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
 
@Heliman Absolutely true, growing is a complex science. We should constantly seek to improve our skills. But for me, I find myself reaching a point that won't be fun anymore if I'm not careful. I want to learn enough of the science to better understand what I'm doing, but the science is not my end game.
Since I started this thread I have had to constantly remind myself of my base assumptions, and to stay focused on what I wanted to research. My assumption was that
I have done very successful single plant grows under both HID and LED lighting, using the same metrics for each. So I chose not to try to define all the things that COULD mess up a grow because I was comfortable my grow techniques addressed them all. I felt safe to concentrate only on the effect that light intensity has on plant stretch.
Fact: my HID grows have ALWAYS stretched.
Fact: My LED grows have NEVER stretched.
Fact: my current grow started with lighting at 39 - 40" above the plant, and stayed there. Of the two ways to influence light intensity - power & distance - this covered distance. And the plant did not stretch AT ALL. None. 3" tall, healthy as she could be, but vertically challenged.
Fact: in two days, under HID lighting, she has almost doubled in height to 5.5", and even healthier than before if that is possible.
I have reviewed others' grow threads, and asked for input. I have seen some small indicators that SOME growers have seen SOME stretch under weaker LED lighting. But nothing to the extent of my experience with HID lighting.

I think most of us already understand that light intensity has a large role in bud density. And to a much lesser extent than I originally believed, intensity will result in a more lush, compact growth characteristic. But it's not going to keep a plant with 24-30" growth genetics at 10".
So after some interesting twists and turns, I find myself reaching a decision point.
I believe the answer is that light intensity IS NOT preventing my plants' stretch.
I intend to continue this data gathering for a bit, but I believe it's time to start looking at other causes.
Is my problem that my LED's are not full spectrum? @Hippy_BiotabsF70 thinks so, and based upon what I've seen since starting this thread, I have to concur.
Should I buy a couple or four full spectrum COB's to continue this research? Hmmmm, it seems when I bought a couple of LED system lights it was because of their claims of superiority. I think I'll continue research before pouring more money into a technology that might not deliver what I want. Just exactly WHAT spectrum will be needed to accomplish what I want - healthy plant stretch during vegetative, transitional and early bloom plant growth cycles.
So findings for now -
  • A strong light intensity does not seem to keep plants from stretching. I've covered this with strength and distance tests (except no weaker strength yet
  • MARS II - 700 and Mars PRO Cree-128 lighting grows great weed - nice dense buds, heavy yields, and PLANTS THAT STAY AROUND 10 - 12" with minimal training. Please don't interpret this as an ad for Mars. Although I have no problems with their product, I'm sure there will be other LED lighting vendors whose products perform similarly to keep plant stretch from happening. The real takeaway from this finding is that "these" types of LED lighting should be of use to anyone with limited headroom in their grow area. I'll be shocked if that is unique to Mars, and I'd be interested in others' results.
So my next steps are to continue my BubbleGum under HID. As she stretches and shows preflowers, I'll switch from metal halide to high pressure sodium, and continue the grow through LST. When that is done, I'm switching back to LED for the healthy, dense buds I've seen under my other grows. I'll keep you posted on this thread with regular updates & pics. At the end of the grow, I will be onto something if I can beat my previous 11.76 oz yield with this TH Seeds BubbleGum strain.
And somewhere along the way I may see what I can learn about the "best" plant spectrums for inducing plant stretch. And try to figure out why "The Industry" has insisted on getting away from PAR Watts and Degrees Kelvin as ways to rate lighting systems that perform quite admirably.
I would like to know if anyone has ever diffused or filtered their led during veg for stretch by using fabric or some type of light reducing material to produce for lack of a better word a shading. Or maybe angling led towards the wall of the tent to see if it would induce stretch. Just a thought.
 
