Aquaponics Digest - Sun 04/15/01
Message 1: Re: sludge buildup
from wylie bass
Message 2: Re: joseph newmam
from "Tony Cooper"
Message 3: Re: poly tank repair
from fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Message 4: Re: Misunderstanding us
from fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Message 5: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
from fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Message 6: Re: poly tank repair
from RalphMcl 'at' aol.com
Message 7: Re: poly tank repair
from "TGTX"
Message 8: Re: poly tank repair
from dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Message 9: Re: poly tank repair
from dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Message 10: RE: Conductivity levels for different crops (translated)
from "Carlos Arano"
Message 11: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
from dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Message 12: Re: Tesla, Sonic Bloom, etc...was Guru Ted (Forest Gump Ted)
from kris book
Message 13: Re: Tesla, Sonic Bloom, etc...was Guru Ted (Forest Gump Ted)
from "TGTX"
Message 14: Polemics on EC (2) (continuation)
from "Carlos Arano"
Message 15: RV: Polemics on EC (1)
from "Carlos Arano"
Message 16: Administrative note to all members - HTML & message length
from S & S Aqua Farm
Message 17: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
from fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Message 18: Re: Polemics on EC (1)
from "TGTX"
Message 19: Re : Salt
from laberge 'at' cil.qc.ca (LABERGE MARC)
Message 20: Re: Polemics on EC (2) (continuation)
from "TGTX"
| Message 1
Subject: Re: sludge buildup
From: wylie bass
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 01:24:53 -0500
?????
ya got me I thought it was fish poop
marc 'at' aculink.net wrote:
> Is this sludge the same sludge one gets to know and love
> from an activated sludge system?
>
> wylie bass wrote:
> >
> >
> > Ted,
> > OK the problem then is not just more sludge than can
> > be broken down by bacteria, right? If this is true then
> .....
| Message 2
Subject: Re: joseph newmam
From: "Tony Cooper"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 17:17:19 -0700
So, he has finally made it to the aquaponics list.
Anyone of the good members of this list who has anything to do with this man and his
alleged technology does so at his/her own financial risk.
There is lots of info on the web about this man and his roadshow "investment" deals
in the machine that is always soon going into production.
Research well before being sucked in.
Tony Cooper.
His organization is very good at attacking his many detractors so i expect some
comeback from this :-<
| Message 3
Subject: Re: poly tank repair
From: fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 09:42:19 -0500 (CDT)
I have picked up some industrial poly 4by4 meat bins .You know the
kind that is used in the meat packing plants and hold about 400gals. and
some are in need of patching .Is there any one out there that can tell
me a good way to fix them ,maybe weld them up or something?or a good
glue that will work on polyvinel thanks in advance .
Bruce
| Message 4
Subject: Re: Misunderstanding us
From: fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 10:29:17 -0500 (CDT)
Adriana you misunderstood Steve Spring a while back when he said he
was tired. He and I both work long nights and by the time either
of us get home its the same to us as if you started work at 4am and upon
getting home from work at 7pm 6 days in a row we get very sleep
deprived our brains actually hurt and as a result when we replie to the
list we are in real danger of not making sense, making fools of our
selfs, insulting or offending some one unintentionally thats all he
meant.
In the summers I have worked a lot of 80 to 100hr.weeks and i can
get real outrageous in conversations after a while and not know it.
Almost in a walking dream state its for me like being on drugs would be
like.
Bruce
| Message 5
Subject: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
From: fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 11:46:15 -0500 (CDT)
Laberge You asked me about salt in my fish tanks. I normally use one
tea spoon to the gal. In all tanks.
I raise it to 1 table spoon to the gal. if I find a pathogen
present ( except with any black water fish that i might have from the
upper Amazon ) and I raise the temps to 80 Farinhight or above to
accelerate the pathogens metabolisms burning it out so to speak .I also
use epsons salt in many tanks that require harder water .I don't know
what the ppms are I have just done this for a lot of years as my first
step in disease control its fairly trouble free .This works with trout i
think too being that so many have salt water morphs ?
Bruce
| Message 6
Subject: Re: poly tank repair
From: RalphMcl 'at' aol.com
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:14:02 EDT
Just a thought, you may try sanding the area needing repair and use fiber
glass and resin to make the repair. Components and instructions are
available at most Marine dealers.
Ralph
| Message 7
Subject: Re: poly tank repair
From: "TGTX"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 13:24:08 -0500
> Just a thought, you may try sanding the area needing repair and use fiber
> glass and resin to make the repair. Components and instructions are
> available at most Marine dealers.
> Ralph
>
Or, sanding and J-B Weld. How big are the hickies? You say it is polyvinyl
and not polypropylene or polyethylene?
Ted
| Message 8
Subject: Re: poly tank repair
From: dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 13:32:11 -0700
Ure blessed Bill!!
Check http://www.usplastic.com/tr-newindex/uspwelding.htm !! Was just
looking there maself this am.
Blessings...
Mike.
Bruce Schreiber wrote:
>
> I have picked up some industrial poly 4by4 meat bins .You know the
> kind that is used in the meat packing plants and hold about 400gals. and
> some are in need of patching .Is there any one out there that can tell
> me a good way to fix them ,maybe weld them up or something?or a good
> glue that will work on polyvinel thanks in advance .
> Bruce
--
"Faxes and emails are used by Barnetech Industrial Consultants as a
convenience for confidential, and often legally privileged, business
communications both within the firm and with clients. Disclosure to
parties other than addressees through for exampleforwarding, copying,
printing, distribution etc requires Barnetech Industrial Consultants
specific consent. Barnetech Industrial Consultants are not liable for
unauthorised disclosures nor for subsequent actions or omissions in
reliance upon them. If you have received this message in error please
notify us immediately and destroy all copies of it."
| Message 9
Subject: Re: poly tank repair
From: dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 13:39:54 -0700
Sorry Bruce...not Bill...!!
But Bill, you are blessed too if U have life and are reading this.... :)
Mike.
dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com wrote:
>
> Ure blessed Bill!!
>
> Check http://www.usplastic.com/tr-newindex/uspwelding.htm !! Was just
> looking there maself this am.
>
> Blessings...
>
| Message 10
Subject: RE: Conductivity levels for different crops (translated)
From: "Carlos Arano"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 01:04:03 -0300
Adriana:
I will send to your out of list mail a copy of manuscripte of charts .zip.
