Fancyhuh101
Well-Known Member
I have 4 auto strains which I planned topping all around 3rd or 4th node . But alot of people are saying just let them grow . Isn't the canopy more even and controlled when you top ? Any suggestions? Thanks in advance !
To top or not to top
- Thread starter Fancyhuh101
- Start date
Kola_Kreator
Well-Known Member
Lst work a lot better than topping on Autos
manfredo
Well-Known Member
No to topping, yes to supercropping. Less stress, bigger plant, more buds.
Benefits of Super Cropping Autoflowering Cannabis Plants | Fast Buds
You can teach a dog to sit and heel, and a horse to gallop and canter, but what on earth does training a plant entail? Many beginner growers are often baffled a
2fast4buds.com
Modern Selections
Well-Known Member
Topping autos usually does not turn out well. Bending them over under a net will encourage the plant to bush out without stressing the plant. Any stress and autos react negatively. LST = Low Stress Training.
Best advice I can give you is get some photoperiod cannabis seeds.
Best advice I can give you is get some photoperiod cannabis seeds.
I've done 5 auto grows, one photo. All plants were topped and LST'd. Since I started growing in early 2021, I've read numerous comments by growers that disparage autos, all lacking evidence or explanation.
My experience, and the experience of growers on a network that's dedicated to autoflower cannabis, is that autos grow very quickly, they can grow very large, and they offer prodigious yields. I've had good success in germination, quick growth into seedling and veg, and then, unfortunately, some of the plants have grown out of sight, into the top of the tent (it's a 2' x 4' Gorilla tent with the 1' extension).
In the three photos below, one is a photo grow, the others are autos. Which is the photo grow and why?
My experience, and the experience of growers on a network that's dedicated to autoflower cannabis, is that autos grow very quickly, they can grow very large, and they offer prodigious yields. I've had good success in germination, quick growth into seedling and veg, and then, unfortunately, some of the plants have grown out of sight, into the top of the tent (it's a 2' x 4' Gorilla tent with the 1' extension).
In the three photos below, one is a photo grow, the others are autos. Which is the photo grow and why?
manfredo
Well-Known Member
So that was a yes for topping then??
Oh, you mean answer the question?
Yes.
And LST.
Autoflowers are a cannabis hybrid, the same way that most cannabis is hybrid. In the case of an auto, growers "splice" in the gene from cannabis ruderalis which is a type of cannabis that grows wild in very hard climates (high altitude, short summer a la Afghanistan and the Russian steppes) so it doesn't wait until "end of summer" to flip to flower. Instead, it flowers after a given time period.
Other than that, autos seem to me to be very much like photoperiod cannabis - a very hardy plant that, when given the right levels of light (800to 1000µmols) and the right (low) level of nutrients, will result in a prodigious crop.
This is a graphic from a Bugbee video. It has been very helpful to me in terms of creating and refining my growing processes.
Per my "low" level of nutes. > nutes ≠ more growth. More nutes might make the grower feel better but, from what I've seen, can be a huge source of problems for growers, though I'm a hydro grower and I think hydro grows are more work but less mystery.
manfredo
Well-Known Member
I've never grown autoflowers before, but it seems to me since they only grow for a pre-determined amount of time, that the less stress the better...Assuming you want bigger plants, I would think bending would be a lot less stress and time consuming than topping them.Oh, you mean answer the question?
Yes.
And LST.
Autoflowers are a cannabis hybrid, the same way that most cannabis is hybrid. In the case of an auto, growers "splice" in the gene from cannabis ruderalis which is a type of cannabis that grows wild in very hard climates (high altitude, short summer a la Afghanistan and the Russian steppes) so it doesn't wait until "end of summer" to flip to flower. Instead, it flowers after a given time period.
Other than that, autos seem to me to be very much like photoperiod cannabis - a very hardy plant that, when given the right levels of light (800to 1000µmols) and the right (low) level of nutrients, will result in a prodigious crop.
This is a graphic from a Bugbee video. It has been very helpful to me in terms of creating and refining my growing processes.
