The UK Growers Thread!

theslipperbandit

Well-Known Member
Huskies ain't that bad. It's alaskan malamutes that are right fuckers. They are not very domesticated. I've a mate that does sled dog racing with malamutes and one of his has bitten me twice. Once quite bad I've still got the scar from where it got infected ffs
Your not even meant to have a husky off the lead man they'll fucking bolt to fuck n they've a nasty prey drive
 

R1b3n4

Well-Known Member
He's just marking shit. .is he neutered?
Aww man dogs hands down that breed is the perfect companion.get a rottie since you've a young one but staffies are also great around kids.one breed I'd disagree with is huskies..no where near as domesticated as well as out known breeds
No he hasnt been done by the sound of it lol

Also with Huskies i find it depends totally on the individual dog etc, my cousins husky I used to babysit below was completely soft and loving with children but would go for any cat/dog etc it came across, specially cats/birds n small shit etc
424536_10151252275484537_1893012923_n.jpg
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
So you know yourself that the plant can change where it distributes IAA in reaction to stimulus. Yet you don't think light and air flow, two of the most important stimulus for a plant will affect how it distributes IAA?

I've seen other people's larf, who didn't defoliate, I see the buds at the very bottom of my plant and there's a pretty big difference.

Have you tested it yourself or seen anyone run a reliable test?
Air flow is not an important stimulus for plants at all. Co2 concentrations in air yes, air flow no (correct feed ratios and PH with enough light are THE most important)



Light WILL affect how the plant distributes IAA, but only if you MOVE the source of light (it's why plants bend towards the light if far off above/centre)

As before IAA is mostly produced in the apical tip of the plant, the apical tip grows directly towards the light source.

If you move the light source to the sides of the plant evenly then you will change the distribution of IAA to the sides of the plant rather than the main stem tip thus making the side branches/buds act like main branches/buds and giving a better yeild and better development of side branches/buds.
This is the reason why the 'bare vertical bulb' technique works like it does, by manipulating the distribution of IAA by changing the position of the light source.

If you leave your light source directly above the plant and have it shine down on the plants main stem/apical tip and defoliate, all you have done is deprive your plant of leaves it needs to capture said light and have reduced its photosynthesis abilitys, you've done fuck all to manipulate IAA distibution because the plant is the same shape but more importantly the light source is in the same place it was before.

If you want to manipulate the distribution of IAA then you need to either.....

A) Change the shape of the plant so there is no main stem/apical tip in which to concentrate IAA production (SCROG).

Or.....

B) Change the position of the light source evenly to the sides of plant so that IAA production is moved to the sides of the plant thus making side buds develop potentially as big as the main/apical tip bud (vertically hung bulbs).


You comparing your defoliated plants to somebody elses non defoliated plants with a different environment is anecdotal and it doesn't stand the scientific test.
That is the major problem with forums, too much speculation and anecdotes.




Yes I've tested this myself, my last grow shown here was using the 'bare vertical bulb' technique and I was growing main buds the size of 4 pint cartons of milk and 3L bottles of cooking oil.


Yes I know of people doing reliable tests.......

Charles Darwin in 1881.
Peter Boysen-Jensen in 1913.
Frits Went in 1926.

And......

Kenneth V. Thimann PhD was the first man to isolate and determine the chemical structure of IAA and was the worlds leading authority on plant hormones since he wrote the book on the subject called 'Phytohormones' in 1937.

So my mistake, we've known the auxin facts since Thimann's work in the 30's, not the 70's!
 

The Yorkshireman

Well-Known Member
Oscar.

Yes mate there are tickets left, £15 plus booking fee.

Go to the www.skiddle.com website and type Rejuvenation into the search bar and the gig advert should come up, can pay with paypal, debit.

It's on Saturday 12th November (9:00pm - 5:00am) at Beaver Works warehouse in Leeds.
 

dazzyballz

Well-Known Member
Whats going on with the cheez,was the most reliable strain up here for years now its been crossed and is shit wont get u stoned.
Theres also been a lot of bud floating round here sprayed wit1475936773120734558892.jpg h sugar/flour water all through floweing so its hidden,u get a half joints worth but weighs a gram.
Got the purple done outdoors its dried and went fukin black never seen it as dark.
 

