A tribute to Uncle Ben and the Almighty Leaf

[HeartlandHank]

I think Gimpman has reading comprehension problems, go look at the quote he posted. He thinks you were dissing UB. He just didn't understand what you said.LMFAO

Haha. I think you're right. That's funny.

I don't know, could be something else.. I've been pissing some people off lately. Randomly... I guess I've been a dick.


<<Gimpman>> You're lucky he even posts for you bastards... LEAVE UB ALONE!!!!

!View attachment 2780024

 

[propertyoftheUS]

Truth About Removing Fan Leaves [h=6][/h]

by riddleme

• I am probably one of the most outspoken members here when it comes to removing leaves from our plants, I want to share this little ditty from
  
  
  https://www.rollitup.org/marijuana Botany
  An Advanced Study: The Propagation and Breeding of Distinctive Cannabis
  by Robert Connell Clarke
  
  
  
  
  Leafing is one of the most misunderstood techniques of drug Cannabis cultivation. In the mind of the cultivator, several reasons exist for removing leaves. Many feel that large shade leaves draw energy from the flowering plant, and therefore the flowering clusters will be smaller. It is felt that by removing the leaves, surplus energy will be available, and large floral clusters will be formed. Also, some feel that inhibitors of flowering, synthesized in the leaves during the long noninductive days of summer, may be stored in the older leaves that were formed during the noninductive photoperiod. Possibly, if these inhibitor-laden leaves are removed, the plant will proceed to flower, and maturation will be accelerated. Large leaves shade the inner portions of the plant, and small atrophied floral clusters may begin to develop if they receive more light.
  
  In actuality, few if any of the theories behind leafing give any indication of validity. Indeed, leafing possibly serves to defeat its original purpose. Large leaves have a definite function in the growth and development of Cannabis. Large leaves serve as photosynthetic factories for the production of sugars and other necessary growth sub stances. They also create shade, but at the same time they are collecting valuable solar energy and producing foods that will be used during the floral development of the plant. Premature removal of leaves may cause stunting, because the potential for photosynthesis is reduced. As these leaves age and lose their ability to carry on photo synthesis they turn chlorotie (yellow) and fall to the ground. In humid areas care is taken to remove the yellow or brown leaves, because they might invite attack by fungus. During chlorosis the plant breaks down substances, such as chlorophylls, and translocates the molecular components to a new growing part of the plant, such as the flowers. Most Cannabis plants begin to lose their larger leaves when they enter the flowering stage, and this trend continues until senescence. It is more efficient for the plant to reuse the energy and various molecular components of existing chlorophyll than to synthesize new chlorophyll at the time of flowering. During flowering this energy is needed to form floral clusters and ripen seeds.
  
  Removing large amounts of leaves may interfere with the metabolic balance of the plant. If this metabolic change occurs too late in the season it could interfere with floral development and delay maturation. If any floral inhibitors are removed, the intended effect of accelerating flowering will probably be counteracted by metabolic upset in the plant. Removal of shade leaves does facilitate more light reaching the center of the plant, but if there is not enough food energy produced in the leaves, the small internal floral clusters will probably not grow any larger. Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic change.
  
  If leaves must be removed, the petiole is cut so that at least an inch remains attached to the stalk. Weaknesses in the limb axis at the node result if the leaves are pulled off at the abscission layer while they are still green. Care is taken to see that the shriveling petiole does not invite fungus attack.
  
  
  whole thing available here
  http://www.mellowgold.com/portugese/...nabotany2.html
  
  I wonder if the trend of pruning leaves would change if folks knew it could cause hermies???
  Enjoy <<<<<<Thanks to the OP Zues for shining some light on our beautiful green leaves,,,,I think this about sums up any debate on defoliation,, It's a shame that thread was closed,, lol maybe not,, Thank you as well UB for trying to keep the masses of weedwhackers at bay!!! Keep Em Green Yall!!