@Olde School Player

Can I enquire why stretch is so important in your thinking ??? My lack of experience leads me to wonder why. Given any choice a plant will take the most energy efficient path to ensure it's genetics are passed on...ie flowers and seeds. If enough of the correct energy is available, the plant would rather use energy to make more energy producers (leaves) than energy wasters (stems). Stems will be made where height of the plant gives it a competitive advantage or it is in shady conditions and tries to climb out of them, thus further avoiding competition.

If therefore your conditions produce leaves and not stems, is not your plant signalling that it is in the "sweet spot" and does not need to compete with conflicting variables. Ergo...no stretch, happy plant....big stretch...not so happy.
 
Hmmm, that's another way to reduce strength. My attempt was to raise the light and accomplish the same thing, reduce the light intensity reaching the plant canopy. Heliman was so kind as to explain the inverse square rule of light dissipation over distance traveled - doubling the distance decreases the intensity by the SQUARE of the distance; i.e. 4 times.
I hung my light at 39 - 40", which is almost THREE TIMES the height I had previously run it. So that would reduce intensity closer to 9 times; i.e. my 325W LED would be putting between 4 times, up to almost nine times, LESS LIGHT on my plant canopy. The plant still did not stretch. That quick & short little experiment is what convinced me I was chasing a ghost, especially when, as of today, in three days since going under HID she has stretched from 3" to 6.5".
So... reducing wattage, increasing distance to canopy, or filtering... all valid ways to reduce intensity, but my research is saying the reduction in intensity won't cause the plant to stretch.
Angling would be a good idea I hadn't thought of; that would have a greater effect of intensity reduction by distance traveled, AND loss due to reflectivity (no material is 100% reflective, not even a mirror).
So my speculation is filtering would have a possibly greater effect on intensity, but probably wouldn't induce stretch anymore than the other methods. And I would be concerned with any filtering material being safe - far enough away from the light to not encourage a heat source problem. If that could be safely addressed I think that would have a lot of merit for limited headroom grows, up to especially micro grows.
Thanks for stopping in!
 
@Olde School Player

Can I enquire why stretch is so important in your thinking ??? My lack of experience leads me to wonder why. Given any choice a plant will take the most energy efficient path to ensure it's genetics are passed on...ie flowers and seeds. If enough of the correct energy is available, the plant would rather use energy to make more energy producers (leaves) than energy wasters (stems). Stems will be made where height of the plant gives it a competitive advantage or it is in shady conditions and tries to climb out of them, thus further avoiding competition.

If therefore your conditions produce leaves and not stems, is not your plant signalling that it is in the "sweet spot" and does not need to compete with conflicting variables. Ergo...no stretch, happy plant....big stretch...not so happy.

Sure, glad to elaborate. I'm a medical grower in a state that does not yet recognize medical growing, and t
he severity of any charges are set by the number of plants involved. So
I specialize in single plant grows, and never have more than one or two plants going at any one time. So if ever charged, my hope is mercy of the court would at least acknowledge that medical usage is not supporting drug cartels and would slap me on the wrist, or punch me in the gut, and tell me not to do that anymore. So that's my main story & I'm sticking to it.... But what does that have to do with stretch??? Nothing :nono:
I want to see more stretch is for improved yield and bud quality. Take the premise of SCROG. With photoperiod plants, we can keep a plant in vegetative growth under 16-18 hours of light, and the plant will continue growing while trained to fill the screen. Then when the light period is dropped to 12 hours to induce bloom, you have a bigger canopy with an order of magnitude more bud sites, and the auxins are diverted from the main top cola to all the secondary nodes as well. End result is a huge increase in yield. With autoflowers, the only way to come close to re-creating that is with stretch. Once that growth phase is over, that's all you get.
Then there's the bud quality. By inducing a plant to stretch, LST opens the plant so that all the secondary bud sites receive a more even coverage of light. My last grow of Dutch Passion Blue Auto Mazar, while pretty good smoke, was a huge disappointment in yield (3.75oz.) and bud quality. The plant never stretched any, it was one of the smallest plants I've ever grown. And the main top cola was so dense and fat, that it shielded the bottom half of the top cola, and the rest of the plant, from getting good light:

