Also, does it respond more positively to sudden or gradual change in light?How long does it take an indoor plant to 'recognize' that the light schedule has been changed to 12 hours on and 12 hours off? Is it instantaneous or does the plant kinda gradually respond? Just curious.
Thought about that too, if I go suddenly to 12/12, am I 'shocking' the plant?Also, does it respond more positively to sudden or gradual change in light?
My kinda guy. Good point! My plants love hps!the plants realize the lights have been changed when the pistils emerge, usually within a few days...that's when many "***" their plants...I always hammer my girls, no mercy for them as I toss them into 12/12 when I see they are ready...
I think dogster is on the money, but my experience tells me that each cultivar responds differently to those hormones. After setting 12/12 lighting I've seen pistils begin to emerge in 3 to 8 days on average.They recognize the change in light as soon as it happens.
That triggers a hormonal response that initiates the flowering cycle which takes a few days to physically express.
So basically, the pro-level growers like in here are forcing a 'weed' to produce beyond what it normally would be producing, by exposing it to extreme conditions that it wouldn't see growing in the wild, is that correct?I think dogster is on the money, but my experience tells me that each cultivar responds differently to those hormones. After setting 12/12 lighting I've seen pistils begin to emerge in 3 to 8 days on average.
No. There is no difference to the plant. They respond within a few days. The tops all turn a lighter green than the rest of the plant, then start stretching. Bruce bugby studied the gradual light change and found no effect. Same for the day to night change. No need to simulate sunrise or sunset.Thought about that too, if I go suddenly to 12/12, am I 'shocking' the plant?
So my opinion is that we aren't looking to replicate natural conditions. We are looking for optimal conditions.So basically, the pro-level growers like in here are forcing a 'weed' to produce beyond what it normally would be producing, by exposing it to extreme conditions that it wouldn't see growing in the wild, is that correct?
Plants are classified as autotrophs - they feed themselves, and yet I find that most growers fall into one of two types: 1) control freaks or 2) lazy *******s.So my opinion is that we aren't looking to replicate natural conditions. We are looking for optimal conditions.
I'm definitely on the lazier side of that. I tend to follow the KISS theory in life, and growing will be no different, I don't think. I'm a cherry-boy at it, and I just need to find that sweet spot between personal effort and yield/potency to suit my minimal needs. An 1/8th oz of weed lasts me literally months, so I don't need 1 ounce buds - but I like sticky, skunky smoke and a good head buzz when I do smoke.Plants are classified as autotrophs - they feed themselves, and yet I find that most growers fall into one of two types: 1) control freaks or 2) lazy *******s.
Control freaks follow a complex process of feeding, measuring, metering and logging. They use non traditional growing "mediums" like Coir, peat, rockwool or just water. Lazy *******s like me, just like watering the soil, so we use organics and living soil to make sure our autotroph has everything it needs.
Which category of grower do you fit into?
That’s me. Can’t control things outside so muchControl freak inside, lazy ******* outside.
Enter your email address to join: