PeeJay's Perpetual Organic Homebrewed Soil - Stealth Cabinet And Greenhouse Grow

... although maybe the runt should be called something more like Blunder ... ?

Or ... Lol ... Will. :cheesygrinsmiley:
 
... although maybe the runt should be called something more like Blunder ... ?

Or ... Lol ... Will. :cheesygrinsmiley:

That is just too good to pass up, Graytail. Blunder and Grace she/they are. :goof:
 
Have any of you ever seen this stupid cartoon called the BOONDOCKS? No you have to say it all together, it's one name; Like "A Pimp Named Slick Back" you know, like a plant named "Blunder & Grace" LOL!! You almost had to see that episode! :rofl:
 
The Jolly Green Giant and Little Green Sprout? That's a fine idea, too, Rain. I'd be reluctant to give them names that might lead to gender confusion though. Things are confused enough already! :rofl:
 
Conversation last night nudged me to revisit the topic of defoliation. It's something I formed an opinion about when I was reading everything I could find and getting ready to do my first grow. I went back into reading mode. I revisited Bassman's stuff. The best journal of his to read about defol in is this one found in the hydro forum: Increasing yield with defoliation indoors - What's it mean? How to do it?

He makes a good point early on. Often growers who have struggling plants defol. When the grow isn't all they wished it was they blame the defol. In fact their grow wasn't great before the defol and there are many reasons their yield was disappointing. If you have conditions dialed in and robust growth, the plants charge straight ahead after a heavy defol.

I went off site and read about crops that benefit from defoliation. Hops, which are related to cannabis, and cotton stand out. They benefit greatly.

I took a hard look at flower formation on Helen and Colette. Colette has a much more open structure and is putting on bud weight much faster than Helen. Helen is very robust, but her bud production down low just isn't like Colette's. Helen is at the right age - three weeks into flower. So Helen has gone from this:

big_hair.jpg


bighair2.jpg


To this:

bald1.jpg


bald2.jpg


I'm going to leave Colette alone. We'll see what happens!
 
Wow, what a change in style for Helen! I hope that it works out well for her!
I did some research this morning myself, but I'm going to stick with just defoliating the scrawny one that I have just to see if it helps those buds fill out more. Never know till ya try it.
I will continue to take the yellow stuff off below the scrog though.
Collette remains beautiful too!
I'm heading off to read the link you posted. Can never learn too much!:thumb:
 
I know the feeling.
 
Since stretch is over - they haven't done much growing up and the flowers have been picking up speed - and I did the major stripping on Helen today, I figured it would be good to look at how big the plants are.

The White Panther Dyarina broke ground on the 14th of September. I wasn't really sure of the date, but found some old notes I'd scrawled. It seems to jib with the date the first picture of her was taken. She went on a 12/12 schedule on October 3rd, 17 days later. She was showing strong pistils on October 13th so I'm calling that the first day of flower. Pretty short veg time.

dyscale.jpg


The three gallon pot is 9" high. Dy is right about 20 inches tall - 29" from the bottom of the pot.

The two Mama Mias broke ground on September 1st. Like Dyarina, they went on a 12 /12 schedule on October 3rd. The were doing 18/6 for 32 days. I'm calling the first day of flower October 13th - same as Dyarina.

colette_scale.jpg

helenscale.jpg


The pots are 12" tall, the screen is 6" above the soil. The tallest tops on both plants are around 26" from the bottom of the pot and 14" above the soil.

Here's a top down of Helen naked. The screen is 12" x 18". Helen is 18x24 inches across. Colette is close to that - maybe 17x22. Helen has 21 tops. There is a ring of five in the middle that are whimpy, but the rest are solid.
helentd.jpg


Here's pictures of a bunch of the non-whimpy ones. These are all different tops in the foreground by the stick.

tp1.jpg


tp2.jpg


tp3.jpg


tp5.jpg


tp6.jpg


tp7.jpg


tp8.jpg


tp9.jpg
 
Very interesting that Cotton and hops benefit greatly from a defol, this must mean outdoors right? Most people say that defol is not needed outdoors, but I am seeing some pretty pointless little buds down low on my denser plants. I remember watching a Jorge Cervantes video in which he was showing the inner growth on a massive outdoor bush, and he also said to defol the inner stuff to focus energy on outer main buds. The plants do a natural defol, but it is sort of 'too late' by that point. I would think energy would have already been wasted. I think I mentioned it before, but Scarfinger69 showed anecdotally that the deflol resulted in denser buds, but similar overall weight.
Flowers are looking great so far, I am looking forward to seeing how they progres!
:circle-of-love:
 
Reading technical hop and cotton yield research was interesting. Land grant universities with quality ag schools do heaps of carefully controlled studies aimed at helping farmers maximize production. Scads of money are thrown around. Hops are all about resin and terpene production as well as yield. Cotton is all about getting big puffy dense flowers.

Wading through that research changed my way of thinking about defoliation of cannabis. Sadly, cannabis does not get the same research attention as other more legal cash crops do. We must wade through heaps of anecdotal and observational input. Often that information is biased by dick-swinging bravado as opposed to hard data.
 
Very interesting that Cotton and hops benefit greatly from a defol, this must mean outdoors right? Most people say that defol is not needed outdoors, but I am seeing some pretty pointless little buds down low on my denser plants. I remember watching a Jorge Cervantes video in which he was showing the inner growth on a massive outdoor bush, and he also said to defol the inner stuff to focus energy on outer main buds. The plants do a natural defol, but it is sort of 'too late' by that point. I would think energy would have already been wasted. I think I mentioned it before, but Scarfinger69 showed anecdotally that the deflol resulted in denser buds, but similar overall weight.
Flowers are looking great so far, I am looking forward to seeing how they progres!
:circle-of-love:

The sun doesn't have problems w/penetrating light so for "lumens" within the canopy defol shouldn't matter per se; dead, dying or unhealthy growth attracts all kinds of undesireable things whether indoors or out and air circulation/ambient heat and humidity still matters also...corn industrially grown is grown a certain way (ie, footprint as an example) for certain reasons as I'm sure most things are...just some insight and an ignorant opinion here so take it for what its worth, lol.
 
Reading technical hop and cotton yield research was interesting. Land grant universities with quality ag schools do heaps of carefully controlled studies aimed at helping farmers maximize production. Scads of money are thrown around. Hops are all about resin and terpene production as well as yield. Cotton is all about getting big puffy dense flowers.

Wading through that research changed my way of thinking about defoliation of cannabis. Sadly, cannabis does not get the same research attention as other more legal cash crops do. We must wade through heaps of anecdotal and observational input. Often that information is biased by dick-swinging bravado as opposed to hard data.

Bear in mind that most small to medium commercial growers of cotton make more money from subsidies in plowing the crop under as opposed to actually harvesting for most (if not all) years for the last few decades and I doubt seriously that Anheiser Bush gives a real squat about hops' terpenes although I'd also bet a good chunk of small micro-breweries and the more upscale brands in the store almost for sure do.
 
Back
Top Bottom