Register free!


Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #61  
Old 09-06-2012, 10:29 AM
Smallaxe Smallaxe is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central Wisconsin
Posts: 9,945
I remember as a kid working in the potato warehouses and noticing the blow sand that makes up this part of the country, stuck to the potatoes and being sifted of of the conveyors...

With all the fertilizer and all the irrigation, that blow sand was more of a muck type soil texture than a simple sand texture of soil, because of all the organic matter the fertilizer and water had produced over years of growing potatoes...

So if you want to say that you produce SOM w/out adding any OM,,, then I have to say that nothing holds a candle to what the potato growers of CentroWisco have done...
__________________
*
Now that I know that clay's texture(platelets) has nothing to do with water infiltration, percolation, or drainage
,,, I wonder what does...
*
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 09-06-2012, 10:30 AM
Lawn132012 Lawn132012 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 175
NattyLawn- I am no scientist but I know what I see with the SumaGreen Turf on lawns I have done. So with that said I did send in your question to Sumagreen to see what the technical answer would be so I would not give out wrong info. Here is what Jennifer sent back to me from Sumagreen: (Could not attach pictures / study they sent me but they were pretty impressive with difference in root mass and OM.)

OM is matter which comes from a once-living organism from either their waste or their decomposition. Our liquid application of microbes dramatically increases the microbial life in the soil which leads to greater OM. This increase in microbes can be measured by Formazan testing. The attached study shows 29% to 41% increases in the Formazan testing (done at Arise Research facility in Illinois).

Additionally, OM is increased by the more significant root mass of plant life grown with SG when they decompose. The attached picture from testing at Michigan State University (and included in an article posted on Forbes.com) shows the significantly greater root mass compared to the conventionally grown roots.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 09-06-2012, 10:54 AM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by NattyLawn View Post
I think you're the one being naive here. You can't continue to mine the soil without putting anything back and continue to get the same results. Conventional products don't build the soil!!!!! Farmers have to increase fertilizer use for the same or less yield, increased disease pressure (buy more fungicides!) and insect pressure that's getting worse as well (buy more insecticides!). The soil being out of whack causes everything else to be out of whack and you buy more fert, more insecticides, more fungicides. Who makes money off of that? Monsanto, Dow, Syngenta, etc.

Dr Zuberer works for TEXAS A&M!!!!! Who do you thinks funds a lot of his research? I'll give you a hint. It's not the makers of Sumagreen, Nutrients Plus, or any other organic product producing company. Sorry, I don't trust university studies. Most don't have any knowledge of organic products.

You call me naive, then spew junk about "building the soil"?! You're showing your lack of plant and soils knowledge with your uninformed claims about fertilizers and yields. Then, you try to use agricultural examples (incorrectly, BTW) to convince me that a lawn is analagous to annual grain or legume crops! This is EXACTLY what the microbial people want you to do -- confuse the issue and cloud the information with useless non-related bunk! Perennial crops grown for performance and aesthetics (lawns) behave MUCH differently than annual crops grown for yield. And, if you've followed agricultural production over the last 50 yrs, you would notice that fertilizer and pesticide use is a fraction of what it was just 20 yrs ago and that yields are much higher. 2 billion more people are fed using 60% less land. Doesn't sound like lower yields to me ....

Your funding claims are also way off base. The Bio Soil Enhancer people told me that they don't like university turf research becuase it doesn't give them the results they want. They know they can't pass scientific muster, so they would rather not even try to have it tested. They don't want you to know that the product doesn't perform as advertised. They did a couple of things at MSU years ago on crops (not lawns), but I notice that you don't dismiss those claims sipmly b/c BSE paid for them. Double standard?

Phasthound is correct that we are all entitled to our own opinions, but we are not all entitled to our own facts. The facts have been presented and are before us. Ignore them all you want. Just understand that science doesn't change because you want very badly ot believe in a product.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 09-06-2012, 11:04 AM
NattyLawn NattyLawn is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
You call me naive, then spew junk about "building the soil"?! You're showing your lack of plant and soils knowledge with your uninformed claims about fertilizers and yields. Then, you try to use agricultural examples (incorrectly, BTW) to convince me that a lawn is analagous to annual grain or legume crops! This is EXACTLY what the microbial people want you to do -- confuse the issue and cloud the information with useless non-related bunk! Perennial crops grown for performance and aesthetics (lawns) behave MUCH differently than annual crops grown for yield. And, if you've followed agricultural production over the last 50 yrs, you would notice that fertilizer and pesticide use is a fraction of what it was just 20 yrs ago and that yields are much higher. 2 billion more people are fed using 60% less land. Doesn't sound like lower yields to me ....

Your funding claims are also way off base. The Bio Soil Enhancer people told me that they don't like university turf research becuase it doesn't give them the results they want. They know they can't pass scientific muster, so they would rather not even try to have it tested. They don't want you to know that the product doesn't perform as advertised. They did a couple of things at MSU years ago on crops (not lawns), but I notice that you don't dismiss those claims sipmly b/c BSE paid for them. Double standard?

Phasthound is correct that we are all entitled to our own opinions, but we are not all entitled to our own facts. The facts have been presented and are before us. Ignore them all you want. Just understand that science doesn't change because you want very badly ot believe in a product.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 09-06-2012, 11:11 AM
NattyLawn NattyLawn is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lawn132012 View Post
NattyLawn- I am no scientist but I know what I see with the SumaGreen Turf on lawns I have done. So with that said I did send in your question to Sumagreen to see what the technical answer would be so I would not give out wrong info. Here is what Jennifer sent back to me from Sumagreen: (Could not attach pictures / study they sent me but they were pretty impressive with difference in root mass and OM.)

