(post if you make your own soil) making your own potting soil

@Nullis. I've added this to my RIU journal. I'll try to add more conversations with Dr. Robby as time permits. This is a copy and paste, for the full conversation go into my profile and view my journal or click on "Journal Entries: 1" below avatar to the left.

Mycorrhizae are fungi that form a symbiotic relationship with many, many plants. There are three main types: Ericoid mycorrhyzae, endo-, and ectomycorrhizae. Ecologically speaking, a mutualistic relationship means that both parties will benefit. In this case the fungi will get sugars from the plant and the plant will get more nutrients (usually phosphorus) from the fungi.

These fungi associate themselves with the plants roots and will essentially increase the surface area that the roots are exposed to the soil. In addition, the fungi have a few tricks up their sleeves to make nutrients more available for absorption.

You can inoculate your soil with these fungal spores, but they more or less are found naturally in nature. Many plants cannot thrive without them now. In fact acid rain has a detrimental effect on the growth and infection rate of these mycorrhizae and many scientists feel that trees suffer more from lack of mycorrhizal infection than from the acid rain itself.

Now here's the kicker: plants are sacrificing some sugars to the fungi for the fungal services, but what happens if the nutrients are not in any deficiency in the soil. In other words, what if you as the gardener are capable of constantly providing enough nutrients to the soil so that the plant is never really lacking.

In this scenario, a plant that has a mutualistic relationship with a mycorrhizal fungus is now sacrificing sugar that could be used to make new plant parts to the fungus for no added benefit. This is generally the case for plants grown in pots.

Mycorrhizal fungi will give the greatest benefit to plants living in the ground and not in pots. This makes sense when you think about it though. The mycorrhizae help the plant explore the soil for nutrients. When a plant is in a pot, the roots cannot really explore much and the nutrients generally have to be provided to them.

I hope this is helpful. Let me know if you have any further questions.

Cheers,

- Dr. Robby

Nice excerpt Vindicated except a few issues I have. How do they help the plant explore the soil for nutrients? My soil science resources say the Mycorrhizal fungus break down nutrients that plant roots can't absorb into ones that the plants can access while benefiting from the excess sugars/nutrients plants release naturally. Dr. Robby makes it look like they are leeching from the plant which doesn't make sense because sugars/nutrients aren't stored in the roots they are in the fan leaves, the byproduct of the plants consuming the sugars are released back out the roots. So my problems, Mycorrhizal fungus break down nutrients plants can't absorb creating nutrients accessible by the plants that they can absorb so if they do this why wouldn't they just go after the nutrients the plants utilize instead of breaking down the "locked" nutrients since it would be biologically more efficient if they are in competition like Dr. Robby is suggesting. Again, I really don't see what he means by the fungus helping the roots explore the soil for nutrients that doesn't make sense. Roots absent of the fungus search for nutrients, the fungus like they do grow on the roots and use them as a super highway through the soil. Mycorrhizae break down "locked" nutrients the plant can't absorb and create nutrients the plants can use while using the waste the plant produces as well. Symbiotic relationship, I am relaying information Michael Melendez has imparted through my circle and would recommend to Dr. Robby that he have a discussion, I'm sure they'd have fun "shooting the shit" haha ^_^

Vindicated said:

@Nullis. I've added this to my RIU journal. I'll try to add more conversations with Dr. Robby as time permits. This is a copy and paste, for the full conversation go into my profile and view my journal or click on "Journal Entries: 1" below avatar to the left.

Mycorrhizae are fungi that form a symbiotic relationship with many, many plants. There are three main types: Ericoid mycorrhyzae, endo-, and ectomycorrhizae. Ecologically speaking, a mutualistic relationship means that both parties will benefit. In this case the fungi will get sugars from the plant and the plant will get more nutrients (usually phosphorus) from the fungi.

These fungi associate themselves with the plants roots and will essentially increase the surface area that the roots are exposed to the soil. In addition, the fungi have a few tricks up their sleeves to make nutrients more available for absorption.

