what is lollipoping

[420grower.cali]

I say: if you cut anything, minimize both the amount and frequency thereof. Cut the least material, the fewest possible number of times. Hacking a plant too much will stress it, which can cause/trigger almost every problem you want to avoid. Better to just give them plenty of room and sufficient air flow, instead of chopping off the parts that catch light and store nutrients and help it breathe. The more light the plant catches (to a point), and the more it remains in appropriate supply of proper nutrients, the better.

But yeah, some trimming and shaping is okay, if it's done to avoid a much worse problem. You don't want your bush too thick to the point where you start getting mold. If you have to hack off parts of the plant to avoid mold, do it. If you have to make them fit in a smaller than optimal space, go ahead and cut some.

I'm not saying that lolipopping is going to destroy an otherwise healthy and potent specimen... but it's extra work for less yield. You might have prettier colas, but overall yield will decrease.

I can confirm that stuff at the bottom that doesn't seem to get much visible light, turns out just as good (or nearly) as the colas. Maybe even better, since colas get singed a bit sometimes.

IMO, cutting off so many pieces of the plant, exposing it to so many points of possible infection, isn't worth the risk, isn't worth the decrease in yield, isn't worth the extra effort (unless you Need to decrease the compacted bushiness, to decrease the chance of mold).

Build the soil/substrate, start 'em, get 'em up and topped... stabilize and let 'em run. Flower when ready. Stay out of the way. Don't let anything compromise it. That's all you really need to do.

Consider this: every leaf you let grow, is spent and stored resources/nutrients.

If you let it grow, the resource/energy/nutrient is already 'consumed' or 'spent' (from the soil to the plant). Why waste it?

The only good reasons i can think of, for any aggressive cutting, are these: disease prevention and shaping for container/room parameters.

Otherwise... just let 'em grow how they do.

Uncle Ben says: "i will not be a slave to my plants." Only took me one grow to adopt that perspective. I can't imagine why anyone with anything else they might want to do, would spend time lolipopping a plant that will be no worse by Not hacking off branches (and will likely yield more). The only times it's worth doing, are when you have to make a compromise to save the rest of the plant, or when your space just doesn't allow a whole bush. Otherwise... don't we all have better things to do? Like maybe building better lamps, better ventilation, better scrubbers, etc. Or just anything else non-cannabis-related.

I understand some people just like to shape the plant, and i have no problem with any of that.

I just dislike the idea that people are being told to lolipop with expectation of inexplicable improvements, which almost certainly will not occur (unless in the specific circumstances i mentioned, or others i didn't).

Smaller yield yeah but i can fit more plants in one space

 

[420grower.cali]

Smaller yield yeah but i can fit more plants in one space

And im pretty damn sure they finish faster in sog so it increases yield as far as time but maybe not per harvest

 

[a mongo frog]

Smaller yield yeah but i can fit more plants in one space

But not a smaller yield though. i don't agree with that.

 

[reasonevangelist]

Yea theres some circumstances you didn't mention. But hey I'm not going to be the one to tell the op to prune up some bottom growth.

I can't exhaustively list every circumstance, just wanted to get the gist and the notion across: there's some situations where it's beneficial, but outside of those situations, i'd avoid it entirely.

I mean, people can do whatever they prefer with their specimens... doesn't matter to me one bit. If you're happy lolipopping, that's fine with me.

Smaller yield yeah but i can fit more plants in one space

More plants = more roots in the same amount of soil. Wear your soil out faster? Idk. Maybe only relevant in no-till ROLS.

 

[420grower.cali]

But not a smaller yield though. i don't agree with that.

U think one sog plant will have the same yield as one plant just left to grow how it may? Or do u mean per harvest with multiple plants?

 

[a mongo frog]

I can't exhaustively list every circumstance, just wanted to get the gist and the notion across: there's some situations where it's beneficial, but outside of those situations, i'd avoid it entirely.

