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
 
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:

Well stated, F6. We know what HID is capable of, how to manage heat, etc. I feel LED is the future, and has the ability to be a better solution. But it is new(er) technology and will take a bit of time to settle in. As I find myself going into this study, in all honesty what I'm looking for is the ability to equal or exceed my prior results from HID. I'm already seeing better bud quality, but not better yield. And sometimes worse yield. Thus this thread aimed at resolving one of the main attributes of lighting - intensity.
 
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:

Welcome Heliman. Yes, I referenced Son of Hobbes' study on LED lighting parameters at the beginning of this thread, and provided as much input as my non-lighting-engineer brain could verbalize. DLI sounds like an interesting concept - quite similar or same as PAR Watts which attempted to qualify the same parameters' effectiveness of light as seen by the plant, which has been around for years. But for some reason LED (and other forms of) lighting manufacturers have not embraced this as a standard measure. This is where I think our insistence that it be included will have great effect.
With no established parameters to measure across all platforms of lighting, that is the sole reason I chose watts-at-wall, with the extended measures of distance to plant canopy and square footage of coverage. These are all easily attainable industry standard measures and practical attributes that all growers can obtain, and do not vary across the various types of lighting. I truly feel that the various lighting types and other variables will average-out across this study, and results should begin to highlight those technologies (or vendors) that excel.

But what I don't want to do is to let a lack of standards; or all the other things that affect plant growth, prevent me from completing this study. I need to maintain everyones focus on the single parameter of light intensity and those measures that directly affect it.
 
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.

Hmmm, I've used fixed fans in both my HID and LED grows. And in probably 50+ indoor photoperipod grows I used a much stronger oscillating fan through the upper 12" of the plant canopy, and they all stretched. Temps I have not tracked concisely; that has been a parameter I monitor and fix it if it ever gets out of a safe range, but I but don't maintain records throughout the grow. I do recall that HID temps ran a slight bit higher than LED. I'll keep that in mind, if higher temps could encourage stretch.
But to stay on task for my study, did you maintain a record of power, light height, and square footage coverage for those grows that stretched? I feel those stats would benefit my study.
 
Hi there Old School

I have in mind a methodology that could take some of the mumbo jumbo out of the LED issues....

There is an explosion of LEDS out there just now, and I am sure that for reasons of longevity and economy they will continue to grow in popularity. But we BOTH agree (along with many others I guess) that the information against which to make purchase decisions is too surrounded by Advertising hype to be meaningful

With reference to DLI, I reckon that all the seed breeders out there would have a VERY good handle of what lighting they are giving their plants, after all, light is one of their biggest Capital and Operating costs...thus tied strongly to Profit !!!!

So when we browse Breeders info and seedbank suppliers, they usually tell us the expected yield, the life cycle (60, 72 or some such days). Would any of them be prepared to tell us the PPFD and the day length under which any particular variety is grown ???

If we had this info we can then specifically relate it to DLI and test a light against this data.....

What about it Mr and Ms Breeder...can you assist.???? ......not looking for "Commercial-in-Confidence" data, just some real numbers to get the model started.
 
IMG_20180414_165609.jpg

This is 6000k spectrum 2 40w qb
IMG_20180414_165456.jpg

3000k lighting 7 50w cobs
 
Hi there Old School

I have in mind a methodology that could take some of the mumbo jumbo out of the LED issues....

There is an explosion of LEDS out there just now, and I am sure that for reasons of longevity and economy they will continue to grow in popularity. But we BOTH agree (along with many others I guess) that the information against which to make purchase decisions is too surrounded by Advertising hype to be meaningful

With reference to DLI, I reckon that all the seed breeders out there would have a VERY good handle of what lighting they are giving their plants, after all, light is one of their biggest Capital and Operating costs...thus tied strongly to Profit !!!!

So when we browse Breeders info and seedbank suppliers, they usually tell us the expected yield, the life cycle (60, 72 or some such days). Would any of them be prepared to tell us the PPFD and the day length under which any particular variety is grown ???

If we had this info we can then specifically relate it to DLI and test a light against this data.....

What about it Mr and Ms Breeder...can you assist.???? ......not looking for "Commercial-in-Confidence" data, just some real numbers to get the model started.

Makes sense to me, only exception being breeders' advertised yields. I've seen those vary in both directions so far that I've come to think they are pretty much as worthless as tits on a boar hog!!! I really need to focus my study on light intensity only, and try to keep everyone coming on here focused in the same direction. So far that's been like herding cats from Texas to Montana. I'm going to leave the other parameters to others.
If you decide to chase that let me know, I'd love to subscribe & follow. And thanks for the thoughts.
 
No maybe my camera is changing it
 
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:

I've seen it several times.
 
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:

Sorry dude but that claim is far from true! A shite 600w HID is not much more than a single cob? Maybe a single 400w cob! Cobs are good, but they're not the amazing miracle light that many seem to think in my opinion.

I personally think 400w of cobs = about 600w of HID. 600w of HID produces a lot of bud in the right hands.

EDIT: Oh, do you mean in terms of cost? I thought you were talking about performance!
 

Test

Test
Back
Top