Trichomes & Harvesting

[k0ijn]

Flushing is no myth my son! Your plant stores nutes as it grows, it is real important to purge these buildups out of your ladies so your not smoking it. While it may seem the same as 2 days to 5 once it's all the way dry and cured your gonna notice it. plus it's not healthy for u. Flushing is a purging process, I used to flush insane amounts of water through my pots until I found I wasn't purging at all but soaking the main stalk wterlogging u can call and actually making it harder for the plant to take up the water for the purge. So now my flushes consist of a gallon and a half of water a nite for two weeks instead of running 10 gals or more through the pot at once. It seems to give a plant the chance to use it built up nutes thus expelling them from the smoke. Didn't want to write a novel so tried to get it to the point in the short.

It is though.
I have provided scientific evidence which shows pre-harvest flushing is a myth.

First of all you must make a distinction between flushing and pre-harvest flushing.
Nobody is saying flushing is a wrong thing to do, if you have grow medium imbalances or salt build up for example.

Pre-harvest flushing is based on a fallacy.
Nutrients are not stored in the calyxes, there is literally nothing to flush out.

I have provided all the info and links to references & sources in many threads, you can find the info with a simple search.
But for the sake of the argument I will show a quote of a post I've made:

All the information is out there, you can find it with a simple search of the forums.

But just to rest the case I've gathered up the points and links in one post (this is quotes of what I've written):




... I find it funny how you can still have unanswered questions.
Have you read all my posts on pre-harvest flushing?

The big debate in this thread is about _pre-harvest flushing_.
Not about leaching in general (leaching is flushing but is NOT the same as pre-harvest flushing), which has been explained by all of us against pre-harvest flushing many times, can be useful.

Leaching/flushing in general is thought of as to be:

Correcting grow medium errors.
Clearing salt buildup.
And just a general error corrector for solutions or medium in both hydro and soil.

Leaching is used by most growers, because problems tend to occur, even in the most perfect setups.


What we (especially Harrekin, SirLance and myself) in this thread who are against pre-harvest flushing state, is that pre-harvest flushing has not been proven to work for any of the reasons pre-harvest flushers claim they do it.
Many people claim improved taste, odour, yield, less harsh bud, better burning bud, better ash (whiter, cleaner) etc. etc.
They claim all kinds of wondrous things, which are apparently all thanks to the pre-harvest flush.

Although people claim this, there is no proof for any of it.
There are anecdotes of what people have done, there are stories, there are stories from authors (such as Cervantes, who is known to take information from other writes / growers and post it in his books).

What I have posted in this thread is a scientific study on the nutrient storage in plants, particularly ryegrass.

The study is very comprehensive and explains rather well about how nutrients are stored, where they are stored and what happens with the plants when nutrient levels are too high or too low (abundance versus. deficiency).

I will post the image from the study again showing this:





This explains a lot about the points in the discussion about pre-harvest flushing / leaching.

The study says that "growth requirements are generally achieved before high concentrations are attained".
This is a very important point.
Especially since this is about abundance versus deficiency (the optimal is 'critical').

What this study shows quite clearly is that if you underfeed the plants, the yield is affected quite heavily.
But what it also shows is that nutrient stored in the various parts of the plants change a lot depending on the levels on nutrients available (strength of the solution).

Since most experienced growers don't overfeed their plants but keep well measured levels of PPM, they can stray close to the 'critical' nutrient supply, giving their plants as much as possible without overfeeding or underfeeding.

We are not saying overfeeding is correct, we're not talking about overfeeding neither, we feed our plants as close to the perfect ranges of PPM as possible.

The points of Gastanker was that since plants store nutrients, and nutrients are stored all over the plant (including in the calyxes (buds)) and causing a deficiency will cause the plant to 'eat away' at it's nutrient storage, you will end up with less nutrients in the calyxes, therefore less nutrients in your final product, and the smoke will be less harsh.
You will not end up with 'chem bud' so to speak.

This theory is unfounded, and the study I posted contradicts this theory.
First of all nutrients are not stored in the calyxes so there is nothing to flush out.
That in itself should be the end of it but I'll continue explaining.

