Evan,
I think you have a valid point, in that there is a lot we don't know about=
microbial interactions with plants in the rhizosphere. As Tim has pointed =
out,
there has been ongoing research in this field, conducted mostly in Europe. =
I've
read a few papers that he's eluded to and they quite good.
I think this lack of knowledge is the very reason that ACT is so critical i=
n
organic systems. It's a shotgun approach, as we attempt to put out the hig=
hest
levels of diverse microbes as possible (visible morphological differences i=
n
bacteria/archea, fungal hyphae, flagellates, and ciliates). This is why I t=
hink
brewing for 24-36 hours (on average) is so critical. Perpetual brews elimi=
nate
that diversity, as monocultures become dominate in the tea. I'm not saying=
it
has zero benefit, but it's not going to contain anywhere near the diversity=
or
concentrations of microbial populations that you would have in a shorter br=
ew.
Now personally, I'd probably be inclined to use a perpetual brew tea over a=
dormant or instant tea, with limited sets of organisms, but again we're
sacrificing the diversity that I believe is so critical, precisely because =
there
is so much we don't know. Let's get all the organisms out there in suffici=
ent
diversity and quantity and let the plant be in charge. To use your basketb=
all
analogy, if it wants more "power forwards" or a good "center," then it's go=
ing
to put out exudates to increase that particular bacterial population. But =
it
needs to be in the brew in order for the plant to be able to access it, rig=
ht?
And that's what leads us back to the need for good diversity!
~Tad
________________________________
From: evanfolds <evan_at_progressearth.com>
To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, June 29, 2011 6:59:47 AM
Subject: [compost_tea] Re: can a brew continue by simply adding nutrients?
Quite an intense review of humus, Tim. I skimmed it and read some of it, bu=
t not
all of it yet.
There are certainly those studying the technicalities of these natural
substances with great fervor and accomplishment, no doubt. What I was refer=
ring
too is the lack of emphasis on studying microbial balance and populations
towards the growth of plants. After all, the impulse from studying the life=
of
the soil is in the context of what comes out of it. At least that is my imp=
ulse.
It seems to me that if we started to connect what see under the scope with =
how
it helps plants grow that we could go a long way in establishing a baseline=
of
what soil "should" be. This would lend more credence to the recommendatiosn=
given by labs.
Look at it from a mineral approach. You go the Extension Service and they a=
dvise
you on how much ime to use to correct your pH on a piece of paper. Lime is=
comprised of Ca and Mg. What if you have a K deficiency? It's extremeely sh=
ort
sighted and ignores the profound research done by Albrecht, et al in the 40=
's.
We know the sweet spot in soil with miunerals, but not microbes.
Just evaluating what you see under the scope in regards to what you usually=
see
does not address how well that microbial balance and population works in th=
e
soil in regards to growing healthy nutrient dense plants. I know there are =
some
at NC State that are beginning to address microbial balance in soil from th=
is
perspective, but they are 50 years behind the mineral approach.
I think this is what Jason was referencing in his "good luck getting fundin=
g"
blurb.
By the way, Tim, great symopsis of your visual under the scope. I'm very mu=
ch
looking forward to your DVD..
evan
www.VortexBrewer.com
--- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tim Wilson" <thegoodjob_at_...> wrote:
>
> Evan,
>
> There are quite a few scientists researching how nutrients are cycled in =
the
>rhyzosphere via predation of bacteria/archaea by protozoa. Some of these a=
re
>Marianne Clareholm, Michael Bonkowski, Bryan Griffiths, Vigdis Torsvik. No=
t only
>are many scientists studying this area but are also using DNA combined wit=
h
>direct microscopy to attempt to determine bacterial/archaeal and fungal
>specialties of which you speak. I have quite a number of papers I can send=
you
>but some are referenced on my webpage. [Did you read the paper on humus I =
posted
>for you?]
>
> The thing about compost tea is that it is so simple to ascertain when you=
have
>the basic microbial population you are seeking for supporting the microbia=
l
>nutrient loop. The microbial nutrient loop refers fairly specifically to
>nutrients released by protozoa (mainly flagellates and naked amoebae) dire=
ctly
>following consumption of bacteria/archaea. [this is not to slight the pres=
ence
>of supportive fungi] There are some who have a vested interest in complica=
ting
>this but it is not complicated. It is similar to me choosing whether to pa=
y a
>lawyer $30K to file a patent for me or do the fairly simple work myself at=
a
>fraction of the cost. Lawyer's don't want lay people to learn their langua=
ge
>just like many laboratories don't wish people to learn they can count thei=
r own
>microbes.
