RE: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale

From: Stephen Steyn <ssteyn_at_wcaccess.co.za>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 09:05:05 +0200

Codswallop makes excellent compost. Very high in N, so you need to add high=
 carbon foods too. Straw is a good medium to mix with the bullshit.

SS

 

From: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com [mailto:compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com] On B=
ehalf Of quantumsoil
Sent: 21 February 2011 04:06
To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
Subject: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale

 

  

Its all CODSWALLUP,
Every time I come to this site, it seems that everyone is going around in c=
ircles. As for me, I go where the action is. I have been living in South Ea=
st Asia for the last 2 ½ years with some amazing results with my formu=
las. I dissected the microbial elements in Alaska Humus many years ago, muc=
h to the chagrin of Jeff lowenfels, and I have never gotten any credit in h=
is book
This is a very difficult place to work, as deception and lying is part of t=
he "so called" culture.
How many of you can claim that a rice crop gained 38% increase in the first=
 season, without any fertilizer, and the seed was much larger and nutrient =
dense, or fruiting of trees completely out of season?
As I see obesity, diabetes, cancer and other related diseases on the increa=
se, I took
the momentous task upon myself to research the underlying causes, in order =
to get the facts from an historical aspect.
So far I have cured and am curing over 130 people with multiple problems in=
 this regard!
LIFE IS MICROBIOLOGY!
My latest email.

Hi John,
Got a call today from my Canadian friend. He had a request from the ministe=
r of agriculture from South Africa. They desired to reestablish soil fertil=
ity. Their goal was sustainable agriculture. The man in charge of processin=
g this request for the United Nations through the World Bank was Pierre Gas=
ton. He is a client of my Canadian friend. His CPA. Serge and I talked for =
a while and decided to attain both of their goals they would need microbes,=
 nutrients, and humus. But aside from normal agriculture they need to be ta=
ught maintenance. Compost tea on a schedule. per my request he is obtaining=
 a soil sample. We had both decided you were the only man for the job. Firs=
t do a test plot with a side by side. (actually 100 yard apart to avoid cro=
ss contamination) a 100 by 100 sq ft plot with a variety of local vegetable=
 would be right. The next step is the 200 acre plot owned by our mutual fri=
end. When the 200 acres shows promise Pierre Gaston had remarked that all t=
hird world countries would be open for this technology and world bank funds=
 would be available. Serge is now getting the soil test done. Let me know i=
f you can jump into action. They will pay for the testing fee and all expen=
ses, which include air fare. Get back to me as soon as possible. Tom

--- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> ,=
 "Pawlett, Mark" <m.pawlett_at_...> wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Thanks v much for the feedback.
>
> any good research would require laboratory work and field trials. You are=
 right, it is important to describe what CTs do to plants. There is plenty =
of info on its effects as a foliar spray, but very little regarding the eff=
ects on the soil and how they affect nutrient cycling processes. That is re=
ally my main interest.
>
> Here's hoping that one day I'll have some cash to do some good quality re=
search that will benefit all users.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> =
 [compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> ] On B=
ehalf Of Jason Kalka [shortstop42000_at_...]
> Sent: 18 February 2011 17:55
> To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale
>
> Mark,
> I think you bring up excellent points about testing. I think before even =
attempting these tests you must realize what the results will mean for your=
 plants. I see a lot of these posts and wonder if the posters realize what =
the various microbes will actually do for their crops. I think results in t=
he garden outweigh anything done in the lab.
>
> Just my two cents.
>
> Jason Kalka
> Amature gardener
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Pawlett, Mark <m.pawlett_at_...>
> Sent: February 18, 2011 5:56 AM
> To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> <=
compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> >
> Subject: RE: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale
>
>
> Hi
>
> Ok, the debate as I see it is whether the methods that many compost tea e=
nthusiasts use at the moment are sufficient. Due to the complexity of the s=
oil microbial system it is my opinion that microbial and culture based meth=
ods are insufficient in describing the interactions of CT and the soil micr=
obial community. The microscopy method used do go some way towards describi=
ng the compost tea, but do little if anything in terms of describing the in=
teractions with the soil.
>
> All method have weaknesses. The important thing is to recognise the weakn=
esses. I wonder if the CT community understands the weaknesses of using mic=
roscopy as their main technique?
>
> How about that as a starting point ☺
>
> The link looks great, but unfortunately its not in my neighbourhood. IÃ=
¢â‚¬â„¢m in UK.
>
> Please keep me informed regarding your research. Iâ€â„=
¢d be very interested if you publish anything. Also, if you require colla=
boration from us then please contact me (m.pawlett_at_...<mailto:m.pawlett_at_...=
>) and we’ll try and work something out.
>
> Enjoy Seattle.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
> From: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> =
 [mailto:compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>=
 ] On Behalf Of Tim Wilson
> Sent: 17 February 2011 18:28
> To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale
>
>
>
> Mark,
>
> I still do not see where the debate is. I have no argument with what you =
have stated and it is not much different than what I have stated.
>
> In particulr though you have not really addressed the weakness I pointed =
out except to say; "Protozoa and nematodes would require another method, mi=
croscopy is only one method"
>
> With my microscopes I can view the active protozoa and nematodes in soil =
or compost, etc. so indeed it is another tool in the kit for the horticultu=
rist. From some of the studies I've read from USDA and other institutes, wh=
ich did not include evalution of protists and nematodes of any kind, a micr=
oscope would have easily solved this. To the best of my knowledge, the micr=
oscope is the favoured tool for seeing protozoa and nematodes in soil and w=
ater at the University of British Columbia, the University of Toronto,Insti=
tut für Zoologie, Technische Universität Darmstadt, W=
ashington State University, etc. etc.
>
> You might be interested in attending this if you can afford it. It is in =
my neighborhood.; http://www.3dcourse.ubc.ca/2009/public.php?page=compani=
es
>
> Your questioning applications of compost tea and the microbes contained t=
herein surviving in the soil into which they enter, is quite valid. It is a=
 crap shoot but informally I have observed soil microbial populations chang=
ed over a period of time with repeated applications. Along with this, I bel=
ieve soil properties such as pH have been altered by these (microbes) appli=
cations. However, this is all anecdotal information. I'm not saying that I =
will have published works on the subject but I intend to do some research o=
n this subject (survival of ACT microbes in the soil) over the next 2 years=
. Right now I'm in the midst of constructing a new laboratory space.
>
> This is going to likely be my last response to you until March as I'm lea=
ving for Seattle to set up a soil microscopy exhibit at a garden show and I=
'm going mad with preparations.
>
> I am sponsoring a student doing a self-determined study through a Washing=
ton institution, with donations of a microscope and resource materials. I d=
on't believe he has a masters but degrees don't mean much to me. I find tha=
t many people with degrees sometimes have tunnel vision as a result of impr=
inting by their favourite instructor/supervisor.
>
> Salutations,
> Tim
>
> --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>=
 <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>, "Pawlett, Mark" <m.pawlett_at_> wrote=
:
> >
> > Hi Tim
> >
> > The PLFA method (there are others but this one is relatively cheap) wil=
l give you a phenotypic fingerprint of the microbial community (or as you s=
