In this Podcast Extra, Join John as he answers a wide range of grower-submitted questions covering challenges in agriculture. The discussion focuses on managing high summer leaf temperatures, optimizing organic nitrogen budgets, and navigating severe base saturation imbalances. John emphasizes the critical connection between precise crop nutrition, active soil biology, and the natural suppression of destructive diseases and pests.
Other topics discussed include:
- Distinguishing between air temperature and leaf temperature, highlighting how a healthy wax lipid layer lowers a plant’s canopy temperature by 8 to 10 degrees.
- Managing the photorespiration process in C3 and C4 plants to prevent protein degradation and the buildup of high ammonium levels.
- Utilizing trace amounts of nickel (3 to 10 grams per acre) as an essential enzyme cofactor to rapidly lower ammonium in plant sap.
- Applying Rejuvenate as a foliar tool to provide stressed crops with carbohydrates, enzymes, and high-energy compounds.
- Addressing low magnesium and potassium in soils with extreme calcium base saturation using targeted applications.
- Citing historical 1960s data on fire blight indicating the disease cannot establish when sap sucrose levels remain above a 22–26% threshold.
- Restructuring high-chloride potato programs by pairing Rebound micronutrients with Holo-K, SeaShield, and SeaStim.
- Remediating the typical “burnt leaf tips” on garlic by satisfying the crop’s unusually high molybdenum requirement.
- Evaluating the limitations of indigenous microorganisms (IMOs) and acknowledging that 90% of living soil microbes require active plant roots to propagate.
- Deploying PhotoMag to optimize plant sap ratios, delivering magnesium, sulfur, molybdenum, and boron to efficiently convert excess ammonium into complete proteins .
- Advocating for a national food policy focused on nutritional quality and farmer economic viability over cheap, abundant food.
- Utilizing MacroPack and MicroPack within target foliar combinations to halt disease progression.
- Understanding why high-salt content fertilizers solubilize trace minerals and leach them down the soil profile over a 20- to 40-year period.
Additional Resources
To learn more about managing nutrition during Critical Points of Influence, please watch this webinar.
To learn more about how optimizing foliar applications, please watch this webinar.
To learn more about AEA’s Integrity Grown program, please listen to this podcast episode.
To hear John and Michael McNeill’s conversations, please listen to this podcast episode.
About John Kempf
A top expert in biological and regenerative farming, John founded AEA in 2006 to help fellow farmers by providing the education, tools, and strategies that will have a global effect on the food supply and those who grow it. Through intense study and the knowledge gleaned from many industry leaders, John is building a comprehensive systems-based approach to plant nutrition – a system solidly based on the sciences of plant physiology, mineral nutrition, and soil microbiology.
Support For This Show & Helping You Grow
Since 2006, AEA has been on a mission to help growers become more resilient, efficient, and profitable with regenerative agriculture. AEA works directly with growers to apply its unique line of liquid mineral crop nutrition products and biological inoculants. Informed by cutting-edge plant and soil data-gathering techniques, AEA’s science-based programs empower farm operations to meet the crop quality markers that matter the most.
AEA has created real and lasting change on millions of acres with its products and data-driven services by working hand-in-hand with growers to produce healthier soil, stronger crops, and higher profits. Beyond working on the ground with growers, AEA leads in regenerative agriculture media and education, producing and distributing the popular and highly-regarded Regenerative Agriculture Podcast, inspiring webinars, and other educational content that serve as go-to resources for growers worldwide.
Visit https://advancingecoag.com to learn more.
–>
Podcast Transcript
0:05 – 0:07
Hi, friends. Excuse me.
0:07 – 0:09
Hi, friends. Welcome to our Ask Me
0:09 – 0:13
Anything session. I have a lot of fun with
0:13 – 0:16
these, and I know a lot of people enjoy
0:16 – 0:17
sending questions in.
0:17 – 0:20
So, if you are a subscriber to the
0:20 – 0:23
newsletter, one of the things that we've
0:23 – 0:26
offered, if you're a subscriber to the
0:26 – 0:28
newsletter, then those subscribers get
0:28 – 0:30
early notification of the Ask Me Anything
0:30 – 0:33
and they can send questions in advance.
0:33 – 0:36
So, we have a number of those questions
0:36 – 0:38
that have been submitted in advance.
0:38 – 0:41
I'm going to start our discussion with
0:41 – 0:44
those. And feel free to submit any
0:44 – 0:46
questions here in the chat as well.
0:46 – 0:50
And I will get to those as best as I
0:50 – 0:53
am able. And if you want to pre submit
0:53 – 0:56
questions in the future, just subscribe to
0:56 – 0:59
our newsletter and send those in to us and
0:59 – 1:01
be happy to respond to you.
1:01 – 1:04
So, all right, without anything further
1:04 – 1:07
We're just going to jump right in and see
1:07 – 1:09
what all great questions are you've been
1:09 – 1:12
able to come up with so far.