>
>
> When I brew a compost tea it may have 5,000 to 10,000 bacteria/archaea an=
d 5
>flagellates per field and a hyphae complex every 10 fields at 18 hours or =
it may
>take 36 hours. With a microscope it is not a guessing game. Besides being =
able
>to evaluate this and observe this basic diversity, I am also able to see t=
hat I
>have some rigid flagellates which are round, some which are long and some =
which
>are bumpy and that I have two very different looking plastic flagellates. =
From
>this observation I can ascertain that I have 5 species/genera of flagellat=
es. I
>might also observe that I have some tiny smooth testate amoebae and some l=
arge
>rough shelled ones as well as some small directional spreading naked amoeb=
ae and
>some larger finger type pseudopod naked amoebae, indicating 4 species/gene=
ra of
>amoebae. I may also observe 2 or more species/genera of ciliates. These ar=
e
>really easy to tell different types. Fungal hyphae is trickier but one can=
learn
>to identify species by spore appearance but as mentioned earlier, if I see=
>really different septal wall frequency, different colors and membranes, it=
>usually follows that there are different species/genera of fungi present. =
I
>don't usually expect to see many nematodes in compost tea but in a compost=
or
>soil sample, I can tell whether they are good nematodes which consume
>bacteria/archaea and cycle nutrients by observing their mouth action OR no=
t so
>good root and fungal suckers. I can also tell a male from a female with a=
>microscope. Rotifers, unlike nematodes thrive in a compost tea but they ar=
e
>kinda rare, except in some vermicompost. [unfortunately some information o=
ut
>there has confused them with insect larvae] They are also great nutrient
>cyclers, as they consume bacteria/archaea. They are exciting to watch and =
there
>are different species/genera which can be identified visually. = Diversi=
ty
>
> [NOTE: I use species/genera because I'm not sure which term is correct to=
use]
>
> Of course there is a whole other level of diversity involved with microbi=
al
>species and there are things about compost tea, compost extract and compos=
t
>which we do not understand yet. This is one reason I strive for the highes=
t
>diversity in a brew so that I might apply the shotgun approach and allow t=
he
>soil and plants to select the necessary players needed at the time of
>application.
>
> If I know that my soil or plant is suffering from a certain pathogen and =
know
>the type of microbe which might contribute to controlling this then I migh=
t be
>better off to purchase one of the those products which contain it. Or if I=
wish
>to increase a specific type of free living nitrogen fixers or endomycorrhi=
zal
>species then likewise I can apply spores of those species to the soil. Som=
e of
>these bacterial types are likely contained in compost tea but this is a to=
tally
>different game than the home grower or farmer using ACT for the shotgun
>approach.
>
> That's my take anyway.
>
> Salutations,
> Tim
>
> --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "evanfolds" <evan_at_> wrote:
> >
> > Tad, I agree with you. IN NO WAY am I trying to undermine the importanc=
e and
>relevance of working with a microscope. It is vital. I'm simply trying to =
point
>out exactly what you stated: "...frankly I don't know what all the differe=
nt
>species and sub-species do in the rhizosphere anyway."
> >
> > That's it. We don't know. It is my opinion that we need to couple what =
we are
>seeing under a scope directly with how it works with growing plants. Nobod=
y to
>my knowledge is doing this.
>
> >
> > I also think we need to entertain a seperate metric of "microbial stren=
gth"
>into our analysis here. Without accounting for the reletaive strength of t=
he
>same microbe from different sources, we are acting as if they are all the =
same.
>This may make testing easier, but it does no justice to the end result we =
all
>seek --> healthy biologically active soil that grows nutrient dense plants=
>without pest & disease.
>
> >
> > I too am appreciateive of being part of this group...peace & light
> >
> > evan
> > www.VortexBrewer.com
> >
> >
> > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tad" <tadhussey_at_> wrote:
> > >
> > > Evan and Tim,
> > >
> > > This discussion jumps around quite a bit, but I wanted to chime in on=
a few
>things.
