Do lower leaves in a scrog grow really take nutrients away from the re

[Naycha]

My uni only has access to The Journal of Experimental Botany from 1996 onwards. Dunno about others.

 

Naycha

[ConvexConepiece]

I think that the info from these botany books should be put into context.

 

This info would mainly pertain to plants growing out in the wild correct?

 

What about in hydroponics where nutrients aren't valuable as they are always readily available and of precise ratios? Is this info as quoted above relevant to us?

[forgetiwashere]

I think that the info from these botany books should be put into context.

 

This info would mainly pertain to plants growing out in the wild correct?

 

What about in hydroponics where nutrients aren't valuable as they are always readily available and of precise ratios? Is this info as quoted above relevant to us?

 

no this is actually more important to the indoor grower. this isnt so much about nutrients as it is light.

 

Nutrients dont have as large an effect on yield as the Nutrient companies would have us imagine, with the exception of PGR's etc of course.

when increasing doses of nutrients your yields dont really increase the more nutrients you add, once your plant is at full health you can keep adding more nutrients if you like but it wont increase yields, it plateaus right up until the point you start over feeding and it becomes toxic. here is a good diagram

 

 

 

sorry i couldnt delete the graph i didnt want for some reason

 

thats kind of beside the point though, what we are discussing here is the removal of shaded leaves, will removing them increase the vitality of upper level growth, will it increase yields. are the lower leaves having a parasitic effect on the plant or does the plant simply shed any leaves that it does not need?

 

thats why im going to be discussing with my wife whether or not im allowed to spend $38 i want to read that report, the study is actually done in growth chambers and greenhouses so i suspect it is also done in hydroponics because that is the only way they would be able to control the experiment, using soil would add to many variables

Edited April 17, 2014 by forgetiwashere

[merl1n]

Hey CC,

My understanding is that the plant still needs to convert nutes + light  to make the sugars it needs to grow(photosynthesis) and the plant needs to store them prior to use. Although we control the environment the plant still has its processes. We are trying to support the plant's processes to its maximum in our own controlled environments. We try to nurture our babies, not beat the the little bastards into submission There is a point where too much nute is toxic and the plant starts to decline (edit: as Forget's graph shows).

I usually leave mine in 12/12 for up to 13-14weeks. By this time the plant is sucking all of its goodness from the leaves, not just the lower leaves but the whole plant starts discolouring and the leaves start to yellow leaving just the veins green. Nutes are still available for the plant to convert sugars, but the plants processes are nearing an end.

 

Others may disagree and that's fine, but that's my take on it.

 

What I do is, grow the plant, get it to the size I want. Then strip under the scrog net, and I do mean strip. When done it looks like this

 

 Before

 

 

 After

My reasoning is selfish really. I hate cleaning popcorn bud. I would rather the plant push all its goodness up into the crowns, not support the little shit underneath. Also I inspect the plant regularly and I've found that the bugs like the warmth under the canopy, not the raging heat from my lights. By removing the undergrowth I'm removing that temperate zone for the bugs to live and flourish. The other thing is airflow which is improved heaps by stripping. Prior to taking up the practise of stripping underneath, often I would find mould spores forming on the light fluffy buds lower down later in the season. By stripping this out it removes the nutrient source for the mould, plus heaps better air movement reducing the moist air, which the mould loves, and the less mould in your grow space the better.

 

Merl1n

 

EDIT: P.S. Billy mentioned about placing a light underneath. BE VERY BLOODY CAREFUL IN DOING THIS. A mate had one on the floor once, his resi tank (200ltr) split one night and the flooded his floor. WARNING: ELECTRICITY AND WATER ARE NOT A GOOD MIX. VERY BLOODY DANGEROUS. My mate has a safety switch which blew, but be aware.

Lights up high, water down low.

Edited April 17, 2014 by merl1n

[forgetiwashere]

well said merlin

[ConvexConepiece]

There's just too many variables here to give a definitive answer i'm afraid, and reading books on this that aren't related to canna (especially indoors and SCROG related) won't give you the answer your looking for.

 

Do shaded leaves actually store useful energy? 

 

Does removing them and allowing extra air circulation/light penetration improve the overall health/yield of the plant?

 

What about hygiene where removing them early minimizes how many fall to the media bed and start rotting, attracting pests and whatnot?

 

etc etc.

 

We know that plant bondage via intentionally breaking limbs has huge gains so it's not safe to assume that allowing the plant to run it's own processes is the best thing to do.

 

So many variables so i'm going to just conclude by saying experiment and find out what works best for you. Removing them early certainly makes it easier come harvest time for us so OUR needs should be considered into the equation as well. My experience tells me that removing below the screen, and even selectively above, gives me the best results. Each to their own.

 

peace

Edited April 17, 2014 by ConvexConepiece

[billygoat]

Pretty sure the study in question is cannabis related.... But it is from 1966.... In any case would be an interesting read....

[louise]

The study in question used Cucumis sativus... that's cucumber rather than cannabis.

[onemancrew]

In my experience any branch I've ever snapped off intentionally has seemed to make the plant angry. It grows back more aggressive than ever. I'm sure it there's something in it.

 

I know they are a different species but pumpkins kinda grow like that the way they get them huge pumpkins is rip off all the flowers but only leave one and it seems to grow one huge massive pumpkin.

[SpaceMonkey23]

I know they are a different species but pumpkins kinda grow like that the way they get them huge pumpkins is rip off all the flowers but only leave one and it seems to grow one huge massive pumpkin.

 

Makes me wonder if the total yield of the single gigantic pumpkin is actually less than would be achieved from multiple smaller pumpkins, in such a case? If we're talking about total yield, even the popcorn buds in a cannabis plant should be factored in, but if people are wanting to produce less buds of a more connoisseur quality, then perhaps a lower total yield is acceptable.