plant sap pH 6.4

[Microbeman]

MM...why do you think sap analysis is a joke? Do you also feel the horiba hardy meters have no use? The basic argument is that sap analysis provides a look at what is available for new growth. Tissue analysis will alsi include ca and b that is immobile and not available.

Sea shield is a mystery and I remain nervous using it. The chitosan claim along with how it is stabalized both bother me. At the same time ii like the results.

Plus you are ignoring the micronized part. Maybe not a big deal in your well established a d highly functioning soil. But if you have a problem it does work fsster

Edit...btw that mag cl bothered me to. But I think that is the mg from the sea water...just a way of avoiding stating on a label what the actual ingredients are.

You tell me;

http://crophealthlabs.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CHL_AlfalfaSample-Guide_140517.pdf

How's this for all the yuppie organo buzz words one could possibly dream up by hiring one of the best PR firms in the land?
http://crophealthlabs.com/wp/about


What micronized part?
http://www.advancingecoag.com/products
http://www.advancingecoag.com/about-aea

I could be mistaken but in my books soluble is soluble.

 

[Backyard Farmer]

Is something thats a large particle more soluble than something thats 100 micron or lower?

 

[Microbeman]

So if not Albrect's, then what soil ratio's do you shoot for?

As illustrated in the link previously posted, I believe it depends on soil type, climate, crop grown but I do not generally fuss about it myself. If I were to trust a soil test anyway, I'd probably avoid the $20 Melhic III extractions in favor of HPLC-MS.

How do you think my ferns and many mushrooms would like it being forced into 6.4 pH? - jk

https://web.archive.org/web/20030713.../soilresum.php

A review of over 100 published studies and conversations with several soils consultants revealed evidence that proper cation balancing is inherently site specific. Most soils apparently do not need to conform to the Albrecht formula to be healthy and productive. Sandy Tidewater soils actually require somewhat higher Mg and K saturation for optimum crop nutrition. Some soil scientists warn that growers may be spending money and natural resources for lime or gypsum applications that their soils do not need. Both vegetable and agronomic crops thrive at a wide range of Ca and Mg levels, and soil tilth deteriorates only at extremely high Mg levels. However, too much soil K relative to Ca and Mg can tighten some soils, upset plant nutrition, and increase susceptibility of vegetable crops to some diseases and physiological disorders. Excessive soil K is a common problem in intensive vegetable production (both organic and conventional), and is often related to heavy use of off-farm inputs.

 

[Bulldog420]

MM, you always bring an educated approach to a discussion, and as you know, I highly value your opinion. I am not 100% sold on AEA products, and I didn't even use it on all my plants this year. However I am not counting them out either. I am getting better growth from my plants not treated with AEA, however as they mature the aroma profile and THC seems to be in higher levels. I never judge till the plant is weighed and cured before I make a call.

 

[Microbeman]

according to Arden Andersen at sap pH 6.4 the plant will put out more of a white light, while deviation will produce other colours (that are attractive to pests)

Might you be referring to 'chlorophyll fluorescence'?

"Chlorophyll fluorescence—a practical guide
http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/51/345/659.full "

I believe this to be the case and perhaps you could provide some citations from Arden Andersen's published research to substantiate that plants emit white light when the sap sample is pH 6.4.

Chlorophyll fluorescence is very interesting, and can be used to tell if the plant is stressed due to the changes in the photons the leaves emit (e.g. from water stress, biotic stress, etc), as well as other things like inferring nutrient status, effects from pesticides, and photosynthetic rate.

In the end, if there is any real evidence that when plant sap is pH 6.4 leaves emit white light so that bugs are not attracted, the best way is not to measure the plant sap, it is to use a chlorophyll fluorometer and measure the photons emitted by the leaves at pH 6.4 and use that as the reference point for a 'healthy plant.' Then use the chlorophyll fluorometer for testing the plants.