 

[Rocketman64]

/QUOTE]

Truth About Removing Fan Leaves

by riddleme

• I am probably one of the most outspoken members here when it comes to removing leaves from our plants, I want to share this little ditty from
  
  
  marijuana Botany
  An Advanced Study: The Propagation and Breeding of Distinctive Cannabis
  by Robert Connell Clarke
  
  
  
  
  Leafing is one of the most misunderstood techniques of drug Cannabis cultivation. In the mind of the cultivator, several reasons exist for removing leaves. Many feel that large shade leaves draw energy from the flowering plant, and therefore the flowering clusters will be smaller. It is felt that by removing the leaves, surplus energy will be available, and large floral clusters will be formed. Also, some feel that inhibitors of flowering, synthesized in the leaves during the long noninductive days of summer, may be stored in the older leaves that were formed during the noninductive photoperiod. Possibly, if these inhibitor-laden leaves are removed, the plant will proceed to flower, and maturation will be accelerated. Large leaves shade the inner portions of the plant, and small atrophied floral clusters may begin to develop if they receive more light.
  
  In actuality, few if any of the theories behind leafing give any indication of validity. Indeed, leafing possibly serves to defeat its original purpose. Large leaves have a definite function in the growth and development of Cannabis. Large leaves serve as photosynthetic factories for the production of sugars and other necessary growth sub stances. They also create shade, but at the same time they are collecting valuable solar energy and producing foods that will be used during the floral development of the plant. Premature removal of leaves may cause stunting, because the potential for photosynthesis is reduced. As these leaves age and lose their ability to carry on photo synthesis they turn chlorotie (yellow) and fall to the ground. In humid areas care is taken to remove the yellow or brown leaves, because they might invite attack by fungus. During chlorosis the plant breaks down substances, such as chlorophylls, and translocates the molecular components to a new growing part of the plant, such as the flowers. Most Cannabis plants begin to lose their larger leaves when they enter the flowering stage, and this trend continues until senescence. It is more efficient for the plant to reuse the energy and various molecular components of existing chlorophyll than to synthesize new chlorophyll at the time of flowering. During flowering this energy is needed to form floral clusters and ripen seeds.
  
  Removing large amounts of leaves may interfere with the metabolic balance of the plant. If this metabolic change occurs too late in the season it could interfere with floral development and delay maturation. If any floral inhibitors are removed, the intended effect of accelerating flowering will probably be counteracted by metabolic upset in the plant. Removal of shade leaves does facilitate more light reaching the center of the plant, but if there is not enough food energy produced in the leaves, the small internal floral clusters will probably not grow any larger. Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic change.
  
  If leaves must be removed, the petiole is cut so that at least an inch remains attached to the stalk. Weaknesses in the limb axis at the node result if the leaves are pulled off at the abscission layer while they are still green. Care is taken to see that the shriveling petiole does not invite fungus attack.
  
  
  whole thing available here
  http://www.mellowgold.com/portugese/...nabotany2.html
  
  I wonder if the trend of pruning leaves would change if folks knew it could cause hermies???
  Enjoy <<<<<<Thanks to the OP Zues for shining some light on our beautiful green leaves,,,,I think this about sums up any debate on defoliation,, It's a shame that thread was closed,, lol maybe not,, Thank you as well UB for trying to keep the masses of weedwhackers at bay!!! Keep Em Green Yall!!

