On Facebook recently, a grower claimed that he's been re-vegging his autoflowers and that it can be done with all autos.
The alleged trick is to keep the light on 24/0 and switch back to veg nutes.
This sparked a TREMENDOUS amount of replies, with a very small percentage saying "oh yeah, we've done this too" and the majority saying "bullshit." Absolutely no one has provided any proof during any of the conversations about it however. The comment about it reverting back to the "prized photo period" was a bit of a stretch lol.
Personally I think some growers are seeing unstable autoflowers, or what's essentially a "semi-auto." Ruderal characteristics but it's still a photo by definition (needs to flip to properly finish.) We've seen it dozens of times over where growers have an auto that doesn't auto, and every time you treat it like a photo and it's good to go. So really, at that point is it still considered an autoflower? I think this is what a lot of growers are seeing when they say "oh my plant re-vegged" or "I have an autoflower mother I keep taking clones from for years," that it was sold and labeled as an autoflower, but that it's a photo dominant strain. Perhaps a bit of semantics?
I've seen autos start to push out new leaf growth at the end of their lives, but personally I take all my meds longer than normal (more amber) than probably most do, and I've yet to see them reveg. I've left autos in pots where they've eventually died (way past harvest window) and they never revegged. Doesn't explain partial harvests either.
But then we were talking about it in the staff room and
@Mossy mentioned she had an auto start to reveg going from natural sunlight (outdoors) then moved inside to a grow light (and more hours on than what it was getting.) Very curious stuff.
What do you think? Ever see this phenomenon happen? Truth and merit to the claim, or stoner science? Chalked up to genetic anomaly? Or able to be replicated?
)
ppp
