defoliation? yes/no and techniques

I will admit that I'm out of my league here, but want to toss out my opinion anyway.

Apical dominance is the formation of the main cola(s) right? We can manipulate what branch or branches are determined to be the main cola...such as super-cropping etc....right?

I look at this as the plant's is only trying to produce dominant buds with the best chance of being germinated....thus located at the top, and the production of a bigger bud. The only function a female plant is trying to succeed at is to get pollinated and produce seeds. This is also why there's small pop-corn buds in areas where it's not likely to collect pollen.

I have absolutely nothing to back up my opinion, and there's high-odds I'm all wet on this.

Natural growth stimulants include:
Natural Auxins - 11 mg per liter:
indole-3-acetic acid
indole-3-carboxylic acid
indole-3-aldehyde
N,N-dimethyltryptamine
N-hydroxyethylphalimide
Natural Cytokinins - 0.031 mg per liter:
trans-zeatin
cis-zeatin
trans-ri bosyizeatin
dihydrozeatin
isopentenyladenosine
isopentenyladenine
Plus a host of Macro / Micro nutrients, Vitamins and Amino Acids.

lilroach said:

...

I have absolutely nothing to back up my opinion, and there's high-odds I'm all wet on this.

...

Click to expand...

I respect that. A lot of myths probably start from theories that are made up. I think most people make up reasons for the simple fact they don't know any better, and that is fine. But when posting them it helps to let others know all it is was your theory.

jacksthc said:

:: snipped :: also the nodes grow a lot closer :: snipped ::

Click to expand...

I have noticed this, looking at some of the defoliators plants... tight node spacing. Stronger growth though? I haven't seen that, but maybe you're right, idk. I know based on your opinions about defoliation I have to question your findings a little bit. But yeah, I see the tighter node spacing on your plant posted, and some other defoliators plants as well.

I'm sure tighter node spacing can be used to your advantage.. resulting in some weight increase of wider node spacing, given all other aspects of the grow are the same...

Does it offer you more in weight than not pulling off the leaves that the plant uses? I don't know for sure because I haven't tried your methods... but using what I know about a plant, I would think it is not a good trade off.. At best, the resilient plant manages to yield the same for you despite being plucked. At worst, lost yield. I just wouldn't think that an increased yield would come.

But yeah, haven't tried it in a long time and prefer to go the way of the leaf. I've been hanging in this argument long enough... I think I got my point across. Leaves are good for the plant..

I think along with the "new school growers are on to something" argument... you're other piece would need to be "the plant can perform photosynthesis just as well with defol as w/o" .. which would mean, the plant has excess leaves OR regrows leaves w/o skipping a beat.... for the record, I don't believe that... But, that would seem like your best argument, to me. I don't know the auxins, hormone and dominance stuff or if your plucking fucks with that. I'm sure UB knows and he prbly posted it somewhere in this thread already.

Fuck, if it works for you who cares what other people think? The real reason we are all here though is because we like to argue..

lilroach said:

Uncle Ben,

Once again I'm going to stray a little bit from the subject.

You've written about light-saturation, different spectrum, and how a plant processes light energy. I know you're primarily an outdoor grower (I envy you), but do you have an opinion on an optimum wattage-per-plant or lumens-per-plant for indoor growing?

Click to expand...

I used a F.C. meter at an average of 6,000 read at just below plant tops. 32 watts/s.f. It's all relative as one's rust bucket hood will not give the same output as one's high tech super hood. Every lamp, hood, and ballast is different. To do the forum grams/watt drills is just ridiculous.

I currently have 1,000 watts of over-head lighting (400w MH/600w HPS) on a light mover, and have various florescent lighting coming from the sides and between my eight plants (to ensure there's no "non-light" times when the mover is elsewhere) in a 5x7 flower room.

I've read posts on here and elsewhere (so it has to be true...right?) that 100 watts-per-plant is ideal.

Click to expand...

No. What are your plants telling you? Do they look green and healthy? If so then you've dialed in all the elements that will max out photosynthesis.

The only thing I take off my plants are dead leaves and fat buds.

https://www.rollitup.org/indoor-growing/407048-20-000-watt-medical-grow-33.html#post6148395

This is the cross before the vampire of the anti-defoliation coalition.

lilroach said:

Uncle Ben,

Once again I'm going to stray a little bit from the subject.

