Induction Lights? The newest (supposedly) technology in Induction Grow Lights

Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
http://www.lightyourreptiles.com/ard3t546in54.html
http://www.reptileuv.com/megaray-metal-halide-uvb.php

These are the only affordable lamps that will produce the 400 uw/cm2 at distances from the bulbs of 12-18 inches on the T5's and 28-36 inches on the mh floods. They are productive for 6-9 months on the t5's and 18-24 months on the mh's. See almost all light sources emit uv with the halide and fluorescent quite high. However to the glee of lamp manufacturers, normal glass formulations effectively block the uvb making the production cheaper and keeping uv from harming people and fading things. So in order to emit uvb a much more expensive glass formulation containing quartz needs to be utilized to allow enough but not too much uvb and no uvc through. This is the costly and finicky part of the game.

my meters

http://www.solarmeter.com/model62.html
http://www.solarmeter.com/model96.html
http://www.solarmeter.com/model94.html
http://www.solarmeter.com/model96.html

The reasoning for the uvc meter is when doing the research to find a suitable source I also wanted to to make sure the sources were safe. Alot of the cheaper bulbs did emit uvc in harmful amounts regardless the brand. Commonality was Chinese manufacture. Also the uvb meters/recommended lamps are most responsive to the frequencies we seek which thanks to nature is the same as for d3 synthesis in reptiles. I found it to be absolutely amazing that a plant and reptiles evolved to utilize the same frequencies for use for totally different purposes. I also have a friend that is a professor at the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs that has been and is doing cannabis research that has the insanely high dollar radiometers that absolutely measures these things and he verified the accuracy of and indicated to me that my meters are perfect for my uses. He discovered the same things I did and verified my hypothesis to him that it is the same frequencies of d3 synthesis for cannabinoid ratio shifting. He is currently researching my other hypothesis that the synthase proteins are altered which causes the thc and thcv to go up while cbd goes down. In my mind this means that the glands absorb uvb and the uvb provides the energy to fuel increased production of the synthase proteins for thc and thcv and lowers the synthase proteins for the cbd. He promised that once his studies have completed and he is published and peer reviewed he will forward me a free copy. I would not be able to share the actual documents but surely will be able to share the info contained therein. But it will be a while as the study is currently ongoing and these things take time.
Therefore when seeking to produce high cbd ratios I do not use uvb.

This chart may help to see what I mean.




Its has been eluded to by my colleague that blue light also causes some of these to occur but to a much lower degree than uvb and that in flower a 3:1 red to blue and not the former 7:1 is ideal in both growth and potency during flower.

I hope this is better understood now and explains alot of my reasoning that went into my lighting choices.
 
Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
some more info

[h=1][/h]

[h=2]The dawn of cannabinoid science….[/h]Despite the medicinal and recreational use of Cannabis for centuries, the identity of its main psychotropic constituent remained unknown until 1964 when Raphael Mechoulam, Yechiel Gaoni, and Habib Edery from the Weizmann Institute of Science in Rehovot, Israel, isolated and synthesised tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). It was subsequently established that this compound is responsible for the psychotropic effects of the plant, one early hypothesis being that since THC is so hydrophobic it induces these effects by interacting with cell membrane lipids. However as more was learnt about the pharmacology of THC and of synthetic cannabinoids such as CP55940 that induce THC-like effects it became increasingly likely that these effects must be mediated by a distinct family of receptors.

[h=2]The discovery of cannabinoid receptors….[/h]It was not until 1988 during experiments using radiolabelled CP55940 that the first of these receptors was actually identified. Aptly named cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1) it was located at the synapses of the central nervous system and importantly, the peripheral terminals of sensory neurones. CB1 receptors are thought to be the most widely expressed G protein-coupled receptors in the brain but are also found in peripheral tissues including peripheral nerves and non-neuronal tissues such as muscle, liver and fat. A few years later a second receptor (CB2) was identified through homology cloning. This is predominantly expressed in the cells of the immune system.

[h=2]A receptor requires a ligand…[/h]The discovery of cannabinoid receptors prompted the hypothesis that the body must produce one or more endogenous ligands (naturally occurring molecules) that bind to the receptor. The first such endogenous compound was isolated in 1992, just two years after the cloning of the CB1 receptor. This was the endogenous cannabinoid (endocannabinoid) anandamide (AEA) and investigators have shown that it functions as a CB1 receptor partial agonist. A second endocannabinoid, 2-arachidonoyl gylcerol (2-AG), was discovered a couple of years later and in the following decade several other endogenous molecules that can activate CB receptors were identified. Evidence also emerged that the endocannabinoid system is transiently activated under certain stressful conditions to restore homeostasis.

