Reduce harvest time 6/12 light cycle

[sMACkaddict]

here a copy of whats written on the page on this link:

hMPp://www.intelli-cycle.com/information.php

I know its from a company website, but I saw other people talking about it as well. I wonder how this would pertain to vegging because marijuana can grow with non stop light cycle.... so no dark period is necessary.

I have a grow that I am going to have to harvest early(no other option!) and I was looking into ways to speed flowering so I can harvest on time with as little effect to potency as possible... I wasn't expecting to find a solution but i came across this:

Growing with an 18 hour Day/Night Cycle

The Theory
The theory behind the 18 hour Day/Night cycle is that during a normal 24 hour light cycle plants will usually acheive high growth rates peaking at 100% capacity during the first 50 - 60% of the day. The growth rates will then diminish rapidly and the last 20 - 30% of the day acheives minimal growth. So by reducing the length of the day we are triggering an increased growth mode where the growth rates are at their peak for the majority of the day. This effectively achieves a very fast growth cycle with full yield potential.

NOTE: To achieve these incredible growth rates it is important to provide maximum light intensities and CO2 enriched conditions. The recommended lighting is 600W per square metre.

The Cycles
Vegetative Cycle - Lights ON 14 hours
Lights OFF 4 hours
Flowering Cycle - Lights ON 6 hours
Lights OFF 12 hours

The Benefits
The growth acheived during an 18 hour cycle can be the equivalent to that acheived during a 24 hour cycle. So by running 18 hour cycles the same growth and yield can be acheived in 75% of the time.

Reduced day lengths also mean reduced power consumption. Grow more and use less power. Who can argue with that?

For example, an average crop grown from seed using a 24 hour day/night cycle will have a 4 weeks grow cycle and an 8 weeks flower cycle. This equates to 28 days @ 18 hours a day and 56 days @ 12 hours a day = 1176 hours of light over 12 weeks.

An accellerated crop using an 18 hour day/night cycle will achieve the same yields using a 3 week grow cycle and a 6 week flower cycle. This equates to 21 days @ 14 hours a day and 42 days @ 6 hours a day = 546 hours of light over 9 weeks resulting in a 40% reduction in power consumption and a 25% reduction in crop time.

Anyone come across this before? Thoughts?

sMACk

 

[Hick]

sounds like someone trying to reinvent the wheel..IMO.. Are they trying to sell something related to such a regime? (EDIT..ahh digital timer )
first, mj plants have evolved on a 24 hour 'internal' clock for thousands of years. I'm thinking these erratic times is 'likely' to promote more hermies at least.
I'm also doubting the "equal growth" under only 14 hours of light. IME, dark periods during veg produce stretching, but NOT growth. e.g.. 2 clones from the same plant, grown in identical conditions, one given 24/0 the other 16/8, the 16/8 'will' be taller. But will have identical number of nodes. "I" don't consider that more growth, and can be counter productive under light.
Lastly, studies have shown (per Clarks MJ Botany... hXXp://www.weedfarmer.com/cannabis/botany_guide.php) that nearlly twice as much thc is produced under a 12 hour light than under 10 hours of light. In which case, Six hours certainly doesn't soubd beneficial..

 

[Locked]

Sounds like more hogwash....I will stick to 24-0 veg times and 12-12 flower thanks.

 

[sMACkaddict]

Yea i figured, I was reading about how MJ(marijuana) actually counts nights until its done flowering or something. So you can give it an 18 hour day and it is still getting 12 on 12 off its just, 6 on 12 off then 6 so the plant thinks its been 2 days instead of one and matures faster.

It sounds scientific and complicated enough to work but obviously too good to be true...

 

[Roddy]

Yeah, I agree with Hick and Hammy, but encourage experimentation....not because I think it'll show there is a difference, but to answer the question fully for yourself.

 

[The Hemp Goddess]

I think this has come up before....

