Quote:

---

I definitely wouldn't want to be around the UVB lights when they're on though.

---

Ha, I was going to make a thread on this. I was doing a more comprehensive search on google to find some more info to help with the thread, and I found this on the second page. Of course after reading it, I remembered reading this before.

This definitely seems to be the way to go. THC has high capabilities of absorbing UV-B, protecting the plant from the radiation. The idea that the plant would produce more THC to protect it from its presence would seem reasonable. It should also be noted that HPS essentially provides no UV-B, which is most commonly used for indoor flowering. It would definitely seem that there would be a significant opportunity for THC production that is being lost without a source for UV-B.

The reptile lights would probably be the best source. You'd probably need a few unless you found one with a lot of watts (like this one). A tanning light would do it too, but would be pretty expensive I would assume.

I've heard that its best to not leave them on for more than four hours a day because UV-B is harmful to plants, but I would think this is something best determined through one's own experimentation. Simply turning them off when you're in the room, or having them on when one knows one won't be in the room, negates any threat to oneself.

 

Quote:

---

coda said:
Also forgot to mention most people turn these lights off in the last few weeks of flowering to prevent the light from destroying any active alkaloids.

---

Quote:

---

coda said:
Apparently UV light in the early stages of flowering encourages heavy, and early, trichrome formation.

---

Yes, but what is really important is the production of THC as well. Trichrome production doesn't necessarily equate into THC production.

Quote:

---

Sirius said:
I've heard that its best to not leave them on for more than four hours a day because UV-B is harmful to plants, but I would think this is something best determined through one's own experimentation. Simply turning them off when you're in the room, or having them on when one knows one won't be in the room, negates any threat to oneself.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, but what is really important is the production of THC as well. Trichrome production doesn't necessarily equate into THC production.

---

Quote:

---

The reptile lights would probably be the best source. You'd probably need a few unless you found one with a lot of watts (like this one). A tanning light would do it too, but would be pretty expensive I would assume.

---

Quote:

---

I hadn't read this before. Do you remember where you found anything about that?

---

Quote:

---

The round head of the trich magnifys the uvb in late flowering stages until they cloud up and turn amber because they stop acting as magnifiers. Pot TV did a show recently that shed much lite on this subject.

---

Quote:

---

Do you plan on experimenting with this, coda?

---

Quote:

---

Could you use a UVC bulb as a supplemental light at say a certain distance from your plants?

---

Quote:

---

coda said:
yes, i know this. I was just pointing out one of the benefits to the UV light. More trich's = more protection for your plants = healthier, happier, plants = more potent plants = ....etc

---

I was just throwing it out there since it hadn't been mentioned yet.

Quote:

---

It really depends on the size of your grow tho.  More plants and more sq ft = more uv lights needed.  The grows i have seen usually have at least two lights in there.  The lights themselves are relatively inexpensive so purchasing a couple won't put too big a dent in your pocket.  Make sure to get the 10% UV bulbs tho, they're more efficient then the 5% ones.

---

The cheap ones run at lower watts and can only penetrate a few inches. How many one would actually need, of course, just depends on the specifics of one's grow, like you said. I was just saying that one of the inexpensive bulbs alone probably isn't going to do it.

I also ran across an article on reptile lighting and pet supplies in general, regarding the lack of truth-in-advertising laws on the products. Here's an excerpt. There's also a list of ones that actually do produce UV-B.I don't know enough about any of this, but just tossing it out there as a grain of salt...

Quote:

---

The problems with truth in advertising goes beyond the misleading use of the term "full-spectrum". When it comes to UVB-producing fluorescents, the percentages given are not particularly useful as the manufacturers rarely tell you what that is a percentage of. If you have a light producing, for example, 20% of its total wavelengths in the UV range, and of that 10% is in the needed UVB range, while another light produces 40% of its wavelengths in the UV range, with 6 percent of that in the UVB needed range, the product with 6% of the 40% is going to produce more UVB in the needed UVB range than the other product. The product with "10%" on the package may look like the better light than the one that says "6%", but it isn't if that "10%" isn't providing enough UVB for your reptile.

---

Quote:

---

UV light degrades THC, this is why you don't dry your weed in the sun.  When using UV lights in your grow there is a certain point where you want to stop using them because the trichromes aren't utilizing the light correctly.  This happens when the trichs start going from cloudy to amber (towards the end of the cycle).  At this point the actives are beginning to over mature anyways (amber trichs yadda yadda) so the extra UV light on them (IMO) just helps to further degrade the goodies in your plant.  Here's a slightly better explanation:

---

Quote:

---

What you said about THC production is true, BUT, it's because of the increased trichrome production that your THC levels are increasing.

---

Quote:

---

After watching someones grow produce trichromes by the end of the first week was enough to convince me to buy some, then, reading up on WHY it was so just made it concrete that i HAVE to have these in my next flowering cycle.

---

Exactly! It seems as logical as applying nutrients really.

Quote:

---

The cheap ones run at lower watts and can only penetrate a few inches. How many one would actually need, of course, just depends on the specifics of one's grow, like you said. I was just saying that one of the inexpensive bulbs alone probably isn't going to do it.

I also ran across an article on reptile lighting and pet supplies in general, regarding the lack of truth-in-advertising laws on the products. Here's an excerpt. There's also a list of ones that actually do produce UV-B.I don't know enough about any of this, but just tossing it out there as a grain of salt...

---

Quote:

---

Actually this is the point I was arguing against. THC itself is doing the absorption. Of course the trichrome production increases and this further increases the production of THC, but I would have to assume that THC production within individual trichromes increases as well. If the amount of trichromes stayed the same with the introduction of UV-B light, the THC production within the amount that is there would still increase. I think this is supported by the idea that the amount of trichromes in general doesn't equate into high levels of THC, even though it is reasonably safe to assume as much with varieties of cannabis used as drugs.

---

Quote:

---

coda said:
In that case having a light that isn't as strong would be a good thing. I can understand your concern with light penetration, but, considering how cheap these things are and how versatile they can be there's no reason not to add some to hit the lower portions of the plant.  In fact you could take the 4' tubes, put two on top, and buy two more to  place on opposite sides of the plants.  this way you have light coming from the top and the sides.

---

I agree with you completely on all of these points. I was just saying that it wouldn't take just one of these bulbs, but possibly a few. My friend is planning on using the inexpensive reptile ones, anyhow.

Quote:

---

hmm, i'll have to go back and read up on the biochemical process again, but it was to my understand that it was the trichromes that absorbed the UV light and the plant then used that absorption to increase the levels of THC.  I think we're thinking/saying the same things in just different words.

---

I'll read up more on this as well soon, but from what I've been reading, its THC that absorbs the UV-B light, the trichrome simply collecting it and magnifying it to the disc cell or something like that.