Soil PH

[symplastless]

Tad

Please define "nutrient".

Also as far as soil goes and the chemistry there of pertaining to trees can be found here:

[Billy]

John,

nutrient noun a substance that provides nourishment essential for growth and the maintenance of life : fish is a source of many important nutrients, including protein, vitamins, and minerals. ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from Latin nutrient- , from the verb nutrire.

Please note, "including protein, vitamins, and minerals. There is no energy in vitamins or minerals but they are nutrients.

One of my instructors once picked up a round metal trash can and asked the class what it was. We, enthusiastically said it was a round metal trash can. Where upon he turned it over and started drumming on it. What is it?, he asked again. A drum we responded less enthusiastically. The he sat it up-side down on the floor and sat on it. A thing is only restricted in our imaginations as to what it is. It is what it does.

N, P, K, C and so on are elements and can be nutrients, except for N which is pretty much worthless until it is converted into ammonia or nitrate. C is also pretty inert biologically unless it come as CO2 or carbohydrates.

Now, if you want to talk elements, we need to talk electron orbitals, each of which has a "probability" of being in a particular area at any given time. For our purposes, I presume you will be prepared to talk about the s, p, d, and f orbitals next time. P orbitals are particularly important because they allow for double bonds and aromaticity in cyclical compounds, like tannins.

[Billy]

To whom is this missive addressed John?

Not really, elements make up compounds, like nitrate NO3 or ammonia which can be absorbed by the plants. N2 is of no interest to a plant and O2 is a plant waste product.

Well cork does retain moisture, it provides a haven for bacteria and fungi, and it does help break up heavy soils.

You are already on record that plants don't need food because they are autotrophs. Is that still your position John. I truly hope you aren't going into melt down here.

Yes, John, a nurse log is a thing.

(Oh, Lord) In a situation where you have poor soil (for whatever reason), the quickest fix would be compost tea because of the amount of living matter that is introduced into the soil. Mulch will work but it is slower acting.

An airliner was flying into Seattle when its' instruments went out. Dropping down through the clouds to get his bearings, the captain found himself flying between skyscrapers. Opening his window, the captain shouted at a man in one of the buildings,"Where an I?"

The man in the building shouted back, "you're in an airplane."

The captain immediately told the copilot to bank hard left and to put the plane on a 20% glide. Shortly there after the runway lights came into view and, the plane landed safely.

"How did you do that?", the copilot asked.

"Oh, it was easy", said the pilot. I asked the guy in the building where I was and the answer he gave was completely correct and totally useless, so I knew we were at the MicroSoft Tech Support building. Knowing were I was made it easy.

-------------

John, what you have just said is absolutely true and totally useless. If you have a sick tree are you going to treat it or wait for the geology to improve? For a forest, I would treat the geology. For a tree, I would treat the immediate soil.

They are just a Google away.

A few maybe but most aren't.

The point is do you have the time? Supportive interventions can be made.

Logic is only as good as its' premise. Some of your premises seem to be fairly far fetched.

You realize that you are making D. Staples "seem" plausible, don' you? You appear to have a good heart, John, and I'm sure that you are good at what you do. But to put a good theoretical handle on your views, take a class in botany (+ biology) and, chemistry(101-102). That would be about

9 units a semester for a year.

Classes are the only way. Without a deadline, the reading material will leave you comatose.

[symplastless]

80 + or - 10. I would rather discuss quarks and mesons. Then work our way back to why it is illigal to grow commercial hemp in the USA to relieve the forest from its hurting extracting procedures. Ben Franklin was a hemp farmer, why can I not be one? What was really the problem with Ben Franklin? He watched the lightning raise the hairs on the hemp kite string as it traveled downward into the Earth, LeMay said Franklin couldn't resist reaching out to touch the hemp and, as you'd expect, he got a slight shock. It was not just any string that connected Ben Franklin to the clouds above for his famous experiment, it was hemp string. George Washington as a hemp farmer. The writer of the Declaration of Independence grew hemp. THE STORY OF HEMP IN COLONIAL VIRGINIA, By Herndon. A Dissertation which includes references to George Washington as a hemp farmer. Excellent history. Ask yourself this question: How does George Washington get to grow hemp and not the Curator? It gets to the core of the question, what happened in the last 200 years that we lost such an important right, namely the control of agricultural production. This prohibition must come to an end. What an incredible embarrassment it would be to have to explain to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson that they would have to pull up their hemp crops, that would have been the Second American Revolution! Both men were high on hemp as an important crop to replace and rotate with tobacco. It still is.