Furthermore where is the proof that 'bugs' aren't attracted to white light and what exactly is meant by "white light?" White light is merely a collection of wavelengths. Do we not need to know the wavelengths referred to, which are supposedly emitted by the leaves when the plant sap is pH 6.4?

The Logical Science Team

 

[Avenger]

Is something thats a large particle more soluble than something thats 100 micron or lower?

No.

for example calcium carbonate has a solubilty of 0.0013 g/100 mL of water at 77 degrees Fahrenheit. it does not matter what size the particles of calcium carbonate are, the maximum that will ever be in solution at any one time is 0.0013 g/100 mL of water at 77 degrees Fahrenheit.

What you can improve upon by micronizing the particles is the rate of dissolution. You can shorten the time it takes to reach a saturated solution.

You can however, generally increase the solubility by increasing the solvent temperature and/or the pressure. Albeit usually it is not dramatic.

I hope that is helpful. cheers.

 

[Microbeman]

Is something thats a large particle more soluble than something thats 100 micron or lower?

Hey BF; You are likely correct that there is a greater liklihood of faster more thorough suspension with a dry element in water with smaller size particles. I don't know how valid this is with truly soluble elements. My point was more that I did not see this mentioned in the AEA products.

I may have missed it, thus my question posed.

 

[Microbeman]

No.

for example calcium carbonate has a solubilty of 0.0013 g/100 mL of water at 77 degrees Fahrenheit. it does not matter what size the particles of calcium carbonate are, the maximum that will ever be in solution at any one time is 0.0013 g/100 mL of water at 77 degrees Fahrenheit.

What you can improve upon by micronizing the particles is the rate of dissolution. You can shorten the time it takes to reach a saturated solution.

You can however, generally increase the solubility by increasing the solvent temperature and/or the pressure. Albeit usually it is not dramatic.

I hope that is helpful. cheers.

Now that is what I was trying to say. Thank you!

 

[Pangea]

Smaller sized particles are easier for microbes to consume, which in turn make them more soluble. Same amount of matter, more available surface area.

 

[Bulldog420]

I think pangea has the right idea. Not about water solubility, but being able to be consumed by microbes right away. Like the difference between compost and humus maybe?

 

[Microbeman]

Smaller sized particles are easier for microbes to consume, which in turn make them more soluble. Same amount of matter, more available surface area.

Yes but where do they say anything like that regarding their ordinary looking ingredients?

Be aware this only applies to non-soluble elements.

 

[milkyjoe]

You tell me;

http://crophealthlabs.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CHL_AlfalfaSample-Guide_140517.pdf

How's this for all the yuppie organo buzz words one could possibly dream up by hiring one of the best PR firms in the land?
http://crophealthlabs.com/wp/about


What micronized part?
http://www.advancingecoag.com/products
http://www.advancingecoag.com/about-aea

I could be mistaken but in my books soluble is soluble.

No disrespect but whether a person is a yuppie or not and no matter who wrote the copy what does that have to do with the science itself? I get that you do not personally like certain types of people and I personally have no problem with.

What I was asking is if you know of a reason the science is wrong?

Some of aea's products are in fact truly water soluble...hypercap or the epsom salt in photomag. No argument there at all. But lets argue about something like pht-p. It is in fact plain old rock phosphate...not even soft rock. And yes 3% of that P is water soluble. The rest is not. But it is ground to 5 micons or less. That does not make it soluble.

But it does make it easier for microbes to digest and shit out as an amino chelate making uptake to the plant much easier. Maybe not a benefit to you at all...no question your soil and your microbes are kicking ass. But to a guy that does not have dialed...could be a huge help.

What's up avengar...jump in and tell me if I am full of shit. And how goes it on the Ca meter

 

[milkyjoe]

And yea...ordinary ingredients no question. What is wrong with that.

