about the UVB light!

[Yodaweed]

my LED has UV-B Dangling from it that's on a separate power supply so I have it on its own timer and it turns on at noon and off at 6pm (night time for my plants).http://www.gothamhydroponics.com/led-grow-lights/lighthouse-hydro-ion-8-1546w-led-grow-light-fsf-uvb.html its a 4 slot of that light with that thing dangling from it.

 

[charface]

my LED has UV-B Dangling from it that's on a separate power supply so I have it on its own timer and it turns on at noon and off at 6pm (night time for my plants).http://www.gothamhydroponics.com/led-grow-lights/lighthouse-hydro-ion-8-1546w-led-grow-light-fsf-uvb.html its a 4 slot of that light with that thing dangling from it.

That is a pretty sweet rig. :thumbup:

In nature plants don't live in plastic buckets but at my house they do or they get the f**k out!

 

[Dr. Who]

Just to add my $.02 I have one 26w reptiglo 10.0 that I run the full 12 hours the lights are on, about 3-4 inches from the canopy (as the levels of uv-b it produces are nowhere near what outdoor sun exposure is, I see no reason to turn it off as I see no way of overdosing with a bulb that small) and I've noticed that the buds closest to it are noticeably frostier than the buds furthest away. (Also I've noticed that buds closer to the 6500K bulb have a similar increase in trichome density when compared to the buds closer to the 2700K bulbs, my guess is that it is from the extra uv-b the 6500K's put out)

On your 65K bulb. Yes it will have SOME extra UVnm range light production (you've found that out). Bulbs that run the "blue" range of the spectrum produce the UV in A,B and C nm ranges. Like I said you can get this same effect with HID lighting, using your MH bulb the last 2 weeks of flower. Be sure to remove any glass from between the bulb and the plant as, like I mentioned earlier that glass is formulated to reduce UV.

On the buds closest to the 26w. Now you can actually "see" how far the effect is expressed in the increase of trich's. That's shows how effective the bulb is at growing distance from the bulb.

If you don't yet know. The plant is reacting to the UV by producing more trich's to protect it's self from the damaging UV radiation. This in turn raises the THC level simply because there are more trich's to carry it. The UV radiation ALSO increases the delta 9 THC content of the THC compound (delta 9 being the most psychoactive form of the compound).

While you can increase trich production with chemical manipulation. It appears that this way does not increase the delta 9 levels as much as the use of UVB! Yet, the increase in the total THC compounds by this method DO seem to increase the "relative"(the active relationship between the delta compounds) psychoactive effect!

So then. Once you try both methods, gather some test subjects and smoke one type against another on altering days. You will now have gathered data that should point to how well either way is effective to what your trying to achieve with one or the other.

To cover my size grow area with additional lighting for UV manipulation is not cost effective to the result. The use of MH for the last 2 weeks is cost effective in that there is no increase in overall electric use. Couple that with the chemical (nutrient) manipulation, it becomes interesting. The only problem at this point, again comes from the overall penetration of the UV effect to the lower budding on the plants. So now I have an inconsistency "problem"....Uniformity IS important to me and my Patients.....so then, this whole thing boils down to what YOU want to achieve!

All of this information is based on testing of the finished plant matter from differing locations on the plants. Both from "manipulated" and from "control" plants grown at the same time and both from the same mother.

The next thing I'm about to test is PAR lighting......730nm range lighting that runs at the end of the light cycle (20min before and extending to "about" 20min after lights out. We'll see how that goes. This is supposed to increase quality and yield!

 

[Nizza]

from cannabis cultivation by mel thomas, he states 3 10-minute intervals of UV light during the "peak hours" of the day will increase THC % by up to 10%
what i get out of that statement is starting from the middle of your light cycle, make 3 even cycles, spaced around 1/2-hour to 45 mins apart, that are 10 minutes

he uses old sun bed tanning equipment and recommends facial tanners for micro-growers
but I think the reptile bulbs are the same

 

[charface]

On your 65K bulb. Yes it will have SOME extra UVnm range light production (you've found that out). Bulbs that run the "blue" range of the spectrum produce the UV in A,B and C nm ranges. Like I said you can get this same effect with HID lighting, using your MH bulb the last 2 weeks of flower. Be sure to remove any glass from between the bulb and the plant as, like I mentioned earlier that glass is formulated to reduce UV.