I mean, people can do whatever they prefer with their specimens... doesn't matter to me one bit. If you're happy lolipopping, that's fine with me.


More plants = more roots in the same amount of soil. Wear your soil out faster? Idk. Maybe only relevant in no-till ROLS.

I assure you if you cleaned up the tops on this girl and made some clones. Then flowered her out after re pottting you would not be mad a bout a loss of yield.

 

[reasonevangelist]

But not a smaller yield though. i don't agree with that.

This seems to be the primary point of contention on the issue: do the colas swell enough to account for the lost branches? I say no. You say yes. I don't know how we can prove it either way. Some people say they already have.

I say: more leaves = plant functions better.

more cuts = more 'repair energy', lost nutrients, lost time, delay, risk of enough stress to cause a problem...

 

[a mongo frog]

U think one sog plant will have the same yield as one plant just left to grow how it may? Or do u mean per harvest with multiple plants?

I'm not sure what your asking me.

 

[a mongo frog]

This seems to be the primary point of contention on the issue: do the colas swell enough to account for the lost branches? I say no. You say yes. I don't know how we can prove it either way. Some people say they already have.

I say: more leaves = plant functions better.

more cuts = more 'repair energy', lost nutrients, lost time, delay, risk of enough stress to cause a problem...

i never said yes to that. Your hurting my feelings putting words in my mouth for everyone to see.

 

[420grower.cali]

This seems to be the primary point of contention on the issue: do the colas swell enough to account for the lost branches? I say no. You say yes. I don't know how we can prove it either way. Some people say they already have.

I say: more leaves = plant functions better.

more cuts = more 'repair energy', lost nutrients, lost time, delay, risk of enough stress to cause a problem...

Small amount of loss though and i think the pros outweigh the cons when the plant is focusing more energy into the top colas wrather than wasting nutrients and energy on the small buds and undergrowth, also it doesnt really have a great effect on function when, due to the canopy, the undergrowth is hardly getting much light therefore not.contributing much to the growth of the plant, although i do agree with u about the stress of the plant, that can be an issue

 

[420grower.cali]

This seems to be the primary point of contention on the issue: do the colas swell enough to account for the lost branches? I say no. You say yes. I don't know how we can prove it either way. Some people say they already have.

I say: more leaves = plant functions better.

more cuts = more 'repair energy', lost nutrients, lost time, delay, risk of enough stress to cause a problem...

I'm not sure what your asking me.

Well ur saying u dont agree that they have a smaller yield when lollipopped right? Maybe i misunderstood but if so then im asking if u think one plant lollipopped in sog would carry the same yield as a plant that jasnt been lollipopped or.placed in sog? Or were u not talking about sog at all?

 

[420grower.cali]

Well ur saying u dont agree that they have a smaller yield when lollipopped right? Maybe i misunderstood but if so then im asking if u think one plant lollipopped in sog would carry the same yield as a plant that jasnt been lollipopped or.placed in sog? Or were u not talking about sog at all?

I didnt mean to quot reasonevangelist in that post btw

 

[a mongo frog]

Well ur saying u dont agree that they have a smaller yield when lollipopped right? Maybe i misunderstood but if so then im asking if u think one plant lollipopped in sog would carry the same yield as a plant that jasnt been lollipopped or.placed in sog? Or were u not talking about sog at all?

All I'm saying is i don't think pruning the bottoms hurts or lessons yield.

 

[420grower.cali]

All I'm saying is i don't think pruning the bottoms hurts or lessons yield.

Agreed

 

[reasonevangelist]

I assure you if you cleaned up the tops on this girl and made some clones. Then flowered her out after re potting you would not be mad a bout a loss of yield.

yeah that does look quite bushy.

For me, as long as i get enough to not worry about running out before next round is ready, my yield is sufficient. That's not difficult to achieve in a small space, so i don't worry about aggressive shaping techniques so much.

i never said yes to that. Your hurting my feelings putting words in my mouth for everyone to see.