We really need to use our minds on something prodcutive. As far as the table of elements. Its still not a table of nutrients. Industrial hemp has thousands of uses, from paper to textiles to biodegradable plastics to health food to fuel. It is one of the fastest growing biomasses on the planet, and one of the earliest domesticated plants known. It also runs parallel with the "Green Future" objectives that are becoming increasingly popular. Hemp requires little to no pesticides, replenishes soil with nutrients and nitrogen, controls erosion of the topsoil, and converts CO2 to oxygen very well, considering how fast it grows. Furthermore, Hemp could be used to replace many potentially harmful products, such as tree paper (the process of which uses bleaches and other toxic chemicals, apart from contributing to deforestation), cosmetics (which often contain synthetic oils that can clog pores and provide little nutritional content for the skin), plastics (which are petroleum based and cannot decompose), and more. Hemp was used extensively by the United States during WWII. Uniforms, canvas, and rope were among the main textiles created from the hemp plant at this time. Much of the hemp used was planted in the Midwest and Kentucky. Historically, hemp production made up a significant portion of Kentucky's economy and many slave plantations located there focused on producing hemp.[25]

In ref. to latter: A nutrient is a substance used in an organism's metabolism which must be taken in from the environment. Non-autotrophic organisms typically acquire nutrients by the ingestion of foods. Methods for nutrient intake vary, with animals and protists having an internal digestive system, while plants digest nutrients externally and then ingested.

Again

[symplastless]

.

If we could feed trees, we would take away the major job of the sun! People who say "plant food" are ignorant about photosynthesis.

I never said the trees do not require food. However they are autotrophs and thus manufacture their own food. They do require at least 17 know essential elements. Providing some of these elements and stimulating micros that alter these chemicals absorbable at urban trees is our duty as MODERN ARBORIST. I.e., if you are really a MODERN ARBORIST. First someone needs to do studies on optimum fertility levels for trees and we need to stop fertilizing them as if they were corn. maybe corn use a tea.

If you believe that you can feed a plant, put the "food" on and then put the plant in the dark. See what happens. If you could feed plants, there would be no need for photosynthesis, or the light energy of the sun. Ridiculous! Stupid! Why do we keep using the sloppy term? Because everybody does it. More ridiculous! More Stupid! I, and many other people, refuse to be part of the everybody. Fertilizers are not plant food in the sense of having an energy source.

Animals have food tubes. Upper appendages put the food in the tube (arms). A brain tells them where to find the food. Lower appendages take the animal to the food. Animals move to get their food. Food is processed in the animal's food tube.

Foods are substances that contain an energy source mostly, and may contain some elements, and other substances. The main part of food is the energy source. There are junk foods, fatty foods, and healthy foods. There are many diet books telling you about healthy foods. Animals can absorb an energy source. Plants cannot absorb an energy source. fertilizers are not plant foods. Fertilizers provide elements essential for growth of plants. The elements are part of salts, usually, that ionize in water. Ions are charged particles; anions, negative, and cations, positive. Plants "make" carbohydrates by trapping the light energy of the sun in a process called photosynthesis. Sad that so many people who work with plants do not know this. They call fertilizers plant food. very sad.

Reclaim our freedom and legalize commercial hemp!

Myths - wood is dead. Heartrot explains decay. Flush cuts are correct. Wound dressings stop rot. Nature is balanced. Fertilizer is food. Wetwood is bad. Planting deeply is good. Rot is a major cause of failure. Water causes decay. Insects and diseases are the major causes of tree problems. There are at least a hundred more.

[symplastless]

Billy

I think I will try to go study elements

[symplastless]

What is an element? Chemically, an element is a pure substance composed of atoms that all have the same number of protons in the nucleus. That number is the "atomic number" and specifies the element's position in the periodic table. The atomic nucleus also contains neutrons. For each element, the sum of the numbers of protons and neutrons is the approximate atomic weight. Depending on the definition, 17 out of the 94 naturally occurring elements are generally considered essential for the growth of plants.

[Billy]

While kicking around the idea of quarks and their odd flavors may be interesting, it seems a bit (a whole freakin' lot actually) tangential to the discussion of plant nutrients and healthy garden soils. Whereas ionic bonding transports ammonia and nitrates to the root hairs, the actual transport across the cell membrane requires the making and breaking of covalent bonds by the appropriate proteins. So where do quarks come into the conversation? NOWHERE!!!

Or are you assert> > Now, if you want to talk elements, we need to talk electron orbitals,

I'll catch you at 4:20 but for now can we please stay on subject?

What is CO2? What is NO3, or NH3? Are these nutrients? Are they digested externally? Yes, they are nutrients, and no, they aren't metabolized externally.

Everything above is correctly identified as myths and totally useless to someone who wants to adjust their soil to maximize plant health.