You can inoculate your soil with these fungal spores, but they more or less are found naturally in nature. Many plants cannot thrive without them now. In fact acid rain has a detrimental effect on the growth and infection rate of these mycorrhizae and many scientists feel that trees suffer more from lack of mycorrhizal infection than from the acid rain itself.

Now here's the kicker: plants are sacrificing some sugars to the fungi for the fungal services, but what happens if the nutrients are not in any deficiency in the soil. In other words, what if you as the gardener are capable of constantly providing enough nutrients to the soil so that the plant is never really lacking.

In this scenario, a plant that has a mutualistic relationship with a mycorrhizal fungus is now sacrificing sugar that could be used to make new plant parts to the fungus for no added benefit. This is generally the case for plants grown in pots.

Mycorrhizal fungi will give the greatest benefit to plants living in the ground and not in pots. This makes sense when you think about it though. The mycorrhizae help the plant explore the soil for nutrients. When a plant is in a pot, the roots cannot really explore much and the nutrients generally have to be provided to them.

I hope this is helpful. Let me know if you have any further questions.

Cheers,

- Dr. Robby

Click to expand...

i had read about these fungi a little not in much detail, at a site called mother nature news, they were explaining why turning your soil at summers end is bad cuz you will disturb the web of fungi that are attached to your roots.

Arent myco's beneficial bacterias, not fungi?

Nullis said:

So I take it your friend has never heard of mycorrhizae? Trichoderma? It would actually be quite understandable if your friend did indeed hold a doctorate in horti-science and hadn't ever heard or seriously researched these symbionts... microbes are [mostly] invisible to the naked eye, of course. They've been over-looked and under-appreciated for so long, and research into the complex interactions they share with plants has only just begun to unfold over the past couple decades.
Certainly this is something a soil scientist who has graduated within the last decade and keeps up to snuff on the latest news in the field should be aware of. It is now known that most plants in nature do in fact rely on these peculiar kinds of fungus known as mycorrhizae. The various species of mycorrhizal fungi interact with plant roots in a few distinct ways, some more intimately than others, but the common thread is that the plant gets nutrients (phosphorous in particular) and even water in exchange for root exudates (carbohydrates in particular). Studies have shown that plants grown with myco as opposed to in sterilized soil are indeed more vigorous and do indeed yield more and require less fertilizer. Some plants won't grow at all without mycorrhizae.

In fact, plants secrete exudates rich in carbohydrates specifically in order to attract microbes and mycorrhizal fungi into the rhizosphere. Now, maybe you know all this and still know something that I don't. But it seems like a lot of people who have worked for a very long time with plants simply are not aware of this. Case in point:

- http://www.the-compost-gardener.com/mycorrhizal-fungi.html

These days brands of grass seed now come inoculated with mycorrhizae. You might have seen the advertisements for the "Smart Seed" which grows into a lush healthy lawn and can grow with significantly less water... and this is all thanks to mycorrhizal fungi (they've even used it for the lawn at the White House).

Click to expand...

olylifter420 said:

Arent myco's beneficial bacterias, not fungi?

Click to expand...

Both......

They are beneficial fungus. A fungus is not the same thing as a bacteria.

@mugan That is correct. Tilling is an outdated practice that destroys the microbiology in soil and perpetuates waste. Soil building is the only real way to farm and farmers nowadays are learning the hard way that ancient practices were much more efficient than the ones being encouraged.

I'm sure you can find experts with different opinions. My point for posting this is so next time you see someone that has a $60 product and claim it will increase your grow by tenfold you can think logically and say to yourself, "I know some experts don't think fungi is really that important in my particular growing environment. I think that manufacture is talking a lot of BS. I can probably do without." If you read both sides and come away thinking," I hear some dr's are for it and some are against it, I'm going to be for it.." Well then at least your making an informed decision.

Oh I agree, there are always experts with differing opinions. Also, the most believed ones aren't always the most accurate. Opinions are just that, it is when facts are presented that one makes a logical decision not rely on opinion. High enough in any profession you find beliefs that are trying to be proven so that they become facts, it is the shared facts the get you high enough to make 'educated' guesses and they differ widely. Michael Melendez shared a paper with me that he got an F on in the 70's in a Soil Science class because the teacher said this is a science class and we only deal with facts. Now information in that paper are all regarded as facts and have been proven, I love higher learning. ^_^ Differing opinions doesn't make either party wrong, only when something has been empirically proven that it shouldn't be ignored when making an informed decision.

