YOUR GARDEN IS NOT ORGANIC...

[treefrog]

This is a quote from the introduction of "The Complete Book of Composting" by J. Rodale and staff It is an old book and made me think of this thread....

"Compost is the core, the essential foundation of natural gardening and farming. It is the heart of the organic concept. Composting is not new. Neither in theory nor practice are the basic tenets of returning organic matter to the soil revolutionary or even of comparatively recent vintage. The pages of history are filled with emphatic evidence that nothing is more fundamental to man's prosperity-to civilization itself-than a lasting, productive agriculture. This, the past proves, can stem from heeding the most primary of Nature's laws-the law of return, the very cycle of life itself.
Wherever a nation has adhered to this principle, there alone has a people survived and a land flourished. Where it has been violated and abused, whether through ignorance or mistaken custom, there has a race perished, a metropolis fallen to ruins, and a country's soil withered and blown to sterile desert..."

 

[Centrum]

Isnt everything organic even radioactive super chemicals ?

 

[Londinium]

If you grow under artificial lights with electricity you are kidding yourselves if you think that is organic anyway ...organic involves Sunshine as far as I am concerned that is not negotiable.......Growing under lights is neither 'Natural' or 'Organic' but is Marvellous all the same, so please Get over yourselves ALL Pot-Snobs that like telling others what to grow with-who do u think you are?
My gardens greener than your garden....My dads bigger than your dad....My Guns bigger than your gun.. ITS QUITE PATHETIC,REALLY!

 

[uglybunny]

Uglybunny:

I did find this to be an interesting study but not truly reflective of the microbial nutrient cycling network as I have already outlined in how I believe a proper study should be conducted. I had problems with how they evaluated the microbial biomass. They really should have measured this microscopically including all of the player groups. Interestingly the nematodes that are players in nutrient cycling are the bacterial and fungal feeders and the authors have stated;


“Soil food webs in undisturbed natural grasslands
and forest systems are mainly fueled by high cellulosic and
lignified organic matter and usually exhibit fungal dominated
decomposition pathways which favor fungivorous nematodes
belonging to Fu2, Fu3, and Fu4 guilds (Ferris et al., 2001). Fu3 and
Fu4 are important contributors to the Structure Index, and soil
food webs in natural grasslands and forest systems are usually
highly structured and poorly to moderately enriched (Quadrat
C in the model) (de Goede and Bongers, 1998; Ferris et al., 2001).
However, in turfgrass soil, enrichment opportunistic nematodes
of low c–p values dominated, while nematodes of high c–
p values did not. Therefore, the food webs in managed
turfgrass soil indicated a disturbed food web compared to
natural grasslands and forest ecosystems.”

If anything this reflects the shortcomings the authors perceive in the general applications of their findings. They go on to exemplify that the findings related to chemical fertilizers apply ‘really’ only to lawns and to nematode populations;

“Our results also showed that organic-fertilizer management further promotes soil
microbial biomass and SOM in turfgrass systems, although
it had no significant effect on the nematode community.”

They're not saying that their findings "really" only apply to lawns and to nematode populations. What they are saying is that natural ecosystems vary from human managed ecosystems, in that natural grasslands and forest systems are highly structured and poorly to moderately enriched and managed ecosystems are highly enriched but poorly structured. What this tells us is that regardless of management style managing soil disturbs the soil food web, makes it less structured, but overall richer in nutrients.

Nematodes are indicator-species which show the general health of a soil food web as they interact with almost all trophic levels and are directly exposed to chemicals in aqueous solution in the soil.

"Nematodes are the most abundant metazoa on the earth
(Ferris et al., 2001), appearing at almost every trophic level
such as bacterivores, fungivores, plant parasites, predators,
and omnivores (Yeates et al., 1993). They play an essential role
in the soil and sediment ecosystems, because grazing by
bacterivores, fungivores and omnivores may affect the pool of
soil microbial biomass (bacteria and fungi populations), and
grazing by predators may impact the population of microbial
feeding nematodes and other small microbial groups. Since
nematodes depend on the continuity of soil water films for
movement, their activities are largely controlled by soil
physical and biological conditions (Yeates and Bongers,
1999). Also, nematodes are in direct contact with dissolved
chemicals in the soil solution through their permeable cuticle
and can react rapidly to disturbances and contaminants. Thus,
nematodes can provide a good indication of the condition of
soil food web, environmental disturbance, and pollution. In
addition, compared to soil microbial groups, representative
samples of soil nematode communities are easy to obtain and
they are relatively easy to identify and count (Ritz and Trudgill,
1999). Therefore, nematodes are used as indicators for
assessing the conditions of soil environment (Ritz and
Trudgill, 1999; Neher, 2001; Somasekhar et al., 2002; Nahar
et al., 2006). However, studies of nematode community in
turfgrass soil ecosystem are few, and most of them deal only
with plant-parasitic nematodes."

