NPK and ACT help me clear up the myth?

[bajangreen]

Really? What method/test/kit are you using? I find that fascinating. Also, is there an initial source specifically of NH4 going into the ACT?

However, during their growth phases, that food becomes unavailable to the plants for a period. This always seems to be especially apparent to me in small containers (as opposed to growing directly in the ground or in raised beds outdoors), and so additional, readily plant-available feeds often also must be offered.

I am using "Jungle" brand, "quick dip 5in1 test strips". And All of my FPE and fresh ACT show 0 readings for nitrate(No3) & Nitrite(No2).

In the ACTs sometimes i use water from my aquaponic system filters or composted chicken manure, fpe's, clamon cherry and raw sugarcane juice. bubble 24-36 hours and used immediately.

I was thinking that the NPK's were "eaten/sequestered" by the aerobic micro life and held in a form that the test strips cant pick up. To figer out if that was happening i placed some ACT in a air tight pep bottle for a week and after it gave a slight NO3 reading (-20ppm). However my FPEs are also in airtight pep bottles and i have some of them that were closed from last season and they still don't give readings, so unless anaerobic micro life also sequesters NPKs i am still at a lost.

 

[bajangreen]

When one makes ACT, the bacteria/archaea (BA), fungi and protozoa which are bound to the compost or vermicompost (VC) are extracted or broken loose.

So these critters are stationary? always thought of them as little slugs\worms constantly on the move looking for food. It seams like it doesn't take much movement to dislodge them, but how easy/efficiently do they reattach to the new media (soil particles)? I am wondering how much % of them actually make it and take up residence in their new intended home (our pots).

If the plants do not want or require some forms of these nutrients, they are simply rapidly re-sequestered in the form of microbial cysts, fungal hyphae, other BA, as cations or anions bound to organic matter or humus.

I believe this is what happens to cause no Nitrate readings on FPEs and ACTs any "free" NPK is in the form of cysts and the test cant pick that up.

There is no huge overpopulation of microorganisms which some people seem to be conjuring up.

so yours saying that there can never be a case where bacteria/archaea (BA) are out competing the plant? even if i use the ACT before the protoza get a chance to multiply enough?

There is some attribute or value in ACT used to inoculate soil with a set of microorganisms but if the soil is lacking a healthy microbial population, this can take quite some time.

Now i am confused, we use ACT to inoculate micro life into other wise dead soil, don't we? what general effect does the prior microbial population of the soil have on the usefulness of ACT?



IN the end ACT really is a "self administering" NPK.

 

[Microbeman]

Here come the micro nazis, hehe.
But no, u guys kno ur shit, not trying to go there..

Although I'm not sure why you take yourselv's so seriously. Lighten up a little not everyone is on your level of excellence. Cheers!
That's kind of what this thread is about anyway. More opinion and general discussion of experience if I'm correct. And even tho not all of us are micro/bio engineers most of us do grasp the concept u put forth. Keep in mind there are very many shades of grey. Different strokes for different folks. And if something particular works for someone, that's all that really matters.
Personally I never achieved the full spectrum of benifits in regards to what a true living soil is all about. So I lean on organic additives. And inoculate with act. But I don't use a scope either. So it's just guess work. Ja kno

Lmao!! I just read your last post microb. Pretty much said what I just posted about at the end of your dissertation. Hehe, nothin but love people. Live and love

No worries mate. I do not even attempt to read poorly written posts, so your's was not read nor referenced.

 

[Microbeman]

So these critters are stationary?

You are bound to the earth yet are not stationary.

I am wondering how much % of them actually make it and take up residence in their new intended home (our pots).

As I mentioned some are used, some are not and obviously many will perish. I'm sure it will have a huge variance dependent on individual curcumstance

I believe this is what happens to cause no Nitrate readings on FPEs and ACTs any "free" NPK is in the form of cysts and the test cant pick that up.

Correct. Sequestered nutrients are not detected by these types of tests. It is likely what you do detect is already in the 'soil solution'.

Now i am confused, we use ACT to inoculate micro life into other wise dead soil, don't we?

Why confused? I'm only expressing that it can take quite some time for a healthy microbial population to become hierarchically established. Compare it to a planted tree farm and old growth forest or ancient prairie grass and a seeded hayfield.