On the buds closest to the 26w. Now you can actually "see" how far the effect is expressed in the increase of trich's. That's shows how effective the bulb is at growing distance from the bulb.

If you don't yet know. The plant is reacting to the UV by producing more trich's to protect it's self from the damaging UV radiation. This in turn raises the THC level simply because there are more trich's to carry it. The UV radiation ALSO increases the delta 9 THC content of the THC compound (delta 9 being the most psychoactive form of the compound).

While you can increase trich production with chemical manipulation. It appears that this way does not increase the delta 9 levels as much as the use of UVB! Yet, the increase in the total THC compounds by this method DO seem to increase the "relative"(the active relationship between the delta compounds) psychoactive effect!

So then. Once you try both methods, gather some test subjects and smoke one type against another on altering days. You will now have gathered data that should point to how well either way is effective to what your trying to achieve with one or the other.

To cover my size grow area with additional lighting for UV manipulation is not cost effective to the result. The use of MH for the last 2 weeks is cost effective in that there is no increase in overall electric use. Couple that with the chemical (nutrient) manipulation, it becomes interesting. The only problem at this point, again comes from the overall penetration of the UV effect to the lower budding on the plants. So now I have an inconsistency "problem"....Uniformity IS important to me and my Patients.....so then, this whole thing boils down to what YOU want to achieve!

All of this information is based on testing of the finished plant matter from differing locations on the plants. Both from "manipulated" and from "control" plants grown at the same time and both from the same mother.

The next thing I'm about to test is PAR lighting......730nm range lighting that runs at the end of the light cycle (20min before and extending to "about" 20min after lights out. We'll see how that goes. This is supposed to increase quality and yield!

So do you only use mh for the last two
weeks or is that used with hps?
Nevermind I read it again.
Thanks

In nature plants don't live in plastic buckets but at my house they do or they get the f**k out!

 

[noham]

So all I've heard is trichs here trichs there...
Can you not tell us the difference in smoke quality too?
Anybody?
...


ps: try to stay unbiased. no placebo here.

 

[Ace Yonder]

So all I've heard is trichs here trichs there...
Can you not tell us the difference in smoke quality too?
Anybody?
...


ps: try to stay unbiased. no placebo here.

It is literally impossible to give an opinion on smoke quality without the taint of placebo effect. Number of trichs is an empirical measurement that cannot be tainted by things such as placebo, hence the reason most of the talk has revolved around them. Only thing better would be if we could lab test samples that were grown under identical conditions save for the use of UV-B.

 

[Ace Yonder]

On your 65K bulb. Yes it will have SOME extra UVnm range light production (you've found that out). Bulbs that run the "blue" range of the spectrum produce the UV in A,B and C nm ranges. Like I said you can get this same effect with HID lighting, using your MH bulb the last 2 weeks of flower. Be sure to remove any glass from between the bulb and the plant as, like I mentioned earlier that glass is formulated to reduce UV.

On the buds closest to the 26w. Now you can actually "see" how far the effect is expressed in the increase of trich's. That's shows how effective the bulb is at growing distance from the bulb.

If you don't yet know. The plant is reacting to the UV by producing more trich's to protect it's self from the damaging UV radiation. This in turn raises the THC level simply because there are more trich's to carry it. The UV radiation ALSO increases the delta 9 THC content of the THC compound (delta 9 being the most psychoactive form of the compound).

While you can increase trich production with chemical manipulation. It appears that this way does not increase the delta 9 levels as much as the use of UVB! Yet, the increase in the total THC compounds by this method DO seem to increase the "relative"(the active relationship between the delta compounds) psychoactive effect!

So then. Once you try both methods, gather some test subjects and smoke one type against another on altering days. You will now have gathered data that should point to how well either way is effective to what your trying to achieve with one or the other.

