Effect of Defoliation on Yield - Skywalker OG indoor scrog

[OscarLaGrouch]

This has NO CHANCE to become a sticky. Where is your empirical data when you can't properly use scientific terms that "in your opinion" are interchangeable. For your edification:

Theory: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.

Hypothesis: For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.

THE DIFFERENCE ? Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A scientific hypothesis is a proposed explanation of a phenomenon which still has to be rigorously tested. In contrast, a scientific theory has undergone extensive testing and is generally accepted to be the accurate explanation behind an observation.

I was too tired to entertain a basic question yesterday. Relax. Of course I know the difference.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

I feel a need to expand on that since it hits home. Amongst the winegrowers community, there is disagreement regarding the laborious task of "leafing"....removing most leaves in the fruit zone on the east side in hot climes, both east and west in moderate. The effect is on the fruit, has nothing to do with productivity that is alluded to in all defoliation threads. The exposure to sunlight reduces the herbaceous profile in the wine and increases anthrocyanins. More color, more market appeal. Having said that, there are scientific studies that have been done using lab spectometers reflecting that as little as 10% of dappled light produces the same effect as "leafing" and has the added benefit of cooling the clusters of grapes which reduces the "jam" effect.

As discussed, you remove fan leaves, the primary food factory unit for a plant, and you retard the plant. You interfere with very important plant processes such as metabolite storage, transpiration and can impart hermies, etc.

Uncle Ben

I read that study and I agree with a lot of what you say. I just feel that indoor plants produce more leaves than they need and, in a scrog, these excessive leaves create air flow and light penetration issues, not to mention fungal issues.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

This has NO CHANCE to become a sticky. Where is your empirical data when you can't properly use scientific terms that "in your opinion" are interchangeable. For your edification:

Theory: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.

Hypothesis: For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories.

THE DIFFERENCE ? Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A scientific hypothesis is a proposed explanation of a phenomenon which still has to be rigorously tested. In contrast, a scientific theory has undergone extensive testing and is generally accepted to be the accurate explanation behind an observation.

ok
what empirical data do you want? do you want me to count all the leaves on all the plants and then give you the exact percentage I removed? what data do you want?

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Buy the book - http://www.amazon.com/Marijuana-Growers-Insiders-Guide-Frank/dp/0929349008

is there a defol/yield?

 

[burgertime2010]

What is a sticky?

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Leaves produce buds, not nutrients.

Oscar....you're digging yourself a (newbie) hole!

ok that 's my point. the plants are hopped up on nutrient to produce leaves to produce buds. you're saying we should leave all the leaves on to produce bigger buds. all I'm saying is that I believe that the energy used to produce and maintain excessive leaves could be retained by the plant for producing bigger buds.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

What is a sticky?

man, I don't want this thread crowded up with irrelevant posts. go look on the forums and you can see em. they are threads that are relevant and helpful such that they are posted at the top of the forums as topics new members can read. it prevents the same questions being asked over and over.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Leaves produce buds, not nutrients.

Oscar....you're digging yourself a (newbie) hole!

why am I feeding my hydro set up nutrients then? I just need leaves. lots of leaves.

stop being condescending to me. it's very unattractive and makes you look less like an expert to consult and more like someone to avoid.
all your acrimonious posts will be deleted so please keep it to science and stop the insults.

 

[CaretakerDad]

ok
what empirical data do you want? do you want me to count all the leaves on all the plants and then give you the exact percentage I removed? what data do you want?

"Empirical evidence (also empirical data, sense experience, empirical knowledge, or the a posteriori) is a source of knowledge acquired by means of observation or experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, Εμπειρία (empeiría).

Empirical evidence is information that justifies a belief in the truth or falsity of an empirical claim. In the empiricist view, one can claim to have knowledge only when one has a true belief based on empirical evidence."


This is determined by by what is known as the scientific method where proven knowledge is shared by experienced professionals in the community and then built on and experiments are done under controlled conditions also by professionals which you are not. You have an idea (and not a good one) based on your "feelings" that goes against the knowledge base of every grower of merit. Like I said, welcome to peer review where junk science will be publicly bashed.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Irony of this place is that most use techniques that actually retard a plant when their dream is to enhance it, push it. Too much light, too little N, too much plant food of the wrong kind, removing the very unit that produces the bud and other important plant tissue i.e. roots, flushing, confining/restricting plants to tents.....the list just goes on.

Bit of wisdom found in another active defoliation thread - "well i don't know the science, I've just proven it doing side by side comparisons."

