The organic myth?

[Seamaiden]

Seriously, if you're truly interested in real eco-farming, get yourself a subscription to Acres, USA. Seriously. The tomato study came out of UCDavis.

I think that what's going on is that when you're feeding chem salts, that's ALL the plants (and whatever microbes are living through it) are getting, but when you're doing things by organic methods (and there's a LOT to know about what that means) then you're giving more than just, ya dig? So with something like fish emulsion you're also getting lots of amino acids. I'll let the squigginator take it from there, but I'll start with this--aminos are another source of N.

 

[Chronic Monster]

whats ur fav boost for p and k @Seamaiden..?

 

[Seamaiden]

Hehhheee hee hee hee...! Pee!

 

[Chronic Monster]

what do you guys think about combination sythethics and organics throughout or swithing to organics around week 5?

 

[Chronic Monster]

pee for the indoor plants too, or just the ones outside...?
iv never tried pee, lol

 

[ttystikk]

Hehhheee hee hee hee...! Pee!

Let me guess, born under a water sign, too? LOL

I'm gonna whiz in my ACT now, just cuz you said that.

 

[squiggly]

Squigs, the microbes aren't just a conduit, they often oxidize or otherwise change the actual molecule that's being delivered to the plant. P uptake and utilization is where we can observe HUGE differences, for example.

It's all the same molecule what's being fed into the metabolic pathways within the cell. If it's oxidized outside the cell, chances are it will be reduced within it before being fed into a pathway--or the opposite may be true, that the unchanged molecule will instead, itself, be oxidized when it gets into the cell. Metabolic pathways have high specificity, the plant uses the same stuff in the same form no matter what you're growing it in or feeding it. If it wants Mg2+ it's not going to settle for MgO.

What changes ultimately are the ratios, and microorganisms do a better job of achieving equilibrium. They stop production when enough product has been formed, and they begin it again when enough of it is removed. When you link up tens or hundreds/thousands of different types of organisms like this. The result is some pretty staggering balance. That's really why I go organic. Why fuss over that which nature has perfected?

"Inorganic" nutrients are actually chemical salts. The subject is vast and complex, but with specific regard to foods, there are studies that prove higher flavanoid and terpene levels in organic vs conventional agriculture. There are higher levels of vitamins and minerals as well. That doesn't begin to address the other legal issue with organic production--soil health.

Just to be clear, organic methods are very much a route to the same thing insomuch as it concerns what is going in to the plant. The plant wants inorganic ions by and large. What differs ultimately is how much of these ions, what ratios of them, and the specific pathway for uptake.

Also, when dealing with EITHER organic or inorganic ferts there are concerns with contamination et al by various compounds--though rightly many of these concerns are centered on the synthetics, because we ultimately can't control what nature creates. What's the point of regulating it?

I trust in organic methods simply for ease of use and cost effectiveness. I believe the plant benefits from an environment more akin to that which it has evolved in over thousands of years. If I could, I'd have all my babies out in the sun. That's where they want to be, quality be damned.

There are clear data which support the hypothesis that synthetic fertilizers, properly applied, provide appreciable increases in mean product weight.

Ultimately I think this is a very silly argument. As Seamaiden correctly pointed out soil-health is really the biggest issue here long-term. The chemical ferts themselves are not going to damage us (uncontaminated ones, at least). What we need to be worried about is pesticides. It doesn't hurt to eat a plant fed with proper ratios of salt in the correct environment--but it hurts very much to eat pesticides.

 

[Seamaiden]

Following response written before the squiggers':

Chemical salts are known to both kill microbes and build up in soil profiles. They cause a trending away from friability, tilth, carbon storage, and both mineral density and accessibility.

Hold on, let me find something because I know that this particular point is being debated.