The micronization and certain combos is what they are selling. I have never seen them claim exotic base materials other than sea shield...and even then it is the processing that is a mystery to me...not the actual ingredients

 

[milkyjoe]

And maybe I ignored the real question is this stuff micronized or not. Yes it is...down to 5 micon and below. Somewhere in the first few pages c-ray posted that. Or give em a call...they are happy to confirm. It is a source of pride to them.

My buddies at nutri tech use a similar tech but are just now breaking into the US market. I don't have the reference but iowa did a study on plain ol K Sulfate. Only 12% became available to the plant withi 90 days.

I don't have a peer reviewed university study showing how fast .icronized becomes available. But then again it ain't necessary. Tissue testing would allow any of us torun those side by side

 

[Backyard Farmer]

Hey BF; You are likely correct that there is a greater liklihood of faster more thorough suspension with a dry element in water with smaller size particles. I don't know how valid this is with truly soluble elements. My point was more that I did not see this mentioned in the AEA products.

I may have missed it, thus my question posed.

you got my point exactly

 

[Microbeman]

No disrespect but whether a person is a yuppie or not and no matter who wrote the copy what does that have to do with the science itself? I get that you do not personally like certain types of people and I personally have no problem with.

What I was asking is if you know of a reason the science is wrong?

Some of aea's products are in fact truly water soluble...hypercap or the epsom salt in photomag. No argument there at all. But lets argue about something like pht-p. It is in fact plain old rock phosphate...not even soft rock. And yes 3% of that P is water soluble. The rest is not. But it is ground to 5 micons or less. That does not make it soluble.

But it does make it easier for microbes to digest and shit out as an amino chelate making uptake to the plant much easier. Maybe not a benefit to you at all...no question your soil and your microbes are kicking ass. But to a guy that does not have dialed...could be a huge help.

What's up avengar...jump in and tell me if I am full of shit. And how goes it on the Ca meter

I guess my point is that I am seeing no science explained. Are you?
I pointed out that I also have not seen where they talk about micronized product. I said I may have missed it. If they are grinding up rock phosphate; no big deal. I have practiced this myself for a greater surface area. What else is micronized?

My original point was AEA does not do sap analysis but pass it on to a lab. That lab does not 'apparently' provide their method of analysis, again, that I could see. This leads me to contemplate about how it differs from leaf tissue analysis which gives realtime nutrient readings (AFAIK).

 

[Microbeman]

you got my point exactly

MJ & BF;

If a grower is using a dry product which is non-soluble there is an advantage for most products to be micronized, if you are either mixing it in suspended state into a liquid or using it in soil or compost. That is if you wish to keep it in suspension longer or have it break down faster respectively.

If a non-soluble dry product is added to a liquid bottled commercial amendment, I'm not sure I see the advantage and not certain why a grower would purchase such a product.

If a dry element which is soluble is mixed into a liquid bottled commercial amendment it makes no difference the particle size.

That is all.

 

[Pangea]

Check out nova crop control outta the Netherlands for more info on their sap testing and benefits. NA samples get shipped to them, which seems lame, but doesnt affect the science behind sap analysis. The more info the better, what we do or dont do with that info is the key part.

I assume they are micronizing all particles that are not readily water soluble. A coffee grinder is good but cant be compared to a industrial type micronization process.

 

[milkyjoe]

I disagree. When something is non soluble in water grinding does not make it soluble. It stays suspended but does not dissolve. Soluble stuff literally breaks down into ionic form.

Nova crop control is the company that does sap analysis. They have licensed that tech to aea for the us market.

How do you feel about horiba cardy meters...been around for a while. Similar technology

Edit...on actual soluble stuff particle size is of no consequece when dissolving. On that we agree.

 

[Microbeman]

I disagree. When something is non soluble in water grinding does not make it soluble.

Did I say something different?

It stays suspended but does not dissolve. Soluble stuff literally breaks down into ionic form.

It stays suspended for a slightly longer period but does not stay suspended.