The study says plants are high efficient, they can consume nutrients before high concentrations are attained, and since none of us against pre-harvest are overfeeding, we are not achieving 'too high' concentrations of nutrients.
None of us have 'chem bud', we have all tried flushing, and not flushing, we don't see a difference.
We might even be receiving higher yields (which none of us have recorded however) if the study is the be correct (nutrient levels in the plant greatly affect yield).
What we do see a difference in is when you dry & cure properly versus dry & cure wrongly.
Drying & curing is probably the single most important step in any grow, it can cause mold, it can cause joy and it can be a pain in the arse.
But drying and curing is where your weed either ages like a good wine or crumbles, molds up and becomes useless.
Most people fail in drying & curing, many are somewhat successful, few master it.
I for sure don't master it, I'm trying to however, I invest in drying & curing equipment quite a lot and I am very careful.
That doesn't stop mold from setting in from time to time though, due to slipup or assistant error.


I'm not saying I don't want people to flush / leach their plants if they have problems with nutrient levels, salt buildup or anything else.
I'm not saying that you can't do what you want with your own grow either.

Where my problem lies, is with people trying to get other people to pre-harvest flush / leach.
When they claim all these myths about improvement of: taste, odour, colour, ash, harshness etc. it irritates me that people are just left to believe whatever this person writes, with no scientific backing, no factual information presented.

This is why I post these studies, why I try to show people the facts.
There are logical explanations to all those things.
Bad tasting weed, harshness and ash can all be improved by doing a proper dry & cure.
Most people have these problems because they do not know how to properly dry & cure.



To conclude, I don't believe in the surplus nutrients / substances theory regarding normally PPM'ed weed (as close to 'critical' as possible without overfeeding nor underfeeding) contra flushed / leached weed.
This is the theory brought up by Gastanker who said that you'll get a surplus of nutrients if you do not pre-harvest flush your plants.
There is absolutely no evidence for this, neither did Gastanker provide any evidence.

Plants which are in a deficiency do not 'eat away' the excess nutrients in calyxes, there are no excess nutrients or stored nutrients in the calyxes.
The plants basically eat themselves (yellowing leaves, withering leaves) to stay alive.
I don't believe that pre-harvest flushing / leaching your weed will give you better tasting, smelling and looking weed.
I don't believe you will yield more either.

In fact, I "believe" quite the opposite, I "believe" that keeping nutrient levels proper all the way to harvest, is the best way to get the most out of your plants humanly possible.
I mark believe because it in fact has nothing to do with belief.
It has to do with facts and whether you value logic, reason and evidence or not.
That is the great thing about science, you don't have to believe in it for it to be inherently true.

When you pre-harvest flush your plants, you starve your plants at the most important phase of growth, late blooom.
You cause a deficiency, which leads to (if we are to trust science) decreased productivity.
And most importantly, all the myths about pre-harvest flushing seem to be false.
Not one scientific piece of evidence has been provided by the pro pre-harvest flushing people.
You cannot find one study that proves any of pre-harvest flushings proclaimed positives.



Just to sum up with some references and sources:

Books & Publications:

Marijuana Chemistry;
Genetics, Processing and Potency

Cannabis and Cannabinoids:
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Therapeutic Potential

Plant nutrition - from genetic engineering to field practice.


Research and testing:

montanabiotech.com

http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/



I use sciencedirect.com and ncbi.nlm.nih.gov to look up publications.


There are a lot more references and source I could link to/quote/name.
But it would be a hell of a job naming them all.
I just named some of the most respected (peer reviewed scientific publications only) ones here, you can find loads more by searching on ncbi, sciencedirect or google in fact.

Read the publications, the books and the studies I've linked to and see if you come to a different conclusion.

In the end it's about whether you value science most or personal belief most.

 

[k0ijn]

Hello everyone and k0ijn!

I am a first time grower and would love to hear from you on how ready my baby is.

First, some information about my girl. Grew her from seed in mid August. Fed on nothing but pure sunshine, rain, organics, and love, here in the tropics. Early October she showed pre-flowers, and about two weeks later, she started to bloom. The monsoon season started at around the same time, but she seems to be doing fantastically in the heavy rainstorms. It's been a month since. She's now 3.5-4 feet tall. She's from Ceres Seeds, the John Sinclair Sativa 'Trans-Love'.

