10 min $10 DIY aerated compost tea ACT brewer

[shopkin]

Perhaps you need to learn how to read as well as I said, "Some organisms can live in both environments, but many cannot."

Like I said, I would like to be a believer but am not because it sounds like nonsense. It would help if you could provide some citations of peer-reviewed controlled studies showing that ACT can control pathogens.

 

[Microbeman]

Perhaps you need to learn how to read as well as I said, "Some organisms can live in both environments, but many cannot."

Like I said, I would like to be a believer but am not because it sounds like nonsense. It would help if you could provide some citations of peer-reviewed controlled studies showing that ACT can control pathogens.

However, why would obligate aquatic microorganisms be extracted from compost? Are they floating in the air? What would that then make them?

Logical thought might bring one to conclude that there very likely are the same or similar microbial populations in an aerated microbial extrapolation as there are in a non-aerated microbial extrapolation, provided the same source material. Therefore one might conclude similar anti-pathogenic efficacy if applied in similar fashion. Therefore a scientific mind might garner a hypothesis or even theory that if a certain pathogen is controlled by non-aerated CT that it may also be controlled by aerated CT, provided other methods and materials are consistent.

One hypothesis that I can provide to explain the reason for digression between aerated [vermi]compost liquids, in pathogen control in contemporary peer reviewed literature, is that non-aerated CT is often created over a lengthy period, up to 14 days, while most aerated CT is created over a time period of less than 3 days and usually in 24 to 48 hours.

It leads one to ponder the possibility that in respect of certain anti-pathogenic qualities, that a longer 'brew' time may promote the division and growth of the microorganism(s) responsible for pathogen suppression. Indeed it does tweak my old mind memory enough to recall that in relation to the aforementioned defeat of erwinia, the liquid extract created did take usually 4 days - plus to 'finish'

This was the only case I presented in support of ACT pathogen suppression and I don't need any peer reviewed literature for it because I can believe myself and others can decide to believe me or not.

Many studies which profess to evaluate the efficacy of ACT-CT do not adequately examine the active microbial population factoring in their predatory relationships spatially.

I very much doubt that people like Chalker-Scott are avidly peering down microscope tubes.

I am working on a point of open reference to be freely shared in the short coming future. I don't know whether I can link it to this site but I shall try. It is a lot of work. There are a few studies amongst it illustrating pathogen suppression using aerated watery compost suspensions, AFAIR.

 

[shopkin]

The reason for making a microbial extrapolation rather than using straight compost is to 1/ accelerate the process Or
2/ use less compost Or/and 3/ fight pathogens.

So, there is no real evidence that ACT fights pathogens. That assertion is debunked.

Accelerating the process is not a benefit. It is a detriment to the notion of compost being a way to slowly mineralize and release nutrients.

Using less compost?? Now that really makes no sense at all. If you expand the numbers of microbes and add it to the grow medium, there has to be compost or something there for them digest. Otherwise, they are just microbial pollution.

Frankly, I do not think you have a leg to stand on here and promoting ACT is akin to being a snake oil salesman. A lot of people are wasting time and money that could be better spend elsewhere.

 

[xmobotx]

something ain't right here. you just pop up out of nowhere & every post you make is an effort to assail the compost tea process. seems kind of weird like, don't you have anything better to do?

 

[shopkin]

something ain't right here. you just pop up out of nowhere & every post you make is an effort to assail the compost tea process. seems kind of weird like, don't you have anything better to do?

I started out looking for info on hydrolyzing raw fish and kept bumping into posts about ACT. Seems like a lot of growers are doing it and wanted to know what I was missing. Now I know.... not missing anything. It's snake oil. So, back to fermenting fish.

 

[Microbeman]

The reason for making a microbial extrapolation rather than using straight compost is to 1/ accelerate the process Or
2/ use less compost Or/and 3/ fight pathogens.

So, there is no real evidence that ACT fights pathogens. That assertion is debunked.

Accelerating the process is not a benefit. It is a detriment to the notion of compost being a way to slowly mineralize and release nutrients.

Using less compost?? Now that really makes no sense at all. If you expand the numbers of microbes and add it to the grow medium, there has to be compost or something there for them digest. Otherwise, they are just microbial pollution.

Frankly, I do not think you have a leg to stand on here and promoting ACT is akin to being a snake oil salesman. A lot of people are wasting time and money that could be better spend elsewhere.

You are welcome to your opinion, whatever your agenda. I used ACT on my farm for quite a number of years with success and did manage to use less compost to cover/treat a given area. There is quite a difference between compost and organic matter. One thing that is clear is that you do not follow logic very well.