You've written about light-saturation, different spectrum, and how a plant processes light energy. I know you're primarily an outdoor grower (I envy you), but do you have an opinion on an optimum wattage-per-plant or lumens-per-plant for indoor growing?

I currently have 1,000 watts of over-head lighting (400w MH/600w HPS) on a light mover, and have various florescent lighting coming from the sides and between my eight plants (to ensure there's no "non-light" times when the mover is elsewhere) in a 5x7 flower room.

I've read posts on here and elsewhere (so it has to be true...right?) that 100 watts-per-plant is ideal.

Thanks again for veering off subject to give advice.

EDIT: I read one of your post the other day and you said you've never heard of mainlining. Here's a very good journal of this type of topping:

https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journals/690504-critical-kush-mainlined.html

Here's a pic as a tease...yeah, it's one plant:

Click to expand...

Wow... mouth hit floors...+1 rep.

jacksthc said:

not good with science talk, but this don't mean I can't grow a plant

Click to expand...

Wow....

Do you also do windows?

jacksthc said:

I could grow for 20 years and grow the best plants every and not know, just remember you read this info, didn't get it all from growing a plant

Click to expand...

Right.

Reminds of a quote from the Messiah - "You didn't build that".

Taken slightly out of context but made me think of this thread

Confirmation Bias

Psychologists have shown that people have a very, very strong, robust confirmation bias. What this means is that when they have an idea, and they start to reason about that idea, they are going to mostly find [often completely irrational] arguments for their own idea. They're going to come up with reasons why they're right, they're going to come up with justifications for their decisions. They're not going to challenge themselves.

And the problem with the confirmation bias is that it leads people to make very bad decisions and to arrive at crazy beliefs. And it's weird, when you think of it, that humans should be endowed with a confirmation bias. If the goal of reasoning were to help us arrive at better beliefs and make better decisions, then there should be no bias. The confirmation bias should really not exist at all.


So defoliators, it's ok, just human nature. Don't blame yourself for having confirmation bias but you got two options now: acknowledge your socalled proof is anything but proof, or remain ignorant about the above and every thing you'll ever have a discussion about. List the pro arguments and the cons objectively and make an informed decision after that.

you lot are very wrong about me, I challenge every ideal I have and always find ways to improve my grow/yield, you can't say defoliation has done any damage to my plants or reduced my yield and I can't prove that defoliation works, so talking the piss out of my written skills is the best you can do, uncle ben has just dropped to a new low

Sativied said:

So defoliators, it's ok, just human nature. Don't blame yourself for having confirmation bias but you got two options now: acknowledge your socalled proof is anything but proof, or remain ignorant about the above and every thing you'll ever have a discussion about. List the pro arguments and the cons objectively and make an informed decision after that.

Click to expand...

It is you who is suffering from confirmation bias. Please reference the link I posted above regarding the work of collective gardener, a commercial grower who works with other commercial growers to determine those methods by which maximum yield and best product may be obtained from commercial indoor growing operations. I'll take his word over that of a mere hobbyist any day.

jacksthc said:

uncle ben has just dropped to a new low

Click to expand...

Was he ever high?

Pffff, finally.... someone pointed out the obvious. My turn again:

You're using your confirmation bias to confirm that I have confirmation bias.... EVERYONE has confirmation bias... like I said human nature.... yes, so do I. The difference is that I'm aware of it and challenge myself and every single argument I ever use 'before' I write it down. Let me try this one more time:

Try to be an adult for a second and be honest with yourself if you can: do you have a preference when it comes to the answer to the question whether defoliation is beneficial for yield-wise? You defoliators show so obviously you WANT it to work, and you will remain blind endlessly even if someone spoon-feeds you botanic facts. Highschool-level wishful-thinking that doesn't work in real life and certainly not with plants...

I do NOT have a preference, and challenged every pro and con I could find (from many experts). See the difference? To add to it and mindfuck you completely: I used to pluck some leaves. I stand behind that decision because it was based on the info and knowledge I had at the time. After seeing so many of these discussion I decided to do some objective research myself. The challenging yourself part remember from my post above...

fg2020 said:

I'll take his word over that of a mere hobbyist any day.

