Need Advise On The Truth Behind the 24, 48, 72 Hours Of Darkness Before Harvest.

[Harrekin]

You can feed right up to the day before harvest and your buds WILL NOT taste like chemicals.

Nutrients are NOT stored in buds,they are stored in fans leaves and translocated to the rest of the plant when they are ready to be utilised. Simple plant biology.

Bad tasting/popping/sparking buds are from either pesticides/other chemicals sprayed directly onto the buds or from incorrect drying/curing leaving starches unbroken down.

It's like flogging a dead horse at this stage.

 

[oHsiN666]

The darkness deal is a waste of time. I experimented with it for a few years on almost a dozen different strains and I could never tell a difference. Bricktop claimed some institute did a test but of course no one has that document because it probably doesn't exist. I don't flush either because if you have an idea of how plants work and have gardened at any point in your life, flushing would make no sense.

again, another answer that doesn't make a lick of sense, im sure you just chimed in after reading 3 posts. please if you are going to waste your time helping me, please go back and read everything i have posted. im just about done here. thanks everyone who has helped in a positive constructive way.

 

[homebrewer]

again, another answer that doesn't make a lick of sense, im sure you just chimed in after reading 3 posts. please if you are going to waste your time helping me, please go back and read everything i have posted. im just about done here. thanks everyone who has helped in a positive constructive way.

I have no interest in guiding someone with as little experience as you so if my decade of experience is of no use to you, then I'd suggest you pick up a book on botany instead of hanging out on cannabis forums.

 

[oHsiN666]

I have no interest in guiding someone with as little experience as you so if my decade of experience is of no use to you, then I'd suggest you pick up a book on botany instead of hanging out on cannabis forums.

HAHAHAHA!!!! ok then. keep learning!!

 

[oHsiN666]

i should just bite my lip!!

 

[homebrewer]

sir, my first grow was in 1997. i have had a few in between, but nothing special. a lot has changed in 17 years as well.

You skipped math class didn't you .

 

[j4droopy]

Ive also heard different things about this subject. From my experience, its a strain preference. Some will respond to the light stress in a positive manner. Most dont respond at all. What i do like to do is sort of simulate a frost. 36 hrs before i harvest i give my girls a couple liters of ph'd ice water. What this does is simulate the first frost of the year. Tells the plant the season is changing and its time to throw down. 12 days before i harvest i feed my girls with straight water for the duration and 36hrs before harvest i do the ice water thing. The week of water breaks down the build up of salts and such in your medium and your roots. This allows the natural flavors and aromas of your plant to really enhance. I also harvest a couple of hours before my light cycle begins, allowing no direct light to hit the plant when i do.

When direct light hits the plant it begins to expend energy using stored sugars and starches in order to photsynthesize, thus taking away from the sugars stored in your buds. hence harvesting in the dark.

 

[Brick Top]

Brick top had a really good post about this topic. With university studies about 72 hrs of darkness. Try and find it. I personally do it. It doesn't cost anything to not run the lights for 3 days. From what I read in his post i was convinced.

"The Stichting Institute of Medical marijuana (SIMM), the first company to sell marijuana through the pharmacies of Holland, has been investigating the medical possibilities of cannabis, together with TNO laboratories and the University of Leiden.

One of their discoveries has been that to keep the ripe plants in the dark before harvesting could increase their potency.SIMM’s growers separated a crop of mature plants, harvested half of them and kept the other half in absolute darkness for 72 hours before cutting and drying. Analysis of the resulting dried buds showed that some varieties had seen an increase of THC of up to 30%, while CBD and CBN remained the same."

 

[j4droopy]

"The Stichting Institute of Medical marijuana (SIMM), the first company to sell marijuana through the pharmacies of Holland, has been investigating the medical possibilities of cannabis, together with TNO laboratories and the University of Leiden.