Respecting references sources, it is a long time compilation I was doing:
Resh, all the Proceedings of ISOCS (International Society of Soilless
Culture) since 1973 til it was clossed at 1999, Merapeitian S. (Armenian
Academy of Sciences) -data on herbs-, PH&G magazine collection, maybe Sholto
Douglas, etc. Really, I did not take all the notes on each reference. But I
tell you, when I cross some reference from one to other source, I found
agreement. Only two small differences: in Israel seems that Roses require
only 1200 and cucumbers goes up to 2800 µS/cm.
Regards,
Carlos
----- Original Message -----
From: Adriana Gutierrez
To:
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2001 9:24 AM
Subject: Conductivity levels for different crops (translated)
> Thanks for sharing this information Carlos, it is one f the most
> extensive lists I have seen on this topic. I'm curious about the
> source and how these levels were derived. I've translated as many as
> I could on this first pass without going to my dictionary which is
> inaccessible at the moment:
>
> Adriana
>
> > VEGETABLES
> Conductivity
> > values µS/cm
> > Low
> Medium
> > High
> >
> > Ajíes (Peppers)
> > 1800-2200
> > Ajos (Garlic) 1400-1800
> > Alcauciles 800-1800
> > Apio (Celery)
> > 1800-2400
> > Arvejas (Peas) 800-1800
> > Batatas (Sweet Potatoes)
> > 2000-2500
> > Berenjenas (Eggplant)
> > 2500-3500
> > Brócoli (Broccoli)
> > 2800-3500
> > Cebollas (Oninions) 1400-1800
> > Chirivía 1400-1800
> > Coliflor (Cauliflower)
> > 1500-2000
> > Endibias (Endive)
> 2000-2400
> > Espárragos (Asparragus) 1400-1800
> > Espinacas (Spinach)
> 1800-2300
> > Guisantes
> 1800-2400
> > Lechugas (Lettuce) 800-1200
> > Maíz dulce (Sweet Corn)
> 1600-2400
> > Nabos (Turnips)
> 1800-2400
> > "Okra" (Okra)
> > 2000-2400
> > Papas (Potatoes)
> > 2000-2500
> > Pepinos (Cucumbers)
> > 1700-2500
> > Porotos
> > 2000-4000
> > Porotos anchos
> 1800-2200
> > Puerros 1400-1800
> > Rabanitos (radishes)
> 1600-2200
> > Remolachas (Beets)
> > 1800-5000
> > Repollos (Cabbage)
> > 2500-3000
> > Repollitos de Bruselas (Brussels Sprouts) > 2500-3000
> > Tomates (tomatoes)
> > 2000-5000
> > Zapallos (Pumpkins)
> > 1800-2400
> > Zucchinis (Squash)
> > 1800-2400
> > Zanahorias (Carrots)
> 1600-2000
> >
> > FRUITS
> > Ananá (Pineapple)
> > 2000-2400
> > Arándanos
> 1800-2000
> > Banana (Bananas)
> 1800-2200
> > Frutillas
> 1800-2200
> > Grosella negra 1400-1800
> > Grosella roja 1400-1800
> > Melón (Melon)
> > 2000-2500
> > Pasionaria (Passion Fruit)
> 1600-2400
> > Ruibarbo (Rhubarb)
> 1600-2000
> > Sandía (Water melon)
> 1500-2400
> >
> > HERBS
> > Achicoria
> > 2000-2400
> > Albahaca (Basil) 1000-1600
> > Berro (Watercress) 400-1800
> > Cebollino(Chives)
> 1800-2200
> > Hinojo 1000-1400
> > Lavanda (Lavender) 1000-1400
> > Mejorana (Marjoram)
> 1600-2000
> > Menta (Mint)> 2000-2400
> > Mostaza (Mustard)
> 1200-2400
> > Perejil (Parsley)
> > 800-1800
> > Romero (Rosemary)
> 1000-1600
> > Salvia (Sage)
> > 1000-1600
> > Tomillo (Thyme)
> 800-1600
> >
> > FLOWERS and ORNAMENTALS
> > Alhelí
> > 1600-2000
> > Aster
> > 1800-2400
> > Begonia 1400-1800
> > Bromelias 800-1200
> > Caladio (Calla lillies)
> > 1600-2000
> > Canacea
> > 1800-2400
> > Claveles (Carnations)
> > 2000-3500
> > Crisantemos (Chrysanthemums)
> > 1800-2500
> > Dalias (Dahlias)
> > 1500-2000
> > Ficus
> > 1600-2400
> > Gerbera
> > 2000-2500
> > Gladiolos (Gladiolus)
> > 2000-2400
> > Helechos (Ferns)
> > 1600-2000
> > Impacientes (Impaciens)
> > 1800-2000
> > Palmas (Palms)
> > 1600-2000
> > Rosas (Roses) > 1500-2500
> > Violetas africanas (African violets) 1200-1500
> >
>
>
>
| Message 11
Subject: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
From: dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:20:16 -0700
Bruce Schreiber wrote:
>
> Laberge You asked me about salt in my fish tanks.
Salt salt?? NACL??
| Message 12
Subject: Re: Tesla, Sonic Bloom, etc...was Guru Ted (Forest Gump Ted)
From: kris book
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:43:12 -0600
Ted,
I didn't know that a plant can get more light than it likes. About 10
years ago I experimented with the vegetative cycle by turning grow lights
on 24 hrs. a day. Having no sleep cycle didn't seem to bother any of the
vegetable plants that I tried but, I didn't notice any appreciable gain
in growth above 18 hrs. of light a day. I also played with CO2 levels
quite a bit. If memory serves correctly, above 2,000 ppm showed
noticeable growth retardation. Back to my original question for a minute.
I grew my plants in an organic semi-hydroponic system. My pots were full
of 60% perlite, vermiculite, and pumice and 40% organic soiless planting
mix that had been composted in the traditional Indore method and then
dosed heavily with worms and castings. This mix needed to be watered at
least every day, sometimes twice, later I added those polymers that
extend the need for watering. I noticed that plants that weren't under
lights for 18 hrs. and CO2 injection preferred a diluted mixture of
planting mix. I mean I would add some used planting mix(mix that had
produced one crop) at a rate of about 50%. It didn't seem that the plants
under the lights and sun, with CO2 injection ever got to many nutrients.