Info from their website:

- Breed: (Sativa x Indica) x Sativa
- Flowering: 70-75 days
- Yield: 0.9-1.1 gram per Watt of light

I am growing outdoors, so i'm not sure how these numbers apply, but they're here just in case they can help.

For an apparently Sativa dominant strain, she's not that tall. I've noticed that she started growing with what looks to me like more Indica dominant leaves, but since she started flowering, the blades are now lanky.

I've read every single post on this thread, which is the first time i've ever done that on any forum! A big thank you k0ijn for dispelling some myths and providing some very wonderful insights. Before this thread, it was all about trichs. Now, at least i know about the swelling of calyxes and retraction of pistils.

My girl doesn't look ready yet. She's much too skinny, the calyxes aren't fully swollen, and there's only very minor retraction of pistils. The trichomes however, seem to be telling a different story. Overall, it seems, to my novice eye, that it's mostly cloudy with very little clear, and even less amber. I do think that some of the amber looking ones aren't true amber, but reflections on a cloudy or clear trich. Reflections of the suns rays, maybe? And a few rare ones even look like they've gone past amber. Could that be due to injury, rather than maturity? On a few flowers though, there are quite a number of ambers already. She's only been flowering for a month.

I'd like to get a second opinion on my observations and will provide as many photos as possible for this process.

Thank you all in advance!

First of all, thank you for your kind words, I'm happy you found the information helpful.

With regards to the trichomes of your plant I see a majority of clear trichs.
I do spot some amber and some cloudy but it looks to me as if the majority are clear.
And with the extra info of 1 month blooming and the general look of your plant I would say you she has at least a month left.
But I would not follow a strict timeline, I would check the plant every day, watch out for changes, try to take in as much information about how and where it's changing so you can follow what the plant tells you and not what some seed company tells you.
Always go with what the plant tells you.

I hope that was specific enough, if not just let me know and I'll go into more detail

 

[aurora stardust]

First of all, thank you for your kind words, I'm happy you found the information helpful.

With regards to the trichomes of your plant I see a majority of clear trichs.
I do spot some amber and some cloudy but it looks to me as if the majority are clear.
And with the extra info of 1 month blooming and the general look of your plant I would say you she has at least a month left.
But I would not follow a strict timeline, I would check the plant every day, watch out for changes, try to take in as much information about how and where it's changing so you can follow what the plant tells you and not what some seed company tells you.
Always go with what the plant tells you.

I hope that was specific enough, if not just let me know and I'll go into more detail

You are most welcome for the kind words as you certainly deserve them.

Thanks for being an extra pair of eyes for me. That's what i was hoping to hear... that she's got another month left! There's no rushing, I'm just going to let her take her time. I'll let her tell me when she's ready. I've just added more photos to my post. The last few show quite a bit of amber. Have a look and let me know what you think.

I agree that there is no strict timeline as it depends on many factors. But according to your estimate, the seed company is in the ballpark, as it suggests another 35-40 days left of blooming for her.

You were specific enough, but if you still want to go into more detail, I'm not going to stop you.

 

[k0ijn]

You are most welcome for the kind words as you certainly deserve them.

Thanks for being an extra pair of eyes for me. That's what i was hoping to hear... that she's got another month left! There's no rushing, I'm just going to let her take her time. I'll let her tell me when she's ready. I've just added more photos to my post. The last few show quite a bit of amber. Have a look and let me know what you think.

I agree that there is no strict timeline as it depends on many factors. But according to your estimate, the seed company is in the ballpark, as it suggests another 35-40 days left of blooming for her.

You were specific enough, but if you still want to go into more detail, I'm not going to stop you.

Cheers

Yes exactly, let her take her time.
I looked through the photos again and I do see more cloudy and a few more amber but the overall feel I get is that clear is the most prevalent.
However that can change rather quickly, so keep a good eye on them.
I can't know exactly where you've taken the images though, have you split them out between top and bottom of the plant and calyx and leaves?
You need to get an overall view of how the trichomes develop, and you have taken quite a few good pictures, just trying to make sure it's an overall view and not a specific location.

