Forum für die kritische Würdigung
Forum for critical appreciation
Forum pour une appréciation critique
Foro de apreciación critíca
Aktuelle Zeit: So 26. Mai 2019, 20:58

Alle Zeiten sind UTC + 1 Stunde

Ein neues Thema erstellen Auf das Thema antworten  [ 13 Beiträge ] 
Autor Nachricht
BeitragVerfasst: Do 9. Jan 2014, 10:57 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Edaphon vs. Soil Food Web


1. Bodenbakterien
2. Bodenpilze
3. Algen
4. Protozoen
5. Rotatorien
6. Oligochaeten
7. Nematoden
8. Enchytraeiden
9. Tardigraden
10. Spinnen
11. Insekten
12. Mollusken
13. Säugetiere

Please Compare to:

Soil Food Web:

1. Bacteria
2. Fungi
3. Protozoa (Flagellates, Ciliates Amoeba)
4. Nematodes

Draw your own conclusions ..

See: Das Edaphon

See: The Soil Food Web

It is a shame that the (Soil) Food Web proponents and it's hype pushing evangelists never mention(ed) or refer(ed) to the real discoverer of the biocoenotic community of microorganisms in the soil:

See: Raoul Heinrich Francé and also here in the forum


See: Annie Francé-Harrar and also here in the forum


Ask Elaine Ingham about Raoul Francé and Annie Francé-Harrar.
She knows them - at least their names:

May 7, 2004

"Isn't it interesting that NONE of the work by Raoul France, or Anne France-Harrar, or Howard, or Eve Balforth, or even the Luebkes was ever pointed out in any class when I was a graduate student working in the area of soil ecology?"

Even five years before I myself was introduced to their life & work ..


Finally "Algae" have come to the ""soil food web":

Life In The Soil - Soil Foodweb Online Classses

"Learn Biological Agriculture"
Most important: find a new word for an old fact.

"The Most Current Research Available on the Web"
This research has been done 100 years ago already:

Session 1 - Introduction to the Microscope: Part 1
Session 2 - Introduction to the Microscope: Part 2
Session 3 - Morphology of Different Organisms Groups: Bacteria
Session 4 - Morphology of Different Organisms Groups: Fungi
Session 5 - Morphology of Different Organisms Groups: Algae, Pollen & Protozoa
Session 6 - Morphology of Different Organisms Groups: Nematodes
Session 7 - Morphology of Other Materials in Soil
Session 8 - Quantification: Using the Spreadsheet
Session 9 - Seven Fields: Assess Variability from Field to Field
Session 10 - Practical Quiz

"Groups: Algae, Pollen & Protozoa"
Totally different microorganisms with total diffrent biological activity and importance

Finally a more complete view of the EDAPHON
But no change of previous practical application in the field.

Quantification: is good - in the laboratory.
In the field way to much variation within the microorganisms.
Qualitative assessment is sufficient plus practical experience.

"Compost Tea / Extract Class"
Compost Tea/Extract will always contain a subset of the compost in terms of chemical & organical components as well as microorganisms.


See also:
Environment Celebration Institute.


Elaine Inghams discussion group:

Compost Teas, The Soil Food Web & Soils

Following various quotes ..

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: So 19. Jan 2014, 09:55 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Was macht der Kompost im Winter ?

"Many of the organisms in a compost in winter, as the pile freezes, will move to aggregates were the middle of the aggregate does not freeze, and thus will survive through the winter.

However, the compost has to have build good structure.... i.e., microaggregates and macroaggregates for these species to survive. The research on this has been done in frozen tundra soils, ice floes, arctic and antarctic ice studies.

In addition, many bacteria and fungi produce dormant spores that are not killed by freezing. these species survive in that dormant form for long periods.

Protozoa make cysts that are their dormant stages, nematodes produce eggs. So most organisms in compost, or soil will survive winter freezes."

Elaine R. Ingham, 2014 Jan 8 11:14 PM

So weit so in Übereinstimmung mit den Francé.

Bezüglich der (Kompost-/Boden)-Pilze bemerkt Annie Francé-Harrar, daß diese im Winter sich nicht auf die faule Haut legen sondern weiterarbeiten (Habe Literaturbeleg nicht zur Hand - selber suchen).
Allerdings: Auch Pilze bilden Sporen (Konidien) - aber auch Dauerformen / Überdauerungsformen ? Und unter welchen Bedingungen ?

Das kann untersuchen wer will.

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Mi 22. Jan 2014, 11:42 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Topic: soil chemistry facts (49 Messages) Aug 27, 2004

., Message 1 of 49, Aug 27, 2004

Teaching the Soil Biollgy and Soil Chemistry course with Dr. Lancaster here at Southern Cross University, and we are showing some very interesting relationships between soil chem and soil biol.

Did you know that NO AGRICULTURAL SOIL lacks the NUTRIENTS needed to grow plants?

Maybe one or two rare exceptions to that rule when we get into non-ag [agriculture] soils, but any soil used for agriculture does not lack the nutrients needed for plant growth.

So, why do we add fertilizers?

Because the AVAILABLE nutrients may be limited.

In the ag world, we do things to make the nutrients in a soil NOT-AVAILABLE to the plants. How stupid is this?

Why would we behave this way? Either no one understands what is really going on in soil, or we are being lead astray by people who want to sell you things that you don't really need.

How do you move nutrients from the not-available pool to the available pool in soil?

The answer - SOIL BIOLOGY

Soil organisms, in the right places, active at the right time. All that is needed is to learn how to make sure the organisms are there and active. Simple, inexpensive, and everyone can learn how to do this, at very little cost.

Soil biology - in your compost, compost tea, and easily monitored in a qualitative fashion by anyone with a decent small microscope. Need quantitative numbers? The lab can help you with that.

But no one needs to add inorganic fertilizer to their soil, unless they lack the biology that should be there. When you look at total nutrients present in any soil, there's more than adequate levels in any ag soil.

We calculated how many years' worth of phosphate was actually present in wheat filed soil in Australian, soils where growers have been told they needed to add thousands of dollars of PO4 because there was no phophate present. There was 15,000 years worth of phosphate present in that soil (something like $48,000 worth of "fertilizer"), if that phosphate could be made available to the plants.

Makes you wonder about the soil chemists telling you that there's "no phosphate" present.

Well, ok, no AVAILABLE phosphate. But that's really a WORLD different from no phosphate at all, don't you agree? It is a lack of MICROORGANISMS to solubilize that phosphate that is the problem, not a lack of phosphate.

When do we get off the toxic chemical bandwagon?
And back on the bandwagon that supports life?

Elaine Ingham


dkemnitz2000, Message 2 of 49, Aug 27, 2004

Wow what an awesome (new word I learned at the barber today!)
question. But I wonder WHAT it will take to get off the toxic
bandwagon? Here in rural Kansas I smell toxic chemicals nearly daily
which neighboring farmers and others spray.

Dennis Kemnitz

> When do we get off the toxic chemical bandwagon?
> And back on the bandwagon that supports life?
> Elaine Ingham

Elaine, I had to grin at this new "concept", "and other places".
Does this mean you're coming to Kansas soon? It's great you're
getting closer. I'd like to drop my samples off on the way to work in
the city! And Wow, simply awesome, I can attend the 3 week course
here too someday. Dennis Kemnitz in Kansas

-, Message 3 of 49, Aug 27, 2004

Dennis -

You are right, what is needed is for people to teach soil food web concepts in every city and town.

You ready to sign up for training to be able to do the teaching?

The next University credit course will start June 27, 2005 at Southern Cross University, and go 3 weeks. Graham Lancaster and I will be teaching the course.

We would love to teach the same course at Kansas State University. Who do we need to contact?



L Blair, Message 4 of 49, Aug 28, 2004

This is very interesting, Elaine.

I hope you're having a good time in Oz.

My first question is about trace elements. For eg, in NZ there is said to
be a shortage of Selenium (among other things). (Also, of course, the
result of the NPK mindset is that what Se there is has been further locked
out). Isn't there a case for 'dosing' the soil (via compost preferably)(or
plants or animals) with the likes of Se, Cu, etc?

Then there is the question of soil type. For example could a sandy soil be
lower in nutrients and need suppliments? (extreme case: sand itself).

And thirdly, what about climate? I am thinking that a wet climate would
have more opportunity to leach minerals, while a dry climate would retain
them (one of Albrecht's theories).

I've done a bit of reading of different theories recently, and one thing
that stands out is the health of plants and animals grown on the
Albrecht-Reams-Beddoe chemical approach. And when I buy vegetables and
fruit (organic of course), most have blemishes and don't keep long - signs
of lack of health, and I'm assuming mineral deficiency. (One exception that
stands out in memory is some BD apples grown in Hawkes Bay).

Of course, the one thing I havn't seen is veges/fruits claiming to have been
grown with ACT!
And there is the news from Betsy Ross that ACT improves her cattle's health.
(And I'm not disbelieving your message, but I'm struggling to come to some
sort of system to proceed with).

Regards, Lynton


Jeff Lowenfels, Message 5 of 49, Aug 28, 2004

Of course, the one thing I havn't seen is veges/fruits claiming to have been grown with ACT!

You need to come to Alaska and seem veggies grown with ACT. IN THE
dozen or more records using compost tea....and probably will win a few
more this year at the State Fair!

Jeff Lowenfels

Plant a Row in your garden to feed the hungry. Join Plant A Row for the
Hungry. Ask me how.

-, Message 6 of 49 , Aug 28, 2004

Lynton asked:
"My first question is about trace elements. For eg, in NZ there is said to be a shortage of Selenium (among other things).
Nope, no shortage of Selenium in any of your soils. It may not be available for your plants, but there is definately plenty of Se in the soil."

Locked up - correct. But how do you "un-lock" any locked up nutrient?