Very true and that is can be said for every other profession not just growing... In my field of expertise, which in not growing, there are a great many "myths" that are being labeled as true or something worth investing your time in. There are a lot of products out that claim to do great things for you with no logical facts to support their claims. I also see a lot of people out and about giving false information to other patrons just cause they read it off some magazine at the store... And i just hate it when they argue with me about something that i know is right and they disagree that that is not the way! I have spent countless hours doing research of my own, reviewing countless Journal Studies from different Authorities in my field and these people think they know more then i do... It is just so funny how they make an informed decision without looking at all the facts


That Michael Melendez sounds like a very smart person. Does he have any books out that you might know of?

MasterS said:

Oh I agree, there are always experts with differing opinions. Also, the most believed ones aren't always the most accurate. Opinions are just that, it is when facts are presented that one makes a logical decision not rely on opinion. High enough in any profession you find beliefs that are trying to be proven so that they become facts, it is the shared facts the get you high enough to make 'educated' guesses and they differ widely. Michael Melendez shared a paper with me that he got an F on in the 70's in a Soil Science class because the teacher said this is a science class and we only deal with facts. Now information in that paper are all regarded as facts and have been proven, I love higher learning. ^_^ Differing opinions doesn't make either party wrong, only when something has been empirically proven that it shouldn't be ignored when making an informed decision.

Click to expand...

He has only published journal articles that I know of. He does a lot of public speaking as well.

olylifter420 said:

Arent myco's beneficial bacterias, not fungi?

Click to expand...

No, myco's are fungi.

www.fungi.com is good for some info. I use their MycoGrow.

Wet

Cool, and you said he is at new mexico state, correct?

MasterS said:

He has only published journal articles that I know of. He does a lot of public speaking as well.

Click to expand...

Yes he is, when I have some free time I'll find a recent article he published showing the benefits of his humic acid when added to soil that has been contaminated with heavy salts and petrol. ^_^

Wetdog said:

No, myco's are fungi.

www.fungi.com is good for some info. I use their MycoGrow.

Wet

Click to expand...

Their mycogrow is an excellent product that comes in much cheaper than many other hyped up versions currently being marketed. I 2nd the use of this product

Vindicated said:

Now here's the kicker: plants are sacrificing some sugars to the fungi for the fungal services, but what happens if the nutrients are not in any deficiency in the soil. In other words, what if you as the gardener are capable of constantly providing enough nutrients to the soil so that the plant is never really lacking.

In this scenario, a plant that has a mutualistic relationship with a mycorrhizal fungus is now sacrificing sugar that could be used to make new plant parts to the fungus for no added benefit. This is generally the case for plants grown in pots.

Mycorrhizal fungi will give the greatest benefit to plants living in the ground and not in pots. This makes sense when you think about it though. The mycorrhizae help the plant explore the soil for nutrients. When a plant is in a pot, the roots cannot really explore much and the nutrients generally have to be provided to them.

Click to expand...

MasterS said:

Nice excerpt Vindicated except a few issues I have. How do they help the plant explore the soil for nutrients? My soil science resources say the Mycorrhizal fungus break down nutrients that plant roots can't absorb into ones that the plants can access while benefiting from the excess sugars/nutrients plants release naturally. Dr. Robby makes it look like they are leeching from the plant which doesn't make sense because sugars/nutrients aren't stored in the roots they are in the fan leaves, the byproduct of the plants consuming the sugars are released back out the roots. So my problems, Mycorrhizal fungus break down nutrients plants can't absorb creating nutrients accessible by the plants that they can absorb so if they do this why wouldn't they just go after the nutrients the plants utilize instead of breaking down the "locked" nutrients since it would be biologically more efficient if they are in competition like Dr. Robby is suggesting. Again, I really don't see what he means by the fungus helping the roots explore the soil for nutrients that doesn't make sense. Roots absent of the fungus search for nutrients, the fungus like they do grow on the roots and use them as a super highway through the soil. Mycorrhizae break down "locked" nutrients the plant can't absorb and create nutrients the plants can use while using the waste the plant produces as well. Symbiotic relationship, I am relaying information Michael Melendez has imparted through my circle and would recommend to Dr. Robby that he have a discussion, I'm sure they'd have fun "shooting the shit" haha ^_^

Click to expand...

