which 14/10 or 12/12 works best for yall?

[massproducer]

I think the bolded line lends some of the most information... IME, this is more of a senerio then a rule... I would agree that the more intense the light source the higher the requirements are for water, nutrients and CO2, this could potentially lead to a depletion of all available CO2, water or nutrients in an uncontrolled or unfavorable environment, but an indoor grow room is far from an uncontrolled environment, it is the exact opposite, it is a highly controlled environment.

In a controlled environment understanding all of the variables, one can easily take advantage of these very same principles. By simply exchanging the air within the growroom with air from outside, and using oscillating fans to circulate this air among the plants you can prevent CO2 levels from ever coming close to becoming depleted around the plants. Watering and the plants access to water, as we all know, is very easy to control and is one of the first things that any new grower will master, along with when and how much nutrients to feed. These basic things will keep your plants growing as long as you provide light. The more light you give, the faster the plants will grow, but the higher the requirements for water, nutrients and CO2. Temperature also plays a major role in the growth rate as it increases the growth rate but also increases the requirements for light, water, nutrients and CO2

Also once a grower understands and masters the basics, then they are able to move on to things like supplementing CO2, which again increase the growth rate but also increase the requirements for everything else.

The point in all of this being, that it has nothing to do with the amount of time a light is on, or going past 18 hours of light, it has to do with all of the other requirements being met in harmony. In fact your CO2 levels can be depleted 10 minutes after turning you lights on if you do not have an adequate supply of CO2 in the form of either fresh air or CO2 supplication, and if you don't give your plants water then they obviously wont have access for long, but if they do have an adequate supply of both then there is not any mysterious force that stops light from being efficient after 18 continous hours, or anything like that... my plants that are on 24/0 grow the exact same at 12 am as the do at 12 pm

Everything credible sounding, that I have read, leads me to believe that the max light hours are tied with intensity..
Not that photons won't be absorbed after that many hours, but that photon absorbtion beyond the red-line can be destructive to the chloroplasts..
See photosynthesis doesn't just turn on like a light, it builds up like a fire.. Throughout the day, more and more electrons get bumped up, and stuck in triplet state waiting for water/CO2 to process.. In intense light, there comes a point during the day where there are more excited electrons than there is water/CO2.. When this happens, those electrons end up participating in undesrible reactions.. Doing things like using O2 to create superoxides, and other toxic crap that destroy chlorophyls/chloroplasts..
This has nothing to do with hormone balance, its more analogous to running an engine too hard for too long.. Where this red-line sits depends on the plant, temperature, humidity and CO2 levels.. I have a pretty hardcore indepth biochem pdf file outlining PS1, PS2, and the Calvin Benson Cycle.. If anybody is interested, let me know how to send it, its ~1.2MB (30pgs)..

 

[born2killspam]

I agree with all of that, but apparently there is a red-line where favorable conditions just can't compete with the number of excited electrons.. As though the plant itself ends up as the weakest link.. It will continue to absorb photons, but it can't metabolize enough CO2 etc to keep up even if concentrations are ideal..

 

[massproducer]

that is the part that I have never heard and as such can not say that i agree with

 

[born2killspam]

pm me an email address and I'll send the document that explains the concept best..

 

[DomsChron]

Thanks for clearing this up, massproducer. I was under that impression because when I was introdused to this "theory" I was told it as fact.

Born2 kill, I think what he means is everything you are saying is true, but it dosen't have to do with the subject me and mass were talking about. We were talking about the max usage of light per day in a cannabis plant.

The only way to tell is to set up two exact environments, and do everything EXACTLY the same. One would run 18/6 and the other would stay on 24/0. The only way we would prove this is to grow about 20 plants in each room. One would have to show CONCLUSIVE evidence that either the 18/6 vegged plants were growing slower, or the 24/0 ones were growing faster. However you might also find out visa versa, that 18/6 grew a little better.

The only other result would be that they didn't change. And if I hadn't seen a change by the end of the experiment, then I would choose 18/6. Only reason being because there is proven studies to show a dark period is beneficial. Not at all necessary, just a little beneficial.

 

[born2killspam]

Yea, admittedly what I'm refering to isn't hormone oriented, and doesn't really cue the plant to do anything..