View attachment 5321602
Per my "low" level of nutes. > nutes ≠ more growth. More nutes might make the grower feel better but, from what I've seen, can be a huge source of problems for growers, though I'm a hydro grower and I think hydro grows are more work but less mystery.
View attachment 5321604
But again, I have never grown autos so I could be all wet.
Modern Selections
Well-Known Member
Splice in the gene?
It's actually done by conventional breeding where one of the parents is an autoflower. No voodoo just straight plant sex.
True some yield well but I've yet to try one that even tries to get me baked.
They are great for people that have a short season but do not make sense for indoors unless new growers with low tolerances just want some weed.
It's actually done by conventional breeding where one of the parents is an autoflower. No voodoo just straight plant sex.
True some yield well but I've yet to try one that even tries to get me baked.
They are great for people that have a short season but do not make sense for indoors unless new growers with low tolerances just want some weed.
This is not an "autoflower issue". It's how plants grow/respond to the environment.
"that the less stress the better" - how do you define stress?
Is it the "droughting stress" that growers swear by (but which produced harmful results when tested under research conditions? Is it the damage that growers routinely cause to their plants by removing fan leaves, which provide the vast majority of photosynthesis, in a search to "expose buds sites to light" (an end result that contradicts the basics of plant biology)?
Is it the stress of over fertilizing, a practice that is frequently the cause of nutrient lockout?
And then there's the stress of exposing plants to UV B which, according the the last theory I read, induces the plant to create more…cannabinoids (I think it's cannabinoids)?
Or when you say "stress" do you mean the stress induced by topping which requires the removal a few new buds at the top of a plant which have never opened and, thus, have contributed anything to the growth of the plant thus the only "stress" is the tiny site on the stem where the foliage was removed and which grows over in a matter of hours?
Don't mean to sound harsh but, no, the "wound" is tiny and it heals very quickly. One side effect of topping is that, if you don't leave enough of the stem above your cut, you might find that the stem splits when you LST the plants. Been there, done that.
"Assuming you want bigger plants, I would think bending would be a lot less stress and time consuming than topping them."
"bigger"? - I use a flower light because red promotes cell expansion and results in taller plants. I use a veg light to produce a plant with a lot of inflorescence. More inflorescence (stems and leaves) will tend to increase photosynthesis which results in a "bigger" plant.
"time" - I bill by the hour (I write software) so time is money for me. Every second I've got my nose in the tent instead of writing software, costs me money. On the other end of the equation, primo weed is $500 an ounce here in Southern California. Put those two together and I have a lot of incentive to reduce my "nose in the tent time" and to maximize crop quality. Topping + LST helps accomplish those goals.
Topping takes a few seconds. Snip, snip. What can take a few minutes is to figure out where the fourth node is. Thanks to using a veg light, it can be very hard for me to see into the plant to figure out where to top it. Yup, there's that much of a difference even at day 20 with a veg light.
"bending" = LST? That's part of the process. Topping gives you more colas. One of the goals of LST is to grow a plant that is shorter and has a level canopy.
"I've never grown autos" - it's just weed where you don't have to futz with the lights.
Undestood. That's why "splice" was in quotes (wasn't it?)
And yet tens of thousands of other growers don't experience that and, chemically, it is indistinguishable from any other cannabis cannabis.
"do not make sense for indoors unless new growers with low tolerances just want some weed" - As with your claim "I've yet to try one that even tries to get me baked.", thousands of other growers seem to think "it makes sense" to them and they provide product to tens/hundreds of thousands of their customers. Amazing how those people can be so wrong.
calvin.m16
Well-Known Member
What EC do you run in that system and how often do you do changeouts of water if ever? Just top off with nutrient solution? I like the setup but nothing you or any forum can say will make me go to autoflowers mainly because I prefer the consistency photoperiods provide. I started out growing autos, they are great, but not as great as photoperiods, I like being able to clone results. I have state licensed patients I need to provide consistent stuff to, so I'm limited in what genetics I can play with anyways.