(Replying to your post and the one above):

First we're setting aside the fact that mycorrhizal varieties comprise but one 'class' of fungi (saprophytes are important, too). Note that there have been studies on myco which absolutely depend on growing the plants in containers. It is clearly observable that the plants grown in soil inoculated with mycorrhizal fungi are doing better than the ones in sterile soil. Now, here is where I find Dr. Robby's logic really flawed: who wants to be constantly providing all of these nutrients in all the right ratios to the plant when you don't have to? If you've got myco you simply don't have to use so much fertilizer/plant food, and the myco would really prefer you used the least amount possible, precisely so that they can go after it for the plant. Compound this with the fact that Dr. Robby apparently assumes or otherwise feels that a soil mix should be bland and homogeneous. Consider that many TLO growers are "flooring" and "layering" or using organic "spikes" in the soil intentionally and effectually making for uneven distribution of nutrients and nutrient-rich organic matter... so plant roots and mycorrhizae will have to go and find it. And lastly it is my feeling that the plant is hardly "sacrificing" the carbohydrates (which many container growers provide as kelp\molasses, etc. anyways), the roots are handing them over willfully and delightfully (chemical trading at the cellular border for AM fungi); otherwise why even produce exudates? The plant knows, man. The fungi is desperate for carbon; plant has that covered and then some: the plant can photosynthesize, the fungi cannot. But, the plant still needs a wide variety of nutrients to build with; and there are rules as to how a plant can take in nutrients. They more or less have to be in a specific form. Furthermore the plant root has some bio-tectural 'flaws' which the fungi can address, and then some. Fungal hyphae can go where plants roots cannot. And not just due to the ability of fungal hyphae to stretch for MILES (as they would in nature), but hyphae are also much smaller than root hairs and they can growth in a nature which roots cannot: their main +1 over plant roots has to do with this and the key is surface area.

Furthermore, it is my understanding that plant roots have some trouble absorbing anions (as opposed to cations, and there are reasons for this beyond the scope of this post: humus and CEC). For example, phosphorous is very important for plants, and according to general understanding of how plants acquire phosphorous it is only available to roots as an anion...unlike N which is available in both cation NH4+ (ammonium) and anion NO3- (nitrate) forms. Pants need P as the phosphate anion PO4-; there could be tons of P locked up tight in your soil mix and the roots just can't touch it otherwise. Guess what a primary function of myco is? They've got the phosphatase-enzymes that break off phosphate molecules where-ever they find them... they gather up that phosphate and they take it to the plant. I doubt the fungi cares very much whether it is seeking P and other nutrients for the plant outdoors in the ground or whether it is doing so in a container: so long as it has to be sought.

This truly makes perfect sense to me, when I think about it: the plant has some wild abilities the fungi doesn't have and the fungi has some awesome qualities which the plant would die for (or at least trade carbon for). Together they are the perfect team, and together they help each other thrive. Hence why this is a mutualistic\symbiotic relationship... there ultimately is no sacrifice either way, net result is overwhelmingly positive. Not to mention that nutrient acquisition is merely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the benefits. The notion that us humans can give everything to the plant so here we oblige, well that's certainly a perspective on gardening\agriculture and not necessarily a wrong one but as pertains to organics it seems quite backwards.

Of course, if you're spending $60 on mycorrhizae you need to get your ass down to Lowes and buy some Espoma Bio-Tone Starter Plus and/or maybe find another distributor who isn't going to rip you off and charge you for the marketing as opposed to the product; but that doesn't lend credence to shamming mycorrhizae per se.

Nullis you been speaking to Michael? haha I kid. You'd love him since you both share similar passion for the beauty of soil.

