How to Use UV And IR For Growing Indoor Plants

Peat Phreak said:
Unless you desperately want it to.
Click to expand...

I don't desperately want it to, why do you think that?

I grow mostly outdoors anyway, once my seedlings are strong enough, out they go; plenty of UV outside.

... but you seem to be desperately not want it to, for whatever reason. I just can't figure it out. I have no problem if people want to experiment and discover new things. Just because some experiments say one thing, that's not an excuse to give up research and discovery.
Why do you want science to be stagnant; to have a last say so you can win arguments, all the while ignoring those doing research and getting results that contradict what you last read?

Seriously, give it a rest, you have some sort of superiority complex going and always have to have the last word, seek help.

j
 
Jaz said:
I don't desperately want it to, why do you think that?
Click to expand...

Because I've refuted everything that you have said with actual science to support it. You ignored all of that and still keep banging your head up against a wall here with trivial points that don't matter.
 
Peat Phreak said:
Because I've refuted everything that you have said with actual science to support it. You ignored all of that and still keep banging your head up against a wall here with trivial points that don't matter.
Click to expand...
Brothers n Sisters please can we say Peace on Earth and Goodwill to Men, cmon it’s the holidays let’s just live n let live. CL🍀
 
And when they do.... We will reevaluate.
 
I recall @Emilya Green is doing experiments with deep red (edited) and the results are going against what the current science is saying. The caveat being the scientific experiments were done with the light constant for 24 hours, whereas she is pulsing the it at dawn and dusk - something 'actual scientists' have not gotten around to testing I guess.

I have great respect for those taking the initiative to research and discover.

j
 
Jaz said:
I recall @Emilya Green is doing experiments with IR and the results are going against what the science is saying, however, so far the experiments have been done with IR constant for 24 hours, whereas she is pulsing the IR at dawn and dusk.

j
Click to expand...
I just want to clarify the experiment I have been running for the past 2 years. My trigger lights, used at dawn and dusk, barely fit into the definition of IR. Half of my special lights are at 660nm (deep red), clearly just below the IR range that starts around 700nm. Technically, IR is not visible to the human eye, so even my far red lights running at 720nm, which can be seen by our eyes (barely) and is barely within the IR range which produces by definition, heat instead of light.

My work being clarified, I absolutely do not advocate using deep and far red lights full time during the grow, nor do I believe that the data available to us today shows UV or actual IR to be beneficial when run full time. Experiments have shown that far red (720nm) run full time produces large leafed stretchy plants, pretty much the opposite as what we would like to have happen in our cannabis gardens. IR simply burns and dries out the leaves, and UV run around the noon hour increases trichomes and run full time, degrades the trichomes quickly.

As far as the published science goes, the light manufacturers doing most of these light experiments have never published experiments based on only running these specific light spectrums during short specific times during the day. All of the published experiments that I have seen have all based their conclusions based on running these spectrums full time. Proclamations such as those out of Apogee employee Bruce Bugbee describing the Emmerson Effect are based on those full time experiments and have nothing in common with the more specialized experiments that I have been doing.
 
I love all the testing. It's great. I love trying new things. Replicating them is another. That's where science comes in. I was a prototype engineer for several years for a start up company that crashed as COVID hit. It's easy to make things happen. Replicating, or repeating is everything, that's where the money is at.
 
OGpapa said:
I love all the testing. It's great. I love trying new things. Replicating them is another. That's where science comes in. I was a prototype engineer for several years for a start up company that crashed as COVID hit. It's easy to make things happen. Replicating, or repeating is everything, that's where the money is at.
Click to expand...
I have exactly replicated my far red trigger light experiment on every grow for the last 2 years. This effort, despite lacking the degrees and lab coats, is science. You are exactly correct, in that being able to replicate and follow the scientific method is the key to learning something new. Even not being a recognized scientist, my documented experiments have proved a couple of things, at least to me and some of my smartest readers... I can restrict stretch by using a far red trigger light in the morning and I can produce better buds by putting my plants into night mode an hour or two earlier each night with the evening trigger light. Have we seen any of the "real" scientists doing similar work? Nope... they have no financial incentive to develop such a complicated and expensive light, so the backyard/attic/basement growers presently lead in the research going on today regarding these spectrums.

The sad thing is that without the scientific community and the light manufacturers communities doing similar specific timeslot experiments with UV and Far Red, it is on us hobby growers to lead the way. To wit, I plan on installing a special UV module sometime in this coming year, so that I can experiment with running UV for just 2 hours a day, centering on virtual noon time. This will follow up on early experiments done with reptile lights 20 years ago by fellow growers like you and me.
 
