The ghost of farming future

[martian]

Excuse me. What is slugs?

Two pictures taken 30 yards apart this morning. Same field as above; no sign of anything attacking it, just a big difference in growth stage. Ground frozen.
Hardly used any slug pellets this year. Stopped growing osr and, under Clive's guidance, given up insecticides. Mind you, this land had our last bit of osr two years ago, but wheat last year (drilled on the green) didn't need slug bait either. Either we are blessed (dka to thank for this) or there is something else going on.

 

[Jim Bullock]

Excuse me. What is slugs?

Two pictures taken 30 yards apart this morning. Same field as above; no sign of anything attacking it, just a big difference in growth stage. Ground frozen.
Hardly used any slug pellets this year. Stopped growing osr and, under Clive's guidance, given up insecticides. Mind you, this land had our last bit of osr two years ago, but wheat last year (drilled on the green) didn't need slug bait either. Either we are blessed (dka to thank for this) or there is something else going on.

John
Have you dug a hole to see what the soil structure is like...my guess is that your problem is due to poor drainage and subsequently poor rooting. I think slug damage is just like black grass in so much as some soils are more prone to hosting slugs and/or black grass than others. There is nothing you can do about it! It's a fact of life you just have to work around it!

 

[martian]

Jim
There's dry well structured soil under the surface, but top couple of inches has run together a bit and is not letting the rain through very well. There's standing water in odd spots dotted about. From experience I'd say it will grow away ok in the spring. Looking at the photos again I see that there is actually a decent covering of wheat straw in both plots and the thinner bit is looking healthier than in other parts of the field where the straw has disappeared. Oats are pleasingly robust...

 

[bactosoil]

Have seen many times the top few inches being wet and below dry, with in most cases bacterial populations being the cause

 

[dontknowanything]

Have seen many times the top few inches being wet and below dry, with in most cases bacterial populations being the cause

How do you know it's the cause and not the effect?

 

[bactosoil]

Through testing, profiling and replication its certain that bacteria are not the effect but the cause

 

[Hartwig]

Through testing, profiling and replication its certain that bacteria are not the effect but the cause

If that is true, it springs to my mind that many agchems have an effect on bacteria/fungi-ratios and populations. From my gut feeling I think especially about glyphosate, but maybe I`m missing out other todays agchems.

Does anybody know if there`s something about this ?? Or maybe even some data or trials out there ??

 

[dontknowanything]

Through testing, profiling and replication its certain that bacteria are not the effect but the cause

Sorry, but that sounds like the kind of wishy washy non-answer that tries to blind with "science". Got any more details?

 

[SilliamWhale]

If that is true, it springs to my mind that many agchems have an effect on bacteria/fungi-ratios and populations. From my gut feeling I think especially about glyphosate, but maybe I`m missing out other todays agchems.

Does anybody know if there`s something about this ?? Or maybe even some data or trials out there ??

They are bound to have an affect. As would crop type. As would monoculture, tillage etc. I still think glyphosate is probably "less bad" than others but we will see more in the future.

I think if you can build resilience in soil by whatever means then you have a better chance of ameliorating some of the issues. But I think in the farmed environment it is very difficult (not realistic?) to get the perfect balance.

 

[bactosoil]

If that is true, it springs to my mind that many agchems have an effect on bacteria/fungi-ratios and populations. From my gut feeling I think especially about glyphosate, but maybe I`m missing out other todays agchems.


Does anybody know if there`s something about this ?? Or maybe even some data or trials out there ??


agchems do have a quantifiable effect but it is not exclusive to gluphosate and yes there are trials in these areas


Sorry, but that sounds like the kind of wishy washy non-answer that tries to blind with "science". Got any more details?


Not trying to be elusive but yes maybe a bit coy , there are new testing protocols that I have seen that can clearly show different bacterial densitys and their effects but not down to me to go ‘taddar ‘ with more ,as that is the prerogative of others .The effect of bacteria on infiltration is very real and effective and changes much faster than you would think .



They are bound to have an affect. As would crop type. As would monoculture, tillage etc. I still think glyphosate is probably "less bad" than others but we will see more in the future.

