24hour light cycle good or bad ?

[Hubbabubba]

I respect the information you have collected @brock1 but it I see many holes in the internet extracts and in the context your using them.

It also unfortunately doesn’t address the posts you called incorrect.

 

Definitely an interesting read. Thanks.

[brock1]

1 hour ago, Hubbabubba said:

You seem a decent person @stu194 so have a good read back and see were the emoji’s start, or is this as we have witnessed this week a will attack anyone how call’s out a paying member thing?

Come on dude this is not a forum class war. Paying members being called out? This is meant to be a intellectual debate on what a day neutral plant is not a class war. Don't bring that nonsense into this please. We can have a adult debate without that. 

[Hubbabubba]

Just now, brock1 said:

Come on dude this is not a forum class war. Paying members being called out? This is meant to be a intellectual debate on what a day neutral plant is not a class war. Don't bring that nonsense into this please. We can have a adult debate without that. 

Do you read the irony in your post?

[brock1]

21 minutes ago, Hubbabubba said:

I respect the information you have collected @brock1 but it I see many holes in the internet extracts and in the context your using them.

It also unfortunately doesn’t address the posts you called incorrect.

 

Definitely an interesting read. Thanks.

How so @Hubbabubba ? I don't understand how you don't get that if the scientific community consider plant's that flower with over 16hr of light day neutral (auto flowering) because of the mutation that causes it being present and fuctionig. It makes no sense not to as these are the test standards in labs to determine short day, long day & day neutral in labs. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by brock1

[brock1]

Just now, Hubbabubba said:

Do you read the irony in your post?

Not i don't. I didn't mention paid subscription members getting special treatment you did. If you didn't that post wouldn't even exist. Now are you genuinely here to cause trouble because that is how its coming across now and I have no time for that. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by brock1

[Hubbabubba]

@brock1We are going around in circles with your distraction . I understand your not going to justify calling my posts on Autos untrue with an explanation.
Now we have a thread full of unrelated junk from members not involved in the discussion.

Im hopeful an admin can come along and remove all the unrelated clutter. Perhaps we can then get back to the matter of unresolved Auto flower traits.  

[brock1]

1 hour ago, Hubbabubba said:

I respect the information you have collected @brock1 but it I see many holes in the internet extracts and in the context your using them.

It also unfortunately doesn’t address the posts you called incorrect.

 

Definitely an interesting read. Thanks.

If you wanting to know the source its from ncbi.nlm.nih.gov from a paper called Day neutral flowering. Ots uses rudy auto's in the study.

Edited April 19, 2022 by brock1

[brock1]

Just now, Hubbabubba said:

@brock1We are going around in circles with your distraction . I understand your not going to justify calling my posts on Autos untrue with an explanation.
Now we have a thread full of unrelated junk from members not involved in the discussion.

Im hopeful an admin can come along and remove all the unrelated clutter. Perhaps we can then get back to the matter of unresolved Auto flower traits.  

Go find the article it will explain Auto flowering traits are on a genetic level to you if you can understand the scientific terminology

 

now let's just leave it at that. 

Edited April 19, 2022 by brock1

[Hubbabubba]

Just now, brock1 said:

Go find the article it will explain Auto flowering traits are on a genetic level to you if you can understand the scientific terminology 

Meow 

[brock1]

Just now, Hubbabubba said:

Meow 

Come on dude. You know its wasn't meat like that at all just a lot of genes and protein for example are not fully names on these papers they just use things like FT, G1, ect. You really took offence to being called out that your statement isn't correct. I didn't see your going out to prove that your statement was correct in any of this to be fair. Now your just out right acting like a child over what could of been a great discussion 

[Shumroom]

Apologies  

 

i thought we were in brock1's breeding thread.

 

We're all here to learn from each other,

not have arguments over misunderstandings.

 

 

Atb

 

 

Edited April 19, 2022 by Shumroom
Wrong thread

[Baron von greenback]

6 hours ago, Shumroom said:

Apologies  

 

i thought we were in brock1's breeding thread.

 

We're all here to learn from each other,

not have arguments over misunderstandings.

 

 

Atb

 

 

Shit i dont even understand the arguement hah ha

[Shumroom]

Two different points of view, 

I think 

 

Atb 

 

 

[Newcouch]

i think we can agree, today that the only correct cycle is 4 20.

[Crow River]

I'm not claiming any expertise here. I have only grown autos so far. I have tried 18/6, 20/4 and 24/0 and combinations of these. I've also grown just under sunlight.

 

What I can say from my current grow: as my lights are a bit underpowered, I vegged under 24/0, then when the plants started flowering I switched to 20/4. This was for two reasons: to allow more THC production and preservation, and also because the plants stretched and DLI needed to be a bit lower due to proximity to the light source (restricted headroom). 

 

What I observed was that autos grow very vigorously under 24/0, but with relatively short internal spacing. Once they have even a brief dark period, they stretch more. It's possible of course that with more powerful lights you may get much squatter, bushier plants under 24/0 and less pronounced stretching with a dark period due to DLI being higher. I'm due to upgrade my lights for the next grow, so I'll find out soon.