G
Guest 88950
: 
gotta love the free education you get here at the International Cannagraphic College.
thank you all
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Why is my unflushed plant turning yellow and dying?
- Thread starter maryjohn
- Start date
- Status
: gotta love the free education you get here at the International Cannagraphic College.
thank you all
did read posts, & debated replying or not...
whether included dolomite lime or azomite, or not, still seems to be plant eating itself up becauser it wants more magnesium - which it requires in large amount during flower.
since calcium translocates @ slower rate then other heavy metals, foliar feeding cal permits plant to grow large flowers w/out drawing reserves from roots, which leads to lower leaves yellowing...
but... if not useful data, ignore...
azomite has mainly trace micro-nutrients... not enough to overcome deficiencies...
whether finishing or not, the leaves in the 2nd pic look to be deprived of magnesium &/or calcium... not desirable.
while plant is finishing up, leaves should still not be cupped, tips pointing downwards, nor concaving inwards @ edges...
the leaves should be stading up-right, neither cupped up, nor down, & flat, full of turgor pressure making them open & accepting most light energy... & simultaneously expelling water into air... harder to do when leaves are cupped & in not so good health...
in any event, nice garden... maybe feed that cut additional mag & cal during first 2-3 weeks 7 flowering & wont occur next time...
but, maybe maryjohn has it all dialed & has own pattern.methods, etc, that need no further refining...
just ran across same issues w/ certain cultivars & found that cal & mag solved leaf discoloration, downward/upward tips, & inter-veinal chlorosis & yellowing in general... as another member pointed out as well, iron may be culprit..
but ca & mg definitely can be added to forestall deficiencies...
not really about 'flushing'... want plant to be healthiest until actual harvest.
flush...
where did *mistress* post that flushing is dogma?
flushing is a matter of taste... if have cultivar that can take nutes up until last day - feed it... not all chem+organic gardeners flush.... there are hydro gardeners that dont flush @ all...
one gardener that didnt flush @ all was growgreen... used to be on c*nn*bis world. ran e&f tables, hydroton & fnb... 2000ppm - & didnt flush... why? that gardener knew the strain they were growing, had nute regime dialed & knew how to feed just enough to affect taste, but not destroy it w/ ferts...
can post long, long thread on methods, if desired...
so, no flushing is not 'dogma'... it is dependent on strain, feeding regime & ability to wash away any residuals that may affect aromas, taste, or combustion...
if feed lightly, or feed-water-feed-water... then no flush is generally required. not new or novel... just recognition that you have fed lightly thru out season & accumulation is not issue...
can feed up until 72 hrs left... w/ 2.0+ec... & flush plants w/ h202 @ 30ml/gal... then water... should oxidize most undesired materials... & water wilo carry away... end.
&, btw, not many here agree w/ *mistress* on topics dealing w/ plants... but 'agreeing' is not object of website - gardening is... in its many forms & expressions...
if maryjohn happy w/ results... all that matters.
enjoy your garden!
You have rep disabled, so I can't give you any, mis. This is a great post. I overlooked half of it. Once you teased me for being cocky I got all sensitive.
Also sorry I accused you of dogma, you are clearly on a path of your own making.
Misstress, you should look into what happens to nutrient availability when soil is 15% or more organic matter (not counting functionally inert components like peat and coco). Apparently from a chem point of view, things become available at much wider ranges, and the lockout thing can't happen easily. Organic soil is like a marketplace. It can accomplish some amazing feats on its own, but if it is to serve the master (knew you would like that line), some regulations do have to be set down. I still feel the best example is trying to grow plants like drosera. Microorganisms in that case are kept in line by withholding the nutrient sources one finds in tap water to simulate a peat bog, showing just how impossible it is to empty the soil of nutes once the ball gets rolling.
Stepping back, I am really proud of our community here. This whole thread was mostly disagreements, yet all of us are getting along, more or less, and everyone feels free to speak their piece. The result is a great read, loaded with info from all the great people who responded with knowledge and experience. Thanks you so much.
Bingo! Sorry for butting into the middle without reading anything but I may need to leave on business for a few days and wanted to support what MJ is saying here. Aye, bioavailable (organic process) N is made available by 1/ protozoa munching bacteria or archaea
2/ direct feeding by fungi 3/ on a limited basis N fixing bacteria.