AutoFlower grown under Mars Hydro TSW-2000 in Mother Earth coco/perlite with Advanced Nutrients Coco Connoisseur A+B.
Cpappa27
Well-Known Member
Put a photo period plant under 12/12 after 4 weeks veg then compare it to an auto under whatever lighting you choose and the photo wins almost every time in every department. Most autos are 90 days seed to finish and so are photos if you do 4 week veg then flower for 8 more You'll save money on electric and you'll yield more with photos, most of the time. Autos are hit or miss most of the time. Some Auto genetics are probably killer and dialed in properly, but for the most part Autos have been lackluster for me over the years and Ive tried many many breeders. I play with autos sometimes, I have like 100 free Auto seeds Ive collected over the years from multiple orders and I hate throwing seeds away so I pop a few here and there if I have extra space and time.
Modern Selections
Well-Known Member
Just my experience man.
The average smoker would be fine with autos I'm sure. Same with new growers. Just I've been smoking proper cannabis for 30 years so I guess my tolerance is just too much for the autos. If you like that kind of thing have at it.
Nice plant. Looks like you defol like I do!
"What EC do you run in that system and how often do you do changeouts of water if ever?"
EC may have hit 1.8 but I know I've run 1.6 for some time.
Re. replenishing the res - with 28 gallons of nutes, the res lasts a long time. Like a good newbie, I started off changing the res weekly but didn't last long. I'm using the "add back" approach meaning that I swap a res when I've added back the volume of the res. That's not a guideline rather than a rule. Over the course of a grow, I'll run a given res for two to three weeks.
When I started following that practice it was strange to watch my EC consistently drop - "where's my ferts going!!?? How will my plants be able to grow!??!". Well, it's not going anywhere, right, because its isn't not in the res, it's in the plant which is where it needs to be.
Two papers pointed me in that direction. Check out "Nutrient Management in Recirculating Hydroponic Culture". Lots of good info about managing a res but there's also explanation as to what's going on in the res. The latter has been really helpful to me because it provides some insight into why growers can end up with nute issues and it drives home, to me anyway, the value of giving the plant a sufficient about of ferts and then just leaving it alone.
This page is a good read, as well.
"Just top off with nutrient solution?"
Did that at first, until I read the above sources. Per the Bugbee paper, nutes don't leave the grow tent. They're either in the plant or in the water so when you top off with nutes, you're adding more chemicals that have been taken up very quickly (within hours) along with those that are taken up over the course of days (most of the nutes). That can lead to issues as the res gets more and more of the "fast uptake" in the plant while the "slow uptake" are very gradually used by the plant. That's one reason why nute imbalances can occur. I don't recall that happening to me, fortunately, but I changed my res maintenance processes to avoid that.
I think it works out well. For my Spring grow (I start a grow in January and one in September), I had to go in the tent about every other day and that was to check/adjust light levels and put water in the humidifier. I use an AC Infinity Controller 69 to manage the devices in the tent and have a web cam aimed at a Bluelab pH and EC monitor. I think I've done the "easy 80" in terms of streamlining a grow.
"I like the setup but nothing you or any forum can say will make me go to autoflowers mainly because I prefer the consistency photoperiods provide. I started out growing autos, they are great, but not as great as photoperiods, I like being able to clone results. I have state licensed patients I need to provide consistent stuff to, so I'm limited in what genetics I can play with anyways."
That's a very valid argument. Clones are the only way to ensure consistently and since you can't clone an auto… QED
Having said that, there are growers who support medial patients and they use autos because they can turn a crop so quickly. Their strategy is to grow SOG and they're able to turn their grows over in the advertised 60-70 day time frame.
I switched off of autos because I can't hit that time frame. For one, multiple plants in a big res results in roots growing together unless I'm constantly in the res separating the roots. That's a PITA. More important is that the seed to seed variability resulted in one monster plant dominating the grow (all of my grows were that way and I could not find an environmental cause) plus they were growing big (> 4') so I was always in the 110-115 day range for a grow. Add in the fact that I was running 300-500 watts for 18+ hours at 43¢ per KwH, there was simply no reason for me to grow autos.