I usually harvest when I have around 5%-10% amber trichomes (and a large majority of cloudy).
I would estimate your plant does not even have 2% amber, so you still have a while to go.
But again I'm basing this not just on the trichomes but on the look of the calyxes as well.
The calyxes look very young, I hardly see any formation and I don't spot any swollen pods.

I have quite a busy day today so I will hold off with the details for now, most of the details are in the original post of this thread (and the referenced links) anyway
Don't be afraid to check back in in some time if you have any questions!

 

[aurora stardust]

Cheers

Yes exactly, let her take her time.
I looked through the photos again and I do see more cloudy and a few more amber but the overall feel I get is that clear is the most prevalent.
However that can change rather quickly, so keep a good eye on them.
I can't know exactly where you've taken the images though, have you split them out between top and bottom of the plant and calyx and leaves?
You need to get an overall view of how the trichomes develop, and you have taken quite a few good pictures, just trying to make sure it's an overall view and not a specific location.

I usually harvest when I have around 5%-10% amber trichomes (and a large majority of cloudy).
I would estimate your plant does not even have 2% amber, so you still have a while to go.
But again I'm basing this not just on the trichomes but on the look of the calyxes as well.
The calyxes look very young, I hardly see any formation and I don't spot any swollen pods.

I have quite a busy day today so I will hold off with the details for now, most of the details are in the original post of this thread (and the referenced links) anyway
Don't be afraid to check back in in some time if you have any questions!

I do agree that the calyxes look young. They're growing fast though, so I'll be checking on them regularly. I hope there's at least a month left, but if she tells me she's ready next week, then next week it'll be.

As for the photos, I take shots of whole flowers with a macro lens, and on the highest resolution possible. The trichome shots are just cropped portions of the flower shots. The flowers presented were just the ones I was worried might be getting mature, the ones at the tips of stems, from top to bottom of my girl. The lower flowers closer to the main stem definitely are too young, babies... The trichome shots are mostly calyxes. The shots with the leaves are where there is more amber (than on the calyxes), and some trichomes that look like they have gone beyond amber and popped.

If most of the details are on the first page of this thread (and patiently repeated throughout the rest of the thread), then please don't waste your time anymore. You already have spent too much of it repeating what you said in your original postings. I've read it a few times as well. I can just refer to it again if necessary. As for any other details that haven't been presented yet, I will not mind learning more whenever you have the time or the mood to post.

Enjoy your weekend!

 

[k0ijn]

I do agree that the calyxes look young. They're growing fast though, so I'll be checking on them regularly. I hope there's at least a month left, but if she tells me she's ready next week, then next week it'll be.

As for the photos, I take shots of whole flowers with a macro lens, and on the highest resolution possible. The trichome shots are just cropped portions of the flower shots. The flowers presented were just the ones I was worried might be getting mature, the ones at the tips of stems, from top to bottom of my girl. The lower flowers closer to the main stem definitely are too young, babies... The trichome shots are mostly calyxes. The shots with the leaves are where there is more amber (than on the calyxes), and some trichomes that look like they have gone beyond amber and popped.

If most of the details are on the first page of this thread (and patiently repeated throughout the rest of the thread), then please don't waste your time anymore. You already have spent too much of it repeating what you said in your original postings. I've read it a few times as well. I can just refer to it again if necessary. As for any other details that haven't been presented yet, I will not mind learning more whenever you have the time or the mood to post.

Enjoy your weekend!

Good.
It sounds like you've taken pictures from all over so it's a good overall view of the plant we're getting.
That makes it much easier to determine when it's @ peak potency.

I do the same myself with my digital camera, I hardly ever use my USB-microscope anywhere, although it's cool to play with.

The publications and books I reference are great reads.
They are quite long and technical but if you have the time and the interest I'd advice you take a look at them.

Hehe thanks, I've wasted a lot more time discussion pre-harvest flushing though so I'm alright with repeating pertinent info ^^

Thank you, and likewise, time to relax and enjoy some good Sativa

 

[aurora stardust]

Good.
It sounds like you've taken pictures from all over so it's a good overall view of the plant we're getting.
That makes it much easier to determine when it's @ peak potency.

