Removing fan leaves during flowering

[Growan]

You read a pseudo post you thought was great? Then you'll love the 'Defoliation to increse yield' thread, loads of pdeudo in there. Pseudo science, pseudo comedy, pseudo advice...

 

[neo12345]

If you cut off all the fan leaves.... Then what exactly is fueling this extra bud growth?

I hear this comment quite a lot that a plant can't grow without leaves, it's a common misconception spread around by the defolihaters.

 

[chuck estevez]

I hear this comment quite a lot that a plant can't grow without leaves, it's a common misconception spread around by the defolihaters.

He didn't say the plant won't grow, HE asked, WHERE DOES THE SUPPOSED EXTRA BUD FROM DEFOLIATING GET THE ENERGY FROM TO PRODUCE THIS EXTRA BUD???

damn Neo,

 

[joe macclennan]

best piece of advise i can give you is ,DON"T LISTEN TO ANYTHING NEO TELLS YOU.

https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journal-discussion/809749-defoliation-experiment-side-side-sister.html

https://www.rollitup.org/advanced-marijuana-cultivation/809775-anyone-fan-defoliation-increase-yeild.html

lol, pretty good advice there

according to the square inverse law, it states that light fades directly in relation to how far you get from the light source.. at one foot, you're only getting half of the light as you would at the light source..
so, according to the square inverse law, if you chop off the leaves at the top of the plant, the leaves only one foot lower will only ever receive 1/2 the light as the leaves at the top of the canopy.. so, but cutting off the top leaves in an attempt to get more light at the bottom of the plant, at only one foot all that light is only going to be half as strong as it was for the leaves you just cut off... two feet and it's only 1/4 the light strength, so on and so on..
so to sum it up again.. the leaves at the top of the plant, the ones that are closest to the source of the light, are getting the strongest light for the entire plant, therefore doing the most work for the plant creating sugars and food via photosynthesis. simple raelly..

pretty good explanation

Leaves are relevant to their locality on the plant.

sure...to a point. But just as the plant can pull nutrients up from it's roots it will redistribute the sugars produced from photosynthesis by the process of translocation. It only stands to reason that the leaves closest to the light source are doing more work than those farther away.

I hear this comment quite a lot that a plant can't grow without leaves, it's a common misconception spread around by the defolihaters.

it's not that we are hating knucklehead. Get over yourself. There is just no credible data or studies that back defoliation as being beneficial. and this is not to be confused with pruning/mainlining or lst.

here is a study proving that the closer to the light source the more photosynthesis occurs. Like reasonable folks would assume.
http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/54/4/575.full.pdf+html

 

[joe macclennan]

I tried to copy and paste the most pertinent data but it won't let me. Please refer to the table 1 on page 576 top right hand corner.

It lists translocation and photosynthesis rates at varying distances and o2 concentrations.

 

[neo12345]

according to the square inverse law, it states that light fades directly in relation to how far you get from the light source.. at one foot, you're only getting half of the light as you would at the light source..
so, according to the square inverse law, if you chop off the leaves at the top of the plant, the leaves only one foot lower will only ever receive 1/2 the light as the leaves at the top of the canopy.. so, but cutting off the top leaves in an attempt to get more light at the bottom of the plant, at only one foot all that light is only going to be half as strong as it was for the leaves you just cut off... two feet and it's only 1/4 the light strength, so on and so on..
so to sum it up again.. the leaves at the top of the plant, the ones that are closest to the source of the light, are getting the strongest light for the entire plant, therefore doing the most work for the plant creating sugars and food via photosynthesis. simple raelly..

The square inverse law does not take leaf penetration into account though, as surely a large fan leaf at the top of the plant will shadow the passage of light to many leaves on it's way down? For example if you put your hand palm down on the floor under the lamp you'll see the shadow enlarge as you move your hands towards the lamp, and although your hand is now close to the light and you probably can't see the shadow anymore it must be blocking out quite a lot of light?

So if you stripped leaves at the top 8" of the plant does that translate to an extra 8" of usable light lower down the plant, in a section where there are more leaves than you took off at the top?

