List your favorite brand of Canadian Peat Moss?

[Kozmo]

... Ill go with what I have in the garage...

 

[Microbeman]

Eclipse;

In university ag programs peatmoss is recommended for both humus and slow release Nitrogen (varying between place of harvest, color, grade, etc.) I believe this is mentioned in the link from UC Davis.

As I think I mentioned earlier the test results on compost show low NPK using typical fertilizer tests, however one can grow plants through all stages using only compost. This is a heavy indicator of the sequestered nutrients (sequestered in the bodies of microbes and humified organic matter). One of the greatest illustrations of this is an old growth sequoia or spruce forest which puts on more mass in a season than a gazillion corn fields with no apparent nutrients.

These are the nutrients I'm referring to. They have often been the only nutrients I've depended on period. This year I used zero nutrients in one greenhouse and got an equivalent yield to the other greenhouse given fish, alfalfa, etc.

I have yet to use silica but have found it in my HPLC-MS testing of my mix, the only testing I trust....period.

My comment initially regarding peatmoss was do not be too sure. It does contain nutrients, in my experience of using it and it seemingly increases nutrient release after the first season.

 

[Kozmo]

Eclipse;

In university ag programs peatmoss is recommended for both humus and slow release Nitrogen (varying between place of harvest, color, grade, etc.) I believe this is mentioned in the link from UC Davis.

As I think I mentioned earlier the test results on compost show low NPK using typical fertilizer tests, however one can grow plants through all stages using only compost. This is a heavy indicator of the sequestered nutrients (sequestered in the bodies of microbes and humified organic matter). One of the greatest illustrations of this is an old growth sequoia or spruce forest which puts on more mass in a season than a gazillion corn fields with no apparent nutrients.

These are the nutrients I'm referring to. They have often been the only nutrients I've depended on period. This year I used zero nutrients in one greenhouse and got an equivalent yield to the other greenhouse given fish, alfalfa, etc.

I have yet to use silica but have found it in my HPLC-MS testing of my mix, the only testing I trust....period.

My comment initially regarding peatmoss was do not be too sure. It does contain nutrients, in my experience of using it and it seemingly increases nutrient release after the first season.

Nice... Very interesting. Life is amazing. Thank you MM.

 

[barnyard]

For Peat's sake...

from: http://afghanag.ucdavis.edu/natural...cs/soil-fact-sheets/FS_Growing_Media_Peat.doc

About peat Moss

Peat moss is used in the production of many horticultural crops.
"Peat moss is a term used in the trade for dead, fibrous, slightly
humified moss that has been excavated from peat bogs, dried to
a moisture content not exceeding 30 percent, shredded,
screened into sizes according to the requirement of the trade,
and pressed into bales or smaller packages."
"Sphagnum peat forms on poorly and very poorly drained sites
which are isolated from nutrient rich ground waters
and thus moisture is supplied only by rain."

Characteristics & Qualities of Peat
Characteristics of Peat
Organic matter
An acceptable quality peat should be at least 80% organic matter. A high quality peat
contains 95% organic matter on a dry weight basis.

pH
Depending on peat type, pH can range from a very acid 3.6 to slightly alkaline 7.5.
Low lime peats have a pH value below 5.0 and are usually calcium deficient. High
lime peats have a pH above 5.0 and are usually calcium sufficient.

Percent water
Percent water is correctly expressed on an oven-dry basis. Thus,
a water contentof100% means the weight of the water equals the weight of the peat.
Percent water is also oftenexpressed on a moist weight basis(i.e., the weight of water as a percent of the total weight of the peat and water).Weed seed content Sphagnum peat moss is virtually free of weed seeds, while reed-sedge and peat humus may contain weed seeds.

Water holding capacity
Sphagnum peat can adsorb 20 to 30 times its dry weight in water, while hypnum peat
and reed - sedge peat can adsorb 5 to 7 times their dry weight.
Nitrogen content The nitrogen content determines fertilizer requirements. Peats low in nitrogen will require supplemental fertilization for healthy plant growth. Much of the nitrogen in peat is tied up in the organic residue, and is slowly released over
a long period of time as the organic matter decomposes.