UB what is wrong with me doing this science project to find out for myself? what is the harm in that? why can't you just let me do this? why do you feel the need to stop me from trying because you already know it is a waste of time?

 

[Uncle Ben]

why am I feeding my hydro set up nutrients then? I just need leaves. lots of leaves.

This is a lot of (over priced, over hyped) "stuff":

Heavy 16 nutrients (full line)
50/50 coco/perlite
Mykos beneficials mixed into medium and added weekly by top dressing
Protekt Silica
MagiCal
Bio-Cozyme
CannaZyme
Eagle 20
Dutch Master reverse

Do you even know what elements the plants are being given, what the NPK values and micros they "see"?

What did you pay for that stuff? Bonafide educated botanists wouldn't be caught dead buying some of that cannabis specific crap and sure wouldn't divulge to their professional friends they network with that they did. They know better....they'd be laughed right out of the room.

Oscar, contact Raphael Diez at Dyna-Gro, Have a chat with him, tell him what you're using. He's honest and down to earth and the company is well respected in the "normal" horticultural community. He also doesn't take fools lightly (get ready to be told that AN and others are snake oil). No question about it, he outshines me when it comes to diplomacy, which doesn't take much.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

"Empirical evidence (also empirical data, sense experience, empirical knowledge, or the a posteriori) is a source of knowledge acquired by means of observation or experimentation.[1] The term comes from the Greek word for experience, Εμπειρία (empeiría).

Empirical evidence is information that justifies a belief in the truth or falsity of an empirical claim. In the empiricist view, one can claim to have knowledge only when one has a true belief based on empirical evidence."


This is determined by by what is known as the scientific method where proven knowledge is shared by experienced professionals in the community and then built on and experiments are done under controlled conditions also by professionals which you are not. You have an idea (and not a good one) based on your "feelings" that goes against the knowledge base of every grower of merit. Like I said, welcome to peer review where junk science will be publicly bashed.

thanks for that.
I am creating my own empirical knowledge and experience. I defoliated and I will observe the result. I will record the data with regard to the yield of the defoliated plants vs. the natural control plants. A few numbers will result:
yield of A
yield of B
difference between A and B
% difference between A and B

Also, I am a professional. Your position that I should not even do this experiment does not make me unprofessional. You should know that is not a logical conclusion to make. It is an emotional statement that your ego is making. You have stated your intention to bash my junk science. This is not logical either. You also state the knowledge base of "every grower of merit". That means if there are 100 growers of merit that all 100 will oppose defoliation. However I know many 'growers of merit' that DO practice defoliation for various reasons. If it hurt their yields, do you think they would do it? no. however, your emotions would lead you to classify any grower that does not agree with your POV as a "grower without merit". None of this is logic or science, just emotional investment and closed-mindedness. Its sad, really, to see a man of science be so emotional and illogical.

I want to see if yanking some leaves significantly affects my yield good or bad. I'm gonna do it no matter what is said here.

 

[Uncle Ben]

How are you going to decide exactly what material to weigh come harvest? Do you decide or a team of seasoned laboratory professionals and their assistants? What if disease or insect pressure, or some other cultural issues affects some but not others which will affect the outcome and skew the results?

Plant tissue moisture levels? You do have an accurate method/instruments to measure moisture levels in the tissue, or you gonna hang "those bitches", let them dry, clean 'em up and say, "it's time to weigh!" ?

At what point in the plant's development will you say part or all of A or B is ready?

At least you have a control group to play with.

Nobody is saying your shouldn't do your experiment. We've pointed out that these "experiments" are a dime a dozen, the defol threads are a dime a dozen, that this does not come close to being an experiment as conducted by a non-partisan independent lab.

The only conclusion is it will be closed like all the rest.

But more power to you! You have every right to do and share whatever you choose.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

thanks. outshining you in diplomacy would not be that hard. I am not abandoning my nutrient line for another one as that would cost even more money.
NPK 3.25/3.7/6.9.0
micros Glomus intraradices

all plants look robust and vigorous with green leaves and no nutrient burn
buds are up to 2cm wide at this point which is day 17.

This is a lot of (over priced, over hyped) "stuff":

Heavy 16 nutrients (full line)
50/50 coco/perlite
Mykos beneficials mixed into medium and added weekly by top dressing
Protekt Silica
MagiCal
Bio-Cozyme
CannaZyme
Eagle 20
Dutch Master reverse

Do you even know what elements the plants are being given, what the NPK values and micros they "see"?