I'll keep reading and sorry If I said something already said.
This is a good thread. Disagreement without insults.
well, mj, consider the gauntlet laid down
personally i would have preferred it if your plant hadnt been so cold for the last few days as i think this may have contributed to its appearance, and as i said i feel the yellowing at the end is in my estimation 50% senescence and 50% allowing the nutes to run out in a timely fashion.
nevertheless this will be interesting. remind me of the strain you will be running in there this time mj?
i posted these pics on the other thread but i should also post them here as this is what makes me confident that i am at least partly right about this.
UK cheese about to be harvested
another uk cheese about to be harvested - this one had 20% less N guano and other amendments in the soil mix (it was diluted with 20% coco) both were grown at the same time in the same cab - as you can see it is much more yellow and tasted/smelt somewhat better. both were great though
cheers
V.
personally i would have preferred it if your plant hadnt been so cold for the last few days as i think this may have contributed to its appearance, and as i said i feel the yellowing at the end is in my estimation 50% senescence and 50% allowing the nutes to run out in a timely fashion.
nevertheless this will be interesting. remind me of the strain you will be running in there this time mj?
i posted these pics on the other thread but i should also post them here as this is what makes me confident that i am at least partly right about this.
UK cheese about to be harvested
another uk cheese about to be harvested - this one had 20% less N guano and other amendments in the soil mix (it was diluted with 20% coco) both were grown at the same time in the same cab - as you can see it is much more yellow and tasted/smelt somewhat better. both were great though
cheers
V.
yes, can be very difficult to diagnose...
provided opinion, thats all. could be entirely wrong...
just went thru several several gardens in which some plants required more mg & cal - especially during mid-late flowering... general reason why many, many ag crop prduction facilities use additional cal+mg+... & why nearly every co has a cal-mag fert...
gave opinion. again, could be wrong...
gypsum is only slightly soluble... good to let soak, or use as top-dressing, to seep thru media & loosen...
the issue w/ calcium is that it easily precipitates & changes form into bi-carbonates when interacting w/ some chems... mainly potassium. also hard to translocate - w/in plant... one part of plant can be ok... another part can have dificiency...
*mistress* can see the rep points, other cant... would make *mistress* blush if member maryjohn gave rep points
... especially since *mistress* is non-partisan/neutral when comes to media/organics/chems...try to avoid dogma & provide sci-facts, field experiments reported genuinely.
drops of water make canyons... so path can be made w/ even drips.
include 10% mineral matter... but rely on fertigation for nutritional value to plant.
can list the 10% mineral matter content of the mix... if interested... could be termed 'vegan' (non-animal). even 'organic'... but, point is to be effective & have balance of available electrical charges, ph stabilized...
however that is achieved is
...
just have fundamentally different p.o.v. regarding organics...
ultimately, everything in existence is 'organic'... even 'synthetics'... they were made by man/woman, who are 'natural' & 'organic'...
the issue is contaminating the media, plant &/or environment w/ excess wastes/chems, or organics... if no contamination & efficient use of whatever applied,
results...used to supply myco to media... plant success tabs, myco madness (humboldt nutes), etc, etc... no real way to confirm or deny presence. no way to test efficacy of inclusion of micro-organisms... except to not include them to see difference...
no difference observe from inclusion of myco & exclusion of myco...
so... since not growing myco for mycorrhizae's sake... eliminated...
if want myco, can grow in petrie dish... want large flowers, so use chelated, & highly assimilatable ferts to accomplish this.
others have diff view...
here, if myco wants into plants' roots, they will have to find own way there...
refuse to allocate resources to include a variable that cannot be measured, counted, or maintained w/ any accuracy...
unless have microscope examining many, many types of protozoa, amoeba, etc, etc... daily/weekly...
so... total disregard for myco. yes, blasphemy in organic soil forum, but plants like solution of charged elements going directly to roots more than they like bunch of microbes eating each other... @ least, *mistress* like ferts better...
... nice!enjoy your garden!
