Le Potager du Sloth: Gardening without fatigue more than Bio

[Did67]

... but if possible also in situ.

A scientific approach is quite difficult (perhaps impossible) in the merry mess of a real environment. At least with regard to the mechanisms ...

We can only establish correlations between such "treatment" and such results. But at the level of the mechanisms, we remain in the cabbages. However, I think that a lot of scientists are interested in the mechanisms. RNAs, peptides, macro-molecular mechanisms ... The "machines" to analyze have done spectacularly (following work on human genomes, in particular) and suddenly, everyone is a little toy in there. And for that we must "simplify" the living. Just study a factor. And so we do a little test in a sterilized pot, in which we introduce a mycorrhizal fungi and a plant ...

It is, I think, as much the consequence of fragmentation, the fragmentation of knowledge as that of lack of money.

With one major difference: in France, we no longer have the means for powerful agricultural research (INRA, in particular; CIRAD too) which over time excelled in this field, ranging from fundamental research to applied research [ we do not know enough that for his first "test tube baby", Frydman was directly inspired by the work of INRA]. This is the big problem. A significant part - the bulk - of the work of 'INRA is financed by research contracts for "private boxes" - which do not care about mycorrhizae, apart from one or two companies likely to market preparations such as IF TECH - and that we know how to do].

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

... but if possible also in situ.

A scientific approach is quite difficult (perhaps impossible) in the merry mess of a real environment. At least with regard to the mechanisms ...

We can only establish correlations between such "treatment" and such results. But at the level of the mechanisms, we remain in the cabbages. However, I think that a lot of scientists are interested in the mechanisms. RNAs, peptides, macro-molecular mechanisms ... The "machines" to analyze have done spectacularly (following work on human genomes, in particular) and suddenly, everyone is a little toy in there. And for that we must "simplify" the living. Just study a factor. And so we do a little test in a sterilized pot, in which we introduce a mycorrhizal fungi and a plant ...

It is, I think, as much the consequence of fragmentation, the fragmentation of knowledge as that of lack of money.

With one major difference: in France, we no longer have the means for powerful agricultural research (INRA, in particular; CIRAD too) which over time excelled in this field, ranging from fundamental research to applied research [ we do not know enough that for his first "test tube baby", Frydman was directly inspired by the work of INRA]. This is the big problem. A significant part - the bulk - of the work of 'INRA is financed by research contracts for "private boxes" - which do not care about mycorrhizae, apart from one or two companies likely to market preparations such as IF TECH - and that we know how to do].

That's what I feared one wonders why Selosse is working on it when he could probably earn much more by doing research on something else.

What is the future of agronomic research?
Not the search for ever more profitable productivity
But that of sustainable profitability

Not sure that the last researchers it is not us in the end ....

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

Nothing to do with the above but for info

https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr ... r=EPR-521-[france3regions] -20180718- [info-titre5] & pid =

[ChristianC]

Come on, I'll bring it back. In an excellent book that I know well, I write something like: "We still know very little about essential soil processes. Perhaps we are sending too many probes to Mars but not enough to our gardens?" ...

I was talking about humification (formation of humic substances from fibrous organic matter - cellulose, lignin).

This is also true for mycorrhizations. I looked for a reliable source (scientifically referenced) that gives the life expectancy of earthworms. I've found nothing. Just this "info" that I'm not sure at all, that worms live 7-10 years. Repeated from each other - which, to me, makes her suspicious!

But what surprised me is that Sélosse seems to ignore known "agronomic" things, such as the work of Fortin and the Canadians on the dependence of cultivated plants on P. That is more my "complaint". A little "researcher in his ivory tower?" [that said, I'll get his book, because scientific "prudence" also has virtues - he insists, as I have often done here, on the need for "controls" - in science, the sample without treatment ; what I call "all other things being equal" tests. So I wouldn't want my "scratches" to spoil the whole thing, which still lays an excellent foundation. It is up to everyone to then make their "conjectures" and "move", in real and concrete life, at the risk of being on the wrong track, insufficiently supported]

Yes Didier, get his book. I am happy to read it (Never alone) and I am sure you will get much more than me who opens me to this type of knowledge about symbiosis - which will allow us to benefit from your insights on what is happening under our gardens.

[to be chafoin]

There is clearly a threshold for vegetables, between 100 and 150 ppm P in the soil, at which the benefit of mycorrhizae decreases or collapses. On this basis, I recommend not to fertilize, at the risk of making the plant "independent" - since it easily finds what it needs - mycorrhizal fungi. The mycorrhizal fungus then becomes a parasite, from the point of view of the vegetable - "which has all it needs". Why would he feed him ??? Because this mushroom costs him (I did not note the figures of Selossus: up to 40% of the products of his photosynthesis; I often say 20/25% - I do not know if I am wrong). It is then the gardener who becomes dependent, because he took charge, at his expense, what the living system was doing [for the same reason, I advise against watering as long as the soil is stable and as long as the vegetables do not show obvious signs of wilting.