<response to squiggilator's post>
What's still being debated are things like why the different flavanoid (sp?), terpenoid, secondary plant metabolite levels between organic and synthetic. It's noted, it's juts not explained. But there has to be a reason, and I personally believe that we're limited scientifically at this time from fully understanding what's happening. Because you're giving an argument just like the last OB/GYN did with regard to bioidentical hormones vs synthetics. Bioidenticals don't cause feminized amphibians, whereas synthetics do, just as an example of what I believe are the limits of our knowledge and understanding, and that I believe we all, those in the sciences especially, must push beyond to gain better understanding. In other words, why does Nature still do so many things better??
</response to squiggilator's post>

I'm not even going to bring up using Brix levels to determine plant health, let alone plant sap pH. D'oh! (I have those moments.)

Pee for anything that's not being grown for consumption by others, because believe it or not, it is NOT an approved method of organic cultivation! :D LMAO!! But guano and manures are.


Ok, links + a pdf from 1974/75!!! We knew this stuff back then, and before. Actually, two pdf's, because both are very good and fairly short reads.

Scholarly articles for chemical salt fertilizers effect on soil microbes.
I give you the whole link ^^ because there are many articles to sift through.

 

[organicozarks]

My "Chemicals are for genocide" was to draw an emotion. I don't get into all of the back and forth that people like to argue about organic or not. Believe it or not, my mind is made up. :)

Acres USA will indeed open up a lot of people's eyes. It is a great read. They also have tons of other books, and publications that you can purchase. A lot of good info in there.

 

[Seamaiden]

If nothing else, going the synthetic route is resource-heavy; i.e. expensive. In more ways than one.

 

[PaperStreet]

Awesome stuff seamaiden and squiggs u guys explain stuff very well, even good enuff for a caveman like such as myself to Kinda understand. Awesome

 

[ttystikk]

It's exactly this debate that is inspiring me to get set up for aquaponics. That, and I just looooove fresh fish!

Seriously, I'm of the opinion that our current best efforts at synthetic fertilization are a substitute for how nature does things, and is necessarily a compromise. If I can fertilize naturally, especially with added value as bonus, I'm in!

 

[Gamrstwin36]

i have been a fan of al. b fuct for awhile.
, dude is funny as shit too
im not that great of a grower so take my opinion for a grain of salt...i always have grown using synthetics. you are providing the plants a nutrient readily available to a plant immediatly instead of microbes need to break it down into their non organic state.
but i think the benefits of organics is all the complex things that occur during the break down of nutrients and the by products of having a livng root zone..things are produced that are not required by the plant but maybe help to increase flavors or aromas

ALBFUCT is a LEGEND in a lot of Places. ...EVERY method he's suggested worked. Wonders. ..I was raised by a vegan Grandmother and oh boy did she know her shit ...I HIGHLY believe its all in your taste Preference . .Some Men thrive with blondes some brunette. .Can't run from SCIENCE AND NATURE. ..All on your preferences and situation. .Where im moving too I'll BE able to start a compost ..SO don't You organic junkies get ninja on me ill be hounding for tips lol Grow On!!

 

[Gamrstwin36]

OrganicOzarks, it just so happens that my mother, a registered dietitian of over 50 years experience, pushes non-GM and organic.

Don't get me started on bioidentical hormones and patented, because the logic being used above is precisely the same. IF they were precisely the same, how come my natural hormones don't cause feminized amphibians further down the waste stream, but all my sisters using common birth control are? Why I got into such a huge argument with the last OB/GYN.

Squigs, the microbes aren't just a conduit, they often oxidize or otherwise change the actual molecule that's being delivered to the plant. P uptake and utilization is where we can observe HUGE differences, for example.

Actually, that is not the legal (and regulated) definition of organic, or what 'approved for organic production' means. E.G. Rock dusts--absolutely vital in organic cultivation, only comprised of earth shit (volcanoes).

"Inorganic" nutrients are actually chemical salts. The subject is vast and complex, but with specific regard to foods, there are studies that prove higher flavanoid and terpene levels in organic vs conventional agriculture. There are higher levels of vitamins and minerals as well. That doesn't begin to address the other legal issue with organic production--soil health.

