If you fail it won't be the light :thumbsup:
 
The Site Admin (and most of us out here) share your views on the need to get some objectivity and logic into the lighting question....especially where LEDS are concerned. They have already sought our input on what we would like to see from Manufactures as to comparative stats on LED performance so that we can make informed purchase decisions that are clear from Advertising hype.

I cant help thinking that much more attention should be given to DLI. DLI represents the genetic need of the plant to achieve its potential....and its all wrapped up in the components we discuss endlessly on this and other forums....PPFD, Day Length, Spectrum, CRI to name a few.

I am sure you are correct about the different ways to achieve a target DLI....strong light, short day or weaker light, longer day, but this only holds good if you stay within the Target DLI...dont ask me what this number is exactly because there is much confusion on the 'net about it !!!! (and its way above my basic botany know-how)

Also, you can get the DLI right but if your spectrum is deficient, you cant grow good plants...for instance, a good DLI number with no blue or red light components would be a disaster for growth...the spectrum is just plain wrong.

Watts at wall, wont necessarily grow good plants, but it will tell you what you gonna pay for power !!! So IMHO it is a vital stat.

So, maybe we should seek to clarify DLI between us as a very important key principal in light effectiveness. In doing this, PPFD becomes the key driver...might this not be a better "mousetrap" ????? :biggrin::biggrin:
 
I have experience with about 20 different auto strains, and have had significant LED stretch with most of them, until last time, when there was practically zero stretch.
Two things were changed that eliminated almost all stretch
(1) An oscillating fan blowing directly on the plants was added instead of several stationary fans not blowing on the plants, but just keeping the air stirred up.
(2) The tent temp was lowered from the low 80s F to the mid-high 70s.

My tentative opinion is that light is not the most important stretch factor, but that these two things might be.
(1) Fans. A non-oscillating fan blowing straight on a plant might be harmful, especially when it's young. A safer oscillating fan will discourage tallness and stretch.
(2) Temps in the 80s can lead to hugely stretched 5+ ft tall autos. For many of us this isn't a good thing.
 

Test

Test
Back
Top