Your Grandpa's Weed or is UV supplementation really needed?

MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
RM3 said:
Finally, researchers appear to have identified the actual pathway of exactly how UVB affects THC production. While the analysis is somewhat technical, we’ll do our best to outline the results below. Ready?

UVB causes damage in plants in much the same way as it damages human skin, and plants created defenses against UVB in the form of a protein called UVR8.

UVR8 is a protein molecule which senses UV, and then “tells” plant cells to change their behavior. Exactly how UVR8 molecules sense UV was recently discovered and is pretty interesting. UVR8 is what chemists call a “dimer,” which simply means that it’s made of two structurally similar protein subunits. When UV light hits the two protein subunits in UVR8, their charge weakens and they break apart. To help visualize this, imagine rubbing two balloons against one another. The balloons will stick together because of a static charge. Now imagine the balloons get rained on. The water takes the static charge with it and the two balloons fly apart. In this example, the balloons are the two protein subunits and the rain is UV light cascading down on the plant cell. After the protein subunits break apart, they head to the cell nucleus to deliver their information.

One of these changes caused by this reaction is very important in your cannabis garden. UV stress stimulates cannabis’ production of chemicals via the phenylpropanoid pathway, specifically malonyl-CoA and phenylalanine. Why is this important? Because cannabis uses malonyl-CoA to make Olivtol, which it in turn uses to make THC. So finally the specific pathway which increases Cannabis potency when exposed to UV light is understood, and we can use this information to our advantage.
Click to expand...
Can you post the source?
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Absolutely fascinating stuff here!

I've been told and have read in several places that 320nm UVB is the most effective for resin production. Is there anything in the study that might shed light on why this is?
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
I'm very skeptical of UV making any difference at all in THC. I hear it a lot.. I've seen the studies... but it's just not enough to convince me. There's just not enough data for me to make a good conclusion.
 
VTMi'kmaq

VTMi'kmaq

Well-Known Member
In nature when folks grow outside....yes mile high Denver imho qualifies...as does the S.American Andes or any range that can go a mile above sea lvl or higher. I think a neighbor who is/was a lifelong tibetan claims the altitude allows more of the suns rays ( I took this as more uv exposure at altitude) as opposed to lower lvl gardens. There must be more technology down the line in uv bulb production of like to think. lots to be explored imho.
 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
I just looked at the fundraising campaign to help RM3 produce an LED lamp....

"High Quality Bridgelux 3W chips"

Straight up, he's looking to design another ripoff lamp to put on the over-saturated market and he wants you to help him fund the startup. RM3, invest in your own business. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to crowd fund yet another garbage product just for your own sake. Literally, people would be better off if they just donated money directly to your living expenses and didn't bother wasting their time with such a nonsense product. Give the beggar some money, then go buy an HPS lamp.

"say no to blurple", then in the picture you see a 660nm epiled. Complete garbage... Complete lie... Something tells me his kindergarten competitors are going to kick his ass. Verified con man...

No good....
 
Last edited:
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
I just looked at the fundraising campaign to help RM3 produce an LED lamp....

"High Quality Bridgelux 3W chips"

Straight up, he's looking to design another ripoff lamp to put on the over-saturated market and he wants you to help him fund the startup. RM3, invest in your own business. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to crowd fund yet another garbage product just for your own sake. Literally, people would be better off if they just donated money directly to your living expenses and didn't bother wasting their time with such a nonsense product. Give the beggar some money, then go buy an HPS lamp.

"say no to blurple", then in the picture you see a 660nm epiled. Complete garbage... Complete lie... Something tells me his kindergarten competitors are going to kick his ass. Verified con man...

No good....
Click to expand...
Yeah agreed, not because of opinion... but because they suck.. its all in my signature. Then you have this fool with his OOOOOooooOOOoOOoMols.... People that focus on umol/s and PPF instead of PPDF are what make my blood boil lol.

 
C

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
Yeah agreed, not because of opinion... but because they suck.. its all in my signature. Then you have this fool with his OOOOOooooOOOoOOoMols.... People that focus on umol/s and PPF instead of PPDF are what make my blood boil lol.

Click to expand...
umol/s of PAR (or W of PAR) is what matters. PPF is a more important number than PPFD when buying a lamp. A lot of light companies will use reflectors and lenses to get a high PPFD in a very small area, but only PPF (total photon flux) or total power (W of PAR) tells you the whole story.

Edit: Of course, PPF and power don't make it a good light. That's efficiency and quantum efficacy of the source in umol/J.
 
hillbill

hillbill

Well-Known Member
Being as I received welder flash several times when running Philips CMH, I will limit my uv exposure to reading this thread. I am however getting as much frostiness or even more under COB's as I was under cmh. I have 2 of the most triched up plants I ever had right now under 3500k-4000k COB's.

I am also not convinced that light of a very near wave length would not prompt similar response in plant like deep blues, present happily in COB's stunning white light.

Again though with my flash history I am not worthy of dangerous wave lengths.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN

MeGaKiLlErMaN

Well-Known Member
churchhaze said:
umol/s of PAR (or W of PAR) is what matters. PPF is a more important number than PPFD when buying a lamp. A lot of light companies will use reflectors and lenses to get a high PPFD in a very small area, but only PPF (total photon flux) or total power (W of PAR) tells you the whole story.

Edit: Of course, PPF and power don't make it a good light. That's efficiency and quantum efficacy of the source in umol/J.
Click to expand...
This is vastly inaccurate. I suggest checking your sources. on PPFD.. not PAR
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top