> > >
> > > First of all, I think the importance of testing is largely understate=
d and
>many commercial manufacturers of brewers don't do proper testing before se=
lling
>their brewers or making claims as to efficacy. One SFI test is not suffic=
ient
>in my opinion, but is a good starting point. Successive microscope work i=
s
>better, even if it is qualitative in nature.
>
> > >
> > > Ethan, you talk about "true diversity" as something we cannot see or=
>understand without DNA testing. I have to agree with Tim here in that dir=
ect
>microscopy is really the most effective methodology we have for evaluating=
>microbial teas and extracts at this time. DNA testing would really not gi=
ve me
>much more information and is not realistic, as each brew would be differen=
t, and
>frankly I don't know what all the different species and sub-species do in =
the
>rhizosphere anyway.
> > >
> > > However, I can tell the difference better a ciliate and a flagellate.=
I
>can see that they're both present in my tea and in good ratios. I can see=
>different morphology in the bacteria and whether it's motile or forming la=
rge
>areas on the slide of biomass. This is the diversity I'm talking about. =
It
>gives me data that I can then use to determine the quality of my product.
> > >
> > > Every brew I've ever taken for longer than a few days lacks this dive=
rsity.
>DNA testing is not going to show anything surprising in this regard. If I=
'm
>unable to find fungal hyphae through direct microscopy, it's not going to=
>magically show up through other means of testing.
> > >
> > > Our solution to this issue was to have hydro shops brew 1-2 times a w=
eek,
>and customers just knew that if they wanted ACT, they would have to come i=
n on a
>Weds or a Saturday and those would be the days it's available for purchase=
.
>
> > >
> > > Some manufacturers claim you can refrigerate their tea or store it fo=
r a
>period of time. I find this irresponsible and have yet to see anyone prov=
ide
>data to show otherwise. And personally, I don't see how they ever could. =
With
>a properly made ACT, you've created an unsustainable amount of aerobic mic=
robes
>at it's peak (avg 24-36 hours). I don't believe there is a way to maintai=
n the
>diversity and concentrations of organisms over time.
> > >
> > > As Tim stated, it would be relatively easy to test Evan's theory abou=
t
>plant available nutrients being more accessible in longer brews by just te=
sting
>for nutrients say at 24 hours and again a week later from the same liquid,=
>without any additions.
>
> > >
> > > I guess my point is that let's not throw out direct microscopy as the=
>standard to evaluating teas, just because it doesn't answer every question=
we
>might have. Spend enough time behind a microscope and I think you'll find=
that
>you can learn quite a bit about how your teas change over time. For insta=
nce, I
>can make a bacterial dominated tea, fungal dominated tea, or flagellate
>dominated tea all from the same material, simply by adjusting the length o=
f the
>brewing cycle.
> > >
> > > In order for out industry to continue to grow and gain legitimacy, I =
think
>it's important that we move away from testimonials, quasi-science, and
>unsubstantiated claims, and towards direct microscopy and methodology that=
can
>be replicated in a variety of environments and with different brewers.
> > >
> > > I think these discussions are beneficial as well. There's a lot of
>different knowledge and experience floating around in here and I'm glad to=
be a
>part of the group!
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Tad
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "evanfolds" <evan_at_> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Tim, I'm not trying to overcomplicate compost tea. I'm simply tryin=
g to
>speak to its complexity. The reality is that the only way to illustrate ac=
tual
>diversity is through DNA testing. I work loosely with a local lab who
>sepcializes in E.coli testing. We live at the end of the Caope Fear river =
in NC
>and there are more hogs than people in this state. They track contaminatio=
n
>sources to outbreaks in water ways and are able to reverse engineer where =
it
>comes from. Pretty cool. Of course, they cannot tell this without DNA test=
ing.
>That's my point. Not that you cannot get valuable information out what you=
are
>doing. That is not my point.