To cover my size grow area with additional lighting for UV manipulation is not cost effective to the result. The use of MH for the last 2 weeks is cost effective in that there is no increase in overall electric use. Couple that with the chemical (nutrient) manipulation, it becomes interesting. The only problem at this point, again comes from the overall penetration of the UV effect to the lower budding on the plants. So now I have an inconsistency "problem"....Uniformity IS important to me and my Patients.....so then, this whole thing boils down to what YOU want to achieve!

All of this information is based on testing of the finished plant matter from differing locations on the plants. Both from "manipulated" and from "control" plants grown at the same time and both from the same mother.

The next thing I'm about to test is PAR lighting......730nm range lighting that runs at the end of the light cycle (20min before and extending to "about" 20min after lights out. We'll see how that goes. This is supposed to increase quality and yield!

Do you have any data on how much UV-B is output by MH bulbs, or if there is a specific MH bulb that has a higher UV-B rating? I only ask because it is my understanding that even though MH produces UV-B, the coating on the glass of the bulb itself (not just the glass cover of the reflector/cooltube) filters out nearly all UV-B radiation unless the bulb is specifically designed to allow it.

 

[topfuel29]

hello today iam going to buy rapti glo 10.00 its t5! so how long i should run it each day!

now i have 4x30w cfl bulps, and iam growing 2 autoflowering strains bubelicios and big bang!


Sorry about the mistakes, english isnt my first language!

Run your UVB light with your flowering light cycle.
As mentioned, you need to keep the UVB light close to the plant.
Rotate the plant, or move the UVB light every couple of days.
Some Strains produce more trichromes than others. Results may vary.

-Or-

Buy a bottle of Humboldts "Snow Storm"
It's 100x's better than the UVB light in producing Trichromes.

Good Luck on Your Grow.

 

[noham]

It is literally impossible to give an opinion on smoke quality without the taint of placebo effect. Number of trichs is an empirical measurement that cannot be tainted by things such as placebo, hence the reason most of the talk has revolved around them. Only thing better would be if we could lab test samples that were grown under identical conditions save for the use of UV-B.

...or give some (a) friend(s) a sample of a uvb supply grown and one without, without having them inspect the material.
A lab test may show increase in psychoactive compounds, but only if you can FEEL the difference would motivate me to into use of supplemental UV light.

Like, how much can you actually feel a 1 or 2 % increase in thc? ( I don't know. I'm asking )

 

[Dr. Who]

Do you have any data on how much UV-B is output by MH bulbs, or if there is a specific MH bulb that has a higher UV-B rating? I only ask because it is my understanding that even though MH produces UV-B, the coating on the glass of the bulb itself (not just the glass cover of the reflector/cooltube) filters out nearly all UV-B radiation unless the bulb is specifically designed to allow it.

I'm sorry to say that, No I don't. The cost of an optical spectrum analyzer is way out of line for my needs.
But there is NOT a coating on MH bulbs (that are used for growing plants) that block UV radiation (some bulbs ARE available with a "phosphore" coating that looks "white" and are NOT useable for growing, and maybe that's what your thinking of). Conversely, the "outer" glass bulb that contains the whole "works" inside (usually made of Borosilicate glass) does "reduce" the amount of UV passing to the outside. But still emit higher amounts of UVB then HPS to actually HAVE an effect on the trich, THC production question. I would have to speculate that MH grow bulbs that emit more on the "low end" of the nm range may emit somewhat more UV A, B and C. But that would be better answered by the bulb manufacturer!

Like I said earlier. There are Mercury Vapor bulbs out there at 400w, that DO emit much more UV A-B-C then any other available. Please note that these are trying to be phased out for JUST that reason! (To many city's (and other various outdoor users) still rely on these Merc-Vapor lights and they are available on-line. The gov. has not set any "stop use/manufacture by date" as of yet. Only a strong Recommendation to). Be aware that they DO come with an "exposure" warning!! So on this point, in this context, (as much as it pains me to admit it). Vostok IS correct! Eye protection in and around the Merc lights, at the proximity you would be to them. USE EYE PROTECTION!