1:12 – 1:15
So, the first question here is from Jana
1:15 – 1:18
Could you please go deeper on supporting
1:18 – 1:20
vegetable crops during the hot summer
1:20 – 1:22
period when leaf temperatures push plants
1:22 – 1:23
from photosynthesis into photorespiration?
1:24 – 1:27
In our sap analysis, all nitrogen
1:27 – 1:29
fractions are above optimum, especially
1:29 – 1:30
ammonium nitrogen.
1:30 – 1:31
And total nitrogen.
1:31 – 1:33
Magnesium, sulfur, molybdenum, and boron
1:33 – 1:36
are all at optimal or slightly above
1:36 – 1:40
optimal levels. What would be the good
1:40 – 1:43
strategy for this few months of high
1:43 – 1:44
temperatures? All right.
1:44 – 1:47
So, the question that Jen is asking if
1:47 – 1:50
you're not familiar with the context here,
1:50 – 1:53
what happens when you have high
1:53 – 1:56
temperatures? And if I recall correctly,
1:56 – 1:58
for C3 photosynthetic wet pathway plants,
1:58 – 2:01
when leaf temperature, this is An
2:01 – 2:02
important distinction.
2:02 – 2:04
I'm talking here about leaf temperature,
2:04 – 2:06
not air temperature.
2:06 – 2:09
But when leaf temperature gets warmer than
2:09 – 2:11
78 degrees Fahrenheit, plants switch from
2:11 – 2:13
photosynthesis dominant to
2:13 – 2:14
photorespiration dominant.
2:14 – 2:17
In other words, they are consuming energy
2:17 – 2:19
faster than they are generating energy.
2:19 – 2:22
And in that process, there's also some
2:22 – 2:25
water metabolism aspects that are
2:25 – 2:26
interesting as well.
2:26 – 2:28
But from an energy perspective what
2:28 – 2:32
happens here is that they, because they
2:32 – 2:35
are consuming energy faster than they are
2:35 – 2:37
generating it through the photosynthesis
2:37 – 2:39
process, they will deplete, they will
2:39 – 2:42
become depleted of available sugars to use
2:42 – 2:44
as an energy source.
2:45 – 2:47
And they begin extracting energy from
2:47 – 2:49
proteins and degrading proteins.
2:49 – 2:52
And so the result of that, protein
2:52 – 2:54
degradation, is what we would call the
2:54 – 2:57
proteolysis process plants that have high.
2:57 – 2:59
Called the proteolysis process is plants
2:59 – 3:02
that have high levels of ammonium because
3:02 – 3:05
ammonium is the end metabolite of this
3:05 – 3:06
protein degradation process.
3:06 – 3:09
Where the plants are essentially one way
3:09 – 3:12
to think about it is you could say they're
3:12 – 3:14
essentially catabolizing themselves and
3:14 – 3:17
using proteins as a source of energy
3:17 – 3:18
instead of sugars.
3:18 – 3:21
And that results in elevated levels of
3:21 – 3:23
ammonium within the plant sap, which
3:23 – 3:26
results in all kinds of disease and insect
3:26 – 3:28
susceptibility. But particularly, there's
3:28 – 3:31
a handful of insects that well, I
3:31 – 3:33
shouldn't even kind of group them with
3:33 – 3:35
insects, but they're obviously not.
3:35 – 3:38
Spider mites show up in this profile very
3:38 – 3:41
strongly if you have high temperature
3:41 – 3:43
conditions. So basically, any disease or
3:43 – 3:46
any insect that is commonly associated
3:46 – 3:49
with hot temperatures or shows up in high
3:49 – 3:51
temperatures, almost always that is
3:51 – 3:53
associated with high ammonium levels.
3:53 – 3:56
So what they really need is not the
3:56 – 3:59
high temperatures, they need the high
3:59 – 4:02
ammonium levels that are associated with
4:02 – 4:04
those high temperatures in plants.
4:04 – 4:07
And the, so I mentioned leaf temperature
4:07 – 4:11
of 70 degrees for C3 plants for C4
4:11 – 4:13
photosynthetic pathway plants, which is
4:13 – 4:16
our warm season grasses, corn, sorghum,
4:16 – 4:18
sedan grass, and so forth.
4:18 – 4:21
If I recall correctly, the threshold there
4:21 – 4:24
is a leaf temperature of 86 degrees
4:24 – 4:27
Fahrenheit. And I pointed out the
4:27 – 4:29
distinction between leaf temperature and
4:29 – 4:32
air temperature because the healthier a
4:32 – 4:35
plant becomes the higher the wax and oil
4:35 – 4:39
lipid layer on the leaf surface, the more
4:39 – 4:42
efficient plants are at cooling themselves
4:42 – 4:45
because that wax and oil layer does a
4:45 – 4:48
couple of things. One is it's better at
4:48 – 4:51
reflecting solar radiation, and so there's
4:51 – 4:53
actually less heat absorption from the
4:53 – 4:55
atmosphere and from solar radiation.