Structure
Most baled peats look and feel fibrous or felty in structure, while packaged peat maybe pulpy or spongy. Characteristics of sphagnum peat and other horticultural peats

Type of Peat
-Range ofNitrogen (%)
-Range of Water Absorbing Capacity (%)
-Range in Ash Content (%)
-Range inpH
-Range in Volume
-Weights (lbs./ft.3)
Sphagnum moss peat
0.6
-
1.4
1,500
-
3,000
1.0
-
5.0
3.0
-
4.0
4.5
-
7.0
Hypnum moss peat
2.0
-
3.5
1,200
-
1,800
4.0
-
10.0
5.0
-
7.0
5.0
-
10.0
Reed
-
sedge peat (low lime)
1.5
-
3.0
500
-
1,200
5.0
-
15.0
4.0
-
5.0
10.
-
15.0
Reed
-
sedge peat (high lime)
2.0
-
3.5
400
-
1,200
5.0
-
18.0
5.1
-
7.5
10.0
-
18.0
Decomposed peat
2.0
-
3.5
150
-
500
10.0
-
50.0
5.0
-
7.5
10.0
-

 

[Microbeman]

Some key phrases from the document;

slightly humified moss

Nitrogen content The nitrogen content determines fertilizer requirements. Peats low in nitrogen will require supplemental fertilization for healthy plant growth. Much of the nitrogen in peat is tied up in the organic residue, and is slowly released over
a long period of time as the organic matter decomposes.

and the other doc;

These high clay soils are low in humus and may have imbalance in mineral nutrients. Also, these soils may have few beneficial soil organisms (bacteria, fungi, algae, protozoa, earthworms and others). High clay soils may be amended with peat moss, sphagnum, organic mulch to increase the humus content.

but I had already posted those quotes so for peat's sake what would your point be?

There was a time several years ago (2003 to 2007 somtime) when some (most) gardening experts (among them Jeff Lowenfels, Elaine Ingham, Howard Garrett[Dr. Dirt]) were stating that sphagnum peatmoss was an inert substance with no life, no nutrients. I produced irrefutable data proving otherwise (to date) which was accepted by all but the latter. If you have opposing data, I'd be very interested in viewing it.

 

[barnyard]

oh, for the love of Peat! lol

 

[EclipseFour20]

I was basically suggesting peat is absent of nutrients (using the more common definition used by most users on ICMag)...and must be added by the cultivator....

It's all good...we both know peat is good grow medium and one must amend it with nutrients in order to achieve above average gardening results.

...Peats low in nitrogen will require supplemental fertilization for healthy plant growth. ...

I guess we all are saying the same thing; but since we are all talking past each other, no one is listening. We are both saying "peat requires additional nutrients for healthy plant growth"...more or less.

BTW, with peat's low pH doesn't it have to be "amended" prior to use? But I guess for the purposes of this discussion, adding a form of calcium (liming agent) probably is not considered "nutrient" amendment.

.....This year I used zero nutrients in one greenhouse and got an equivalent yield to the other greenhouse given fish, alfalfa, etc.

...My comment initially regarding peatmoss was do not be too sure. It does contain nutrients, in my experience of using it and it seemingly increases nutrient release after the first season.

Are you sure you got an equivalent yield using 100% unamended peat? Sorry dude, I just have difficulty reconciling that: zero nutes + peat = equivalent harvest....or put differently: water + peat = equivalent harvest. That notion goes against all my experiences/eduction/knowledge, sorry...it "ain't logical".

 

[Microbeman]

Please note that at no point have I even remotely suggested once nor said that I grew in straight sphagnum peatmoss. Both of you guys seem to be projecting words into my mouth. All I said was

Don't be too sure about that. After all sphagnum peatmoss almost always contains humus.

For some reason you extrapolated this into something else.

I am sure that my yields were the same (as same as same is). One greenhouse was amended with fish, alfalfameal/kelpmeal teas, the other not. Both were comprised of roughly the same soil mix; compost, shagnum peatmoss, local soil, pea gravel.