Keffka said:
“Therefore, modern cannabis genotypes may function nearer to cannabis’ maximum capacity for producing Δ9-THC; which could impede their ability to further increase Δ9-THC production under an abiotic stress such as UV exposure, relative to older genotypes.”

This was an interesting bit in that article.. I’m still unsure on UV but IR has intrigued me ever since I saw this image
83FCAE95-BFFD-4A4E-84CC-62A8AA203D6C.jpeg
Click to expand...

I posted this image earlier in the thread but feel it’s worth reposting with these recent remarks. With the depths that far red can penetrate into the leaf it’d be quite wise to limit its exposure. I can definitely see how it would be beneficial used in “blasts”.
 
Jaz said:
I recall @Emilya Green is doing experiments with deep red (edited) and the results are going against what the current science is saying. The caveat being the scientific experiments were done with the light constant for 24 hours, whereas she is pulsing the it at dawn and dusk - something 'actual scientists' have not gotten around to testing I guess.
Click to expand...

The current science says far-red can be beneficial if the far-red fraction is 30% or less of the total light output. That's with running the red lights full time. It turns out, actual scientists are doing a lot of things that you aren't aware of. And when they get around to testing pulsed IR, I anticipate a similar benefit that is less than continuous IR.

Frontiers | Why Far-Red Photons Should Be Included in the Definition of Photosynthetic Photons and the Measurement of Horticultural Fixture Efficacy

Historical background. Photosynthesis has long been known to be wavelength-dependent (Hoover, 1937;Emerson and Lewis, 1943). At low photon flux densities, Mc...
www.frontiersin.org
 
I am very glad that Thomas Edison did not wait for the actual scientists to solve his problem. Same goes for the Wright Brothers. Scientists are highly over rated when it comes to mankind's advancements, especially those who are funded and directed by industry.
 
Emilya Green said:
I am very glad that Thomas Edison did not wait for the actual scientists to solve his problem. Same goes for the Wright Brothers. Scientists are highly over rated when it comes to mankind's advancements, especially those who are funded and directed by industry.
Click to expand...

Science and scientists also very often have extreme biases.. One look at AI and Facial recognition software verifies that. In a field dominated by white men that very often come from privileged backgrounds it’s no surprise that science quite often has horrific biases that very much hurt other humans. The Nazis had scientists, as matter of fact, we gave their best scientists a pass for all of the disgusting inhumane things they did because they knew how to launch rockets.

Leaning on scientists and their work only can quite often lead us down a path of immoral, inhuman behavior, which is why it is so critical that we temper our beliefs in what they have to say. The path to hell is paved with good intentions.

Now, that’s not to say I don’t believe in science or scientists, I just think we need to be as skeptical of them as we are of the backyard experimenters.
 
Emilya Green said:
I have exactly replicated my far red trigger light experiment on every grow for the last 2 years. This effort, despite lacking the degrees and lab coats, is science. You are exactly correct, in that being able to replicate and follow the scientific method is the key to learning something new. Even not being a recognized scientist, my documented experiments have proved a couple of things, at least to me and some of my smartest readers... I can restrict stretch by using a far red trigger light in the morning and I can produce better buds by putting my plants into night mode an hour or two earlier each night with the evening trigger light. Have we seen any of the "real" scientists doing similar work? Nope... they have no financial incentive to develop such a complicated and expensive light, so the backyard/attic/basement growers presently lead in the research going on today regarding these spectrums.

The sad thing is that without the scientific community and the light manufacturers communities doing similar specific timeslot experiments with UV and Far Red, it is on us hobby growers to lead the way. To wit, I plan on installing a special UV module sometime in this coming year, so that I can experiment with running UV for just 2 hours a day, centering on virtual noon time. This will follow up on early experiments done with reptile lights 20 years ago by fellow growers like you and me.
Click to expand...
Hi , just a poor DIY 52yo Aussie that's trying UVA/B, IR + 600W LEDs & RDWC for the first time and now finally found somebody with knowledge through experimentation over 20 years, the kind of stuff that can't be read or youtube into the brain and in todays world knowledge doesn't mean too much to me without the experience to back it up, basically I really dig what you're doing and sharing.
That aside, I just brought a 24W 14% uvb arcadia reptile fluro and was wondering if you could tell me the correct timing and height from canopy & I also have 60W UVAs that need placing/timing as well so can you help me? Here's some info to consider and has my bird flown the coup with my reflective passion for brightness?
The appropriately named STUDIO 54 is my 5x5x9 room and I'm trying (on top of silver insulation} mirrors and plenty of them, like offset spinning spheres ,spinning hexagonal towers and res covers all made from old unused 80s disco bathroom tiles and a few old mirrors I had strategically placed under and around the base of the res and a several computer fans for air circulation . I've already addended to your suggested timing with the IR.
So what do ya reckon? Your opinion would be greatly appreciated
 
