Real Science vs Bro Science: Ohhh some of you are NOT going to like this!

[Son of Hobbes]

Lol sorry that sounded crappy. I meant yep I run 24/0 and there is science that says they don’t need rest. Specifically auto flowering cannabis. Not other types of plants but specifically autos, I haven’t seen any actual science. When I say there is science says 25/0 works best is just bro science lol. But imo it’s brains plus science. Put The two together and you can formulate an logical conclusion.

here is a post I just made in my thread when asked about my light schedule and philosophy as to why. It’s a little long but I think worth it when it comes to the argument ofa 24/0 schedule.

“
I have never grown autos under anything but 24/0. The only downsides I see to 24/0 would be for indoor growers. Those would be A.) a heat issue, where you need to turn the lights off during a hot part of the day. And B.)If you are worried about electricity cost and need to limit the amount of time your lights are on.

when it comes to growing autos I see zero disadvantages to running a 24 hour light cycle. Here’s why:

Autoflowering cannabis is in existence in nature due to where it grows. Because ruderalis that grows above a certain latitude doesn’t have the benefit of a gradually changing season,like we do below like Siberia and Alaska, it has to flower automatically. Now of course we all know that part. But here’s the thing in nature where these grow the lights( the sun) basically Comes on one day and stays on for anywhere from 60-90 days. Now it doesn’t stay with direct sunlight or anything I totally get That. But they NEVER get total darkness in nature Especially not for 4-6 hours.

these babies are built for speed! All it wants to do is grow and do sex before the first freeze, which up in them parts can Happen as early as like the end of august. So technically the most nature mimicked light cycle would be a twilight period of about an hour in the morning and an hour at night. But there are points in the summer up there where it is alllmost directish light 24 hours straight. So I know they nor only can handle it but thrive it it.
What I have noticed with having both natural and artificial light is that they seem to kind of get “tired” after 12ish hours of either one and then just about the time they are gettin worn out, they get hit with the other source of light and recharge as if they had been in darkness for several hours. It’s honestly badass to see and really interesting. And you really do get the yield and great colors of the outdoor world, while all the look and dense mugs of indoor. Best of both worlds.

I definitely have my sound reasoning for basically everything I do grow wise and if someone asks I will definitely tell em my philosophy haha”

Ah but the gains from running 24/0 versus say 18/6 are pretty negligible (highly anecdotal at best.) If it was so evident that 24/0 was the best cycle, everyone would be running it. And it's not evident. Also, the extreme majority of autoflower we grow are hybrids of cannabis sativa/indica. We see photo dominance all the time in autoflowers, when autos don't auto, or get "stuck" in pre-flower, etc.

You absolutely have to factor in the source of lighting; there's a saturation point in lighting where you're just pounding photons with no gain. I personally believe the vast amount of lighting tech out there is why we see it so "all over the map," someone with a less efficient light OF COURSE should see better gains by running the light for more hours on versus a more efficient light that's delivering more usable energy to the plant in the same amount of time.

The "cannabis is a C3 plant" argument gets used all the time by people defending 24/0, but they always stop there and never mention that about 85% of all plant life on planet earth is a C3 plant. Just because a plant has the ABILITY to do so, does not mean it's the best thing to do to maximize results.

I don't quite agree that ruderalis only originates in areas where there is little darkness, that has long been a bro-science myth.

Cannabis ruderalis is not a dominant species of cannabis; but it's requirements for growth aren't as competitive as indica/sativa either. Ruderal species are the first to colonize areas where the dominant species of plant life were decimated. I'm not 100% convinced that autoflowering is an adaptation for darkness, but rather an adaptation of cannabis to survive just in general.

 

[derek420colorado]

Ah but the gains from running 24/0 versus say 18/6 are pretty negligible (highly anecdotal at best.) If it was so evident that 24/0 was the best cycle, everyone would be running it. And it's not evident. Also, the extreme majority of autoflower we grow are hybrids of cannabis sativa/indica. We see photo dominance all the time in autoflowers, when autos don't auto, or get "stuck" in pre-flower, etc.