4:55 – 4:57
So that's one aspect.
4:57 – 5:00
But the other aspect is waxes have these
5:00 – 5:02
interesting characteristics in that they
5:02 – 5:05
are efficient conductors and reflectors at
5:05 – 5:09
the same time. So it also, not only is
5:09 – 5:12
it a good reflector of heat and energy,
5:12 – 5:15
but also they're good at conducting, which
5:15 – 5:17
means they're good at cooling.
5:17 – 5:20
They're good at helping the plant to cool
5:20 – 5:23
down. So we have some data, some field
5:23 – 5:25
data that various growers, particularly
5:25 – 5:28
tree fruit growers and vineyards, have
5:28 – 5:30
actually measured this over time where.
5:30 – 5:34
Blocks that were on an AEA protocol for a
5:34 – 5:37
several year period, the leaf canopy could
5:37 – 5:40
easily be on a very hot summer day,
5:40 – 5:43
temperatures in the 90s or even the low
5:43 – 5:47
hundreds, the leaf canopy can be eight to
5:47 – 5:50
10 degrees Fahrenheit lower than a section
5:50 – 5:53
or a different block that has been on a
5:53 – 5:54
different nutritional program.
5:55 – 5:58
So that's quite substantial from a
5:58 – 6:00
Perspective of additional energy
6:00 – 6:02
generation and photosynthesis versus
6:02 – 6:03
photorespiration dominant.
6:03 – 6:06
So that's the context in which Jana is
6:06 – 6:08
asking this question.
6:08 – 6:11
And of course, she focuses on magnesium,
6:11 – 6:13
sulfur, molybdenum, and boron because
6:13 – 6:16
those are the nutrients that are contained
6:16 – 6:19
in photomag that are needed for optimum
6:19 – 6:22
protein synthesis to convert the various
6:22 – 6:25
forms of nitrogen into complete proteins.
6:25 – 6:28
So, Jana, to answer your question, you say
6:28 – 6:31
that all nitrogen fractions are above
6:31 – 6:34
optimum, especially ammonium nitrogen and
6:34 – 6:37
total nitrogen. So, there are two pathways
6:37 – 6:40
to consider here. The one pathway is how
6:40 – 6:44
can we make sure that the plant has
6:44 – 6:47
the tools and the ability, the nutrients
6:47 – 6:50
that it needs to convert ammonium to
6:50 – 6:51
complete proteins?
6:51 – 6:53
So, that's one consideration.
6:53 – 6:57
And the other consideration is to ask the
6:57 – 6:59
question do we perhaps have excessive
6:59 – 7:02
levels of ammonium, or excuse me,
7:02 – 7:05
excessive levels of total nitrogen?
7:05 – 7:08
And would it be easier for the plant
7:08 – 7:11
to metabolize ammonium if our total
7:11 – 7:13
nitrogen levels were lower?
7:13 – 7:16
So when you suggest that total nitrogen
7:16 – 7:19
levels are above optimum, that's one of
7:19 – 7:23
the places that I would look is to
7:23 – 7:26
say, how can we reduce our total nitrogen
7:26 – 7:29
levels? Do we have over overapplication Is
7:29 – 7:31
the soil mineralizing too much?
7:31 – 7:35
Some of the things that we can do, if
7:35 – 7:38
applied in slightly larger doses, is that
7:38 – 7:41
humicarb can be very effective at tying it
7:41 – 7:44
up. So you mentioned vegetable crops, so
7:44 – 7:47
you could look at putting on an irrigation
7:47 – 7:49
application of humicarb to perhaps slow
7:49 – 7:51
down the absorption a little bit.
7:51 – 7:54
Something else that can be effective is
7:54 – 7:56
elevating magnesium even slightly more,
7:56 – 7:58
and that will actually lower the
7:58 – 8:01
absorption of nitrogen into the crop.
8:01 – 8:03
You mentioned that you were already
8:03 – 8:06
slightly above optimal levels, so I don't
8:06 – 8:09
know exactly what that means, but you
8:09 – 8:11
might consider increasing magnesium even
8:11 – 8:13
more using photomag or magnesium sulfate.
8:13 – 8:16
Photomag would be a good source here.
8:16 – 8:19
So that would be the one suggestion to
8:19 – 8:21
moderate total nitrogen absorption and
8:21 – 8:24
make sure that we don't have excesses.