Also the authors explain why they chose turfgrass:
"Consumer demands for improved aesthetic
lawn quality and control of pests that may impair its quality
can be exasperated by lawns planted to poor soils, poorly
adapted cultivars and/or improper cultural inputs. Consequently,
lawns increasingly have become chemical input
intensive systems with repeated, often routine, applications of
water-soluble fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides."

"These inputs are expensive, and are often perceived as a significant
source of environmental contamination, which may impair
natural ecological processes in the lawn ecosystem and
threaten nearby water bodies. Unlike other grass ecosystems,
turfgrass ecosystems are very rich in organic matter due to
extensive root growth and the continuous addition of
clippings following mowing (Strom et al., 1992). Thus, turf
ecosystems have high potential for microbial activity (Horst
et al., 1996)"

Sounds a lot like the situation we're in with MJ. Big root mass, high nutrient needs, pest problems, high potential for microbial activity. Too bad it is really hard(or impossible I'm not sure) to find peer-reviewed studies specifically on MJ ecosystems, but given the current state of laws I think it is reasonable.

Trying to specifically account for every environment, and every species in every environment in one study would be foolish. The amount of unknown variables would be staggering. Scientists tend to use indicator species to demonstrate theories experimentally. This is the reason we use rats in medical science, the rat happens to be a model mammalian system.

I fail to see how you have applied this study to the interactions of; plant roots releasing carbon molecules> feeding bacteria/archaea> eaten by protozoa and bacterial feeding nematodes (& fungi eaten by fungal feeding nematodes)> producing ionic form nutrients> feeding roots = microbial nutrient loop.

You're saying that this cycle is skipped by the application of chemical fertilizers, and this skipping will eventually cause it to collapse. However the longitudinal study of turf grass shows that properly managed use of synthetics does not cause microbial collapse, it enriches the soil food web.

"High Enrichment Index represents an enriched food web,
where disturbance occurs and resources become available
because of organism mortality, turnover, or favorable shifts in
the environment (Odum, 1985). In fact, human inputs, in
general, can enhance Enrichment Index as we found in this
study."

"Soil nutrient analysis revealed that significant difference for microbial biomass nitrogen and SOM existed among the 9 regimes, where organic-fertilizer management (including Oa and Ob) resulted in higher microbial biomass nitrogen and SOM compared to mineral-fertilizer management and the control. SOM in organic-fertilizer management was not significantly higher than in mineral-fertilizer management, but it was higher than the control."

"In addition, microbial biomass and soil organic matter pools in turfgrass ecosystems were generally improved by inputs as the control resulted in lower microbial biomass nitrogen and SOM than all other regimes overall."

"Overall, food webs in managed turfgrass soil systems are
evaluated to be highly enriched and poorly to moderately
structured compared to the natural grasslands and forest
ecosystems which have poorly to moderately enriched but
highly structured food webs."

There is no mention of rhizosphere collapse due to use of synthetic fertilizers, the only thing found to have a negative impact on soil food web quality was high N inputs of either type. So I stand by my statement, that proper use of synthetics on soils does not harm the soil food web any more than the proper application of "organics."

Peace,

UB

 

[NUG-JUG]

Growing under lights is neither 'Natural' or 'Organic' but is Marvellous all the same, so please Get over yourselves ALL Pot-Snobs that like telling others what to grow with-who do u think you are?
My gardens greener than your garden....My dads bigger than your dad....My Guns bigger than your gun.. ITS QUITE PATHETIC,REALLY!

If you don't grow organically, my pot tastes better than your pot......

Treefrog- Thanks for that excerpt it captures what organic really is imo. If your not composting, or at least trying to....You ain't organic Mother#%!$@$!!!

 

[mrwags]

Isnt everything organic even radioactive super chemicals ?