FINALLY!!! Someone posts something 'on topic'. This was my original intent with the tribute to leaves. All I intended to do with this whole 'tribute' thing was to agree with the idea that aimlessly removing leaves from an otherwise healthy plant to somehow improve it's potential is just silly. The pics I posted were simply a distraction from the usual 'dripping-with-nectar- bud pics we all love. Let's not forget how we all get from point A to point B. Healthy leaves and roots = big buds. How you get there is your business. Use all the tricks in the book if you want- don't care. I don't think a single person here would be stupid enough to think a plant comes out of the ground sporting big, healthy buds. It's the leaves, stupid. Go ahead- pull every one of those pesky, green bastards off the plant if that's what you've heard is the way to go. Meanwhile, I'll be sacking up my buds while you're waiting for your plant to recover from the massive dose of stupidity you just gave it. Before flaming me with all the 'old hippy' comments about how I grow, go do your own research. I've had 30 years to do mine so you'll have some catching up to do. In the meantime, plant two identical strains at the same time, in the same medium, the same light source and watering schedule. Go ahead and remove a few leaves on one of them. Hell, go ahead and take all those damn things off. Report back here and tell me what you find. All due respect to those of you who truly have discovered new methods for growing that actually produce higher yields. It's your research, time and efforts that move us forward. My guess is, these methods generally do not produce better results by removing foliage to increase light to lower branches. I love this one, too, '....remove lower fan leaves and excess foliage so the plant can concentrate on making flowers.' Say what? The only thing that plant will be concentrating on is where it's going to get it's next meal when you take it's food source away. Need more light on the lower branches? Add more bulbs or plant the thing outside and leave it alone. This is just my two cents based on what has worked for me. Go grow weed however you want, I really couldn't give a shit, but don't come to the forums begging for answers when you decide to try some 'new and improved' method for growing a weed that's proven it can grow perfectly fine with absolutely NO human intervention. Growers like myself that grow 'old school' (god I hate that terminology) have already figured out there's no need to babysit these fucking plants. Control their environment if you must but then just let the damn things grow, you won't be disappointed.

 

[Uncle Ben]

I have posted that R.C. Clarke ditty (in the form of a discussion we had on defoliation many years ago) in every one of the many defoliation threads.

I see the ignorance of some is as un-nerving to you as it is me.

UB

 

[Sativied]

FINALLY!!! Someone posts something 'on topic'. This was my original intent with the tribute to leaves. All I intended to do with this whole 'tribute' thing was to agree with the idea that aimlessly removing leaves from an otherwise healthy plant to somehow improve it's potential is just silly.

OK Ok ok ok...

Based on a few hours objective reading (Robert, Mel, Ed, Jose and other reputable sources)

1. Removing leaves removes essential reserves for primary nutes, which are mobile, so the plant can transport them to where they are needed. For example from old leaves to young new shoots when there is a nutes def in the medium.
2. Removing healthy leaves can cause stunting/delay partly because the total amount of photosynthesis becomes smaller for the plant. Large leaves create a shadow but do so by catching light for the entire plant - an essential process for creating new material including plants, flowers, buds, etc.
3. Removing leaves can slow the transition to flowering, which causes the stretching to go on longer with the nett result being just having less leaves.
4. Removing leaves can cause stress, hence a decrease in yield.
5. "The buds that form from leaf axils with leaves removed are noticeably smaller than those where the leaves have been left on the branch."
6. Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic change. [I too expected that would change a few people's minds...]
7. Removing leaves weakens the plants and makes it more susceptible to pests and deceases.

That's largely translated "back" to English from an excerpt of a dumbed-down dutch post "The slaughtering of innocent leaves" which I wrote for some people on my side of the pond (including sources of course). Mainly to see if they had any valid rational argument or decent side-by-side test experience or whatever... I don't need to explain how that went...

 

[Sir.Ganga]

The whole problem with this debate is you have ramrods on oneside of the debate! Nice read though...If you look around you will see studies for the other side from legitimate author also. The whole thing about proof is a joke...anyone with any knowledge knows that all these studies, for or against, can not be backed because they are not DOUBLE BLIND STUDIES. Until there are its all here say. I could easily post a study done on vineyards that prove otherwise. One can only judge for themselves for their gardens...choose wisely because half your crop depends on it.

 

[Uncle Ben]

.... I could easily post a study done on vineyards that prove otherwise.

As vineyard owner - why don't you "easily post that study".

It takes 13 - 15 leaves to ripen a cluster of grapes, and that's a fact.

The 7 points Satived presented are correct.

UB

 

[ilikecheetoes]

how are you going to double blind or even blind test defoliating?

