The apparent age of clones

[leafminer]

One thing I don't like about clones.
The 'apparent' age seems to be the age of the parent plant. It's not like starting out with a new seed.
My first batch of clones have been getting 16 hours light minimum, usually more, but even so they have gone into alternate branching and are showing early flowering signs.
Seems to me that the clone still believes it is part of its mom and showing what it would show at that number of days, irrespective of the lighting conditions.

 

[2Dog]

lol thats what I love about clones...hehe

cept when the mom was almost done flowering and I had to reveg her for 3 months...fun times.

 

[The Hemp Goddess]

One thing I don't like about clones.
The 'apparent' age seems to be the age of the parent plant. It's not like starting out with a new seed.
My first batch of clones have been getting 16 hours light minimum, usually more, but even so they have gone into alternate branching and are showing early flowering signs.
Seems to me that the clone still believes it is part of its mom and showing what it would show at that number of days, irrespective of the lighting conditions.

Well, yes, the clone is biologically as old as the mother you took it from, but I don't understand the problem. Even though you have alternating nodes and preflowers, you can still veg for as long as you want and let it get as large as you want. If you bump the lights up to 18/6 or 24/7, you will most likely see more vegetative growth.

 

[4u2sm0ke]

Agreed^^^^^^



:48:

 

[Droopy Dog]

LeafMiner

Are you old enough to remember the SSSC? Super Sativa Seed Club

DD