You get the proper biology back in the soil.

Just exactly how do you do that? You have to have GOOD compost. That means checking the compost for organisms.

If you don't bother making sure you have the organisms, just quit now and apply toxic chemicals for the rest of your life.

Not checking to make sure you have what you THINK you have is like assuming that when someone says there's anti-biotic in your medicine, it is actually there. Why do we have the FDA? People try to sell bad things all the time. Regulations are unfortunately necessary.

Lynton wrote:
"Also, of course, the result of the NPK mindset is that what Se there is has been further locked out). Isn't there a case for 'dosing' the soil (via compost preferably) (or plants or animals) with the likes of Se, Cu, etc?"

Only if you REALLY are out of nutrients. And we are looking at the FACT that there is NO AGRICULTURAL SOIL, in the US or in Austrailia where we really have LOST anything!!!!!

Do you have soils in NZ where you have actually lost, completely, or to below plant-requirement levels, any nutrient? I am not aware that anyone has ever documented that. Perhaps the nutrients are not available, but that doesn't mean you need to add back in more nutrients. It's a waste of your money, and destroys water quality.

Lynton wrote:
Then there is the question of soil type. For example could a sandy soil be lower in nutrients and need suppliments? (extreme case: sand itself).
Any hard data for that? No - there's plenty of any nutrient in any soi, straight sand or otherwise. The nutrient is present in the soil - not available, perhaps, but again, that doesn't mean you add more of something you already have plenty of.

Lynton wrote:
And thirdly, what about climate? I am thinking that a wet climate would
have more opportunity to leach minerals, while a dry climate would retain
them (one of Albrecht's theories).
That's the theory, of course. But where's the data? All we have is that exchangeable nutrients are lacking.

That doesn't mean add something that is in plenty in your soil. You have to get the biology back. That's all, They'll move those nutrients from the huge storage concentration of nutrients, but not-available nutrients, into the available nutrients.

Why buy something you don't need? Get the biology back, and never add more chemicals.

This has been an eye-opener for me. I've been saying, you have to add back into the soil the nutrients you take off in the crop.

But the DATA show that is not true! We have 15,000 years of PO4 sequestered in most ag soils. You don't need more!

Lynton wrote:
I've done a bit of reading of different theories recently, and one thing
that stands out is the health of plants and animals grown on the
Albrecht-Reams-Beddoe chemical approach. And when I buy vegetables and fruit (organic of course), most have blemishes and don't keep long - signs of lack of health, and I'm assuming mineral deficiency. (One exception that stands out in memory is some BD apples grown in Hawkes Bay).
Lynton, think this through. Just because you stop using toxic pesticides, have you got your biology back? Properly balanced?

No. Many organic people do not make compost properly. They kill the biology by using copper sulfate, rotenone, peroxide, and so forth. Aren't those toxic chemicals? what's the effect on the biology?


Albrecht - Reams are looking at EXCHANGEABLE nutrients. Are the nutrients in your soil in a plant available form? No, they aren't.

Why not? You don't have the biology you need to make teh nutrients available.

Start working on how you get the biology right. The sign that you are doing it right is when you don't need to add nutrients, when your roots are down a metter or more into the soil. Easy to assay? Sure.

OK? Did I make the message clear this time? I apprecaite you asking when something I say isn't clear. and I apprecaite that your resopnse isn't nasty, attacking or arrogant. I try my best not to be any of the above, but sometimes I don't always get the fact that people take what I say as me attacking. Hope you don't interpret my response in that light. Just trying to be arrow-clear.

Elaine R. Ingham


Bill George, Message 7 of 49 , Aug 29, 2004

I have a question about aeration bubble size. I have read elsewhere that
smaller bubbles disturb fungal developement in ACT; That larger bubbles
are preferred. However, there does not seem to be a "bubble adjustment" on
the air stones available from the fish tank store. Is there a FAQ or a
discussion on bubble size?

Thank you, Bill George

-, Message 8 of 49, Aug 29, 2004

Typically a compsot tea machine will come with set size for bubble production.

All the tea makers that SFI works with (see the website) have made sure their bubble sizes are not the MICRO sizes.

If your bubbles move upward in the water column at a normal rate, then you can be pretty sure your bubble size is not too small.

On hte other hand, you don't want huge bubble sizes either, because then your don't get enough surface area for significant air exchange to occur. So, bubble sizes in the range of 1 mm to 1 cm would probably be the best.

And the way to test is to assess teh biology in the brew. Get a small microscope, or find a Soil Foodweb Advisor near you who can test for you, or send the samples into the SFI lab for the qualitative assessment. Two days from end of brewing is the max time to get teh sample in to be assessed. your choice how you want to do it.

Right now the SFI website does not list the qualitative assay, but just write that on your submission form, and we'll do it for you - bactreia, fungi, protozoa, nematode qualitative assessment (bad, ok, good, excellent categories, plus what that means) on your report. Cost? $25 per sample.


Elaine R. Ingham


L Blair, Message 9 of 49, Aug 29, 2004

Elaine, I can't thank you enough for your reply!
You said : "Just trying to be arrow-clear".
Well, it just so happens that I need that! It has come at a valuable time
for me, as I was getting ready to invest in the CEC approach in a big way.

As I have outlined before, I have been struggling with the various
approaches to growing food and managing soil. Its interesting that I learnt
first from Sir Albert Howard "An Agricultural Testament" and his wife Lady
Eve Balfour "The Living Soil". And this was more than 25 years ago!

Somehow I did not come across the CEC merchants until recently; at least
they do tell a story that avoids pesticides. However, the question in my
mind about high Brix readings was a worry about having excess raw elements
in the food. And this could lead down an interesting pathway...

However, in the light of what you say (and I must say that I respect your
scientific approach very much), I prefer to go down the approach you suggest
(which should be a VERY interesting pathway!!!).

So thank you for making your message clear for me.

Best regards, Lynton (who never intends to flame, BTW; life is too short!)


L Blair, Message 10 of 49, Aug 29, 2004

Oh, Elaine, I have to ask
what about Calcium? (I'm assuming that you do mean ALL elements are present).


Mike Harvey, Message 11 of 49, Aug 29, 2004

Elaine R. Ingham wrote:
"........OK? Did I make the message clear this time? I apprecaite you asking when something I say isn't clear. and I apprecaite that your resopnse isn't nasty, attacking or arrogant. I try my best not to be any of the above, but sometimes I don't always get the fact that people take what I say as me attacking. Hope you don't interpret my response in that light. Just trying to be arrow-clear......"

This seems like great info however would you be able to point us to the data that supports this. I have not seen the data that shows this to be the case. I am not saying this is not the case I am just asking where the data is that shows there is no need to add any minerals and that the soil biology can release all the required minerals. I would say that I am beginning to see this on my farm however it would be good to have the data that shows this "to be scientific" to be able to proceed with confidence in a certain direction and to be able to advise others to do the same.

It should be noted that the addition of inorganic minerals has been very sucessful and soil biology has benefited. Case in point on the volcanic plataux in N.Z the addition of Cobalt stopped cattle from dying- called bush sickness. Cobalt and Selenium in Western Australia - allowed sheep to be farmed. Similar examples come from Texas I believe?? I could go on.
Super phosphate in west aus and Queensland has been beneficial to soil biology and earth worm numbers.
I do however believe that without the soil biology, as you promote, these systems will not perform.
It is clear that we need to release calium and Phosphate from the soil and make it available - this can only be done with soil biology. How much compost tea is required to do this on western australian soils??
I hope to be able to tell you this in the future.
It is clear that the bank of phosphate in our soils is waiting to be unlocked by the Golden key-the only key that seems to fit this is soil biology and compost tea is the lock smith.
If there is data available now, showing this, - trials etc then it would be great to have this info so we can proceed with greater accuracy.

Mike Harvey,

-, Message 12 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

Hi Lynton -

I never internd to flame either, but sometimes people read that into what I write. Getting the tone right in an e-mail is sometimes hard. I've learned to through a GRIN! in there when I'm being cute, so people don't take it wrong.

And I'm glad you take the responses the way they are meant!

I think that getting calcium into the soil if you have too low Ca:Mg is important, but you need to add that in the compost, not as a mineral addition. The mineral addition means negative impact on the microorganisms. Killing the very organisms you need to help!

Elaine R. Ingham

-, Message 13 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

Let's go back to what I said in my e-mail.

Working with Graham Lancaster at Southern Cross University, we have the data showing that no nutrient element is limiting in any soil. the total extractable nutrients - N, P, S, Fe, Ca, Co, whatever - were not in any way even close to the limiting level in any ag soil in Australia.

Ok, Do we all have that fact clear? Don't add any other interpretation to that piece of information. No other extrapolation. This is fact. I will get the data to show you and post it to the e-zine. Graham and I will work on a paper to be published in a scientific journal.


Then, the next step is, what makes nutrients available? That means, what solubilizes nutrients? And what we mean by that is, what moves a nutrient from the total extractable pool, which may not be available to plants, into the exchangeable pool, which are nutrients in the soil solution, which are nutrients available to plants?

The only way to do that is through the action of organisms. Many papers have been written about hte phosphate-solubilizing bacteria. I don't really have to put up a list of those references, do I? There are thousands of papers about nitrifying bacteria. there are hundreds of papers about nutrient cycling occurring through the actions of protozoa, nematodes and microarthropods. The Soil Biology Primer, the Ecological Monograph by Ingham et al in 1986, any of David Coleman's books, papers by Paul Hendrix, Darvid Wardles' book, all cover this topic quite well.

There are papers about how microorganisms move any mineral from the not-soluble pool to the soluble pool of nutrients. It is in the scientific litereature. Maybe Steve Diver has reviewed it on the ATTRA website.

Now, you bring up the fact that addition of inorganic nutroents can improve plant growth.