If you are purchasing fish hydrolysate, you'll likely find that a couple of the larger manufacturers trusted my testing methods.

I am not trying to talk anyone into anything. I just explain processes as I see them. I actually saved thousands of dollars using compost tea. It is somewhat akin to using microbial fermentations which have been used in Asia for nature farming for many years.

 

[shopkin]

There are urban legends, old wives tails, late night TV infomercials for diet pills, climate change deniers, etc. all around us. Some of it is just modern-day superstition, some stems fro deceit. The only way to separate the crap from the truth is to base judgment on sound science. There is no sound science to back up the supposed benefits of ACT, even though very smart people have tried to find those benefits.
http://puyallup.wsu.edu/~linda%20cha...ea%20again.pdf
You cannot prove a negative, but if the benefits of ACT are so miniscule that science cannot prove they exist, then it is highly unlikely to be worth the effort. Better to devote the time and effort to something that produces measurable results.

So, you guys just keep bubbling your tea. Going to church might help too. Also, move the airlifts down to where the outlet is half submerged and water is barely lifted above the surface. Airlift efficiency drops off dramatically as the static head increases. Airlifts have been extensively modeled by engineers and each configuration needs to be tuned to find the sweet spot. There are airlift calculators on the web now that do all the math for you.

I do not want to purchase fish hydrolase, I want to make it. What is on the market has been over-processed and lost much of its punch. Actually, I'm leaning toward fermentation instead of the sodium hydroxide hydrolysis of commercial products. The question is, do the results justify the effort.

I currently alternate feeding a puree of fresh fish and a puree of fresh crawfish. The fish is more balanced in terms of the nutrient profile, but crawfish has the chitin which has been proven (by science, through controlled studies) to inhibit certain pathogens, especially things like Phytophthora and Pythium which cause root rot and damping off. The puree of fresh fish or crustacean is not something you would want to use as a foliar spray, may not be suitable for indoors, and needs to be injected into the soil so as not to attract vermin. I include a few Hawaiian peppers in the puree because the capsaicin does a good job of repelling rats and mice, which are a problem here even when using inorganic fertilizers.

 

[Microbeman]

There are urban legends, old wives tails, late night TV infomercials for diet pills, climate change deniers, etc. all around us. Some of it is just modern-day superstition, some stems fro deceit. The only way to separate the crap from the truth is to base judgment on sound science. There is no sound science to back up the supposed benefits of ACT, even though very smart people have tried to find those benefits.
http://puyallup.wsu.edu/~linda%20cha...ea%20again.pdf
You cannot prove a negative, but if the benefits of ACT are so miniscule that science cannot prove they exist, then it is highly unlikely to be worth the effort. Better to devote the time and effort to something that produces measurable results.

So, you guys just keep bubbling your tea. Going to church might help too. Also, move the airlifts down to where the outlet is half submerged and water is barely lifted above the surface. Airlift efficiency drops off dramatically as the static head increases. Airlifts have been extensively modeled by engineers and each configuration needs to be tuned to find the sweet spot. There are airlift calculators on the web now that do all the math for you.

I do not want to purchase fish hydrolase, I want to make it. What is on the market has been over-processed and lost much of its punch. Actually, I'm leaning toward fermentation instead of the sodium hydroxide hydrolysis of commercial products. The question is, do the results justify the effort.

I currently alternate feeding a puree of fresh fish and a puree of fresh crawfish. The fish is more balanced in terms of the nutrient profile, but crawfish has the chitin which has been proven (by science, through controlled studies) to inhibit certain pathogens, especially things like Phytophthora and Pythium which cause root rot and damping off. The puree of fresh fish or crustacean is not something you would want to use as a foliar spray, may not be suitable for indoors, and needs to be injected into the soil so as not to attract vermin. I include a few Hawaiian peppers in the puree because the capsaicin does a good job of repelling rats and mice, which are a problem here even when using inorganic fertilizers.

You certainly enjoy displaying your ignorance; eg. by not responding to my logical hypothesis. Just because I have not provided a citation or because Chalker-Scott, one of the dumbest phds around, does not produce any studies, does not mean that smart scientists are not studying the effects of aerated watery compost extracts. As pointed out, it appears from some studies that disease suppression is superior with non-aerated teas but the point I made concerning this YOU evaded.

There is actually a Harvard study on this forum someplace but I'm sure someone of your profound intelligence can find it. There are current studies ongoing at the U of Arizona and Texas State.

