There was a thread started recently which has been disappeared for some reason or another which addressed , at least partially, the application of the soilfoodweb to indoor container growing using bottled ‘organic’nutrients.
To have this discussion I think we first need to clearly define what is ‘the soil food web’ and what is ‘the microbial nutrient cycle’. Are they the same thing?
In my opinion the term soil food web can be all encompassing to include trees dying, falling on the ground to be devoured by fungi and leaves and annual plants seeking a similar demise, birds flying over dropping a poo, arthropods and worms macro and micro contributing to degradation and defecation. A passing moose urinates. It can be very extensive and to attempt to incorporate such into one’s indoor garden would be a challenge at the least. There are some growers who make efforts to utilize the soil food web indoors, even allowing fallen leaves to degrade and growing cover plants (mini-clover) for natural N input [go Mad] but alas the supply of mini-moose is not at hand. Still one can succeed at implementing the soil food web indoors in containers to a large degree with topdressing organic matter, compost, etc.
The microbial nutrient loop is contained within the soilfoodweb but is more focused and narrow. We don’t need any mini-moose (just the collected poo) or deadfall trees. The microbial nutrient cycle describes the means by which organic nutrients are cycled to roots in the rhyzosphere in available [ionic] form. There are several ways that this occurs and briefly;
1/ (a) bacteria & archaea are consumed by protozoa which exude approximately 65% of the energy intaken as available nutrient [ionic form; usually N with micronutrients] {this is the mainstay of the microbial nutrient loop}
1/ (b) as described above but predation is by bacterial feeding nematodes
2/ various types of fungi degrade organic matter and deliver nutrients to root systems via encapsulation or penetration and receive certain forms of carbon in exchange. This association is commonly called mycorrihiza. [I’ve recently learned of another group of fungi {dark septate endophytes} which may also be mycorrhizal; my ongoing research project]
3/ (a) there are several bacterial and archaeal species which are free living nutrient fixers [everyone’s heard of N-fixers which are all the rage in the bottled microbial products]
3/ (b) there are N-fixing bacteria which are symbiotic with certain plant root systems [e.g. legumes; Mad’s mini-clover cover crop] which deliver N.
4/ as has been discussed previously by Spurr, roots can exude acids [e.g. citric acid] to mineralize {ionize} nutrients in the rhyzosphere.
5/ and there is more and likely more we have yet to learn.
In summary we can see that nature always has a plan B. There is greater detail on these systems throughout the forum and on my webpage.
So, in the recently disappeared thread, to the best of my knowledge there was an hypothesis partially presented that the soil food web was incorporated when using bottled commercial nutrients. If we accept the definition above I think we can only say a tenuous ‘maybe’. What Mad and others are endeavoring is closer to the mark.
However, I do believe that organic bottled nutrients [if they truly are organic] can be incorporated into a growing system which derives nutrients through the microbial nutrient loop. I don’t pretend to know anything about such commercial nutrients but I believe I recall a study posted by Spurr (AKA?) on greenhouse grown organic tomatoes which used Earth Juice which is one of those commercial organic products. If these substances are topdressed perhaps in combination with vermi(compost), ACT etc and the growing media is allowed to live undisturbed for the most part, I see no reason for this method of nutrient application to not be processed by the microbial nutrient cycle and be called organic [and to succeed].
As for the growing media, I do not know much about coconut products but a soilless media consisting of sphagnum peat moss and ‘aged’ bark fines supports a soil microbial population just fine [as illustrated by facts concerning porosity, etc. previously posted by Spurr and from my own microscopy]. Actually sphagnum peat moss brings with it a dormant microbial population ready to go to work cycling nutrients. One aspect for consideration is that, in my opinion, the growing media really does come to life and should optimally be left intact between crops and maintained in the largest, deepest containers possible. [there may be a critical mass; I would not want less than 5 gallons] I had containers of peat that after 2 years could not be discerned from soil.
I’ve gotta run now….more later?
To have this discussion I think we first need to clearly define what is ‘the soil food web’ and what is ‘the microbial nutrient cycle’. Are they the same thing?
In my opinion the term soil food web can be all encompassing to include trees dying, falling on the ground to be devoured by fungi and leaves and annual plants seeking a similar demise, birds flying over dropping a poo, arthropods and worms macro and micro contributing to degradation and defecation. A passing moose urinates. It can be very extensive and to attempt to incorporate such into one’s indoor garden would be a challenge at the least. There are some growers who make efforts to utilize the soil food web indoors, even allowing fallen leaves to degrade and growing cover plants (mini-clover) for natural N input [go Mad] but alas the supply of mini-moose is not at hand. Still one can succeed at implementing the soil food web indoors in containers to a large degree with topdressing organic matter, compost, etc.
The microbial nutrient loop is contained within the soilfoodweb but is more focused and narrow. We don’t need any mini-moose (just the collected poo) or deadfall trees. The microbial nutrient cycle describes the means by which organic nutrients are cycled to roots in the rhyzosphere in available [ionic] form. There are several ways that this occurs and briefly;
1/ (a) bacteria & archaea are consumed by protozoa which exude approximately 65% of the energy intaken as available nutrient [ionic form; usually N with micronutrients] {this is the mainstay of the microbial nutrient loop}
1/ (b) as described above but predation is by bacterial feeding nematodes
2/ various types of fungi degrade organic matter and deliver nutrients to root systems via encapsulation or penetration and receive certain forms of carbon in exchange. This association is commonly called mycorrihiza. [I’ve recently learned of another group of fungi {dark septate endophytes} which may also be mycorrhizal; my ongoing research project]
3/ (a) there are several bacterial and archaeal species which are free living nutrient fixers [everyone’s heard of N-fixers which are all the rage in the bottled microbial products]
3/ (b) there are N-fixing bacteria which are symbiotic with certain plant root systems [e.g. legumes; Mad’s mini-clover cover crop] which deliver N.
4/ as has been discussed previously by Spurr, roots can exude acids [e.g. citric acid] to mineralize {ionize} nutrients in the rhyzosphere.
5/ and there is more and likely more we have yet to learn.
In summary we can see that nature always has a plan B. There is greater detail on these systems throughout the forum and on my webpage.
So, in the recently disappeared thread, to the best of my knowledge there was an hypothesis partially presented that the soil food web was incorporated when using bottled commercial nutrients. If we accept the definition above I think we can only say a tenuous ‘maybe’. What Mad and others are endeavoring is closer to the mark.
However, I do believe that organic bottled nutrients [if they truly are organic] can be incorporated into a growing system which derives nutrients through the microbial nutrient loop. I don’t pretend to know anything about such commercial nutrients but I believe I recall a study posted by Spurr (AKA?) on greenhouse grown organic tomatoes which used Earth Juice which is one of those commercial organic products. If these substances are topdressed perhaps in combination with vermi(compost), ACT etc and the growing media is allowed to live undisturbed for the most part, I see no reason for this method of nutrient application to not be processed by the microbial nutrient cycle and be called organic [and to succeed].
As for the growing media, I do not know much about coconut products but a soilless media consisting of sphagnum peat moss and ‘aged’ bark fines supports a soil microbial population just fine [as illustrated by facts concerning porosity, etc. previously posted by Spurr and from my own microscopy]. Actually sphagnum peat moss brings with it a dormant microbial population ready to go to work cycling nutrients. One aspect for consideration is that, in my opinion, the growing media really does come to life and should optimally be left intact between crops and maintained in the largest, deepest containers possible. [there may be a critical mass; I would not want less than 5 gallons] I had containers of peat that after 2 years could not be discerned from soil.
I’ve gotta run now….more later?
Last edited:
Im all ears....