I am NOT disputing that. This isn't an attack on the fact that when AVAILABLE nutrients are not present, that addition of available nutrients helps plants grow.

But the real question is, why aren't the nutrients that are in your soil available? why are they stuck in a plant un-available form?

Answer: the biology has been killed, or wasn't there to begin with.

How did the biology get killed? Inorganic fertilizers and pesticies.

How to get the biology back? Compost, compost tea.

How much compost tea? We need to do studies to figure this out. Neither you nor I can make recommendations without data. How much biology is required, and what are the foods needed, to keep the organisms active?

the data are not present for each nutrient element. We have some clues for Ca, and for N.

compost tea added at 100L/HA as soil drenches, 25L/Ha for foliar applications. You may need "kick-starts" of Ca, and fungal or bacterial foods to get things going. Testing your soil to determine whether the kick-start has happened is necessary.

Elaine R. Ingham


Vida na Terra, Message 14 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

Dear Dra. Elaine R. Ingham

I must start by, thanks for your last few mails on this topic, it has answered some of my questions but on the other hand some still remain, so I will ask now.

Due to high inorganic fertilizers applied without due care, soils in greenhouses have become phyto-toxic due to excess availability of nutrients. All soil analysis we have done, report low Ca. The Ca:Mg ratio going from 1:1 to worst (in clay soil). In one case the Mg was 2,5 times the Ca on a sandy soil, the soil behavour like clay, when wet soggy & sticky and when dry cracking. COCa was applied and most problems went away. We have noticed that prior to the Ca application, CT didn't made a diffrence but now it works.

In our case, my conclusion is that in this extrems we need to apply the Ca even if this can kill some microbs (which hopefully will be the ones that are causing the root rots) and follow from then onwords CT and compost with Ca to keep on the correction.

Please comment

Best Regards Joao Ventura


Jeff Lowenfels, Message 15 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

<<<However, there does not seem to be a "bubble adjustment" on
the air stones available from the fish tank store>>>

Which is one reason they are not recommended anymore. Plus, they can
accumulate biofilm.

cheers, Jeff L


Ted Peterson, Message 16 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

My experience is that if you get the soil biology right, there is no need to add any further minerals. In tests I did, the CEC remained the same after a long period without the addition of minerals. Tradition states that the plants should have used up the available minerals and there should have been a deficit which means adding minerals and other nutrients.

It is difficult to remember that when dealing with biology, you need to think differently from the ways you were taught or the indications from labs and manufacturers. Lab data has to be intrepreted differently because lab data, for the most part, doesn't take into consideration healthy biological activity. Soil analyses only look for amounts not the ability to create amounts.

Think of it this way. You take a soil test. It shows low in say Ca. It doesn't show that you have a warehouse full of Ca that will be applied in the next week. You have to think of healthy biology like a warehouse full of nutrients and minerals that are only made when the plants need them. There is no resevoire in the soil because that isn't the way nature works. It's more like a direct pipeline to the warehouse: The plant needs something and it sends out messengers. The bacteria uses the messengers and as a byproduct produces the mineral/nutrient the plant needs. The plant uses the byproduct and stops sending out messengers until it needs the nutrient again.

Now, this all takes time. It takes a certain amount of time for the biology of a soil to change and stay healthy over a long term. If you absolutely have to have it tomorrow for what ever reason, using compost tea to restore your soil biology might not fit into the deadline you are faced with. In that case, it is probably prudent to directly apply minerals/nutreints to solve the immediate problem. To avoid having to do emergency type actions in the future, you should start on a program that reestablishes the soild biology and fungi consistent with your local area. When you have that done, you will be surprised at how little you have to do to the soil to keep it healthy.

I have a city park going on three years with nothing added but water and a shot of compost tea twice a year and it is the healthiest park in the city.

Ted Peterson


dkemnitz2000, Message 17 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

---Elaine I'll talk to some folks at KSU and get back. I might be
able to do some direct microscopy here in North-Central Kansas
although that's a pretty big "might" at this point cause I've only
used direct methods on Coors beer to identify beer spoilers
(Pediococcus sp, Pectinatus sp, Lactobacillus sp, and wild yeasts)
raw milk enumerating somatic cells and total counts(I thinkit was?,
It HAS been a while), and for determining ratio of rods and cocci in
mozz cheese starter. Those are all pretty interesting until they
become daily jobs! Teaching would be CHALLENGING to say the least.
Doubt that I could get that organized these days. At this point I do
try to get more facts to the toxic chemical folks whenever I can
strike up a conversation about farming methods. Seems like teaching
soil food web concepts and showing practical applications of it
across America are necessary to move away from toxic chemical
farming. I'm sure it's not that simple, either. A teacher would need
a GOOD set of slides (or the computer generated show and tell show)to
do that though, eh?

Dennis Kemnitz


Steve Diver, Message 18 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

The insights from your work with Graham Lancaster are
fascinating, Elaine, thanks for sharing.

In the late 1980s Eric Kindberg, an organic farmer
who lived here in Arkansas, was the U.S. distributor
for the Keyline Chisel Plow, also known as the
Yeoman's Slipper Imp in the early days.

Yeomans likewise said that soils are full of phosphates
but are locked up and need soil biology -- thru humus
farming practices that feed the soil; i.e., composting,
cover crops, pasture grazing, subsoiling -- to solubilize
the phosphates and make P available.

There might be a paper from his work in Australia
that you can also draw from.

Steve Diver


Jeff Lowenfels, Message 19 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

Hi Doc (and others),

Has any one you know tried using compost tea to control clover in
lawns? My theory is that since clover is a nitrogen fixer and nitrogen
fixing bacteria require alkaline soils, that good strong fungal teas
would lower the pH enough to make the fixers and thus the clover,
disappear. What am I missing?

Cheers, Jeff L


Robert Norsen, Message 20 of 49, Aug 30, 2004

Are you missing the wonderful value of cloer in lawns, gardens and fields? Helps keep the lawn green in the worse dry weather. Helps keep the lawn healthy. Why is grass the only thing of beauty in a lawn.?


Steve Bridges, Message 21 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

Clover is nature's way of remedying compacted, low N soils. In soils with enough N you won't find clovers. Not enough N in tea? Still need a good organic fertilizer?

My backyard grew thick with burr clover in the unimproved soil when the house was first built. Since that area has been turned into a vegetable garden, with compost and other soil amendments added, the clover has disappeared. My soils are slightly acid...

Missing? Aeration, remineralization, and paying special attention to getting some N out there.

Steve Bridges


Mike Harvey, Message 22 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

Thanks for your comprehensive reply and the excellent stream of information you present.
The concept that you are promoting is radical, because of this it must be supported with convincing evidence.
As far as I am aware most of the consultants and researchers involved with biological and organic farming have found that the addition of minerals has been critical to the success of biological systems. Reams Albrecht arden andersen, Kinsey the list goes on, have all advised the use of mineral applications.
What you are saying seems to go against this body of work, hence the need to present sound evidence - data.
I will be looking forward to the next ezine.
I will be setting up a trial to verify this concept and get some idea on rates and frequency required to get the desired result for our soil types and conditions.
"........How much compost tea? We need to do studies to figure this out. Neither you nor I can make recommendations without data. How much biology is required, and what are the foods needed, to keep the organisms active? ............." Elaine
The theory of what you are saying seems perfectly logical and reasonable however I want to see it working on my farm before I get too excited!!
Once a demonstration site such as this was established in my area I am sure people would sit up and take notice of this approach.

regards Mike Harvey


Trisha Shirey, Message 23 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

I agree with Jeff. Clover is a good early source of nectar for ladybugs and other beneficials. The leaves are often full of ladybug eggs. The spots where I have white clover in spring are the healthiest in summer. Why do we embrace diversity in agriculture but insist on monoculture lawns?

Trisha Shirey


Jeff Lowenfels, Message 24 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

Thanks Steve, I agree with all you wrote about clover. What I am
looking for is some way to help my readers who are applying teas.
Aeration is at the top of the list, but I specifically wanted to ask if
anyone had fooled around with fungal teas.

Thanks again! jeff


Ted Peterson, Message 25 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

Clovers appear when grasses are stressed. They are considered broadleaves. The problem with these in lawns is that they restrict the lawn growth because they are nutrient hogs. Yes they are green and can fill in bare spots but healthy lawns will have minimal clovers.

Now, there is a type of clover lawn that is popular in So. Cal. In this lawn, you want to minimize blade grasses. Most lawns are blade type grasses like fescues and ryes and in these lawns, broadleaves are generally considered a problem.

When you get a healthy soil biology for your lawn, the root mass increases and the lawn more effectively uses existing nutrients in the soil and also sends out messengers to the bacteria that produce the byproducts that the blade lawns like. These lawns outcompete the broadleaves and use up soil space where the broadleaf root mass would normally grow.

Read the report I posted for a detail of how compost tea was used to increase root mass and reduce the incidence of broadleaf intrusion.

As a side note, blade lawns, as far as I can tell from my research, do not like it highly fungal. They are bacterial dominant grasses. So you want a tea brewed shorter with younger compost and little humic acids.

Ted Peterson

-, Message 26 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

Hi Joao -

You are exactly correct.

When the chemistry in the soil is severely messed up, the biology just can't deal with correcting it rapidly. when you are in the condition where Mg far exceeds Ca, then, yes, the first step is to get the chemistry right, then add the biology.

Excellent logic! Let me know how things continue to work out!

Elaine R. Ingham

-, Message 27 of 49, Aug 31, 2004

Nothing really all that new about hte concept, right? It's just having the data, which Graham will be publishing, so stay tuned!

Elaine R. Ingham

-, Message 28 of 49, Sep 1, 2004

Thank you Ted, for that support. You have observed what we are trying to document with some solid chemical and biological data. We all need to work together on this, so the more support that is possible, the better.