Damn near anything can be labeled Organic now days if your willing to spend the bucks to get them to give you the Organic Certified sticker for your bottle or box.

This thread is so funny

Mr.Wags

 

[ParanoidNovice]

My buds come with a certificate of authenticity so don't tell me they're not organic!

 

[Microbeman]

Ugly bunny; I'm running out of time for this. If you read some of the citations I have posted here and on my page you will find that the nutrient loop is very easy to see and account for in one sample observed on the microscope slide. Besides that, if you accept my word, I see it everyday I work in the lab. Your group has accepted nematodes as indicators without even looking properly at the other players. That is what I call short sighted. I never said that the microbes dissapeared from the ryzosphere; rather I said it was altered (different species) which is kinda what your study said even though they did not look at the alteration.

"Therefore, the food webs in managed
turfgrass soil indicated a disturbed food web compared to
natural grasslands and forest ecosystems.”

 

[uglybunny]

Ugly bunny; I'm running out of time for this. If you read some of the citations I have posted here and on my page you will find that the nutrient loop is very easy to see and account for in one sample observed on the microscope slide. Besides that, if you accept my word, I see it everyday I work in the lab. Your group has accepted nematodes as indicators without even looking properly at the other players. That is what I call short sighted. I never said that the microbes dissapeared from the ryzosphere; rather I said it was altered (different species) which is kinda what your study said even though they did not look at the alteration.

"Therefore, the food webs in managed
turfgrass soil indicated a disturbed food web compared to
natural grasslands and forest ecosystems.”

You know that quote is referring to both organic and synthetic management practices, right? The study found that both management practices significantly disturbed the natural food web making more highly enriched, but less structured. The distinction you draw between the way organics function and the way synthetics function is false dichotomy. Both have the potential to encourage microbial populations to increase, and both have the potential to cause microbial populations to decrease. It seems to be mostly dependent on C:N, not source of nutrients. This study shows there is an N loading level in soils, which when exceeded causes the microbial population of soils to decrease.

The group explains why they use nematodes as their indicator species, I'm sorry you're not happy with it, but it is the standard within the field. Regardless of your personal criticisms of its experimental design, this paper clearly shows that it is possible to maintain an active microbial population in your soil using proper synthetic nutrient management practices(which is what p4p and I have been saying) over a long period of time. Further, it found little statistical difference between synthetic and organic practices in regards to how it affected the soil, the more significant difference was between managed plots and unmanaged control plots.

Peace,

UB

 

[mullray]

There is a very sound argument that the word "organic" should be banned. These days a lot of organic people are rebranding with "earth friendly sustainable agriculture" slogans. There is no such thing as organics - that simple. Organic soils contain inorganic particles and these are uptaken by plants (organic and inorganic arsenic, cadmium, lead etc). Just a bit of very basic science but then I expect it will fall on deaf ears where organic enthusiasts (die hards) are concerned. Oh and BTW - the most dangerous contaminant in cannabis is (if you like) organic. Toxic fungi by-products known as mycotoxins. Just under 2000 times more toxic than even the most toxic chem pesticides. Just because its organic and natural don't make it safe. Sorry but that's the science. All power to organic growers --- I really just wish they'd learn to talk science and get away from all the misleading info they spread.

 

[uglybunny]

Yes I agree mullray, the simple fact that people will not accept the scientific definition of organic when discussing soil science is the main cause of confusion. They simply don't realize that the microherd is actively producing the same chemical "poison" which makes up synthetic fertilizers, and that their methods of soil amendment have the same net result in the end as adding synthetic fertilizers(salt and all, people).

 

[mad librettist]

There is a very sound argument that the word "organic" should be banned. These days a lot of organic people are rebranding with "earth friendly sustainable agriculture" slogans. There is no such thing as organics - that simple. Organic soils contain inorganic particles and these are uptaken by plants (organic and inorganic arsenic, cadmium, lead etc). Just a bit of very basic science but then I expect it will fall on deaf ears where organic enthusiasts (die hards) are concerned. Oh and BTW - the most dangerous contaminant in cannabis is (if you like) organic. Toxic fungi by-products known as mycotoxins. Just under 2000 times more toxic than even the most toxic chem pesticides. Just because its organic and natural don't make it safe. Sorry but that's the science. All power to organic growers --- I really just wish they'd learn to talk science and get away from all the misleading info they spread.

mycotoxins, eh? any info on those? or just the scary inference? Organic growers aren't morons, you know. Most of us know that the world is a dangerous place for any individual organism. Oh and hey, does using synthetics prevent mycotoxin contamination? Or would you put your faith in a biodiverse phyloshpere? In my world, if you don't want squatters you keep the residence occupied.


pseudo-organick is the answer, btw. pseudo-organick is about managing systems, not chemistry. It's about your intentions, too. It's about less work, less disease, beautiful plants, tasty product, no schedules, no flushing, turning waste into cannabis, great yields, and an overall enjoyable time.