I think if you can build resilience in soil by whatever means then you have a better chance of ameliorating some of the issues. But I think in the farmed environment it is very difficult (not realistic?) to get the perfect balance.


Glyphosate is possibly no better or worse than others but understanding its effects are interesting, there has been work done on completely disrupting the action of glyphosate once applied and though you may ask why would you want to, the key to it is that if you understand how to render it totally ineffective against plants using a very low volume liquid inoculant you will then understand how to use chemicals more efficiently ( or not at all) .In relation to balance I do not believe any soil is perfectly balanced as biology changes from hour to hour

 

[Jim Bullock]

Have seen many times the top few inches being wet and below dry, with in most cases bacterial populations being the cause

We have this problem on some of soils, the question is how do we improve the Bacteria/Fungi ratio...Compost?

 

[Simon C]

Have seen many times the top few inches being wet and below dry, with in most cases bacterial populations being the cause

@bactosoil you talk a lot of sense and have made some good contributions to this forum but I have to take issue with this.

I too have seen many times the top few inches being wet and below dry and without exception it is always a cultivation that causes the problem, however deep or shallow that is. If you create a loosened layer of soil on the surface, water will not soak through into the more dense soil beneath and this is why undisturbed, no-till soils drain much better than cultivated soils. Obviously if the surface layer is holding water, the bacterial population will change from aerobic to predominantly anaerobic and is why wet soil stinks.

I realise that many soil organisms try to change the soil to the conditions that they, themselves prefer, but I cannot see how, if the soil is in a good aerobic and free draining state, anaerobic bacteria can suddenly proliferate and make the surface layer wet and mucky.

 

[shakerator]

@bactosoil you talk a lot of sense and have made some good contributions to this forum but I have to take issue with this.

I too have seen many times the top few inches being wet and below dry and without exception it is always a cultivation that causes the problem, however deep or shallow that is. If you create a loosened layer of soil on the surface, water will not soak through into the more dense soil beneath and this is why undisturbed, no-till soils drain much better than cultivated soils. Obviously if the surface layer is holding water, the bacterial population will change from aerobic to predominantly anaerobic and is why wet soil stinks.

I realise that many soil organisms try to change the soil to the conditions that they, themselves prefer, but I cannot see how, if the soil is in a good aerobic and free draining state, anaerobic bacteria can suddenly proliferate and make the surface layer wet and mucky.

Pasteur vs Bechamp

 

[Simon C]

Pasteur vs Bechamp

Thanks @shakerator, I had no idea who Bechamp was so googled Pasteur vs Bechamp, very interesting.

 

[bactosoil]

over enrichment / excess availability of carbohydrates will cause bacterial population flux though there are other secondary natural feedstocks that also cause this , if you look at soils in the UK or on other continents in permanent or partial cultivation or even true virgin soils similar problems can be found and bacteria contributes to the making of a wet layer rather than is a consequence of it . Simon you are comparing the infiltration variables of a physically broken soil with an break layer without or poor hydraulic connection v a no till soil that has time to improve its hydraulic draw through fungal and bacteria action in both planes and the two are very different .The fact that you see good infiltration in you no-till soils over conventional cultivation could well be due in part to the balance of biology being better in the no-till soils with better management over establishment but again so many massive variables its impossible to clearly state without a huge amount of field specific analysis

Our soils though are not only living and breathing are very dimensional , with varying ph and biology and nutrient/mineral levels throughout the soil horizons that can co-ordinate change within itself , one for google is quorum sensing which is another factor to throw into the huge melting pot and it is very influential ..

 

[Simon C]

over enrichment / excess availability of carbohydrates will cause bacterial population flux though there are other secondary natural feedstocks that also cause this , if you look at soils in the UK or on other continents in permanent or partial cultivation or even true virgin soils similar problems can be found and bacteria contributes to the making of a wet layer rather than is a consequence of it . Simon you are comparing the infiltration variables of a physically broken soil with an break layer without or poor hydraulic connection v a no till soil that has time to improve its hydraulic draw through fungal and bacteria action in both planes and the two are very different .The fact that you see good infiltration in you no-till soils over conventional cultivation could well be due in part to the balance of biology being better in the no-till soils with better management over establishment but again so many massive variables its impossible to clearly state without a huge amount of field specific analysis

Our soils though are not only living and breathing are very dimensional , with varying ph and biology and nutrient/mineral levels throughout the soil horizons that can co-ordinate change within itself , one for google is quorum sensing which is another factor to throw into the huge melting pot and it is very influential ..

