Michiganja Meduana
Active Member
Why would you want an autoflowering plant?
Are they genetically modified to flower like that?
Are they genetically modified to flower like that?
Why Auto?
- Thread starter Michiganja Meduana
- Start date
Geronimo420
Well-Known Member
auto flowering plants are obtain by mixing "normal" cannabis with the ruderalis strain, ruderalis is a naturally auto flowering strain with a very weak buzz. A good choice for beginner only in my opinion.
Sp33dymonk3y
Active Member
I am currently growing an auto just because I haven't before.. You will get a smaller yield though for sure.
Michiganja Meduana
Active Member
Smaller yield, less potency....makes sense. 
FRICKITYFRICKTYFRESH
Well-Known Member
Auto's are naturally higher in CBD and Lower in THC. They make a good choice for someone looking for medical relief without the full blown effect.
Last edited:
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Ruderalis is merely the origin of the auto-flower genes, doesn't mean all autos are ruderalis hybrids with a lot of ruderalis in it.
Autos are also not higher on CBD by default. CBD is not linked to auto-flower genes. Strains in which the auto genes are backcrossed into contain less than 10% of the strain the auto genes come from which often isn't even ruderalis but another auto hybrid (which contains less than 10% of the ruderalis or another auto strain...).
Autos are also not higher on CBD by default. CBD is not linked to auto-flower genes. Strains in which the auto genes are backcrossed into contain less than 10% of the strain the auto genes come from which often isn't even ruderalis but another auto hybrid (which contains less than 10% of the ruderalis or another auto strain...).
past times
Well-Known Member
I have never ran only autos, but I have had a bunch of freebie autos, that I have run off and on in my regular grow cycle stuff. They are pretty fun to grow. They are somewhat smaller and require much less attention (Especially young). They are faster. And I got plenty stoned. I just started my second NYC diesel auto after an ounce and a quarter off the last one.
my first plant was an auto, now i only grow them if they are free seeds and i have room in the room and have recycled soil to use up.
churchhaze
Well-Known Member
Why Auto?
Because people need to learn the hard way!
Because people need to learn the hard way!
Indoor Sun King
Well-Known Member
I am using auto's for my outdoor grow, as I want to harvest in September, not November
Mike Roach
Well-Known Member
If you're willing to sacrifice potency to save a couple weeks then grow auto otherwise stick to the real thing
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
Outdoor is the only application where growing auto's make any sense. Growing them indoors is utterly daft.
polo the don
Well-Known Member
Not only are they a great learning tool, they are fun to watch. I grow photos in perpetual but I do about 10 autos every summer when I have the extra room. My wife loves auto smoke. Sometimes I just want a "lighter" buzz with some pain relief. Not all autos are punks, some are actually pretty potent.
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
Yet nothing in that post is an actual reason to grow auto's instead of photo.
polo the don
Well-Known Member
Because I want to. Is that enough reason?
BTW I do grow photos. I wouldn't grow autos instead of photos. I grow autos in addition to my photos.
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
No, it's not enough of a reason. This thread is about reasons why you would grow them. As in advantages over photo. I have no issue with you or anyone growing them because why not, but i certainly have an issue when someone is told to grow them instead of photo under some bullshit reasoning.
I was simply pointing out that there is still no reason to grow auto over photo, in that you can get that mild smoke from a photo, for far cheaper, and in terms of learning, there is absolutely no difference between phto and auto yet for some reaon people often try and harp on about how auto's are somehow eaier to grow.
Upsides:
1. They don't require a "dark period" in flower. You can grow one on your kitchen table without concern for "light leaks."
2. Feasible to do a perpetual grow in a 4x4 tent. You can fit 6 in a tent, harvesting a plant every 3 weeks, replacing it with a seedling. No "feast or famine" cycles of sprouting a dozen seeds, months of bordedom, followed by the work of harvesting (trimming, curing) a lot of plants at once.
3. Tend to be more compact plants, for smaller areas. I grow good yields in a 2' tall tent in 3-gal containers.
4. With a slightly faster lifecycle, they make growing a little more interesting. The way things happen on their own makes it easier for a beginner to know "when." To me, it's more fun than photosensitives.
Downsides:
1. You'll run lights 18/6 all the time (no 12/12 period). That's more electricity and wear/tear on your lights.
2. I hear people say it's weaker high.
- But, my friends with high tolerances say it's some of the strongest they've had. We notice no difference between it and the photosensitives I grow. (I've read that early genetics were weak. Maybe something's changed as genetics improved?).
3. They produce less. I agree that if my primary motivation was production (cash crop?), I'd go photosensitive.
- But, if you're a small grower (supply friends, have fun growing, value low-maintenance), autos produce pretty darn well. I got 180g (6.4 oz) off an autoflower. My last one which struggled with acidic soil produced 120g (4.2 oz). The plant I'll harvest in a couple days looks somewhere between those two.
ayr0n
Well-Known Member
Smaller yield, less potency....makes sense.
To do a photo in the same time as an auto you'd have to run 12/12 from the start right? Is a 12/12 from seed photo going to yield the same as a 20/4 auto with all other conditions the same? It seems like 8 extra hours of light each day would produce a larger plant (ie; larger yield) and from what I've been reading there are quite a few autos out now that get just as potent as photos.
I know a lot of people prefer to dwell on the tried and true, oldschool, w.e...(yea yea music was better when you were a kid) Why preach no autos to people if there are hundreds of auto strains you've never tried and more than likely quite a few that can go toe to toe w/ a wide variety of photos in the potency department? That's like eating one type of cookie and saying all cookies taste like shit. Molasses cookies might be booty but I fux w/ chocolate chip
IDK I'm no pro grower but I feel like a lot of the negative things about the early auto strains is still getting regurgitated even though there's been a lot of improvements over time. Just like photos, autos will keep getting better as more and more breeders work their lines, breed new crosses and find those hidden gems. Just my 2cents for what it's worth...(approximately two cents)
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
1. Why would you grow a plant on your kitchen table? In reality, where we pay money to give our plants light, autos cost more.
2. You can do exactly the same with photoperiods.
3. You can do exactly the same with photoperiods. Cannabis plants are as compact as you chose or make them.
4. To me, one or two weeks longer is not enough to dramatically change how interesting the process is. If it is to you, i feel sorry for you, no sativas for you! And the latter part makes no sense. The only thing that an auto does on it's own that a photoperiod does not is going into flowering. That doesn't teach you anything, because there is no "when" that you speak of. when is whenever you like it.
I'm not here trying to troll, i am always just very much intrigued to learn the apparent arguments that have swayed people to thinking there is a purpose for autoflowering plants indoors. Outdoors they make wonderful sense.