Actually, I do not think it sounds scientific at all. People have been experimenting with light regimes for decades trying to figure out ways to shorten the flowering period. If this worked, I would be figuring that it would be taking the growing world by storm. I am sure someone somewhere would have documentation if this actually did work.

I do not believe that you can trick a plant into growing 2 days worth in a day and a half. While we can manipulate the light regime, we still stick with the 24 hour day that the plant has been growing with forever.

Clarke has shown (scientifically) that reduced light during flowering will substantially reduce yield. There is really no reason to believe that this would work or be beneficial at all. Until I actually see something scientific with controlled tests, I am putting this in the hogwash section of my brain.

 

[Lesso]

I have experimented with light schedules during veg and have found that plants vegged under 24/0 hour light periods show no significant growth increases/advantages to plants grown under 18/6 hour light periods. when grown under 14/6 hour light periods plants under performed, coming in an average of 2 nodes or about 4" smaller when compared to 24/0 and 18/6. I did not try any other schedules during flowering as I was not ready to deal with a tent full of hermies. these studues were conducted as such....18 clones cut from the same mother. the mother plant was a g13 labs cheese that i got for free from the attitude. After being cut the clones were placed under a six bulb t5 ho light for 24 hours until they were rooted and produced new growth....i then chose the best 15 clones and separated them into three groups of five. the first five were a control as they stayed under the 24hour light...the next five were separated and placed under the same intensity t5 light for a 18/6 light period...and the third group of five were placed under a 14/6 light period using the same type of t5 light. when compared through a 4 week vegging period the 24/0 and 18/6 were almost identical in height, with a very slight edge in height going to the control 18/6 group, however the 24/0 plants showed slightly more dense foliage. the third group under 14/6 were healthy but were not as dense or tall as the other two groups. all plants were given the same nutrient and feeding regiment and were grown in hempy buckets with 75% pearlite and 25% vermiculite. Gh 3part was the nutrients i used. no co2 was given however, as the op explains would be needed on this type of light schedule....however using co2 properly should boost growth and overall plant health under any light schedule given that temps and intensity were on par.

 

[Lesso]

it should be noted that the experiment was not entirely scientific in that i only used one strain with a relatively small sample group.

 

[The Hemp Goddess]

I have experimented with light schedules during veg and have found that plants vegged under 24/0 hour light periods show no significant growth increases/advantages to plants grown under 18/6 hour light periods. when grown under 14/6 hour light periods plants under performed, coming in an average of 2 nodes or about 4" smaller when compared to 24/0 and 18/6. I did not try any other schedules during flowering as I was not ready to deal with a tent full of hermies. these studues were conducted as such....18 clones cut from the same mother. the mother plant was a g13 labs cheese that i got for free from the attitude. After being cut the clones were placed under a six bulb t5 ho light for 24 hours until they were rooted and produced new growth....i then chose the best 15 clones and separated them into three groups of five. the first five were a control as they stayed under the 24hour light...the next five were separated and placed under the same intensity t5 light for a 18/6 light period...and the third group of five were placed under a 14/6 light period using the same type of t5 light. when compared through a 4 week vegging period the 24/0 and 18/6 were almost identical in height, with a very slight edge in height going to the control 18/6 group, however the 24/0 plants showed slightly more dense foliage. the third group under 14/6 were healthy but were not as dense or tall as the other two groups. all plants were given the same nutrient and feeding regiment and were grown in hempy buckets with 75% pearlite and 25% vermiculite. Gh 3part was the nutrients i used. no co2 was given however, as the op explains would be needed on this type of light schedule....however using co2 properly should boost growth and overall plant health under any light schedule given that temps and intensity were on par.

I personally have found a huge amount of difference between 24/7 and 18/6 vegging light. Occasionally in the summer, I will turn the light off for 6 hours a day to help everything keep cool enough. Although there is no real difference in the height of the plant, the plants vegged 24/7 has far closer internodal spacing, therefore more budding spots.

