Maritimer
Well-Known Member
Stoneotter, we must promote Monique to Science Officer I says. She gots smarts and sounds honest.
Droughting and its medicinal effects in cannabis
- Thread starter Krissi Carbone
- Start date
Maritimer
Well-Known Member
We the headhunters
I agree the head is what we are after. Pretty sure there is THC in the glandular stem. The gland is the gas tank, and the stems are gas lines. But it is the head we are mostly interested in for extractions. The joint smokers will benefit more from the little that may be in the stems, but for concentrates we want the Heads.
Sorry I was late answering your e-mail.
now "You got mail". he he
- Thread starter
- #1,564
So, if this elongation and twisting of trichomes is a consistent effect of a successful draught, as it appears to be in Krissi's pictures from multiple plants, that makes me wonder if we can look through a loop at the elongated trichomes as an alternative method for determining success rather than leaf wilt angle.
If so, that would be a more direct approach since it's the effect on the trichomes we are after, not a secondary indication (leaf wilt angle is a symptom of enough draught to stimulate the process but it is in no way causative).
I wonder if there are any circumstances where you get a big droop in leaf angle without a corresponding elongation or if the two are somehow linked. For instance, in a root bound plant in a container like @Carcass had on his balcony, the droop in the leaves comes quite quickly, maybe even early in the day on hot sunny days, but Caplan indicated the effect took multiple days to trigger (I think his was 11?). So, maybe plants in Carcass' circumstances, or those say in a Hempy or a SIP which are used to much more consistently wet conditions, the elongation might be a way to tell that the effect had happened either long enough or repeatedly enough to trigger the response.
I know early on we were wondering how to affect this process in various mediums, so maybe if this is a viable approach it could help determine when to rescue water to avoid draughting more than necessary.
@Krissi Carbone @Maritimer ??
I need some time time to go through this and comment. Thank you for sharing Stone
I do not @Lockoutmonkey. I keep my grow tent clean and bug free. You can bet when I do grow outside though, I'll be washing.
I was also confused. Thought I was just getting old
Yes
It happens....
Thank you for the science @Maritimer @InTheShed.We the headhunters
I agree the head is what we are after. Pretty sure there is THC in the glandular stem. The gland is the gas tank, and the stems are gas lines. But it is the head we are mostly interested in for extractions. The joint smokers will benefit more from the little that may be in the stems, but for concentrates we want the Heads.
Sorry I was late answering your e-mail.
now "You got mail". he he
I don't want to seem like we are avoiding Caplans theory. I don't want it to seem like we are losing sight of the main goal-because we most certainly are NOT.
This study is what I started this thread from.
The whole purpose of this thread has been to educate on the idea of yet another stress technique that based off of Caplan's study, proves to be extremely beneficial to our harvested smokes and in doing so, our overall health in general.
So here we are at a cross roads. The young kids want to try out all the new stuff and experiment with new ideas.
I don't want to seem harsh in saying this because I believe in the original study-or I wouldn't be here, obviously-however.....
There is so much more to learn and to explore! That is all Azi is trying to say here and me for that matter. Yes this study showed the benefits of long term droughting, the study didn't attempt multiple shorter droughts. The study didn't suggest that there was a possibility that over a course of time, a plant that was droughted repeatedly over a series of x amount of weeks and not necessarily x amount of days in succession, that we would get any increased anything. It didn't note or look into if the plant during an earlier or shorter drought, takes 'mental notes' on what's going on.
We don't know because it wasn't studied, what exactly the trichome metamorphosis is and represents. Maybe it is something more than what we have discussed because, heck, we haven't discussed it.
Yes, if Caplan were to have said, I droughted some and not others, the droughted plants are better, I bet not many would listen. But some would.
Some would have tried a little of this and a little of that to see what else they could find out or notice.
I'm not a scientist. I'm not sitting here at Cornell in my lab chair, staring at my abstract notes and the molecular biologies of a trichome stalk.
No one is trying to suggest anything against Caplans original theory. What we are merely doing is trying to add some more thought to maybe some things that went overlooked.
