reza92
Well-Known Member
when they say industry they mean commercial greenhouses is fruit and veg, or are hoping for someone form the us or Canada etc.
They also probably throw any applications without a degree in the bin without reading them.
Aussie Growers Thread
- Thread starter jats
- Start date
They also probably throw any applications without a degree in the bin without reading them.
reza92
Well-Known Member
I’d guess 70-90k depending on how much they want someone/how much experience they have
bursto
Well-Known Member
i want some candies, carmels and a boom stick, please
(imagen if there were like an aussie phat panda or greenside dispensary)
menu.greensiderec.com
how does any of the employees not sample a caramel or watermelon lollie and have a trip during work hours, i have no idea
(imagen if there were like an aussie phat panda or greenside dispensary)
Shop Edible in Des Moines WA | Greenside Recreational Menu
Delicious, discreet, and highly flexible. Cannabis edibles can provide a wonderfully complete mind and body experience in a delectable package. These products are usually felt within 30-45 minutes, but can take up 2 hours depending on the person. Eat your greens!
menu.greensiderec.com
how does any of the employees not sample a caramel or watermelon lollie and have a trip during work hours, i have no idea
Last edited:
JimyTheCook
Well-Known Member
Yea might sound good to jump in there at the bottom as a trimmer or something like that for the first weeks id been blown away on the commercial size of the grow but then reality would kick in of trimmin day in day out it get as boring as workin in a factory packin boxes
JimyTheCook
Well-Known Member
Without a doubt aye abit like any work place if ya haven got the papper work to bak up your words then you wont be gettin any where
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH
Well-Known Member
Mephisto don't disappoint. Getting a bit to big for my space
PURPLEB3RRYKUSH
Well-Known Member
Bitches hogging the small light lol
JimyTheCook
Well-Known Member
They have taken off
Same as workin at maccas
Venus55
Well-Known Member
Well I guess I will find out as I decided against repotting the other after the mayhem yday. It’ll be really interesting actually to see the differences if there are any
Alarmclock
Well-Known Member
Did anybody see the results from a Dr. in the U.S. who done a full DNA tests on Cannabis strains Sativa, Indica, Ruderalis?
For those who havent hold on to your hats: what you know as
old Sativa is Indica,
old Indica is Afghanica, and
old Ruderalis is Sativa.
Just read that again, WOW!!!!
That is proper genealogy, DNA.
Ofcourse people will argue but that doesnt change the facts. A fact is a fact no matter which way you look at it. Dr. spent years learning his craft, all based on scientific fact,(we all understand genetic markers, undisputable). Its not like "art" which is open for your own interpretation, DNA is straight up black and white!
Some people honestly beleive the earth is still flat.
So no doubt some will say its all shit.
So what strain or hybrid are you growing? How long till the breeders accept the evidence.
Do you think it will ever be accepted by the wider Cannabis community?
Any thoughts or opinions
For those who havent hold on to your hats: what you know as
old Sativa is Indica,
old Indica is Afghanica, and
old Ruderalis is Sativa.
Just read that again, WOW!!!!
That is proper genealogy, DNA.
Ofcourse people will argue but that doesnt change the facts. A fact is a fact no matter which way you look at it. Dr. spent years learning his craft, all based on scientific fact,(we all understand genetic markers, undisputable). Its not like "art" which is open for your own interpretation, DNA is straight up black and white!
Some people honestly beleive the earth is still flat.
So no doubt some will say its all shit.
So what strain or hybrid are you growing? How long till the breeders accept the evidence.
Do you think it will ever be accepted by the wider Cannabis community?
Any thoughts or opinions
Venus55
Well-Known Member
Ok so no laughing and keeping in mind these girls have been all but neglected.
4 wks today.
This is the one I massacred yday
Leaving this one alone
And so by neglected they have absolutely no structure going on in this phase just pretty much tied them apart each time I could get there to see them. No topping no nothing just wild trees.
4 wks today.
This is the one I massacred yday
Leaving this one alone
And so by neglected they have absolutely no structure going on in this phase just pretty much tied them apart each time I could get there to see them. No topping no nothing just wild trees.
reza92
Well-Known Member
apart from the tops being way too close to that hps I can’t see much wrong. Maybe get rid of some of that undergrowth
bursto
Well-Known Member
you scored some good weed recently?
what Dr ,?
,,, where you reading this from
wait, is that the same Dr. that worked out lettuce would grow under green and red lights
jokes bro
wouldnt mind a link tho
Last edited:
Calbrowno
Well-Known Member
Agreed 100%, I consider trimming the most pain in the ass part of the whole process so no thanks!
klx
Well-Known Member
My head hurts
Alarmclock
Well-Known Member
HERE IS A START FOLLOW THE LINKS. If you care about cannabis, or call me a spinner (and the blokes who spent years learning their craft and can now use technology they never had 40 years ago. READ IT EVERYONE!!!!
Since the 1970s, cannabis has been divided into three sub-species (often confused as different species), C. indica, C. sativa, C. ruderalis, with ruderalis largely being considered ‘wild cannabis,’ not fit for medicinal or recreational uses. A common lay-persons distinction is between marijuana, which is bred for high cannabinoid content, and hemp, which is bred for industrial uses like fiber.
Any of the three subspecies can be bred as a hemp or marijuana plant. John McPartland, a researcher affiliated with GW Pharmaceuticals, presented a study at the 2014 meeting of the International Cannabis Research Society, proposing a new nomenclature for cannabis. The original report on O’Shaughnessy’s contains more information than I can reproduce here, and has a wonderful chart; it is definitely worth your time to read.
It seems Richard Evans Schultes, the man who created the original taxonomy for cannabis in the 1970s, misidentified a C. afghanica plant as a C. indica plant. That one mistake began 40 years of confusion which has only been dispelled by McPartland’s research this year.
McPartland was the first researcher to look at the genetic markers on the three subspecies of cannabis using the plant’s genome to conclusively identify where it originated. He also proved conclusively that they are all the same species, just different subspecies. As it turns out, C. sativa should have been identified as C. indica, because it originated in India (hence indica). C. indica should have been identified as C. afghanica, because it actually originated in Afghanistan. Finally, it seems that C. ruderalis is actually what people mean when they refer to C. sativa.
If that sounds confusing, refer to this handy table, or the original chart.
Cannabis Indica (Formerly Sativa)
Origin: India
Morphology: Taller (>1.5m) than their short and stocky Afghanica cousins, with sparser branches and less dense buds/flowers.
Physiology: Longer flowering time, between nine and fourteen weeks. Minimal frost tolerance with a moderate production of resin.
Chemistry: Much greater THC than CBD and other cannabinoids, this leads to the “head high” many users report.
Psychoactivity: Stimulating.
Cannabis Afghanica (Formerly Indica)
Origin: Central Asia (Afghanistan, Turkestan, Pakistan)
Morphology: Shorter (<1.5m) than Indica strains with dense branches with wider leaves, and much denser buds/flowers
Physiology: Shorter flowering time, as little as seven to nine weeks. Good frost tolerance with high resin production. Afghanica strains can be susceptible to mold due to how dense the buds and branches are.
Chemistry: More variable than Indica strains. THC is often still the predominant cannabinoid but some strains have 1:1 ratios and some may have even higher CBD than THC.
Psychoactivity: Sedating.
Cannabis Sativa (Formerly Ruderalis)
Origin: Usually feral or wild. From Europe or Central Asia.
Morphology: Variable, depending on origin.
Physiology: The flowering time is short and variable, many varieties exhibit autoflowering traits (flowering independently of sun cycles). Moderate frost tolerance with relatively low resin production.
Chemistry: More CBD than THC. Prominent terpenes include caryophyllene and myrcene, giving these strains a floral flavor and scent.
Psychoactivity: Usually lacking.
This new nomenclature should come to replace the old system, because it is grounded in the actual genetics of the plant and is scientifically sound. Despite that, it is likely that this new naming scheme will face resistance from cannabis users and those in the medical cannabis industry who will have become used to decades of convention firmly establishing an inaccurate taxonomy.
This is reminiscent of the Brontosaurus, a dinosaur that never existed but we were all taught in school it was real, or the former 9th planet of Pluto (now a ‘dwarf planet’). Sometimes science gets it wrong and it is up to modern scientists with better methods, like McPartland, to correct our old mistakes.
The difficult part will be getting mass acceptance of his newly proposed taxonomy. What seems likely is that a split may develop between academics and laymen, with academics adopting the new system and laymen continuing to adhere to the old system, at least for a few more years.
Perhaps in time C. afghanica, C. indica, and C. sativa will come into the vogue, but that largely depends on the willingness of the medical cannabis industry to adopt this new system and thus pass it on to the patients and growers. But it seems unlikely that the cannabis industry would wholeheartedly jump on board, given the risk that this new nomenclature could confuse patients who may be used to seeing only “indicas” and “sativas” on the shelf.
Time will tell.