30% more thc every grow.

BBQtoast

Well-Known Member
I believe the method will work . The science behind it is cause and effect and I would think it has to do SOMETHING . Uvb burns the plant and tricks into producing more trichomes to protect it . At this point it’s a matter of , is it cost effective? The solacures are def cheaper than the California light works I was eyeing up..... either way I’m definitely going this route .
Tricks it into producing more trichomes, more than it already does?

I don't think I can fit more trichomes onto some strains.

That's why I'm asking, you can go past present limits by 15%, 30%?
 

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
If they are F40 t12 I think the wattage matches but check the site.

Essentially sunbed bulbs or from the same makers as far as I can see from manufacturer.
I got their site bookmarked now you bet. :) Should work off my fixtures Ok. Site says, "Any F32 or F40 lamp will work in the fixture." So the reverse should be true as well.

Now to figure how much more the VISA card can take and still be blamed on Covid. lol

:peace:
 

Scuzzman

Well-Known Member
absolute crap - another one for the bro science in my view - what do you say to the guys growing under poly tunnels and green/ shade houses - they grow some monsters....
 

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
absolute crap - another one for the bro science in my view - what do you say to the guys growing under poly tunnels and green/ shade houses - they grow some monsters....
Lab testing has shown UV does increase resin production along with increased terpenes and all cannabinoid levels. Greenhouse growers wouldn't bother adding UV lights to their monsters if it didn't have benefits. Large plants don't mean high THC. Just bigger plants.
 

BBQtoast

Well-Known Member
Lab testing has shown UV does increase resin production along with increased terpenes and all cannabinoid levels. Greenhouse growers wouldn't bother adding UV lights to their monsters if it didn't have benefits. Large plants don't mean high THC. Just bigger plants.
Every test ever validated was only small differences, why we never obsessed it.

Now if there some new tests that support the sales patter I would be interested in getting my hands on it.

This wasn't if UV does small things this was about the advertising and figures that everyone is giving.

I've given things to answer on strain strength and trichome density of some that exhibit the most, can I really boost them above their no UV lab tests because 30% would be next level and a whole new set of strengths never seen before.
 

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
Every test ever validated was only small differences, why we never obsessed it.

Now if there some new tests that support the sales patter I would be interested in getting my hands on it.

This wasn't if UV does small things this was about the advertising and figures that everyone is giving.

I've given things to answer on strain strength and trichome density of some that exhibit the most, can I really boost them above their no UV lab tests because 30% would be next level and a whole new set of strengths never seen before.
I've read enough articles about UV over the years to want it. Even 10% more resin glands that are a bit larger are welcome. Not a huge priority tho. I already overspent on grow room goodies in the recent past so UV can wait. Light Rail, new 8" inline fan, CO2 controller, trimmer etc etc. :)

:peace:
 

Imcamping86

Well-Known Member
Tricks it into producing more trichomes, more than it already does?

I don't think I can fit more trichomes onto some strains.

That's why I'm asking, you can go past present limits by 15%, 30%?
companies claim15-20% trichome increase. It seems like simple science to me . Worth the try lol
 

jimihendrix1

Well-Known Member
My basic thought as to use UVA/B is simple. The plants evolved with it, and the sun produces it, just like it reproduces all the other wavelengths needed to grow plants, stimulate vitamin D production, and all kinds of things. Its simple logic to use it. Can they grow without it?? YEP!!!

Still the best weed I ever smoked came from outside, even though the strain did great inside. Outside changed the weed vs inside, and I grew the weed 5 years both inside, and out. Clones. Its much easier to keep it pristine inside, unless one uses a greenhouse, and that filters out the UVA/B.

They get more money in Cali for weed harvested in mid-late Spring vs Fall, and is considered better weed than is the fall. Main difference is UVA/B.

Plants also get Vitamin D from the sun. Just like humans, and is created by UVA exposure.
Also remember Trichome total Increase does not necessarily lead to being more potent. It does mean if you make oil, or hash, you will have a higher yield.
It still takes the UVB, to change the terpene/chemical profile as plants have a receptor at 285nm. About 5% UVB makes it to earth. The Solacure is geared more towards Plants as SC have their strongest range from 280nm-305nm. Plants have the 285nm RUV8 gene. Makes sense to target 285nm.
 
