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!