>
> > > >
> > > > Bottom line, if we assume we can get what we need from a visual
>observation we end up like Justis von Liebig (the man who gave us the NPK =
and
>crippled agriculture forever) identifying "essential nutrients" from an as=
hing
>experiment. After all, he went to his grave regretting that:
> > > >
> > > > "Unfortunately the true beauty of agriculture with its intellectual=
and
>animating principles is almost unrecognized. The art of agriculture will b=
e lost
>when ignorant, unscientific and short sighted teachers persuade the farmer=
to
>put all his hopes in universal remedies, which don't exist in nature. Foll=
owing
>their advice, bedazzled by an ephemeral success, the farmer will forget th=
e soil
>and lose sight of his inherent values and their influence." Source: Fauna =
in
>soil ecosystems, by Gero Benckiser (p 6)
> > > >
> > > > Now I'm not trying to compare you to von Liebig, or suggest that yo=
u are
>ignorant or unscientific, simply trying to illustrate the power and folly =
of
>humanity when they attempt to define the natural world strictly through vi=
sual
>and quantifiable means.
>
> > > >
> > > > evan
> > > > www.VortexBrewer.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tim Wilson" <thegoodjob_at_> wrot=
e:
> > > > >
> > > > > Since it is Sunday http://www.microbeorganics.com/index.html#My_D=
VD
> > > > >
> > > > > Evan; I really believe you are way over complicating the microbia=
l
>perspective as it relates to compost tea and extract. Of course you need n=
othing
>like DNA testing to see the diversity I described.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is absolutely no labelling required whatsoever to say that =
a
>device is capable of extracting and multiplying bacteria/archaea, protozoa=
and
>fungal hyphae. Where does that come from?
> > > > >
> > > > > PGPR = plant growth promoting rhizobacteria, which is what you =
have
>been describing. They are all over the market; some good, some not so good=
. They
>definitely are restricted to what they say on the label.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'll read your citation concerning humus creation re: jelly pocke=
ts but
>I will try to post a relatively scientific paper in the files section here=
which
>was an eye opener for me on humus. Humus still remains undefined. [Even th=
ough
>some cat in New Mexico claims to create his own]
> > > > >
> > > > > Glad to hear the good DO2 rate. I suppose there is great potentia=
l for
>various nutrients uptaken in natural growing to be non-detectable but for =
now
>I'm going to concern myself with those that can be for production of data =
if
>possible. My data, which you will discover by seeing my webpage consists o=
f
>video recordings of microbial populations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Adios Amigo,
> > > > > Tim
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "evanfolds" <evan_at_> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for your response, Tim. I have no seen your DVD, how can=
I?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > by the way, just took a DO reading from the Vortex Brewer on a=
>perpetual brew that's been spinning for over a month and it was 7.8.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regardless of how informed one is in recognizing biological
>diversity, true diversity cannot be attained without DNA testing. That is =
not to
>say that it is not valuable to have scope experience in identifying differ=
ent
>categories of microbe, simply a statement of the obvious truth.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For instance, we get people confused about our biological produ=
cts
>all the time because we do not claim microbes on the label. We do this for=
two
>reasons. One, we don't propose we can know all the microbes in our biologi=
cals.
>They are created on a farm that has been in the same family for 350 years =
and
>have a complexity we cannot know. Second, according to labeling laws, only=
>certain strains (Bacillus, mycchorizae) are accepted. This leaves people t=
o
>believe they are the only ones that are important. Some on this list may t=
ake
>issue with that, but you should deal with the general public every day. Mo=
st
>people simply believe what they are told. It's the same when 99% of this c=
ountry
>believes Miracle Gro is sufficient to maintian health in an ecosystem. Mos=
t of
>the time they don't even know what an ecosystem is, they think microbes ar=
e the
>reason for hand sanitizer. Not trying to be ugly, its simply the truth. No=
t
>being able to claim biological existence on a label cripples people's abil=
ity to
>know about them. This has happened with "essential nutrients" with plants.=
>Plants can use 50-60 elements directly or indirectly (microbes all of them=
as
>co-factors), yet the "experts" speak of 17 at the most.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is my belief that the onset of degenerative disease in moder=
n
>society is a direct (with no smoking gun) result of growing plants (and
>microbes) for what they have to have, not what they want, or, better, what=
we
>need from them.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Most importantly, however, assuming we can identify microbes, i=
s what
>function those microbes perform. We know very little about this considerin=
g
>estimates that only 1/4 of the fungal species have even been identified, f=
or
>example.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Potential NEW microbe species:
>http://www.npr.org/2011/05/12/136207874/a-new-somewhat-moldy-branch-on-the=
-tree-of-life
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Further, in regards to biological strength and ability, we are =
both
>humans. You may be a better soccer player (N cycler) and I may be a better=
>basketball player (digester), but one cannot tell this by looking at us un=
der a
>microscope. If you purchase a microbe grown in a Petri dish with no natura=
l
>stress or predator, the organism is weaker. This is another simple stateme=
nt of
>truth. They lack life experience and have not worked with other organisms.=
These
>are not tiny programed machines, they are living life forms.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What are "PGPR products"?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is even thought that certain species of microbes, outside=
of
>individual ability, are "smarter" than others. Check out this article on a=
>"smart community" or vortex bacteria ;)
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
>http://www.dynamicyouth.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&=
id=1748:social-iq-score-of-bacteria&catid=79:research&Itemid=89
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It would make sense to most, I imagine, that much of the benefi=
t from
>microbes comes in their complexity (diversity). Meaning that often it is t=
he
>assistance of a microbe that has no interaction with a plant directly towa=
rds a
>microbe that does, that accounts for the incalculable work done by microbe=
s for
>plants and Nature. To use a basketball analogy, what if the starter cant c=
ome
>out of the game and there's no 6th man? Further, what if there is no train=
er or
>assistant coach?