You absolutely have to factor in the source of lighting; there's a saturation point in lighting where you're just pounding photons with no gain. I personally believe the vast amount of lighting tech out there is why we see it so "all over the map," someone with a less efficient light OF COURSE should see better gains by running the light for more hours on versus a more efficient light that's delivering more usable energy to the plant in the same amount of time.

The "cannabis is a C3 plant" argument gets used all the time by people defending 24/0, but they always stop there and never mention that about 85% of all plant life on planet earth is a C3 plant. Just because a plant has the ABILITY to do so, does not mean it's the best thing to do to maximize results.

I don't quite agree that ruderalis only originates in areas where there is little darkness, that has long been a bro-science myth.

Cannabis ruderalis is not a dominant species of cannabis; but it's requirements for growth aren't as competitive as indica/sativa either. Ruderal species are the first to colonize areas where the dominant species of plant life were decimated. I'm not 100% convinced that autoflowering is an adaptation for darkness, but rather an adaptation of cannabis to survive just in general.

You see I see it as the opposite. I see that the gains I get from 24/0 far outweigh the perceived quality of 18/6 I do not see really any drop off in quality in the two lighting cycles.
Also yes I also believe it is a survival thing that is based on light cycle. They are trying to survive as a result of the dinural/nocturnal cycle. And not all Rudy autoflowers, strains that grow below a certain latitude are photoperiod dependent. Like the “Arkansas ditch weed” that grows along the side of the road in that part of the country. So with that being the case and only the ones that grow in the northern light cycle autoflower, it would stand to reason that is why they do the auto thing is as a result of the light cycle right? Again alllllll of this is bro science and anecdotal. This is one of the MAIN reasons I am going to start doin these tissue sample clones. So we can start to try and put some of this to rest.

 

[derek420colorado]

Exactly! Anecdotes should lead to experimentation, not speculative conclusions.

Yep! And that is very very difficult to do at this point for most who grow autos. Also I am not sayin this to sound superior or toot my own horn but I don’t know of anyone else that has the knowledge,tools, time,space and funds to properly run actual experiments that could yield quantifiable results. And I am taking about the tissue cloning sample method for the most part, which will give the best data set. There are folks that can run 10 different semi controlled experiments and take great notes throughout sure, but I don’t know many that are willing to run the exact same strain 20-50 plants at a time and document every variable lol.
So with this being said I am goin to do the tissue sample clone tests and experiments “for science” lol I really really really think want to put a lot of these bro science things to the test and let us alllll figure out if we were right or not

 

[Mañ'O'Green]

Yep! And that is very very difficult to do at this point for most who grow autos. Also I am not sayin this to sound superior or toot my own horn but I don’t know of anyone else that has the knowledge,tools, time,space and funds to properly run actual experiments that could yield quantifiable results. And I am taking about the tissue cloning sample method for the most part, which will give the best data set. There are folks that can run 10 different semi controlled experiments and take great notes throughout sure, but I don’t know many that are willing to run the exact same strain 20-50 plants at a time and document every variable lol.
So with this being said I am goin to do the tissue sample clone tests and experiments “for science” lol I really really really think want to put a lot of these bro science things to the test and let us alllll figure out if we were right or not

I really wish I had the space to do real science. Yes all of my observations are just Bro Science but that does not immediately void what I see.

Also I do have a a DLI Over 50 and run cO2 and while I have heard lots of folks say that exact thing “18/6 gives best quality” but not one person can explain why. So if nobody can explain why then I say phooey and your better quality buds were a result of something else entirely possibly, again cause we grow autos, like it just had better genes. This all harkens back to my earlier post and not really being able to do real science due to an uncontrollable variable. And I see it all too often folks are quick to say oh I ran some 18/6 and some 24/0. The 18/6 was better so that must be it. And while all of the other factors are identical, it was really that phenotype was better.

so for me, in order for this to be more than anecdotal speculation it would have to be done at least ten times in a side by side comparison to weight against the uncontrolled variable. OR for the best and truest results it’ll be done with tissue sample clones so we can Put a lot of this to rest, one way or the other

Yes in my Bro Science test I grew 6 FastBuds Green Crack autos all from the same purchase of seeds in each grow. Yes I understand phenos and there was variation in the genetics. The thing is the difference in quality (better flavor and buzz) extended to all six plants. That is not a coincidence.