Ok, I'm a little confused now, because I think I've been thinking of what I've been doing in the wrong way. Although... ultimately, or fundamentally, does my conceptualization really matter?

Well, all I can say is that this is what I've been saying all along and no, one does not need to know how natural growing works to use it.
You can probably have a good appreciation for the length of time it may take for soil to become alive, springing from your understanding of the time it takes to establish a complete stable nitrogen cycle (biofilter) in an aquarium.

 

[moses wellfleet]

Ok, I'm a little confused now, because I think I've been thinking of what I've been doing in the wrong way. Although... ultimately, or fundamentally, does my conceptualization really matter?

for me plant health is what matters. i love a fat chunk of theoretical text full of scientific jargon as much as the next guy. but if my plants respond to something i feed them then i have to take notice.

sometimes i feel this forum doesnt cater for those of us without formal scientific training.

but i will be ordering a microscope and dvd from microbeman to try take my knowledge to the next level.

 

[bajangreen]

Hey Microbeman 2 questions,

1) What makes the micro-life hierarchically established in the soil? is it the amount of oxygen, temperature, or the water a combination maybe? and can we use this info to tailor our ACTs even more.

2) If the plant uses more ATP when searching for food by itself why doesn't it just use the protozoa "pathway" to acquire ALL of its food? does the plant itself have an affect on the protozoa population.

 

[Microbeman]

for me plant health is what matters. i love a fat chunk of theoretical text full of scientific jargon as much as the next guy. but if my plants respond to something i feed them then i have to take notice.

sometimes i feel this forum doesnt cater for those of us without formal scientific training.

but i will be ordering a microscope and dvd from microbeman to try take my knowledge to the next level.

As I said, one does not need to understand the theory behind natural growing, to use natural growing techniques. When someone asks for an explanation, I provide it as best I can. When someone provides information which I consider counter to contemporary scientific theory, I provide the correct information, as best I can.

 

[Microbeman]

Hey Microbeman 2 questions,

1) What makes the micro-life hierarchically established in the soil? is it the amount of oxygen, temperature, or the water a combination maybe? and can we use this info to tailor our ACTs even more.

2) If the plant uses more ATP when searching for food by itself why doesn't it just use the protozoa "pathway" to acquire ALL of its food? does the plant itself have an affect on the protozoa population.

These are long stories, already told several times over. I may start a new thread addressing this but #2 is clearly answered on my webpage. The short answer is 'it does when easiest'

 

[bajangreen]

put up some links please Microbeman.

 

[Sat X RB]

I grow in pots filled with natural compost, cowshit and some chicken shit. I amend at the beginning of the grow with fishemulsion (and molasses to kill any nematodes in my natural compost).

depending on growth I may or I may not give tea before onset of flowering. at onset of flowering I give fishemulsion once more and in a little while I give tea again.

as flowering progresses I begin a regime of feeding (per soil AND foliar) N + Ca one week and with K the next week ... and so on each week ...

cheers

 

[bajangreen]

During veg i use ACT every 5-7 days because the accompanying growth spurt last for about, well, 5-7 days. Its safe to surmise that's the average length of time it takes for protozoa to over populate the soil solution. From then on the efficiency of the soil to deliver nutrients to the plant (mostly N) tends to diminish quickly.

A good ACT is the way to deliver N to plants organically i had a plant once that would yellow if it went 9 days without a foliar application of ACT, the soil was depleted and the ACT keep it growing up till flower. The ACT did not have what it takes for flowering and producing weight. I find the pre-stretch/final transplant is the best time to concentrate on the soil.

 

[SeaMaiden]

for me plant health is what matters. i love a fat chunk of theoretical text full of scientific jargon as much as the next guy. but if my plants respond to something i feed them then i have to take notice.

sometimes i feel this forum doesnt cater for those of us without formal scientific training.

but i will be ordering a microscope and dvd from microbeman to try take my knowledge to the next level.

I feel that we have two forces at work, and I'm not really sure how to quantify them. But, I know that fishkeeping and gardening can both be considered an art of sorts, husbandry can be considered an art. That doesn't mean there aren't valid scientific explanations, and I love getting at those, too, qualifying or quantifying a thing. For example, how the heck did the Tran brothers always get all these fish breeding, even though they were breaking husbandry rules? That's the art of it. Answering how and why is the science of it.

