Aeration absorbs gas into the water....check out you goldfish bowl sometime.
Then stop and think how much bigger the bubbler is in a hurricane .a100+
Then check out the smog alerts in the Gulf Coastal area for the same period
as the hurricanes.
Are you for real? Is smog CO2? CO2 is an odorless, colorless gas that
exists all over the earth in a concentration of about 377 parts per million.
My apologies. I thought I was arguing with someone who had a basic
understanding of atmospherics.
Actually much cropland is not covered in vegetation.
Also, modern hybrids have shorter stalks, and thus lay down less carbon
per acre than heritage varieties.
Some crops grow more Biomas per acre than others, compare strawberries
Not really, for the most part--hybrid wheat, corn, soybeans all are
essentially the same size plants as always. What crops specifically are
you thinking of?
Plus, most hybrids are grown in much higher "plants/acre" than were
their predecessors--both narrower row spacing as well as plant spacing
in order to produce higher net yields...
Sorghum, wheat, barley, many of the varieties grown in Australia are
significantly less that 50cm tall at harvest, as opposed to heritage
pure strains many of which stand twice (or three times) as tall. Lots
of leaf, big seed heads, very little actual stalk.
I'd be interested to see the hybrid data for those--that's far different
than US hybrids. Who are the seed suppliers and do they have web
presence? Are these produced by the US equivalent of the land-grant
universities research programs as were/are many of the new varieties
here or by commercial seed growers?
I don't recall <ever> seeing a commercially grown wheat/barley/rye
variety that would be much over 3 ft, even going back to old Turkey Red,
the original hard red winter wheat brought over in the 1800s. Extremely
tall is bad owing to tendency to go down, of course. Very, very short is
a problem as well owing to difficulty in cutting w/o getting into the
ground or missing the short heads. On the very rare occasion w/ really
high moisture years I can recall some years which may have gotten to
mid-chest height, but that would be the exception, not the rule.
We've been growing wheat and grain sorghum here since the early 1900s
and the pictures back then of harvest w/ teams and stationary thresher
don't show a real significant difference in heights from what I recall
in the 50s when I first can really remember up to now...
All the usual suspects. Big global companies, developement is mostly by
Deapartment of Primary Industries, lots of local seed companies
producing hybrid seed to. Universities have largely been urban until
recently, so had little to do with horticulture.
Hmmm, mid-chest would be about right heritage varieties, 1m to 1.5m.
Crops growing here are usuall half that high.
Here we go, a traditional variety, 2m (6ft) and a modern hybrid 60cm (2ft).
Pictures of horsedrawn harvesters here show wheat tended to be about 1m
tall, definitely over waist height, as opposed to barely knee high for
the current varieties I see in paddocks by the hyway.
That seems almost incomprehensible that there aren't Ag Departments in
at least some of the major Universities, regardless of where they are
physically situated. Where are the Vet schools, the Animal Husbandry
programs, the Ag Engineers, Milling and Grain experts trained?
There are of course, commercially developed varieties but most US-grown
varieties are developed by the various University and Grower-sponsored
research organizations. Example facilities in Kansas at Kansas State
Dad did a sponsored Farm Tour to Au and NZ a number of years ago under
aegis of US Dept of Ag but other than his tales of visiting and staying
w/ various producers around and meetings w/ Wheat Board (or whatever it
was called specifically) and other gov't officialdom I don't recall what
they saw for the research end.
The "mid-chest" would have been a rare event as I noted, only occurring
in very rare growing seasons.
That's going far farther back than what I would consider
There's not been much of that type grown in really large quantities for
at least a 100 years, at least in the US. I was coming from the frame
of reference of when wheat was introduced as a widespread grain crop in
the US midwest in the mid-1800s which was primarily w/ the introduction
here of hard red winter wheat, specifically Turkey Red.
The Duram wheats are grown farther north and west in the US from where
we are located here.
I wouldn't like wheat quite that short for the reasons stated
before--would force one to run the combine header nearly on the ground
which makes for picking up lots of dirt and wear on the lower carriage
in order to not miss the shorter than average heads.
I still think regarding your point regarding the total biomass per acre
that the modern planting density compared to such hand sown fields of
the reference time frame when such super-tall varieties were predominant
will counteract a large amount of the difference in total plant volume.
That's completely wrong. Horticulture largely pertains to urban and
commercial plant production for food and aesthetics. Agriculture pertains
to rural and commercial food production from plants and animals.
Universities are situated in cities, but their agricultural colleges are
fully engaged in rural food production in all areas.
Giant plants are not so hard to develop, but that's not usually the goal of
plant breeders. The key is the efficiency at which plants convert sunlight,
water and nutrients into the final biomass product. There's not much room
to improve the efficiency of photosynthesis, it has become very efficient
over the last few billion years, and the efficiency of our photovoltaic
cells lag behind them quite badly.
Bigger plants take longer to grow, take more water and nutrients, so what's
the advantage? When grain is the product, there's usually more to gain by
shortening the plant, thereby diverting more of the growing plant's energy
to developing the head of grain instead if building large stalks. Nature
makes plants tall because they usually have to rise above the competition
and capture the precious sunlight. In a field of one type of grain, there's
no reason for the plants to compete with each other by being taller.
If bulk biomass is the key, it may not be the best strategy to grow a forest
of 12-foot high sugarcane that takes 11 months to grow, when the same
biomass equivalent can be delivered from a crop of sugar beet harvested 3
times a year.
There's been considerable research and discussion on these subjects, so I
recommend you investigate some of it.
All depends...the pumpkin and sunflower foks are kinda' into that...
I don't think they know anything about that... :)
I don't know what you're responding to here...the discussion (sorta' a
sidebar, but the immediate discussion) was the height of (primarily)
current wheat hybrids as opposed to those of some bygone time--the exact
time of "bygone" is now apparently long ago as opposed to (say) early
19th century when really large scale small grain farming became
prevalent as I initially assumed.
As a wheat/grain sorghum producer, I naturally got interested in what
some others were up to in the same area. I did note that the very short
varieties such as Brock is mentioning are shorter than I would prefer to
grow simply owing to increased maintenance and wear on harvesting
equipment and quite possibly higher loss from missing shorter than
This all sprang from the observation quite some time ago (in thread life
terms) that modern agricultural varieties are much shorter than
"traditional" thus reducing total biomass during (particularly)
small/cereal grains production. I said I didn't think they had shrunk
<all> that much and that higher seeding densities w/ modern practices
would compensate for much of the shorter growth anyway.
As at least one counter example, modern hybrid corns are much taller and
denser plants than the (American) maize of the native Indians for the
This conversation is being conducted in English. All forms of English to
which I am aware, do not contain any other word to describe a group of
animate and/or inanimate objects with a pronoun other than "they."
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.