i , even in my unscientific ineptitude say,, garbage,, rubbish,, voodoo,, ya must be an old wive,, just sayin
you’d be wrong! Try it next harvest!
Do these trichomes look done? Zoom
- Thread starter Cheffrey
- Start date
you’d be wrong! Try it next harvest!
Elvin
Banned Troll
So putting them in the dark for 3 days before chopping increases THC by 30%? sure . . . I'll buy that . . . (I'm 
)
So does the fact that I'm lazy and instead of branches I just hang a plant in a few chunks and it lives for a few days in the dark until it dies and drys, I'm doing the same?
Perhaps I'm really smart and not just lazy when I'm really high?
)So does the fact that I'm lazy and instead of branches I just hang a plant in a few chunks and it lives for a few days in the dark until it dies and drys, I'm doing the same?
Perhaps I'm really smart and not just lazy when I'm really high?
NorthernCosmos
Well-Known Member
Could have some of the effect, but might not be quite the same as the plant having ample water and nutrition while in the dark. Hard data would've been nice, but without it we have lore which even this naturally born skeptic does not discard out of hand
It would require a controlled experiment to determine thatPerhaps I'm really smart and not just lazy when I'm really high?
Elvin
Banned Troll
I will be blunt. If 3 days in darkness caused a 30% increase in THC there would not be this debate. It would easily be verifiable. A single source claims they have accomplished it. That is not science, it is just the everyday BS that one finds on these types of forums.Could have some of the effect, but might not be quite the same as the plant having ample water and nutrition while in the dark. Hard data would've been nice, but without it we have lore which even this naturally born skeptic does not discard out of hand
It would require a controlled experiment to determine that
It's great fun to discuss such wild claims but like you so aptly said:
"It would require a controlled experiment to determine that" nor has anyone replicated the wild claim of 30% increase.
NorthernCosmos
Well-Known Member
I agree, that is not science, which is what I'm saying (I can't even find that one source), and a 30% increase sounds optimistic. Still, I wouldn't rule out some kind of effect - these are photosensitive plants that might trigger some kind of process if subjected to sudden prolonged darkness (the flip shows that such effects can be dramatic).
I'm new to growing, and have just recently heard about this. It's a jungle of info on all aspects of it and not much seem to be supported by science as such, but people still manage to apply a set of methods and grow seemingly in a more or less deterministic fashion. Oh well, perhaps someone with lots of plants wants to do controlled experiments with the prolonged dark period?
Anyway, we're drifting off topic with this now - sorry @Cheffrey.
I'm new to growing, and have just recently heard about this. It's a jungle of info on all aspects of it and not much seem to be supported by science as such, but people still manage to apply a set of methods and grow seemingly in a more or less deterministic fashion. Oh well, perhaps someone with lots of plants wants to do controlled experiments with the prolonged dark period?
Anyway, we're drifting off topic with this now - sorry @Cheffrey.
This is how bro-science starts.
I'm now wondering why me neighbor farmer doesn't call up to the sun God to turn off the sunlight for 2 days before harvesting?
Emilya Green
Well-Known Member
Because your farmer friend is not dealing with trichomes that degrade in the light. I heard that there is no discernable difference between 36 and 72 hours in the dark but have never gone that long myself. I will be testing that on this upcoming harvest with 3 identical plants... one of them is getting the full 72 hour treatment. I am already convinced to use at least 36 hours in all of my grows, but if I can see a much larger increase by doubling it, I am all in. It's not like it takes any extra power to do this.This is how bro-science starts.
I'm now wondering why me neighbor farmer doesn't call up to the sun God to turn off the sunlight for 2 days before harvesting?
It starts as bro science, and then when reputable and well known growers put it to the test with documented side by side tests, it becomes real and proven science.
Billotto
Well-Known Member
Yeah sorry Cheffrey if I derailed your thread....it wasn't my intention. It's just that I never heard of this prolonged darkness b4 harvest and it made me curious. I'm a new grower so I'm not about to completely dismiss anything that could give me better buds because that was the one aspect of my first grow that I was less than satisfied with.I agree, that is not science, which is what I'm saying (I can't even find that one source), and a 30% increase sounds optimistic. Still, I wouldn't rule out some kind of effect - these are photosensitive plants that might trigger some kind of process if subjected to sudden prolonged darkness (the flip shows that such effects can be dramatic).
I'm new to growing, and have just recently heard about this. It's a jungle of info on all aspects of it and not much seem to be supported by science as such, but people still manage to apply a set of methods and grow seemingly in a more or less deterministic fashion. Oh well, perhaps someone with lots of plants wants to do controlled experiments with the prolonged dark period?
Anyway, we're drifting off topic with this now - sorry @Cheffrey.
Thx for the good discussion everybody.
If Emilya is a proponent, then I deem it to be worth a try
Elvin
Banned Troll
What? Your neighbor doesn't? Perhaps that's why the projected 3% increase in this year's corn crop was lowered last week.This is how bro-science starts.
I'm now wondering why me neighbor farmer doesn't call up to the sun God to turn off the sunlight for 2 days before harvesting?
It is amazing though, all that flooding and even with fewer acres planted this season because of that, genetic advances keep increasing the bushels an acre produces.
And please don't get me started on big long cut-and-pasts posted by newbies that are about stuff being tried on daffodils and rutabagas and how that might apply to cannabis . . . .
Arent rutabagas a root crop?? lol They grow in the dark all day and night so since that's a thing cannabis should be grown in the dark using the bro-science method. could work.
Also Daffodils are bulbs (perennials) so they need a good several months of darkness to grow big and colorful.
The only thing I'm trying to figure out with the dark period is how the person that came up with this idea is going to make any money from it??
Going with this sciency thing if my 20% thc flowers get 30% more thc then I'm going to have a plant with 50% thc at harvest. Should work. lol 48 hours of darkness is all thats required. I'm in.
What? Your neighbor doesn't? Perhaps that's why the projected 3% increase in this year's corn crop was lowered last week.
This fall I could see corn farther than my eyes could sea. We live in the #1 corn producing county in NYS. You haven't had sweet corn till you try some from Livingston County, NY. It aint none of that GMO round up corn either.
NorthernCosmos
Well-Known Member
30% increase (at most, "they" say)... not sure if joking... <ducks>
Yay! Science! Go girl! Seriously interested in the outcome
P.S. Sorry again Cheffrey...
Elvin
Banned Troll
If there was actual science behind this it would be published after it was peer-reviewed to make sure the study adhered to proper scientific standards.
There is nothing of that sort available anywhere, just one group claiming these results.
Perhaps it works, it certainly will not hurt anything to try. But to accept that it is true just because a lot of people say to do it does not convince me. There is plenty of stuff that people swear you must do that if you've even just skimmed an Agronomy textbook you would know it is not true.
Elvin
Banned Troll
Here in Iowa we grow RIB and Roundup ready. No grain farmer (in Iowa, there is a bunch of non-GMO that goes to California but they don't grow corn like we do) grows non-GMO which is why we keep seeing more bushels grown on less land. Heck the US had more acres in corn in the 1930's then we do now and the crop is a lot larger without farming the sketchy stuff like we did in years past.
Its all about soil quality. Eventually the round up ready soil wont be soil. Very few farmers use that stuff where we are. The corn is used for feed to grow animals humans eat not for fuel for cars. Which is completely wrong in my opinion.
Careful for the corporations they want your land.
Careful for the corporations they want your land.
Emilya Green
Well-Known Member
you all act like this is something new. This method has been talked about at least as long as I have been in the online growing world and my Dad knew about it in the 70's. It is documented only partially because only the home connoisseur even worries about it... commercial growers are all about speed and production... 3 days in the dark is just a waste of time and space for them.
So tell me, in this just now becoming legal to grow area of science... who out there has had time yet to publish a peer reviewed study on this, of course following proper scientific research standards? No one has, and it is ridiculous to think that there would be. Give us 10 years of legality, and this sort of data will start becoming available, but until then...
All you have to go by is what is being talked about and documented in grow journals on these online forums... the true bleeding edge of this hobby.
Elvin
Banned Troll
Cows don't use starch when they eat corn they just crap it out. What was wasted is now used to make fuel. Afterward, the cows eat feed that is better quality than the corn was previously. Ethanol is a net energy gain, not loss, like the critics claim.
Well I hear what you are saying. We should be feeding people with food grown in soil not feeding cars. We have the tech to use solar as a fuel source that can replace the corn we grow for fuel and use that corn to feed people. Chickens like corn too - we eat chicken and pork and there's a list.
The farmers here use the corn for cattle to "finish" them before harvest. Yes the eat mainly grass in the form of alfalfa. Also non-gmo here anyways.
We have learned that no-till farming is better for the soil long term.
A lot of farmers will actually grow cover crops in the corn fields and rotate every year.
Thats how we can grow cannabis too!
The farmers here use the corn for cattle to "finish" them before harvest. Yes the eat mainly grass in the form of alfalfa. Also non-gmo here anyways.
We have learned that no-till farming is better for the soil long term.
A lot of farmers will actually grow cover crops in the corn fields and rotate every year.
Thats how we can grow cannabis too!
Elvin
Banned Troll
That is your belief and I'm not going to argue with you.
I've actually studied agronomy, so actual science that I can rely on is kind of important to me and to tell you the truth I do not have the time nor the patience to do something when the claimed science behind it, is not very good to be kind.
We are speaking of a claim that rose from a single almost unknown group that the internet grabbed hold of as if it was an accepted fact.
HigherTheHigh
Well-Known Member
Tried darkness 3 times, once for 48h and another for 5 days as I forgot about them 
no noticeable increase in and I ran Northern Lights so it's a great resin producer, may work for some but not everyone I wouldn't bother doing it again unless I was busy and didn't want to use extra light hours.
no noticeable increase in and I ran Northern Lights so it's a great resin producer, may work for some but not everyone I wouldn't bother doing it again unless I was busy and didn't want to use extra light hours.Similar threads