 

[Microbeman]

UB; This is (nematode population) indeed not the standard of microbial soil health in the field. It is only one limited tiny measurement which the authors chose. As I suggested, read more studies and reviews. Can you not see that they did not evaluate the microbial population?

Besides this their definition of organic management practices is not what I would consider conducive to maintaining close to 'natural integrity' which is what the quote is about. (but that is aside)

Have a look yourself down a microscope and then tell me that we can depend on nematode counts (& concentrations of NH4-N, NO3-N, dissolved organic nitrogen,microbial biomass nitrogen) alone to establish a healthy microbial nutrient loop. As 2ndtry pointed out in another thread we require direct microscopy combined with respiration and even better we could include evaluations of concentrations of NH4-N, NO3-N, dissolved organic nitrogen.

[This was one tiny study which is vastly affected by grass clippings]

 

[uglybunny]

mycotoxins, eh? any info on those? or just the scary inference?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycotoxin

Organic growers aren't morons, you know. Most of us know that the world is a dangerous place for any individual organism. Oh and hey, does using synthetics prevent mycotoxin contamination? Or would you put your faith in a biodiverse phyloshpere? In my world, if you don't want squatters you keep the residence occupied.

You're making the false assumption that organic management practices lead to a more biodiverse ecosystem. The second study I posted clearly demonstrates how both organic and mineral-based management practices lead to poorly structured ecosystems more susceptible to outside influences. I see you still have not read it.

pseudo-organick is the answer, btw. pseudo-organick is about managing systems, not chemistry. It's about your intentions, too. It's about less work, less disease, beautiful plants, tasty product, no schedules, no flushing, turning waste into cannabis, great yields, and an overall enjoyable time.

Which is why I've said from the beginning we don't actually disagree on anything, it is just that you have been led to believe things that are not true -- namely that synthetics and "organics" are mutually exclusive growing paradigms.

 

[mexicangreen420]

i agree, organic is a BS word. but i would like my nutrients to come from sustainable practices. for now i will use biobizz's biogrow, biobloom, topmax, algamic, bioheaven, calmag (i use RO water), and dark energy. planning the switch to simple amended soils with an active worm culture, i won't have to buy any OMRI listed stuff at high prices.

For i will have achieved the ultimate in an organic/synthetic symbiosis. by the way plastic pots, rockwool, hydroton, and anything that is SHIPPED to a store or to your door in a plastic bottle, is INORGANIC. actually in turn, from the shipping/emissions etc etc, hurts the environment.

 

[uglybunny]

UB; This is (nematode population) indeed not the standard of microbial soil health in the field. It is only one limited tiny measurement which the authors chose. As I suggested, read more studies and reviews. Can you not see that they did not evaluate the microbial population?

They're talking about nematode's being an indicator species for the functional state of soils. So, nematodes might not tell us everything there is to know about microbial population, but it they do give a general indicator of how well a soil is functioning. The presence of microbial biomass nitrogen indicates that the nitrogen cycle is sustained, and thus there is an active microbial population. I suggest reading:

Ritz, K., Trudgill, D.L., 1999. Utility of nematode community
analysis as an integrated measure of the functional
state of soils: perspectives and challenges. Plant Soil 212,
1–11.

Neher, D.A., 2001. Role of nematodes in soil health and their use
as indicators. J. Nematol. 33, 161–168.

Somasekhar, N., Grewal, P.S., De Nardo, E.A.B., Stinner, B.R.,
2002. Non-target effects of entomopathogenic nematodes
on the soil nematode community. J. Appl. Ecol. 39, 735–744.