 

[Locked]

I personally have found a huge amount of difference between 24/7 and 18/6 vegging light. Occasionally in the summer, I will turn the light off for 6 hours a day to help everything keep cool enough. Although there is no real difference in the height of the plant, the plants vegged 24/7 has far closer internodal spacing, therefore more budding spots.

:yeahthat:

I hve done the same and noticed this as well....I don't grow in the summer anymore but I do fire up the veg tent mid summer to get ready for the fall grow and I run my lights 18-6.

 

[sMACkaddict]

Alright! Got more than I was asking for! Just thought it sounded interesting.

sMACk

 

[Lesso]

I personally have found a huge amount of difference between 24/7 and 18/6 vegging light. Occasionally in the summer, I will turn the light off for 6 hours a day to help everything keep cool enough. Although there is no real difference in the height of the plant, the plants vegged 24/7 has far closer internodal spacing, therefore more budding spots.

sounds like its worth it for you to go 24/0. Again I used only one strain and a small group at that...I will try this again on a few different strains when I'm done with my current experiment.....I'm growing side by side clones and comparing growth rate,node structure,bud growth, and ultimately yeild among groups of plants that are topped, fimmed, or defoliated against a control group that is allowed to grow naturally. I no longer accept the preconceived notions of growing as truths. Until I experience things for myself....I have found a lot of things that were stated as fact in books I have read about growing to be either false or greatly exaggerated. I will prob start a thread for anyone interested in experimentation to follow along or participate. I belive we should see for ourselves before just accepting what others tell us to be true. I applaud the op for bringing up this light regiment for discussion....lets keep thinking outside the box....I don't believe we have experienced everything this little plant has to show us yet, and when thinking we know all there is to know about her we miss out on all she has to offer.

 

[The Hemp Goddess]

There is nothing wrong with experimentation, but there is also no reason to try and reinvent the wheel. Clarke's studies have shown that flowering plants have a very reduced yield when the flowering lights are run even 10 hours a day rather than 12. There is really no reason at all to believe that 6 hours of light a day is going to produce what 12 hours of light a day does. Especially since it HAS been shown that less light during flowering results in less bud. We can manipulate things so far, but I do not believe that there is any way to cut the flowering time and get the same yield.

I personally do not find anything here that would make me want to experiment with this light cycle.

I, too, have found a lot of things in books that are not true or are greatly exaggerated. This is the reason that I am not much for books. We have many growers here with as much or more growing experience as people like Cervantes, Rosenthal, Green....these people just wrote books or make their voice more heard. It doesn't necessarily mean that they know more than others. This is one of the reasons that forums are great. You have a large body of experienced growers and differing opinions.

 

[Roddy]

:yeahthat: I've not read any books at all, just what's in here....

 

[Lesso]

There is nothing wrong with experimentation, but there is also no reason to try and reinvent the wheel. Clarke's studies have shown that flowering plants have a very reduced yield when the flowering lights are run even 10 hours a day rather than 12. There is really no reason at all to believe that 6 hours of light a day is going to produce what 12 hours of light a day does. Especially since it HAS been shown that less light during flowering results in less bud. We can manipulate things so far, but I do not believe that there is any way to cut the flowering time and get the same yield.

I personally do not find anything here that would make me want to experiment with this light cycle.

I, too, have found a lot of things in books that are not true or are greatly exaggerated. This is the reason that I am not much for books. We have many growers here with as much or more growing experience as people like Cervantes, Rosenthal, Green....these people just wrote books or make their voice more heard. It doesn't necessarily mean that they know more than others. This is one of the reasons that forums are great. You have a large body of experienced growers and differing opinions.