Last edited:

Wizzlebiz

Well-Known Member
Here's the thing. THC level is not the only thing some are looking for. Many are looking for high levels of CBD, THCV, etc... Many strains are low in THC but high in other cannabinoids people are seeking. That doesn't make them shit genetics. In fact many people prefer lower THC which is why many strains high in CBD, THCV, etc... are sought out by some growers.

For instance, I've grown an Ethiopian landrace. Low THC 6 - 12% but high levels of THCV. I find it a very good strain for morning and midday smoking. The lower THC and higher THCV from a true african sativa provides a clear uplifting high that allows you to stay alert and get things done.

ACE also has a strain called Golden Tiger. It's been tested at 29.95% THC and negligible CBD and no detection of THCV. I'm currently growing some for late night smoking.

THC level is only a measure of quality genetics for those that just want to get baked. Many of us grow lower THC strains that are still great genetics but we choose the lower THC strains because that's what we want. There are lots of excellent genetics out there with lower THC levels.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be argumentative. Just providing a different look at what can be considered quality genetics because I do not feel that THC content is the only criteria that can be considered. :peace:
This is exactly what people need to read.

I have a couple of lucy beans I'm waiting to pop. 50/50 THC to CBD ratio.

10% on both sides of it. Happens to be one of my top 3 favorite highs when it comes to the compounds that make you feel right.

Is it loaded with either thc or cbd? No. Not loaded. Do I need it loaded??

No I do not.
 

BBQtoast

Well-Known Member
companies claim15-20% trichome increase. It seems like simple science to me . Worth the try lol
UV is not simple science, many have tried to say and plug this option before.

I'm seeing a lot of stupid ideas resurfacing and wondering if there is anything new or just clever advertising for greenies and nothing for the more scientific or tryptophan fans.
 

hotrodharley

Well-Known Member
I kinda laugh when growers use high THC as their only measure of quality. I had the luxury of befriending a guy whom ran a medical "store" and also sold for recreational customers. In that he had always large varieties of strains with varied levels of THC, CBD and all the others. Everything was lab professional tested. I sampled them all over the years and found that high THC like 30% alone is kinda meh, where as lower about 20% and higher levels of other CBD's totally got me wrecked for hours.
Odd that in 2021 we’ve gotten this far in this post and nobody has mentioned terpene profiles.
 

BBQtoast

Well-Known Member
This is exactly what people need to read.

I have a couple of lucy beans I'm waiting to pop. 50/50 THC to CBD ratio.

10% on both sides of it. Happens to be one of my top 3 favorite highs when it comes to the compounds that make you feel right.

Is it loaded with either thc or cbd? No. Not loaded. Do I need it loaded??

No I do not.
I work only one strain, ratios do not change much.

Someone says 30% is possible and I say prove that properly please, here's a strain that hits 30 with no UV now shine your light and make that 40 or your claim is bullshit and I don't want to be apart of another failed claim on light.

If we took all these failed claims and made a score sheet it would look like this

Broscience 64

Science 3

More important for us to be sceptical especially 15 to 30% claims as that's a noticeable amount it wouldn't be a debate for long.
 

Wizzlebiz

Well-Known Member
UV is not simple science, many have tried to say and plug this option before.

I'm seeing a lot of stupid ideas resurfacing and wondering if there is anything new or just clever advertising for greenies and nothing for the more scientific or tryptophan fans.
We MUST assume until proven otherwise that the rehashed things we are seeing is nothing more than a industry seeing states unlock recreational growing and cashing in on the inexperience. This will continue as long as new growers are flooding the market.

So yea unless proven otherwise I suggest we all take any rehash or new product with a cynical view because just like blurples claims, companies will screw ya for a buck.
 

BBQtoast

Well-Known Member
I did. Post 30, and is also what I mean by Chemical Profile. THC is by no means the be all, end all. Theres 1000s of chemicals in weed.
That's my other question to solacure, there's hundreds of light affected things that 30% with some slim waves of UV on thc doesn't answer, why aren't we seeing everything have this effect not just thc.