Good to hear from you.

Elaine R. Ingham

-, Message 29 of 49, Sep 1, 2004

We have the slide set! Those who want to learn how to use them, let me know!

Elaine R. Ingham

-, Message 30 of 49, Sep 1, 2004

I have seen this shift happen. Push proper fungal ratios, how the nutrients in the soil so clover doesn't ahve an advantage, and clover decreases.

When something in the soil prevents fungal growth, then this doesn't work. What "something"? Fungicide residues in the soil.

Elaine R. Ingham

-, Message 31 of 49, Sep 1, 2004

Exactly right, Mike. We need the solid data. The data from Graham Lancaster establishes that there is plenty of nutrients in soil, but we then need to document how many microorganisms need to be added, and how much food needs to be added, to get the microbes to solubilize enough nutrient to feed plants what they need.

Time to get to work.....

Elaine R. Ingham


Karl Miller, Message 32 of 49, Sep 1, 2004

I thought before the world became chemical oriented, clover was a common addition to lawn seed mixes. When Ortho could not figure out a herbicide that would not kill the clover....they started pushing the mindset to clover being a bad thing in the yard.

Karl Miller


Mike Harvey, Message 33 of 49, Sep 1, 2004

I am now understanding where you are coming from Elaine.

regards Mike Harvey


Thomas Giannou, Message 34 of 49, Sep 1, 2004


The thing that's perplexing to me is how are you going to tell where the plant nutrients are coming from? They may be in the soil in bound up form, but when you feed the microbes, how are you going to distinguish between the nutrients in the soil from the nutrients in the food you are putting down to sustain the soil life? In other words, how are you going to tie nutrients in the plant to those that only come out of the soil and not out of the compost you are putting down to feed the microbes?

Thomas Giannou


Vida na Terra, Message 35 of 49, Sep 2, 2004

Dear Dr. Ingham,

what is the slide set ? I would be interested in learning more about it.

Best regads Joao

-, Message 36 of 49, Sep 3, 2004

This is a slide set from a colleague in Australia, and I have his info. I need to turn the data into useful pictures, so I'll be doing that this weekend.

If you want a set of chemistry info, I'll send it to you. Also, remind me if it gets to be a few weeks and I haven't sent it, ok? Refer to the data as Graham Lancaster's soil chemistry slides, ok?

Elaine R. Ingham


L Blair, Message 37 of 49, Sep 3, 2004

Elaine, I'm very curious about this


-, Message 38 of 49, Sep 3, 2004

The information is where we - actually for the soil chem data it is Graham Lancaster at Southern Cross University - have been doing work looking at how the soil biology solubilizes soil nutrients that are NOT plant available into soil nutrients that are available.

The first set of data show that there is NO SOIL in Australia that is actually nutrient limited.

Yes, I know that you've been told all your life that Australian soils lack phosphorus.

But it simply isn't true.

There is PLENTY of phosphorus in your soils. And beleive me when I say PLENTY, I mean PLENTY..... as in enough that if you didn't add another drop for the next several hundred years, you would still not have any worries.

So, what's the story.

I'm talking about TOTAL EXTRACTABLE nutrients, while you've been mis-lead by salespeople into believing that the soil lacks phosphorus.

It may lack AVAILABLE phposphorus, but that just means you don't have the organisms to move the TOTAL EXTRACTABLE nutrients from that pool into the available pool.

It's a lack of the right organisms, not fertilizer, that is the problem.

Add biology. It's cheaper, because you only have to add them once, and as long as you don't kill them, or a natural disturbance doesn't kill them, you just have to feed them.

Oh, yeah. Have to feed them....... that means plants have to be grown on the land. No more fallow periods where no living plants are allowed. No more methyl bromide, vapam, telone, diazinon, dursban....... etc, etc, etc.

Not that you have been using these things, but probably they were used in or around your land, and where would the "good guys" be coming back from then?

If you are lucky to have bought native bush, and kept your critters fed, then congrats! Just feed them!

But I have the data from Graham, and I will send folks the data. Please realize that you need to credit Graham for his data if you use his information, and you cannot publish them. Graham will be publishing his own data, and so this would be for viewing only.



-, Message 39 of 49 , Sep 4, 2004

In response to Thomas' comment that we can't differentiate between nutrient in compost versus the ones that are solubilized from not-plant available pools of nutrients -

We don't need to differentiate between nutrients in compost, versus the not-soluble set of nutrients in soil.

Often, we don't have enough compost to put down all the needed-for-growth nutrients that you plants need.

What do you do then? Do you have to put down 1 to 3 tons of compost in order to feed your plant EVERYTHING from the compost?

Nope. Compost is really just an inoculum of the needed/desired diversity of organisms your soil needs. The organisms can solubilize any "additional" nutrients from the parent material itself.

Soils have worked that way from the beginning of life on earth. It's only in the last 50 years or so that people have started to imagine that natural cycling wasn't adequate enough.

And when weather conditions make it tough for the natural nutrient cycling to make it, then we can put down inocula, and the foods, to make sure normal nutrient cycling is operating correctly, and that soil will ALWAYS work the way it is supposed to.

Elaine Ingham

-, Message 40 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

Hi folks - don't download the download on my last e-mail. It's for the place we're considering moving next year. Sigh. The brain and the hands aren't connected sometimes......


-, Message 41 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

This is an excellent reminder........ Thank you for sending!!!!



L Blair, Message 42 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

Elaine, the attachment you sent "FairviewTermSheetSoilFoodWeb082204.doc" is not what you think it is!

Regards, Lynton


Thomas Giannou, Message 43 of 49, Sep 4, 2004


Elaine wrote: "In response to Thomas' comment that we can't differentiate between nutrient in compost versus the ones that are solubilized from not-plant available pools of nutrients"

Reply: Actually Elaine, I didn't say we could not differentiate between nutrients in compost verses the nutrients that are solubilized from non-plant available pools of nutrients. I was asking you, "HOW can we make the distinction between the nutrients in the compost and the nutrients bound up in the soils as to which of those nutrients end up in the plants?"

Elaine wrote: "Compost is really just an inoculum of the needed/desired diversity of organisms your soil needs. The organisms can solubilize any "additional" nutrients from the parent material itself."

Reply: I realize that compost is a source of certain soil life organisms. I also realize, as you say above that those organisms can solubilize "additional" nutrients from the parent material itself. By parent material, I think you meant the material in the compost. And that's at the heart of my question. There are nutrients being solubilized out of the compost materials that end up as nutrients in the plants.

Elaine wrote: "What do you do then? Do you have to put down 1 to 3 tons of compost in order to feed your plant EVERYTHING from the compost? Nope."

Reply: Elaine, you are preaching to the choir here. I absolutely agree that EVERYTHING does not come from the compost. BUT, with all the stuff (minerals, kelp, fish, etc) that gets added to the compost by so many people, I don't think it's valid to say that 1 to 3 tons of that kind of compost has an inconsequential amount of nutrients present which are apart from what is in the soils, to the point where you ignore the effect of those nutrients from the compost on the plants and then say the soils furnish all of the nutrients to the plants because of the action of the soil life. I think data needs to be collected about what nutrients are in the soil, what nutrients are in the compost, what nutrients are in the tea... before plants are growing. It would also be good to then test for what nutrients are in the soil and what nutrients are in and on the plants after they are grown.

The reason I'm stressing this point is that when someone writes a journal article that says all the nutrients are already in the soils and then you add compost with it's additives and diversity of soil life and CT with all of it's nutrients and soil life and then say the nutrients are coming out of the soil being worked upon by the soil life and don't even measure what nutrients are in the compost (total bound and unbound nutrients) or CT, I think there should be a problem with that journal article passing peer review. Anyways, it will be interesting to review the findings and the data about the nutrients from the various sources.

--Thomas Giannou


soilfoodweb, Message 44 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

Thomas -

Parent material is the mineral fraction of the soil. This is a standard soil term.

I did not say that there is an inconsequential amount of nutrients in 1 to 3 tons of compost. Please re-rread my e-mail.

When you consider soil that has less than 0.5% organic matter in it, and you need to have the total set of nutrients or even the exchangeable nutrients turned into available nutrients for the plants, you either have to add compost, with all of the great sets of available nutrients in it, or (!) you have to add compost so the great set of diverse organisms in it begin the job of solubilizing the massive set of nutrients locked up in the soil parent matterial.

You are trying to make it sound as if I was arguing against compost, when my message was nothing of the kind.

I don't like when someone tries to get argumentative, and tries to tell me I am saying something that I never said! Please stop doing that.

The organisms - whether from compost, or compost tea, will solubilize the massive set of total nutrients tied up in plant-not-available forms in the soil.

The point of my message was that INORGANIC FERTILIZER is absolutely a waste of people's money, except for that short period of time when you are trying to get the organisms established, and have to have soluble nutrients present for your plants don't die of lack of available nutrients.

Elaine R. Ingham


Ted Peterson, Message 45 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

I don't know about other people but when I use compost on turf I use very little. I usually use 1/4" to 1/2" if you measured it. So what am I trying to do? -
1. Transfer compost with bacteria/fungi already active.
2. Provide some organic matter to aid the active biology and the biology that will wake up when the turf is watered.

What am I doing when I apply compost tea?

1. Transfer the biology in a different form and at a magnified rate than compost.
2. Provide a minimum amount of food in the tea that can help wake up existing bacteria in the soil.

Minerals content will depend on how I brew my tea or make my compost. If I follow Lubeck (sp) methodology, I am providing mineral content in both my compost and my tea. If I have made good compost, I have diversity and will have minerals.

The key here is to get the sleeping biology woken up so it can start the process of dividing and eating that produces healthy soil and healthy plants and provide a baseline for higheer level organisms.