agree...I don't have any interest in trying this at this time. I'm a tinkerer. A hobbyist. I have no commercial plans or goals to meet. I have the time and space needed to try a lot of different things...I'm not saying its for everyone to experiment. There are those that just wish to grow...and following the advice of successful growers is an excellent way to get a superior product. But that doesn't satisfy my curiosity in the least. If someone tells me they had a 12 ounce yield from a 32x32 plant by defoliating it through its life cycle, then I have to see it before I either agree or disagree....even if it sounds contrary to every thing I have heard about what the leaf's role is for the plant.(i read this on another forum....Google cannabis defoliation for more info). If someone claims a 30 percent increase in yield by lst/topping/fimming/whatever...then I have to try it and judge for myself by the data I collect. That's all I'm saying. To challenge what we know as opposed to what is true examine this question...We plant a seed, we give it water and nutrients, it grows into a much larger plant and we harvest....where does the seed get the material to build a plant?...where does that material come from? It may surprise a lot of people to say that most of the plants mass is from the air....not the ground. You can argue it if you want but you would only prove the point I'm trying to make.

 

[7greeneyes]

:confused2: :bolt: :ccc:

 

[Locked]

 

[sMACkaddict]

edit magnets, how do they work?

 

[7greeneyes]

url: hMPp://www.howmagnetswork.com/

Introduction
A magnet is any object that has a magnetic field. It attracts ferrous objects like pieces of iron, steel, nickel and cobalt. In the early days, the Greeks observed that the naturally occurring 'lodestone' attracted iron pieces. From that day onwards began the journey into the discovery of magnets.

These days magnets are made artificially in various shapes and sizes depending on their use. One of the most common magnets - the bar magnet - is a long, rectangular bar of uniform cross-section that attracts pieces of ferrous objects. The magnetic compass needle is also commonly used. The compass needle is a tiny magnet which is free to move horizontally on a pivot. One end of the compass needle points in the North direction and the other end points in the South direction.

The end of a freely pivoted magnet will always point in the North-South direction.



The end that points in the North is called the North Pole of the magnet and the end that points South is called the South Pole of the magnet. It has been proven by experiments that like magnetic poles repel each other whereas unlike poles attract each other.

Magnetic Fields
What is a magnetic field? The space surrounding a magnet, in which magnetic force is exerted, is called a magnetic field. If a bar magnet is placed in such a field, it will experience magnetic forces. However, the field will continue to exist even if the magnet is removed. The direction of magnetic field at a point is the direction of the resultant force acting on a hypothetical North Pole placed at that point.

How is a magnetic field created?
When current flows in a wire, a magnetic field is created around the wire. From this it has been inferred that magnetic fields are produced by the motion of electrical charges. A magnetic field of a bar magnet thus results from the motion of negatively charged electrons in the magnet.

Magnetic Lines Of Force
Just as an electric field is described by drawing the electric lines of force, in the same way, a magnetic field is described by drawing the magnetic lines of force. When a small north magnetic pole is placed in the magnetic field created by a magnet, it will experience a force. And if the North Pole is free, it will move under the influence of magnetic field. The path traced by a North magnetic pole free to move under the influence of a magnetic field is called a magnetic line of force. In other words, the magnetic lines of force are the lines drawn in a magnetic field along which a north magnetic pole would move.

The direction of a magnetic line of force at any point gives the direction of the magnetic force on a north pole placed at that point. Since the direction of magnetic line of force is the direction of force on a North Pole, so the magnetic lines of force always begin on the N-pole of a magnet and end on the S-pole of the magnet. A small magnetic compass when moved along a line of force always sets itself along the line tangential to it. So, a line drawn from the South Pole of the compass to its North Pole indicates the direction of the magnetic field.

Properties of the magnetic lines of force
1.The magnetic lines of force originate from the North Pole of a magnet and end at its South Pole.
2.The magnetic lines of force come closer to one another near the poles of a magnet but they are widely separated at other places.
3.The magnetic lines of force do not intersect (or cross) one another.
4.When a magnetic compass is placed at different points on a magnetic line of force, it aligns itself along the tangent to the line of force at that point.
These are just some of the basic concepts of magnetism. One cannot possibly grasp the depth and appreciate the versatility of magnets without reading more about the uses of magnets, the Earth as a huge magnet and electromagnetism among other things.

 

[The Hemp Goddess]

f*ckin magnets, how do they work?

Why would you ever want to do that to a magnet?