Being the amazing morphological changes the plant goes through in a drought, as we have seen, all I am going to end this schpiel with is WHY DID NO ONE NOTICE THIS or at least comment on it? Surely this was enough of a 'wow, would you look at that' moment that someone would have turned their head and started asking some questions.
This isn't a small change. It isn't a well sometimes you see it and sometimes you don't change. It isn't a well I'm sure that's really nothing but an indicator light like a check engine light on your dashboard.
I just want to explore the trichome phenomenon more-when it starts and the actual reason why and how it relates to the increase in cannabinoid production. Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it is just a sign the drought is eliciting the response we want (as aforementioned).
Can anyone work with me here on the what if though. On all the what ifs.
I'm running the study as he wanted us to, when to start how to manage it and when to finish it.
I'm finding more than what I read and you all have read and I have questions that can't be answered by the basic science we know surrounding droughting that came from Caplan's study.
I think we need to branch out some more and be open to the idea that Caplan could have been wrong or maybe not wrong but didn't just have the full picture.
I could be reaching for the stars here and have no legs to stand on but I'm willing at least to say that I DON'T KNOW. I am capable of admitting MAYBE THERE IS SOMETHING WE ARE MISSING.
I am ready and able and willing to try out whatever ideas I can and to document everything that I can.
I hope that me wanting to find out the things Cap didn't see/overlooked doesn't make it seem like I am discrediting the work he did in the first place; Gathering information on how the GRN works and all of the fancy science verbiage and research on the timing of the drought and JA pathway cues that led him to his theory.
This theory is missing some parts though and like I said, we base a lot of this study off of the morphological changes in plants in response to environmental and abiotic stress. So if we are basing it off of the changes, why not focus on this huge change we see, in the trichomes. Why don't we shift focus to what role this exactly plays-whether or not it may merely be an indicator that the drought is working in the ways Caplan intended.
I've seen amazing changes in a plant over just 4 days so to tell me that I have to reach a certain amount of days in order for it to work doesn't make sense to me. Maybe to achieve the numbers Caplan did, maybe to push the envelope. Maybe to ensure it was enough time to talk to the JA pathways and say hey guys, we got a problem, amp it all up.
All I know is that 4 days of drought or 9 which we are on for Maestro, ALL HAVE ELICITED THE RESPONSE OF INCREASED TRICHOMES in my plants (and this isn't just me saying it-we have pics to prove) followed by the morphological changes we see in the TWINNING AND CORALING.
My next idea is to drought 2 plants for 2 different amounts of days. Maybe do a staggered drought on one and a regular Caplan drought on another. Then test with a kit again. And again on another set of 2. And test again. And again.
The only way to know for sure if a response has been initiated is to do it this way, then over time, we can compare trich shots at specific times throughout a drought and see if we can come up with any trending factors.
I'll bank money that indicas and sativas will be affected differently. I'll bank money that each medium type and size of pot/container will all play a role and each of those plants will be affected differently.
I'm looking for new things. I'm grateful for all of you who have helped manifest questions and thoughts and provided feedback with your own trials of droughting in ways not originally discussed in Cap's study.
@Hafta, how long did you drought and you saw an increase in THC with your test kit? I know it wasn't 11 days.
Back to the droughting girl that is left in my Big Bull. Took these last night so it was Day 8 but we are technically at Day 9. I'll be back with Day 9 Scope Trichome Shots tonight.
@Mars Hydro FC4800 @Prescription Blend @DYNOMYCO Raised....
DAY 8 DROUGHT
@CannaPot BIG BULL PHOTOPERIOD, "MAESTRO":
PLANT/LEAF and NON-SCOPED BUD SHOTS
She has 3/4 wilted leaves, the rest are still pretty turgid and some even praying.
She has some severe requests for Potash on a couple leaves. Her pot is absolutely dry as a bone.
Her leaf coloring is not half bad all things considered.
Her buds are sticky and covered in trichies. Her leaves are brittle.
Happy Droughting!