Just dumping a bunch of minerals and nutrients does not get the same result for one simple reason: These are applied directly to the plants and bypass the biology. None of the current land management practices that I have researched from a number of Universities even mentions achieving a healthy balance of soil biology. All the practices are directed towards the plants.

ACT is directed towards the biology.

Ted Peterson


Thomas Giannou, Message 46 of 49, Sep 4, 2004


I never said you are against compost and I have never entertained the thought. I am simply saying there are different sources of nutrients ending up in the plants (nutrients which are released from the soil by the organisms, nutrients which are in the compost, and nutrients which are in the various tea applications). There are also other sources of nutrients being added.

In your original message you were saying all the nutrients plants need are already in the soils (but are mostly bound up) and all we need to do is add compost / food with the organisms to release those bound up nutrients.

My question was that when we look at what nutrients are in and on a plant, how can we differentiate between the nutrients that are in the compost VS nutrients that are in the tea VS the nutrients that are released from the soils that eventually end up in a plant? You said "We don't need to differentiate between nutrients in compost, versus the not-soluble set of nutrients in soil. Often, we don't have enough compost to put down all the needed-for-growth nutrients that you plants need."

I read in your original message that you said all the nutrients were already in agricultural soils that plants need and that none need to be added. When I consider what people are adding to their compost and to their teas, and the fact that chelated minerals are in teas, then it's highly probable that those organic and inorganic nutrients in compost and tea are ending up in the plants.

It seems clear to me that data needs to be collected about the nutrients (organic and inorganic) made available from the compost as well as the nutrients being made available from various tea applications and the nutrients that are being solubilized out of the soils by the organisms when you consider what nutrients end up on or in any given plant. If you don't collect that data about the organic and inorganic nutrients that are in the compost, tea and soil, and somehow tie it to what ends up in the plants how are you going to present any relevant data about the nutrients that are coming out of the soil that are ending up in the plants? How are you going to define what nutrients are coming out of the soil when you also have nutrients coming out of the compost and the tea that are going into the plants?

In prior conversations about compost tea, you said compost tea was loaded with chelated minerals. If compost tea is being applied frequently, then it seems like there would be a fairly high probability that the inorganic elements that ended up in a plant have come from the tea. Lot's of people are putting trace minerals into their tea and into their compost.

What data can you present in this situation that shows how many nutrients are being made available out of the soils VS the nutrients that are being made available out of the compost VS the nutrients that are being made available out of compost tea applications and how can you tie that data to what actually ends up in or on a plant? I keep coming back to this question because it seems reasonable to know which source the nutrients are coming from that end up on and in a plant before claiming that the soil contains all the nutrients that plants need.

--Thomas Giannou


David Anderson, Message 47 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

Hi Elaine,

While I believe that most soils contain all the necessary nutrients
for plant growth, and I also believe that soil biology, along with
certain mechanical and chemical reactions are what makes those
nutirents availabe to the plants, I am not convinced that the
combination is guaranteed to provide all the nutrition that *any*
plant needs in *any* situation. (and I am not sure if you were saying
that, but it certainly *could* be read that way)

There are lots of limiting factors that do exist that will affect the
rate the microorganisms can convert the non-available nutrients to
available nutrients. Just off the top of my head I can come up with:

- physical barriers (nutrients inside grains of sand)
- population limiting nutrient for microorganism. (iron limiting
phytoplankton growth in southern oceans)
- minerals not in a proper balance to allow the most efficient conversion.
- different levels of non-availability.

So that even if the nutrients are there, and the biology is there,
doesn't automatically mean that they cam make the nutrients available
at the optimal rate for plant growth.

At some point, in some situations, giving the microcritters a little
boost of minerals that are a little "easier to chew" seems to make
sense to me. Get the critters doing their job to the best of their
ability, then if something extra is needed, you only need to add small
doses to reach your goal.

Of course, you didn't claim that there was never any need to add
additional nutrients, but that is an implication that could be drawn
from it.

It is certainly interesting data, and it will be even more interesting
to see how well the biology can do at releasing much of the locked up
nutrition in the so called poor soils. I guess that would be the next



dakesian1, Message 48 of 49, Sep 4, 2004

Dr. Ingham: Are you saying that most parent material has enough
nutrients to never need supplementation except for compost, or
compost tea?

-, Message 49 of 49 , Sep 7, 2004

Given these facts:

parent material is bedrock that being broken down in to sand, silt, clay fractions, and that this process never stops,

given that the parent material contains high levels of the nutrients that your plant needs,

given that the biology will makes these nutrients plant-available,

then, there is no need to add inorganic fertilziers. Ever. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THE BIOLOGY NECESSARY to solubilize the nutrients, and turn them into plant-available forms.

Your parent material contains the nutrients the plants need.

But, till your soil, and what happens? You will need to add compost, or compost tea.

If natural processes kill some of the organisms, then they will need to be added back. And foods will be needed to keep the organisms doing their jobs.

If you use cover crops, the plants will maintain the organisms through the non-crop parts of the year. Cover crops below permanent crops. cover crops that go dormant in dry parts of the year.....

But there is more than enough of any nutrient present in any soil. Hopefully, we'll get the data published soon......

Elaine R. Ingham


Die obigen Diskussionsinhalte werden in den folgenden Beiträgen interpretiert ..

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Mi 22. Jan 2014, 19:24 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
WOHER kommen die Nährstoffe für die Pflanzen und WER macht sie für die Pflanzen VERFÜGBAR und in welcher FORM ?

Topic: soil chemistry facts (49 Messages) Aug 27, 2004, Message 39 of 49 , Sep 4, 2004

In response to Thomas' comment that we can't differentiate between nutrient in compost versus the ones that are solubilized from not-plant available pools of nutrients -

We don't need to differentiate between nutrients in compost, versus the not-soluble set of nutrients in soil.

Often, we don't have enough compost to put down all the needed-for-growth nutrients that your plants need.
What do you do then?

Do you have to put down 1 to 3 tons of compost in order to feed your plant EVERYTHING from the compost?

Compost is really just an inoculum of the needed/desired diversity of organisms your soil needs.
The organisms can solubilize any "additional" nutrients from the parent material itself.

Soils have worked that way from the beginning of life on earth.
It's only in the last 50 years or so that people have started to imagine that natural cycling wasn't adequate enough.
And when weather conditions make it tough for the natural nutrient cycling to make it, then we can put down inocula, and the foods, to make sure normal nutrient cycling is operating correctly, and that soil will ALWAYS work the way it is supposed to.

Elaine Ingham

soilfoodweb, Message 44 of 49, Sep 4, 2004
Parent material is the mineral fraction of the soil. This is a standard soil term.
Parent material = Mineralischer Bestandteil der Erde, Fachbegriff

(1) Grobe Übersetzung des obigen Textes:

In Beantwortung zu Thomas Kommentar, daß man nicht zwischen Nährstoffen im Kompost und denen, die aus einem nicht pflanzenverfügbaren Bestandteil von Nährstoffen in der Erde herausglöst sind:

Wir brauchen nicht zu unterscheiden zwischen den Nährstoffen aus dem Kompost und den nicht gelösten = nicht pflanzenverfügbaren Nährstoffen in der Erde.

Oft hat man nicht genug Kompost um damit ALLE für das Wachstum benötigte Nährstoffe (needed-for-growth nutrients) zur Verfügung zu stellen.
Was macht man dann ?

Muß man 1 - 3 Tonnen Kompost ausbringen um die Pflanzen mit ALLEM was sie brauchen zu versorgen ?

Kompost ist nur ein Impfstoff (inoculum) der die benötigte/gewünschte Vielfalt an Organismen enthält, die die Erde benötigt.
Die Mikroorganismen können jeden "beliebigen" Nährstoff auch aus den mineralischen Bestandteilen (Parent material) der Erde herauslösen (in Lösung bringen und in gelöster Form den Pflanzen verfügbar machen)
Wenn die lokalen Bedingungen den natürlichen Nährstoffzyklus erschweren dann kann man Impfstoff/Impfkultur (inocula, inoculum) zusammen mit ihren Nährstoffen (= Mikroorganismen+Futter für die Mikroorganismen) hinzufügen damit der natürlichen Nährstoffzyklus wieder korrekt funktioniert; und diese (so behandelte) Erde wird IMMER so funktionieren wie sie (es natürlicherweise) sollte.

(2) Interpretation:

Ingham erhofft sich vom Ausbringen von Kompost Tee = Mikroorganismen + Nahrung=Zucker u.a. eine initiale Belebung des Bodens durch die Mikroorganismen, die dann die Nährstoffe für die Pflanzen herstellen.

Das kommt natürlich allen klagenden Landwirten entgegen, die kein organisches Material für die Kompostierung bekommen können oder sich die Arbeit der Kompostherstellung und Ausbringung ersparen wollen.

Ich kann es ja noch nicht glauben, daß Ingham der Meinung ist, daß Compost Tea die Kompostierung und besonders die zweite Stufe, die (menschengemachte) Humifizierung vor der Ausbringung, ersetzen kann.

Offen ist, ob und wie sich mit ihrer Methode der langfristige Humusaufbau vollzieht / vollziehen könnte ..

Über den Compost Tea nach Ingham kann man sich hier ausführlich informieren:

The Field Guide II for Compost Tea
by Ph.D. Elaine Ingham and Ph.D. Carole Ann Rollins (2008)
(Blick ins Buch möglich)

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Di 4. Feb 2014, 18:13 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Reason for use of Aerated Compost Tea (ACT) vs. Compost, Message 13 of 13 , Sep 14, 2007

Think carefully about why we use aerated compost tea.

The purpose is to add the greatest diversity of each group of beneficial organisms, and to make sure that the organisms that grow in the tea are the ones that will function in the habitat you are adding that diversity of organisms.