R1b3n4

Well-Known Member
An ex-gf of mine had 2 Japanese akitas that her entire family including her were shit scared of, dogs used to back ppl into corners n shit for fun n just stare at em with that "move and ill rip your face off" look lol, not one of em had any clue on how to handle a dog let alone something as feisty as an akita, tried it with me n i booted the cunt across the kitchen, me n the 2 dogs were best friends in about 20mins from meeting em n were actually well behaved intelligent dogs when you didnt just let em walk all over you etc

but again, you literally couldnt take them near anything smaller than a horse or they would go into hhunting mode an wanna tear it to pieces
 

Bunduki

Active Member
That is the major problem with forums, too much speculation and anecdotes.


Yes I know of people doing reliable tests.......

Charles Darwin in 1881.
Peter Boysen-Jensen in 1913.
Frits Went in 1926.

And......

Kenneth V. Thimann PhD was the first man to isolate and determine the chemical structure of IAA and was the worlds leading authority on plant hormones since he wrote the book on the subject called 'Phytohormones' in 1937.

So my mistake, we've known the auxin facts since Thimann's work in the 30's, not the 70's!
You're totally right that comparing plants in different environments is not scientific, proper testing needs to be done, preferably a side-by-side with 2 clones in identical setups. Ideally, people would have already done that and published the results. But every thread I've found trying to test it gets to about 20-30 pages of people insulting each other until the tester gives up and stops posting shit :P If you can find one that actually finished and published please link me!

The hypothesis is that removing leaves to allow light through to the bottom of the plant stimulates an increase in the growth of lower buds.

Not a single one of those scientists or yourself (that they or you have published to my knowledge) has tested that hypothesis.
So no then, you haven't tested this yourself and you don't know of anyone who's done reliable tests on Defloliation. None of the research I can find on Auxin's disproves it or even tests it.

The major problem with forums is people being unwilling to speculate, test and observe, or even accept that one of their beliefs may be wrong. I, on the other hand, am perfectly willing to admit I can be, if you can provide sufficient proof.

I did think of something reading the research on Auxins too...


7) Abscission (shedding of leaves):

  • Growing leaves & fruits produce a lot of auxin which is transported to the stem and this retards senescence (aging of leaves) and abscission.
  • Shorter days of fall, drought, or the lack of nutrient causes less production of auxin and this begins senescence.
  • A "senescence factor" stimulates cells to form ethylene which produces cellulase (an enzyme that breaks down cellulose) and pectinase.
  • These enzymes digest the middle lamella.
Here's another theory. According to the research done by the scientists you named, growing leaves produce a lot of auxin. Now Defoliation obviously causes your plant to grow new leaves, since you've stripped a lot off. Perhaps rather than the light, the plant is being forced to grow new leaves at the bottom and that localized auxin production boosts the buds nearby.
 

Rizlared

Well-Known Member
Yoyo

Hows it going today UK ? everyone still loving this indian summer ?

So been looking around for a pad, was going to put up with London and London rent for another year or so but really considering somewhere else

anyone recommend anywhere where I can rent a nice detached house cheap and get a lazy-spa and such set up for the summer ? I mean I work 3 nights a week in London but have a place to stay here, I want somewhere to chill 2 to 6 days a week, somewhere with a nice local stoner community would be pretty cool

Was looking around Luton way`s but if I`m in the town its a shit hole if I`m away from the town I may as well be anywhere else......................... what`s it like where you are ?
Considered Southend?
 

theslipperbandit

Well-Known Member
All I got is 'theory,' get a few books on botany as already stated n learn the scientific proven methods.