 

[Dr. Who]

It is literally impossible to give an opinion on smoke quality without the taint of placebo effect. Number of trichs is an empirical measurement that cannot be tainted by things such as placebo, hence the reason most of the talk has revolved around them. Only thing better would be if we could lab test samples that were grown under identical conditions save for the use of UV-B.

It is literally impossible to give an opinion on smoke quality without the taint of placebo effect. Number of trichs is an empirical measurement that cannot be tainted by things such as placebo, hence the reason most of the talk has revolved around them. Only thing better would be if we could lab test samples that were grown under identical conditions save for the use of UV-B.

As far as lab sampling goes....yes I've done that! testing was done by Iron labs in Mich. Plants were tested at differing heights on the plants tested and this included the "control" plants NOT getting UV supplementation.
The results were that strain dependent, an AVERAGE increase of approx 13.3% was the norm. High was "almost" 14% and low was like 8.4% (If you want the actual #'s, please search for back posting on the subject as I don't remember where the hell I posted that and don't feel like going back to my grow to look up the notes and lab reports). This was done with the 400w Merc-Vapors. The Merc-Vapors are HARD on the plants! Thus you MUST use the timing like Nizza said above.
Variations in outcome in the form of how the THC "spectrum" (Delta levels, Cbn, Cbd, etc) was effected, came about from the time in the "day" the plants were exposed!
Less and earlier = more mentally intense
More and later = More couch locky and confusing
Both were BETTER at pain management!
In the testers trying the 2 (UV supplemented vs. not) EVERYONE like the the supplemented more.....But a lot of those testing the "more and later said it's effect's seemed "overpowering" (couch lock, "I felt stupid" is a real quote from one lady, "munchies" are to strong, "can't stop eating" was another).

In the end.....I agree with Topfuel on this subject. Less work, less cost, and the results are almost always near the same......I do run MH at the last 2 weeks on 2 in rotation strains...Really jacks the Blue cheese to serious connoisseur levels!

 

[Dr. Who]

Lastly, (finally). The testers were not told what they were testing! Only to give opinions on what they were testing! Supplemented vs. not.
This was done to avoid the Placebo effect. It was repeated 3 times each way per persons testing.
Yes I did try it too, and had to agree with the testers.

You guy's & gals ask for details. I try and supply them.

Hope this is what your all looking for.

 

[topfuel29]

Some decent videos about THC/UVB and % from the "Grow Show", Enjoy...
[video=youtube_share;lfiI78uN3Ks]http://youtu.be/lfiI78uN3Ks[/video]

 

[noham]

You guy's & gals ask for details. I try and supply them.

Hope this is what your all looking for.

Totally. Thank you Sir!

So,

Variations in outcome in the form of how the THC "spectrum" (Delta levels, Cbn, Cbd, etc) was effected, came about from the time in the "day" the plants were exposed!
Less and earlier = more mentally intense
More and later = More couch locky and confusing

+

I do run MH at the last 2 weeks on 2 in rotation strains

Does that mean they attain strength in a more "numbing" way?
Does the plant then utilize UV light in a different way if given in an earlier stage? What if earlier supplementation promoted THC output, but in later stages it actually degraded it?

Like when you put your arms up in defense, but if it gets hit and hit again it may aswell start "degrading"

 

[Dr. Who]

OK
#1: If the UV lighting is applied earlier in the day and at 10-15 min per hr = NO.....If applied later in the day and for longer times = YES (you also begin to stress the plant to much as the Mercury bulb's high UV output begins to "burn" the plant).

#2: part A; NO and YES. If applied earlier then the last 2 weeks the plant will still produce more trich's & THC, BUT in my findings those levels hit a "brick wall" and don't get any higher at a point. So then you'r just wasting money on electricity and the plant begins to stress to much from the "high" concentrations of the UV (not natural levels!!!).

#2: part B; I found that yes the "degradation" of the "full" THC spectrum does occur if the UV supplementation (at the concentrations put out by the source) continue to the point that you can see the plant stress.

Please note that this testing was not COMPLETED for repti bulbs as they had to little effective "reach" for my use! I will say that the T5 UVB bulbs for reptiles are better for the result's you may be looking for. they STILL were not effective enough for my requirements!

That what your looking for?