Properly made aerobic compost will contain a huge diversity of bacteria, fungi, protozoa and pretty good diversity of nematodes and possibly some microarthropods.

Brew at the temperature that will result in the growth of the organisms who will be active in the place you are putting the tea. Keep the brew aerobic so we select for the beneficial organisms. Use foods that will select for the growth of the sets of beneficial organisms that you want to encourage.

When applying to foliage, the organisms HAVE to be active and growing, or they don't stick to the foliage.

Clearly, applying compost to foliage doesn't do much good. Noting sticks to the leaves.

So you need to BREW tea to wake up that set of organisms that will be doing the work needed on the leaf, branch, blosson and fruit surfaces.

Do the organisms that are not awake and functioning at the particular temperature/food/aeratoin combination used in brewing survive and begin to function once they reach the leaf surface?

As long as a goodly amount of the awake set of organisms stuck themselves to the leaf surfaces, the rest of the organic matter in the tea, and the other, not-awake set of organisms stuck as well, because they got attached by the action of the awake ones. Remember that where bacteria and fungi live is on surfaces, and then when the awake ones, attached to the organic matter bits, also stick to the leaf surface, they will glue down all the other organisms still asleep on that organic matter as well.

As conditions on the plant surface begin to change, then those previously dormant, sound asleep organisms will wake up and start to function. As temperature shifts, as food resources put out by the plant appear, then other species will be selected.

Is the leaf surface aerobic? <lol> Hard to imagine a more aerobic place, huh?

Will the plant put out foods (called exudates) to feed exactly the set of organisms it needs? Absolutely.

Will protozoa and nematodes cycle nutrients from the compost material and release plant available nutrients? Absolutely.

Will these available nutrients be taken up by the plant? If the stomates open, and there is the least amount of moisture on the leaf surface (dew works just fine here), then those nutrients will be taken up by the plant.

When we apply to the soil, I think putting down compost is probably a bit better, if you have a way to apply the solid in an inexpensive manner. Apply compost where you need instead of broadcasting [= apply/spraying aerated compost tea (ACT)], possibly.

If you are going to water your plants, then it is a good idea to add compost tea to the water, whether that water goes on the foliage or on the soil. Constantly add to the diversity of the organisms in your growing system. Will it help? Probably. It isn't going to harm anything, as long as you are checking and making sure that both the compost and the tea being made contains the beneficial sets of organisms.

Elaine Ingham

"When we apply (aerated compost tea (ACT) or compost] to the soil, I think putting down compost is probably a bit better"

Aha! Die Begründung dafür wird von Ingham nicht geliefert .. muß also noch aufgeklärt werden.

Ebenso eine Definition folgender Begriffe:

awake microorganisms
growing microorganisms

not-awake microorganisms
dormant microorganisms
not functioning microorganisms
asleep organisms
-> im Vergleich zu "Dauerform, Zyste"

beneficial microorganisms

Aerated Compost Tea (ACT) [es gibt noch andere Formen von "Tee"]

Die Botschaft: Aerated Compost Tea (ACT) ist gut für alles Oberirdische der Pflanze, Kompost ist gut zum Aufbringen auf die Erde.

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Mi 19. Feb 2014, 12:00 

Registriert: Do 23. Jan 2014, 19:48
Beiträge: 44
Hallo Winfried,

"We calculated how many years' worth of phosphate was actually present in wheat filed soil in Australian, soils where growers have been told they needed to add thousands of dollars of PO4 because there was no phophate present. There was 15,000 years worth of phosphate present in that soil (something like $48,000 worth of "fertilizer"), if that phosphate could be made available to the plants."
(Wir haben berechnet wieviele Jahre an Vorrat an Phosphat sich wirklich in einem typischen Weizenfeld Boden in Australien befindet, Böden bei denen den Landwirten gesagt wurde, dass sie tausende von Dollar für PO4 ausgeben müssten, weil es dort kein Phosphat gäbe. Es gab dort in diesem Boden Phosphat für 15.000 Jahre (Anm.: fünfzehntausend! Jahre) (was irgendwas um die 48.000 Dollar an "Dünger" entspricht), wenn dieser Phosphat für die Pflanzen verfügbar gemacht würde.

Vielen Dank für das "Herausgraben dieser Yahoo-News-Diskussion! Dass es im Boden genügend Mineralstoffe gibt habe ich erst vor kurzem gelernt, Dank der zwei Artikel von Elaine Ingham auf den Seiten des Rodale Institutes. Dass es aber so viel ist hätte ich nicht gedacht. Diese Infos werde ich jetzt versuchen so weit wie möglich überall zu verbreiten.
Das ist ja wirklich der Hammer wie die Landwirte aber auch wir alle verarscht werden von der Chemie- und Landwirtschaftsindustrie!
Was habe ich mir in den letzten Jahren unter anderem wegen dem angeblichen Phosphat-Problem den Kopf zerbrochen und nach Lösungen im Internet gesucht, um eine Hilfe zu finden.

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Mi 21. Mai 2014, 20:01 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Ingham on Effective Microorganisms EM

Can EM1 and vermi-compost-tea co-exist?

Burkhard Kiehne Message 1 of 15 , May 14 4:28 PM

Starting a small organic farm operation we are still looking for fundamental questions concerning microbes. EM1 is obviously anaerobe while vermi tea is, of course, is aerobe. Can both systems live side by side or do they cancel out each other, do they add more variety or do some of the EM microbes convert to aerobe dissimilation? How does EM1 fit into a mostly aerobe organic farming in the first place?
dansquest2005 May 17 5:13 AM

Hi Burkhard,
I made my own EMOs this winter. Smelled like a creamery when done. I think EM1 is just another tool for biological gardening. I think bokashi if done correctly is a means to recycle a greater percentage of food waste and scraps. I may use it as a method in creating worm food. I think Dr Ingham is wise to have people to err on the side of caution and keep most of the process aerobic and if you decide to dabble in the anaerobic one best be well informed and have the wherewithal to know the dangers.
John Bridges May 17 1:33 PM

Most, if not all the organisms in EM are facultative, not anaerobic.
As EM produce enzymes that allow them to function in both aerobic and anaerobic environments as well as in conditions in between.

There isn't a black and white line fixed at 6 PPM oxygen that separates aerobic good guys from anaerobic bad guy organisms. A lot of what we desire in our soils, compost and teas start dying off at like 6.5 PPM oxygen.

Things like E coli and salmonella are better known facultative organisms. They too can survive in both aerobic and anaerobic environments.

But if in a constant aerobic environment? Purely aerobic organisms, given time, will out compete them. Same thing with EM.

I think that people seeing the most benefits from EM have soils cycling between being aerobic and anaerobic.

But to directly answer your stated question would depend on what you're calling vermi tea.

Is it the liquid anaerobic leachate coming out the bottom of a overly wet worm bin? Whose very existence means you're making a mistake. Here EM would have value. Just not as valuable as keeping your worm bin a bit dryer and better aerated.

Or are you properly calling worm made compost and/or worm manure that has never went anaerobic, used to create properly made AACT, vermi tea? Then incorporating EM would lower over all diversity of your good guys and be a mistake.

The over all strength of a healthy soil food web isn't a handful or two of overly aggressive species of beneficial microbes.

It is having millions to hundreds of millions to billions of different oxygen breathing beneficial species of life in our soil.
Burkhard Kiehne May 18 4:35 AM

When you "activate" or extend EM1 you dilute it with water and add molasses. It is recommended to cover the mixture air tide with little or no air inside. That means this process is at least at this stage anaerobe. EM opens the door to ferment meat and animal parts which will be hard and may be dangerous in an aerobe compost pile. It is recommended to bury such wastes for some weeks in the ground. My guess is to convert it to an aerobe system. But that is just my guess. If you apply at any time during this process vermi tea, what will happen? Does it interrupt or benefit the process? Since bokashi is also produced under absents of oxygen it should also be anaerobe. Bokashi is known as a good fertilizer. How does this fit together with vermi tea?
dansquest2005 May 18 7:03 AM

Hi John,
One of the EMOs components lactobacillus is facultative anaerobic or microaerophilic basically an anaerobic microorganism. Going anaerobic can't be a death sentence. It is best in brewing compost tea not to but many fermentation processes go anaerobic. I think in trying to grow things aerobic is best but in composting, taking a look at some portion of it going anaerobic might be part of a solution to recycling and speeding up the process.
Elaine Ingham May 19 9:00 AM

Please look at what lactobacillus produces as it growa........ acids which if allowed to be anaerobic for very long will drop the pH to 2 to 4.

Death sentence? How many plants grow at a pH of 4?

Lactobacillus is used to produce yogurt, for example. The acids produced by these bacteria curdle the milk proteins, thus reducing the likelihood that other bacteria can use those milk proteins. Thus, a preservative.

Note that yogurt is refrigerated to stop the bacteria from causing the yogurt to get too acidic, because then people won't eat the yogurt. Or the bacteria in yogurt are killed by pasteurization at a certain point to stop the fermentation process.

Lactobacillus does not produce ammonia gas, but as ph starts to drop towards 3 or 4, lactobacillus species may begin to produce hydrogen sulfide, and the sulfur smell of rotten eggs will be produced. Meaning fertility is being lost.

Anaerobic processes are incomplete in their use of waste materials, and do not fully decompose materials. Now that might be fine if we liked to live in swamps, but we don't do well there, Anaerobic? Think swamp. Those are the processes being discussed. Would you put swamp water on your plant? Would you put fresh, still smelly swamp muck in your potting soil?
Elaine Ingham May 19 9:12 AM

I recommend a short course in food microbiology to answer these questions. Bokashi is fermented cabbage.... no molasses added, but lots of salt so the desired lactobacillus grows and not other things. Reduced oxygen, yes, in order to produce the acid to preserve the cabbage. Nearly every nation has their version of fermented cabbage or vegetables;, e.g., bokashi, or kimchi, or sauerkraut. In every case, lactobacillus is selected as the fermenting organisms because it makes a wonderful preservative called low pH lactic acid and sometimes vinegar as well.

