Investigating the Effects of Dark Period Light Exposure on Sex Expression In Female Cannabis sativa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hermaphroditism in female plants is a common problem in the cannabis industry. Cannabis sativa florogenesis is dependent on photoperiod, and industry experts suspect disruptions to the photoperiod contribute to hermaphroditism. The goals of this report are to (i) determine the relationship between hermaphroditism and dark period light exposure in C. sativa, (ii) identify a causal mechanism that could explain female hermaphroditism, and (iii) recommend a course of action for indoor cultivators. A literature search suggested that hermaphroditism in C. sativacould be the result of a very low fluence response. To test this idea, 403 plants grown indoors were inspected for male flowers. The distance of each plant from the nearest grow room door—the proposed source of dark period light—was used to calculate relative dark period light intensity values for each plant. Linear regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between relative light intensity and males per plant. The average males per plant was 0.136, compared with an intercept coefficient of 0.125 (p=0.00197, R2=0.0162). Based on these results, proximity to a door does not affect hermaphroditism. Because the actual light intensities during dark periods in this study were likely too low to cause very low fluence responses, this study cannot confidently evaluate the relationship between dark period light exposure and hermaphroditism in C. sativa. Management at the study site would be advised not to spend resources addressing grow room door light leaks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".