AutoNautPsychoFlower
Well-Known Member
Sooooooo much info in this one post alone!I need some time time to go through this and comment. Thank you for sharing Stone
I do not @Lockoutmonkey. I keep my grow tent clean and bug free. You can bet when I do grow outside though, I'll be washing.
I was also confused. Thought I was just getting old
Yes
It happens....
Thank you for the science @Maritimer @InTheShed.
I don't want to seem like we are avoiding Caplans theory. I don't want it to seem like we are losing sight of the main goal-because we most certainly are NOT.
This study is what I started this thread from.
The whole purpose of this thread has been to educate on the idea of yet another stress technique that based off of Caplan's study, proves to be extremely beneficial to our harvested smokes and in doing so, our overall health in general.
So here we are at a cross roads. The young kids want to try out all the new stuff and experiment with new ideas.
I don't want to seem harsh in saying this because I believe in the original study-or I wouldn't be here, obviously-however.....
There is so much more to learn and to explore! That is all Azi is trying to say here and me for that matter. Yes this study showed the benefits of long term droughting, the study didn't attempt multiple shorter droughts. The study didn't suggest that there was a possibility that over a course of time, a plant that was droughted repeatedly over a series of x amount of weeks and not necessarily x amount of days in succession, that we would get any increased anything. It didn't note or look into if the plant during an earlier or shorter drought, takes 'mental notes' on what's going on.
We don't know because it wasn't studied, what exactly the trichome metamorphosis is and represents. Maybe it is something more than what we have discussed because, heck, we haven't discussed it.
Yes, if Caplan were to have said, I droughted some and not others, the droughted plants are better, I bet not many would listen. But some would.
Some would have tried a little of this and a little of that to see what else they could find out or notice.
I'm not a scientist. I'm not sitting here at Cornell in my lab chair, staring at my abstract notes and the molecular biologies of a trichome stalk.
No one is trying to suggest anything against Caplans original theory. What we are merely doing is trying to add some more thought to maybe some things that went overlooked.
Being the amazing morphological changes the plant goes through in a drought, as we have seen, all I am going to end this schpiel with is WHY DID NO ONE NOTICE THIS or at least comment on it? Surely this was enough of a 'wow, would you look at that' moment that someone would have turned their head and started asking some questions.
This isn't a small change. It isn't a well sometimes you see it and sometimes you don't change. It isn't a well I'm sure that's really nothing but an indicator light like a check engine light on your dashboard.
I just want to explore the trichome phenomenon more-when it starts and the actual reason why and how it relates to the increase in cannabinoid production. Maybe it doesn't. Maybe it is just a sign the drought is eliciting the response we want (as aforementioned).
Can anyone work with me here on the what if though. On all the what ifs.
I'm running the study as he wanted us to, when to start how to manage it and when to finish it.
I'm finding more than what I read and you all have read and I have questions that can't be answered by the basic science we know surrounding droughting that came from Caplan's study.
I think we need to branch out some more and be open to the idea that Caplan could have been wrong or maybe not wrong but didn't just have the full picture.
I could be reaching for the stars here and have no legs to stand on but I'm willing at least to say that I DON'T KNOW. I am capable of admitting MAYBE THERE IS SOMETHING WE ARE MISSING.
I am ready and able and willing to try out whatever ideas I can and to document everything that I can.
I hope that me wanting to find out the things Cap didn't see/overlooked doesn't make it seem like I am discrediting the work he did in the first place; Gathering information on how the GRN works and all of the fancy science verbiage and research on the timing of the drought and JA pathway cues that led him to his theory.
This theory is missing some parts though and like I said, we base a lot of this study off of the morphological changes in plants in response to environmental and abiotic stress. So if we are basing it off of the changes, why not focus on this huge change we see, in the trichomes. Why don't we shift focus to what role this exactly plays-whether or not it may merely be an indicator that the drought is working in the ways Caplan intended.
I've seen amazing changes in a plant over just 4 days so to tell me that I have to reach a certain amount of days in order for it to work doesn't make sense to me. Maybe to achieve the numbers Caplan did, maybe to push the envelope. Maybe to ensure it was enough time to talk to the JA pathways and say hey guys, we got a problem, amp it all up.