Well i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I figured you were in the yes-camp.

Small amount of loss though and i think the pros outweigh the cons when the plant is focusing more energy into the top colas wrather than wasting nutrients and energy on the small buds and undergrowth, also it doesnt really have a great effect on function when, due to the canopy, the undergrowth is hardly getting much light therefore not.contributing much to the growth of the plant, although i do agree with u about the stress of the plant, that can be an issue

"rather than wasting nutrients and energy on the small buds and undergrowth..."

Exactly what Uncle Ben would cite as your error. I had the same notion, but encountered some information i hadn't seen yet, and it changed my mind on the issue.

That stuff isn't "wasted," it's catching leftover photons, helping the plant photosynthesize (breathing is part of it; even unlit leaves breathe, and store nutrients for the plant to use later, when/if it feels the need to consume it's own leaves, which it will eventually begin doing... if those leaves ain't there anymore, it's going to need to pull nutrients from the root zone again, instead of having them stocked and ready in the leaves... more energy expended on getting those nutrients where they need to go, if it has to pull from the root instead of the leaf; the leaf has already been pulled from the root).

Plus, light doesn't have to touch the flowers directly, to make them good. All the light your plant gets, helps the WHOLE plant grow, not only the leaves which touch light. This is where i was intuitively mistaken before. Those leaves aren't wasted until you cut them off. ^^

If you're going to cut anything, don't let it grow up in the first place. Letting something grow just to be cut off before it can be used, is wasting resources from your soil, which your plant only stored (and spent energy to do so), and didn't get to end up using, because you cut it off before it could.

However... there's a whole lot of leaves, and probably a surplus of resources in the substrate...

So really all you're doing is spending your own energy on something that doesn't have a whole lot of usefulness, isn't necessary, and can usually be safely avoided without making your plant suck.

But if you want to, that's okay too.

 

[420grower.cali]

yeah that does look quite bushy.

For me, as long as i get enough to not worry about running out before next round is ready, my yield is sufficient. That's not difficult to achieve in a small space, so i don't worry about aggressive shaping techniques so much.

Well i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I figured you were in the yes-camp.



"rather than wasting nutrients and energy on the small buds and undergrowth..."

Exactly what Uncle Ben would cite as your error. I had the same notion, but encountered some information i hadn't seen yet, and it changed my mind on the issue.

That stuff isn't "wasted," it's catching leftover photons, helping the plant photosynthesize (breathing is part of it; even unlit leaves breathe, and store nutrients for the plant to use later, when/if it feels the need to consume it's own leaves, which it will eventually begin doing... if those leaves ain't there anymore, it's going to need to pull nutrients from the root zone again, instead of having them stocked and ready in the leaves... more energy expended on getting those nutrients where they need to go, if it has to pull from the root instead of the leaf; the leaf has already been pulled from the root).

Plus, light doesn't have to touch the flowers directly, to make them good. All the light your plant gets, helps the WHOLE plant grow, not only the leaves which touch light. This is where i was intuitively mistaken before. Those leaves aren't wasted until you cut them off. ^^

If you're going to cut anything, don't let it grow up in the first place. Letting something grow just to be cut off before it can be used, is wasting resources from your soil, which your plant only stored (and spent energy to do so), and didn't get to end up using, because you cut it off before it could.

However... there's a whole lot of leaves, and probably a surplus of resources in the substrate...

So really all you're doing is spending your own energy on something that doesn't have a whole lot of usefulness, isn't necessary, and can usually be safely avoided without making your plant suck.

But if you want to, that's okay too.

Hahaha

 

[a mongo frog]

yeah that does look quite bushy.

For me, as long as i get enough to not worry about running out before next round is ready, my yield is sufficient. That's not difficult to achieve in a small space, so i don't worry about aggressive shaping techniques so much.

Well i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I figured you were in the yes-camp.



"rather than wasting nutrients and energy on the small buds and undergrowth..."