8:24 – 8:28
And then the second aspect is a nutrient
8:28 – 8:31
that we don't speak a lot about because
8:31 – 8:34
there's a very long list of cautions
8:34 – 8:37
around using it here in North America, and
8:37 – 8:40
that is nickel. So, nickel is an essential
8:40 – 8:43
enzyme cofactor for enabling the plant to
8:43 – 8:45
convert ammonia. This, because this
8:45 – 8:47
photorespiration process where plants are
8:47 – 8:49
catabolizing proteins and they get
8:49 – 8:52
degraded to ammonium, the plant has the
8:52 – 8:55
capacity to convert that ammonium back
8:55 – 8:56
into complete proteins.
8:56 – 9:00
And to do that, one of the critical enzyme
9:00 – 9:02
cofactors to facilitate that is nickel.
9:02 – 9:05
Now, the quantity of nickel required is
9:05 – 9:08
tiny. We're talking three to five grams
9:08 – 9:12
per acre for most crops and a maximum of
9:12 – 9:13
10 grams per acre.
9:13 – 9:17
For some crops that have a high nickel
9:17 – 9:19
requirement. Pecans are an outlier.
9:19 – 9:21
They have an extremely high nickel
9:21 – 9:24
requirement. And they're the only, I
9:24 – 9:27
think, one of the only crops that is
9:27 – 9:29
recognized as actually having nickel
9:29 – 9:32
deficiencies or having the capacity for
9:32 – 9:32
nickel deficiencies.
9:32 – 9:36
And so there are a number of nickel
9:36 – 9:38
products available in the marketplace that
9:38 – 9:40
are labeled for pecans specifically.
9:41 – 9:44
So the quantities of nickel are required
9:44 – 9:47
are tiny. And a good proportion of
9:47 – 9:49
agricultural soils already have nickel.
9:49 – 9:50
So it very seldom.
9:50 – 9:53
Shows up as being something that Is
9:53 – 9:55
worthwhile addressing or needs addressing.
9:55 – 9:57
But there's been, if you've done
9:57 – 10:00
everything else and you still have high
10:00 – 10:03
ammonium levels, I would take a look at
10:03 – 10:06
addressing nickel in very tiny dosages.
10:06 – 10:09
And my experience has been that that will
10:09 – 10:11
drop ammonium levels very rapidly.
10:11 – 10:14
Now there is one other aspect, one other
10:14 – 10:18
piece that these and then we have to look
10:18 – 10:21
at the amount of ammonia that these plants
10:21 – 10:24
need as well in order to Convert ammonium
10:24 – 10:27
into complete proteins, and that is they
10:27 – 10:28
need sugar.
10:28 – 10:31
Energy. They need some level of energy
10:31 – 10:32
coming from sugars.
10:32 – 10:35
So one of the tools that I've observed
10:35 – 10:38
being used very, very successfully in when
10:38 – 10:40
plants are very stressed, very drought
10:40 – 10:43
stressed or heat stressed, is actually
10:43 – 10:44
putting on foliar applications of
10:44 – 10:48
rejuvenate. And you can also use sugar or
10:48 – 10:50
other But Rejuvenate is very effective
10:50 – 10:52
because it doesn't just contain
10:52 – 10:54
carbohydrates, it also contains enzymes
10:54 – 10:57
and other very high energy Compounds that
10:57 – 10:59
contribute lots of energy to a plant.
10:59 – 11:03
And so it is actually, these plants need a
11:03 – 11:06
source of energy, as well as nickel, as
11:06 – 11:09
well as these other elements that you're
11:09 – 11:10
already working on.
11:10 – 11:13
And that will facilitate the conversion of
11:13 – 11:15
ammonium back into complete proteins.
11:15 – 11:18
So that's the comprehensive answer to your
11:18 – 11:20
question. And it's a great question.
11:20 – 11:23
If you're working on it in this way with
11:23 – 11:26
the approach that you're taking, it's
11:26 – 11:28
fascinating to observe how much more
11:28 – 11:31
productive plants can be in heat stressed
11:31 – 11:33
environments than we commonly give them
11:33 – 11:36
credit for if we just support them with
11:36 – 11:40
nutrition and we enable them to lower leaf
11:40 – 11:40
canopy temperature.
11:43 – 11:46
All right. Next question here is from
11:46 – 11:50
Dexter. I keep hearing you advising to not
11:50 – 11:54
front load high amounts of nitrogen at the
11:54 – 11:57
start of the season, but I'm struggling to
11:57 – 12:00
find a different cost effective approach
12:00 – 12:01
for organic production.
12:01 – 12:05
Well, Dexter, we can partially pause this
12:05 – 12:07
question right here with this comment
12:07 – 12:10
right here. When I advise not front
12:10 – 12:14
loading high amounts of nitrogen in the
12:14 – 12:16
season, I am specifically referring to
12:16 – 12:19
ionic nitrogen, which is specifically
12:19 – 12:20
nitrate or ammonium.
12:20 – 12:24
Those are the two that we need to
12:24 – 12:25
be cautious about.
