I think you are referring to elements. many elements are provided in
composting wood. Especially the element calcium. In fact most parts shed
by the tree provide some elements. One part like the phellem does not
provide a food source for the soil. That's why I am against using all
phellem for mulch. One thing is nurse logs. Nurse logs are water
reservoirs for trees during dryer times. They are like a big sponge. No
spray will replace this unique feature. Trees were designed in groups with
shedding woody and non-woody parts constantly recycling elements and
providing carbon based substances for a food source. 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. Again I am not against the tea and
think it would be of value in participation of a proper mulching program.
I mean for example. many tree associates are fungi eaters. Some of the
fungi they eat are associated with nurse logs or decomposing wood chips.
Nurse logs are the substrate for the base of the food web the mycorrhizal
fungi. Fallen trees harbor a myriad of organisms, from bacteria and
actinomycetes to higher fungi. Of these, only some of the fungi might be
noticed by the causal observer as mushrooms or bracket fungi. These
structures, however, are merely the fruiting bodies produced by mold
colonies within the log. Many fungi fruit within the fallen tree, therefore
they are seen only when the tree is torn apart. Even when a fallen tree is
torn apart, only a fraction of the fungi present are noticed because the
fruiting bodies of most appear only for a small portion of the year. The
smaller organisms, not visible to the unaided eye, are still important
components of the system (Maser and Trappe, 1984, pg 16-par 5). This
process may not be possible with just using a tea. This type of an
ecosystem exists with the help of the ecological stage of trees.
You can find many of the benifits of wood for the system here:
Do you have a fact sheet or something on these teas? Are they a biodynamic
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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. www.simplici-tea.com
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.
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.