A blind or blinded experiment is a test or experiment in which information about the test that might lead to bias in the results is concealed from the tester, the subject, or both until after the test.[SUP][1][/SUP] Bias may be intentional or unconscious. If both tester and subject are blinded, the trial is a double-blind trial.

Wait you could use a blind gardener that cant see the leaves or lack thereof.

 

[PJ Diaz]

As vineyard owner - why don't you "easily post that study".

It takes 13 - 15 leaves to ripen a cluster of grapes, and that's a fact.

The 7 points Satived presented are correct.

UB

How's this?: http://www.ajevonline.org/content/46/3/306.short

• 
  [*=left]Article[h=1]Partial Defoliation of Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon/99 Richter: Effect on Root Growth, Canopy Efficiency; Grape Composition, and Wine Quality[/h]
  
  

  • 
    [*=left]J. J. Hunter,
    [*=left]H. P. Ruffner,
    [*=left]C. G. Volschenk and
    [*=left]D. J. Le Roux

  -Author Affiliations
  

  • Plant Physiologist, Plant Physiologist and Agricultural Research Technician, respectively, Nietvoorbij Institute for Viticulture and Oenology, Private Bag X5026, 7599 Stellenbosch, Republic of South Africa
  • Enzymologist, Institute of Plant Biology, Mycology and Phytochemistry, University of Zürich, Zollikerstrasse 107, CH-8008 Zürich, Switzerland.

  ​
  [h=2]Abstract[/h]
  Vitis vinifera L. cv. Cabernet Sauvignon/99 Richter was grown under field conditions. The effect of partial defoliation (33%) in the lower half of the canopy at berry set stage, and thereafter at pea-size and veraison, respectively, on root development, distribution, and composition as well as on canopy efficiency, yield, grape composition, and wine quality was investigated. Defoliation evidently stimulated occurrence of fine and extension roots, which may have increased the absorptive capacity of the root system. Root number decreased with increasing depth and roots occurred predominantly in the top 800 mm of the soil profile. Starch was the principal carbohydrate storage form in the roots, irrespective of root size. Starch synthesis appeared not affected by root age. Sucrose and organic acid patterns were similar. Citric and tartaric acids were the main organic acids in roots, followed by malic acid. Elevated sugar and organic acid levels were found in roots of treated vines. The results demonstrate that the remaining leaves of partially defoliated vines were able to sustain normal metabolic functions in the roots. Canopy density was efficiently reduced by partial defoliation, leading to increased light penetration, fruit exposure, and photosynthetic activity of mature and old leaves. Although partially defoliated vines had much less leaf area per gram fresh berry mass at ripeness, yield increased considerably with defoliation at pea-size and veraison. Root density, yield, and cane mass were related. Grape total soluble sugar content was unaffected, but titratable acidity increased and the pH of the must decreased with partial defoliation. Ostensible increases in wine constituents (anthocyanins, phenolics), color density, cultivar character intensity, and overall wine quality were found in wines from treated vines.​

 

[Uncle Ben]

How's this?: http://www.ajevonline.org/content/46/3/306.short

Very interesting, thanks for the link. There is a lot more than what meets the eye and what you cherry picked. That was a S. African study and to be valid under all conditions, it would need to be replicated with many varietals grown and managed under different climes and terroirs in different areas. I know leafing on the east side is recommended by TX A&M in the fruiting zone but that is primarily for the sake of reducing a compound in the grape that contributes to herbaceous. I don't agree and I'm not about to leaf. My customers are producing premium wines. TX A&M has never presented wines for examination produced from partially defoliated vines and those left untact. This (Texas) isn't Napa. Our grapes cook enough in this Texas heat. There are plenty of studies showing exact cluster temps and how it affects grape quality. There is a study that totally refutes that recommendation of leafing, saying all a grape cluster needs to be at its prime is 10% dappled light in untreated vines. http://www.winebusiness.com/wbm/?go=getArticleSignIn&dataId=45457 You have to be a member to get the whole enchilada.

