Humic/Fulvic Acid, Root Rot, Fusarium, fertilizer meeting Kindersley/Humboldt

[tweety]

Like jumpstart, its called paying for it twice....

This is exactly what agriculture needs. More effective ways to mine what's there.

[tweety]

Thanks for posting Klause!

The first one, ..... "There was no statistically significant difference in total biomass or seed yield among treatments"

Second, dry matter increased by 22%. But no yield, and i don't want to pay for the study.

Third, from Pakistan, ya that helps, also no yield data, and no i'm not going to pay to read it.

Fourth, Plants were taller, um ok. No yield data. No mention if compared to properly fertilized trials

Fifth. Pakistan again, no mention of comparing a properly fertilized check. Since yields were around 15 bu/ac it is doubtful. A trial that shows adding nutrients helps.

Sixth, Pakistan again - btw Pakistani soils are highly deficient in organic matter, have a very high pH, and difficulty in uptake of nutrients. Ya, that's applicable.

Seventh, do i bother? Nope, Pakistani again. No mention of yield or that checks were properly fertilized.

Oh sure, now you're gonna say i'm a troll. Or some other flippant comment. Oh BTW, i live in Canada, not in Pakistan.

[biglentil]

Thanks for posting Klause!

The first one, ..... "There was no statistically significant difference in total biomass or seed yield among treatments"

Second, dry matter increased by 22%. But no yield, and i don't want to pay for the study.

Third, from Pakistan, ya that helps, also no yield data, and no i'm not going to pay to read it.

Fourth, Plants were taller, um ok. No yield data. No mention if compared to properly fertilized trials

Fifth. Pakistan again, no mention of comparing a properly fertilized check. Since yields were around 15 bu/ac it is doubtful. A trial that shows adding nutrients helps.

Sixth, Pakistan again - btw Pakistani soils are highly deficient in organic matter, have a very high pH, and difficulty in uptake of nutrients. Ya, that's applicable.

Seventh, do i bother? Nope, Pakistani again. No mention of yield or that checks were properly fertilized.

Oh sure, now you're gonna say i'm a troll. Or some other flippant comment. Oh BTW, i live in Canada, not in Pakistan.

Tweety how much does monsanto pay you to be a shill?

[Klause]

Like jumpstart, its called paying for it twice....

This is exactly what agriculture needs. More effective ways to mine what's there.

Maybe spend some time learning about ion exchange. We have highly calcareous soils. Acids neutralize pH making what you apply more available.


Or do you think adding 80lbs of N makes 80lbs available to the plant. LOL

[farmaholic]

Klaus. I think alot of people understand not all the nutrients applied get used by the crop. Some is outright lost and some is tied up and some needs to be converted to plant available. Elemental sulphur. Nitrogen volatilization and leaching. Phosphate conversion. It's the micros that I have little experience with. Are they literally there in abundance but not plant available and the humic acid in the seed row causes a chemical reaction releasing them from their bond? My mining comment basically was making the point if the elements that are there in limited amounts, adding something to get more of a limited finite element available isn't replacing what was used.

[tweety]

Oh and there it is, the shill comment. The shill is actually the one making a claim without any proof. The hawker, the swindler, the over enthusiastic customer.

So this is what Ag has become? Welcome to the dark ages.

I am sure you will find plenty of success with the product. BlindLentil already has the chequebook out.

[stonepicker]

Why do most people on here have to turn every idea into a confrontation like a bunch of teenage girls?

This is a great place to learn about ideas and options. I don't want to see pushy sales pitches (which dyker has not) but even more info would be great. I know nothing about these products other than the names, would like to know more. The contribution from guys that used them is priceless compared to most research. Don't insult them and shut them down, fine to disagree if you've got different results but if you haven't got experience keep the attitude in check.
Thank you to those that post on this site with good info and honesty, the few that don't I don't usually need to read past your first line before skipping to next post.

I agree. Farmer's experiences with a product are far more valuable than "peer reviewed articles" tweety your adding nothing to this thread, go troll another one.

[blackpowder]

I'm gonna stay on the fence here but teety not being troll.
Everyone needs maintain cool.
Over 30+ years ive bought a lot of fairy dust. Maybe some paid. Mostly didnt because all other agronomy lower then.
Today if a klause swears by it, im listening. And if a Regas Karamanos poos it, I may trust his credentials, but am critical of some of his reports for a few reasons.

[Ache4Acres]

I agree BP. Scientific studies are so biased and often manipulated by whoever is the sponsor de jour. either intentionally or through sloppy methodology

What I can't wrap my head around the humates is that they are basically compost. You are putting on minuscule amounts compared the massive load of everything else in the soil. Maybe you may pull ph down a minuscule fraction and tweak up your CEC a hair.

Since every farmer typically has different results based on their soil etc, best would be for everyone here to give it a spin this year as a trial on a quarter or two and then we can all reignite the debate here in the fall

[the big wheel]

Tweety sells fertilizer? Hahahahaha was told.