Verdant, looks to me like senescence was faster in the lighter soil. That's not exactly flushing. Empirically, it only makes sense to say the soil cut with coco resulted in a more stressed plant and better result than the other soil. What's to say cold, trauma, or other environmental conditions don't contribute?
In any case, I am not arguing that finding the perfect soil for the strain (not too comfy, not too stressful) is a waste of time. I am making an argument that "flushing", as conceptualized and practiced by organic gardeners in imitation of conventional growers, is the wrong approach, because it is not accomplishing the intended goal. It's like a religious ceremony to make the sun come up.
Lentils grown in rich soils are crap. But if you did some indoor lentils, let's say, in rich soil, and then tried to undo the damage at the end by flushing, you would be wasting your time. As my drosera story points out, growers who think you can flush soil are sorely mistaken. I do believe watering a plant to 150% runoff repeatedly will eventually help it die.
Adding coco, which is for all intents and purposes inert, limits microbial activity and density. How can it not? You have reduced food sources and living space. The biomass is simply less. Just like the desert has less going on than a swamp. Cutting your soil was a smart move. MJ is evolved to inhabit grasslands type soil. I got that from CT Guy, and haven't looked it up.
Now that you mention it, before I left, I took the cab away from the outside door (i had it there to lower the temps to simulate winter), and put it by the boiler. I didn't want anyone coming in the basement and tripping over it. My other strains will not get the same treatment. They panic in the low 60's. It's about 10-20 degrees warmer by the boiler depending on wind direction. The second pic from the bottom is a week or so into being chilled. In all, weeks 5-8 were spent in "winter". Also note: the plantlet, when I left, was not touching the heat shield. It put on 1-2 cm.
I thought I would run the blue burmese in there, but It's almost ready for transplant. The timing isn't right, as I have to compost the roots, do the EM thing, etc... My EM, btw, has a purple non-sulfur bacterium that can make its own food or eat. It can also fix N from the air.
In line behind them is menage a trois and a skunk x haze, both unsexed. I'll take some BB cuts today to make sure something is ready. I could take a cut from the same plant as I have a clone, but I want some smoking weed again.
I'm not using a huge container, which is supposed to be the way to do this. I think it will work anyway, or at least close.
The plantlet I showed, btw, is in slightly different soil.
In any case, I am not arguing that finding the perfect soil for the strain (not too comfy, not too stressful) is a waste of time. I am making an argument that "flushing", as conceptualized and practiced by organic gardeners in imitation of conventional growers, is the wrong approach, because it is not accomplishing the intended goal. It's like a religious ceremony to make the sun come up.
Lentils grown in rich soils are crap. But if you did some indoor lentils, let's say, in rich soil, and then tried to undo the damage at the end by flushing, you would be wasting your time. As my drosera story points out, growers who think you can flush soil are sorely mistaken. I do believe watering a plant to 150% runoff repeatedly will eventually help it die.
Adding coco, which is for all intents and purposes inert, limits microbial activity and density. How can it not? You have reduced food sources and living space. The biomass is simply less. Just like the desert has less going on than a swamp. Cutting your soil was a smart move. MJ is evolved to inhabit grasslands type soil. I got that from CT Guy, and haven't looked it up.
Now that you mention it, before I left, I took the cab away from the outside door (i had it there to lower the temps to simulate winter), and put it by the boiler. I didn't want anyone coming in the basement and tripping over it. My other strains will not get the same treatment. They panic in the low 60's. It's about 10-20 degrees warmer by the boiler depending on wind direction. The second pic from the bottom is a week or so into being chilled. In all, weeks 5-8 were spent in "winter". Also note: the plantlet, when I left, was not touching the heat shield. It put on 1-2 cm.
I thought I would run the blue burmese in there, but It's almost ready for transplant. The timing isn't right, as I have to compost the roots, do the EM thing, etc... My EM, btw, has a purple non-sulfur bacterium that can make its own food or eat. It can also fix N from the air.
In line behind them is menage a trois and a skunk x haze, both unsexed. I'll take some BB cuts today to make sure something is ready. I could take a cut from the same plant as I have a clone, but I want some smoking weed again.
I'm not using a huge container, which is supposed to be the way to do this. I think it will work anyway, or at least close.
