Jack Larson
Active Member
I tried it on "The Purps" + it worked = FACT! A "claim" to you , a fact to me , at this point I think it's more about you taking on Brick than weather or not the method works . "WHY?"
I have a question for all you veteran growers out there!
- Thread starter Miketsu
- Start date
Brick Top
New Member
I am glad to hear that you had a strain it worked and worked well on.
What I keep saying about the extended period of darkness thing, and MANY try very hard to ignore, is that the study found that; "SOME strains" would see as much as a 30% increase.
That means that; "SOME strains" might see a 22% increase or an 18% or a 11% increase or maybe a 4% increase or maybe a .2% increase and maybe; "SOME strains" might not see any increase, thought that is almost a virtual impossibility, but the point is just because someone tries it on 'the strain they grow or on a small handful of the over 3000 known strains' and they are unable with their physical sense able to tell a difference that is in absolutely no way evidence, let alone actual proof, that an extended period of darkness will not result in some gains and that in; "SOME strains" it could be as high as 30%.
"SOME strains" does NOT mean ALL STRAINS and; "SOME strains" might only see minimal gains. I do admit that. Others who love to claim it all to be a farce and that it does not work at all NEED to admit that it WILL cause increases in at least; 'SOME strains" and in some cases the increases could be very appreciable. Between it having been scientifically proven and so many people having tried it on their own over the years and were capable of clearly telling there was an increase, those combined should be acknowledged rather than ignored and only the opinion of the individual considered to be proof and all important and the singular deciding factor.
homebrewer
Well-Known Member
Personally, I would really like someone to find this 'study' because I'm hoping they explain why this method only worked on some strains. Did they say it was more likely to work on sativa dominant strains or indica dominant strains or strains that were from a certain region? How many strains did they actually test? If there isn't some sort of parallel that can be drawn at the end of the study explaining why it worked on certain strains and didn't on others, then that 'study' was really a waste of money (which is probably the reason why they're charging for the results).
I'm subscribed to this thread in hopes this paper pops up somewhere....
I'm subscribed to this thread in hopes this paper pops up somewhere....
gish grower
Member
i did the 72hr thing but wha do i know???
Jack Larson
Active Member
I still do it with The Purps but I havent seen a differance in any other strains, Cheese is the only one I haven't tried it on yet.Last time I did it with Purps I saw a little White Powdery Milldew, next time I will increase air circulation.I flush, so soil was very wet.
Alex Kelly
Active Member
I know that you are very against this method HB but have you ever seen anything to make you believe that a couple days of darkness would be detrimental to your plants in any way?
Another thought: I have a hard time understanding how this proccess would only effect certain strains... From what I have seen and read, IF this proccess of extended periods of darkness before chop works, than this would be due to the Trichromes upping their THC content and size during the dark cycle, as they would every night, in order to protect the plant from the harmful rays of the sun during the daytime (through reflection). If this is the case, than there would be some sort of noticeable increase in THC in any cannabis plant that was left in darkness for 2-3 days before harvest. I see this theory either working on every cannabis plant or none of them.
I have to agree that there is STILL no correct answer to this question because no real scientific evidence has ever been provided, but even if this magical study ever is dug up I don't think that I could take it as the holy gail that answers all of our questions. No one's been able to find this for at least a year (that's how long ago I first heard about it from BT), and it has seemed to disappear because of a "lawsuit" or something, I would not be able to accept it as an accurate study of the cannabis plant and how extended periods of darkness effect daily THC production. Just my .02. Cheers.
homebrewer
Well-Known Member
Assuming you're not missing the 'harvest window' and you're not subjecting your plants to a situation where mold may take over, this so called method wont hurt plants. But just like the nail-through-the-stalk, feeding plants sugar and other such fallacies I've come across, I've tried to make a habit of only doing things that improve yield and quality. I'd recommend everyone try it, but are you growers out there skilled enough to be consistent in your daily, larger scale perpetual harvests to tell a difference between the dark cycle plant and every other one you take down? Lack of consistency is the reason why so many growers out there are using rip-off products because they attribute one decent harvest to the $100/litre bottle of junk they were sold.
Wolverine97
Well-Known Member
I agree with you that most growers aren't astute enough to be able to determine on their own whether the 72 hours of dark makes a difference in potency, but it does seem to reduce chlorophyll levels somewhat. That, in and of itself is reason enough for me.