3 thoughts on “#39: Mountain View Hops Part 2: Sexy Cones!

  1. Can you explain how night interruption response differs in hops vs. cannabis? I know that night interruption limits flower formation in cannabis, as well as the chance of inducing hermaphroditism.

    Also, if mid-Atlantic yields/side arm formation suffer due to lower total solar insolation, why wouldn’t lighting help to remedy this? Regardless of the effect of the night interruption you’re promoting, if low light conditions reduce side arm formation then add more light. And if that’s bullshit, why is it common practice in South Africa? Their breeding material is specifically selected for shorter daylength requirements, possibly by down-regulating the relationship between solar insolation and sidearm formation?

    Can you further explain the relationship between insolation value, auxin formation and sidearm formation? It sounds like yield is relative to sidearm production, and sidearm production is relative to insolation value the vegetation was exposed to prior to the auxin response of top-wire position, which means daylength IS transitively tied to flowering and yield potential by increasing the production of the things that produce the cones.

    Also, can you explain the mechanism of alpha acid and/or soft resin production related to latitude? Seems counterintuitive that the low vigor influenced by lower insolation values in lower latitudes would increase secondary metabolite production, unless that metabolite production has an inverse relationship to total biomass.


    1. Or, if minimum internode count is reached and dark period is sufficiently long then the plant will flower? So supplemental light in insufficient daylength regions would delay the flowering trigger until optimal internode count can be reached?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *