Biology lesson.
- Thread starter asf2j
- Start date
humbo jumbo
Well-Known Member
huzah! congratulations on that!! 
By the way seamaiden Ive got a road king with every harley skull you can possibly imagine hehe.
Ive got a few things in store, but Ill just message you rather than continue my hijack of threads
By the way seamaiden Ive got a road king with every harley skull you can possibly imagine hehe.
Ive got a few things in store, but Ill just message you rather than continue my hijack of threads
Seamaiden
Well-Known Member
Damn! Somebody's got a little extra scratch, eh? Put up a thread showing that sled, Humbo.
Now that sounds about right. Good on you for sticking up for your rights and working the system.
humbo jumbo
Well-Known Member
email468
Well-Known Member
thank you, thank you, thank you asf2j for sharing your research! Or at least as much as you can.
Without violating your NDA (or whatever the university calls it) - can you please discuss the two following statements made in Ed Rosenthal's book: "The Best of Ask Ed"?
I realize there is a lot of misinformation out there and truly appreciate honest-to-goodness scientific investigation into this. By the same token, I am curious as to where you agree/disagree with the following:
The first is regarding the use of MH lighting...
thanks again for all your efforts and insight!
Without violating your NDA (or whatever the university calls it) - can you please discuss the two following statements made in Ed Rosenthal's book: "The Best of Ask Ed"?
I realize there is a lot of misinformation out there and truly appreciate honest-to-goodness scientific investigation into this. By the same token, I am curious as to where you agree/disagree with the following:
The first is regarding the use of MH lighting...
And here is the second statement regarding light cycles...
Would you consider your research definitive or would you think a lot more research needs to happen to draw real conclusions?
thanks again for all your efforts and insight!
asf2j
Well-Known Member
more people are starting to take notice of this thread, this is both a good and a bad thing.i say that because i have until tomorrow, may 9th, to disassociate myself from this thread completely.
for the first question.
the kind of light(hps/mh/cfl/etc) doesnt matter. at effing all. what you should be concentrating on is the kelvin spectrum (sometimes given in nanometer wavelenghts readings) and the lumen out put. you should also consider the relative heat output from each bulb respectively.
if i may, let me back up my statements. this is definitive, there has been study after study after study regarding specific wavelengths of light that plants absorb. (keep in mind wavelength is the same as Kelvin rating). these "useful" wavelengths are different for every plant(plants in the tropics get more direct sun(less red light) than plants near the poles(more red, due to the angle of the sun's rays))
but anyways, there is a very intuitive reason for why plants use blue and red light.
if you look at the visible light spectrum from left to right, you should realize the colors roy. g. biv. red to the left, green in the middle, and blue to the right. unfortunately i dont have a chalkboard i can draw on to show you what the graph looks like on this forum. but if you can imagine a graph in which amount absorbed is the y axis and wavelength(color) is the x axis. you will see that plants take up a fair amount of the red spectrum, hardly any green, and a fair amount of blue spectrum. the reason why we see a leaf as green is due to the fact that green light is reflected, not absorbed, green light bounces back.
so that was pretty long winded and didnt have much to do with anything, but it is interesting, but is a necessary precursor for the following:
studies have shown that different wavelengths of absorbed light are indeed responsible for the expression of separate hormones, obviously, just like when you got your first pube, your hormone expression was changing and putting your body through the morphological changes associated with puberty. the same in plants. blue light is associated with the summer and IN MARIJUANA associated with vegetative growth. many plants have different genetics that allows for blue light to stimulate flowering. in the fall, you may think of this as when you turned 10, the angle of the sun produces less blue light and a cooler, less energetic red light. the red light sets off a series of second messenger gene cascades( youll have to look that one up, its a whole other topic) that are responsible for proteins and hormones involved in flower formation.
this is the important part to keep in mind, even in nature when cannabis is flowering, it is still absorbing blue light, most notably around noon(obviously), both spectrums are used during flowering, just like vegetating. the most notable difference between the effects of blue and red light is that, IN SEEDLINGS and IMMATURE plants, red light stimulate the plant to stretch, no matter how close the plant is to the source, red light is conducive to shade so the plant grows to get out of the shade. (thats just a neat side note)
what really gets a plant going in the flowering cycle, is not necessarily the type of light, but the cycle of the mysterious TOC protein/hormone oscillation. although many studies show that in mature plants, excessive red light, produces larger flowers mainly due to red light striking appropriate red light phototropins that release more of the "flowering" hormone(s)
so basically, it is the cycle 12/12 that will do it, and really the kind of bulb you choose doesnt mean diddly, so long as you know lumens/color or wavelength or kelvin/keeping the heat with in tolerance.
hope that helps for the first question
and on to the second question.
this ed guy may know a bit, but alot of it sounds like hot smoke, or hot garbage... but he does have a good bit down.
let me start off by saying that i dont know jack about the specs on mh or hps as far as spectrum or lumen.
but i do know that if you are using a single light in your grow, it had better be a mixed spectrum. plants use both blue's and red's and they are responsible for different organic compounds being produced(not just carbs or sugars).
the part about 18/6 only giving you 75% growth. BULLSHIT. ive said it a million times. use my steroid analogy in my first post on this thread. if you dont believe me about TOC oscillation, try you grow on 24/0 for a week and then switch it to 18/6 for a week, and then with another plant for control do the same.
then after that, on your next grow do 18/6 for a week, then 24/0 for a week.
if you cant tell that 18/6 gives huge improvements in growth, your blind.
there are completely different classes or groups of metabolic reactions that happen while a plant is under lights than those that happen when a plant is in the dark, both are necessary for healthy growth... dont believe me, go to any university library, and look for the scientific peer review journals on horticulture.
everything i have said has come from learned scientists with reputable backgrounds and laboratory test. unfortunately im not sighting anyone or anything on RIU b/c i could step into some serious doodoo.
hope that helps.
for the first question.
the kind of light(hps/mh/cfl/etc) doesnt matter. at effing all. what you should be concentrating on is the kelvin spectrum (sometimes given in nanometer wavelenghts readings) and the lumen out put. you should also consider the relative heat output from each bulb respectively.
if i may, let me back up my statements. this is definitive, there has been study after study after study regarding specific wavelengths of light that plants absorb. (keep in mind wavelength is the same as Kelvin rating). these "useful" wavelengths are different for every plant(plants in the tropics get more direct sun(less red light) than plants near the poles(more red, due to the angle of the sun's rays))
but anyways, there is a very intuitive reason for why plants use blue and red light.
if you look at the visible light spectrum from left to right, you should realize the colors roy. g. biv. red to the left, green in the middle, and blue to the right. unfortunately i dont have a chalkboard i can draw on to show you what the graph looks like on this forum. but if you can imagine a graph in which amount absorbed is the y axis and wavelength(color) is the x axis. you will see that plants take up a fair amount of the red spectrum, hardly any green, and a fair amount of blue spectrum. the reason why we see a leaf as green is due to the fact that green light is reflected, not absorbed, green light bounces back.
so that was pretty long winded and didnt have much to do with anything, but it is interesting, but is a necessary precursor for the following:
studies have shown that different wavelengths of absorbed light are indeed responsible for the expression of separate hormones, obviously, just like when you got your first pube, your hormone expression was changing and putting your body through the morphological changes associated with puberty. the same in plants. blue light is associated with the summer and IN MARIJUANA associated with vegetative growth. many plants have different genetics that allows for blue light to stimulate flowering. in the fall, you may think of this as when you turned 10, the angle of the sun produces less blue light and a cooler, less energetic red light. the red light sets off a series of second messenger gene cascades( youll have to look that one up, its a whole other topic) that are responsible for proteins and hormones involved in flower formation.
this is the important part to keep in mind, even in nature when cannabis is flowering, it is still absorbing blue light, most notably around noon(obviously), both spectrums are used during flowering, just like vegetating. the most notable difference between the effects of blue and red light is that, IN SEEDLINGS and IMMATURE plants, red light stimulate the plant to stretch, no matter how close the plant is to the source, red light is conducive to shade so the plant grows to get out of the shade. (thats just a neat side note)
what really gets a plant going in the flowering cycle, is not necessarily the type of light, but the cycle of the mysterious TOC protein/hormone oscillation. although many studies show that in mature plants, excessive red light, produces larger flowers mainly due to red light striking appropriate red light phototropins that release more of the "flowering" hormone(s)
so basically, it is the cycle 12/12 that will do it, and really the kind of bulb you choose doesnt mean diddly, so long as you know lumens/color or wavelength or kelvin/keeping the heat with in tolerance.
hope that helps for the first question
and on to the second question.
this ed guy may know a bit, but alot of it sounds like hot smoke, or hot garbage... but he does have a good bit down.