ay the players in the party), without the need to look down a microscope (I=
 gave that up years ago). It will not give species level but groups, e.g. f=
ungi:bact, G+ve:G-ve, methanotrophs, AM fungi, stress indicators and some o=
thers. Protozoa and nematodes would require another method, microscopy is o=
nly one method. Another method called tRFLP (terminal restriction length po=
lymorphism) will enable you to study in more detail, such as ammonia oxidis=
ing bacteria.
> >
> > But what is the most important thing here. To define what is there or t=
he function (I'm not taking about the whole food web, rather the bacterial =
and fungal component). You can make a spectacular compost tea, but if you d=
on't understand the abiotic and biotic constraints of the soil that you are=
 going to apply it to the microbiology will not survive or genes will not f=
unction, thereby the compost tea will not work. This is about function, but=
 of course the phenotypic signature is important. Yes the 2 are linked, but=
 there are important situations where the phenotypic fingerprint of the soi=
l microbial community does not change, but the function does, and visa vers=
a. You cannot do this stuff using a microscope.
> >
> > Check out the journal Soil Biology and Biochemistry. You will be hard p=
ushed to find any microscopy based techniques to describe soil microbial co=
mmunities in the last 10 years. Horticulturalists use the microscopy techni=
ques as they are easily accessible to them. Not because they are the best m=
ethods. Yes, of course the methods that you describe would be useful to a h=
orticulturalist, I'm sure nobody would deny that. But there are more tools =
in the tool kit of soil microbiology than the ones that you describe. The b=
ridge between the academic and the horticulturalist does need crossing, but=
 that's a wider issue.
> >
> > Of course, if you want to put your money where your mouth is why don't =
you fund a MSc student to compare methods, and at the same time answer some=
 fundamental questions that are still unanswered regarding compost tea appl=
ication. Go on, you know you want to do it. Of course you will be more than=
 happy with the quality of research that we conduct within the department t=
hat I work.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com=
> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.co=
m <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.=
com>] On Behalf Of Tim Wilson
> > Sent: 16 February 2011 19:15
> > To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> =
<mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > I agree and believe that I already stated that it is important to have =
more than one method of microbial analysis so you have no argument there.
> >
> > To repeat what I actually said, "To assertain the optimum efficacy of a=
 'compost tea' or a multiplied microbial extract in liquid one HAS TO obser=
ve the existence/numbers of bacteria/archea and the predatory flagellates a=
nd naked amoebae."
> >
> > This is necessary to actually see what players, microbially speaking ar=
e at the party. It is a simple thing to peer (pun intended) into a sample d=
own a microscope tube to SEE if there are indeed bacteria/archaea, fungal h=
yphae and/or conidia, various protozoa and nematodes. One can view this in =
soil/compost samples as is or after applying various foodstocks to see what=
 microbes are emergent.
> >
> > I'm glad that you have quoted one of my dear friends <GRIN> Vigdis beca=
use, I believe, it was she who originally stressed the importance of direct=
 microscopy in combination with more detailed methods, which you have outli=
ned adequately in your remarks. I believe that E. Ingham, Bryan Griffiths, =
Marianne Clarholm, Michael Bonkowski and Wilhelm Foissner would likely acco=
rd with this approach to microbial estimations/analysis of soil samples. [i=
f you really want I'll dig up the citations]
> >
> > For the purpose of horticultural activities, one can usually depend on =
the microscope alone as a tool to evaluate the general microbial population=
 of one's soil, compost and compost tea. This, however, as you have pointed=
 out is not up to par with the measurements required to publish an article.=
 My point still bears out that microbially related studies of compost, soil=
, compost tea etc. are just as much not up to par if microscopy is not incl=
uded unless some other technique utilized reveals the 'at least general' po=
pulations of ALL related microbial groups. [bacteria/archaea; protozoa; nem=
atodes; fungi]
> >
> > So when does the debate begin? <enormous grin>
> >
> > BTW, you will note, I did not attack the student but criticize
> > the instructors for failing to provide better guidance. As noted previo=
usly, the use of a microscope can be far from expensive and even less expen=
sive than the methods named. I assume Yale can afford some microscopes(?)
> >
> > Salutations,
> > Tim
> >
> > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.co=
m> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.=
com>, "Pawlett, Mark" <m.pawlett_at_> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Tim
> > >
> > > So, let's open the debate regarding methods used in the world of soil=
 microbiology.
> > >
> > > In terms of methods. There are many other methods , and in my opinion=
, better methods for example PLFA, 16S rDNA transcriptome analysis, RNAi te=
chnology, molecular matchmaking, RAPD, T-RFLP and FT/MS. Torsvik (1990) est=
imated that in 1g of soil there are 4000 different genomic units, based on =
DNA-DNA reasociation. It is also estimated that 5000 bacterial species have=
