- Location
- NSW, Newstralya
This is a book..... ......
- Thread starter Clive
- Start date
Depends on a variety of factors. Stuff doesn't grow here for at least 8 months of the year but that doesn't mean the ground is burping up carbon that entire time. Just like the plants go dormant, so to does the soil microbial community.
Generally if you apply heat and food, the microbial community will take off and burn through the carbon faster, thereby not being a sink anymore. The act of ploughing uncovers the ground allowing it to heat up more, the act of fertilizing provides the food, put the two together and you can get extremely out of balance extremely fast.
The more untouched you can leave the soil, and to a point the plants, the more in balance the microbial community will be.
In addition when you're considering popular agronomic species, like wheat, that have been bred to have a lot of biomass above soil, it can be a challenge to get the carbon produced sequestered low enough so that it's in a longer term, slower breakdown, storage. This is why native grasslands with a diversity of species tend to be better at sequestering. A lot of native species have a greater root biomass than mass above ground. This places the carbon in a deeper, slower break down, larger pool. It's why native grasslands are considered better at sequestering than other fields. DD might be a better option at sequestering than just ploughing...and ploughing and ploughing, but it still isn't really a long term sink.
- Location
- Owaka, New Zealand
Pretty much, the key is "actively growing plants" - ie in a vegetative state of growth.
The more diverse the better, which is why a lot of the organic no-tillers have a succession crop sown before the cash crop boots, flowers, whatever it does, I guess the easiest demonstration of a regenerative system is a native woodland or forest - which is full of plants waiting for light, so when an old tree crashes down they are ready to take their turn.
Nature doesn't do "gaps", because that's not feeding her soil life; unless, as @Blaithin says the whole system is dormant, it rarely happens
- Location
- NSW, Newstralya
dormancy is pretty common here to, with heat or lack of moisture
a bit different in a green damp non brittle environment . . .
a bit different in a green damp non brittle environment . . .
I’m only 5 pages into this thread and the blind, and even wilful ignorance is fantastic, living proof of the attitudes that perhaps led to the events on Montgomery’s previous book?
Cannot for the life of me see the irony in the op listening to it whilst flying either.
Cannot for the life of me see the irony in the op listening to it whilst flying either.
- Location
- Owaka, New Zealand
Keep reading, it's woeful
you can see how that soil became dirt in the first place - fundamentalism
- Location
- Owaka, New Zealand
It's difficult to tell if it is dormant here or not, it can freeze alright but not to a depth of more than a few inches, worst case scenario.
So there's little excuse not to be building soil here.
- Location
- NSW, Newstralya
- Location
- Derbyshire
Thought I'd revive this thread with pic of this mornings post. I think there's going to be some extremely relevant content in here
@Jungle Bill this follows your 'heads up' on another thread. ?
@Jungle Bill this follows your 'heads up' on another thread. ?
In whose interest would it be to invest perhaps millions of pounds/dollars In genetically engineering a cereal crop that is both leguminous and a perennial crop?
Weed control in such a crop will of course create problems.
But after seeing articles in the farming press about farmers trying to grow leguminous crops in crops of wheat I do wonder if the theory of the above has lot going for it BUT and I say again BUT?
Any plant breeder would surely be creating their own down fall if they ever bred such a perennial/ leguminous plant?
The above may seem sci fi rubbish but perhaps an ideal to aim for?????
Perhaps @Clive may care to comment
Weed control in such a crop will of course create problems.
But after seeing articles in the farming press about farmers trying to grow leguminous crops in crops of wheat I do wonder if the theory of the above has lot going for it BUT and I say again BUT?
Any plant breeder would surely be creating their own down fall if they ever bred such a perennial/ leguminous plant?
The above may seem sci fi rubbish but perhaps an ideal to aim for?????
Perhaps @Clive may care to comment
Legumes are Fabaceae. Cereals are Poaceae.
Without having a degree in botany, I would say you can’t really make one the other. You can’t genetically engineer a cow into a horse.
There are cereals that are perennial. There are legumes that are perennial. When using annual versions to boost soil health, I think the more plausible solutions would be:
- Maturity times becoming more similar.
- Equipment ability to plant the crops as well as harvest and separate the crops from one another if needed.
- The necessity of different in crop herbicide options.
You would struggle to make a pea, wheat, or wheat, a pea. But there should be the ability to bring the two closer together in their handling and maturity, I would think.
There is unfortunately not a lot of focus in bringing perennial varieties farther ahead. That seems to be a University research area and the odd forage association goal instead of commercial use.
glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
Its the root nodules which make the nitrogen, not actually part of the peaplant.
Science could graft them onto wheat roots, but what inputs company is going to fund that,?
Thats been the perennial problem , no company will fund organic type low input type farmingresearch as they can't sell a product off it
Science could graft them onto wheat roots, but what inputs company is going to fund that,?
Thats been the perennial problem , no company will fund organic type low input type farmingresearch as they can't sell a product off it
No but they could sell books off it
Tbh Got that one in the op but still havnt read it because to put it bluntly ... If I'm going to read a book it will need to take me out of myself not about something I do 7 days a week as a job , vocation whatever.
but i have been reading about all the old railways and the reasons for failure ( or why they were closed ) and Charley Boormans ' By any means'
- Location
- Limousin, France
Follows on from "Dirt,the erosion of civilisation"
Which should be compulsory!You’d be getting into taxonomy then. If a cereal has roots that produce nitrogen, would it be a cereal anymore?
If a pulse started producing caryopsis seeds instead of in pods, is it still a pulse?
glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
The nodules are independent of the roots
Gm could fix it to wheat if someone funded it
Nodules are complex pieces formed through the interaction of rhizobia with the root structure. They are formed through signals coming from the entire plant. It’s not as simple as sticking them on a different plant.
An alien patchwork plant of a hodge podge of different classifications would be the only way to achieve such an organism. A Frankenstein plant taking pieces from other classifications to attempt to get an end product. You’d be creating a new class, not modifying an existing one.
An alien patchwork plant of a hodge podge of different classifications would be the only way to achieve such an organism. A Frankenstein plant taking pieces from other classifications to attempt to get an end product. You’d be creating a new class, not modifying an existing one.
And for that matter if the idea is they don’t want to develop it and therefore not make so much money on inputs for fertilizer, why have they not taken it out of legume crops. Soybeans is a huge crop. How much more money would they make on inputs if they GMd the ability out of soybeans.
glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
Because that would be too obvious a rip off
The details can be worked out, but they eould rather ransom us for fert every year