Nahar, M.S., Grewal, P.S., Miller, S.A., Stinner, D., Stinner, B.R.,
Kleinhenz, M.D., Wszelaki, A., Doohan, D., 2006. Differential
effects of raw and composted manure on nematode
community, and its indicative value for soil microbial,
physical and chemical properties. Appl. Soil Ecol. 34 (2–3),
140–151.

The last paper is even cites our favorite Dr. Ingham in helping to establish nematodes as general indicators of soil food web health.

The rate of decomposition of organic amendments influences the supply of plant nutrients and plays a key role in structuring soil nematode communities. Nitrate and ammonical nitrogen accumulated during decomposition are toxic to plant parasitic nematodes (Mian and Rodriguez-Kabana, 1982). Rodriguez-Kabana et al. (1987) reported that the nematicidal activities of an amendment depended on its chemical-composition and the type of organisms that develop during “degradation. Also nematode communities may help” regulate decomposition and nutrient cycling (Ingham et al., 1985). Ingham et al. (1985) postulated that nematodes assist in organic matter, decomposition by grazing on soil microbes, in effect selecting for an-active community with a high rate of N mineralization. Therefore, it is not surprising that nematodes are increasingly used in soil food-web analysis (Ferris et al., 2001, Bongers and Ferris, 1999 Bongers, T., Ferris, H., 1999. Nematode community structure as a bio-indicator in environmental monitoring. Review Paper, TREE 14, pp. 224–228.Bongers and Ferris, 1999 and Porazinska et al., 1999). Abundance, diversity, richness, evenness and maturity indices of nematodes are considered indicators of soil environment/ecosystem status and are commonly used for comparing ecosystems affected by human intervention (Freckman and Ettema, 1993, Yeates et al., 1999, Bongers, 1990 and Ferris et al., 1996).

As organic amendments differ in physical and chemical composition (Bulluck et al., 2002a), it is reasonable to expect that their effects on soil properties and nematode communities will vary (Bulluck et al., 2002b). Therefore, the objectives of this study were to compare the effects of raw and composted manure on trophic abundance and community structure (indices) of soil nematodes, and how this relates to soil characteristics (including bulk density, mineral nitrogen, organic matter, particulate organic matter, microbial biomass-N, potentially mineralizable-N and C). We hypothesized that as raw and composted manure differ in their chemical compositions, they impart different effects on soil properties and nematode community.

Have a look yourself down a microscope and then tell me that we can depend on nematode counts (& concentrations of NH4-N, NO3-N, dissolved organic nitrogen,microbial biomass nitrogen) alone to establish a healthy microbial nutrient loop. As 2ndtry pointed out in another thread we require direct microscopy combined with respiration and even better we could include evaluations of concentrations of NH4-N, NO3-N, dissolved organic nitrogen.

[This was one tiny study which is vastly affected by grass clippings]

Just because you perceive complexity, doesn't mean the system does not have a pattern or indicator.

Peace,

UB

 

[Microbeman]

Here are a couple of informal articles written by Zuberer a fellow generally supporting your point of view which I addressed on another forum last year. (Sorry only convenient way to capture them)

This guy Zuberer makes some sense. In both of Zuberer's articles he outlines quite nicely that in organics the microbial process is necessary for nutrient uptake while with the use of inorganic fertilizers the microbial process is bypassed. He makes a passing reference to the importance of protozoa and says it needs further study but unfortunately does not explain why it is just about THE most important microbe. It is the important link in the microbial nutrient loop. Without it, there is no loop. Extended use of ionic form fertilizers breaks the link. It does not take profound logic to see that if a system (muscle) is not used, it atrophies. Besides this, Zuberer admits there is an effect from using ionic fertilizers, one of which results in the increase of pathogenic fungi. Gee did I say that a couple of times? The point is (IMO) that when ionic fertilizers are used, the microbial population changes (over time) from healthy and balanced to unhealthy and more pathogenic.

To be clear I do not doubt that it is easy to feed microbes chemicals; that is elementary.

 

[Microbeman]

Just because you perceive complexity, doesn't mean the system does not have a pattern or indicator.

Excuse me. You are telling me there is a pattern? Have you looked at my webpage?

 

[Microbeman]

even cites our favorite Dr. Ingham

Was it Elaine or her husband, reputed nematode expert? I'm willing to bet Elaine would come in on my side of this.

 

[staff11]

UB hmmmmmmm

Uncle Ben?