12:25 – 12:29
If you are using amino acids Nitrogen or
12:29 – 12:32
nitrogen from compost or liquid fish or
12:32 – 12:34
proteins, whatever, I'll just broadly call
12:34 – 12:38
them organic forms of nitrogen instead of
12:38 – 12:41
mineral forms of nitrogen, then those have
12:41 – 12:44
a longer release period than the ionic
12:44 – 12:46
forms of nitrogen do.
12:46 – 12:49
And so you don't have the same degree
12:49 – 12:53
of negative effects on soil biology and on
12:53 – 12:56
plant health and our overall performance
12:56 – 12:58
with those gradual release materials.
12:58 – 13:01
As you do with front loading high amounts
13:01 – 13:02
of soluble nitrogen.
13:02 – 13:03
Continuing with your question or comment,
13:03 – 13:06
I use NatureSafe 1300 pellets for the vast
13:06 – 13:08
majority of the season's nitrogen budget,
13:08 – 13:10
mixed with humicarbon, magnesium, sulfur,
13:10 – 13:12
molybdenum, boron, but it has to go down
13:12 – 13:15
at the start of the season to be
13:15 – 13:16
incorporated during tillage.
13:16 – 13:18
That's fine, that's not a problem.
13:18 – 13:20
I use some hot soil hydrolysate and macro
13:20 – 13:23
pack, but both are expensive per pound of
13:23 – 13:25
N, and I don't always want the potassium
13:25 – 13:27
from the macro pack.
13:27 – 13:29
I can usually only afford about five to
13:29 – 13:32
six pounds of N per acre in these soluble
13:32 – 13:35
forms. I foliar feed early in the season,
13:35 – 13:38
but do not have the equipment to be able
13:38 – 13:41
to increase N efficiency by foliar feeding
13:41 – 13:44
the solubles in the latter part of the
13:44 – 13:47
season. Do you have any thoughts on
13:47 – 13:49
improving my strategy on a budget?
13:49 – 13:51
So, Dexter, you haven't described what
13:51 – 13:54
crops you're growing, but based on the
13:54 – 13:56
context, the way you're framing the
13:56 – 13:58
question, I'm assuming it is organic grain
13:58 – 14:00
crops, row crops. And...
14:00 – 14:03
I'm actually completely in favor of if
14:03 – 14:05
you're using the 1300, it's completely
14:05 – 14:07
appropriate to front load all of it
14:07 – 14:10
because you will have a gradual release,
14:10 – 14:12
extended release during the growing
14:12 – 14:14
season. So the fact that you're doing
14:14 – 14:16
that, and particularly when you're
14:16 – 14:18
combining it with magnesium, sulfur,
14:18 – 14:21
molybdenum, and boron, that will have the
14:21 – 14:23
effect of holding that stable for the
14:23 – 14:25
entire duration of the season.
14:25 – 14:29
So I'm not opposed to you won't get the
14:29 – 14:31
yield responses and the same degree of
14:31 – 14:34
yield responses that other growers who are
14:34 – 14:36
able to use foliars, particularly foliar
14:36 – 14:38
urea, are able to get.
14:38 – 14:41
But it's not inappropriate at all to front
14:41 – 14:44
load large amounts of organic in if you
14:44 – 14:47
need it. But also, the other thing to
14:47 – 14:49
consider you titled this question Organic
14:49 – 14:51
Nitrogen Strategy on a Budget.
14:51 – 14:55
I mean, the reality is you should think
14:55 – 14:57
about getting nitrogen from legumes.
14:57 – 15:00
In your rotation rather than from the
15:00 – 15:04
1300. And again, I don't know what your
15:04 – 15:07
rotation is or what that crop in context
15:07 – 15:10
looks like, but legumes, I'm of the
15:10 – 15:13
persuasion that legumes are not a, the
15:13 – 15:16
legumes are a pioneering species in a
15:16 – 15:19
rotation and that as they generate
15:19 – 15:21
nitrogen to facilitate more rapid
15:21 – 15:24
development of other crops that eventually
15:24 – 15:26
will supersede those legumes.
15:26 – 15:28
But I would definitely encourage the
15:28 – 15:31
consideration of legumes and cover crops
15:31 – 15:33
to contribute more of your nitrogen
15:33 – 15:37
component because that's going to be a lot
15:37 – 15:39
less expensive than buying 1300.
15:39 – 15:42
Question from John I'm growing wine grapes
15:42 – 15:45
in central Kentucky where the calcium
15:45 – 15:47
levels in the soil are high.
15:47 – 15:51
Calcium as part of the base saturation is
15:51 – 15:54
87 magnesium is about 4 Ouch.
15:54 – 15:56
Potassium, about 1 Percent, ouch.
15:56 – 15:58
Potassium about 1 Ouch.