 been described ((Pace 1997 1999). Only approximately 1% of the bacterial p=
opulation can be cultured by standard laboratory practices, and it is not k=
now (in my opinion unlikely) that this 1% represents the bacterial populati=
on (Torsvik 1999). An estimated 1, 500, 5000 fungi species exist in the wor=
ld (Giller 1997) but fungi are much harder to culture in the lab than fungi=
. This information was retrieved from a review written by Kirk et al 2004 (=
Journal of Microbial Methods 58: 169-188). Some of these methods are expens=
ive, however some (e.g. PLFA) is certainly not too expensive to anyone alre=
ady using the other methods of analysis. It may be cheaper, and would provi=
de more useful information.
> > >
> > > Catabolic profiles are culture independent methods. As such they are =
not subject to the same biases. Of course it is important to remember that =
all methods have bias. The important thing it to recognise that bias. The m=
ethods described in the report that you refer to not only give microbial bi=
omass, but in addition give a culture-independent method of measuring the c=
atabolic functional profile of the soil microbial community. The method is =
used considerably globally in the world of soil microbiology (refer to the =
series of papers started by Degens and Harris starting I think in 1999).
> > >
> > > Simple methods are only important if they are relevant. It is worthwh=
ile noting that study that involves only microscopy or culture based techni=
ques would not be published in any reputable peer reviewed journal of soil =
microbiology To test this just have a search and let me know whether you co=
me up with any in the last 10 years.
> > >
> > > I'd would prefer it if you didn't criticise student (undergrad or MSc=
) projects that are both limited in time and money. If this continues I wil=
l discontinue the debate. Lets now stick to published, peer reviewed, facts=
 and see where it goes. In the above I have referenced the published articl=
es, and you can assume that anything that is not referenced is my opinion.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.c=
om> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups=
.com> [mailto:compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups=
.com> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogrou=
ps.com>] On Behalf Of Tim Wilson
> > > Sent: 16 February 2011 00:21
> > > To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com=
> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.c=
om>
> > > Subject: [compost_tea] Re: Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Well, I thought about shutting up but....
> > >
> > > I skimmed through the student's paper and yes it is a student project=
 and not a journal article. That is no excuse for not including microscopy =
as part of the methodology. I am consulting a student at a minor western co=
llege who is conducting a similar study with much more detail applied.
> > >
> > > Your statement "Indeed microscopy would NOT be a suitable method for =
such work. Catabolic profiles are a very important and valid way of describ=
ing the functional component of the soil microbial community."
> > >
> > > seems to me off base. Sure there is value in measuring microbial resp=
iration for overall mass but if one is studying the effects of compost tea =
in soil, one would think this implies studying the microbial nutrient loop.=
 (it is unfortunate that the one Ingham quote used is not wholly accurate) =
To assertain the optimum efficacy of a 'compost tea' or a multiplied microb=
ial extract in liquid one HAS TO observe the existence/numbers of bacteria/=
archea and the predatory flagellates and naked amoebae. This is what drives=
 the microbial nutrient loop. [true that nematodes and arthropods contribut=
e this in the soil but are virtually impossible to maintain in compost tea]=
. To not include microscopy and related microbial counts in such a study is=
 ridiculous and I'll easily debate anyone on this issue. There is no great =
expense involved in this. If you set up the study, I'll provide the microsc=
ope and counting wells. Don't get me wrong. This should be included with CO=
2 efflux and respiration related staining as well. The expensive part comes=
 in when we want to ID the microbes to species.
> > >
> > > I am ranting but I get so sick to death with these studies that do no=
t even encompass the simplest things. Look at the studies conducted by the =
USDA and Canadian Min of Ag where they did not even consider the protozoa p=
opulation when they determined that e-coli can grow in compost tea (only af=
ter inoculating it with e-coli of course). Protozoa eat e-coli. Hello.
> > >
> > > Looking down a microscope tube to see if there are bacteria/archaea a=
nd flagellates and naked amoebae is so simple that even a caveman can do it=
.
> > >
> > > I don't know why it is considered expensive to evaluate whether there=
 are nematodes in ones compost or soil. It is as tough as looking to see if=
 there are robins in the back yard.
> > >
> > > BTW, Peter of Compostwerks LLC is hardly unamed.
> > >
> > > Salutations,
> > > Tim Wilson
> > > www.microbeorganics.com
> > >
> > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.=
com> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroup=
s.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>, "Pawlett, Mark" <m.pawlett_at_> =
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > Just to make this clear. I can't see any evidence that this was act=
ually published. Published scientific papers are all subject to peer review=
 examination by fellow scientists in the field. This appears to be a studen=
t research project report. Nothing more and nothing less. For an undergrad =