The plantlet I showed, btw, is in slightly different soil.
the thing is mj, i think that the exhaustion of nutrients in the soil is one of the things that encourages senescence in the plant because it mimic how it would be in nature's seasonal cycle. growing sensi mj is removing what must be the major signal to senescence - not to mention that we standardize the light source seasons in an indoor grow, thats why i think getting the nutes to run short is an important practice to 'nudge' the plant in the right direction
i agree that it reduces the available food, but i imagine it changes quite a few things, it actually changed the phenotype of the uk cheese to an extent.
i am quite certain that the yellowing of the plant in the coco cut soil was to a large extent due to the nutes running short at the right time though - because i could see it beginning to happen around 3 weeks before harvest. i resisted the temptation to feed though because i knew that the plant would use the nutrition from its leaves and this would be enough to carry it through.
i remember reading somehwhere that coco helps make N more available too, so if this is true its likely that this helped exhaust it sooner too.
cool, i think it would be good to use a strain/hybrid that is a moderate feeder. when you say compost do you mean you are adding wormcasts or garden compost?
V.
what he said!!!,
nugding the plant in the right direction by helping the N run short near the end..
i believe this can be easily done and will experiment by topping a hot mix with carbon rich organic matter.
i agree as well,
i find that if i mix more then 20-30% coco to my very similar LC mix, that i get N deficiencies if i dont supply N in an other way..
i got pictures to help prove this
Hi MJ - just to clarify - I spoke of river deltas as being filters. This is not the exception. organic soils clean water. I used the river as an example of land that gets 'flushed' regular, but is actually enriched.
I can also clean water running it through rocks! The rocks however are covered in same/similar bacteria to those found in soils. Again particulates are attracted to the bio-film and vice versa.
My point is that flushing is pointless in (organic) soil.
Now - nutirent load in the soil, this is what will make a difference. I do not believe starving a plant is wise, nor any other stress to induce senescence. It was pointed out in my previous posts that naturally occuring senescence is triggered by photoperiod and stress induced senescence results in reduced yields.
Verdant Green I believe has the right approach with nutrition being adequate but not overboard. And Verdant's yield numbers are unquestionable. Although his views on stress induced senescence are questionable...
What difference in yield between the heavily senescing plant and the other Verdant? I'm betting it's minimal.
I can also clean water running it through rocks! The rocks however are covered in same/similar bacteria to those found in soils. Again particulates are attracted to the bio-film and vice versa.
My point is that flushing is pointless in (organic) soil.
Now - nutirent load in the soil, this is what will make a difference. I do not believe starving a plant is wise, nor any other stress to induce senescence. It was pointed out in my previous posts that naturally occuring senescence is triggered by photoperiod and stress induced senescence results in reduced yields.
Verdant Green I believe has the right approach with nutrition being adequate but not overboard. And Verdant's yield numbers are unquestionable. Although his views on stress induced senescence are questionable...
What difference in yield between the heavily senescing plant and the other Verdant? I'm betting it's minimal.
Fista, to me deltas and flood plains are not flushed by their contributing water bodies, but that's one way of seeing it I guess. Massive amounts of silts and nutrients and organisms are deposited there. That ain't no tap water. It's one of the richest places a plant can live. I did misunderstand your point though. It's true what you say. Swamps play a huge role in establishing a clean water table, by the same mode of action.
Verdant and Fista, let me try to describe what I mean. The two of you seem to conceive of the soil in the container as a finite system, one that starts with resources and accumulates deficits, with a beginning when the plant goes in, and an end when it comes out.
I see a perpetual system in the scenario Verdant describes, in both cases. One merely functions at a higher intensity than the other, and that vitality is reflected in the plant. When we depend on microörganisms to provide us with nutes, we are not talking cumulatively and permanently. We mean our plant has access to X amount of nutrient per given period of time. Until the plant reaches a point where it would like more per moment than the soil is giving, there is no stress. If it wants more, it will need to make a sacrifice.
If N is less available to both plant and microbes, and requirements stay high, does that not increase competition? Isn't that one more stressor for the plant? That much less spare capacity? Your "plant A" has had the easy life, with money in the bank. "Plant B" has had to scrap it out. Protozoa poo doesn't stick around unused forever. But neither has been deficient - look at them buds!