My mix would usually have enough nutrients to get within two or three
weeks of harvest. At that point I would water every day with compost tea
and foliar feed on plants that like getting their leaves wet. So I have
been wondering if the S&S system can deliver enough nutrients to make
using lights and CO2 feasible. Or do you think it's possible to set up a
system that can add nutrients to the roots and then get flushed before
putting in the fish effluent.
Happy Easter,
kris
| Message 13
Subject: Re: Tesla, Sonic Bloom, etc...was Guru Ted (Forest Gump Ted)
From: "TGTX"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 17:16:01 -0500
Now I think I see where you are going.
I thought you were talking about increasin light intensity, not light
duration. And I can agree that increasing light duration with supplemental
lighting would aid in monthly or seasonal vegetative yield. Flowering is a
very different matter and such efforts can foul up flowering plant
photoperiods if you go beyond the outer limits..... Hmmm... I am aware of
experiments where red lights were turned on at night and resulted in some
interesting photosynthetic yields, so I guess that segways back to cheap red
LEDs, as skeptical as I am about that.....
O.K., so the foliar feeding angle.....well, to tell you the truth, I have
been working on an overhead misting system along those lines and spaces.....
Will report when I have something substantial.....Tally Ho, and all that.
Lines and spaces....everyday I write the book...
Ted
| Message 14
Subject: Polemics on EC (2) (continuation)
From: "Carlos Arano"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 07:50:00 -0300
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C0C580.AC4A2540
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I say:
Nothing here seems to be wrong. In fact, the cited author is talking =
about common soil and organic soil. He explain the slow release on =
minerals in the form that can be assimilated by the plants. That is =
right.
However, point 3) should be discussed. As extracted the cited note, =
seems that Jeavon is giving to the organic acids in humus the property =
of improve the opening of the root membrane. I'm not going to discuss =
this point because I don't know. But it is a good time to see how the =
solution with the food and the root requiring it interacts.
Osmotic pressure is the clue. Inside of the plant is a concentrated =
sirup. Outside is a diluted liquid. Between both there is a porous =
membrane (sking of the roots). The osmotic principle said something like =
this: If there is a porous membrane between two liquids of different =
concentration, the more diluted one pass through that membrane in =
direction to the more concentrated until both concentrations are =
equilibrated.
Sirup concentration inside plants varies according the variety. Plants =
with high concentrated liquid inside requires high concentrated =
solutions (or richer soils in conventional cultures) in order to have a =
enough rich balance. If you have tomatoes plants, an example, in a weak =
solution, such as lettuce requires, you will be diluting more and more =
the sirup inside of tomato plant. Result: a poor plant.
Much more later, Ted say:
"Even Dr. Howard Resh, who has written "Hydroponic Food Production" =
among
others, will tell you the important role that organic matter has in soil
/plant systems. You will find that he would agree with at least part of
what I have asserted...on page 42 of his book "Hydroponic Food =
Production".
=20
I say:
Not only Resh is talking about the important role that organic matter =
has in soil
/plant systems. At point 2.3.4. Soil vs. Hydroponics, first statement, =
he said: There is no physiological difference between plants grown =
hydroponically and those grown in soil.=20
I should add: ....and those grown aquaponically providing in all three =
cases a good and equilibrated food quality and quantity is given or can =
reach them.
If you follow this subchapter 2.3.4., Resh explain much better than I =
did how it is necessary to decompose the organic and inorganic =
components into inorganic elements in ion forms.
=20
Ted said:
"So, now is it clear that nutrients can both reside within an aquaponics
system, and be available to the plants without necessarily being picked =
up
by a conductivity meter. This reminds me of the story in which a half =
dozen
blind philosophers were asked to describe the nature of an elephant, =
having
never seen or known of such a beast, by their grabbing a different part =
of
the elephant, just one part, and coming to a conclusion about the nature =
of
the elephant. "It is like a rope, said one who grabbed the tail""
=20
I say:
It is not so clear for me. If you want to do a good job, you will have =
to check EC. Maybe you can do many things, as I do, without certain =
measurements (for instance, I cannot buy, because it is expensive for =
me, a quantor sensor to measure light intensity as PAR). But as soon you =
want to improve your work, to get higher productivity, to do everything =
better, you will need to have the tools to do it. The EC meter is a good =
non expensive tool and I can say, even much more important in certain =
cases than the pH meter.
Ted said:
"And you can see why that some aquaponic systems could grow abundant =
tomatoes
and the like. The scientific literature reports that comparable yields =
per
square foot per season of tomatoes were found to be possible in =
aquaponics
systems of various kinds...comparable to hydroponics or dirt culture, =
that
is. Dr. Rackocy et. al. has summarized this numerous times in his =
various
papers, for example."
=20
I say:
O.K. I'm agree. But some is not all. My question, the question that =
helps to improve knowledge, is why ? .=20
Could somebody tell me all the facts around each operation? Of course =
it will be impossible. There are sometimes when somebody around you is =
having excellent results in doing something and you are doing exactly =
same with poor results. Why ? . Of course there are a reason. If you =
don't know all the facts you will never know what is really hapening.
Knowing that many of the facts that Ted is talking in his discussed mail =
are rigth, I would like to know at least the EC of water in the fish =
tank (before entering in the bacterial-plants-transformation-beds) and =
the EC of leaving solution for a fellow that could get 40 to 45 =
Kgs/sq.m. tomatoes/year in two crops*.
* If somebody needs a .jpg picture of an hydroponics full-controlled =
place, I will be sending to his/her mail out of the list.
These data should be compared with the values of the other fellow that =
complains about his tomate production.
Maybe I will not have an answer to my WHY ? . But at least I will have =
something to think about.
=20
My appologies to Ted and to all of you. In spite of my intentions in =
shortening it up, it was a too long mail. But I think always is =
interesting to point out agreements and differencies.=20
=20
Regards to all of you,
=20
Carlos
PS.- By the way, "CEBOLLAS" =3D ONIONS
=20
=20
------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C0C580.AC4A2540
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I say:
Nothing here seems to be wrong. In =
fact, the cited=20
author is talking about common soil and organic soil. =
He=20
explain the slow release on minerals in the form that can =
be=20
assimilated by the plants. That is right.
