biochemical changes in flower and reveg - please enlighten - Page 2

lab_rat_x · 05-22-2002, 06:35 PM

i made a post to a website that has info on ethylene, as well as other plant hormones. it is a gasseous hormone i believe that emminates mostly from the root structure. ethylene, it will causes leaves to fall off, make open wounds, fruit to ripen on the branch, and make ripened fruit rotten, and "ages" (sessesence sp?) the plant. its bad mojo! ethylene doesn't become a problem until late flowering it seems. but an interesting note, unhealthy plants produce the ethylene hormone in greater amount. a few online hydro shops sell "ethylene adsorbers" pellet packs.
i believe i am "somewhat "accurate in the discription of ethylene, have a look at the site, good info, i am still trying to learn it.
plant hormones... the dark science of growing......
peace...
rat

Delta · 05-22-2002, 09:20 PM

can't forget about phytochrome, either

depending on the reveg spectrum, cryptochrome can also be activated and that can counter act the phytochrome ... blue/white and UVb speeds up the reveg process

sure i've done it tons of times and it does work

but I still maintain from an empirical point of view, I've reversed them once, twice, even three or four times ... each time, I notice a degrade in vigor and overall quality in the phenotype. Not because the roots are bound, or anything horticultural; I'm talking clones of clonse of clones of a revegged donor. Revegged cubed, at least. I've even gone so far as to take a cutting off a flower strain that I have a valid mum in veg, then, put them to the test .... 6+ months after the initial reveg, too.

cannabis is an anual, we may not understand the mechanism fully, but the proof is in the pudding

i simply don't believe that one can't notice the effects of revegging after the 2nd or 3rd time on the same pheno

Vigor suffers. Senesence is quicker. Maybe it's an advantage, too ... got a long flowering strain? Reveg it and see what happens.

So how do y'all explain that?

Vegetative maturity?

So, chopping the plant in half, leave a few leaves on, maybe a bud or two ... flush the soil and wait. Didn't ABA come into play here somewhere along the line?

Have you ever seen a revegged from flower plant start herming on you? While the original donor didn't? Or maybe it just herms more?

Surely, mother nature isn't so simple.

Follow KRS1's advice and just start over unless you are trying to save an awesome pheno ... and then .. will it ever really be the same?

See for yourself ...

lurkapup · 05-22-2002, 09:41 PM

I think in some ways this threads driven by a desire to keep any phenotype more than a special one

... particularly for the starters amongst us with only one growspace .. its that issue of where do you keep the viable genes while you flower your plants?

mine wont survive out of the growspace .. I dont have enough light in my house ... Ive run out of closets .. and I dont really want a light randomly sitting in the middle of the lounge etc ...

this has been my single biggest quandry since I started growing .. and it hasnt really gone away ..

*OzGrowa* · 05-23-2002, 03:14 AM

Quote:

Follow KRS1's advice and just start over unless you are trying to save an awesome pheno ... and then .. will it ever really be the same?

For that special pheno you simply reveg the plant, at the first sign of useable, cloneable growth you clone, the new plant will throw roots and the cycle begins again, this is the only real way to ensure the stability from the hormones and the phenotype.

Oz

lurkapup · 05-23-2002, 05:40 AM

that you're saying you can do it .. and get away with it without having a dodgy clone if you have to .. but that its not a good practice to have as your standard cloning method?

*OzGrowa* · 05-23-2002, 02:06 PM

there is nothing dodgy about it

its just a straight forward clone.

I rarely need to do it as I allways keep mother plants. Its for a situation where you may have flowered from bagseed or all the plants you have are flowering but you want to keep that 1 special plant, so you reveg it then re-clone it. The clone will be just like the other in every way, absolutley identical.

Oz

lurkapup · 05-23-2002, 02:50 PM

the stressors from the fowering phase I take it? umm duh sorry kinda of obvious since thats why you said to do it .. just labouring the point to get it into my dazed skull

Delta · 05-23-2002, 05:39 PM

I'd be a hypocrat if I said don't do it.

Some more data; it hasn't worked on every strain I've tried it on. It's like some strains like to revert while others are extremely stubborn.

The genes are unchanged, I completely agree. DNA remains the same and a reveg'ed plant can be mated and produce identical offspring to a never flowered donor of the same phenotype.

I'm not given to just saying that the clone of the revegged mum is as robust as the original, from seed. Or, even comparable to the identical strain from different mums: 1 flowered and revegged (long day/long night/long day), and 1 never flowered (long days, always), .. what I've seen simply doesn't support this hypothesis. I'm not exactly sure the cause, but I am led to believe that ethylene and auxin are playing a part and along with the photoperiod, ultimately activates a signal transduction pathway that never gets actived under long days. Once the pathway is created, I believe that the cuttings off the revegged mum have build this pathway (before we cut them off) and the cuttings from the never flowered mum does not have them. This, I think, is what eventually leads to the more rapid decline towards senesence in clones from a reveged donor.

Such controversy ...

ciratac · 05-28-2002, 08:56 AM

> Such controversy ...

No controversy, just curiosity. Just to restate my position
(if you can even call it that), I'm not debating whether revegging and
cloning is as good as cloning from a mother. The anecdotal evidence
(from KRS_ONE and Delta9420 in particular) is that clones from a reveg
are less vigorous than those from a never-flowered plant, and I have no
problem believing that, since we're forcing this plant to do what was
never intended.

Despite this, I'm doing the revegging because it's really the most practical
way for me to get another harvest. Believe me, if I could keep a mother
plant, I would.

I'm really just curious about what happens during reveg that causes subsequent
veg/flower cycles to be less successful. I get the feeling that it's
not well-understood, but Delta is getting to the point:

> I am led to believe that ethylene and auxin are playing a part and along
> with the photoperiod, ultimately activates a signal transduction pathway
> that never gets actived under long days. Once the pathway is created,
> I believe that the cuttings off the revegged mum have build this pathway
> (before we cut them off) and the cuttings from the never flowered mum
> does not have them. This, I think, is what eventually leads to the
> more rapid decline towards senesence in clones from a reveged donor.

This is kind of the picture I've had in my mind. So my question boils down
to "What is that pathway and why can't it be shut off again?"

There's also the possibility that the pathway does get shut off again, but
the flowering process has caused structural changes which interfere
with the repetition of the cycle.

I suppose if we know the mechanism responsible, we can then ask, "Is there
something we can do to thwart this mechanism to improve the reveg process?"

Only for those of us without the means to keep a mother plant, of course.

Thanks for all the good input. I'm learning a lot here.

*OzGrowa* · 05-29-2002, 02:30 AM

Quote:

I suppose if we know the mechanism responsible, we can then ask, "Is there
something we can do to thwart this mechanism to improve the reveg process?"

Yes, and the key to kicking any plant in the guts is Gibberelins from blood meal, seaweed, kelp for the organic growers or synthetic forms for the hydro people. Nitrozyme is the best product for both soil and hydro for just this that I have come cross, its loaded with a whole heap of useful things. I should have expaned on this in my last post now I think about it.

The presumption of hormonal pathways and a transduction threshold necessitates the possibility of xtinction of the pathway due to redundency, a plant will not sustain a redundant pathway, its not efficient in terms of the overall system and is preculded by the fact that the daylength will return to long andfrom this will the ebb and flow ofall the ga's 1 through 3 and even the enzyme precursors to the hormones themselves.Additionally the use of rooting hormone durin the cloning process effects a revitalisation inany of the genetic material I have ever cloned, revegging the plant used for flowering is not desireable but cloning that plant and begging anew is.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate View Forum Leaders Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read

Hot Products: