Info about DON vs. ions: plants don't only use ions

[ShroomDr]

This thread is analogous to someone going to the organic forum and reading something like 'Plants only need sunshine, dirt and water' and then some asshole makes the argument 'plants need air too, they cant grow in a vacuum'.


1.) No shit.
2.) The point is true but worthless.
3.) Nothing stated is practical.


For someone who claims to correct Dr's, you have a poor way of phrasing ideas. The inclusion of the word 'only' in the thread title is a fallacy. Plants dont 'only' use 'anything' they use 'many' things. You seem to be a know it all, who has no practical knowledge or a filter for importance.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

This thread is analogous to someone going to the organic forum and reading something like 'Plants only need sunshine, dirt and water' and then some asshole makes the argument 'plants need air too, they cant grow in a vacuum'.


1.) No shit.
2.) The point is true but worthless.
3.) Nothing stated is practical.


For someone who claims to correct Dr's, you have a poor way of phrasing ideas. The inclusion of the word 'only' in the thread title is a fallacy. Plants dont 'only' use 'anything' they use 'many' things. You seem to be a know it all, who has no practical knowledge or a filter for importance.

Or alternately:

It'd be like If someone said "Plants cannot live without light"

and someone started a thread to say

"plants don't only use light"
and their main argument is that
"plants can live for a short time without light"

But still, like you said:
1.) No shit.
2.) The point is true but worthless.
3.) Nothing stated is practical.

 

[Guest 18340]

My IC>Settings & Options>Edit Ignore List...

 

[spurr]

@ evlme2:

No worries, I won't be responding to them further in this thread.

 

[Guest 18340]

That was not intended at anyone specifically...It's your thread, it IS nutrient related and theirs no TOU violation, post away.

 

[spurr]

Thanks evlme2. I am befuddled at the hostility and 'goal post moving' in this thread...

I still plan to not respond to unhelpful posts, but it's nice to see that I am not doing anything wrong by posting this here.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

No hostility, no goal post moving, there was never a claim that plants only use ions.
Plants can thrive with only ions, but can also use some dissolved organic molecules sometimes.

You posted no evidence that plants can live and grow without ions.

on what level do you imagine your information (that in addition to the ions they must have, plants can also use some dissolved organic compounds) to have practical application that isn't covered ad nauseum elsewhere on site? I'm not angry or hostile, I just am curious if you have a point (other than useless nitpicking of semantics).

 

[spurr]

No hostility, no goal post moving,

I beg to differ on both accounts. For the latter claim, re: goal post moving, I am referring to how you and others have tried to change my thread into a topic about bringing cannabis to harvest without ions (something I never wrote about), and trying to change my thread into a topic of conventional vs. organic growing (again something I didn't' write about)...that is pretty much the definition of goal post moving. You first wanted to me prove plants can use DON and DOP in place of ions, than you wanted me to prove plants can be harvested without ions, the latter is something I never claimed.

there was never a claim that plants only use ions.

Your quote, and the belief by most people that plants only get nutrients such as N, P, K, etc., from ions (i.e. inorganic minerals), is the claim that spurred me to post this thread. Even in some areas academia (esp. before this decade) there is/was an incorrect belief that plants only use ions for nutrients.

You are correct that people have not claimed plants use only ions. But it is very often claimed that plants only use ions for nutrients, that is the topic of this thread.

Plants can thrive with only ions, but can also use some dissolved organic molecules sometimes.

True, if you remove the word "sometimes". If there are DON and DOP available in most all cases most plants will use it; just like if there are ions available in most all cases most plants will use it. It's a fact plants can get more than trace levels of N and P from DON and DOP directly. In the case of DON, plants can get quite a lot of their N from DON; and the same goes for DOP, it can replace phosphate ions for plant P...see referenced below and the other references I posted in this thread.

You posted no evidence that plants can live and grow without ions.

Maybe you missed the info so I will post it again below. I never claimed they can live and grow with dissolved organic substances (like DON and DOP) replacing all needed nutrients in ionic form. I did claim they can use (at least) DON and DOP in place of N and P ions (i.e. inorganic elements; those without carbon); and they can use DON and DOP along with N and P ions.


1. DON:

"Nutrient Media for Plant Tissue Cultures"
University of Florida, Horticultural Science Dept.
http://www.hos.ufl.edu/mooreweb/Tiss...Medium I.doc

(plant tissue culture is sterile)

One of the first decisions that must be made when developing a tissue culture system is what medium to use. Nutrient media for plant tissue culture are designed to allow plant tissues to be maintained in a totally artificial environment. Many different tissue culture media have been developed, but only a few have found wide-spread use, e.g. MS (Murashige and Skoog, 1962). SH (Shenck and Hildebrandt), and Gamborg's B5. One of the most successful media, devised by Murashige and Skoog (Murashige and Skoog, 1962) was formulated by analyzing the inorganic components in tobacco plants and then adding them to medium in amounts similar to those found in the plants. Not only did they find that the ions themselves were important, but the forms in which the ions were supplied were critical as well.

In addition to mineral elements, the macro- and micronutrients that are similar to what is found in fertilizers, nutrient media also contain organic compounds such as vitamins, plant growth regulators, and a carbon source.

...

Nitrogen may also be added to medium in an organic form, as amino acids such as proline or glutamine, hydrolysates (such as casein hydrolysate), or, as above, as organic acids. Organic nitrogen is already reduced, i.e. in the form in which most nitrogen exists in the plant, and so may be taken up more readily than inorganic nitrogen. The organic forms are often added to media that do not contain ammonium. However, almost always, some inorganic nitrogen is present.

2. DOP:

"The growth and phosphorus utilisation of plants in sterile media when supplied with inositol hexaphosphate, glucose 1-phosphate or inorganic phosphate"
Volume 220, Numbers 1-2, 165-174, 2000
Julie E. Hayes, Richard J. Simpson and Alan E. Richardson

Abstract

Seedlings of six temperate pasture species, three grasses and three legumes, were grown for 19–24 days in sterile agar or sand-vermiculite media, in the presence of inorganic phosphate (Pi), glucose 1-phosphate (G1P) or inositol hexaphosphate (IHP). Agar (pH 5.0) had a low IHP-sorbing capacity while IHP was almost completely sorbed in sand-vermiculite. Pi and G1P were relatively available in both media. Growth of each species was measured in relation to phosphorus (P) supply and levels of Pi supply at which shoot yields reached 90% of maximum yield (Pcrit) were determined. Pcrit values were generally higher for the legume species than for the grasses, and were six-fold higher for Trifolium subterraneum L. seedlings when grown in sand-vermiculite relative to agar. When supplied with G1P, seedlings of the six species grew as well as plants supplied with Pi. By contrast, IHP was a poor source of P for plant growth, even when supplied in agar at levels up to 40-fold greater than Pcrit. Using the growth of T. subterraneum in the presence of IHP, it was calculated that roots released approximately 0.09 nkat phytase g-1 root dry wt per day, over 20 days of growth. By supplementing agar containing IHP with phytase from Aspergillus niger (E.C. 3.1.3.8; 0.012 nkat plant-1, or ∼1.3 nkat g-1 root dry wt), sufficient P became available to enable T. subterraneum seedlings to grow as well as Pi-supplied plants. These results indicate that while pasture plants can quite effectively use P from some organic P sources (e.g. G1P), the acquisition of phytate-P is limited both by availability of substrate and the capacity of plant roots to hydrolyse available IHP.

on what level do you imagine your information (that in addition to the ions they must have, plants can also use some dissolved organic compounds) to have practical application that isn't covered ad nauseum elsewhere on site?

That is not what I claimed, nor is it what this thread is about. Also, claiming plants "must have" ions is false in terms of N and P, see my references above. To your other point: this thread isn't about organic substances benefiting plants in a general manner, ex., via. PGRs, vitamins, etc.. This thread is specifically about how plants can use DON and DOP (and possibly other dissolved organic nutrients) in place of, and along with ions for nutrients. There is a clear distinction between the two topics. Maybe you should read my responses in this thread again?

Why do you continuity try to make this thread about something it is not? Why do you keep trying to make this thread bout conventional vs. organic vs. hybrid growing?

The practically of this info is two fold: (1) to simply disseminate correct info so people can increase the quality/correctness/level of their horticultural knowledge; and (2) this info can allow people to understand that they can provide a wider range of direct nutrient sources for plants (e.g. DON and DOP along with N and P as ions), that better mimics how plants have evolved. Thus using logic it seems plants would be better off, just like they are better off when we provide high levels of Co2 that they have evolved to utilize...it's about allowing the plants to reach their greatest potential.

I'm not angry or hostile, I just am curious if you have a point (other than useless nitpicking of semantics).

You claim you're not being angry or hostile in the same sentence you use the words "useless nitpicking"? Maybe you don't think that is being hostile but I do, and it's negative to boot (and not in a good way like constructive criticism).

Unless your next post is about something other than you have already posted I will not respond, it does no good to for me to keep writing the same things over and over again.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Where is it claimed that plants only can use ions as nutrients?
I know my quote prompted you to post this thread.
My quote did not say 'plants only use ions' or anything of the sort.


If your only point is that plants can use some organic molecules for some things, then it has been well made.
Those facts don't contradict anything I've asserted.

You can only make my statement seem incorrect by interpreting 'cannot live' to mean will instantly die.
no reason to do so, unless you like arguing about irrelevancies that have no practical application.

You can keep all your out of context quotations from marginally related papers.
They make no point... you're just using them out of context in attempt to validate your semantic nitpicking.

Thank you for admitting that having a practical application was not the point of your thread, and that there is no real point or practical usefulness.



Yes plants can survive for a short time without ions, or sunlight, or water... so what?

They can thrive without organics.

 

[spurr]

Just keep using logical fallacies and misrepresentation and disingenuous-ness...I'm sure it keeps you warm at night. /done trying to show you the light

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Just keep using logical fallacies and misrepresentation and disingenuous-ness...I'm sure it keeps you warm at night. /done trying to show you the light

Nope... you keep pretending I am.
Any literate person will see through your mischaracterization.
pretend all you want.





BTW... what light do you imagine you're showing me?
Nothing I've said is contradicted by any of your out of context misapplied sources.

 

[ShroomDr]

on what level do you imagine your information ... to have practical application that isn't covered ad nauseum elsewhere on site? I'm not angry or hostile, I just am curious if you have a point (other than useless nitpicking of semantics).

QFT

 

[Guest 18340]

I tried to be fair but this thread has lost it's usefulness.
Anyone who doesn't agree can pm me...