The main nutrients that our plants can't absorb are Nitrogen and Phosphorous. The main source of nitrogen in nature is in organic matter (except for legumes, they are able to make nitrogen from the atmosphere). When plants and animals decompose, it adds nitrogen to the soil. However, not all nitrogen is created equal and in nature it is the bacteria that converts nitrogen into usable nitrogen, called Nitrates. Phosphorous comes from minerals (which technically makes it inorganic) and like nitrogen, comes in several forms. Plants only use phosphorous in it's orthophosphate form, also known as phosphoric acid . In nature, the moisture in the soil and the sulphuric acids that the Mycorrhizal fungi produce is what breaks down phosphorous.

Do the beneficial organisms do the job people claim? That is, break down nutrients that the plant's would not otherwise be able to absorb in nature. Yes!, but then again that's not what's really being argued. I've taken the position that purchasing beneficial organisms is not needed when you the gardener are able to supply the plants with the nutrients. I believe they've lost their added benefit when you begin applying nutrients such as blood and bone meal. Fish hydrolysate is another organic source that is very rich in both N & P. Rain water will contain the rest of the micro nutrients the plant needs. Potash (K) is ash, which you should have plenty of if your smoking your medicine Which is exactly what I'm off to go do...

Hope that clears things up.

- Vin

Beneficial bacteria can make nitrogen from the atmosphere, too, independent of legumes. They turn it into ammonium, as plants can use nitrogen as ammonium (NH4+), too, but nitrifying bacteria will want to turn it into nitrate. Many plants prefer nitrate over ammonium. The nature of plant symbiosis truly goes even further as mycorrhizal fungi produce their own exudates to lure bacteria including those which fix N from the atmosphere. Some fungi (certain endophytes in particular) can even make nitrogen from the atmosphere all by themselves. But it isn't all about that; it isn't all about breaking down nutrients or acquiring them, it goes way beyond that. Microbes can do both generalized as well as quite specialized tasks, all for the plant. They'll actually produce growth stimulants\hormones, antibiotics and more for the plant... and they will keep ubiquitous 'bad' microbes from being able to do any real harm (because they are out-competed). No good microbes means open season for the bad guys. It isn't even just about fungi or bacteria though, those are just a couple fundamental pieces of the puzzle that forms the soil food web- which has been feeding plants for eons.

Your position is moot, for a couple reasons. For one thing you probably already have beneficial microbes in your medium and don't realize exactly what it is they are doing for you (bone meal wont work so well without microbes to break it down). It also doesn't quite add up that you'll go out and purchase things like blood & bone meal and fish hydrolysate, but refuse to purchase anything that might allow you to use less of those ingredients and further the health of your plants. Aside from the fact that commercial inoculations can be found inexpensively, the real kicker is that microbes need not be purchased at all really. Many dry organic fertilizers already come with microbes. You can also compost or vermi yourself and eventually have free fertilizer and inoculant. You could simply buy a single bag of forest humus or compost and do actively aerated compost teas; start a home compost pile, use the humus tea to increase the diversity of organisms in your pile and when it is ready use that compost for AACT and continue the cycle without buying anything else.

I just feel that thinking as if we as gardeners seriously know everything about what plants need, indeed as if we know better than the plant itself is not an organic mindset. That to me is virtually identical to saying: hey! we have all of these chemicals\substances that we know plants can [partially] absorb (we can even 'force' their absorption) so lets volunteer to take total responsibility for the entirety of a plants burden. That's fine in certain scenarios or whatever, but it disregards natural exogenous influences which are endemic to ORGANICS. I mean, we are still talking about organic growing right? Literally growing cannabis derived from living organisms. Not just because the 'fertilizer' we're giving was derived from a living organism, but physically allowing living organisms to nourish the plant.

If your soil isn't teaming with life and you're just using 'organic' nutrients instead of synthetic ones I am hard-pressed to say if you are really growing organically.

Yes organic is good and all but it's sustainability that I care more about, which happens to have organics as a byproduct ^_^

Hey guys, where can I read more about how these meals breakdown and how guanos breakdown and stuff like that?

Thanks