Managing Your Canopy to Prevent Overexposed Fruit

Wine quality may be at risk when fruit is overexposed to sunlight or when too many leaves are removed from the fruit zone.
by Mark Greenspan

Sunlight is probably more important to winegrowing than is both water or nutrient availability, and its availability throughout the year limits the regions where winegrapes may be successfully grown. I frequently see vineyards with leaves stripped from the fruit zone, with clusters hanging helplessly, baking in the midday sun. Perhaps some members of our industry have looked at the cover of Richard Smart and Mike Robinson's Sunlight into Wine1 book without getting further into the meat of ...

 

[Sativied]

Plant Physiologist, Plant Physiologist and Agricultural Research Technician, respectively, Nietvoorbij Institute for Viticulture and Oenology, Private Bag X5026, 7599 Stellenbosch, Republic of South Africa

Funny, "Nietvoorbij" means "not over", as in this is not over yet

Personally I can easily dismiss the entire study based on one word: grapes. The 7 items I listed sum up info from cannabis experts. That doesn't mean I don't trust the source or info, but it definitely means one cannot simply assume it applies to cannabis as well. Hence, we don't know if it's automatically true for cannabis (in let's say western climates and closets) as well.

To try and have a real discussion about this and few other controversial topics locally I posted the following and I think it applies here too:

1. Figure out what we know to be true.
2. Spend some time thinking about it.
3. Determine the best course of action.

From http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/building-logical-arguments.html

Point 1 is key. Decisions or a course of action should be based on what you know to be true, on information that is accurate and relevant amongst others traits (and not on beliefs, wishful-thinking or 'opinions'). I know the 7 items I listed are true. I do not know if it's true that defoliating MJ has any positive effect that would outweigh most or all the 7 cons in such a way that it changes something. Add step 2 and 3 and you'll know what to do... or in this case, what 'not' to do.

 

[TonightYou]

Just wanted to give props to uncle ben. As many others have benefited from his knowledge, I have avoided mistakes as well. I purchased Mel Franks book on his advice, stopped loving my plants to death and bought Jacks instead of the bottle racket.

By the way, since switching to Jacks I haven't had any of the problems I faced before and the added benefit of using all in one. Plus crop now cost a few dollars in nutes compared to over $50 for each harvest.

So thanks again Uncle Ben. Many of us do appreciate your advice and input. Tbh I'd have a hard time dealing with some of this juvenile nonsense.

 

[chuck estevez]

University of Bologna, pretty much says it all!!!!

 

[Sativied]

I know it's early and all, wake-and-bake and all, and it could be 'me' but I think someone needs to reread the study above a couple of times:

The effectiveness of early leaf removal on [already/too] high-yielding cultivars Sangiovese and Trebbiano (Vitis vinifera L.) was investigated as a tool for reducing crop potential and for inducing looser clusters that are less susceptible to rot.

So... they investigated how leaf removal could be used as a tool to 'reduce' crop potential, to 'induce' popcorn...

Fruit set, cluster weight, berry number per cluster, berry size, and cluster compactness were reduced by all defoliation treatments as compared to non-defoliated shoots.

Overall, early defoliation may be an excellent tool for yield control, replacing time-consuming manual cluster thinning.

How is that research a valid argument to defoliate... it logically only works as argument not to defoliate MJ. They investigated means to create more popcorn... I could have told them that

 

[PJ Diaz]

OK Ok ok ok...