15:58 – 16:01
I suspect my magnesium uptake issues in
16:01 – 16:04
the vines, as shown in sap analysis, is
16:04 – 16:06
due to the high calcium.
16:06 – 16:09
I'm applying photo mag, but still not
16:09 – 16:12
achieving optimal levels of magnesium in
16:12 – 16:15
sap results and not advancing the plants
16:15 – 16:17
up the plant health pyramid.
16:17 – 16:20
Any help in balancing magnesium would be
16:20 – 16:21
appreciated.
16:22 – 16:25
John, the one missing piece of information
16:25 – 16:29
that's quite critical to making a good
16:29 – 16:31
recommendation here is understanding not
16:31 – 16:34
just. What these elements are in ratio
16:34 – 16:38
to each other, but also what the
16:38 – 16:41
absolute values are or what the CEC
16:41 – 16:45
is. Because if you have sandy soil
16:45 – 16:48
versus clay soil, then the recommendation
16:48 – 16:50
is quite different here.
16:50 – 16:53
So, definitely calcium at 87 magnesium at
16:53 – 16:56
4 and potassium at 1 is problematic,
16:56 – 16:59
whether it's sand or clay.
16:59 – 17:02
And possible solutions, depending on what
17:02 – 17:05
the CEC levels are and whether it's
17:05 – 17:09
sand or clay soils, one possible solution
17:09 – 17:11
would be spoonfeeding KMag or SopoMag,
17:11 – 17:14
making annual applications before you put
17:14 – 17:17
the crop in the ground.
17:17 – 17:20
Or actually, no, we're talking about wine
17:20 – 17:24
grapes here. So this could be a
17:24 – 17:27
fall application and a spring application.
17:27 – 17:30
So that might be a good fit.
17:30 – 17:33
Depending on, you haven't mentioned soil
17:33 – 17:36
pH, but your total base saturation only
17:36 – 17:40
adds up to about 93 So you
17:40 – 17:43
have a slight amount of acidity.
17:44 – 17:47
Again, depending on CEC, depending on pH,
17:47 – 17:51
dolomite lime might be a possible fit to
17:51 – 17:52
increase your magnesium levels.
17:52 – 17:55
Other possible fits, we're talking here
17:55 – 17:58
about addressing, we need to build
17:58 – 18:00
magnesium and potassium levels.
18:00 – 18:04
Greensand is a mined rock powder that has
18:04 – 18:06
some potassium. But I'm guessing, unless
18:06 – 18:10
you have really sandy soil, your soil will
18:10 – 18:13
probably begin releasing potassium over
18:13 – 18:16
time. What's the name of the rock powder?
18:16 – 18:20
Basalt. You have to be really cautious
18:20 – 18:22
about basalt applications because you can
18:22 – 18:25
trigger accelerated rock weathering and
18:25 – 18:27
very rapid carbon sequestration which will
18:27 – 18:30
create, which can create a nitrogen
18:30 – 18:34
deficiency. I've seen this on a number of
18:34 – 18:37
occasions. But basalt, if you can source
18:37 – 18:40
it inexpensively, actually can contribute
18:40 – 18:41
magnesium and potassium relatively
18:41 – 18:44
inexpensively. So those would be the
18:44 – 18:47
possible Options. Which of those is the
18:47 – 18:51
right fit for you depends a little bit
18:51 – 18:54
on your soil pH and total exchange
18:54 – 18:58
capacity and the absolute levels of these
18:58 – 19:00
various nutrients that you're talking
19:00 – 19:01
about.
19:01 – 19:04
I think the one recommendation that you
19:04 – 19:08
probably cannot go wrong with is KMag or
19:08 – 19:09
Salpol Mag application.
19:09 – 19:12
The other thing that you can do in
19:12 – 19:16
season I guess this is now obviously for
19:16 – 19:19
this this summer this growing season.
19:19 – 19:21
Photomag, the Magnesium in photomag is
19:21 – 19:24
very bioavailable, but if you need to
19:24 – 19:27
increase magnesium in this growing season
19:27 – 19:29
substantially, just go with straight
19:29 – 19:31
applications of magnesium sulfate and
19:31 – 19:34
consider that as well as a foliar
19:34 – 19:37
application. There's a question here from
19:37 – 19:39
Francisco. I'd like to ask about
19:39 – 19:43
strategies to help manage fire blight in
19:43 – 19:45
pear orchards. So fire blight is
19:45 – 19:48
fascinating. I'm a little bit of a.
19:48 – 19:52
Years ago, I spent quite a few hours
19:52 – 19:54
researching fire blight, and I've got a
19:54 – 19:57
document, probably a 40 page document of
19:57 – 20:00
notes and details of information that I
20:00 – 20:03
pulled together from a lot of different
20:03 – 20:04
references and citations.