Click to expand...

Ad hominem and utterly stupid. How many hobbyist here say defoliation works? And how many pros say it doesn't? Exactly, you just take the word from the ones who confirm your bias. You don't care about the truth and you'll swallow anything based on the source rather than the validity of arguments and facts as long as it aligns with you PREFERENCE. Ironic, that being such typical behavior of the people accusing others of blindly following UB...

It's the same as in the previous defoliation discussion in which I point out the fanatic use of fallacies by defoliators, back it up with facts and a similar quote... It's like giving advanced weaponry to rebels in a desert... don't have a clue how to use it wisely.

You choose to remain ignorant fg2020. One cannot blame oneself or another for not knowing something, but choosing to remain ignorant is the decease that is killing the planet: idiocracy. Not too long ago people like you would be excluded from any intelligent discussion...

As for the stupidity of people posting bud pics as proof, your pics and yields are anything but impressive to me. Noobs talking yields per plant rather than per watt and surface area claim they get 30% more... I've seen so many many way fatter buds from grows with no leaves removed... according to your own simplistic (lack of) logic that should proof defoliation isn't necessary... THINK FFS!

It's like showing you can jump a feet high and than claim you found some way to jump that high, something like weights on your ankles . And then when someone points out it's scientifically complete nonsense.... (science, from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") you start debating like a bunch of religious fanatics. THAT should tell you something...

jackthc said:

I could grow for 20 years and grow the best plants every and not know, just remember you read this info, didn't get it all from growing a plant

Click to expand...

I almost feel sorry for you, how can you write that down and not see the obvious... If you don't read or understand the theory and science behind it, it's nothing more than your own perception. And as Hank pointed out earlier already, you can't rely on your own perception alone.

jackthc said:

not good with science talk, but this don't mean I can't grow a plant

Click to expand...

No, it just means you don't have a clue of what you are doing while you are doing it. You'd fit well in the dutch grow forums where they have many monkeys who are able to learn a trick and repeat it endlessly, perfect it even, without having a goddamn clue of what they are actually doing. Clearly not capably of making a 'wise' decision themselves. In a professional environment, people like you water the plants, people like me decide how much water they get. Plucking leaves or not would be discussed based on facts, not beliefs and personal and emotional preferences.

Asshelmets...

PS. Jack, what your pics do tell me is that you got some real grow talent, let go of the forum nonsense and you'll be amazed of what cannabis plants can do.

Sativied said:

As for the stupidity of people posting bud pics as proof, your pics and yields are anything but impressive to me. Noobs talking yields per plant rather than per watt and surface area claim they get 30% more... I've seen so many many way fatter buds from grows with no leaves removed... according to your own simplistic (lack of) logic that should proof defoliation isn't necessary... THINK FFS!

It's like showing you can jump a feet high and than claim you found some way to jump that high, something like weights on your ankles . And then when someone points out it's scientifically complete nonsense.... (science, from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") you start debating like a bunch of religious fanatics. THAT should tell you something...

I almost feel sorry for you, how can you write that down and not see the obvious... If you don't read or understand the theory and science behind it, it's nothing more than your own perception. And as Hank pointed out earlier already, you can't rely on your own perception alone.

No, it just means you don't have a clue of what you are doing while you are doing it. You'd fit well in the dutch grow forums where they have many monkeys who are able to learn a trick and repeat it endlessly, perfect it even, without having a goddamn clue of what they are actually doing. Clearly not capably of making a 'wise' decision themselves. In a professional environment, people like you water the plants, people like me decide how much water they get. Plucking leaves or not would be discussed based on facts, not beliefs and personal and emotional preferences.

Asshelmets...

PS. Jack, what your pics do tell me is that you got some real grow talent, let go of the forum nonsense and you'll be amazed of what cannabis plants can do.