As I told you I have between 200 and 300 studies on my computer. I was going to provide you more citations until I discovered that I had to type out the text;

Effect of compost water extracts on grey mould
(Bo trytis cinerea)
Y. Elad* and D. Shtienberg
Department of Plant Pathology, Agricultural Research Organization, The Volcani Center, Bet
Dagan 50250, Israel

In situ and in vitro suppressive effect of agricultural composts and their water extracts
on some phytopathogenic fungi
M.H. EL-Masry1,*, A.I. Khalil2, M.S. Hassouna2 and H.A.H. Ibrahim1
1Department of Bioscience and Technology, Institute of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Alexandria,
163 El-Horreya Avenue, El-Shatby, Alexandria 21526, Egypt
2Department of Environmental Studies, Institute of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Alexandria,
163 El-Horreya Avenue, El-Shatby, Alexandria 21526, Egypt
*Author for correspondence: Fax: +20-3-4285792, E-mail: [email protected]
Received 27November 2001; accepted 6 April 2002

Influence of compost and liquid bioferment on the chemical
and biological characteristics of soil cultivated with banana
(Musa spp. L.)
M. de L. Adrianol, F. Gutierrez', L. Dendooven3 and M. Salvador -Figueroa' *

Aerobic Compost Tea, Compost and a Combination of Both Reduce the severity of Common Scab (Streptomyces scabien) on Potato Tubers Journal of Plant Sciences 2008
ISSN 1816-4951

Measuring Root Disease Suppression in Response
to a Compost Water Extract
Gilberto Curlango-Rivera, Tom Pew, Hans D. VanEtten, Xiong Zhongguo, Naitong Yu, and Martha C. Hawes

Effect of aerated compost tea on grapevine powdery mildew,
botrytis bunch rot and microbial abundance on leaves
K. J. Evans & A. K. Palmer & D. A. Metcalf
Accepted: 3 October 2012 / Published online: 13 October 2012

COMPOST EXTRACT ADDED TO MICROCOSMS MAY
SIMULATE COMMUNITY-LEVEL CONTROLS ON SOIL
MICROORGANISMS INVOLVED IN ELEMENT CYCLING
R. A. JANZEN, F. D. COOK and W. B. MCGILL*
Department of Renewable Resources, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2E3

Suppressive effect of non-aerated compost teas on foliar fungal pathogens of tomato
Souleymane B. Koné a, Antoine Dionne a, Russell J. Tweddell a, Hani Antoun a,b, Tyler J. Avis a,c,*
a Centre de recherche en horticulture, Université Laval, Québec, Qué., Canada G1V 0A6
b Département des sols et de génie agroalimentaire, Université Laval, Québec, Qué., Canada G1V 0A6
c Department of Chemistry, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ont., Canada K1S 5B6

TOMATO (Lycopersicon esculentum ‘Red Sun’) M. T. McGrath and D. D. Moyer
Powdery mildew; Oidium sp. Department of Plant Pathology
Septoria leaf spot; Septoria lycopersici Cornell University, LIHREC
Bacterial speck; Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato 3059 Sound Avenue, Riverhead, NY 11901
Evaluation of compost tea and the biofungicide Sonata for foliar diseases in organically produced tomatoes, 2004.

Microbial Starter for the Enhancement of Biological Activity of
Compost Tea
YUVARANI NAIDU1, SARIAH MEON, JUGAH KADIR† AND YASMEEN SIDDIQUI
Laboratory of Food Crops and Floriculture, Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400,
Selangor D.E. Malaysia
†Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Selangor D.E. Malaysia




If you are really interested, this will give you a start.

One must read studies from a critical stance, weeding out information or methods which seem suspect. Not all studies have been conducted by smart people. For example the studies on ACT done by the USDA and CAN Ag are pathetic as they inoculated them with e-coli and did not consider the effect of protozoa.

As for airlifts...math on airlifts? really? I had no idea. Now we can say goodbye.

 

[shopkin]

Now that wasn't so hard; was it? There is some nice stuff there. I sincerely appreciate the citations Microbeman and will digest them thoroughly (no pun intended). It has been a pleasure.

 

[BurnOne]

Now that's the way to have a CIVIL discussion on IC Mag. Bravo gentlemen.
Burn1

 

[Ya Dingus]

Hey guys! I built a brewer based off of these designs (THANKS HEADYBLUNT!) and I watered in my first tea yesterday. My plants today seem to have grown an inch overnight! Anyway I have a question regarding this brewers design and best functionality.

I built mine using a 5 gallon bucket. The PVC tube thing is designed like the updated version Heady has posted.