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Consider a plant, we can grow them with ionic minerals, but we =
all
>know the benefit of having a microbe help.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Consider a human, there are microbes in our gut that use Yttriu=
m to
>help us digest our food. Yttrium has no direct use by humans that we know,=
but
>if it is not found in our diet, and it is not found in most people's anymo=
re,
>microbes cannot cycle Aluminium in our intestines. This has been implicate=
d in
>Alzheimers and other degenerative diseases, especially with people eating =
so
>much Al in pharmaceuticals and using it in their underarms. This is the
>importance of using ALL elements as tools for microbes. Read "Minerals for=
the
>Genetic Code", by Dr. Olree.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Nature barely ever works directly. Therefore we don't know as m=
uch as
>we think we know. Given this innate complexity, how is a human supposed to=
know
>how to create a proper biological inoculant? What if the coach (human) put=
s the
>wrong players (microbes) on the court? Five point guards can't beat a well=
>balanced basketball team, and the center must get the assist from the poin=
t
>guard to dunk the ball.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To put it another way, to realize the importance of biological=
>teamwork, what if a trapeze artist picked someone out of the crowd to catc=
h her
>on her pass?
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately, due to the dynamic nature of what we are discuss=
ing,
>there may be no way to prove the lab grown weakness hypothesis directly ex=
cept
>out of subjective experience and intuition. We can't set up an obstacle co=
urse
>and let them run through it. :) This, of course, is what prevents people f=
rom
>gravitating towards concepts like BioDynamics due to us being trained to e=
xpect
>hard quantifiable data to even consider entertaining potential truths.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Arguably, the most important aspects of living systems are
>unmeasureable and unobservable.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The scientific method, while allowing us to advance as a specie=
s,
>cripples us. It says that a hypothesis can only be a theory and then a law=
if it
>happens the same way every time. Remember that Nature does not work this w=
ay, by
>design. She works in chaos and spirals. The consepquence of the anthropoce=
tric
>concept of the scientific method, again, while not worthless, is making "l=
aws"
>for humans that do not jive with the laws of Nature. In fact, they are
>counterintuitive. Newton pondered gravity by getting hit in the head by th=
e
>apple, or so the fable goes, but we spend no time discussing how the apple=
got
>up there to begin with.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Without acknowledging the unobservable and unmeasureable life f=
orce
>involved in natural systems, we are only considering half the story.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In regards to the shredder part, yes, that is what I'm referrin=
g too.