You're misunderstanding how N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Si, etc, etc, etc, are actually taken into plant tissues, nor how they're made available to the plant by microbes. There is a HUGE difference, for example, in the flavor of a tomato that has high nitrate levels and a tomato that does not. I'm finding that it's typically accepted that produce that has high nitrates has been grown with chemical salt fertilizers (that also kill microbes). From a phsysiological standpoint I believe it's been known for some years that ingesting foodstuffs that are high in nitrates, like many luncheon meats for example, is unhealthy and can lead to health problems like cancer, for example.

Hopefully you and others can read this link: Nitrates and Nitrites: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions.

Did you know that a combination of diluted urine and wood ashes outperforms chemical salt nutrients in field trials? Even urine alone outperforms chemical salt fertilizers. The question is why, yes? Well, it just so happens that, among other things, urine is very easily oxidized and utilized by microbes, the same microbes that then go on to feed the plants. Of course, if it's too concentrated then it will kill them.

Hopefully I didn't come off as an evangelist, just someone who's not only using organic methods but is looking towards certification in the future.

:stop: Stop It Mrs Maiden .no offense taken. I look to Your advice like gospel in certain areas so truly writing down bits of what i didn't know. .Knew about urine but ashes? ? Another reason i adore This farm so much ...#KNOWLEDGE

 

[Gamrstwin36]

If nothing else, going the synthetic route is resource-heavy; i.e. expensive. In more ways than one.

This Fact I'll never Think about debating ..But when the debate turns quality and such i guess ima Fence rider. Im going with what's helping my bulging fractured discs in back. .and what's getting me baked so i can muster strength to read and Enjoy family. .No denying science again. .But would love to to know numbers Organic Vs Salts sales wise. Cuz it's all like voting for Year Book Titles and prom queens. .just my 2©

 

[twist1]

Get a terminal disease like cancer, and most likely your doctor will tell you to go organic and vegan. Wonder why?

Chemicals are for genocide, not growing plants. :)

The only reason for extra veggies or a vegan diet for a cancer patient is because cancer reacts {in their favor} to meat protein; particularily red meat:

In 2007, the American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) published their second review of the major studies on food, nutrition, and cancer prevention. For cancers of the oesophagus, lung, pancreas, stomach, collorectum, endometrium, and prostate, it was determined that red meat (beef, pork, or lamb) and processed meat consumption possibly increased cancer risk. For colorectal cancer, a review of the literature determined that there is convincing scientific evidence that red meat increased cancer risk and that processed meat, saturated/animal fat, and heavily cooked meat were also convincing of increased risk.5

 

[Owlfarm]

From what I remember in 'teaming with microbes' soil can handle a certain amount of synthetics without becoming dead. I think large scale industrial farming does kill soil, but that is a whole different thing compared to small scale farming with synthetics.
I just finished 'growing vegetables west of the cascades' and steve solomon is basically saying synthetics don't kill microbes and soil. They deplete humus. As long as you keep adding humus the soil can keep jamming. If you deplete all the humus the soil is dead.
Whatcha guys think? Seems like many of you are on the fence or prefer organics...

 

[baba G]

the soil has been at work for a long time, I let it pick and choose from the alive soil. The synthetic nutes are relatively new from the 1950's and are hardly proven over the long term. A higher yield and depleting of the soil biotic components is achieved very rapidly in a fully synthetic system especially when outdoors in the central cali food producing areas....
A blend of both is nice, just depends on the source of the feed and what will be left after the plant uses the plant "edible" stuff(laymen terms...lol)

 

[baba G]

From what I remember in 'teaming with microbes' soil can handle a certain amount of synthetics without becoming dead. I think large scale industrial farming does kill soil, but that is a whole different thing compared to small scale farming with synthetics.
I just finished 'growing vegetables west of the cascades' and steve solomon is basically saying synthetics don't kill microbes and soil. They deplete humus. As long as you keep adding humus the soil can keep jamming. If you deplete all the humus the soil is dead.
Whatcha guys think? Seems like many of you are on the fence or prefer organics...

humus takes a while to produce....

 

[baba G]

granted there have been advancements in synthetic nutrient delivery and combinations of synthetic/organic blends that grow awesome tasting herbs so it depends on many factors but organic is not a myth. It's simply carbon based...