Exactly what Uncle Ben would cite as your error. I had the same notion, but encountered some information i hadn't seen yet, and it changed my mind on the issue.

That stuff isn't "wasted," it's catching leftover photons, helping the plant photosynthesize (breathing is part of it; even unlit leaves breathe, and store nutrients for the plant to use later, when/if it feels the need to consume it's own leaves, which it will eventually begin doing... if those leaves ain't there anymore, it's going to need to pull nutrients from the root zone again, instead of having them stocked and ready in the leaves... more energy expended on getting those nutrients where they need to go, if it has to pull from the root instead of the leaf; the leaf has already been pulled from the root).

Plus, light doesn't have to touch the flowers directly, to make them good. All the light your plant gets, helps the WHOLE plant grow, not only the leaves which touch light. This is where i was intuitively mistaken before. Those leaves aren't wasted until you cut them off. ^^

If you're going to cut anything, don't let it grow up in the first place. Letting something grow just to be cut off before it can be used, is wasting resources from your soil, which your plant only stored (and spent energy to do so), and didn't get to end up using, because you cut it off before it could.

However... there's a whole lot of leaves, and probably a surplus of resources in the substrate...

So really all you're doing is spending your own energy on something that doesn't have a whole lot of usefulness, isn't necessary, and can usually be safely avoided without making your plant suck.

But if you want to, that's okay too.

Im not sure who Uncle Ben is. Is this a relative of yours? Sounds like a nice man though.

 

[reasonevangelist]

Im not sure who Uncle Ben is. Is this a relative of yours? Sounds like a nice man though.

lol. You've been here since 2010.

And no, he and i have no connection beyond words exchanged on this site. I'm unable to assess or speak to his actual demeanor, but i can say he seems to know plants quite well, and to a depth and degree most probably don't. I ain't callin' nobody King Plant God or anything... just sayin', he usually has good info on plant things. Just sayin', i agree with Why he opposes lolipopping, but i won't call anyone stupid for doing so, because it's their plant, and maybe they have a reason, or maybe they just WANT to do whatever. If a person perceives a benefit, and it isn't hurting anyone in the process... might as well let them keep that perception, if they're so inclined.

 

[churchhaze]

I think part of the problem is that different people have different meainings for lollipopping. For me, I have very strict rules if I do lollipop.

1) no cutting petioles, only cutting stems. Lolipopping is not defoliation.. Do not defoliate, anywhere, ever.
2) don't cut off any branches thicker than a toothpick. Any mass you cut off is wasted energy. Only consider cutting off brand new growth tips that have negligible mass.

That's basically it. Lollipopping will not increase yields, but it will allow you shape the plant if you know how to shape plants. I can't say I recommend lollipopping if the intention is to increase yield. It's just that sometimes with indoor lighting, you know that will not have the lighting for some lower branches and it's possible some energy might be saved by cutting lower branches BEFORE they develope into thicker than toothpicks. I don't even like to call what I do lollipopping.

 

[reasonevangelist]

I think part of the problem is that different people have different meainings for lollipopping. For me, I have very strict rules if I do lollipop.

1) no cutting petioles, only cutting stems. Lolipopping is not defoliation.. Do not defoliate, anywhere, ever.
2) don't cut off any branches thicker than a toothpick. Any mass you cut off is wasted energy. Only consider cutting off brand new growth tips that have negligible mass.

That's basically it. Lollipopping will not increase yields, but it will allow you shape the plant if you know how to shape plants. I can't say I recommend lollipopping if the intention is to increase yield. It's just that sometimes with indoor lighting, you know that will not have the lighting for some lower branches and it's possible some energy might be saved by cutting lower branches BEFORE they develope into thicker than toothpicks. I don't even like to call what I do lollipopping.

ah, dammit, i forgot about defoliating. It wasn't just lolipopping we discussed (although they're clearly similar).

I guess that means i won, doesn't it? I forgot all about defoliation. lol.