All I know is that 4 days of drought or 9 which we are on for Maestro, ALL HAVE ELICITED THE RESPONSE OF INCREASED TRICHOMES in my plants (and this isn't just me saying it-we have pics to prove) followed by the morphological changes we see in the TWINNING AND CORALING.
My next idea is to drought 2 plants for 2 different amounts of days. Maybe do a staggered drought on one and a regular Caplan drought on another. Then test with a kit again. And again on another set of 2. And test again. And again.
The only way to know for sure if a response has been initiated is to do it this way, then over time, we can compare trich shots at specific times throughout a drought and see if we can come up with any trending factors.
I'll bank money that indicas and sativas will be affected differently. I'll bank money that each medium type and size of pot/container will all play a role and each of those plants will be affected differently.
I'm looking for new things. I'm grateful for all of you who have helped manifest questions and thoughts and provided feedback with your own trials of droughting in ways not originally discussed in Cap's study.
@Hafta, how long did you drought and you saw an increase in THC with your test kit? I know it wasn't 11 days.
Back to the droughting girl that is left in my Big Bull. Took these last night so it was Day 8 but we are technically at Day 9. I'll be back with Day 9 Scope Trichome Shots tonight.
@Mars Hydro FC4800 @Prescription Blend @DYNOMYCO Raised....
DAY 8 DROUGHT
@CannaPot BIG BULL PHOTOPERIOD, "MAESTRO":
PLANT/LEAF and NON-SCOPED BUD SHOTS
She has 3/4 wilted leaves, the rest are still pretty turgid and some even praying.
She has some severe requests for Potash on a couple leaves. Her pot is absolutely dry as a bone.
Her leaf coloring is not half bad all things considered.
Her buds are sticky and covered in trichies. Her leaves are brittle.
Happy Droughting!
Stunning.
- Thread starter
- #1,566
Sooooooo much info in this one post alone!
Stunning.
for your amazing support my friend. It doesn't go unnoticed 
- Thread starter
- #1,567
You know what's cool, we talk about this so much it gets out there. Helping with the SEO issues and labeling things is also doing its trick but we will get the word out there to all soon enough.
It's literally at the world's fingertips now because of all of you making this thread what it has become... 
It's literally at the world's fingertips now because of all of you making this thread what it has become...
I don't think Caplan was wrong because he had the control subjects and repeatability to confirm his results. There may be all sorts of combinations of ways to increase THC content of the flowers at harvest, but without a control group of clones, all is anecdote. Anecdote is fine as far as it goes (think darkness, screws, stem splitting, heavy metal music) but it is very far from what Caplan actually proved with his tests.
Two plants are two plants. They're genetically different and similar, but what they aren't are clones. Testing doesn't prove anything without a control group of genetically identical plants grown under the same conditions. Am I asking too much? Caplan produced science. We can do something similar and present facts to the growing community within the confines of our grows, but we can't do it with seed plants and it's not like clones are unachievable.
I won't be able to drought this current plant. I should have done it a week or so ago...she's in her final stages now, and will be chopped within the week.
The only other plant that id try it on, is in a DWC- and she's still got some ways to go- and isn't prime condition. She might have gotten mites. I gave her a safers soap spray (she's already started flowering).
Next summers grow will be much more organized, and will include droughts. This summer is just me trying to keep the stash stocked.
- Thread starter
- #1,570
Of course. I agree with all of the aforementioned Shed. My thought was since my current grows don't have a clone on the near horizon, I would like to explore the trichome phenomenon. Not to mention I am also just trying out as many different droughts to gather more of an understanding to things to look for.
LWA for example, in my opinion, should not be the only referencing indicator. I would like to explore that corner of the droughting room as well with hopes to be furthering the study in yet another way, focusing on other effects that were once undocumented.
This way im not just sitting here on my butt twiddling my thumbs. Just branching out past the information presented in the original study; like I mentioned earlier, I wanted this thread to be open to any ideas so that we could learn more about droughting together, exploring it with more than one eye.
it seems we have begun to do this already with so many questions and theories already beginning which is just amazingly peachy to see!