One of their discoveries has been that to keep the ripe plants in the dark before harvesting could increase their potency.SIMM’s growers separated a crop of mature plants, harvested half of them and kept the other half in absolute darkness for 72 hours before cutting and drying. Analysis of the resulting dried buds showed that some varieties had seen an increase of THC of up to 30%, while CBD and CBN remained the same."

can you post the link where you copied this information from? please?

 

[homebrewer]

"The Stichting Institute of Medical marijuana (SIMM), the first company to sell marijuana through the pharmacies of Holland, has been investigating the medical possibilities of cannabis, together with TNO laboratories and the University of Leiden.

One of their discoveries has been that to keep the ripe plants in the dark before harvesting could increase their potency.SIMM’s growers separated a crop of mature plants, harvested half of them and kept the other half in absolute darkness for 72 hours before cutting and drying. Analysis of the resulting dried buds showed that some varieties had seen an increase of THC of up to 30%, while CBD and CBN remained the same."

Did you ever find the link to this 'study'?

 

[smokebros]

Thanks Brick Top.

 

[j4droopy]

These threads/comments/posts or whatever you want to call them only further my belief that each individual plant can somewhat "take on" the characteristics of its caregiver. Ive smoked great weed grown in hydro and great weed grown in soil. As well as just about any other distinguishable difference. I think its a simple matter of not being a complete idiot, and giving it lots of love. Those seem to be the most consistant ingredients for great marijuana.

 

[Harrekin]

"The Stichting Institute of Medical marijuana (SIMM), the first company to sell marijuana through the pharmacies of Holland, has been investigating the medical possibilities of cannabis, together with TNO laboratories and the University of Leiden.

One of their discoveries has been that to keep the ripe plants in the dark before harvesting could increase their potency.SIMM’s growers separated a crop of mature plants, harvested half of them and kept the other half in absolute darkness for 72 hours before cutting and drying. Analysis of the resulting dried buds showed that some varieties had seen an increase of THC of up to 30%, while CBD and CBN remained the same."

One thing to note is it's a THC increase of about 30%...so a variety of 10% average would increase to 13% not 40%.

Brick Top,purely for academic reasons,would you agree thats rather than it increasing THC levels it's more related to a lack of degradation instead? Same end result but I like the little details

 

[Brick Top]

3 days in the dark isn't going to produce extra amber trichs and if anything will surely stop the trichs developing much more, as for the resin claim i can't say, the only way to do it fairly is to get two cuttings from the same plant and then do a side by side blind sampling, but i can be dam sure that if ur getting extra something from keeping her in the dark that chances are ur sacrificing something else....all bout balance innit

1.) Since amber is a sign of oxidized THC that has become nearly worthless CBN it is good that 72-hours of darkness does not increase levels of nearly worthless CBN.

2.) The darkness causes increased levels of THC. THC protects the delicate inner glands of glandular trichome heads, somewhat similar to how sunscreen protects skin. Doing so degrades THC. During each day/period of light some amount of THC is lost and it, along with an additional amount, is replaced during the night/period of darkness, when most THC is created. In an extended period of darkness you have the increased level of THC production without the daily loss that would occur due to THC degrading as it protects the delicate inner glands of glandular trichome heads.

Each strain will respond to extended periods of darkness to a different degree. Some will see very little gain, possibly at times less than a person's senses can notice, and other times with other strains the gains can be dramatic and other times it can be somewhere in between.

Consider all the various things that people spend money on in an attempt to grow better plants that are more potent. Some things people spend their money on are not a value for their dollar, their price in relation to what is received makes them very overpriced and in some cases not inexpensive. Some are nearly worthless and just gimmicks, but people shell out their cash left and right. Giving plants 72-hours of darkness has been proven to work. It is free to do. So why do so many people not know about it and those who have some idea of it seldom know it is 72-hours and not 24-hours or 36-hours or 48-hours and others who have some idea of it claim it does not work? It does work, but it will work to varying degrees depending on the strain.

