Register free!
Search
 
     

Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 07-02-2008, 11:44 AM
Ric's Avatar
Ric Ric is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: S W Florida
Posts: 11,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by tremor View Post
Diligent use of organics does reduce the need for synthetic urea based Nitrogen up here. Warmer soils I would think might need more organic acids, but the benefits should be similar.
Yo

I got the agree strongly with Tremor about Organics use. Bridge products having both synthetic and organic nutrient work the best on almost all soils. I will not in any way discount the use of Humates, Humic acid, or fulvic acid. But I will try and stress the need for SOM (soil organic material). SOM both increase field capacity and drainage. In sandy soils it increases CEC. In all most all soils it increases microbes both beneficial and non beneficial.

In Microbiology We say "Everything is everywhere, but the environment selects" Adding microbes to soil doesn't increase populations very long. Only if the environment is correct will microbe population increase. SOM helps the soil provide the right environment for increased microbe populations.

In todays rising prices we need to look at the history of our science. Organic agriculture and horticulture has worked to some degree since man first farmed. We as applicators need to use the best of these methods. But Organic people must also realize this is the 21th century and synthetics add greatly to the organic.
__________________
.

"TG doesn't give a rats ass about being "Responsible" as long as sales/production quotas are met. That's it in a nutshell. A recipe for disaster IMO." Ted Putnam 2/28/14

You can lead a Donkey to water but you can't make the Jackass Drink

"As Americans you have the right to be stupid." John Kerry

"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.” John Wayne.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-02-2008, 12:09 PM
ICT Bill ICT Bill is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Howard County MD
Posts: 4,120
Quote:
In todays rising prices we need to look at the history of our science. Organic agriculture and horticulture has worked to some degree since man first farmed. We as applicators need to use the best of these methods. But Organic people must also realize this is the 21th century and synthetics add greatly to the organic.
I agree with you completely, it is about less inputs.
With the local and national lawn care folks that we work with there is ONE bottom line. Is the customer happy and paying the bill, this typically means a great stand of turf with little to no weeds.

Most lawn care companies keep their weed and feed in the spring and put an astrict on the last application in the fall to adjust for whatever may be going on at the site. In between we can reduce expensive inputs using practices to increase SOM and overall health of the site.

Compost is a great amendment that is sustainable (typically from a waste stream) and will increase SOM and the diversity of the beneficial microorganisms. The only drawback to compost applications is the application part, there is no way around it it is an absolute pain and time consuming, almost too time consuming. Vermicomost is also a kick butt amendment, you can apply less than compost and get great results, but it is expensive, if you can find it. Humate can be used, same deal as vermicompost

If you can find ways to increase soil fertility the NPK inputs can be reduced by 50 to 75%. HOW we increase soil fertility, in a way that is cost effective, is the question?

I certainly don't have all of the answers but I have a few good to great ideas

So do these guys http://soils.usda.gov/sqi/concepts/s...y/biology.html

One thing to remember reading the above, Ag is referred to mostly and is an open system for inputs, lawns are closed systems and are dealt with much the same but with some big differences. We can't amend soil down six inches unless it is a total refurb job. Ag does it every year sometimes more

Last edited by ICT Bill; 07-02-2008 at 12:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-03-2008, 02:26 PM
ChemicalKing's Avatar
ChemicalKing ChemicalKing is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 33
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICT Bill View Post
Humates, Humic acid, fulvic acid (carbon compounds) are food for the soil microbes. These guys can mine nutrients that may not be plant avialable, if you are able to get nutrient cycling going in the soil you can indeed reduce fertilizer inputs. The no Till farmers (closed system) are getting great results, turf is much the same in this instance as it is also a closed system

Here is part of an explanation from the site http://www.humate.info/ . the info is from HumaTech Inc. so it may be slanted towards their product but the basics are pretty good.

HUMIC SUBSTANCES AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON SOIL FERTILITY

Humic substances are a good source of energy for beneficial soil organisms. Humic substances and non humic (organic) compounds provide the energy and many of the mineral requirements for soil microorganisms and soil animals. Beneficial soil organisms lack the photosynthetic apparatus to capture energy from the sun thus must survive on residual carbon containing substances on or in the soil. Energy stored within the carbon bonds functions to provide energy for various metabolic reactions within these organisms. Beneficial soil organisms (algae, yeasts, bacteria, fungi nematodes, mycorrhizae, and small animals) perform many beneficial functions which influence soil fertility and plant health. For example the bacteria release organic acids which aid in the solubilization of mineral elements bound in soil. Bacteria also release complex polysaccharides (sugar based compounds) that help create soil crumbs (aggregates). Soil crumbs give soil a desirable structure.
Thanks ICT Bill for the info! I have read & reviewed the data from www.humate.info.com previously, as well as spoke to Ag Horizons, Earthgreen & many others that are involved with the more desirable humate products derived from the Menefee (fresh water diatoms) formation in New Mexico.

Any opinions regarding an actual reduction in N-P-K with same response via decreased leachate?

Know anybody who has field trialed it or better yet implemented it into a succesful fertility program?