However, point 3) should be discussed. =
As extracted=20
the cited note, seems that Jeavon is giving to the organic acids in =
humus the=20
property of improve the opening of the root membrane. I'm not going to =
discuss=20
this point because I don't know. But it is a good time to see how the =
solution=20
with the food and the root requiring it interacts.
Osmotic pressure is the =
clue.=20
Inside of the plant is a concentrated sirup. Outside is a diluted=20
liquid. Between both there is a porous membrane (sking of the =
roots). The=20
osmotic principle said something like this: If there is a =
porous=20
membrane between two liquids of different concentration, =
the more=20
diluted one pass through that membrane in direction to the more =
concentrated=20
until both concentrations are equilibrated.
Sirup concentration inside plants =
varies according=20
the variety. Plants with high concentrated liquid inside requires high=20
concentrated solutions (or richer soils in conventional cultures) in =
order to=20
have a enough rich balance. If you have tomatoes plants, an example, in =
a weak=20
solution, such as lettuce requires, you will be diluting more and more =
the sirup=20
inside of tomato plant. Result: a poor =
plant.
Much more later, Ted say:
"Even Dr. Howard Resh, who has written =
"Hydroponic=20
Food Production" among
others, will tell you the important =
role that=20
organic matter has in soil
/plant systems. You will =
find that=20
he would agree with at least part of
what I have asserted...on page =
42 of his=20
book "Hydroponic Food Production".
I say:
Not only Resh is talking about the =
important role=20
that organic matter has in soil
/plant systems. At =
point=20
2.3.4. Soil vs. Hydroponics, first statement, he said: There is =
no=20
physiological difference between plants grown hydroponically and those =
grown in=20
soil.
I should add: ....and those =
grown=20
aquaponically providing in all three cases a good and equilibrated food =
quality=20
and quantity is given or can reach them.
If you follow this subchapter 2.3.4., =
Resh explain=20
much better than I did how it is necessary to decompose the organic and=20
inorganic components into inorganic elements in ion forms.
Ted said:
"So, now is it clear =
that=20
nutrients can both reside within an aquaponics
system, and be =
available to the plants without necessarily being picked up
by a =
conductivity=20
meter. This reminds me of the story in which a half=20
dozen
blind philosophers were asked to describe the nature of an =
elephant,=20
having
never seen or known of such a beast, by their grabbing a =
different=20
part of
the elephant, just one part, and coming to a conclusion about =
the=20
nature of
the elephant. "It is like a rope, said one who grabbed the=20
tail""
I say:
It is not so clear for me. If you want =
to do a good=20
job, you will have to check EC. Maybe you can do many things, as I do, =
without=20
certain measurements (for instance, I cannot buy, because it is =
expensive for=20
me, a quantor sensor to measure light intensity as PAR). But as soon you =
want to=20
improve your work, to get higher productivity, to do everything better, =
you will=20
need to have the tools to do it. The EC meter is a good non expensive =
tool and I=20
can say, even much more important in certain cases than the pH=20
meter.
Ted said:
"And you can see why that some =
aquaponic=20
systems could grow abundant tomatoes
and the like. The =
scientific literature reports that comparable yields per
square foot =
per=20
season of tomatoes were found to be possible in aquaponics
systems of =
various=20
kinds...comparable to hydroponics or dirt culture, that
is. Dr. =
Rackocy=20
et. al. has summarized this numerous times in his various
papers, for =
example."
I say:
O.K. I'm agree. But some =
is not=20
all. My question, the question that helps to improve =
knowledge,=20
is why ? .
Could somebody tell me all the =
facts around=20
each operation? Of course it will be impossible. There are sometimes =
when=20
somebody around you is having excellent results in doing something and =
you are=20
doing exactly same with poor results. Why ? . Of course =
there=20
are a reason. If you don't know all the facts you will never know what =
is really=20
hapening.
Knowing that many of the facts that Ted =
is talking=20
in his discussed mail are rigth, I would like to know at least the EC of =
water=20
in the fish tank (before entering in the =
bacterial-plants-transformation-beds)=20
and the EC of leaving solution for a fellow that could get 40 to 45 =
Kgs/sq.m.=20
tomatoes/year in two crops*.
* If somebody needs a .jpg picture of =
an=20
hydroponics full-controlled place, I will be sending to his/her=20
mail out of the list.
These data should be =
compared with the=20
values of the other fellow that complains about his tomate=20
production.
Maybe I will not have an answer to my =
WHY ?=20
. But at least I will have something to think =
about.
My appologies to Ted and to all of you. =
In spite of=20
my intentions in shortening it up, it was a too long mail. But I think =
always is=20
interesting to point out agreements and differencies.
Regards to all of you,
Carlos
PS.- By the way, "CEBOLLAS" =3D =
ONIONS
------=_NextPart_000_0043_01C0C580.AC4A2540--
| Message 15
Subject: RV: Polemics on EC (1)
From: "Carlos Arano"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 07:50:05 -0300
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C0C580.AF86B2A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Carlos Arano=20
To: aquaponics 'at' townsqr.com=20
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 4:03 AM
Subject: RV: Polemics on EC
The original mail was rejected because it was too long for this list. I =
divided it in two parts.
=20
Friends:
I have a deep feeling of gratitude and admiration for our friend =
Ted. Each time he writes something in the list I read carefully learning =
a lot from him. Most of his interventions are so good that I have a file =
with his TGTX list name in order to keep them.
However, today respectfully I have to exchange different points of =
view with him. I don't want to start a polemic but I want to clear some =
things. Lets consider a small brainstorming.
First of all, I'm not a Hydroponic Salesman's but I'm a retired =
scientist, maybe not a rocked one but a humble scientist with some =
knowledge and some rests of common sense. I'm not trying to sale neither =
hydroponics nor aquaponics, organics, fertirrigations, conventional soil =
cultures, etc. to anybody. Each one of these systems have advantages and =
dissadvantages. Every one should know to what system adhere.
After clearing this, lets see my points of view respecting latest =
Ted's statements.
