Abstract
Two common challenges reported by cannabis growers are low yields and small profit margins. Although recent research of cannabis yield has focused on lighting and nutrition, little research has examined how changes in other cultivation practices may be beneficial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the following two techniques to potentially improve yield: fertilizer restriction (FR) to reduce plant size and, thus, increase plant density and shoot number manipulation (SNM) to reduce shoot length and improve biomass partitioning. The FR technique involves leaching the substrate and providing only tap water for 0, 1, or 2 weeks at the start of flower initiation, whereas SNM involves pinching shoot tips 2, 3, or 4 times to produce 4, 8, or 16 shoots/plant, respectively. This study used a full factorial treatment design for a total of nine treatments (three FR × three SNM). Plants were flowered under 12-hour photoperiods for 8 weeks and then destructively harvested for data collection. The results demonstrated that both techniques improve plant productivity in different ways. The FR technique reduced all mass measurements (g/plant) and decreased plant area (m 2 /plant); therefore, the yield metrics (kg·m −2 ) increased with the increasing FR treatments. The SNM technique did not affect plant area, but more pinching events resulted in a decrease in reproductive shoot length (cm/shoot) and an increase in inflorescence to trim the dry mass ratio (inflorescence:trim). Shorter shoot lengths are desirable for eliminating trellis support netting, which helps growers reduce material costs and improve labor efficiency during harvest. Increasing the inflorescence:trim may also reduce labor costs related to trimming, which comprise the largest cost of production by many growers. Although both techniques offer advantages, there are trade-offs that must be considered in the context of overall profitability.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing fertilizer restriction reduced all per-plant mass measurements.
- Taxon
- Cannabis sativa L.
Cannabis sativat0 - Treatment
- FR techniquee0
- Outcome
- all mass measurements (g/plant)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The FR technique reduced all mass measurements (g/plant)”
t0“Cannabis sativa L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing fertilizer restriction decreased cannabis plant area.
- Taxon
- Cannabis sativa L.Cannabis sativat0
- Treatment
- FR techniquee0
- Outcome
- plant area (m 2 /plant)e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The FR technique reduced all mass measurements (g/plant) and decreased plant area (m 2 /plant)”
t0“Cannabis sativa L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Area based yield increased with increasing fertilizer restriction.
- Taxon
- Cannabis sativa L.Cannabis sativat0
- Treatment
- increasing FR treatmentse0
- Outcome
- yield metrics (kg·m −2 )e0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the yield metrics (kg·m −2 ) increased with the increasing FR treatments”
t0“Cannabis sativa L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoot number manipulation did not affect cannabis plant area.
- Taxon
- Cannabis sativa L.Cannabis sativat0
- Treatment
- SNM techniquee0
- Outcome
- plant areae0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The SNM technique did not affect plant area”
t0“Cannabis sativa L.”
Claim · model-written summary
More pinching events decreased reproductive shoot length.
- Taxon
- Cannabis sativa L.Cannabis sativat0
- Treatment
- more pinching eventse0
- Outcome
- reproductive shoot length (cm/shoot)e0
- Direction
- decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more pinching events resulted in a decrease in reproductive shoot length (cm/shoot)”
t0“Cannabis sativa L.”
Claim · model-written summary
More pinching events increased the inflorescence to trim dry mass ratio.
- Taxon
- Cannabis sativa L.Cannabis sativat0
- Treatment
- more pinching eventse0
- Outcome
- inflorescence to trim the dry mass ratio (inflorescence:trim)e0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more pinching events resulted in a decrease in reproductive shoot length (cm/shoot) and an increase in inflorescence to trim the dry mass ratio (inflorescence:trim)”
t0“Cannabis sativa L.”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · growth · Cannabis sativaPositive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
fertilization · yield · Cannabis sativaPositive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.