Also; please do not break up my quotes and dotdotdot them to infer something I am not saying.

 

[EclipseFour20]

MM...now I am confused, how else should I have interpreted this post?

Eclipse;

In university ag programs peatmoss is recommended for both humus and slow release Nitrogen (varying between place of harvest, color, grade, etc.) I believe this is mentioned in the link from UC Davis.

As I think I mentioned earlier the test results on compost show low NPK using typical fertilizer tests, however one can grow plants through all stages using only compost. This is a heavy indicator of the sequestered nutrients (sequestered in the bodies of microbes and humified organic matter). One of the greatest illustrations of this is an old growth sequoia or spruce forest which puts on more mass in a season than a gazillion corn fields with no apparent nutrients.

These are the nutrients I'm referring to. They have often been the only nutrients I've depended on period. This year I used zero nutrients in one greenhouse and got an equivalent yield to the other greenhouse given fish, alfalfa, etc.

I have yet to use silica but have found it in my HPLC-MS testing of my mix, the only testing I trust....period.

My comment initially regarding peatmoss was do not be too sure. It does contain nutrients, in my experience of using it and it seemingly increases nutrient release after the first season.

The topic of this thread is peat.
I made a statement that peat lacks nutrients (using the definition that most ICMager use).
You injected a new concept "sequestered nutrients" and said I was wrong--you believe peat does have nutrients.
Then you follow up with the "equivalent yield" statement in the above post.

If you are not talking about peatmoss...then what else are we talking about? No one is talking about ROLS? Not custom grow medium. Not foxfarms....
I am really confused now. How else is one to interpret you "equivalent yield" statement?

 

[xmobotx]

I don;t have any problem reconciling MM's statement. most people in general are way wrong in the way they view "nutes." Along w/ that, they are throwing away tons of un-used nutrients every cycle in their absurdly amended mixes not realizing how fortunate they are that the plant even completed the cycle

 

[EclipseFour20]

Agree... but the topic of discussion was peat and it's nutrients (or lack thereof) and it appears that MM was referring to a different growing medium...I guess if he had stated that, there might have been less confusion. But now I am slightly more confused....as I don't see the relevancy of his equivalent yield statement (obviously in a different grow medium) to our discussion about sequestered nutes in peatmoss...but its cool, I guess I missed that transition/leap.

IMHO, most important thing about nutrients is understanding how the element breaks down and the time it takes in a particular grow medium. You are absolutely right, lots of wa$te out there for those that don't know!

BTW, MM no one is putting words in your mouth...just trying to get clarification to something you said, hence my question "Are you sure you got an equivalent yield using 100% unamended peat?"...You gotta admit if someone told you that you would say WTF too.

 

[Microbeman]

Good grief Eclipse, I said several times or twice at least that an old growth forest or grassland is a good example. I reminded you at least once that I was only referring to my statement 'not to be too sure'. When I said 'the nutrients I'm referring to, I mean the ones which are released over a period of time. [read the quote you copied above again, slowly. Separate the paragraphs and see the progression] These are not specific to peatmoss but are specific to living soil and are the crux of natural/organic growing. You must have noticed that I have been writing about nutrient free growing since 2008...no?

 

[EclipseFour20]

Its all good MM...but if you can not see how your words were easily misunderstood, then I am sorry. Cuz I know if I did...then others might be "confused" as well.

BTW...when/where do I disagree with your points or arguments? Please point me to that post and I will edit it. You act as if I disagree...I don't. Too funny, smoke a fatty and relax, we are both go to the same church, but happen to sit in different pews.

Like I said...I must have missed the segue/transition on your thoughts as they "progressed" forward.

And I don't think I came across any of your writings in my research....so no I am not aware of your published work or your philosophy--other than what I gleaned here on ICMag. Is there something particular I should read?

 

[rasputin]

What nonsense. Absolute, utter nonsense.

Let's rewind, eh? Just to see the troll in his natural environment, trolling as he does.

This all started when the absolute statement that peat contains no nutrients was made by someone who is clearly ill-informed. If the term sequestered nutrients is new to you in 2014 perhaps you should chill out on the agenda-laden posts and start doing some homework.

Microbeman simply pointed out it is wise to caution against such absolutes as peat can and does contain nutrients and in response he has had to deal with passive aggressive bullshit comments like "I guess I stumped the professor" which is all the more comical coming from someone who seems incapable of understanding the basics of humus colloids and soil humification. This shit is rich, unlike your bunk ass soil.

MM makes mention of the potential for and availability of sequestered nutrients in peat and the capability of sustaining plant life throughout a growing cycle, offering examples of such nutrient availability and also citing his own personal experience, no less. Troll responds by saying "but what if you use salt fertilizers? Then what? Huh?" He says this in earnest, as if he is looking out for those who dare to use peat in such a way and are at risk of being lead astray by Microbeman's comments, and as if MM has faulted by overlooking this segment of the cultivation crowd.

Oh, wait... he says this while posting in a thread about peat in the Organic Soil forum. Is it not reasonable of MM to expect anyone posting in this thread is concerned about the use of peat moss in organic soil rather than as a soilless medium with synthetic fertilizers?

This trend of having to qualify and couch every comment made in this specific forum in such a way as to address the concerns of every different cultivation method is fucking absurd. It isn't being done in any earnest attempt at furthering knowledge, it is being used as a crutch by a certain few who are incapable of having an honest intellectual discussion and instead resort to bullshit strawman arguments just to score a point which has fuck all to do with the actual topic at hand. So instead of talking about the use of peat and different brands, we have to stop and give someone with an attitude a lesson in humus and sequestered nutrients because what? Because they want to make a lot of noise? Fuck that nonsense.

You gotta be real lonely to troll this hard.

 

[EclipseFour20]

Chill Rasp!

As you can see...my posts contain ZERO HATE, if so--please direct me to one example.
No trolling here...again, direct me to a single example if you can.

If asking questions and getting clarification is uncomfortable for you, then I am sorry. Grow thicker skin.

BTW saying shit does not make it so...but facts speak better.

Again, there is not one post in this thread where I disagree with MM...so why all the "shit"....LOL (I have thick skin).

Peace!

BTW I don't use chem soluble nutes...99% organic (biodynamic backbone) and probably can find 25+ years of garden dirt under my fingernails.

 

[xmobotx]

the only confusion is resulting from attempting to justify MM's comment w/ the soluble nute paradigm. to clarify, yes ~you can grow w/ soluble nutes but then you have to be feeding the plant at reasonably specific levels & problems are common when methods are combined or pre-amended soils are used throwing the chemical situation out of whack.

key to this is where MM described his mix as compost & peat

because he provided high quality humus inputs, the scant few nutrients locked up in the peat were made available as the plant required by the living components of that humus source & were adequate

IOW, he fed the soil & the soil fed the plant

 

[rasputin]

More nonsense.

Who said anything about hate? Just you, tinkerbell. Now you want me to bring up examples of a charge I never made? Get a grip.

You're a troll. Perhaps you equate that with hate like a 12 year old might. You're not being hateful, just purposely annoying and obtuse. Just like you are being in regards to this very point, acting as if you don't know exactly what I mean when I say trolling. I've seen you muck up far too many threads by now to think it's anything other than obvious troll is obvious.

This sad act you put on as if you've been misinterpreted or mistaken in intent is tired and lame. The troll as victim. Oh, the agony.

 

[prune]

More nonsense.

Who said anything about hate? Just you, tinkerbell. Now you want me to bring up examples of a charge I never made? Get a grip.

You're a troll. Perhaps you equate that with hate like a 12 year old might. You're not being hateful, just purposely annoying and obtuse. Just like you are being in regards to this very point, acting as if you don't know exactly what I mean when I say trolling. I've seen you muck up far too many threads by now to think it's anything other than obvious troll is obvious.

This sad act you put on as if you've been misinterpreted or mistaken in intent is tired and lame. The troll as victim. Oh, the agony.

thank-you for addressing the asshole in the apple...

 

[BurnOne]

I'm going to lock this one too so everyone can cool off.
Burn1