let me start off by saying that i dont know jack about the specs on mh or hps as far as spectrum or lumen.
but i do know that if you are using a single light in your grow, it had better be a mixed spectrum. plants use both blue's and red's and they are responsible for different organic compounds being produced(not just carbs or sugars).
the part about 18/6 only giving you 75% growth. BULLSHIT. ive said it a million times. use my steroid analogy in my first post on this thread. if you dont believe me about TOC oscillation, try you grow on 24/0 for a week and then switch it to 18/6 for a week, and then with another plant for control do the same.
then after that, on your next grow do 18/6 for a week, then 24/0 for a week.
if you cant tell that 18/6 gives huge improvements in growth, your blind.
there are completely different classes or groups of metabolic reactions that happen while a plant is under lights than those that happen when a plant is in the dark, both are necessary for healthy growth... dont believe me, go to any university library, and look for the scientific peer review journals on horticulture.
everything i have said has come from learned scientists with reputable backgrounds and laboratory test. unfortunately im not sighting anyone or anything on RIU b/c i could step into some serious doodoo.
hope that helps.
Seamaiden
Well-Known Member
While high pressure sodium lighting is, to the best of my knowledge NEVER used in aquaria, metal halide, compact fluorescents of differing types, and normal output fluoros are used extensively. If you want to find good information on lighting for aquaria there are many sites with excellent information available. Spectra, Kelvin ratings, and lumen output of MH and differing fluoros are usually available by brand.
In aquaria, for keeping all photosynthetic organisms (I'm including hermatypic and non-hermatypic corals in this, hermatypic means "reef-building") metal halide and fluorescents that are strong in the blue light range (around, get this, 420 nanometers
) are preferred. This is because blue light is the "strongest" wavelength of the visible spectrum, this is specific to earth's atmosphere of course, which is why the sky and water tend to be blue. Anyway, even organisms that are growing in extremely shallow waters are more responsive to the blue end of the spectrum, even green aquatic plants. Obviously terrestrial plants will show different preferences, but certain basic functions are the same.
asf, everything you say makes logical sense to me, and honestly, the idea of giving anything a 24hr. photoperiod seems counterintuitive to me. Where in nature would ANY organism receive that type of photoperiod? More is not always better, and for me, mimicking nature is what we should strive for. That's just my two cents.
Will you be allowed to answer general horticulture questions? One of my sisters has given me her username and pass to one online uni library, so if there is any recommended reading that you could steer me towards I would appreciate it.
In aquaria, for keeping all photosynthetic organisms (I'm including hermatypic and non-hermatypic corals in this, hermatypic means "reef-building") metal halide and fluorescents that are strong in the blue light range (around, get this, 420 nanometers
) are preferred. This is because blue light is the "strongest" wavelength of the visible spectrum, this is specific to earth's atmosphere of course, which is why the sky and water tend to be blue. Anyway, even organisms that are growing in extremely shallow waters are more responsive to the blue end of the spectrum, even green aquatic plants. Obviously terrestrial plants will show different preferences, but certain basic functions are the same.asf, everything you say makes logical sense to me, and honestly, the idea of giving anything a 24hr. photoperiod seems counterintuitive to me. Where in nature would ANY organism receive that type of photoperiod? More is not always better, and for me, mimicking nature is what we should strive for. That's just my two cents.
Will you be allowed to answer general horticulture questions? One of my sisters has given me her username and pass to one online uni library, so if there is any recommended reading that you could steer me towards I would appreciate it.
email468
Well-Known Member
Thank you for the information. I am so very grateful that real experiments are being made. I was not questioning your experiment or experience but there is a lot of FUD around growing marijuana (as i'm sure you know) and it is sometimes hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. Ed has a lot of experience but to my knowledge is not a botanist or biologist and he often disagrees with other experienced growers like Jorge Cervantes. And I was looking for a genuine student of biology for input.
If i may impose on you for one more question... you mention Kelvins (K). Would it be correct saying temperature or Kelvins is single most important factor in choosing a light? Can you speak to the importance of lumens (the more the better for example) and how lumens would relate to temperature?