Ted said:=20
"Yes, Mr. Bill, the hydroponic school uses these rules of thumb of
conductivity to measure the overall ionic strength of the nutrient =
solution
that they are introducing directly to the plant roots. There =
observations
and measurements have led to these guidelines. "=20
=20
I say:
They are not rules of thumb. Electric conductivity is a scientific =
measure of the amount of availables ions to the plants in the nutrient =
solution, in the water extracting soils juices, in the enriched water =
provided by aquaponic fish, etc. etc. In hydroponics the ions are =
supplied free through salts, ready to be ingested by the plants. In =
other systems, ions could be free as salts dissolved by water, or =
attached to higher or insoluble molecules. These ones should be =
transformed by microorganisms in free soluble ions in order to be taken =
by the plants. Plants cannot absorb molecules in insoluble form. So, the =
measure of conductivity is the measure of the true available food for =
plants in any system.
Tom said:
"They don't have the benefits of organic matter substrates within their =
system and this is key to what I am about to launch off on."
I say:
Eternal discussion.=20
Physiologicaly plants does not identify from where the ions came. To =
them it is the same that food cames fron a nutrient solution, an =
extracting of soil, a bacterial transformed fish water excreta, or other =
liquor. Substantially there are not differences between organic cultures =
and hydroponics in the ingest of food by the plants.=20
=20
Ted said:
"In making comparisions between hydroponics and aquaponics, one should =
not be
led astray to the incorrect conclusion that we cannot expect good yields =
in
all aquaponics systems across the board, when we culture plants such as
tomatoes that are heavy feeders and prefer higher ionic strength =
nutrient
concentrations IN SOLUTION...that is IN THE PORE SPACE WATER."
I say:
If you have a rich fish water bacterial-treated-in-the-beds effluent =
with the high ionic strength nutrient that tomatoes needs you can expect =
as good yields as in other well feeded plants. I you haven't, your =
plants will be poor, your produce scarce or your flavor not good.=20
Tom say:
"Here we go. Lets segway this back to the King, Organic Carbon. For =
fish
effluent, 80% of the total phosporus resides in the suspended solids and
only 20% is truely in solution. Total phosphorus includes the soluble
orthophosphate, PO4, as well as organic phosphorus forms. Please don't =
err
in saying "phosphates", there is only orthophosphate, PO4 in solution =
for
the most part.....yes I know there is this somewhat more complex species =
we
used to call metaphosphate, but let's not go there cause it will only =
muddy
the fish tank. So, back to phosphorus. It's mostly organic, that is to =
say
it is chemically bound up in some organic form, which means it is =
somehow
attached to some carbon rich molecules from plant and animal and microbe
"bodies", and it is mostly associated with the solids in the fish =
culture
system. All right, now that is background."
=20
"Now lets ask ourselves what role King Carbon plays in either the soil, =
or in
the aquaponic grow bed on the surface of the gravel. Let's switch names
here and let the King go by his more pedestrian name of organic =
matter....by
any other name, though, it smells just as.....it smells the same...What =
are
some key organic matter functions in the soil and in the aquaponics grow =
bed
media? Let's take some notes from Mr. John Jeavon's book "How to Grow =
More
Vegetables".
=20
I say:
Tom confuses me a little bit here. But I feel we should be agree that =
without decomposition of organic matter ( King Carbon ?) there are not =
possibilities for plants of taking its food. The 80% of phosphorous =
cannot be assimilated without such bacterial work.
=20
Tom say (notes from Jeavon's book):
"KEY ORGANIC MATTER FUNCTIONS.
1. Organic matter feeds plants through nutrient exchange and nutrient
release upon its decomposition. =
=20
2. It is a continual slow-release source of nutrients for plants.
3. Organic acids in humus help dissolve minerals in the soil, making =
the
mineral nutrients available to plants. Organic acids also increase the
permeability of plant root membranes and therefore promote the uptake of
water and nutrients by plant roots.
4. Organic matter is the energy source for the soil's microbial life
forms, which are an integral part of soil health. In 1 gram of humus =
rich
soil there are several billion bacteria, one million fungi, 10 to 20 =
million
actinomycetes and 800,000 algae.
5. The microbes which feed on organic matter in the soil temporarily =
bind
the soil particles together...yada yada...their secretions are a =
bacterial
glue (polysaccharides) which holds soil particles...yada yada...
6. Organic matter is key to soil structure, yada yada, keepin it in a
open, porus condition for good water and air penetration."
=20
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C0C580.AF86B2A0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
----- Original Message -----=20
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 4:03 AM
Subject: RV: Polemics on EC
The original =
mail was=20
rejected because it was too long for this list. I divided it in two=20
parts.
=20
Friends:
I have a deep =
feeling of=20
gratitude and admiration for our friend Ted. Each time he writes =
something in=20
the list I read carefully learning a lot from him. Most of his =
interventions are=20
so good that I have a file with his TGTX list name in order to =
keep=20
them.
However, today =
respectfully I=20
have to exchange different points of view with him. I don't want to =
start a=20
polemic but I want to clear some things. Lets consider a small=20
brainstorming.
First of all, I'm =
not a=20
Hydroponic Salesman's but I'm a retired scientist, maybe not a rocked =
one but a=20
humble scientist with some knowledge and some rests of common sense. I'm =
not=20
trying to sale neither hydroponics nor aquaponics, organics, =
fertirrigations,=20
conventional soil cultures, etc. to anybody. Each one of these systems =
have=20
advantages and dissadvantages. Every one should know to what system=20
adhere.
After clearing this, =
lets see my=20
points of view respecting latest Ted's statements.
Ted said:
"Yes, Mr. Bill, the hydroponic school =
uses=20
these rules of thumb of
conductivity to measure the overall ionic =
strength of=20
the nutrient solution
that they are introducing directly to =
the=20
plant roots. There observations
and measurements have led to =
these=20
guidelines. "
I say:
They are not rules of thumb. Electric =
conductivity=20
is a scientific measure of the amount of availables ions to the=20
plants in the nutrient solution, in the water extracting =
soils=20
juices, in the enriched water provided by aquaponic fish, etc. etc. In=20
hydroponics the ions are supplied free through salts, ready to be =
ingested=20
by the plants. In other systems, ions could be free as salts dissolved =
by water,=20
or attached to higher or insoluble molecules. These ones should be=20
transformed by microorganisms in free soluble ions in order to be taken =
by the=20
plants. Plants cannot absorb molecules in insoluble form. So, =
the=20
measure of conductivity is the measure of the true available food for =
plants in=20
any system.
