Super Pruning

Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
For those posting alternative conjecture, I suggest reading the short piece about "apical dominance" in the OP before making assumptions. I'm not saying anything is necessarily wrong, just that the thread really isn't based on mere conjecture but on science.

The plant has a natural apparatus for determining shape. This apparatus (apical dominance) makes the plant grow up as best as it can. This is no doubt a means of competing for sunlight with surrounding plant growth. Tall plants are bad.
Click to expand...
This could be misleading but I know what you are getting at.

Tall spindly plants are bad, that likely is the result of over crowded competing and/or lack of light intensity. Tall plants that have been topped a few times (got tall from long healthy veg) are absolutely fine.

I'd take a tall plant over a small one head room provided. With taller plants you have easier control over keeping a cooler root temp to canopy temp. Once you start getting under 2 foot plants, varied temp control is doable but ever more difficult, as is general air flow/humidity control. Wet pots 6 inches under the canopy+canopy temp isn't the recipe for avoiding rot unless you got that heavily under control.
 
Raven121415

Raven121415

Well-Known Member
DutchUncle said:
On a side note, technically it is not the bending itself that makes branches grow towards the light but rather phototropism, auxins in particular. As they are produced in the shoot apical meristem (SAM), unilateral light exposure causes auxins at the sunny side to be destroyed, thus resulting in greater concentrations on the shaded side of plant. As auxin promotes growth (through various means), it basically means the shaded side grows faster than the sunny side, resulting in a bending towards the light.

Regarding the last point: as far as I know, just as long the apical dominance is broken and remains that way, the auxin will not have the inhibiting effects on any of the lateral buds.
Click to expand...
This is correct! It will allow all the lower “side shoots” to grow rapidly and become main branches themselves. If trained right.

“Auxin that is produced in the tops of plants is capable of inhibiting the development of side shoots. This symptom is known as apical dominance. Removing the main tip stops the inhibiting effect and side shoots then develop which will eventually result in a broader plant. Where crop spacing allows only a few plants per square meter it is worthwhile removing the main tip as this makes it possible to use the light more efficiently. It’s also necessary to remove the tips regularly to achieve a good stock plant for propagation so that it will grow many more side shoots.”

http://www.cannagardening.com/plant_hormones
 
Roger A. Shrubber

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
RickWhite said:
For those posting alternative conjecture, I suggest reading the short piece about "apical dominance" in the OP before making assumptions. I'm not saying anything is necessarily wrong, just that the thread really isn't based on mere conjecture but on science.

The plant has a natural apparatus for determining shape. This apparatus (apical dominance) makes the plant grow up as best as it can. This is no doubt a means of competing for sunlight with surrounding plant growth. Tall plants are bad. Tall plants mean much of the growth is further from the light, AND tall plants mean a great deal of energy is going into producing stem. The more pruning one does, the less stem and more shoot the plant produces.

While tying a plant down does bring more shoots close to the light, it doesn't matter that much because the growth on these branches is inhibited by auxin. Your plant is still mainly in the business of producing stem.

My ultimate experiment, will be to prune a plant until all branches grow branchlets large enough to prune. So, I will prune the main shoot, every branch, and then each branchlet. Then, once the branchlets produce shoots I will flower. The plant should be one massive bud.
Click to expand...
i think you're going way over board. topping a plant twice is useful and productive, topping it after the second time causes major slowdown of growth, the plant has to split its resources too many times and the resulting growth will never be as large or robust as plants that are only topped twice.
i'm aware of auxin, and it's effects. i'm also aware of cytokinins, which are also produced naturally in plants, and are in effect a brake for the effects of auxins.
people break apical dominance all the time. check out the mainlining thread, a whole section devoted to breaking apical dominance.
this concept is new to you...not to most of us
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top