Pampered plants are a great idea for some plants, not for others. Most seem to say they prefer the product of unpampered plants. The cheese in the lighter soil had to struggle harder. So maybe that's why it finished as pictured. The cheese clone (clone, right?) in the heavier had a much easier life, and has aged much slower, but as we can all see, is still nearing the end. How much longer would it have survived under 12/12, even with more manure? And how about 8 or 6 hour days?
Quick summary: I can't accept that nutrient availability in organic soil, absent intervention by long distance defecation or other fertilizing, starts at a higher level and declines from then on. Nutrient cycling means the life in the soil gives and takes constantly, and there are no permanent offers. Evaluation of the biomass in the soil, and perhaps the physical characteristics, is therefore the best way to predict what plant life it can best support. This rule applies to Drosera, Cannabis, Orchids, Roses, and Broccoli. And almost every other plant.
If coco makes N more available, is that only soluble N? I don't see how coco is interacting with the proteins inside a hapless bacterium being sized up by a big bad ciliate about to get all phagocytosis on his ass.
The compost I'm using will be worm compost, which is EWC, whatever I don't pick out, worm cocoons, and worms that are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Verdant and Fista, let me try to describe what I mean. The two of you seem to conceive of the soil in the container as a finite system, one that starts with resources and accumulates deficits, with a beginning when the plant goes in, and an end when it comes out.
I see a perpetual system in the scenario Verdant describes, in both cases. One merely functions at a higher intensity than the other, and that vitality is reflected in the plant. When we depend on microörganisms to provide us with nutes, we are not talking cumulatively and permanently. We mean our plant has access to X amount of nutrient per given period of time. Until the plant reaches a point where it would like more per moment than the soil is giving, there is no stress. If it wants more, it will need to make a sacrifice.
If N is less available to both plant and microbes, and requirements stay high, does that not increase competition? Isn't that one more stressor for the plant? That much less spare capacity? Your "plant A" has had the easy life, with money in the bank. "Plant B" has had to scrap it out. Protozoa poo doesn't stick around unused forever. But neither has been deficient - look at them buds!
Pampered plants are a great idea for some plants, not for others. Most seem to say they prefer the product of unpampered plants. The cheese in the lighter soil had to struggle harder. So maybe that's why it finished as pictured. The cheese clone (clone, right?) in the heavier had a much easier life, and has aged much slower, but as we can all see, is still nearing the end. How much longer would it have survived under 12/12, even with more manure? And how about 8 or 6 hour days?
Quick summary: I can't accept that nutrient availability in organic soil, absent intervention by long distance defecation or other fertilizing, starts at a higher level and declines from then on. Nutrient cycling means the life in the soil gives and takes constantly, and there are no permanent offers. Evaluation of the biomass in the soil, and perhaps the physical characteristics, is therefore the best way to predict what plant life it can best support. This rule applies to Drosera, Cannabis, Orchids, Roses, and Broccoli. And almost every other plant.
If coco makes N more available, is that only soluble N? I don't see how coco is interacting with the proteins inside a hapless bacterium being sized up by a big bad ciliate about to get all phagocytosis on his ass.
The compost I'm using will be worm compost, which is EWC, whatever I don't pick out, worm cocoons, and worms that are in the wrong place at the wrong time.
As previously stated, I have no experience with coco but from what I understand, is it not just a space filler? Soil is as alive as the plants you are growing. Think.
I treated my plants the same from beginning to end, inside and outside. They all turned yellow in death/dying. I learned to not remix my soil between crops and the soil retained its life. [however there is a critical mass element with this method, I believe]
Do you really believe that in a healthy living soil and using organic matter that you are totally in control of nutrient manipulation?
I treated my plants the same from beginning to end, inside and outside. They all turned yellow in death/dying. I learned to not remix my soil between crops and the soil retained its life. [however there is a critical mass element with this method, I believe]
Do you really believe that in a healthy living soil and using organic matter that you are totally in control of nutrient manipulation?