Tom said:
"They don't have the benefits =
of organic=20
matter substrates within their system and this is key to what I =
am=20
about to launch off on."
I say:
Eternal discussion.
Physiologicaly plants does not =
identify=20
from where the ions came. To them it is the same that food =
cames fron a=20
nutrient solution, an extracting of soil, a bacterial transformed fish =
water=20
excreta, or other liquor. Substantially there are not =
differences=20
between organic cultures and hydroponics in the ingest of food by the=20
plants.
Ted said:
"In making comparisions between =
hydroponics and=20
aquaponics, one should not be
led astray to the incorrect =
conclusion=20
that we cannot expect good yields in
all aquaponics systems =
across=20
the board, when we culture plants such as
tomatoes that are heavy =
feeders and=20
prefer higher ionic strength nutrient
concentrations IN =
SOLUTION...that is IN=20
THE PORE SPACE WATER."
I say:
If you have =
a rich fish=20
water bacterial-treated-in-the-beds effluent with the high ionic =
strength=20
nutrient that tomatoes needs you can expect as good yields as in other =
well=20
feeded plants. I you haven't, your plants will be poor, your =
produce=20
scarce or your flavor not good.
Tom say:
"Here we go. Lets segway this =
back to the=20
King, Organic Carbon. For fish
effluent, 80% of the =
total=20
phosporus resides in the suspended solids and
only 20% is =
truely in=20
solution. Total phosphorus includes the soluble
orthophosphate, =
PO4, as=20
well as organic phosphorus forms. Please don't err
in saying=20
"phosphates", there is only orthophosphate, PO4 in solution for
the =
most=20
part.....yes I know there is this somewhat more complex species =
we
used to=20
call metaphosphate, but let's not go there cause it will only =
muddy
the fish=20
tank. So, back to phosphorus. It's mostly organic, =
that is=20
to say
it is chemically bound up in some organic form, which =
means=20
it is somehow
attached to some carbon rich molecules from plant and =
animal=20
and microbe
"bodies", and it is mostly associated with the solids in =
the fish=20
culture
system. All right, now that is =
background."
"Now lets ask ourselves what role =
King=20
Carbon plays in either the soil, or in
the aquaponic grow =
bed on the=20
surface of the gravel. Let's switch names
here and let the King =
go by=20
his more pedestrian name of organic matter....by
any other name, =
though, it=20
smells just as.....it smells the same...What are
some key organic =
matter=20
functions in the soil and in the aquaponics grow bed
media? =
Let's take=20
some notes from Mr. John Jeavon's book "How to Grow=20
More
Vegetables".
I say:
Tom confuses me a little bit here. But =
I feel we=20
should be agree that without decomposition of organic matter ( =
King=20
Carbon ?) there are not possibilities for plants of taking its =
food.=20
The 80% of phosphorous cannot be assimilated without such bacterial =
work.
Tom say (notes from Jeavon's =
book):
"KEY ORGANIC MATTER=20
FUNCTIONS.
1. Organic matter feeds plants =
through=20
nutrient exchange and nutrient
release upon its=20
decomposition. &n=
bsp; &nb=
sp; &nbs=
p; =
; =
=20
2. It is a continual slow-release =
source of=20
nutrients for plants.
3. Organic acids =
in=20
humus help dissolve minerals in the soil, making the
mineral =
nutrients=20
available to plants. Organic acids also increase=20
the
permeability of plant root membranes and therefore promote the =
uptake=20
of
water and nutrients by plant =
roots.
4. =20
Organic matter is the energy source for the soil's microbial=20
life
forms, which are an integral part of soil health. =
In 1=20
gram of humus rich
soil there are several billion bacteria, one =
million=20
fungi, 10 to 20 million
actinomycetes and 800,000=20
algae.
5. The microbes which feed on organic =
matter in=20
the soil temporarily bind
the soil particles together...yada =
yada...their=20
secretions are a bacterial
glue (polysaccharides) which holds soil=20
particles...yada yada...
6. Organic matter is =
key to=20
soil structure, yada yada, keepin it in a
open, porus condition for =
good=20
water and air penetration."
------=_NextPart_000_0046_01C0C580.AF86B2A0--
| Message 16
Subject: Administrative note to all members - HTML & message length
From: S & S Aqua Farm
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 19:29:48 -0500
Please, everyone, if you're using a mail program that uses HTML coding, be
sure to change your settings to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY to this list. If
you're sending and receiving in that mail program, you may not be aware of
it.
Here's a reprint from another list on the same subject:
>
>1) sending your messages in HTML (hypertext markup language) or
>RTF(rich-text format), OR
>
>2) sending attachments
>
>use up a lot of band width and cause serious inconvenience to some readers
>with slower connections.
>
>I agree. Now how to help those folks who don't really know how or why their
>messages are coming in this format, or what to do with attachments? I'll
>take a stab here.
>
>How about if other subscribers with different e-mail systems tell us how to
>format for their particular software?
>
>1) .html or .rtf: THERE IS PROBABLY A SETTING IN YOUR E-MAIL SOFTWARE THAT
>YOU CAN CONTROL.
>
>In my experience with a couple of e-mail programs, you *can* change
>settings, either for all messages you send, or for just a few specific
>recipients -- like sanet-mg and other listservs you send messages to.
>
>For example, in MS Outlook, to change the format for sending to ONE
>PATICULAR recipient:
>
>a) select address book (NOT while composing a message, however -- you won't
>be able to edit the address)
>b) double click on a specific address (sanet-mg 'at' sare.org)
>c) you may need to click on from a couple of buttons at the
>top of the box
>d) There is a box that SHOULD NOT be checked that says: "Always send to
>this recipient in MS Outlook rich-text format."
>e) There is also a button at the bottom called that allows
>you to specify the format for this recipient ONLY. Check .
>
>Depending on what the default setting is for your e-mail (I think), you may
>need to follow d) or e) above.
>
>
>How will you know if you've succeeded? IF you receive messages with bold,
>italic, underline, or different font size or color, this is rich-text. If
>you message looks all the same with respect to the size and color of the
>text, that will be plain text. In plain text, you need to find other ways
>to place emphasis, which is why I use CAPS, asterisks, etc.
Also, although I appreciate the friendliness of this list :>), please snip
long posts before you reply if you feel the need to post a response, leaving
just the pertinent data from the previous post.
Thanks for your help.
Paula
S&S Aqua Farm, 8386 County Road 8820, West Plains, MO 65775 417-256-5124
Web page http://www.townsqr.com/snsaqua/
| Message 17
Subject: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
From: fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net (Bruce Schreiber)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 19:58:23 -0500 (CDT)
--WebTV-Mail-23547-999
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Rock Salt,Canning Salt,Water Softening Salt even Sea Salt just not for
some reason the Iodized table kind but the Epson Salt used for foot
soaking works on some things too . I always have both on hand.
Bruce
--WebTV-Mail-23547-999
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Message/RFC822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Received: from smtpin-102-8.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.45) by
storefull-141.iap.bryant.webtv.net with WTV-SMTP; Sun, 15 Apr 2001
12:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by smtpin-102-8.bryant.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) id 57F22F4;
Sun, 15 Apr 2001 12:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
Delivered-To: fishmanbruce 'at' webtv.net
Received: from compaqwww.townsqr.com (mail.townsqr.com [207.18.224.3]) by
smtpin-102-8.bryant.webtv.net (WebTV_Postfix+sws) with ESMTP id
BB57915B for ; Sun, 15 Apr 2001 12:31:15
-0700 (PDT)
Received: from cwj-serv01.cwjamaica.com (unverified [208.11.45.6]) by
compaqwww.townsqr.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.2.4) with ESMTP id
for ; Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:09:25 -0500
Received: from oemcomputer ([208.11.62.100]) by cwj-serv01.cwjamaica.com (Post.Office
MTA v3.5.2 release 221 ID# 0-57632U50000L50000S0V35) with SMTP id
com for ; Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:13:47 -0500
Message-ID: <3ADA1090.1EF9 'at' cwjamaica.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:20:16 -0700
From: dreadlox 'at' cwjamaica.com
Organization: Barnetech Industrial Consultants
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT-bw (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: aquaponics 'at' townsqr.com
Subject: Re: Re : Salting Hurting Fish
References: <6077-3AD9D057-2121 'at' storefull-147.iap.bryant.webtv.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: aquaponics 'at' townsqr.com
Sender: aquaponics-request 'at' townsqr.com
Bruce Schreiber wrote:
>
> Laberge You asked me about salt in my fish tanks.
Salt salt?? NACL??
--WebTV-Mail-23547-999--
| Message 18
Subject: Re: Polemics on EC (1)
From: "TGTX"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 21:10:17 -0500
Hi Carlos. Thank you for your extensive reply. I very much appreciated
your points and will try to address them or clarify my earlier points as
best I can. I agree, entirely, sir, that this is certainly no polemic on
either of our parts, but rather a discussion.
Please be aware that I have asserted some things in my posts that perhaps I
should better categorize as speculative on my part and not definitive from
any kind of consensus or thoroughly documented standpoint, in some cases.
I was trying to explain, as much to myself as anyone, how or why a variety
of plant such as a tomato, or other "heavy" feeder, might have nutrients
available and delivered to the root system, since it has been observed that
tomatoes can be cultured in aquaponic systems with comparable growth and
yields. I think if we merely ask ourselves if the pore water in a common
garden soil is as high in ionic strength as a hydroponic tomato nutrient
solution, then we must ask ourselves the very same questions and try to
supply the answer as to why, then, we get such phenomenal growth by growing
plants in the common garden dirt which possesses a reasonable level of
nutrients.
Here we go.
>They are not rules of thumb. Electric conductivity is a scientific measure
of the amount >of availables ions to the plants in the nutrient solution, in
the water extracting soils
I never said EC was not a scientific measure of ionic strength or total
dissolved solids.
What I meant by "rules of thumb" is not that the process of measuring
electrical conductivity is vague or inaccurate or non-scientific (for crying
out loud, I am a water quality scientist with peer-reviewed publications
which relied heavily upon total dissolved solids and EC (conductivity) data
measured in the field and in the lab).
Rather, I would say that these 2 following concepts come into play, which
may help you better understand my use of the phrase "rule of thumb".
First, that certain plants are categorized into groups that "Require"
certain ion strengths present as inorganic ions in the pore solution, and
secondly, that the electrical conductivity tells the whole story about
whether the nutrients are present or available.
So, for example if the hydroponic literature states that tomatoes "require"
ionic strengths of such and such PPM range, well this is a rule of thumb, a
classification for very useful purposes within hydroponic solutions, but it
is not necessarily a total exclusion of those plants in other environments,
and I suspect that it does not tell the whole story. That is all I meant.
>In hydroponics the ions are supplied free through salts, ready to be
ingested by the >plants. In other systems, ions could be free as salts
dissolved by water, or attached to >higher or insoluble molecules. These
ones should be transformed by microorganisms >in free soluble ions in order
to be taken by the plants. Plants cannot absorb molecules >in insoluble
form. So, the measure of conductivity is the measure of the true available
>food for plants in any system.
This is where I really wish I had an electronic chalk board or sketch pad to
illustrate what I was trying to get at. Let me try to draw up an
analogy...it is difficult for me to verbalize this concept I have here, but
I will try, and then, if I am quite wrong, well, so be it. Of course, as a
practioner of hydroponics, you and many on this list are familiar with EDTA.
It is a chelating agent, which goes by the long name of
ethylene-diaminetetra acetic acid. It can "chelate" metals such as iron,
manganese, and so forth. It keeps these nutrients in solution....otherwise
they would precipitate out as hydroxides and carbonates and the like, and
they would thus be less immediately available in a pure hydroponic type
solution, but the EDTA chelated metals are not by themselves in
solution...instead they are chelated, or "wrapped up in the claws" of the
EDTA. Chelate is derived from the Latin "claw". So, it is the chelated
complex as a whole....eg "FeEDTA" which is in solution.
Now, suppose you had an ion specific electrode which registered the presence
of nothing but calcium ions...in fact, let us say that it was so specific
that it could only detect and measure (by, let us say, a potential set up
across a selective ion membrane) only those free calcium ions in solution.