I have no formal scientific training, I was a graphic arts major who prefers sciences but can barely do math. Which, again, is weird, because I'm great with money.

If nothing else, we can make observations, and that is itself the very foundation of the scientific method. No special training involved, just observations.

 

[Granger2]

> If nothing else, we can make observations, and that is
> itself the very foundation of the scientific method. No
> special training involved, just observations.

And that's what farmers have been doing since farming began thousands of years ago. Observing and sharing observations among themselves. And, here, we're still adding to that body of knowledge for all of us to draw from, only much more rapidly, and we're spreading it much more widely. -granger

 

[RanchoDeluxe]

Scientific Method

1.Hypothesis
2.Experiment
3.Conclusion

Observations mean very little if the experiment is not controlled. It also helps to have a goal in mind and that is where a well thought out hypothesis comes in handy.

 

[Microbeman]

4. we hope for theory but usually questions

 

[bajangreen]

so wouldn't a ACT fuck up the food web of an established soil?

 

[SeaMaiden]

How so, bajangreen..? What are you thinking on that?

Scientific Method

1.Hypothesis
2.Experiment
3.Conclusion

Observations mean very little if the experiment is not controlled. It also helps to have a goal in mind and that is where a well thought out hypothesis comes in handy.

That hypothesis has to come from somewhere. IME it begins with an observation.

I've also found that it may not be helpful to have a specific goal in mind when conducting a test or experiment. Mine is usually just to see what happens, if anything. Then I proceed from there. E.G. Last year's use of Sea-90 stopping BER on my tomatoes and squashes. I just did it, then made observations. This year, depending on how I plant, I may be able to make comparisons to plants where it hasn't been used vs where it has.

It was never my goal to stop blossom end rot using Sea-90. I just wanted to see how the plants would react, if at all, to its application. See what I mean?

Also, because of my background, I'm brought to consider what we've learned via reefkeeping--much of the science involved isn't given to experimentation, but to observation. Especially out in the natural environment, observations are often the foundation.

I'm not saying no to experimentation or any other aspect of the scientific process, but I feel strongly that it begins with observations. It's how Darwin started.

 

[bajangreen]

My thinking is that the constant influx of micro life from ACT's would cause the "attached resident micro life" to "cyst" from not being used. all the while the "residents" are firmly attached to the soil partial in all the prime locations making less room on the said soil partial for the active the micro life.


I tend to visualise soil partials as akin to big rocks in the garden and micro life ranging from moss(colonising bacteria) up to slugs(protozoa) That's my limited understanding of it.

 

[RanchoDeluxe]

The Scientific Method is not a formula, but rather a process with a number of
sequential steps designed to create an explainable outcome that increases our
knowledge base. This process is as follows:
STEP 1. Make an OBSERVATION - gather and assimilate information about an
event, phenomenon, process, or an exception to a previous observation, etc.
STEP 2. Define the PROBLEM – ask questions about the observation that are
relevant and testable. Define the null hypothesis to provide unbiased results.
STEP 3: Form the HYPOTHESIS – create an explanation, or educated guess,
for the observation that is testable and falsifiable.
STEP 4: Conduct the EXPERIMENT – devise and perform an experiment to
test the hypothesis.
STEP 5: Derive a THEORY – create a statement based in the outcome of the
experiment that explains the observation(s) and predicts the likelihood of future
observations.

This is from the U of Nevada. Looks as though you are correct about observation being the first step in the Scientific Method. I do believe without the 'experiment' part, any theory would be without scientific merit.

 

[Microbeman]

My thinking is that the constant influx of micro life from ACT's would cause the "attached resident micro life" to "cyst" from not being used. all the while the "residents" are firmly attached to the soil partial in all the prime locations making less room on the said soil partial for the active the micro life.


I tend to visualise soil partials as akin to big rocks in the garden and micro life ranging from moss(colonising bacteria) up to slugs(protozoa) That's my limited understanding of it.

I recommend you do some reading.

What is a cyst? What is the most common form over time taken by flagellates, ciliates, naked amoebae, testate amoebae, fungi, bacteria/archaea. What does moss arise from? Can it take on its previous form at will? (maybe its closer to fungi eh?) What does a slug arise from? Can it turn back into that form again and again? Can it divide?

If you put more compost onto/into your garden would it have the same effect you are visualizing? What is it that causes encysting...excysting?