20:04 – 20:07
I found some really fascinating stuff,
20:07 – 20:10
like this paper that was published back
20:10 – 20:13
in, I want to say, 1962 or somewhere in
20:13 – 20:17
the early 60s. About the third or fourth
20:17 – 20:20
sentence to the introduction to this peer
20:20 – 20:23
reviewed article said, We know that fire
20:23 – 20:25
blight cannot establish itself and cannot
20:25 – 20:28
express as a disease when the sucrose
20:28 – 20:32
content of the sap is above 22 or 26
20:32 – 20:35
I forget what the number was exactly.
20:37 – 20:41
And then it just passed that right on by
20:41 – 20:44
and went on to talk about all of the
20:44 – 20:47
other, the need to develop other further
20:47 – 20:49
remedies. It's like, wait, what?
20:49 – 20:51
What did you just say?
20:51 – 20:54
Like, we know fire blight cannot establish
20:54 – 20:57
when you have greater than 22 sucrose.
20:57 – 21:01
Like, you want to talk about a connection
21:01 – 21:03
between BRICS content and disease
21:03 – 21:05
resistance? Here is one in the literature
21:05 – 21:09
60 years ago. So, that was one that really
21:09 – 21:12
caught my attention, and there were dozens
21:12 – 21:13
of other citations.
21:13 – 21:16
But the short version is from that
21:16 – 21:19
research, we put together a fire blight
21:19 – 21:22
protocol. Our team has access to it.
21:22 – 21:26
I no longer have it right off the top
21:26 – 21:29
of my head. With the development of Pinion
21:29 – 21:33
now in the last two years, I would like
21:33 – 21:36
to test Pinion on fire blight as a
21:36 – 21:37
preventative tool.
21:37 – 21:40
But we've been able to develop a
21:40 – 21:41
nutritional approach that includes
21:41 – 21:44
microbial inoculant foliars, it includes
21:44 – 21:45
some specific nutritional foliars
21:45 – 21:48
particularly sea stem and sea crop and
21:48 – 21:49
some other things.
21:50 – 21:52
I forget what the total packaging
21:52 – 21:54
combination is, some micro pack and macro
21:54 – 21:56
pack as well, if I recall correctly.
21:56 – 21:59
And, you know, it's very challenging to
21:59 – 22:01
test for fire blight resistance because
22:01 – 22:04
some years you have it present in certain
22:04 – 22:06
regions and not in others.
22:06 – 22:08
So we've run a number of fire blight
22:08 – 22:10
trials with third party researchers that
22:10 – 22:12
have been somewhat inconclusive because
22:12 – 22:15
pressure wasn't present in the years that
22:15 – 22:18
we were running the trial and not in a
22:18 – 22:20
significant way. But from a Practical
22:20 – 22:22
experience perspective, we have a number
22:22 – 22:25
of growers who have used the fire blight
22:25 – 22:27
treatment protocol very successfully on
22:27 – 22:29
fire blight pressure, where it halted the
22:29 – 22:30
progression of the disease.
22:30 – 22:33
Once it was already present, we put on a
22:33 – 22:36
couple of foliar applications and it
22:36 – 22:38
stops. So I would suggest connecting with
22:38 – 22:41
our team to get that exact protocol of
22:41 – 22:44
what we had put together and what was
22:44 – 22:45
found to be effective there.
22:49 – 22:51
Question here from Steve.
22:51 – 22:54
On previous podcasts, John has stated that
22:54 – 22:57
there are specific times that are good and
22:57 – 23:00
times that are bad to supplement nutrients
23:00 – 23:04
to the plants. Could you please go through
23:04 – 23:08
those specific times that are good or bad
23:08 – 23:11
for each nutrient, especially for corn and
23:11 – 23:14
small grains grown for forage and grain?
23:14 – 23:16
And what levels would you be
23:16 – 23:17
supplementing? Okay.
23:17 – 23:19
What just happened?
23:19 – 23:21
Phil, can you still hear me?
23:21 – 23:24
Because all of a sudden, my earbuds
23:24 – 23:27
stopped working. Okay, here they are
23:27 – 23:31
again. This must have a bad connection or
23:31 – 23:32
something. All right.
23:32 – 23:36
Where were we? All right, so, Steve, this
23:36 – 23:39
is a longer, a bigger question than I
23:39 – 23:43
can answer right now, but I did go
23:43 – 23:45
into this in some detail.
23:45 – 23:48
There is a webinar on YouTube.
23:48 – 23:51
It's a couple years old at this point.
23:51 – 23:54
Where I go into some pretty thorough
23:54 – 23:58
detail on the nutrients that are needed at
23:58 – 24:00
different stages of plant development that
24:00 – 24:04
I refer to as critical points of
24:04 – 24:07
influence. So I'm guessing Phil will
24:07 – 24:10
probably drop a link to that webinar in
24:10 – 24:13
the comments here in the chat section
24:13 – 24:17
here. But I did go into some detail.