Now imagine that the solution that you introduced your ion specific
electrode into was calcium chelated entirely to EDTA... and by golly now
there is just not one free ion of Calcium in solution....bear with me cause
this is imaginary, not reality, and probably not a very good
analogy.so that if we reduced ourselves down to tiny little
nano-people and witnessed the molecular motion and location and passages of
ions, we could calmly float past the chelated calcium and we would see this
big cage surrounding our calcium ion, and we could swim past the ion
specific electrode and we would witness that the CaEDTA was not being
"picked up" as a free calcium ion by the electrode. Now we are reduced to a
gedanken experiment. I promise we won't next try to catch a light wave and
ask about the fundamentals of the universe.
Well, even though that was a small pile of little white lies, let me go back
to the ideas that 1) humus and other carrier molecules and surfaces can
deliver plant nutrients to plants to various degrees of efficiency without
the ions being totally "free" in solution, and therefore the total amount
available may be "cloaked" from certain measurement approaches, as
scientific and accurate as those approaches may be, and 2) that the
"stickiness" of some inorganic plant nutrient ions to some very large and
complex polyelectrolytes such as the humic acids varies according to the
species or valence of the nutrient ion in question, the pH of the solution,
the total ionic strength, and the characteristics of the humic acid
complexes themselves.
>Eternal discussion.
>Physiologicaly plants does not identify from where the ions came. To them
it is the >same that food cames fron a nutrient solution, an extracting of
soil, a bacterial >transformed fish water excreta, or other liquor.
Substantially there are not differences >between organic cultures and
hydroponics in the ingest of food by the plants.
I am not disagreeing with you on this point. I have said this many times.
Obviously I agree that a nitrate ion that came from a compost pile is
indistinguishable from a nitrate ion that came from Chilean Bat Guano, or
pure potassium nitrate salt. That is not the point I was trying to make. I
was trying to goad the notion that the EC might not be telling us the whole
story, as important and as accurate as EC measurement is.
>I say:
>If you have a rich fish water bacterial-treated-in-the-beds effluent with
the high ionic >strength nutrient that tomatoes needs you can expect as good
yields as in other well >feeded plants. I you haven't, your plants will be
poor, your produce scarce or your >flavor not good.
O.K this is where I choose to speculate that carrier compounds can deliver
simple plant nutrient ions to the plant by surface to surface exchange or
plant enzyme exchange, phagocytosis, or other mechanisms, and perhaps
provide an explaination as to how aquaponic systems can grow plants know to
be, by rule of thumb, "heavy feeders". This is where I am recklessly mixing
some of Resh's material with other notions.....That is why I would love to
have an electronic chalk board right now to illustrate what I am talking
about.
Let me ask you this: Does FeEDTA pass through a plant cell membrane as a
complete complex, or does it disassemble itself when it comes into contact
with the root membrane, and, subsequently, the Fe unlocks itself from the
claw cage it resides in and then migrates from the chelation complex and
passes into and through the plant root membrane? If either is the case, I
think I am starting to make part of my point.....or NOT.
Let me ask you this: Do you know of any siderophore complexes that are
produced by the likes of lower organisms such as actinomycetes which might
act as a complex of active sites and as reversible carriers of such
nutrients as iron, etc. to the plant root membrane...perhaps even passing
partway through the membrane?
How about this question: It has been reported that up to 20% of a plant's
photosynthate product is "leaked" outside of the root membrane boundary and
into the microzone immediately surrounding the root-soil water boundary
layer. I also happen to know that there are alleleochemical effects that
certain species of plants have in the immediate vicinity of an established
plant growing in the dirt. These allelochemicals are exuded by the roots
and inhibit other roots or inhibit germination of other plants. Some of
these chemicals are things like gallic acid, which is an aromatic ring
structure, not a simple sugar.....If that is the case, and the photosynate
products are any larger than simple sugars....which they appear to be in
many cases.....let us say some complex starches or polysaccharides and even
secondary metabolites like terpenes and sesquiterpenes, and on and
onare leached out of the root membranes...and thus the endomycorhyzzal
symbiosis is established in which soil fungi derive the benefits of reduced
carbon (fuel) in exchange for "bringing nutrients to the plants", then
doesn't it stand to reason that the passage of relatively large, organic
"chelation" molecules carrying inorganic and organically bound nutrients
could also be possible?
That is, if relatively large molecules from the plant can leach out,
couldn't some means of passage of "foreign" or symbiotic molecules also
enter the root and vascular system of the plant? It's a jungle down there
and it appears to be more complex than a one way street or a foot path.
Agreed?
>Tom confuses me a little bit here. But I feel we should be agree that
without >decomposition of organic matter ( King Carbon ?) there are not
possibilities for >plants of taking its food. The 80% of phosphorous cannot
be assimilated without such >bacterial work.
O.K. I think I was saying that decomposition does in fact take place....no
disagreement there. But I am not necessarily agreeing with you 100% that
the ion has to launch itself into the void of the solution as a pure,
isolated ion....although that is certainly one way, and perhaps the primary
way. In this I am being, admittedly, quite heretical and speculative. If
oxygen and carbon dioxide can move in and out the red blood cell, into and
off of hemoglobin, then.....
We'll go to the next message.
This is fun.
Ted
| Message 19
Subject: Re : Salt
From: laberge 'at' cil.qc.ca (LABERGE MARC)
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 22:11:40 -0400
Thanks Bruce, I always use salt baths with my trout. As you mentioned, never
in the aquaponic system, but in a hospital tank. I use 3% or 30 000 ppm or
30 000 mg / liter or 30 000 grams / M3 ( all the same thing, but different
ways of expressing ) for 4-5 minutes. Sometimes longer, until the fish get
almost knocked out. I always use the canning salt.
Marc Laberge
Mont Tremblant
Quebec , Canada
| Message 20
Subject: Re: Polemics on EC (2) (continuation)
From: "TGTX"
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2001 21:16:52 -0500
>I say:
>O.K. I'm agree. But some is not all. My question, the question that helps
to improve >knowledge, is why ? .
Yes indeed, sir. Why is very important. Why will always be with us.
Constant craving. I only hope that I have not offered junk science or junk
food. I have speculated pretty broadly here and freely admit it. But this
is a refreshing form of improvisation for me and I find it quite interesting
and challenging try to discuss these things extemporaneously.
I have enjoyed our exchange and you have made some very good points.
I bid you good evening, sir, and I hope you will bring this up again and
provide more background information, critiques, or validation, if there is
any out there in your experience or research.
I hope that I have not been too befuddling in my ponderings.
Ted
|