I do the same myself with my digital camera, I hardly ever use my USB-microscope anywhere, although it's cool to play with.

The publications and books I reference are great reads.
They are quite long and technical but if you have the time and the interest I'd advice you take a look at them.

Hehe thanks, I've wasted a lot more time discussion pre-harvest flushing though so I'm alright with repeating pertinent info ^^

Thank you, and likewise, time to relax and enjoy some good Sativa

Alright, I'll read those up if I find myself with some extra time.

Right now, I have a bit of trouble. One of my flowers seems to have a sudden onset of an infestation problem. What should I do? I just doused it with organic pesticide. Should I cut off that flower tomorrow morning, or should I leave it to heal?

View attachment 2414468View attachment 2414465View attachment 2414464View attachment 2414463View attachment 2414462

Thanks again. Hope I'm not disturbing you from enjoying some good Sativa!

 

[Shaggn]

Hmm, very interesting!! I don't have any scientific backed facts on my own little experiment, but I will say some variation is inevitable. I personally try to harvest my plants as close to cloudy w/o any or close to no amber trichs, As I really do not enjoy the couchlock effect at all. I've taken cuttings from the same plant and harvested during the 3 phases (clear/cloudy/amber) and noticed the differences in the high. The main difference between clear and cloudy was strictly potency, while they both had a sativa/social buzz. The more amber they had, the more I noticed the dreaded couchlock effect. An example is a sativa I just took down is mostly amber and it knocks me down n out. But the cuttings of the same plant that I took down earlier in the season has a really nice up social/get things done high. Just wanted to share my own personal findings and not to down anything you've shared. Finally someone out there blowing all the misleading statements. I have also tried the flush and non flush of my plants and only noticed one difference (yield). I was very surprised as i realized I had fallen victim to misleading info myself. Btw I have always grown in soil.

Keep up the good work k0ijn, props!!

 

[k0ijn]

Hmm, very interesting!! I don't have any scientific backed facts on my own little experiment, but I will say some variation is inevitable. I personally try to harvest my plants as close to cloudy w/o any or close to no amber trichs, As I really do not enjoy the couchlock effect at all. I've taken cuttings from the same plant and harvested during the 3 phases (clear/cloudy/amber) and noticed the differences in the high. The main difference between clear and cloudy was strictly potency, while they both had a sativa/social buzz. The more amber they had, the more I noticed the dreaded couchlock effect. An example is a sativa I just took down is mostly amber and it knocks me down n out. But the cuttings of the same plant that I took down earlier in the season has a really nice up social/get things done high. Just wanted to share my own personal findings and not to down anything you've shared. Finally someone out there blowing all the misleading statements. I have also tried the flush and non flush of my plants and only noticed one difference (yield). I was very surprised as i realized I had fallen victim to misleading info myself. Btw I have always grown in soil.

Keep up the good work k0ijn, props!!

It's always good to do small experiments but I would say your premise is flawed.
Is the strain you're growing 100% Sativa?

Allow me quote myself from the first page of this thread:

The strain phenotype (wether it's a Sativa or and Indica) determines overall wether you get an energetic high or a couch lock high.
It's a common misunderstanding that amber trichomes produce a couch lock high, it's mainly because wrong information has been spread around and people keep perpetuating it, in the end everybody believes it's fact when in reality it isn't.
As already stated in the thread; amber trichomes contain degraded THC --> CBN.
CBN does not really produce a high, it does affect the high but not in a positive way.
CBN is pain relieving (as are most cannabinoids) but it does not reduce muscle tension/spasm.
Cannabinoids like CBD, CBG and CBC affect the high more than CBN does.

It's not well known that it's the phenotype which determines the high, not the trichomes themselves.
People get hung up on fairy tales and myths which have no backing evidence.
I'm not sure if it's purely ignorance or it's a lack of critical thinking or what it is but there is deep underlying misunderstanding of facts when it comes to growing.

CBN (which is what amber trichomes contain) does have a sedative effect, but so does most other cannabinoids (even THC does).
We cannot stipulate that amber trichomes lead to a couch-lock effect because it goes against the science, research and understanding we have of cannabinoids.