Hopefully this will help provide further insight into droughting in its entirety.
Again, I'm not trying to go against or not adhere to the requirements of Caplan's droughting method, I just want to take the opportunity to explore other areas that haven't been touched upon yet.
If you're asking too much than I'm asking way too much so I think we're good
You helping on the cloning front if you havr the ability to do so would be greatly appreciated.
Any further backing to Caps original study is another feather on the back for us Rex
I've said this before, but I think Caplan's study was good as far as it went. I doubt it was ever meant to be the definitive guide to this process, but rather a presentation on how he did it. But it was hardly exhaustive. Limited number of plants, reps, media, environment, etc.
Now, can we glean aspects that are aplicable to other experiments we might want to try? Sure, but I thought this thread was about exporling the draughting stress as a way to increase the power of our meds rather than trying to prove or disprove Caplan's results. He had them scientifically calculated and I believe what was presented.
I'm asking about the elongation and twisting as an extension of what he did, and don't in any way feel like I am dishonoring his work or challenging his conclusions or methods. And who knows why he chose LWA as his yardstick. Probably the most obvious and empirical measure, but that doesn't mean something else might work as well.
After all, the goal in the end is to try to increase cannabinoid levels by using, in our case, draught as a stressor. And in that process find a way for growers with an interest to achieve whatever results my be found. So, if we in the process of experimenting on our own find something that might be helpful to the end goal, then in my mind that just advances the art. And if there is a better gage of success that might be applicable across a broader mix of media, and environmental conditions, then we should expole it and try to support or debunk it through more at bats.
I guess I look at his study as a jumping off point and am intrigued enough to add it to my process, but I guess I also have an experimental streak in me and likes to explore the edges. I've learned a lot about growing by trying lots of things and then incorporating what worked.
If you feel uncormfortable straying from the process he expressed, we could always start another thread and keep this one more closely attuned to the original process.
Now, can we glean aspects that are aplicable to other experiments we might want to try? Sure, but I thought this thread was about exporling the draughting stress as a way to increase the power of our meds rather than trying to prove or disprove Caplan's results. He had them scientifically calculated and I believe what was presented.
I'm asking about the elongation and twisting as an extension of what he did, and don't in any way feel like I am dishonoring his work or challenging his conclusions or methods. And who knows why he chose LWA as his yardstick. Probably the most obvious and empirical measure, but that doesn't mean something else might work as well.
After all, the goal in the end is to try to increase cannabinoid levels by using, in our case, draught as a stressor. And in that process find a way for growers with an interest to achieve whatever results my be found. So, if we in the process of experimenting on our own find something that might be helpful to the end goal, then in my mind that just advances the art. And if there is a better gage of success that might be applicable across a broader mix of media, and environmental conditions, then we should expole it and try to support or debunk it through more at bats.
I guess I look at his study as a jumping off point and am intrigued enough to add it to my process, but I guess I also have an experimental streak in me and likes to explore the edges. I've learned a lot about growing by trying lots of things and then incorporating what worked.
If you feel uncormfortable straying from the process he expressed, we could always start another thread and keep this one more closely attuned to the original process.
I don't think anyone said anything about dishonoring Caplan's work, and the trichome elongation thing is an interesting phenomenon if it's related to droughting.
He used LWA because it was obvious and measurable. How do you measure trichome elongation and how do you know when they're long enough to stop droughting?
Who is the "you" in there?
I got the sense Krissi was wrestling with trying keep with the original version and exploring related ideas.
Oh gotcha! Thought in a moment of solipsism you might have been talking to me.
Wow, good one. Had to look that up.Oh gotcha! Thought in a moment of solipsism you might have been talking to me.
Naw, it's her thread and I don't want her to feel pushed in a direction she doesn't want to go. I still think the idea is worth pursuing (and she seems to agree) so I'm happy to discuss it somewhere else if that were preferable.