[h=2]Ligand biosynthesis and degradation…[/h]Once endogenous cannabinoids were identified it was possible to demonstrate that they are removed from their sites of action by cellular uptake processes and to identify the intracellular enzymes responsible for both their production and metabolic degradation. Diacylglycerol lipase (DAGL) is a key enzyme in the biosynthesis of the 2-AG whereas N-arachidonoylphosphatidylethanolamine-phospholipase D plays an integral role in the production of AEA. Both AEA and 2-AG are inactivated via ester bond hydrolysis and the primary enzymes responsible for these reactions are fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) and monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL) respectively. Endocannabinoid ligands are synthesized on demand rather than stored.

[h=2]Manipulation of the endocannabinoid system…[/h]There is now good evidence that the endocannabinoid system can be activated not only with compounds that directly target cannabinoid CB1 and/or CB2 receptors but also with inhibitors of endocannabinoid cellular uptake or of the intracellular metabolism of endocannabinoids by FAAH or MAGL. This has prompted a search for phytocannabinoids that can augment endocannabinoid levels by inhibiting these processes or indeed by activating biosynthetic enzymes such as DAGL in a manner that would enhance the protective role that increased endocannabinoid release plays in certain disorders.

[h=2]Other endocannabinoid targets…[/h]Interestingly, in some scenarios phytocannabinoids, synthetic cannabinoids and endocannabinoids are still able to induce certain effects even when the cannabinoid receptors have been blocked with an antagonist; evidence for the existence of non-CB receptor targets for these molecules. Further studies have demonstrated that these targets include transient receptor potential (TRP) channels such as TRPV1 and TRPM8, the peroxisome proliferator activated receptors (PPAR) alpha and gamma, G protein-coupled orphan receptors such as GRP55, certain ion channels (e.g. calcium channels), transmitter-gated ion channels (e.g. glycine receptors) and finally established non-cannabinoid G protein-coupled receptors(e.g. acetylcholine muscarinic receptors). We are now exploring the potential of phytocannabinoids to interact with targets other than CB1 or CB2 receptors in the search for therapeutically interesting pharmacology.

[h=3]contributing authors: Prof Roger Pertwee & Prof Vincenzo Di Marzo[/h]
 
Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
American Science and surplus sells UVC lamps for 5 bucks
They are t-8 and are for sterilizing water
Click to expand...
and quite useless for growing bro...uvc mutates dna and rna...could possibly come up with a supermutant that grows one giant trichome resin gland ....lol
 
Splifferous

Splifferous

New Member
oh, and just to be clear...

i have zero respect for those cunts that work for Big Pharma. ESPECIALLY the ones that are trying to manipulate Cannabis to fit their business models and profit margins. it's the toxins from pharmaceuticals and GMO foods that cause these medical issues in the first place, and now they want to sell us Cannabis (in a molested form) to treat those ailments...? after lobbying for DECADES to have it kept illegal? it's not ironic; it's downright fucking criminal!

and, please... pardon my language, but i couldn't bring myself to choose a different word there, that's really how i feel about them and i feel no reason to use softer words to describe them.
 
gordobo

gordobo

Active Member
Kite this chart shows that the 70 watt lamp would only deliver uvb at 400 uw/cm2 would be for an area @ 9" under the width of the lamp. So if we put the plants at 18" directly under this lamp we would only expect 100-200 uw/cm2 and we wander off center it drops rapidly. At 9" off center it drops to less than 10 uw/cm2 which is no where near what you have indicated to be desirable levels of uvb. What I'm hoping to hear is that your research, or research you can point to, would indicate that the 400 uw/cm2 value can strike any portion of the plant canopy and initiate responses throughout the entire plant to be of any real value.



So the metal halide for uvb does not seem practical when compared to the fluorescent reptile lamps.
 
gordobo

gordobo

Active Member
Spliff, I can see how you would find this disturbing but if you wouldn't mind, could you elaborate a tad more as I don't have command of the history in these matters? If this cbd research is being propelled to some degree by big pharma isn't it also to the advantage of all cannabis growers that we learn from this research so we too could adapt it to our gardens. In a way it's like what the CIA calls blow back. They initially give guns to rebels than the rebels turn those very weapons on them. My thought being even if a company like GWP got someone like Kite to under government license grow cannabis for research into improvements in cbd % does that research not have the potential to bring benefits to all of our gardens? Do you see anything that big pharma's research could do in helping the independent grower do better in their own gardens? Or would you suspect the published findings as 'unreliable'?

I'm going to crouch for cover now but I did want to ask?
 
M

mrstabbyphace

Member
I believe part of the problem for big pharmaceutical is that you can't really patent a plant. Unless maybe it was genetically altered into something else. And pharmaceutical companies are only interested in money, so their research is in how to create synthetic marijuana based products that they can patent and sell at rediculious prices.