 

[joe macclennan]

obviously you are ignoring the FACTUAL data I posted.....typical

 

[chuck estevez]

the square inverse law does not take leaf penetration into account though, as surely a large fan leaf at the top of the plant will shadow the passage of light to many leaves on it's way down? For example if you put your hand palm down on the floor under the lamp you'll see the shadow enlarge as you move your hands towards the lamp, and although your hand is now close to the light and you probably can't see the shadow anymore it must be blocking out quite a lot of light?

So if you stripped leaves at the top 8" of the plant does that translate to an extra 8" of usable light lower down the plant, in a section where there are more leaves than you took off at the top?

again, neo, get a better light!!!!!

 

[Wavels]

For me it is simple; the more leaves, the bigger the buds.

 

[joe macclennan]

again, neo, get a better light!!!!!

he doesn't get it. I doubt he ever will.

I think he was one of those kids who grabbed a hold of a hot stove burner even when warned not too.

the world needs ditch diggers too chuck

 

[chuck estevez]

he doesn't get it. I doubt he ever will.

I think he was one of those kids who grabbed a hold of a hot stove burner even when warned not too.

The world needs ditch diggers too chuck

yuuuppp!!!

 

[neo12345]

obviously you are ignoring the FACTUAL data I posted.....typical

You didn't even allow me time to reply to your comments?

One minute you want to appear to have a sensible conversation by presenting some information, the next you're doing an immature Beavis and Butthead impression with this adonis:



I think if you check your signature you were very recently telling me how I should be more efficient and that defoliation is not very efficient because it might extend the veg time, and your answer is to buy more lights?

Do you actually know what the arguments against defoliation are, or are you just making it up as you go along?

 

[joe macclennan]

I figured twelve minutes was enough time. but....me bad.

have you had enough time now? Do you care to dispute any of the data I presented?

 

[chuck estevez]

 

[JohnnySocko]

I wonder if 1/2 these threads on defoliation are trolls for entertainment purposes...
then again, so what, these threads are friggin funny regardless

 

[joe blow greenthumb]

Photosynthesis drives bud formation. Leaves drive photosynthesis. Cut leaves=cut bud formation. Sure, it may seem like the lower buds aren't getting enough light but they're a younger part of the plant. Would you rather trim and get the lower buds a little larger or would you rather have the 2oz cola on top without defoliating? The largest leaves are doing the most work.... When you cut leaves during flower you stunt the growth of the bud that the leaf is under. The largest fan leaves growing from the main stalk is feeding the entire plant directly down its main feeding tube.

 

[joe macclennan]

Photosynthesis drives bud formation. Leaves drive photosynthesis. Cut leaves=cut bud formation. Sure, it may seem like the lower buds aren't getting enough light but they're a younger part of the plant. Would you rather trim and get the lower buds a little larger or would you rather have the 2oz cola on top without defoliating? The largest leaves are doing the most work.... When you cut leaves during flower you stunt the growth of the bud that the leaf is under. The largest fan leaves growing from the main stalk is feeding the entire plant directly down its main feeding tube.

pretty much what the link to the study I posted said.

still waiting on neo to finish reading it

 

[Growan]

Yeah, racerboy, you defolihater, you. For a while there it seemed you were gonna give this subject the dignified responses it deserves. But no, man, you gone back to calling neo a bitch ass leaf plucking fiddle monkey who can't leave his plants alone long enough to grow up proper. What's with that? I mean, just cos stripping your plants to fuck is retarded, doesn't mean you have to piss on his cornflakes. Man. You cold. But so right. Hey, neo! Put the scissors down or go run with 'em!

 

[chuck estevez]

Yeah, racerboy, you defolihater, you. For a while there it seemed you were gonna give this subject the dignified responses it deserves. But no, man, you gone back to calling neo a bitch ass leaf plucking fiddle monkey who can't leave his plants alone long enough to grow up proper. What's with that? I mean, just cos stripping your plants to fuck is retarded, doesn't mean you have to piss on his cornflakes. Man. You cold. But so right. Hey, neo! Put the scissors down or go run with 'em!

 

[Growan]

I'm gonna fix my sig. Defolihater!