Are your plants Fungal or Microbial dominant?

I read this question the other day and it got me thinking….
I realise that fungal micorrizae play a vital symbiotic role when colonised around our root systems, improving the uptake of nutrients and also that certain of these have other beneficial effects, including a measure of inoculation. I also realise that Bennies, or beneficial bacteria/microbes consume the soil mix we provide them in our growing medium, to produce basic nutrients in a form the plants can more easily assimilate. What I didn’t know, was that one of these naturally occurring functions could become Dominant, whatever that means in this context. Although there is a clear and fundamental interplay between these two systems, I thought they were mutually independent and flourish or diminish, depending on what the grower provides. Can someone please enlighten me on this subject, specifically;
How can you tell if the environment of your plant is Fungal or Microbial dominant? Moreover, which is preferred - for overall health and production? Or is it striking a balance between the two? If it is as I suspect, finding a balance with these two systems that we should be striving towards, how can we achieve and monitor this balance?
Further to this, I have also been researching AACT since I’ve been wearing my OG’s flat-cap. There is some debate as to AACT’s effectiveness, many growers reporting no visible difference between it and using a regular soil-drench. There are many videos on Youtube with crops showing no variation at all, when half of it had been treated regularly with AACT, the other with a regular steeped tea, or liquid fert. I mean I get the biology bit, about feeding the microbes already present in your compost tea with molasses etc and actively growing these beneficial bacteria. I’m told that if done properly, the resulting bacteria-count can be in the trillions! So why are there so many inconsistencies in both reports and results regarding AACT?
Considering there are many, many different microbes/bacteria strains present in compost/manure, some of which are wonderful to your plants, some ineffective, some bad and some are positively deadly! My concern is; How do you know which of these little critters you’re actually brewing up in your bucket? It’s easy to throw an airstone into that bucket and hope for the best but is relying on growing a majority of ‘oxygen-loving’ ones enough? Don’t some baddies love oxygen too?
Is AACT effective and worth the bother? If so, is there any way to ensure we only grow the really beneficial bacteria in our teas?
This throws-up yet another question for me; Raw, unpasteurized milk! Raw milk is packed with gazillions of microbes, most of which I believe are beneficial to plant growth. Farmers have been spraying raw milk on their crops for eons, many reporting noticeable improvement in health and vitality from the practice. Why not just pour a pint of raw milk into your brewing bucket, along with your molasses – the resulting micro-herd would be spectacular! But would it be good for our plants?

I look forward to receiving the wisdom, of the generous and many-headed oracle that is; IC Mag!

Regards and happy growing!
Iffy

as a rule plants like bacterial dominant soil and trees like fungal dominant soil

Soil microbiology is more complex than that. It's not fungal vs. bacteria dominance, it's a whole spectrum of ecology.
This ecology change with the water content, pressure, and available feed. It should be un-even across your soil mix.

How exactly? I do not know.

Compost teas can add certain microbes / microbe feed but their efficiency is highly dependent on the current status. If you add sugar to your coffee it might be OK, but if you'll add sugar to pea soup you're kind of an idiot.

The problem is, making a proper science out of it is hella complex. We use guidelines, but they become much clearer after getting a system or two running properly. I wouldn't send a newbie grower to microscope the soil biota in order to find out a solution for a poorly growing plant.

For semantics sake, bacteria, archaea, fungi and protozoa are all
referred to as microbes.

Fungal dominated soils and bacterial dominated soils are, as Weird mentioned, related to plant types and species in general. In the case of trees/forests they are mostly fungal > made apparent by all the mushrooms growing in the forest.

ACT and NCT (non-aerated) and LCE (liquid compost extract) are not necessarily related to soil microbial dominance as many salesmen would have you believe. There is no direct scientific evidence relating the two [just some anecdotal]

Plants are also naturally dependent on fluctuating populations and functions. These inter-relationships can occur over the course of a day and a season (generally) as the plant's phase of growth changes from vegetative to fruit production. In other words, as the plant switches phases, mycorrhizal and endophytic fungi take a stronger role in nutrient provision.

Free living microbial nutrient provision in the soil solution is created in a number of ways. One way which CT influences this is by growing out a population of bacteria/archaea along with flagellates and or naked amoebae [protozoa]. Through predation (eating) of bacteria/archaea these protozoa subsequently release bio-available (ionic) nutrients used by plants.

The use of CT & LCE can also influence the soil populations in the same way that [v]compost (vermicompost or compost) does. It depends on the condition of the soil, the quality of the [v]compost used and the quality of the method used to extract and multiply the organisms.

For example, a soil low in compost or in positive microbial activity may have fungal, bacterial/archaeal and protist volumes increased considerably through the use of CT or LCE as long as these organisms exist in the [v]compost used. These organisms can also be effective in suppression of soil pathogens.

If a grower is already using optimum natural growing techniques, she might see minimal positives through using CT or LCE.

If a grower is using soluble fertilizers or other amendments contrary to the microbial nutrient loop, he may observe no benefits to using CT or LCE.

If a grower is using poor quality inputs to make CT or LCE or incorrect methods, then positive benefits will be directly reduced.

Thus we have some growers reporting that CT does not work while others rave about the positive results.

As I have previously stated using aeration in CT does not preclude potential pathogenic microorganisms. Facultative anaerobic organisms like e-coli and salmonella can grow and thrive just fine in an aerated liquid. It is the quality of the thermophilic compost or vermicompost which determines the population of these organisms.

Also, some facultative organisms are desirable. [e.g. phototrophic microbes]

Of course the aerobic organisms will multiply in increased volume in an aerated liquid.

These things have all been discussed in this forum at length. A search and research can go a long way towards answering questions.

Further reading;
http://www.microbeorganics.com/#Organic_Growing_Microbial_Perspective
http://www.microbeorganics.com/#Living_Soil
http://www.microbeorganics.com/#More_on_Compost_Tea_2013_

Most if not all of it is beyond my pay grade.

Compost/EWC is good for soil. If you can layer good compost/EWC on your garden regularly it helps a lot. If your garden is to big, making to much labor, to much materials, to much cost to regularly layer it on, then you can brew tea, hopefully multiplying the microbes then spreading them across the garden saving time/money/labor.

Imagine a vineyard, they might need 100-1,000+ yards of compost for a minimal layer. Or they could get 1 yard, brew tea, and deliver it.

Beyond the giant garden scenario, I have noticed even with smaller potted plants, if you keep layering, eventually you run out of room/reach the top of the pot. So the tea is nice to get that compost benefit and saving room in the pot.

Mr^^

Microbeman,
Wonderful response, thank you so much for that. You kinda summed-up a lot of what I have read and researched, making it far more understandable to a simple man like myself.
I gather the only way to really ensure that you're growing the beneficial microbes, is as you say;
'It is the quality of the thermophilic compost or vermicompost which determines the population of these organisms.'
What then are we to look for in a top-quality compost, as there are so many available commercially. There are many farms selling compost and vermicompost around where I live, so I have many options, just not sure what exactly to look for in regards to the potential microbial content of the same? Any advice on this would be equally appreciated.
Regards,
Iffy

The science of compost is very complex. I think the best method to judge a compost pile is smell and humidity.
The compost pile should smell strongly like forest floor and the compost should be moist. Dry compost, like those often offered commercially, lack a lot of biological activity due to water stress. This is why I prefer home made compost over any commercial option I have.
Vermicompost is no exception (which is why 60L of EWC cost me roughly 300 USD).