Click to expand...

mate you have no ideal what you are talking about "Jack, what your pics do tell me is that you got some real grow talent" and then you put "just means you don't have a clue of what you are doing"

and some basic reading on the net told me that "apical dominance is controlled by light" so more shoots that get direct light the more they will grow and put bud on also getting rid of all the small lateral buds sites gives more energy too the top shoots, to give you results just like the mainlining technique

jacksthc said:

mate you have no ideal what you are talking about "Jack, what your pics do tell me is that you got some real grow talent" and then you put "just means you don't have a clue of what you are doing"

and some basic reading on the net told me that "apical dominance is controlled by light" so more shoots that get direct light the more they will grow and put bud on also getting rid of all the small lateral buds sites gives more energy too the top shoots, to give you results just like the mainlining technique

Click to expand...

Apical dominance is controlled by light. From my understanding though, your yield is dependent on light received by the plant. Not which bud is or how many buds are dominant. It's kinda like UBs topping technique. It creates 4 equal main colas. However they yield in the same ballpark as one huge cola. Even though "more buds are getting direct light.

The plant will put everything it can into bud production. Whatever it can muster. Doesn't matter if its one huge cola or a bush of popcorn buds.

We all know (it is scientifically proven) that a leaf is a plants most efficient point of lights absorption.

Say we have two clones from the same plant. We decide on identical mediums, nutes, pot size, temps humidity, etc... everything controlled and equal. Now the only difference is one is defoliated and one keeps its all of its leaves... even if they both completely fill their canopy, the defoliated plant can't possibly absorb as much light as the other.

Now how much of a difference it'll make I can't say.

My point is just that defoliation cannot logically produce more than a non defoliated plant.

So my question is why bother?

ive found that removeing leaves ( older ones) toward the middle of the plant allows for the Node underneath that leave grows vigorously due to the amount of light its provided now that the leaf is gone and it grows into a whole new branch . ive tryed letting these branches grow on there own with out taking the leaf above it off , but the growth is much slower of it , i usually like to only take off a leaf here or there if i feel it will allow for another area of the plant to gain much more light. usually after cutting the leaf off i like to stick a cfl within 2 inches of where it was and the Node grows a whole new side branch

Dboi87 said:

Apical dominance is controlled by light. From my understanding though, your yield is dependent on light received by the plant. Not which bud is or how many buds are dominant. It's kinda like UBs topping technique. It creates 4 equal main colas. However they yield in the same ballpark as one huge cola. Even though "more buds are getting direct light.

The plant will put everything it can into bud production. Whatever it can muster. Doesn't matter if its one huge cola or a bush of popcorn buds.

We all know (it is scientifically proven) that a leaf is a plants most efficient point of lights absorption.

Say we have two clones from the same plant. We decide on identical mediums, nutes, pot size, temps humidity, etc... everything controlled and equal. Now the only difference is one is defoliated and one keeps its all of its leaves... even if they both completely fill their canopy, the defoliated plant can't possibly absorb as much light as the other.

Now how much of a difference it'll make I can't say.

My point is just that defoliation cannot logically produce more than a non defoliated plant.

So my question is why bother?

Click to expand...

Yes you are right on one point that a plant with more leaves will absorb more light , but if you take that plant that was defoliated and allow it an extra week to recoup then you will have more leaves then you had to start with because the node that was being shadowed over by that leaf is gaining more light thus improving the size/ surface area for light to be absorbed , ive let plants be and they tend to grow with big cola on top and useless popcorn nugs on the interior of the plant and the bottom , taking a few leaves to allow for better penetration to allow new colas to grow and rise = too or near = to the top cola thus giving u more bud . plus it is also known that the plant doesn't only benefit from light abortion through its leaves but its buds as well . so as long as you defoliate correctly dont over do it and take the leaves off in the right places, then the stunning or light loss the plant will experiance due to the defoli will be nothing compared to the gains u can get from taking the shade away from new nodes/ budding sites

jacksthc said:

not good with science talk, but this don't mean I can't grow a plant
trying my best to explain
how I grow


so when I remove some fan leaves from the top shoots the apical dominance in the plants changes as the top shoots are damaged and need time to repair, so the lower shoots become the apical dominance shoot
and all the top shoots I remove fan leaves from become thicker and stronger also the nodes grow a lot closer

the results are a level canopy of top apical dominance strong top shoots

so this gives me total control over the canopy shape, also by taking longer in veg and keeping the plant short and bushy gives the roots more time to grow

Click to expand...

i agree with u 100 percent ive grown this way and experienced same result and equal canopy and lots and lots of side branching that all ends up growing equally