>Read Podolinski for his descriptions of humus. He describes it as the guts=
of
>microbes that form jelly pockets in the soil. becasue "plant food" is cont=
ained
>in certian zoes in the soil the plant can choose to drink or eat at will
>depending on if the sun is out or teh time of day. When using soluble arti=
ficial
>nutrients there is no jelly pocket, "food" is found throughout teh soil an=
d the
>drinking roots of plants cannot help but eat as well. This accounts for in=
itial
>higher yields, but is actually only obesity. His description resonates wit=
h me.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You should also read Steiner on the concept of "You are what yo=
u
>eat". It's easy to think of microbes cycling nutrients through their poop,=
but
>we again can easily oversimplify things. Some may not see the connection h=
ere,
>but "nutrition" is a relative thing from a non-materialistic perspective:=
>http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/NutHealth/19240731p01.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the end, organic matter does not just melt. I consider micro=
bes to
>be responsible for ALL end results in healthy soil. Just as they are for u=
s in
>our gut, or worms and bacteria in theirs, or termites and fungi in theirs.=
This
>is why microbes are so important. They help plants, but most importantly t=
hey
>make plant food in the cycle of life.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If plant food is not kept in solution after being created, wher=
e does
>it go? I too believe that this can be documented, but it will not be direc=
tly, I
>presume. There is a disconnect between articially created nutrients and na=
tural.
>For instance, I can spray a 2000ppm solution of Earth TOnic on a plant and=
it
>will love it. If I do the same with an artificial nutrient it will murder =
the
>plant. Nature has a way of balancing things that a human can never know. W=
e must
>be humble to this.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We have people using natural nutrients in our retail store all =
the
>time with an NPK that is 2-1-1 who get MUCH better results than when they =
uised
>an artifical nutrient with a 15-10-10. I'm sure everyone is aware on some =
level
>the difference of nutrition from Nature versus a factory.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm curious to hear the thoughts of the lab we find to this wor=
k. Are
>tehy set up to assay ionic minerals or biological plant food. I suspect th=
ere is
>a difference, and maybe one we cannot detect readily.
>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let me know on that DVD..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > evan
> > > > > > www.VortexBrewer.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tim Wilson" <thegoodjob_at_>=
wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Evan;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Two things jumped at me from your post;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1/ Diversity; The type of diversity which is qualified/quanti=
fied
>by DNA testing is the species (genera?) difference in bacteria, archaea an=
d
>fungi genera. The type of diversity I am talking about is bacteria/archaea=
,
>flagellates, naked amoebae, testate amoebae, ciliates, rotifers, fungal hy=
phae.
>These are easily discerned microscopically; as simple as looking outdoors =
to see
>the types of animals and birds in your backyard. There are also difference=
s
>which can be discerned inter species. If I see entirely different shapes a=
nd
>motility within bacterial/archaeal species I can assume they are of differ=
ent
>genera but this is not hard and fast with this group. Likewise with fungal=
>hyphae if they grow differently, produce different spores and throw down s=
eptate
>at different distances, have different membranes, etc. I can conclude they=
are
>of different genera. With flagellates, ciliates and amoebae it is quite si=
mple
>to discern different genera visually. And you don't need to know their nam=
e to
>know they are different. That is the diversity I'm looking for in a compos=
t tea,
>soil or compost sample. Have you seen my DVD?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2/ Shredders;
> > > > > > > You mention shredders as providers of plant food and I believ=
e
>humus creators if I'm not mistaken. I presume you are speaking of the pred=
ators
>like protozoa and nematodes. My understanding of how nutrients are cycled =
to
>plants microbially is protozoa consume bacteria/archaea and utilize only 3=
0 to
>40 percent of the energy derived for sustenance. What they excrete is the =
60 to
>70 percent in bioavailable (ionic form - soluble) nutrients which can be
>directly uptaken by plants.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe (as far as I know today) that the creation of humus=
is
>somewhat still in unknown territory but I had not heard the hypothesis of =
it
>being formed from the guts of bacteria (microbes). There are two (that I k=
now
>of) schools of thought on what comprises humus as to whether the organic
>material is no longer recognizeable and it is a unique molecular structure=
>(humic polymers or covalent bonded) OR where some aspect of the originatin=
g
>organic matter is detectable and it forms a molecular aggregate structure=
>(supramolecular aggregates or non-covalent bonded).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As we have discussed, it is my thought that if a compost tea =
would
>'hold' nutrients in solution as a factor of predation having taken place, =
then
>it would seem a perpetual brew would make better sense. If these nutrients=
are
>in solution, it should be relatively easy to detect them through 'dependab=
le'
>laboratory testing. I do believe the testing would need to be done without=
any
>extraction processes but that is my uneducated hypothesis.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The specialty or talented bacteria which you mentioned may ha=
ve
>someplace in compost tea but presently I see them more as something which =
may be
>specifically fermented or purchased ready to use, as is much the case with=
the
>PGPR products.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Salutations,
> > > > > > > Tim
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "evanfolds" <evan_at_> wrote=
:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sorry for the product plug, Tim, hard to get the point acro=
ss
>otherwise.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We have tracked DO in the past with a perpetual brew, but n=
othing
>I can regurgitate. I have tasked my guys to track that with a fresh brew
>starting the beginning of next week along with what we are adding daily fo=
r
>reference and will report back.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I will admit that the quality of the microbe, and possibly =
the
>diversity, is compromised when brewing perpetually. Who's determining ACTU=
AL
>diversity anyway wihtout DNA testing? However, that is of relative importa=
nce.
