UVb an experiment

[Dutch Pimp]

I am weaning myself from HPS. My last grow was 90% CMH lighting; and surprised me at the results.....:thumbsup:

My current grow is half CMH and half HPS. Very disappointing...so far..(6 weeks flowering, with exactly the same criterial)

The plants are rotated...so everybody gets an equal share. This is the last time I do that experiment...:wtf:

[clongo]

First off.. I love the BLUE light discussion folks..

All MJ strains react differently to blue light.. It's all about the strains BLUE light sensitivity... What I mean by this is, Some MJ strains when FLOWERED with too much BLUE light will have a higher leaf to calyx ratio then when being FLOWERED under a much more red spectrum.. ie. a 2K HPS bulb.. I have a Blueberry strain and it's very BLUE light sensitive.. Go figure...lol

If your into studding the effect of blue light and you favorite MJ girls.... Might I suggest growing a single plant under 24hrs of BLUE LED light only.. Use any blue led's you would like 420nm,440nm,450nm,460nm,480nm (you get the point)..... OK, I was just joking.... You already no what 24hrs of blue light only dose.... It just keeps your girls vegging... I no what your thinking (no sh*t holmes) tell us something we don't know.

OK THEN...

Now take RED only 630nm OR 660nm led's... Ether one works for this experiment and run a single MJ girl under 24hrs of RED led lighting only (no blue light contamination at all)... Run this for aprox 4 months and come post you results here... I think you will be surprised with the results..

Kanna... This should be right up your alley...

lol thanks dogz I was going to start arguing, but I think your approach is right, let them try it out themselves.

btw, thanks for the info, i used the 6 hours incandescent and 6 hours cfl on a bf red dragon and I was high for about 4 hours like ive never been. No pictures though, because it didnt really happen?:wtf:

[clongo]

Hey kanna,

Glad to see you, and still following the various lighting threads here. Your input is always intelligent and insightfull.

Hello clongo,

I appreciate your input, but I don't think that blue light explains the difference's here. BTW, you are not the first to mention the blue light effect.

As knna pointed out, the reason I used regular 23w CFLs at the start in 2 chambers was to off set the fact that the UVb bulb used was a CFL of 20w and would put out blue. I was also trying to keep the amount of total light energy the plants recieved equal. But during veg, the one chamber with UVb the bulb was bare, while the other chambers had the CFLs inside the boroscilicate glass tubes to insure no UVb, but they would see the blue. And again when the one chamber used for UVb flowering, that UVb bulb was bare what this means to me is that the spectrum all the way down from UV was available to phytochromes and cryptochromes while also increasing the plants metabolic rate with higher energy photons which accelerate the perceived daytime and circadian rhythm which are blue light responses while the control chamber had it's CFL still in the glass The glass worries me for the same reason the bare UV worried me, I'm sure it filtered more energetic violetblue or even UVC light. All three chambers saw about equal levels of blue light. My only conclusion was the effect's seen were due to UVb and not blue.

While on the subject of blue light, you mentioned it's time factor. Could you explain what time factor is about or steer me to some source dealing in various light wavelenghts and thier time factors? Pad manual itself or Dogznova could explain it all much better than me. if you havent seen it and want to, youll have to make a myspace and befriend temporal photonics It could maybe help me to better understand the PAD Manual and the Rauber theory.

BTW as to amber trichomes, I agree that some people don't like the couch lock effect but in alot of cases with providing medicine to sick/dying people it helps with thier sleep. It's also why I have been growing the heck out of a plant I call "apricot" I used in this experiment; this plant will just not produce many trichomes let alone amber ones. It will stimulate appetite, ease pain and help with nausea but no matter how much is vaped/smoked it is a very mild high. Seems to work great for patients who are undergoing cancer treatments but are not looking to get high.

Respect, I personally use it because I got hit by a car and I find sativas are actually better pain relievers, but it left me with spasticity and I leave buds unchopped longer for that and sleeping.

OM

jah bless

longo

[oldmac]

Been away awhile from the old UVb thread.

I have a scientific white paper "Possible role of Ultrasviolet Radiation in Evolution of Cannabis Chemotypes" by William W. Pate from '81. I have tried to post it here but is 10 pages of pdf and to large to upload. Previously I had been able to brake these things into 2 parts, but I have had no success. (I don't seem to have word on this newer computer and the clipboard has been non co-operative.) If I ever figue it out I will post it.

@ clongo, one of the reasons we used pyrex (cornning product) bake arounds was that pyrex is boroscilicate glass. From everything I've read about it, it does not filter visiible light only UV...and that includes most of the UVa and all UVb and UVc. That plus the first experiment (at beginning of thread) was a back to back experiment. The lights in that test were in a boroscilicate cool tube, and the UVb were separate lights. Used them in one flowering run and did not use in another. My conclusions are that blue light was present in both and differences were directly attributable to UVb exposure.

BTW I have had a copy of the PAD manual since 12/09, while it lists the time factor for various light, I am still trying to find the scientific basis behind it.
Attachment 273594Attachment 273595

OM