28qwvg4.jpg


The result was poor frost and very pale secondary buds, practically yellow rather than any shade of green. When dried and cured it was just shit bag appeal.
I don't sell my weed, but I do donate to a couple of friends with medical needs. And for general social sharing, it is a matter of personal pride to break out a jar of frosty buds that stinks up the room and has everyone's jaws dropping and eyes bulging out as they say "WTF is that and where did you get it????" My reply is "I know a guy in Ohio that grows it in his basement".
This is what I want her to look like:

5plq8h.jpg


So, if I can induce a plant to stretch, I know my training techniques will improve yield and bud quality. That's how I judge the personal success of my grows.
 
Last edited:
Probably a stupid question mate, but why don’t you grow photoperiod plants?
 
@Hippy_BiotabsF70 Man, believe me, been there / done that. Since 1974 to be precise. So many times I lost track of how many. And in spite of conventional wisdom, it seems that autoflowers yield better in my single-plant grow environment. If I were after TOTAL MAXIMUM yield I would go back to photoperiod clone SOG grows. Did that for years until it just became too much work. So now I'm looking for the happy medium, best single plant yield. And in order to not become complacent with "good enough" I need to challenge myself to do better. If you're not going forward you're falling behind.
 
Sooooo, continuing updates albeit in a slightly different direction. Rather than continuing to chase a light-intensity thread that wasn't going anywhere, I've decided to try a hybrid approach with a combination of known influences.
On April 28 I transplanted my next grow, TH Seeds Auto Original BubbleGum, to LED. This will be my third grow of this strain, once under HID and once under LED. The hybrid approach is going to entail veg under HID / metal halide; transition under HID / high pressure sodium, and bloom under LED. Hoping for the best of both worlds with this approach.

After the transplant on 4/28 to LED, the plant was healthy, happy and determined to stay short. After nine days under the 325W LED hung at 39" above the plant, she was 3" short. It was obvious I could not induce stretch by reducing light intensity by raising the light three times further above the plant than my normal height. Here is May7:

jv4pi8.jpg

So rather than continuing to do the same thing while expecting different results (in itself the definition of insanity), on May 7th I removed the LED and hung my 250W HID cooltube reflector at 18" above the plant. Results were immediate - On May 10, in just three days under the HPS lamp she more than doubled her height, from 3" to 6.5":

n6yulc.jpg


In five more days, out to May 15th, she more-than-doubled height again, to 14.5", and was ready to begin LST :

2n1z5mf.jpg


In the meantime, I re-mixed nutes to transition formula at 50% strength, 1010ppm, pH 5.9, and continued training.
Here she is today, May20, thirteen days since switching back to HPS and 22 days since transplant when she was three nodes tall (short???).

20gk0wp.jpg


LST will get some final tweaks as she continues to stretch, but her basic training is complete. With her opened up, I should no longer have to worry about the buds being so compact as to ruin coloring on their undersides. Later this week I'll be replacing the transition formula with my early-bloom formula, and thereabouts switching back to LED lighting to start fattening the buds.

Stay tuned, if this strain does what it usually does it's going to get reallllly interesting.
 
I'm 100% with you on single plant auto yields, I think they shine just a little brighter without any neighbors! I need a second tent for a big single and the other as a 4x grow for variety!

Running both a 860w and a 600w is getting a bit costly so will have to go COB and delete the 600w out of the equation. Your theory's are sound imo, very hard to quantify! But there has to be a tangable "feel" to it, regardless of what metrics are put down in black and white. First hand study and observation is entierly valid in my view, it just needs a bit of ryme and reason to go with it!

:slap: for great out of the box thinking!
 
In case anyone else is noticing, my pictures are gone ... I use TinyPic to host the pic's to get rid of all the metadata from my phone camera. But when TinyPic goes away, apparently the pictures do too. They better come back or I'll be pissed....
:crying::shooty::yoinks::naughtystep::gassy1:
 

Test

Test
Back
Top