Let me simplify it for u. Consider the leafs the solar panals so without leafs what you gonna do with all that needed clorophills..for u know clorophills give that bitch some enengrr literally Google basic botany that u should of known from school.were actually being super polite but most growers will literally laugh at you..just like flushing. You ever hear of clorophills? Light hits that shit n the clorophills are all like yo let's keep some of this energy n use some to breathe up that horrible relationship with H20 so the oxygen hits the beaten trail( via the stomatas) n the H is saved for later so yeah picking thos leaves just fucks/stuns everything.
Ppl laugh at this shit cuz it's common to fuck this is how photosynthesis happens blood
 
Last edited:

theslipperbandit

Well-Known Member
Also removing the means for the plant to absorb more light just sounds silly man.those popcorn buds could be stacking the upper buds not to mention the lower half's maturing slower
 

theslipperbandit

Well-Known Member
Fucking mate was hospitalised last night by some bell end we'll sort after he sues the titty wank..then his transits being filled up with sugar then I'll pull him out the car n ram a poker up his sneaky fucking cock hungry arse. And I'm sending drugs to that cunts family hope n calling it in...fucking cunts jumping ppl.how fucking cowardly is that shite
 

Bunduki

Active Member
The problem is, I can't find any proven scientific methods specifically for cannabis and in general botany, I have found quite a few articles and studies showing selective defoliation to be effective in improving fruit quality. I'm not talking taking all the fan leaves off, my method was crouch at the bottom of my plant, look up, and where I couldn't see light shining through leaves I plucked inward-growing leaves from around midway up the plant until I did.

Let me say here, I've read a bunch of threads on this and there's a lot said by both sides that's complete crap, so it's hard to figure out what's right. I want to bang my head against a fucking wall reading some of them, or reach through my screen and bang some other fucker's head against one!

Nobody has shown me proof it doesn't work, nobody has shown me proof it does work.

None of the scientific studies I can find are conclusive, in some plants it's beneficial in others it's harmful (although not very).

Hopefully I can run a proper test myself at some point, all I know for certain right now is that in my limited experience seeing other people's grows, I've not seen lower bud as good as mine, that my friend who's grown for himself for 15 years says he hasn't seen it as good, and a commercial grower who's sold me some of the best weed I've had is also impressed. Although he says it'll be great for personal smoke but not for sale, 'people see little buds and just think it's shit' was what he said.
 

medicropper07

Well-Known Member
The problem is, I can't find any proven scientific methods specifically for cannabis and in general botany, I have found quite a few articles and studies showing selective defoliation to be effective in improving fruit quality. I'm not talking taking all the fan leaves off, my method was crouch at the bottom of my plant, look up, and where I couldn't see light shining through leaves I plucked inward-growing leaves from around midway up the plant until I did.

Let me say here, I've read a bunch of threads on this and there's a lot said by both sides that's complete crap, so it's hard to figure out what's right. I want to bang my head against a fucking wall reading some of them, or reach through my screen and bang some other fucker's head against one!

Nobody has shown me proof it doesn't work, nobody has shown me proof it does work.

None of the scientific studies I can find are conclusive, in some plants it's beneficial in others it's harmful (although not very).

Hopefully I can run a proper test myself at some point, all I know for certain right now is that in my limited experience seeing other people's grows, I've not seen lower bud as good as mine, that my friend who's grown for himself for 15 years says he hasn't seen it as good, and a commercial grower who's sold me some of the best weed I've had is also impressed. Although he says it'll be great for personal smoke but not for sale, 'people see little buds and just think it's shit' was what he said.
Canopy management
 

theslipperbandit

Well-Known Member
Your problem is ur reading up cannabis related into but all you want is botany..far less hocus pokus on that. Millions of threads systematically making shit of all ur above statements.
Have you got any peer reviewed papers to back you ur noob claims?
 

Bunduki

Active Member
Your problem is ur reading up cannabis related into but all you want is botany..far less hocus pokus on that. Millions of threads systematically making shit of all ur above statements.
Have you got any peer reviewed papers to back you ur noob claims?
Ok.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00288233.1959.10418027

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2260433?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2388403?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

http://www.ajevonline.org/content/57/4/397.short
 
Top