I don't quite understand how you could not spot a potency difference between the majority cloudy & majority amber in regards of potency.
CBN represents at least a 90% loss of potency when compared to THC.
Some researchers say it might be as high as 260% loss of potency, there's a debate in the community over which number is correct, but it's somewhere between 90%-260%.

So any plant grown out with a large amount of amber trichomes should be significantly less potent than a plant with a majority of cloudy trichomes.
That goes for any plant, any phenotype.

Clear trichomes are obviously even less potent than amber ones.
Clear trichomes contain mainly precursor cannabinoids (acids) and has a near 0% potency level.
In comparison to CBN which does have some potency.


I'm not trying to pick on your experiment or call you out, I'm just stating facts.
I've done experiments myself and I have friends who have as well and most of the time (dependent on setup, experience etc.) the experiments tend to follow the science.
I appreciate you took the time to read the info and I hope you learned from it.

I can only assert that you should read the publications and books I've referenced, it'll give you a lot deeper knowledge of cannabinoids and trichomes than what I've written.
My work does not go into as much detail as the educated scientific researchers do, I've simplified a lot of it so it's readily available for a layman.

 

[Shaggn]

Very good point!! I forgot to mention that the same strain that was left till mostly amber did have a significant loss in potency, compared to the clear/cloudy harvest times. That being said it was also a completely different high and was cuttings from the same mother. I'm sure phenotype plays a major roll as well, except mine were all from the same mature mother. Another point I missed that you stated was that your right, It is not a pure sativa and will have variation dependant on phenotype. I have played around with harvest times and try to get as close to having no amber trichs as possible because I do not enjoy the couchlock effect being the basis of the high. My question then is if I have a, lets say 50/50 hybrid. I take one of the moms and make a bunch of clones. I then harvest them at different times and they produce different types of highs but they are all from the same mom. Wouldn't that mean that the harvest time based on the trich stage plays a key role also? I'm no scientist but I do experiment with every strain i've played with to find the best time to harvest to get the up high that I enjoy. That also being said most of the time I get a mixed hybrid high with the up part being the dom part of the high. I thank you for taking the time to break it all down for easy, to the point reading, but also for including where your getting your scientific facts. I look forward to reading any references you have. Peace!!

 

[k0ijn]

Very good point!! I forgot to mention that the same strain that was left till mostly amber did have a significant loss in potency, compared to the clear/cloudy harvest times. That being said it was also a completely different high and was cuttings from the same mother. I'm sure phenotype plays a major roll as well, except mine were all from the same mature mother. Another point I missed that you stated was that your right, It is not a pure sativa and will have variation dependant on phenotype. I have played around with harvest times and try to get as close to having no amber trichs as possible because I do not enjoy the couchlock effect being the basis of the high. My question then is if I have a, lets say 50/50 hybrid. I take one of the moms and make a bunch of clones. I then harvest them at different times and they produce different types of highs but they are all from the same mom. Wouldn't that mean that the harvest time based on the trich stage plays a key role also? I'm no scientist but I do experiment with every strain i've played with to find the best time to harvest to get the up high that I enjoy. That also being said most of the time I get a mixed hybrid high with the up part being the dom part of the high. I thank you for taking the time to break it all down for easy, to the point reading, but also for including where your getting your scientific facts. I look forward to reading any references you have. Peace!!

Alright then it makes sense.
The reason why it's a different high is because the cannabinoids interact with each other to form the high.
So if you grow out your plant with loads of amber trichomes you will dilute the THC high with the sort of sickly amber high.
This might resemble a couch-lock high but it's in no way the same as a pure Indica high (with near 100% cloudy trichs).

The best way to notice this is to grow a pure Indica to peak potency (near 100% cloudy trichs) and compare that high to a pure Sativa grown to 50% amber trichs.
You'll notice how the highs are very different and how a CBN high is very different from a couch-lock high.

Since the plant is not a pure Sativa the high will always have hints of an Indica high.
This might be an even stronger effect if you let the plant go to say 50% amber.

The stage of trichomes do play a role in the high but not in whether you end up with an energetic high or a couch-lock high.
CBN does produce a more sickly high feeling (feeling ill, drowsy etc.) which is comparable with a couch-lock high but not the same at all.