Do you put sauerkraut in your potting mix? Would you know a better, faster way to kill your plant?

It is perfectly fine to compost meat and other animal parts in aerobic compost. As long as you understand that meat and organs are HIGH in NITROGEN, and the bacteria and fungi will have a party while eating these things, resulting in high temperature production if enough meat or organ tissue is present, and in the rapid use of all the oxygen. If conditions do not allow oxygen to diffuse into the material rapidly, then the mix will go anaerobic WITH ALL THE NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES that anaerobic conditions provide for. Loss of N, P, S, production of low acid conditions, pruction of the most toxic material known to kill plants, and other poisons.

So.......unless you have taken some food microbiology courses, and comprehend the various dangers of using anaerobic materials, don't go there.
Elaine Ingham May 19 9:36 AM


Thank you John
Elaine Ingham May 19 12:49 PM

There are specific uses for EM. There are specific uses for compost, compost extract and compost tea.

EM is useful if you have something that stinks to high heaven and you need to stop that smell from causing the health authorities from visinting you with an odor violation.

EM is useful if you have a swamp, cesspool, or other anaerobic nightmare and you need to start moving it along in the right direction.

Compost with the full diversity and sets of organisms (bacteria, fungi, protozoa, nematodes, hopefully microarthropods) that your plants need is an absolute necessity an a source of the organisms to turn your dirt into soil. Change the conditions in the dirt so the dirt turns into soil, and diseases don't flourish, nutrients will be retained, nutrients that are in the sand, silt, clay, rocks and organic matter are turned into plant available forms of nutrients so inorganic fertilizers are not needed, erosion does not happen, roots grow as deep as they can, reaching water that is held and stored in the well-structured soil high in organic matter, etc.

Compost extract and compost tea requires good compost with the right organisms in it to extract those organisms into the water.

Compost tea, needs to have foods to grow the right organisms at the start of the extraction/brewing so the organisms will become active and increase in number/biomass during hte brewing process. For organisms to stick to plant surfaces, they need to make the glues to allow them to stick to those surfaces.

Thus, which is the easiest way for you to get these organisms into all the places they are needed on your farm? Just recognize the differences in having a limited set (only 12 in EM, for very specific situations) of organisms, meaning few situations where it will be useful, versus a material, i.e., compost, with massive diversity (perhaps a million species or more), and huge benefits in many different conditions and situations.

Humans always keep things around that have very specific uses --- how often have you used that fire extinguisher? But when you need it, you can't be wondering where you left it. ``````````
norm cooper May 19 2:52 PM

Hello Elaine,
Your comments on the use of EM are disturbing to hear. Are you looking at the action of individual microbes or the action of the combination of microbes in EM. You constantly say that EM is acidic with a low ph. What is the ph of pasture roots?
I am currently undertaking research into animal health and soil health using EM as the basis of this work. Originally, I used EM to cure a bad dose of acidosis in cattle, which worked very quickly. Can you explain how an acid can cure an acid condition, please.
Burkhard Kiehne May 19 4:55 PM

Thank you so much. That clarifies a lot. Using blood in compost or soil instead of blood meal is therefore also not an option since it could become anaerobic. Animal waste like meat etc should better carbonized and ground up first before that goes into the compost pile, I assume before adding to soil. Making feeds more digestible remains one of the jobs of EM or IMO as a consequence.
Elaine Ingham May 19 5:37 PM

Not all plant roots alter the soil in the same way. The typical pH of soil around a grass root system is alkaline, while around perennial plants, pH is slightly (pH 6.8 to 6.5) to fairly acidic (pH 6 to 5.5).

Recent work has been showing that much of the attitude expressed by soil chemists for the last half of the 1900's was based on faulty controls and data. Root uptake of nitrogen in healthy soil, as opposed to the dirt they were doing trials in, does not cause the soil around the root to become extremely acid. The only time that happens is if the dirt is compacted and anaerobic. And in that dirt, the plant is typically sick, unhealthy and dies fairly soon, unless treated with chemicals to lengthen its life. Thus, scientists who only dealt with conventional agricultural systems thought that soil was acidic, but in fact, they were dealing with artifacts induced by the agricultural management that developed in the late 1800's and early 1900's. They weren't working with soil, but with highly compacted, anaerobic dirt.

In healthy soils, with growing plants, pH can be as high as 11 without detriment to the plant. Or as low as 5.5, depending on what the plant needs. Read any botany or plant physiology textbook: It is clear plants grow quite happily in SOIL with a pH range anywhere from 5.5 to 10.


EM, or Effective Microorganisms, is a fairly well-identified set of species of bacteria, along with, sometimes, yeasts, the facultative anaerobic or true anaerobic form of fungi. There isn't any argument about this from those who first marketed this mix of bacteria as Effective Microorganisms. You can use a microscope and discover this for yourself. Within the bacterial community, there are generally 3 to 4 species of Lactobacillus, several species of actinobacteria, three or four species of pseudomonads (now classified into different genera), and at times a species or two of Bacillus. If lucky, there might be as many as 18 total species, more typically 10 to 12 species, sometimes only 2 or 3 species, and at times I have been sold "EM" without any bacteria in it at all, by people representing that what they sold me was guaranteed to be EM. I certainly paid a pretty price for that water. So, you might see why I am sometimes a bit skeptical of claims. I want to see data, which is easily enough obtained, if folks know how to use a microscope.


According to the US National Library of Medicine, acidosis is any condition in which there is too much acid in the body fluids. There are a myriad of causes of this problem, based on which portion or system of the body is affected. Metabolic acidosis occurs when the kidneys can’t get rid of an acid buildup or when the body gets rid of too much base (see Wikipedia). There are myriads of causes for this condition and it is not likely that one "cure" will be effective for all the conditions causing acidosis.

Exactly how consumption of a culture of lactobacillus might affect mammals with one of a number of medical conditions that causes an inability of "kidneys and lungs to keep the body’s pH in balance" might be related to the KINDS of acids being produced by whatever is causing the acidosis condition versus all species and individuals of any Lactobacillus species which produce lactic acid from lactose, a type of sugar. If the bacteria do not make lactic acid from lactose, then those bacteria can't be placed in the genus of Lactobacillus. When using EM, the main bacterial species present are Lactobacillus.

So, a Lactobacillus culture might neutralize the stronger acid causing the acid-build-up problem. Possibly, if it is an anaerobic bacterium that caused the stronger acid accumulation, and if Lactobacillus could replace those bacteria producing the metabolic imbalance, then maybe the acidosis might be alleviated.

But those are some big ifs, and there would have to be clear proof. Easily enough obtained. But since EM was not mentioned as a cure in any of the reviews I read, I do not see that using EM to alleviate acidosis is considered a viable treatment. Acid build-up is a result of a change in metabolism, not simple warfare between different acids, or different bacteria.
Elaine Ingham May 20 10:31 AM

Any thing that contains easily used types of foods, such as simple sugars, simple proteins, amino acids, carbohydrates, you need to be really careful that the conditions are not those that allow extremely rapid BLOOMS of bacteria or fungi. When their growth is rapid, the danger is that they will generate high temperature, and rapidly use up oxygen faster than oxygen can diffuse into the material.

Care then also needs to be taken to NOT grind up the material too finely, or movement of oxygen will be limited, and as oxygen cannot diffuse into the area, the material will go anaerobic even faster than you might expect.
If there was excellent airflow, the meat was in small, but not fine chunks, and not in high concentration, then there MIGHT not be a problem. Keep the temperature low, to slow growth rates too. Be careful about not too much water, but not too little water.

EVERYTHING in nature is about balance. Change any one thing, you have to think through all the other things that will be affected and make sure the change you are considering is really beneficial.

When you think about meat, or blood, why burn it to make it less likely for organisms to use it slowly? Understand that it is a fantastic food to get organisms growing rapidly, elevating temperature and ridding a pile of diseases, pests and weed seed. Just make sure you know how little it takes of these high nitrogen, simple, easy-to-use foods to get the response you want.

so, EM or IMO as a pre-treat before composting...... yes.... especially if you are in an urban or suburban setting where it is critical to prevent odors. just be aware that you may well need another addition of beneficial aerobic bacteria, fungi, protozoa and nematodes to the starting materials to move the pile biology into the aerobic zone.
Elaine Ingham Message 15 of 15 , May 20 10:47 PM

Lactobacillus has a unique morphology which is highly identifiable. any microbiology text book will have pictures, as well as on the internet.

Bacillus species are quite distinctive as well, as are actinobacteria.

So, easily identified to genus in the case of EM.

Additionally, many people have used plate methods to isolate and then used biochemical testing to ID to species. DNA analysis has been done on EM as well. The results all come out about the same.


So richtig blicke ich immer noch nicht durch.

Auf jeden Fall billigt Annie Francé-Harrar den anaeroben Mikroorganismen eine bestimmte Rolle im Kompostierungsprozeß zu.
Allerding sind die Arten noch zu bestimmem.

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Sa 27. Dez 2014, 13:58 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Compost pile set up & ingredients

30427 Re: [compost_tea] Microbiological community during compost decomposition process ? ... ages/30427

Elaine Ingham

Mon, Oct 20, 2014 12:58 am

Why not add the fungi are the end, after heating and turning?

You can't make sure then that selection for just beneficial fungi has occurred, when you add something after all the important parts of the process are over. The fungi need to grow WITH the bacteria. Remember, we get rid of the bad guys in a thermal compost by reaching hot enough, long enough temperatures as well as by having the competition for foods, spaces, etc. We can't build structure in the pile to allow normal oxygen movement through the pile without fungi building macroaggrates right from the beginning.