Based on a few hours objective reading (Robert, Mel, Ed, Jose and other reputable sources)

1. Removing leaves removes essential reserves for primary nutes, which are mobile, so the plant can transport them to where they are needed. For example from old leaves to young new shoots when there is a nutes def in the medium.
2. Removing healthy leaves can cause stunting/delay partly because the total amount of photosynthesis becomes smaller for the plant. Large leaves create a shadow but do so by catching light for the entire plant - an essential process for creating new material including plants, flowers, buds, etc.
3. Removing leaves can slow the transition to flowering, which causes the stretching to go on longer with the nett result being just having less leaves.
4. Removing leaves can cause stress, hence a decrease in yield.
5. "The buds that form from leaf axils with leaves removed are noticeably smaller than those where the leaves have been left on the branch."
6. Leaf removal may also cause sex reversal resulting from a metabolic change. [I too expected that would change a few people's minds...]
7. Removing leaves weakens the plants and makes it more susceptible to pests and deceases.

That's largely translated "back" to English from an excerpt of a dumbed-down dutch post "The slaughtering of innocent leaves" which I wrote for some people on my side of the pond (including sources of course). Mainly to see if they had any valid rational argument or decent side-by-side test experience or whatever... I don't need to explain how that went...

How do you really think you can be objective when you obviously have a preconceived notion based on some lengthy post you made in the past, which you hold so dearly. Your arguments are inconsistent. One study posted you simply dismiss because it's based on grapes. Then another you go into detail to debunk a different grape study -- it's still about grapes right, so by you're theory your debunking is invalid.

While I do agree that Sir Ganja's post wasn't really a good example of how defoliation might increase yield, but it did point out a couple of other interesting findings which I also found in some other grape defoliation studies. I choose not to post all of those studies, but they are interesting nonetheless. I find it interesting that brix levels went up in the defoliated grapes, as well as a shift in other chemical compounds.

I'm not saying that defoliation is beneficial in every situation, but to discount it as harmful or not beneficial at any time is simply ignorant. Some of these grape studies actually imply that there is a genuine possibility of increasing chemical properties of cannabis through selective leaf removal, including potency.

Also, your "7 truths" are not true in every case. Sorry.

 

[TonightYou]

Sir Ganga, its not blindly following someone, its realizing that this dude knows his shit when it comes to basic botany. For fucks sake, if you followed up on UB suggestions you'd see there is science behind his suggestions. Plus I think you need to reasses your reading comprehension skills as you failed to understand what others pointed out (purpose of the study and why).

 

[Uncle Ben]

Just wanted to give props to uncle ben. As many others have benefited from his knowledge, I have avoided mistakes as well. I purchased Mel Franks book on his advice, stopped loving my plants to death and bought Jacks instead of the bottle racket.

By the way, since switching to Jacks I haven't had any of the problems I faced before and the added benefit of using all in one. Plus crop now cost a few dollars in nutes compared to over $50 for each harvest.

So thanks again Uncle Ben. Many of us do appreciate your advice and input. Tbh I'd have a hard time dealing with some of this juvenile nonsense.

Appreciate the feedback.

Grow hard,
Tio

 

[Uncle Ben]

This is how a one pound plant should look before flower!

Wow fellas, look at this hehe!

<deleted image and post posted by Sir.Troll)

Excuse me? What in the hell is THAT shit? That crap won't yield 10 grams, you loud mouth newbie fraud.

NOW shut the fuck up,

No, YOU shut the fuck up and stay out of my threads, ya worthless posing troll.

Oh, so you're done with me now, eh? oooooooooooooooooo......... (fuckin' idiot.....)

I can spot such a young newb as this a mile off. They always subscribe to ridiculous approaches to botany and write like an immature 15 year old.

Uncle Ben

 

[TonightYou]

Well I appreciate the wisdom and time you drop on this site. Getting a little hippie love on ya, but this isn't something ya have to do, but rest assured there are many of us who value you. I joined this site due to you. I lurked forever and gleaned so much info and dispelled myths from you.

As a gardener before I became a grower, I seem to have lost my way over complicating a plant. As someone who appreciates science and logic over myths and old wives tales, you are more than on point.

Credit were credit is due. Fuck all the knobheads and their voodoo.

 

[TonightYou]

Learn how to spell and the proper use of grammar.

It seems people have a negative light of him because he is direct and doesn't coddle "stuiped" users.
I prefer his directness and factual input.