 

[Brick Top]

The darkness deal is a waste of time. I experimented with it for a few years on almost a dozen different strains and I could never tell a difference. Bricktop claimed some institute did a test but of course no one has that document because it probably doesn't exist.

In one of the countless number of threads on the subject of 72-hours of darkness before harvesting the answer to where the study is was answered. The Stichting Insitute of Medical Marijuana was stiffed on a contract and took the party who broke the contract to court. By court order all information of the study was sealed and it was literally wiped from the Net. That was not all that difficult because the only sites that had it were pay sites and not many growers pay to access scientific research sites so the actual study was not spread around on grow sites like the small summary piece of information I and others have posted did.

I did pay for the information. Two computers ago I had it stored on a hard drive but lost it when the drive died. When I went back to the site the information had been removed and I was unable to download it again or find it elsewhere to download it.

If you choose to not believe it will work just because with the limited number of strains you claim to have tried it on you were unable to tell if there was a difference using only your physical senses that is Kool and the Gang with me. But it is wrong of you, and anyone else, to claim the findings to be inaccurate based on limited attempts in your home relying only on your physical senses to judge the results. Possibly there was no increase in the limited number of strains you allegedly tried it on. That is possible because results will vary depending on strain, but in some strains the increase in levels of THC can be dramatic, as much as 30%.

By claiming that your home attempts have factually refuted actual scientific findings others growing strains where there might be dramatic increases might not give their plants 72-hours of darkness before harvesting and because of that, and because of you, not end up with nearly as high quality of herb at they otherwise could have had because they grew different strains than you did, ones that would respond very well to an extended period of darkness before harvest. Your personal opinion about scientifically proven facts might very well cost others a substantial gain in THC.

 

[Brick Top]

One thing to note is it's a THC increase of about 30%...so a variety of 10% average would increase to 13% not 40%.

Brick Top,purely for academic reasons,would you agree thats rather than it increasing THC levels it's more related to a lack of degradation instead? Same end result but I like the little details

You are correct about the percentage and what you said about THC degradation is most definitely part of it. As I mentioned after the message, most THC is created during hours of darkness. During periods of light THC is degraded as it protects the glands in trichome heads. When you add together the increased rate of THC production during an extended period of darkness and not losing any THC due to light degradation you have whatever total level of THC increase that a strain will have. It is both a gain of THC combined with what THC is saved/not lost to light degradation during the same period of time.

 

[Red1966]

the plant will not be stressed if you flush correctly. i always give 3x's the amount of water as there is soil...so if im growing in 5gal pots i flush with 15gal of water . if its 3 gal pots i flush with 9 gal of water.

the plant wont get stressed as long as you dont pour all the bottles in one after the other...give those roots a chance to breathe inbetween.

ive done this for 3-4 years with no bad results or stressed out plants.

I don't think what you're doing would be called "flushing". More like a short period of heavy watering.

 

[homebrewer]

In one of the countless number of threads on the subject of 72-hours of darkness before harvesting the answer to where the study is was answered. The Stichting Insitute of Medical Marijuana was stiffed on a contract and took the party who broke the contract to court. By court order all information of the study was sealed and it was literally wiped from the Net.

I know that there was some supposed law suit that further adds to the mystery of this missing 'study' but I'm just not buying it. In a simple google search for 'SIMM 72 hour darkness study', six of the first ten hits are Canna forums so the likelihood that this 'study' was erased from the net is virtually impossible. No one has any details about this study, just the little blurb that you repeatedly post and can't back up. How many strains were tested? What parallels were drawn between the strains that darkness 'worked' on? Was in more likely to work on sativa or indica-dominant strains?

You and I have already hashed this out and our discussion can be found here: (https://www.rollitup.org/advanced-marijuana-cultivation/419568-i-have-question-all-you.html)

 

[Brick Top]

I know that there was some supposed law suit that further adds to the mystery of this missing 'study' but I'm just not buying it.

That is your prerogative. But it is wrong for you to be so insistent that it does work because if others believe you your personal opinion will cost others quality they otherwise would have.