>Put it this way, ANY living solution is better than none as long as it is =
not
>aerobic. In other words, when people take a perpetual brew from a garden s=
tore
>they cannot buy the equivalant from a shelf.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Also, I realize that this is a compost tea forum mostly
>interested in the biological aspects of living solutions, and rightfully s=
o. But
>the aspect of compsot tea that gets perpetually glossed over is the fact t=
hat
>microbes make perfect plant food. What I think is happening over time is t=
hat
>the longer you brew the more plant food you have.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Tim, you reference that you think ciliates are nutrient cyc=
lers,
>and I would agree. I would argue that ALL microbes are nutrient cyclers in=
their
>own right. The shredders spill the guts of bacteria and create humus, or p=
lant
>food. Arguably, the more shredding you have going on, the more plant food =
you
>have. The people in the testimonial video may simply be reacting to the pe=
rfect
>plant food beenfit, not the biological influence. I like to think the livi=
ng
>microbes have a direct influence, but how can one know for sure?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It all depends on the application. For instance, an indoor =
grower
>who is planning on throwing his potting soil away in 3-4 months is not
>necessarily trying to establish a soil food web in his container. His inte=
rests
>may be more on the plant food emphasis, therefore perpetual brewing makes =
more
>sense to him. We have many growers who keep perpetual brews going and use =
on
>every watering.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In another context there may be a farmer who is interested =
in the
>long term biological balance in his soil who may benefit more by batch bre=
wing
>and ensuring the sanctity of the microbes involved.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The point is, we don't know for sure.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The future is defining applications and the need for certai=
n
>microbes in those applications, then establishing food sources and brew ti=
mes
>that encourage those microbes needed most effectively. This research has n=
ot
>been done, and is barely even discussed.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Without a baseline of what soil "should" be, we're pretty m=
uch
>shooting in the dark. However, there are certain applications that warrant=
>progress. I saw the other day a reference from a Australian farmer who
>discovered that there is actually a bacteria responsible for frost damage =
in
>plants. In other words, its not the temperature, but an excretion on the l=
eaf
>surface by a certain microbe that makes the plants vulnerable and crstaliz=
es the
>moisture. What if we could determine a predator for this microbe and use a=
food
>source and brew time that encouraged it? The mind races at the potetnial
>applications, but this is the future.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There are also variables involved that throw a monkey wrenc=
h into
>these ideas. For example, the strength of microbes. We discuss microbes as=
if
>they are all the same, but this is not true. Keep in mind that you cannot =
see
>biological strength under a microscope. In other words, a lab analysis can=
only
>get you so far in regards to how the specific microbe influences growing p=
lants.
>I don't know of any labs connecting biological assays and sourcews with pl=
ant
>growth...and this is the most important thing!
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > One way to think about this is biodynamics. In the biodynam=
ic
>method compost is not turned. In other words, the microbe is challenged to=
>operate in an aerobic/anaerobic capacity, as Dr. Ingham referenced in a po=
st a
>couple of weeks ago. The result is that the mcirobes are challenged more, =
they
>develop more life experince, so to speak. If you coddle your children are =
they
>going to end up as accomplsihed adults? You get the idea.