Can you give an example of when carbohydrates in the soil surface would become in excess. We know using molasses helps promote bacteria, whether in the soil or even in a compost tea brew, so what you say makes sense, but how do they then make the soil hold onto water and are you talking about aerobic or anaerobic bacteria.

This has got me thinking about a problem I have with my soil after growing peas. The peas do very well in my nice structured no-till soil but they leave it in a poor condition afterwords, as soon as autumn rains come, the surface runs together and seems to hold onto water like you are talking about. Could pea residue and their roots be considered high in carbohydrates and therefor good bacterial feed as opposed to most other crop residues which are high lignin, fungal foods.

 

[bactosoil]

Bacteria will grab whatever high value feed they can in a preferential order and if say molasses or nitrogen is available then they will consume this first and go onto iron and carbon , the way the bacteria make soil impermeable is not so much by density but structure and the creation of bio films .

Your issue with peas maybe caused by the plants symbiosis with bacteria that provides carbohydrates to those bacteria so they can fix nitrogen, once the plant is harvested there will be some nitrogen fixing going on post harvest and without the plants nitrogen uptake being a factor , an imbalance will happen resulting in other bacterial blooms that with have a consequence though other variables can come into play

The ability of bad bacteria to lay dormant and then to assess and react to a changing environment is grossly underestimated and this is where quorum sensing has such an important part of the whole cycle

Have seen work by others feeding bacteria but not by carbohydrates as this creates a rush and balance is everything for bacteria and fungi

 

[Simon C]

Bacteria will grab whatever high value feed they can in a preferential order and if say molasses or nitrogen is available then they will consume this first and go onto iron and carbon , the way the bacteria make soil impermeable is not so much by density but structure and the creation of bio films .

Your issue with peas maybe caused by the plants symbiosis with bacteria that provides carbohydrates to those bacteria so they can fix nitrogen, once the plant is harvested there will be some nitrogen fixing going on post harvest and without the plants nitrogen uptake being a factor , an imbalance will happen resulting in other bacterial blooms that with have a consequence though other variables can come into play

The ability of bad bacteria to lay dormant and then to assess and react to a changing environment is grossly underestimated and this is where quorum sensing has such an important part of the whole cycle

Have seen work by others feeding bacteria but not by carbohydrates as this creates a rush and balance is everything for bacteria and fungi

I don't think it is the symbiotic ryzobium bacteria because I have never seen this problem after beans or lucerne but I do feel that it may still be something to do with pea residue being quite different to the high carbon residues of most other crops. Baled pea hulm is nutritionally, almost as good as hay, unlike anything else.

The only solution I can see is to grow a cover crop between the peas and the following wheat drilling, but there isn't much time. I think I may have to try broadcasting some mustard into the peas before harvest, to see if it makes a difference.

 

[Richard III]

This has got me thinking about a problem I have with my soil after growing peas. The peas do very well in my nice structured no-till soil but they leave it in a poor condition afterwords, as soon as autumn rains come, the surface runs together and seems to hold onto water like you are talking about. Could pea residue and their roots be considered high in carbohydrates and therefor good bacterial feed as opposed to most other crop residues which are high lignin, fungal foods.

Hi Simon,
I was talking to someone today who said their bean ground had run together badly this autumn, as has mine on the wetter areas. They thought it could be due to the beans leaving the soil extremely friable and loose, almost like a cultivated seedbed. Probably nothing to do with your problem, but I thought it worth a mention.

 

[bactosoil]

I don't think it is the symbiotic ryzobium bacteria because I have never seen this problem after beans or lucerne but I do feel that it may still be something to do with pea residue being quite different to the high carbon residues of most other crops. Baled pea hulm is nutritionally, almost as good as hay, unlike anything else.

Have you ever recorded rooting depth of the three and compared ?