See my previous posts with university of arkansas data...
__________________
Texans know how to GIT-ER -DONE!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-03-2008, 02:42 PM
ChemicalKing's Avatar
ChemicalKing ChemicalKing is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 33
[QUOTE=ICT Bill;2400653] If you can find ways to increase soil fertility the NPK inputs can be reduced by 50 to 75%. HOW we increase soil fertility, in a way that is cost effective, is the question?

If you can belive the data from UA (screenshots of leachate research posted earlier in this thread), two annual apps of HydraHume DG @ 80# per ac on warm season turf = aprox 35% leachate reduction on P, in the 50-70% range for K & N. This is super cost effective @ SRP of $39.20 per ac. If the reduction of actual NPK over time is within a range anywhere similiar to the numbers indicated, the savings would be phenominal...
__________________
Texans know how to GIT-ER -DONE!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-03-2008, 04:23 PM
ICT Bill ICT Bill is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Howard County MD
Posts: 4,120
ChemicalKing, You have to be careful with humates like anything else it is not a panecea. If you use to much it starts tieing nutrients up, really the reverse of what you are trying to get done.
It is used in the northeast right before the turf goes dormant to tie up N and reduce the incidence of snowmold, it works.

It is not one of those things that if a little bit is good than a lot should be better. Golf course supers years ago got on this bandwagon of humates but over the years it didn't really work very well anymore and then it starts doing the opposite of what you want, so start out slow.

You should see great results and less fertilizer inputs, if you have not used it before, I prefer compost because it is sustainable and cheaper and it brings a local population of diverse microorganisms with it

Ric, We use certain strains of endo and ecto mycorrhizae in our product that work great with turf, if you waited on mothernature it would take 20 years to get the fungal populations we can supply in a year. We try for 70% colonization in 2 years with our stuff, if you can get to the magic 70% mark you will have a kickbutt stand of turf and drought tolerance and disease resistance too die for.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-03-2008, 04:28 PM
whoopassonthebluegrass's Avatar
whoopassonthebluegrass whoopassonthebluegrass is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Benson, UT
Posts: 4,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICT Bill View Post
We use certain strains of endo and ecto mycorrhizae in our product that work great with turf, if you waited on mothernature it would take 20 years to get the fungal populations we can supply in a year. We try for 70% colonization in 2 years with our stuff, if you can get to the magic 70% mark you will have a kickbutt stand of turf and drought tolerance and disease resistance too die for.
I peddle myco. The research shows, however, that the growth curve of typical plants without myco will have caught up to those plants WITH myco after 7 years. So it's a great product with lawns/plants only a few years old... but after that it loses its efficacy.

Stuff definitely works, though. The lawns I've inoculated are near bullet proof.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-03-2008, 07:41 PM
RigglePLC's Avatar
RigglePLC RigglePLC is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posts: 9,316
It is actually easy and free to add extra nitrogen--just plant clover. Or any other legume like black medic.

However...those pesky white blossoms are a problem. Also, we need to find a method or product to kill other weeds and not the clover. (or medic).
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-03-2008, 07:51 PM
whoopassonthebluegrass's Avatar
whoopassonthebluegrass whoopassonthebluegrass is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Benson, UT
Posts: 4,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by RigglePLC View Post
Also, we need to find a method or product to kill other weeds and not the clover. (or medic).
I'm not trying to start something, but there's no way on earth we're gonna get paid by people to kill all the weeds but the clover! Sure, a few might go for it, but not most. Not around here, at any rate. They pay us to kill weeds - not preserve a few to cut our own costs...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-03-2008, 08:41 PM
Ric's Avatar
Ric Ric is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: S W Florida
Posts: 11,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICT Bill View Post

Ric, We use certain strains of endo and ecto mycorrhizae in our product that work great with turf, if you waited on mothernature it would take 20 years to get the fungal populations we can supply in a year. We try for 70% colonization in 2 years with our stuff, if you can get to the magic 70% mark you will have a kickbutt stand of turf and drought tolerance and disease resistance too die for.
Bill

I am like a Missouri Mule, You got to Show Me. A university study or three would work. I have seen too many Mom and Pop home remedies that claim to be the next sliced bread. I am not anti Organic, I just need real science and not the Green Tree Hugger BS.
__________________
.

"TG doesn't give a rats ass about being "Responsible" as long as sales/production quotas are met. That's it in a nutshell. A recipe for disaster IMO." Ted Putnam 2/28/14

You can lead a Donkey to water but you can't make the Jackass Drink

"As Americans you have the right to be stupid." John Kerry

"Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.” John Wayne.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-03-2008, 08:46 PM
rcreech's Avatar
rcreech rcreech is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: OHIO
Posts: 5,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ric View Post
Bill

I am like a Missouri Mule, You got to Show Me. A university study or three would work. I have seen too many Mom and Pop home remedies that claim to be the next sliced bread. I am not anti Organic, I just need real science and not the Green Tree Hugger BS.

DITTO!

This is where they say:

"The Universities don't want to try doing this type of research because they have the fertilizer companies in their back pocket."

I have heard this too many times! Maybe I am wrong this time...but we will see. If it hasn't been proven by a University or INDEPENDENT study, I don't really ever want to look at it!
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.com™ - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:38 AM.

Page generated in 0.12141 seconds with 8 queries