Just on these specific points since I just fell on it, here is the information of the book mentioned above, and given by Jeff Lowenfels, who, as you said, is not a researcher but a journalist.

He reports that some experts suggest that, "to establish and maintain arbuscular mycorrhizae, less than 80ppm of P or less than 75 micrograms of P must be present per gram of soil". But he immediately said that these figures "are controversial, because some plants easily form arbuscular mycorrhizae, even in the presence of large amounts of P".

Compared to the balance or imbalance of the symbiotic exchange, it would be "more than 20% of the carbon produced by the host plant which can be transferred to its partner fungus".

[Did67]

Yes. There is still a lot of "vagueness", but the orders of magnitude are there. And for practitioners, like us, in practice, it is clear: it is better not to bring P in an assimilable form or not to bring too much ...

It should be noted that Lowenfels' argument that some plants form mycorrhizae even in the presence of a lot of P says nothing about the effectiveness of this cooperation!

It is also obvious that keeping this symbiote costs the plant. But you have to be aware that it would often cost him (usually?) More to build a more developed root system, though less efficient ... So the fact that it costs 20 or 30% is again not to be taken literally (even if it's true), but to put in perspective. Take the train costs you. But you go further faster than if you go on foot. And if you go on horseback, it also costs you (hay and oats, even when you're not traveling).

One of the faults of Lowenfels is to accumulate pieces of knowledge. It's good. But without thinking globally as a "system", that is insufficient ... Hence the conclusion he arrives at: this absurd affair of "aerobic compost juice".

[This remains one of the best syntheses I know about soil life, treated systematically - all groups involved].

[to be chafoin]

Yes. There is still a lot of "vagueness", but the orders of magnitude are there. And for practitioners, like us, in practice, it is clear: it is better not to bring P in an assimilable form or not to bring too much ...

Yes, and for example do not bring too much in the form of manure. Lowenfels explains that the manure contains phosphate salt and that bringing too much can lead to an excess of phosphorus in the soil, excess that prevents the development of arbuscular fungi, even 100 years after intake!

What to reconsider with even more distances traditional farming practices of fertilization, even if these are sometimes put back in the taste of the day?

[Did67]

I think - but this is only my opinion - that this is to be nuanced strongly:

a) the fresh manure is not rich in P; it is even, for an "organic amendment", rather poor ... (the straw being poor); let's say "very average" [3,5 units of P / tonne with enormous variability according to the nature of the feed, according to the animal species, etc ...]

b) it is true that once the manure decomposed, the C having gone away, the minerals are concentrated; the P is not leached (or little) in the heap, so the content, relative to the gross tonne of manure, increases, where some of the nitrogen escapes as a gas and a part of the K is leached if the pile is not under a roof (which is rarely the case) ... [But there is not more than before; he's just more focused in less material!]

c) 100 years ????? In view of the few things that specialists know about mycorrhizae, I would call it a delusion ... I do not know on what serious basis, scientifically based, we can say that [there are some serious shortcomings - the paragraph on pH is a misinterpretation that would not escape a student of S terminus, which shows that synthesis, when not mastered, is a risky exercise].

A contribution of 40 gross tons / ha every 3 years [an average dose, today very little practiced! This is the equivalent of 4 kg / m² in the kitchen garden, ie 400 kg on 100 m²] brings about 350 units of P. It is indeed, quite significant and corresponds to the needs of the 3 cultures that will succeed one another.

[Adrien (ex-nico239)]

Willemse public site

So-called "mulch" or "mulching" helps protect the soil at the foot of raspberries. On the one hand, this technique will make it possible to make live the fauna which contributes to its development ....

What followed

https://conseils-jardin.willemsefrance. ... dium=email

My faith is better to read that than the opposite

[Julienmos]

greetings

I started harvesting some potatoes, some of my feet being well withered.

Tubers pretty beautiful, smooth and regular, although fewer than in previous years ... (they are Charlotte)

but most of all, alas, many have green parts ... even potatoes under the ground, with little depth certainly.

I do not know whether to attribute it to the very dry land for lack of rain, so cracked, which probably left the light ... the layer of hay (about 10 cm thick), not enough not to obscure enough.

These potatoes, I had not simply placed them on the ground with hay on top, but planted in an almost conventional way, 10 cm underground, and later I even proceeded to a "light" hilling, before add hay.

I had also tried a small row that I had almost no buried, nor buttées, but covered 30 cm hay from the plantation. And here, the harvested tubers are fewer and also smaller.