The Butcherbird said:
Hi , just a poor DIY 52yo Aussie that's trying UVA/B, IR + 600W LEDs & RDWC for the first time and now finally found somebody with knowledge through experimentation over 20 years, the kind of stuff that can't be read or youtube into the brain and in todays world knowledge doesn't mean too much to me without the experience to back it up, basically I really dig what you're doing and sharing.
That aside, I just brought a 24W 14% uvb arcadia reptile fluro and was wondering if you could tell me the correct timing and height from canopy & I also have 60W UVAs that need placing/timing as well so can you help me? Here's some info to consider and has my bird flown the coup with my reflective passion for brightness?
The appropriately named STUDIO 54 is my 5x5x9 room and I'm trying (on top of silver insulation} mirrors and plenty of them, like offset spinning spheres ,spinning hexagonal towers and res covers all made from old unused 80s disco bathroom tiles and a few old mirrors I had strategically placed under and around the base of the res and a several computer fans for air circulation . I've already addended to your suggested timing with the IR.
So what do ya reckon? Your opinion would be greatly appreciated
Click to expand...
First, I have to say that I have no personal experience (yet) regarding the UV. I closely followed experiments that were happening 15 years ago though, and have gained some initial insights because of those early experiments using lights much like what you have there, reptile lights. I can't help you with placement, height or the correct brightness... its all just using common sense at this point, just to see if there indeed is an effect. I don't think that it takes all that much intensity in either the UV or the far red because these spectrums do some new things to the plants even at a low intensity, things that we are just now learning about. I am only running 30w of deep and far red, yet I am seeing huge effects from these lights in my grows. Using that reptile light, I remember my friends also seeing dramatic effects from the UV. I would start you where they finally ended up, where they realized that UV was very powerful and if presented for a couple of hours centering around noon time, the plants protected themselves by dramatically growing new and bigger trichomes. It was also seen that if run full time, this UV light baked those trichomes, and they quickly went amber and then black. It didn't take long to figure out that too much UV was bad.
 
I also don't have any additional insight regarding UVA lights or how to properly use or place them. Document what you do with them and carefully note how they affect the plants... and we will all learn from you!
 
The Butcherbird said:
Hi , just a poor DIY 52yo Aussie that's trying UVA/B, IR + 600W LEDs & RDWC for the first time and now finally found somebody with knowledge through experimentation over 20 years, the kind of stuff that can't be read or youtube into the brain and in todays world knowledge doesn't mean too much to me without the experience to back it up, basically I really dig what you're doing and sharing.
That aside, I just brought a 24W 14% uvb arcadia reptile fluro and was wondering if you could tell me the correct timing and height from canopy & I also have 60W UVAs that need placing/timing as well so can you help me? Here's some info to consider and has my bird flown the coup with my reflective passion for brightness?
The appropriately named STUDIO 54 is my 5x5x9 room and I'm trying (on top of silver insulation} mirrors and plenty of them, like offset spinning spheres ,spinning hexagonal towers and res covers all made from old unused 80s disco bathroom tiles and a few old mirrors I had strategically placed under and around the base of the res and a several computer fans for air circulation . I've already addended to your suggested timing with the IR.
So what do ya reckon? Your opinion would be greatly appreciated
Click to expand...

Please do this if you can:
Emilya Green said:
I also don't have any additional insight regarding UVA lights or how to properly use or place them. Document what you do with them and carefully note how they affect the plants... and we will all learn from you!
Click to expand...

Even if you’re not able to pull inferences and conclusions from your data there is a vast array of minds here that see things in all different ways. I can’t tell you how many times Ive thought one way only to have another way I didn’t even consider, be far more accurate.
 
i wish i was adept at uncovering all the related studies. i have a tendency to remember the relevant stuff but not the sources. most of what i know about was back when they lumped uv in to one category and didn't even know to differentiate between uva and uvb.
 
Back
Top Bottom