What did you pay for that stuff? Bonafide educated botanists wouldn't be caught dead buying some of that cannabis specific crap and sure wouldn't divulge to their professional friends they network with that they did. They know better....they'd be laughed right out of the room.

Oscar, contact Raphael Diez at Dyna-Gro, Have a chat with him, tell him what you're using. He's honest and down to earth and the company is well respected in the "normal" horticultural community. He also doesn't take fools lightly (but outshines me when it comes to diplomacy.)

 

[Uncle Ben]

Oscar, I asked some very important questions which will serve to validate or invalidate your drills. If you really choose to dodge them.......

Glomus intraradices is not a micro. It is a endomychorrhizal fungus frequently found in monocots. Whoever talked you into myco fungi for cannabis sold you down the river.

I have a friend who has been doing this for probably 60 years and he told me that a study proved that myco fungi are useless in potted plants.

Am happy the plants look good.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

click quote for response

How are you going to decide exactly what material to weigh come harvest? Do you decide or a team of seasoned laboratory professionals and their assistants? What if disease or insect pressure, or some other cultural issues affects some but not others which will affect the outcome and skew the results? /QUOTE]
I am going to weigh, as state in the OP, the final trimmed buds at a uniform RH of 55%. Again, I have been a lab assistant as an undergrad and am paid to work in a lab as a grad student, so I am a lab professional. I wish I had assistants. I am technically familiar with precision. One does not prepare slides of material 2 microns thick without precision. If disease or some other event occurs, I will report on it and discuss it and its affects. If that happens, its ok because I will just repeat the experiment over and over.

I calculate the VPD using a formula. The leaves of the plant have adequate turgor. A and B may be ready at different times due to the defoliation. If so, it will be reported. However, I plan to harvest all plants within minutes of each other.

I am not parroting anything seen on the internet. I am doing a simple experiment with a subject and a control in the same environment with the same nutrients. Basic? yes. Scientific? enough for me.
I have not seen anyone do a side by side with n=18. I have seen lots of posts saying "I wish someone would do a side by side defol experiment to see..."
I'm non partisan. I am not trying to prove that defol increases yield. As a trained scientist, I am letting the result speak for themselves. Period. I AM a non-partisan independent lab. I am not producing a study to hype any clients products or anything. This is a quest for EMPIRICAL KNOWLEDGE.
I would think that would be encouraged and supported here.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Oscar, I asked some very important questions which will serve to validate or invalidate your drills. If you really choose to dodge them.......

I thought I answered them

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

every single product or item sold in a hydro store is overpriced. its and expensive endeavor.

This is a lot of (over priced, over hyped) "stuff":

Heavy 16 nutrients (full line)
50/50 coco/perlite
Mykos beneficials mixed into medium and added weekly by top dressing
Protekt Silica
MagiCal
Bio-Cozyme
CannaZyme
Eagle 20
Dutch Master reverse

Do you even know what elements the plants are being given, what the NPK values and micros they "see"?

What did you pay for that stuff? Bonafide educated botanists wouldn't be caught dead buying some of that cannabis specific crap and sure wouldn't divulge to their professional friends they network with that they did. They know better....they'd be laughed right out of the room.

Oscar, contact Raphael Diez at Dyna-Gro, Have a chat with him, tell him what you're using. He's honest and down to earth and the company is well respected in the "normal" horticultural community. He also doesn't take fools lightly (get ready to be told that AN and others are snake oil). No question about it, he outshines me when it comes to diplomacy, which doesn't take much.

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Oscar, I asked some very important questions which will serve to validate or invalidate your drills. If you really choose to dodge them.......

Glomus intraradices is not a micro. It is a endomychorrhizal fungus primarily found in monocots like wheat or alfalfa. Whoever talked you into myco fungi for cannabis sold you down the river.

I have a friend who has been doing this for probably 60 years and he told me that a study proved that myco fungi are useless in potted plants.

Am happy the plants look good.

oh you meant micro nutrients. I thought you meant microbiology

 

[OscarLaGrouch]

Oscar, I asked some very important questions which will serve to validate or invalidate your drills. If you really choose to dodge them.......

Glomus intraradices is not a micro. It is a endomychorrhizal fungus primarily found in monocots like wheat or alfalfa. Whoever talked you into myco fungi for cannabis sold you down the river.

I have a friend who has been doing this for probably 60 years and he told me that a study proved that myco fungi are useless in potted plants.

Am happy the plants look good.

yeah I read that stuff too. however, I am growing in hydro and I believe in symbiotic relationships being beneficial. if it doesn't work it doesn't cost that much. if it works, its there.