So just turn to the least amount possible, by controlling the high N put into the pile. The high N is probably the most expensive thing that goes into that pile, so don't over-do on that part. Just enough, not too much, not too little.

Please realize that mycorrhizal fungi DO NOT GROW IN COMPOST PILES AT ALL. if anyone says they do, ask them to show data. We don't know how to grow mycorrhizal fungi outside of the root- fungus interface. No living roots in compost, no actively-growing mycorhrizal fungi. Spores, yes. Hyphae, no. to increase the number of spores, you have to add an inoculum you know is pathogen-free --- so lab grown, or from a place in the real world where you can be pretty sure there are no disease or pest organisms. and you are taking a chance when you assume a place is disease / pest-free without testing it.

Your description of how you are composting is a bit scary. You CANNOT be constantly adding materials laden with human pathogens to a pile, never reaching temperature, and say you are making compost. Decomposed food waste, yes, but not compost.

So, how should this be done?

Two choices:

1. Worm composting.
2. Partial static - thermal composting.

Let's go through a part- thermal composting - part static composting scheme, which works and serves those who want to do thermal, but have daily to weekly inputs of food waste they need to deal with.

(#1) Get a pile of the green - woody mix (green waste, as bad-stuff free as you can get it). The first load of food waste should go into the pile about a food or two above ground level. The wetter the food waste is, the higher the deposit should be above the level of the ground. We can't have human pathogens moving into the soil below the ground through leaching of water from the food waste. You MUST assume any organic matter touched by human hands is contaminated by human pathogens. Therefore, at least one foot above ground level is fairly dry, two feet of sloppy.

The deposit should be at least 2 feet into the pile, so any odors that develop form the not-completely aerobic
decomposition that might happen will be taken up within the pile and not escape. Can't have our N, S, or P escaping from the pile, so the organisms in the aerobic parts to the side and above the deposit must grab those nutrients before they leave the pile.

And, if those odors leave the pile they attract: any sort of fly, wasps, and any meat-eating vermin or predatory animal. They will dig into the pile to find what --- to them -- is making those delicious odors, and then spread your garbage all over the neighborhood. Your neighbors will never let you forget what happened (the morning I found used paper plates, napkins, ...... spread all over my yard) and might even make laws to prevent composting in the neighborhood.

So check your pile all the time for odors. If you smell bad odors, even the slightest bad odor, add another foot thick layers to the top of the pile, or enough of a layer that no bad smells will be detected.

(#2) The second deposit of food waste goes into the pile at the same height, same depth, but a little bit over from deposit #1. Far enough over that you aren't digging up any part of deposit #1, but not too far over that you are not using all the space you can in the pile.

(#3) The third deposit is same as #2, except a bit further along the pile.

Once all deposit sites are filled on the lowest level of the pile --- I usually put little flags in the pile to note where a deposit site has been filled so I don't accidentally uncover the slightly putrid spots of previous food waste, then I move up a foot, and fill the spots at that next level. Continue until all possible deposit sites are filled. the last deposit is at the top of the pile, straight down into the center of the pile. You are now finished with adding any food to this pile. Wait at least two weeks (maybe longer if you compost through freezing temperatures). Then add 10% high nitrogen to the pile and mix that in.

Now you do the typical thermal composting process, making sure that ALL PARTS of the pile get into the hot middle area, thus killing all the human pathogens. Temperature MUST be measured each day during the 10 to 15 days the pile will be hot. Not hot enough long enough ..... start over.

You can probably see some variations on this method, depending on the pile configuration you like best, and the height you can mange (I can't have piles anything about 4.5 feet, my back just won't take it anymore).

Of course, I give more details in the on-line course, so this is to just get you started doing things so it will be real compost, no pathogens, once you finish.

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Sa 5. Sep 2015, 08:18 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
The daily hype: Massage your compost!

Elaine Ingham Message 3 of 5 , Aug 24

"Purple Cow" (*) compost is often good (85% of the time, I'd say) ---- good fungi, protozoa, nematodes.
They do have their "opps" composts though, so getting the microscope out to check it is important.
Also, storage conditions can destroy the biology, so can't always blame the compost maker......

The amount of time that has to go into compost tea is why I prefer to make compost EXTRACT rather than tea.
Basically, just extract the organisms straight from the compost by vigorous massaging of the compost.
Treat the compost just exactly like a human muscle that is sore and needs a good massage.
No wringing, no sand paper motion, no scrubbing motions, just massage.
Vigorous massage.
About 30 seconds for a pound of compost is what is needed to extract the organisms.
Then apply the compost extract.

Tea has to be made if the application is to establish the right sets of organisms on the plant surfaces aboveground.
The organisms need to be growing, making glues and holding on instantly, in order to stick and stay on the surfaces aboveground.

But when applied to soil, not necessary to instantly stick! So, compost extract works fine, and less work.

So, I encourage you to make extracts when applying to most things --- soil, water, compost, mulch, etc.
Tea only if you have to deal with pests and disease organisms on plant (or animal) surfaces.

Today we moved from tea to extract - and still leave the now useless compost pile sitting useless behind us.

(*) "Purple Cow compost" ... leCow1.JPG
"rescues and reuses yard and brush residuals in 35 Wisconsin cities, as well as produce residuals from places such as Whole Foods and the Willie Street Coop in Madison." ... -Organics/ ... ised-beds/
https://simplicitysoil.files.wordpress. ... 04/241.jpg
Terry Benjamin delivered Purple Cow Compost. We used about 1 yard for the raised beds

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: So 25. Okt 2015, 10:06 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Worm Juice or EM (Effective Microorganisms)

Message 31047 4 of 5 , Oct 20 4:33 PM

Given the culture conditions in EM preparations, i.e.,
the extremely high concentrations of bacteria growing on the high amounts of foods added to increase microbial growth,
oxygen concentrations usually drop well below the 6 ppm concentration level, which is the threshold for the aerobic - anaerobic conditions.

Even if the culture is aerated, the growth of the microbes on all that good food outstrips the ability of nearly any aerator to maintain aerobic conditions.

EM usually contains more than just lactobacillus.
Dr. Higa *REQUIRED* that true EM had to have not only 5 or 6 species of lactobacillus,
but several species of actinobacteria, several yeasts, a couple Bacillus species and at least one species of purple, non-sulfur photosynthetic Cyanobacterium.
As Dr. Higa was the researcher who first noted the ability of these mixes of organisms to suppress clubroot
*which requires compacted soil condition* to be able to take over and cause disease,
and he strongly stated the importance of the diversity of organisms that needed to be present to achieve these results,
there had better be quite a few other species of microbes in EM than just lactobacillus.

Nearly all of the bacteria and fungi (yeasts are the reduced oxygen forms of fungi) in EM are facultative anaerobes.
If the cultures are are aerated enough, the facultatives anaerobes usually lose to any aerobic organisms than happen to fall in the tank.
Thus the addition of *quite a bit of bacterial food* into the culture, so the facultative anaerobes win.
*Lots of food*, rapid growth of bacteria, use up all the oxygen and voila, anaerobic conditions selecting for anaerobic organisms.

Elaine Ingham

Compost Teas, The Soil Food Web & Soils, Restricted Group, 2858 members

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Di 8. Dez 2015, 21:15 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240

Microscope photos of soil microorganismsm like they look through an ordinary microscope.

Very nice for comparing and identifying in your own microcope.

Obviously from Elaine Ingham although there is no impressum

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Sa 19. Dez 2015, 19:18 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Interview With Dr. Elaine Ingham About Her Research Farm

Dr. Elaine Ingham has a new farm as of March 2015.
In her interview she talks about the kind of research she wants to do now that she finally has land of her own.

Nach oben
BeitragVerfasst: Mi 17. Feb 2016, 22:16 

Registriert: Sa 12. Dez 2009, 18:31
Beiträge: 1240
Worm castings, Vermicompost & Mikrobiologie

Elaine Ingham Feb 15 2016 4:39 PM

Worm castings do not, willy-nilly, have more beneficial life than compost.

I've been unfortunate enough to have looked at "worm castings" that are just as bad as the worst manure you have ever seen. So you can't trust people to manage worms right either.

However, if they do manage the worms aerobically, with good fungal foods, then worm castings and thermal compost and static compost can be every bit as good as the others.

How do you tell? MICROSCOPE

Elaine R. Ingham
President, Soil Foodweb Inc.
Soil Life Consultant ... ages/31148

Auf Deutsch:

Regenwurmkompost bietet mikrobiologisch keine besonderen Vorteile gegenüber "normalem" Kompost.

Sag ich ja, aber mir hört ja keiner zu.

Jedoch: der Regenwurm ersetzt die teure Kompostwendemaschine und arbeitet kostenlos Tag und Nacht ohne Unterlaß.

Die Struktur des Kompost wir feiner und krümeliger - wenn man es braucht und bestimmte Pflanzen es verlangen.

Ich glaube, der Mais z.B. ist auch mit Gröberem zufrieden.

Nach oben
Beiträge der letzten Zeit anzeigen:  Sortiere nach  
Ein neues Thema erstellen Auf das Thema antworten  [ 13 Beiträge ] 

Alle Zeiten sind UTC + 1 Stunde

Wer ist online?

Mitglieder in diesem Forum: 0 Mitglieder und 1 Gast

Du darfst keine neuen Themen in diesem Forum erstellen.
Du darfst keine Antworten zu Themen in diesem Forum erstellen.
Du darfst deine Beiträge in diesem Forum nicht ändern.
Du darfst deine Beiträge in diesem Forum nicht löschen.

Suche nach:
Gehe zu:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Deutsche Übersetzung durch