OM is matter which comes from a once-living organism from either their waste or their decomposition. Our liquid application of microbes dramatically increases the microbial life in the soil which leads to greater OM. This increase in microbes can be measured by Formazan testing. The attached study shows 29% to 41% increases in the Formazan testing (done at Arise Research facility in Illinois).

Additionally, OM is increased by the more significant root mass of plant life grown with SG when they decompose. The attached picture from testing at Michigan State University (and included in an article posted on Forbes.com) shows the significantly greater root mass compared to the conventionally grown roots.
Unless you're applying this product at minimum 4 gallons per thousand, sorry bro, you're application of microbes aren't making it into the soil to decompose roots, etc.

What rate is Sumagreen applied at?
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 09-06-2012, 11:44 AM
Lawn132012 Lawn132012 is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 175
FOUR GALLONS?? Yeah if I want to have a rain forest overnight maybe, LOL. I assume you are talking about 4 gallons of water with 3 oz of product then sure why not but a bit of an over kill on the water.

I have applied it at 3 oz per 1000 sq/ft with one gallon of water. If it is dry or not much rain (before or after treatment) I will water in or tell home owners (if no sprinklers) to water in 3-5 minutes to get product into the soil quicker.

Have had very good results and am very happy with the end results. After this last rainfall we got hammered with the grass really looks impressive and better then lawns I am not treating done by other companies. No idea what they are using but my clients are happy. Their happy, I am happy and money is better. Three things I look for when all is said and done.

I am sure you already know this but Sumagreen is a highly concentrated form of microbes. Right now I would not use more then 4 oz per 1000 sq/ft at once time. I have used with 3 oz by itself on several lawns and 2 oz with 1/8 fert on several to compare. Not the most scientific way but an affordable way for me. Yes i know every lawn is different but this works for me. I did not notice any real difference in the lawns as a whole but did notice better growth in the shade and under trees with the sumagreen compared to other years. Rainfall was probably less this year to boot.

I wish I did take a soil sample or two just for a reference to show my clients so maybe next year with a new client or two I will take some soil samples to show the OM difference. Again no scientist but everything above and below the ground looks good to me. I took a shovel and went to stick it in the ground about 2 weeks ago to see the roots and what I did notice was that the shovel went in the ground easier and deeper on the treated side better then the side I was not treating my lawn. This was my lawn which again is not the best test but what it did show me is that the compaction of the soil was broken up on the treated side of the yard.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 09-06-2012, 11:52 AM
phasthound's Avatar
phasthound phasthound is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mt. Laurel, NJ
Posts: 4,076
Skipster,

I'll have to let my clients know that the results they are seeing from using soil building methods and products are just figments of their imaginations.
__________________
Barry Draycott

The nation that destroys its soil destroys itself.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 09-06-2012, 04:05 PM
phasthound's Avatar
phasthound phasthound is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mt. Laurel, NJ
Posts: 4,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skipster View Post
The Bio Soil Enhancer people told me that they don't like university turf research becuase it doesn't give them the results they want. They know they can't pass scientific muster, so they would rather not even try to have it tested. They don't want you to know that the product doesn't perform as advertised. They did a couple of things at MSU years ago on crops (not lawns), but I notice that you don't dismiss those claims sipmly b/c BSE paid for them.
Who exactly is "the people" at Bio Soil? I have discussed this with the owners and they state otherwise. One of the owners, Lou Elwell, even posted a reply here (which was removed) and asked you when and where you met?

The owners categorically deny your statement The Bio Soil Enhancer people told me that they don't like university turf research becuase it doesn't give them the results they want. This would mean that Bio Soil has done university turf studies and, until this year, they state they never have.

Bio Soil's primary market has been ag, which BTW, includes some perennial crops, such as forage grasses, where they have lots of data, however, due to increased interest for ornamental turf, they are now conducting university studies on turf. Also worth noting is that it is not just Michigan St. which has conducted university studies for Bio Soil, but also Murray St, Virginia Tech, Mississippi St. and others.

So, enough with the trash talk and misinformation.

One of the main benefits of Suma Green is root growth as seen in this comparison of non-treated and treated soybeans. Don't worry there will be turf root photos after the studies are complete.

If anyone wants more information about this, please PM me.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Barry Draycott

The nation that destroys its soil destroys itself.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 09-06-2012, 06:56 PM
NattyLawn NattyLawn is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lancaster, PA
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by phasthound View Post
Skipster,

I'll have to let my clients know that the results they are seeing from using soil building methods and products are just figments of their imaginations.
Thanks, Barry. They always referred to you as the product *****. I see what they meant now. All sales and no substance.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 09-06-2012, 07:01 PM
phasthound's Avatar
phasthound phasthound is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mt. Laurel, NJ
Posts: 4,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by NattyLawn View Post
Thanks, Barry. They always referred to you as the product *****. I see what they meant now. All sales and no substance.
Yup, that's me. It's a wonder how I stay in business.
__________________
Barry Draycott

The nation that destroys its soil destroys itself.
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:05 PM.

Page generated in 0.07757 seconds with 10 queries