Shit claims and even shorter story from a light seller who probably smoked weed and learnt to grow on sites.
 

jimihendrix1

Well-Known Member
Solacure started out in 1980s making tanning lights for Show Pigs, and for ageing wood. If you dont know it, buying new guitars, that appear old, are a fad nowdays, and has been since the 90s. The use powerful UVA/B lights to age the wood, and paint. The guitars are called Relics. Fender makes them, and others. Solacure started out with other types of lights long before the started making UVA/B.
They arent the only to study UVA/B.
Phillips has been making UVA/B for decades, and much of it for the medical field to treat Psoriosis, and other skin diseases.
Hortilux also has alot of UVA/B studies.
NASA studied weed in 72-73 on Skylab, and proved they could change the chemical profile by using massive, millisecond flashes of Xenon. I burned the plants, and made them produce more oil to protect it.... Weed was one of, if not the first plant studied in space, on Skylab.


UV Light for Boosting THC in Cannabis | Vanessa Nielsen
https://www.bing.com/search?q




Debates can go back and forth forever about what the exact biological role of cannabinoids in the marijuana plant really are, perhaps a more likely explanation is that cannabinoids are a natural defense mechanism to a variety of assailants from the outside world: pests, mold, disease and ultraviolet radiation. Evidence shows that ultraviolet light can increase potency and resin production, though the whole picture of what cannabinoids do for the plant still isn’t clear.

Ultraviolet radiation in all forms can be damaging, but UVB rays specifically damage proteins and nucleic acids in the cells harming processes of cell reproduction and metabolism. The energetic, short wavelengths rays of UVB radiation pack the punch, and are largely responsible for sunburn and play a major role in skin cancer.

To defend against UVB, some plants produce flavonoids that can absorb the radiation. In humans, exposure stimulates the production of melanin to defend against the sun.

Evidence shows that cannabinoids, specifically THC, may play an active role in defending the cannabis plant against UVB rays, and strains native to areas with high levels of ambient UVB radiation show higher levels of Δ 9THC.

How did they figure this out? Finding out where the best pot in the world grows naturally was the first step. Typically, the best cannabis for hash grows in elevated regions. According to a book about hash (Bergel, 1965):

“When we were still working in this field we were told that the production of the active resin, in any kind of Cannabis plant, depends entirely on the altitude of the plantation; for example, you get rich charas or bhang in northern India only at a certain height above sea level. It was also reported that in order to obtain active resin one had to plant Cannabis in Germany near Roserheim, not far from Munich, which again is above a certain altitude.”

The less atmosphere you put between you and the sun, the more light you receive, and for cannabis plants this means making more resin to defend against UVB.

Plants grown above the 30th Parallel North typically have higher levels of CBD relative to THC, and plants originating from between the 30th parallel north and the 30th parallel south have higher levels of THC with little to no CBD. The first encounter with a South African strain that had high levels of THC with not a trace of CBD in 1973 reinforced this theory given the high natural UVB light intensity in the area.



High THC is found naturally in strains between the two parallels shown in the map. Areas of high hashish production in the Rif Mountains of Morocco, the Beqaa Valley of Lebanon and the Hindu Kush are all on the cusp of the 30 °N, but are all at a high altitude. This perfect balance of climate and sun exposure allows those places to grow the greatest hash plants in the world.

Presence of cannabinoid-rich trichomes near and on the seedpods, added to the fact that male plants barely produce trichomes, it seems logical that these resinous glands function, at least partly, to protect future offspring from the sun.

A more recent side-by-side comparison of plants grown with and without ultraviolet radiation backs up these older theories. So-called “drug-type” plants (strains cultivated for their naturally high levels of THC) produced higher levels of THC, but not other cannabinoids, when exposed to UVB treatments regularly.
 
Last edited:

jimihendrix1

Well-Known Member
All of the best weed I smoked back in the 60s-70s was generally extremely potent. Only weed I even smoked that gave me Auditory Hallucinations was some Oaxacan from 1972. Shit was pure psychedelic, and a heavy crash of a buzz. It lasted for hours, and when you woke up after passing out after a 4 hour high, you wake up with the munchies, and still ripped. All of the best weed I smoked then had a heavy duty buzz to it. None of this Oh, its clear headed, and no crash ect. That tells me right of its weak vs the best of what I know we used to get regularly, and it was often loaded with seeds, though I did start seeing Sensi in 1972. From Santa Marta. Beautiful multicolor fluffy with a green base. We called it green Columbian. Best I ever saw that came from Columbia. All that weed back then was heavy duty shit, and most would blow your lungs clean out.
 
Top