How do the plants grow again in the same spot in the Spring?
in nature the nutrients are replenished by plant matter rotting and its minerals being recycled back into the soil. plus the actions of various animals, alluvial deposits - not a closed system in the way an indoor grow is - also roots usually would have much more freedom than those in a pot.
microbemans method is great and mimics nature rather well by using big pots and encouraging an ecosystem around the whole grow - and lets not forget EWC will feed your plants as will rock phosphate - for a long long time.
im not sure if the plants that predate animals were either annual or perennial.
mr fista yes the yield was much the same - i think it was 1.3 g/watt for the rich soil and 1.4g/watt for the lighter soil with coco - but that plant was flowered for a couple of days longer. and i agree my theory on senescence being encouraged by the nutes running out is questionable but imo its one way we can mimic natural cycles indoors.
V.
microbemans method is great and mimics nature rather well by using big pots and encouraging an ecosystem around the whole grow - and lets not forget EWC will feed your plants as will rock phosphate - for a long long time.
im not sure if the plants that predate animals were either annual or perennial.
mr fista yes the yield was much the same - i think it was 1.3 g/watt for the rich soil and 1.4g/watt for the lighter soil with coco - but that plant was flowered for a couple of days longer. and i agree my theory on senescence being encouraged by the nutes running out is questionable but imo its one way we can mimic natural cycles indoors.
V.
Verdant, I could understand your point about decaying matter if I were a creationist, AND if I believed vegetable matter at the surface returns nutrients at 100% efficiency (even if it were so - 100% efficiency in conservation still only equals 0 growth). But before forests (the largest and most dense above ground nutrient banks known), something else comes first. Something creates the top soil. Grasses work in concert with microbes to eventually create fertile territory, sometimes ceding territory to their mortal enemies, the trees (I think as a result of local climate change). Often these grasslands burn, and all kinds of elements are lost to the air. The nutrients involved can't come from topsoil and organic matter if there is none to begin with. If there is none to begin with, you say it's animals moving in, fine, but where did THOSE nutrients come from? Plants! And where did those plants come from? Animals? Other plants? There has to be a beginning - an extraction of resources from the earth itself. The needle isn't dropped in the middle of Ena-Gada-Davida. That's the bible, not science.
Starting with pioneer plants and microbes, and given enough time, you can turn bare rock into a dense forest. Because of microbes. Reincorporating last year's vegetation is conservation, because nature does not waste. But it is only conservation (as opposed to exploitation) as far as the overall system is concerned. All the materia involved in soil must have their origins from outside that soil, because soil is an organized and complex system that breaks down with time according to the law of entropy unless energy is constantly applied by some actor(s). If you clean up your kid's room, and he doesn't act to keep it clean by investing energy, it will become messy, according to the same law. Don't maintain your car, and it will die. The group of actors keeping soil from becoming not soil is the microbes - bacteria, archea, protozoa, and fungi.
My "system" as described for this "trial", btw, can best be described as semi closed and disjointed - it includes all the earth beneath every farm that fed my worms, some fish juice from the ocean once in a while, my kitchen, some volcano that spewed some azomite, and even some mammals that donated some bones - I make heavy use of recycling as I have no access to living soil. But I mostly use those inputs away from the plants, where I keep my invertebrates. I do make use of invertebrates that accelerate microbial action, then transfer that energy to my containers. I am adding enrgy to the system to overcome certain artificial barriers. I will be adding organic matter in the form of compost, top dressing my rock powder as usual, using compost tea to ensure nutrient cycling, and using EM to condition my soil. A handful of compost technically contains enough molecules of each nutrient required to grow more than one plant. My job is to keep those nutes cycling, or I am screwed. N lost as ammonia if it collapses and goes sour can't be recovered quick enough to finish a grow. I don't think so at least. If I just get through a month of veg, that is proof enough that the nutes are in there, somewhere.
Here is the bottom line: on our planet, life is forcing terrestrial elements from areas closer to the mantle to areas closer to or above the surface. This is how biomass above the surface is achieved. Although animal marking/defecation events and decay make it appear as if it's the animals or dead plants doing the fertilizing, all those nutrients originally came from the air above or the rock below. That is made possible by microbes and a process called nutrient cycling. If all plants get their nutes from dead plants or animals and their poop, and all animals get their energy from plants, how did the plants and animals ever establish populations? The answer is that all nutrients are extracted from the air and the earth, and all (not quite true but let it slide) energy comes from the sun or the core. Growth of the biosphere an extractive process using the bedrock below and the air above as the ultimate resource. At the same time, nutrient cycling makes the system efficient enough to be feasible. The law of conservation of matter does not allow for anything else. Every atom added to the biosphere results in one less atom outside the biosphere. Since the biosphere did not come first, all of the biosphere has been extracted from the unliving earth. I do believe microorganisms doing the dirty work of "mining" nutrients far outweigh those who compete for them in terms of biomass. Many of these have nothing at all to do with the sun, and live entirely off the earth itself.