I have to ask what improved qualities do you perceive in 24/0 and is it worth the additional inputs of energy? I am just asking for your observations here.

 

[derek420colorado]

I really wish I had the space to do real science. Yes all of my observations are just Bro Science but that does not immediately void what I see.


Yes in my Bro Science test I grew 6 FastBuds Green Crack autos all from the same purchase of seeds in each grow. Yes I understand phenos and there was variation in the genetics. The thing is the difference in quality (better flavor and buzz) extended to all six plants. That is not a coincidence.

I have to ask what improved qualities do you perceive in 24/0 and is it worth the additional inputs of energy? I am just asking for your observations here.

Oh and we all know this is a discussion, I am not in any way sayin your observations or void in any way. I consider you as one of the most knowledgeable folks on here for sure!
Now to answer your question, it is very hard to tell. Because I use the blend of natural light and artificial, it makes it hard to say what is a benefit of the light cycle and what is a benefit is the different types of light. This is for my current setup. I have always done 24/0 indoors as well, but that was in hydro using my max o2 technique. So again it’s hard to say what part of the large yield was a result of the cycle or the hydro? This was my first documented grow here and I got 5+ lbs off six plants in about 83 days. I will be completely honest. I have never grown an auto under anything less than 24/0. So my observations are as biased as they come. The only other “evidence” I have is the other grows I have read through and that is some pretty crappy “data”lol. But I have held off on trying anything different as my results have always been spectacular(that is when I don’t catch em on fire or freeze em lol) because I would t be able to really tell what was the cause of whatever it was that was successful or unsuccessful. Now, since I will be able to do that, it will become a moot point. And I promise I will be the very FIRST to say I was wrong about something, mainly for the simple fact I want to know how to grow it the best it can be. So if the actual science demolishes my pre convinced notions And theories SWEET that means I now have the better technique based on science, I do t care how I got there lol

 

[Mañ'O'Green]

Yes burning them up and freezing them does not count It is hard to ignore a 5 pound yield off of 6 plants. I average about 2.25 pounds off of 6 plants.

 

[derek420colorado]

So my perceived benefits are in the yield department and the speed department. As my entire system is predicated on “More, faster and no reduction in quality vs photos” 15 grams a plant Difference in my setup is 3/4 of a lb. per run and almost 5 lbs a year. Even a slight decrease in yield can have if effects, so my priority is yield, Because I feel with top quality genetics the quality will be there more or less. So saving 7-10 days on overall harvest times allow me to get another entire grow in over the course of the year. So with my goals being different than virtually anyone who grows autos, I am an outlier for sure.

 

[derek420colorado]

Yes burning them up and freezing them does not count It is hard to ignore a 5 pound yield off of 6 plants. I average about 2.25 pounds off of 6 plants.

Here is the journal if you wanna check it out. Also here is a picture of one that was almost 1.5 lbs and her root bound 5 gallon container lol. It was ) years ago and I had a shitty camera don’t judge lol

Edit* all of the other plant pics can be seen on page 24 of the grow journal hyperlinked above

 

[pop22]

"So if the actual science demolishes my pre-convinced notions And theories SWEET that means I now have the better technique based on science, I
don't care how I got there lol"



That my friend is the 64 thousand dollar answer! THAT is what everybody should be saying!

So if the actual science demolishes my pre convinced notions And theories SWEET that means I now have the better technique based on science, I do t care how I got there lol.

 

[WildBill]

DUH POP!