>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anyway, food for thought. When we get some results I'll rep=
ort
>back...peace
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > evan
> > > > > > > > www.VortexBrewer.com
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "Tim Wilson" <thegoodjo=
b_at_>
>wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I was hoping you would speak up on this subject Evan. I'd=
be
>more interested in the tracked dissolved oxygen than the testimonials (BTW=
I
>don't know if anyone told you advertising is on Sundays only) I do believe=
that
>a semi-perpetual brew is possible but do not know whether it is more benef=
icial
>than starting a brew over. Some of the longterm brews I've carried out hav=
e
>wound up with a predominence of ciliates and/or fungal hyphae quite devour=
ed by
>bacteria.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If you have tracked the microbial development and/or DO2 =
I'd be
>interested in hearing/seeing.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I was asked recently to put on a seminar for a college gr=
owing
>program and they did not have a brewer. I threw together a 5 gallon airlif=
t
>brewer to donate, using the 2 CFM Hailea. Because of time constraints we s=
tarted
>the brew at my place so it would be on about 36 hours for the seminar. I c=
hecked
>the brew at 11 hours and it blew my mind. It was complete. Bacteria/archae=
a,
>flagellates & mega fungal hyphae. The DO2 was 8.2 ppm. Next morning shut i=
t
>down, drove about 2 hours, then started the brew back up again. I did not =
take
>the O2 meter but samples under the scope at 36 to 40 hours were beginning =
to
>show chewed down hyphae and quite an abundance of ciliates and less flagel=
lates.
>Now does that mean the ACT is not as functional? I don't know. But it was =
on its
>way to being overun by ciliates. We've been told by some in the field, thi=
s is a
>bad sign. I believe ciliates cycle nutrients but I think the lack of diver=
sity
>is not great.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On an upnote; What an incredible little brewer I stumbled=
on.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > *Evan; I'm working on the testing thing.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Salutations,
> > > > > > > > > Tim
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "evanfolds" <evan_at_> w=
rote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We have been brewing perpetually for many years using a=
>Vortex Brewer. Here is a video of many happy customers using compost tea c=
reated
>in this way: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fNWyTqUUN0
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > it is important to refresh teh solution at least once p=
er
>week. In other words, if you are distributing 10 gallons a wekk using a 60=
>gallon unit the inputs compound on themselves. We suggest adding a certian=
>amoutn of input for every 5 gallons of water added to the unit. It works g=
reat.
>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This not only makes sense on a convenience level, but a=
lso on
>a "plant food" level. We all know microbes make perfect plant food. When
>attaining a shredder dominance after 48 hours it makes sense that this pro=
cess
>creates more plant food the longer the tea is brewed. After all, the guts =
of
>bacteria make up humus, i.e. plant food.
>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We are not suggesting that this provides a replicable
>biological product, only that it is a living solution that cannot be purtc=
hased
>from a shelf. Depending on the application, the plant food aspect may be m=
ore
>important than the biological aspect. Consider container gardening or indo=
or
>gardening where the goal is not necessarily to establish an operating soil=
food
>web.
>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We have distributed compost tea from a Vortex Brewer to=
every
>gardening situation imagineable over the last 5-6 years, sometimes with a =
brew
>that has been spinning for up to 6 months without cleaning the unit, and n=
ever
>have we had a negative response.
>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I would not receommend using other compost tea units in=
this
>capacity, not because it will not work, but becasue I have not personally =
tested
>it. There is still MUCH work to do to determine the potentials of compost =
tea,
>but perpetual brewing sure makes sense from our perspective.
>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Evan
> > > > > > > > > > www.VortexBrewer.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --- In compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.com, "RTS Friction -
>Carruthers" <home_at_> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It would seem you run the risk of outside contaminati=
on if
>you continue to use your base stock, much the same as using your yeast aga=
in and
>again in beer making. Look forward to other comments good question.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > If you trail through the archives you will see the
>discussions on adding extra food/nutrient, many members believe it is not=
>necessary. Thanks to good advice I now rely on the release of nutrients in=
the
>compost/vermicast to multiply the MO's, I do add a little barley malt if u=
sing
>the tea for getting the compost heap going or doing a lawn drench.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Ian C
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul M Moriarty To: compost_tea_at_yahoogroups.c=
om
> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 9:03 PM
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > New guy here. I've searched through the archives an=
d
>haven't found an answer to my question. Hopefully, one of you can help me =
out.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to just keep a batch of tea going by=
,
>draining off 1/2 the tea and replacing with water & food as one would with=
a
>sourdough starter, or is it necessary to replenish the castings as well? A=
s an
>urban farmer, I'm trying to get as much mileage out of my castings as poss=
ible.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Received on Fri Jul 01 2011 - 10:53:23 EDT