My aim is not to mimic exactly the process by which soil is created in nature. I use technology to speed things up and I bridge the gap from microbe to bedrock by recycling the work of other microbes - at a loss. But by learning about nutrient cycling, and harnessing it instead of relying on what should be a secondary source (defecation), I am accomplishing my goals in a new and different way, and giving myself freedom I never had before. There are no real disadvantages I can think of, except perhaps the loss of credit. It takes very little skill to just water properly. Manure, on the other hand, is much harder to manage, albeit easier to apply.
Who fertilizes the forest? Who maintains the tera preta to keep it from reverting? Who makes it grow back if you strip away 20 inches? Microbes. We can harvest their power, if we just try. If I can make it work with these containers (fingers crossed), anybody can do it.
History of the earth: plants and animals - can a lurker look it up? A time line starting with Bacteria, archea, fungi, and protozoa, and indicating the first land plants, the monocots, and the dicots, and of course land animals.
montanaorganics
Member
Microbes are well and good but they are nothing without more raw whole earth components on which to act. True, dying plants yellow without flushing, but I am with Verdant in that a rootbound plant yellows faster; with a decreased amount of raw nutrients microbes become less eficient. Now, why does one rootbound plant go through senescence faster thatn another strain in identical conditions?
Verdant; I thought your comment was related to nature and not indoor pots, thus the point I made. Consider a patch of nettles (or fireweed or....) in early Spring in a 'cold zone' like mine. One can still observe last year's dead nettles lying on the ground, waiting to be transformed to nutrient, yet full of vigor up come the new nettles. What is feeding them? The nutrients which were left in the soil, unused by last year's plants which were not taken up by the plant because she did not instruct the microbes to deliver them? Much the same the way the cells of your body interact/communicate? You mentioned worm castings/vermicompost lasting a long time in the soil. True. So what stops the plant from uptaking these nutrients during death phase? And does someone tell the worms in the ground to stop defacating in the Fall? These very observations are what led me to investigate soil microbes years ago.
And as MJ has noted, what about the forest? Does the amount of mass that a forest puts on each year correlate to the annually deposited leaves, branches and deer droppings on the local forest floor?
And as MJ has noted, what about the forest? Does the amount of mass that a forest puts on each year correlate to the annually deposited leaves, branches and deer droppings on the local forest floor?
and how many plants' worth of "raw whole earth components" does my container have? Just one? That's amazing, so many people are able to judge to the day how many "whole earth components" they need, despite fluctuations in temperature, plant health, light, pests, moisture, and humidity. So either everyone is a genius, or maybe there is something to this. Please give it some thought. I reacted just like you when microbeman first told me this. Then I realized I had seen it time and time again outside - in my grow, in my garden, in the forest, in so many areas of nature. I just couldn't chalk it up to diffusion.
FYI, I did say I was dropping in some bokashi when I rest the container, to accelerate the process. It will not be turned. It's way less raw material than most people would add, but it's not nothing.
How many "raw whole earth components" did I pull out from 3 gallons of soil with my one grow, at least 20% of which was compost? My soil didn't shrink appreciably, does yours? Looks even darker than before...
You have a real grow room, montana, you can do big tubs that never get turned as Microbeman suggested. I don't think anyone on this thread will question that method can yield living, self regulating soil. I'm juggling to make it work with my tiny container - you could be sitting pretty, enjoying the grow, and getting the best results possible with organic soil with the least amount of work.
Verdant; I noticed in your photos a distinct separation of the yellowing of the plants with the bottoms remaining green. When they finish are they pretty much yellowing on the bottoms as well? This was pretty much the case with my race (strain).
- Status