In a simple google search for 'SIMM 72 hour darkness study', six of the first ten hits are Canna forums so the likelihood that this 'study' was erased from the net is virtually impossible.

No, it is not virtually impossible. The average Beavis and Butthead is not going to know about the various pay scientific research sites and even if they do they are not going to pay for information. People will seldom even use a search function on sites like this and will instead ask questions that have been asked, and answered, near countless times. Do you honestly believe that someone like that will do a Google search where they might have to search through 75 or 100 or more pages of links and go to all the sites, as I did, to find information that they would then have to pay to read and or download? The information was so limited in it's number of source locations that wiping it was not difficult. Your opinion of degree of difficulty is based on an inaccurate assumption. It was not like the information was out for an extended period of time before a court order said it had to be sealed. It was only on a very limited number of sites. It was long enough ago now that what limited number of growers had it have likely like me lost it. Since sites like this will vanish from time to time, with as much time as has passed it might not be on any growing site now, and if it is it might be buried so deep that it will never resurface. I posted it on the original Cannabis World but the site is long gone now, so Googling currently running grow sites could be futile since ones that had the information might not now exist, like the original Cannabis World.

The only information on 72-hours of darkness working that seems able to be found now is the short summary and how the information was sealed by court order. Admittedly that is not all that much for someone to put their faith in. But then on the other side of the argument is only personal opinion based on what some people claim they did and what they could, or could not, tell relying strictly on their physical senses.

I had the research findings, I read it a number of times, I did post it, it is real, it did exist. If you believe that people should decide what to do based on the personal experience of others, and you say it does not work, well, I have done it many times, I almost always do it, and in my personal experience it works enough of the time that it is well worth doing, especially since it is a totally free gain, not costing anyone so much as a single penny.

If someone understands cannabis plants, if they know how THC is created and when most THC is created and if they know how and when THC is lost, then it will make perfect sense to them how and why there will likely be at least some increase, even if only minimal, and possibly, depending on strain, a goodly increase in THC. If they do not know and understand such things they very well might claim that there will be no increase.

 

[homebrewer]

That is your prerogative. But it is wrong for you to be so insistent that it does work because if others believe you your personal opinion will cost others quality they otherwise would have.

Correction; I said it doesn't work and it's not a personal opinion, I actually tried it many times. You and I have gone over this before.

The only information on 72-hours of darkness working that seems able to be found now is the short summary and how the information was sealed by court order. Admittedly that is not all that much for someone to put their faith in. But then on the other side of the argument is only personal opinion based on what some people claim they did and what they could, or could not, tell relying strictly on their physical senses.

I had the research findings, I read it a number of times, I did post it, it is real, it did exist. If you believe that people should decide what to do based on the personal experience of others, and you say it does not work, well, I have done it many times, I almost always do it, and in my personal experience it works enough of the time that it is well worth doing, especially since it is a totally free gain, not costing anyone so much as a single penny.

If someone understands cannabis plants, if they know how THC is created and when most THC is created and if they know how and when THC is lost, then it will make perfect sense to them how and why there will likely be at least some increase, even if only minimal, and possibly, depending on strain, a goodly increase in THC. If they do not know and understand such things they very well might claim that there will be no increase.

Brick, you don't even grow anymore, yet you continue to post in these 'growing threads' with no evidence to back up your claims other than 'I've done it and it works'. Well, I'm also saying I've done it and it didn't work so as we left it in the last thread, let the kiddies try it themselves and make up their own minds about it. Oh yeah, so when you tried this dark period deal, did you rely on your physical senses to determine it 'worked' or did you get your herb tested? In the event that you got it tested, feel free to post those reports.

On to a broader point: properly grown cannabis doesn't need these cutesy little tricks to be tasty or potent or high quality. If you guys spent as much time understanding how to keep your plants healthy as you do researching magic potions and gimmicky growing practices, you'd all have some stellar plants.