When I run my brewer it bubbles mostly inside the tube, but very little water i think is really being circulated up through it and out down the other side back into the bucket. Some small drips and splashes come out of the P-trap curve but I thought it would be a lot more recirculating-esq than just that. It would really be sweet if the function video on the first page were still working on youtube, then I would know if this is working optimally. Hope someone replies, as I know heady blunts hasn't signed on since 2012.

Thanks

 

[xmobotx]

they kind of shplurp & bloop out a chug of water @ 1 to 3 chugs a second or so depending on the pump/config... if i want to stir my "tea" i fill close to the tip of the pipe {more circulation/less drop} {like to do botanicals as opposed to ACT} for oxygenation {ACT} i won't fill it as close to the outlet {more drop/less frequent shplurping & blurping}

 

[Microbeman]

Hey guys! I built a brewer based off of these designs (THANKS HEADYBLUNT!) and I watered in my first tea yesterday. My plants today seem to have grown an inch overnight! Anyway I have a question regarding this brewers design and best functionality.

I built mine using a 5 gallon bucket. The PVC tube thing is designed like the updated version Heady has posted.

When I run my brewer it bubbles mostly inside the tube, but very little water i think is really being circulated up through it and out down the other side back into the bucket. Some small drips and splashes come out of the P-trap curve but I thought it would be a lot more recirculating-esq than just that. It would really be sweet if the function video on the first page were still working on youtube, then I would know if this is working optimally. Hope someone replies, as I know heady blunts hasn't signed on since 2012.

Thanks

Please moderators if this is forbidden, remove it;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYfHmGOtuqw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faLgIXQ57mM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgc0e8ed0dw

http://microbeorganics.com/Simple design cone airlift.pdf

This may give you a better idea(s) for interfacing the air pump.

 

[Ya Dingus]

they kind of shplurp & bloop out a chug of water @ 1 to 3 chugs a second or so depending on the pump/config... if i want to stir my "tea" i fill close to the tip of the pipe {more circulation/less drop} {like to do botanicals as opposed to ACT} for oxygenation {ACT} i won't fill it as close to the outlet {more drop/less frequent shplurping & blurping}

Please moderators if this is forbidden, remove it;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYfHmGOtuqw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faLgIXQ57mM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sgc0e8ed0dw

http://microbeorganics.com/Simple design cone airlift.pdf

This may give you a better idea(s) for interfacing the air pump.

Thanks guys! Mine will act like the one in the first video but only if the water level is right up under the mouth of the spout of the p trap. I think perhaps I got too wide pvc and so it requires more power to flow better with less water.

 

[uptosumpn]

SUBBED

 

[BurnOne]

Please moderators if this is forbidden, remove it;

I see nothing wrong with it Double M. Thank you for all your help.
Burn1

 

[stoned-trout]

sweet reading...hhhmmm so I need a big blender and a huge syringe...the fish I got....let us know how your fermenting fish works out....I have buried fish like the Indians did for quite a while now...

 

[DAVES NOT HERE]

been bubbling in a 5gallon bucket. Time to step it up and get to building my own air-lift ACT

 

[hoss1111]

Com 1 is in the mail. Going to upgrade my 8w and 3w pumps on my 5gal bucket.

 

[MedResearcher]

Going to attempt to build a 30 gallon air lift style brewer from a "30 Gallon Cone Inductor Tank *Fully Draining*."

Have a few questions, I was hoping some of the pros wouldn't mind chiming in on^^

1) The tank has 2 options for the drain fittings, 1.5" female, or 2" male. Common sense tells me either would work fine, although I am curious if someone has input as to why one would work better than the other.

2) I was going to use (personal use) the airlift design from Microbe Organics (Thanks!). The design seems so perfect, simple, and clean. The only change I am thinking of trying, is to use 2 airlifts or possibly split the 1 airlift in an attempt to create a bit of a vortex. I don't want to have to clean 4 airlifts, or even 2 really, although the idea of the water spinning seems neat. I have a few ideas how to adapt it, but nothing great yet. Hoping someone else may have done it already, or would have an ingenious yet simple way to do it without over complicating the pipping or cleaning.

3) Any suggestions for a good air pump, that would be overkill for a 30 gallon airlift? Noise is of no concern, and price is of limited concern (saving a ton compared to buying a vortex).

4) Also, I had the idea of using 2x pumps and 2x airlifts, 1 pump for each airlift. Most likely this idea is flawed, I just need someone to point out why.

Thanks a ton,
Mr^^