 

[Shaggn]

Thank you for clearing that up for me. The way you have explained it, now makes perfect sense. I completely understand what you mean now Damn, now i'm going to have to hunt down a pure indica and a pure sativa... Peace!!

 

[k0ijn]

Thank you for clearing that up for me. The way you have explained it, now makes perfect sense. I completely understand what you mean now Damn, now i'm going to have to hunt down a pure indica and a pure sativa... Peace!!

You're welcome.
I like hybrids myself but I prefer pure strains even though some of the best strains in the world today are hybrids.
There's nothing like a pure Sativa imho.

 

[annnnie]

So, slightly new at this. Ran into a problem this time I've never encountered... Hurricane Sandy knocked out my power for 7 days, so my plants were pretty much in darkness besides one small window letting in lame stormy light in 45 degree weather about 6 weeks into flowering.

60 days into flowering my white russian and no amber tricomes at all. Everything I've read says WR has a flower of about 50-63 days. The buds are pretty small too.... Would the stress of that one week have anything to do with this? It wouldn't just put the process on hold and add another week, would it? Maybe I'm just being impatient... but I'm worried that one week screwed everything up and this is all I should be expecting. Do some plants just never get amber tricomes?

 

[MajorCoco]

So, slightly new at this. Ran into a problem this time I've never encountered... Hurricane Sandy knocked out my power for 7 days, so my plants were pretty much in darkness besides one small window letting in lame stormy light in 45 degree weather about 6 weeks into flowering.

60 days into flowering my white russian and no amber tricomes at all. Everything I've read says WR has a flower of about 50-63 days. The buds are pretty small too.... Would the stress of that one week have anything to do with this? It wouldn't just put the process on hold and add another week, would it? Maybe I'm just being impatient... but I'm worried that one week screwed everything up and this is all I should be expecting. Do some plants just never get amber tricomes?

It could slow things down yes. All trichomes will eventually turn amber if left long enough. It's chemistry in action..give it another week more I'd say..

 

[watbol]

They were vegged 12 weeks prior to the 12/12.

What would the effect be if I added another stage of 15/9 between the 18/6 & the 12/12,With a light from the Veg and a light from the bloom at a 15/9 cycle?Would this give the plant less of a shock going from 18/6 to 12/12 overnight?Wouldn't this give a more natural transition for the plant?

 

[MajorCoco]

Lots have tried it, and the evidence shows that it doesn't help in the end...plants seem well able to deal with the change, and you aren't losing grow hours leading up to your flowering period.

 

[k0ijn]

So, slightly new at this. Ran into a problem this time I've never encountered... Hurricane Sandy knocked out my power for 7 days, so my plants were pretty much in darkness besides one small window letting in lame stormy light in 45 degree weather about 6 weeks into flowering.

60 days into flowering my white russian and no amber tricomes at all. Everything I've read says WR has a flower of about 50-63 days. The buds are pretty small too.... Would the stress of that one week have anything to do with this? It wouldn't just put the process on hold and add another week, would it? Maybe I'm just being impatient... but I'm worried that one week screwed everything up and this is all I should be expecting. Do some plants just never get amber tricomes?

Your plants have without a doubt been stressed by the lack of light.
It might take a while for them to return to normal bloom, it's hard to say exactly how long and if they will get better but your best bet is to just wait and see and judge them as you go along.

 

[k0ijn]

What would the effect be if I added another stage of 15/9 between the 18/6 & the 12/12,With a light from the Veg and a light from the bloom at a 15/9 cycle?Would this give the plant less of a shock going from 18/6 to 12/12 overnight?Wouldn't this give a more natural transition for the plant?

You don't need to, the change of light is gradual in the real world (outside, using the sun) but the plants can take a swift change without any issues.
It takes a few days, maybe even a week or so, before you'll see the plants reacting to the light and begin flowering but there is no stress in that process.

 

[aurora stardust]

Hello!

It's been a week since I first posted photos on this thread. Here's how some of the flowers look like now. Are the pistils retracting? Are the calyxes swelling? Any guesses on when she'll reach full bloom? If you want photos of the trichomes, I can post them.

Thank you!

View attachment 2417547View attachment 2417548View attachment 2417549View attachment 2417550