I enjoy the idea of knowing that at least what I smoke has not been genetically "modified" by any company that is more interested in my money rather than my health. Let alone companies that would actively block drugs from getting to sick people that are more beneficial and have worse side effects because they don't make as much profit or they might lose a potential life long customer if they were cured.
 
Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
gordobo said:
Kite this chart shows that the 70 watt lamp would only deliver uvb at 400 uw/cm2 would be for an area @ 9" under the width of the lamp. So if we put the plants at 18" directly under this lamp we would only expect 100-200 uw/cm2 and we wander off center it drops rapidly. At 9" off center it drops to less than 10 uw/cm2 which is no where near what you have indicated to be desirable levels of uvb. What I'm hoping to hear is that your research, or research you can point to, would indicate that the 400 uw/cm2 value can strike any portion of the plant canopy and initiate responses throughout the entire plant to be of any real value.



So the metal halide for uvb does not seem practical when compared to the fluorescent reptile lamps.
Click to expand...
thats the old one not the zoo model

alsothis is the manu that I test for so I also have bulbs not available to the public...apologies
 
Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
Splifferous said:
oh, and just to be clear...

i have zero respect for those cunts that work for Big Pharma. ESPECIALLY the ones that are trying to manipulate Cannabis to fit their business models and profit margins. it's the toxins from pharmaceuticals and GMO foods that cause these medical issues in the first place, and now they want to sell us Cannabis (in a molested form) to treat those ailments...? after lobbying for DECADES to have it kept illegal? it's not ironic; it's downright fucking criminal!

and, please... pardon my language, but i couldn't bring myself to choose a different word there, that's really how i feel about them and i feel no reason to use softer words to describe them.
Click to expand...
they are only making hash oil is the preposterous part...and they are learning and discovering breeding techniques without GMO 'ing that I want to know and implement as well...otherwise I totally agree with your statement
 
gordobo

gordobo

Active Member
Kite High said:
thats the old one not the zoo model

alsothis is the manu that I test for so I also have bulbs not available to the public...apologies
Click to expand...
So you have lamps that we don't have access to and the charts on their site are not up to date which leaves the last couple posts/links somewhat irrelevant as you point to these particular MH-uvb lamps, but it still leaves the question do I need to plan on saturating the entire plant with the 400uw/cm2 or just a few spots?
 
Mr. Outdoors

Mr. Outdoors

Well-Known Member
Ok, after researching what someone had suggested to me, then researching the source of the information. I took the advise.


run 2 040.jpgrun 2 041.jpgraised the lights!!!!
 
Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
gordobo said:
So you have lamps that we don't have access to and the charts on their site are not up to date which leaves the last couple posts/links somewhat irrelevant as you point to these particular MH-uvb lamps, but it still leaves the question do I need to plan on saturating the entire plant with the 400uw/cm2 or just a few spots?
Click to expand...
the entire plant is best...It appears the lamps are on backorder and they were recently redesigned...I also have mv lamps from them that produce even more thast are no longer on the site.... I have not communicated with them in a while as he had the info he was seeking and I have plenty of lamps...not trying to mislead...but also the t5 arcadias are stronger than advertised as well

to my knowledge they went through tough times with a sub contractor factory and his health failed so he is trying to get the reptile lamps back in line and then we will collaborate to develop a mh uvb specifically for horticulture....but the timing is on them not I
 
SCARHOLE

SCARHOLE

Well-Known Member
I been thinking about getting a par meter.


But I don't like the way they cover the green light as part of the par when green is reflected by plants?
And My induction flouro has a huge green spike @ 546nm due to mercurys presence in the bulb.
It would give me an artificially high par reading due to the green?


Wish someone made a red an blue spectrum only par meter.
 
chazbolin

chazbolin

Well-Known Member
Personally I wouldn't let the fact that the Hg peak @ 546 (it's not all Hg, phosphors contribute to this emission as well) is a region picked up by a quantum meter which does catch red and blue as well stop you from owning a PAR meter. For me the values are used to determine min/max cataloged uMole intensity levels from previously successful runs. But if that doesn't work for you than you can always take Kites advice and buy a series of relatively inexpensive meters to accomplish taking region specific readings;

422-499: http://www.solarmeter.com/model94.html
585-741: http://www.solarmeter.com/model96.html
 
Kite High

Kite High

Well-Known Member
SCARHOLE said:
I been thinking about getting a par meter.


But I don't like the way they cover the green light as part of the par when green is reflected by plants?
And My induction flouro has a huge green spike @ 546nm due to mercurys presence in the bulb.
It would give me an artificially high par reading due to the green?


Wish someone made a red an blue spectrum only par meter.
Click to expand...
as chaz a;ready stated the red and blue only meters are an AWESOME tool to get them right

and scar clear your pm's as I have something to tell you I feel you will like knowing
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top