Sorry for all the questions but i can not let this opportunity to slip by without asking!
email468
Well-Known Member
the poles....
asf2j
Well-Known Member
unfortunately, if i say anything about growing, or condoning the use of marijuana after tomorrow(really tonight at midnight GMT 6), im screwed out of my educational institution.
indeed it makes sense that most aquaria would respond to higher energy wavelength from penetration into the water. i know from my fish nut experience(lmao, i keep koi like no ones business. three 35 year olds and seven 12 year olds. my babies.) that if you go to your local petco you can buy a bulb for every kelvin you can imagine.
emulating nature will most always be the best deal. you make a good point, where in the world does ANY organism receive that much time under the sun? no where.
as far as kelvins(or nm), the best way to do it, if money were no option, and if you could find ALL of the proper bulbs, i would try to find bulbs between 1800-3000, i would go with 5 of these, at 1000 lumen apiece. try to get one 1800, a 2000, a 2500, 2700, 3000. (you get the idea.) you really would see major benefit if you could get all of these spectrums together.
in addition to the lower end of the kelvins, you should also try to find 1000 lumen bulbs between 5000-8000, pick 5 bulbs at increments similar to the other ones i just gave as an example.
ideally you should be shooting for 10,000 to 15,000 total lumens from the mixed spectrum, excluding green light which is about 4000k.
on a super sunny summer day, the sun spits out between 10,000 and 25,000 lumens per sq ft depending on ozone, cloud coverage, smog, and a few others things.
more lumens, will make your plants produce more, just as long as the heat is kept in check.
so a recap, mix the spectrums as much as possible, exclude green light~3500k-4500k, shoot for 10,000 lumen or more, if you can. you will still get growth with less lumen, just ultra, ultra slow.
indeed it makes sense that most aquaria would respond to higher energy wavelength from penetration into the water. i know from my fish nut experience(lmao, i keep koi like no ones business. three 35 year olds and seven 12 year olds. my babies.) that if you go to your local petco you can buy a bulb for every kelvin you can imagine.
emulating nature will most always be the best deal. you make a good point, where in the world does ANY organism receive that much time under the sun? no where.
as far as kelvins(or nm), the best way to do it, if money were no option, and if you could find ALL of the proper bulbs, i would try to find bulbs between 1800-3000, i would go with 5 of these, at 1000 lumen apiece. try to get one 1800, a 2000, a 2500, 2700, 3000. (you get the idea.) you really would see major benefit if you could get all of these spectrums together.
in addition to the lower end of the kelvins, you should also try to find 1000 lumen bulbs between 5000-8000, pick 5 bulbs at increments similar to the other ones i just gave as an example.
ideally you should be shooting for 10,000 to 15,000 total lumens from the mixed spectrum, excluding green light which is about 4000k.
on a super sunny summer day, the sun spits out between 10,000 and 25,000 lumens per sq ft depending on ozone, cloud coverage, smog, and a few others things.
more lumens, will make your plants produce more, just as long as the heat is kept in check.
so a recap, mix the spectrums as much as possible, exclude green light~3500k-4500k, shoot for 10,000 lumen or more, if you can. you will still get growth with less lumen, just ultra, ultra slow.
Seamaiden
Well-Known Member
I MUST SEE YOUR KOI. I absolutely LOVE koi and used to keep them myself. New threadishness, or take this one to new depths? 
Since I'm growing outdoors and basically letting nature do her thing my questions will be fewer and less specific, but I love information and learning when something has piqued my interest. And the baby is crying, so I'm gonna go see if anyone needs a hand.
Since I'm growing outdoors and basically letting nature do her thing my questions will be fewer and less specific, but I love information and learning when something has piqued my interest. And the baby is crying, so I'm gonna go see if anyone needs a hand.
email468
Well-Known Member
yeah - i was just messin' with seamaiden! not too much plant growth going on at the poles!
email468
Well-Known Member
I'm glad my instincts are correct as I use both an MH (blue-heavy) and HPS (red-heavy) bulbs throughout my entire grow. The heat is tough to control but 135,000 lumens and a wide-spectrum seems to be worth it!
Thank you again for your answers!
i hope you visit us again after you are no longer subject to the draconian university baloney. I really do appreciate your input! I am not a scientist but i am a science cheerleader! Give me an "S", give me a "C".... give me an "I", "E", "N", "C-E"!!
email468
Well-Known Member
i was just being an ass (as usual)! it's not like plants grow there or anything.Jeez.. duh.And I'm not even high! What else can I blame it on?
email468
Well-Known Member
thanks! you are also awesome!hhahaa, email your awesome
can you tell how desperately i want cannabis legalized so more scientists can get to work on this wonderful plant?