- Thread starter
- #1,576
All of this. Yes Yes Yes. Yes to all. Azi is in my head
Negative
Not sure. Who knows lol Maybe we can find out or at least find the correlation or reason for the coraling and twinning. Maybe some group of scientists will stumble across some trichome pics and wonder what the hell is going on and help us out back at home base. Hey.. it could happen.
Until then, I'm gonna start noting when it starts. If it starts at the top or the bottom, what day it accelerates, how many twins pop up from around an existing stalk, how long it takes, if the new twins come out already twisted, if they're more bulbous than pre existing stalks, etc etc.
Oh Shed, it's not all about you!
Nah, like you said, we have proven that theory a billion times over now.
Oh gotcha! Thought in a moment of solipsism you might have been talking to me.
Word of the Day! Solipsism: Thinking of ones self in a context that isn't intended for you. I should look up the actual definition but that's how I remembered the term from way back when
Naw I'm down to explore. I've said it a bunch of times. More than happy to and eager to do so, in fact-especially this trichome thing.
I was probably practicing some sort of solipsism myself, thinking everyone was getting mad at me for venturing off on another path.
I digress back to your initial post at the top-lets just keep digging and trying and seeing what we can come up with. I know with a team of such amazing and willing and capable growers, we will be able to document and congregate here and discuss a plethora of new findings as we come across them.
I enjoy the bouncing of thoughts, I dislike when it seems like we are at war with eachother. This is not a thread that focuses on right and wrong, rather what is and what can be.
Let's just keep doing what we are doing, pointing out the things we have been seeing and digging a little deeper into the unknown.
Sooooooo back to this drought. I called it at Day 9.5.
Not for reasons of wilt, although 2 small bottom leaves were pretty much there. I based it because of her dry leaves and buds like I did with Onyx, my @Weed Seeds Express Sirius Black squat Indica.
They just get crisp these squats. And when I mean crisp, you touch a leaf and they crinkle as if you stepped on a leaf outside on an early morning in late fall.
She got 1.5 gallons of water last night and another gallon this morning. She was bone dry.
Now that Im looking for trichome things, I noticed that her bottom of the plant trichies seem to take longer to coral.
I'm wondering if the maturity of the plant at the time of the drought plays a role in how much coraling/twinning we will see as the top buds are more developed than the bottom.
If we start to try staggered or earlier droughts, my 1st thought is to focus on the trichomes and to get some good shots of their morphological changes during this time.
I am going to go out on a limb and say if we did an earlier drought, we wouldn't see the effects on the trichomes the same way we would when done later in flower like we have seen on the girls we have done; I want to find out the exact why that is (or if I'm wrong about that all together) and what exactly the relation of the drought is to the transformation of the trichomes.
I'm sure this has something to do with Caplan's timing of the drought and the JA pathways ability to then communicate, increasing cannabinoid/resin production.
@Mars Hydro FC4800 @Prescription Blend @DYNOMYCO Raised....
DAY 9.5 DROUGHT
@CannaPot BIG BULL PHOTOPERIOD, "MAESTRO":
TRICHOMES
Be back in a jiffy with our: DAY 9.5
BIG BULL Plant/Leaf and Bud Shots
- Thread starter
- #1,577
@Mars Hydro FC4800 @Prescription Blend @DYNOMYCO Raised....
DAY 9.5 DROUGHT
@CannaPot BIG BULL PHOTOPERIOD, "MAESTRO":
PLANT/LEAF and NON-SCOPED BUD SHOTS
Happy Droughting!
DAY 9.5 DROUGHT
@CannaPot BIG BULL PHOTOPERIOD, "MAESTRO":
PLANT/LEAF and NON-SCOPED BUD SHOTS
Happy Droughting!
Nice buds@Mars Hydro FC4800 @Prescription Blend @DYNOMYCO Raised....
DAY 9.5 DROUGHT
@CannaPot BIG BULL PHOTOPERIOD, "MAESTRO":
PLANT/LEAF and NON-SCOPED BUD SHOTS
Happy Droughting!
- Thread starter
- #1,579
Amazebuds!
Similar threads