or MSc research project this report is fit for this purpose. Only the very =
top students at either undergraduate or MSc level produce work of sufficien=
t quality to publish in a scientific journal.
> > > >
> > > > You are quite correct in some of your statements, there are some fl=
aws in the experiment. The compost tea, soil and compost are inadequately d=
escribed. Replication is unclear, and there are some problems with the stat=
istical design. The results and conclusion sections could be clearer. This =
project is not perfect by a long shot, however I certainly would NOT descri=
be this as shocking.
> > > >
> > > > Student projects have limited time and money. As such they cannot c=
over all analysis (e.g. nematodes). In order to gain both it is necessary t=
o have some form of financial investment from the users. I personally (as a=
 Research Fellow of Soil Microbial Ecology) have had an interest in compost=
 teas research for some time. Despite numerous attempts to find funds for c=
ompost tea research from the users and research councils, I have had very l=
ittle in terms of financial assistance for research into compost teas. Of c=
ourse if anyone has any suggestions as to where I can find funds then I wil=
l certainly follow it up. It is my intention to supervise a PhD student res=
earch programme on compost teas. Such a programme would allow a student to =
research compost teas for 3 years, but of course financial investment is re=
quired to have scientifically robust data that can withstand the peer revie=
w process necessary for scientific papers.
> > > >
> > > > I would also like to stress that the methods used were also suitabl=
e. Indeed microscopy would NOT be a suitable method for such work. Cataboli=
c profiles are a very important and valid way of describing the functional =
component of the soil microbial community. There are numerous per reviewed =
papers that are available that demonstrate this. Microscopy has inherent fl=
aws in terms of bias.
> > > >
> > > > The methods DO NOT only give data on bacteria. The data does not di=
fferentiate between bacteria and fungi, but rather gives a functional profi=
le of the soil microbial community as a whole. Thus data includes both bact=
eria and fungi. A more detailed study would allow the research to use the m=
ethods to differentiate between fungi and bacteria. But the substrates used=
 in the method are suitable, would be utilised fungal community, and have b=
een published in peer reviewed scientific journals.
> > > >
> > > > I wonder whether the un-named writer of the below had the courtesy =
to send his questions to the authors of the work to give them a chance to r=
espond before sending into the group.
> > > >
> > > > Dr Mark Pawlett
> > > > Research Fellow of Soil Microbial Ecology at Cranfield University.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups=
.com> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogrou=
ps.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:compost_tea_at_yahoogrou=
ps.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogr=
oups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoog=
roups.com>] On Behalf Of Peter
> > > > Sent: 15 February 2011 00:22
> > > > To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.c=
om> <mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups=
.com><mailto:compost_tea%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Subject: [compost_tea] Compost Tea 'Data' from Yale
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi folks;
> > > >
> > > > I just came across a published paper entitled "Closing the Loop: Al=
ternative Land Management at Yale". The paper's root is located at http://e=
nvironment.yale.edu/hixon/student-research/student-research-interns/
> > > >
> > > > The paper is located here; http://environment.yale.edu/hixon/files/=
pdf/2010_Emily_Stevenson.pdf
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone else find this paper a bit shocking? Here's another cas=
e of flawed methodology and misunderstanding on how biological systems perf=
orm in the real world.
> > > >
> > > > There seems to be a complete disconnect on how compost tea is made.
> > > >
> > > > * Too many foods (certainly an anerobic tea they're referencing her=
e)
> > > > * No testing of compost tea
> > > > * No mention of brewer design aside from a 'bubbler'
> > > > * No DO data
> > > >
> > > > No testing on their 'food waste' compost.
> > > >
> > > > No mention of microscopy...at all.
> > > >
> > > > Flawed methodology in before/after soil testing. Only bacteria are =
measured using narrow range of foods. Where's the data on fungi, nematodes =
and prots??
> > > >
> > > > There's a misunderstanding of organic matter accumulation in soils.=
 Can we expect appreciable increase in OM using 1,500 grams of compost, mak=
ing tea, diluting 1:1 and applying multiple times in a 6 X 6 meter area?
> > > >
> > > > There's a major disconnect as to how to apply CT on a large scale a=
nd even the basics of equipment involved. It reads as though they're quite =
resistant to changing there current chemical system.
> > > >
> > > > I see lots of logarythmic scatter gram but not much in the way of s=
cience.
> > > >
> > > > I'd expect to see somthing more substantial. This is a dissapointme=
nt from an institution as fine as Yale.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>







image003.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: image003.jpg)

image004.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: image004.jpg)

Received on Mon Feb 21 2011 - 03:48:16 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Feb 07 2012 - 13:58:04 EST