Never mind. I can see that the Borg have landed and conversation is futile.

[Billy]

Cool. And how much CO2 and H2O does it take to make an ounce of glucose?

[Tad]

John,

First off, I want to state that you've so managed to convolute this discussion that I no longer have any idea what you are talking about. How did the discussion turn to industrial hemp?

Secondly, your so-called "myths" is entirely inaccuratein my opinion. Some of the statements are untrue, but others are not, that is unless you have some backhanded way of explaining them. Here's a couple I've listed below that I'd love to have your explanations on:

"So-Called Myths: roots absorb nutrients, roots are the most important part of a plant, roots have associations called mycorrhizae, you can inoculate roots with mycorrhizae, "

Did you look at my link to the Soil Food Web website? Here's another one for you.

or you can join the Yahoo Group that is moderated by Jeff Lowenfels that discusses Compost Tea technology.

Just for the record, I never made this statement: "You just cannot take all of the benefits of the ecological stages of trees for trees and their associates and replace it with a tea."

My recommendation would be to use a good compost and compost tea in conjunction with each other. Of course, this may change depending on what type of soil or environmental conditions we're dealing with.

[symplastless]

I do not have the answer. You seem to know much more than me about chemistry.

could you define two things for me please?

nutrient -

element -

Thanks

[symplastless]

Oh really? maybe we can kick this around. First my concern for the health of soils is the supply of cellulose. Cellulose provides glucose for many organisms especially in the soil or more correctly, of the soil. One problem with most definitions of soil is they forget the enormous amount of living organisms that make up "HEALTHY" soil.

e.g., just one def. off the internet.

"Soil is the unconsolidated mineral or organic material on the immediate surface of the earth and serves as a natural medium for the growth of land plants."

Here is another def.

"Dirt, or soil, is made from rocks that break apart or wear away over many years. This is referred to as weathering. It may take 100 to 1000 years for 1 cm of soil to form through weathering. Soil also contains air, water, and humus, the decayed remains of dead animals and plants. Soil can actually be separated into 5 main parts: humus, clay, silt, sand, and gravel." hmmmm!

I prefer this def. Soil is a substance made up of sands, silts, clays, decaying organic matter, air, water and an "enormous number of living organisms". Is it alive or dead? Yes, is the answer. We have no word for a substance that is both living and dead - wood, soil.

Now healthy soil concerns must address an enormous number of living organisms. Cellulose provides food for many.

OK, back to quarks. Cellulose is atoms of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. Atoms are protons and electrons. Protons and electrons are quarks and leptons. Not that I completely understand it but quarks do play a role in soil health.

Something interesting I was studying when I found this out.

Did you know in a sense trees are music? Music is highly ordered waves and vibrations. Trees are wood, mostly. Wood is cellulose, mostly. Cellulose is atoms of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen. Atoms are protons and electrons. Protons and electrons are quarks and leptons. Quarks and leptons are highly ordered waves and vibrations. Wait a minute!! Music is also highly ordered waves and vibrations!! Think about it.

[kzin]

Do you talk like this to your clients? Do they come back after you do? Or, more likely, do they edge away from you slowly and carefully refraining from sudden movements. I'm not a consulting arborist but I'm pretty sure that you don't need to delve into quantum physics to practice effective horticulture. As for trees being music... well ... whatever floats your boat.

ml

[symplastless]

Do they come back after you do? Or,

1st. I was not talking to you I was speaking to Billy. 2nd I sure do. Believe it or not some people with an understanding of chemistry do hire people like me who understand a very little about chemistry to work on their property. 3rd You reply really does not explain the topic or offer any incite to the topic. maybe you should comment on something you can offer or add understanding to. As far as your opinion on waves and vibrations, thanks for sharing your beliefs. You or anybody offering a servcie have the right to be ignorant. BTW, what do you mean when you say "practice effective horticulture"? Just what does that mean? Oh, if they did not come back they would not be a client.

[kzin]

yeah fine, whatever. your aluminum foil beanie needs adjusting.

[symplastless]

One more thing about my boat. let me guess. You are talking about the displacement of water? What are you trying to say?

[symplastless]

Oh, kzin

Draining a wetland for a foot path is not only illegal in some areas but a very bad idea.

Ref:

[kzin]

well if you follow the entire thread you'll note that I recommend that he seek professional advice. Said professional would have been able to assess the environmental impact of the propsed path and the legality thereof. Also if you read that thread you'd see that it wasn't a wetland he was talking about but an area behind a commercial office block that would flood during the rain.

nice try

ml

[David Hare-Scott]

Uh huh.

Humans are mammals. Donkeys are mammals. Therefore humans are donkeys.

David

[symplastless]

Oh, its a flood plain?