24:17 – 24:20
It's not, and to reframe your question a
24:20 – 24:22
little bit, it's not.
24:22 – 24:26
That there is particularly a bad time to
24:26 – 24:29
apply nutrients. It is simply that at
24:29 – 24:31
specific stages of plant development, a
24:31 – 24:33
nutrient application has a
24:33 – 24:35
disproportionate impact on yield.
24:35 – 24:38
And at other stages, a nutrient
24:38 – 24:40
application will have a disproportionate
24:40 – 24:42
impact on resistance mechanisms, disease
24:42 – 24:44
resistance, insect resistance, and so
24:44 – 24:47
forth. So, and those stages are determined
24:47 – 24:50
by The plant's reproductive versus
24:50 – 24:53
vegetative growth cycle and where it is in
24:53 – 24:57
the cycle as it is moving back and
24:57 – 24:59
forth and fluctuating between reproductive
24:59 – 25:01
dominance and vegetative dominance.
25:01 – 25:04
So I go into some detail on that
25:04 – 25:08
topic in that webinar, and I would refer
25:08 – 25:11
you to that. Question here from John.
25:11 – 25:13
I have a question regarding nutrient
25:13 – 25:16
uptake and straw mulched garlic.
25:16 – 25:19
For the past several years, I've been sat
25:19 – 25:22
testing our garlic crop and there are
25:22 – 25:25
nutrient deficiencies across the board.
25:25 – 25:27
I have done several foliar sprays
25:27 – 25:29
targeting deficiencies, but the garlic
25:29 – 25:33
seems to use them faster than I can
25:33 – 25:35
get them to reapply.
25:35 – 25:38
My main question is how to remedy the slow
25:38 – 25:41
biological activity in spring soil when a
25:41 – 25:43
crop The number of plants that are growing
25:43 – 25:46
in the area is growing very vigorously.
25:46 – 25:49
I'm on a clay loam with adequate rainfall.
25:49 – 25:52
I'm thinking of making ridges in the fall
25:52 – 25:54
and not mulching or possibly seeding oats
25:54 – 25:58
and peas just prior to planting to leave a
25:58 – 26:01
little residue to cover the soil over the
26:01 – 26:04
winter. All right, John, this is a good
26:04 – 26:05
question. And there's a cultural
26:05 – 26:08
management part of the answer and there's
26:08 – 26:10
a nutrition management part of the answer.
26:10 – 26:13
So on the cultural management side,
26:13 – 26:14
Essentially, you want to facilitate
26:14 – 26:17
warming the soil up in the spring, which
26:17 – 26:20
is already the direction that you are
26:20 – 26:23
thinking of by making ridges and leaving
26:23 – 26:25
just a little bit of residue.
26:25 – 26:27
So, here where we are in northeastern
26:27 – 26:31
Ohio, we used to, on the farm that I grew
26:31 – 26:34
up on, we used to have the practice of
26:34 – 26:37
planting oats in the fall or really in
26:37 – 26:40
late summer and growing them really tall
26:40 – 26:42
really thick, and having a mulch that
26:42 – 26:45
would winter kill for the following spring
26:45 – 26:46
and planting into that.
26:46 – 26:49
So we would plant four bushels per acre of
26:49 – 26:53
oat seed in, I want to say early August,
26:53 – 26:54
late July, early August.
26:54 – 26:57
And by mid October, for our average first
26:57 – 27:00
freeze, hard enough to kill it, mid to
27:00 – 27:03
late October, we would be three and a half
27:03 – 27:05
to four feet tall of a thick, lush stand.
27:05 – 27:08
And what was interesting is once you
27:08 – 27:09
started having good biological activity,
27:09 – 27:12
it would be surprising even how much of
27:12 – 27:14
that mulch would disappear by the
27:14 – 27:16
following spring. So you might be looking
27:16 – 27:19
for a little bit less residue than that.
27:19 – 27:21
But the other thing to consider is if you
27:21 – 27:24
have less residue, then you're going to
27:24 – 27:26
get some weed emergence in the spring as
27:26 – 27:29
well. So that's a challenge to consider.
27:29 – 27:31
And of course, the other practice that we
27:31 – 27:34
experimented with on the farm that I grew
27:34 – 27:37
up on, we did this for, We grew about an
27:37 – 27:40
acre, an acre and a half of garlic for a
27:40 – 27:42
number of years. And we actually planted
27:42 – 27:44
it into plastic mulch, biodegradable
27:44 – 27:47
plastic mulch. And that also worked very
27:47 – 27:51
well to warm the soil up in the
27:51 – 27:54
spring to get more biological activity.
27:54 – 27:57
So that's on the cultural management side.
27:57 – 28:00
Now on the nutrition management side, we
28:00 – 28:03
got substantial benefits from fertilizing
28:03 – 28:06
our garlic well in the fall, but with
28:06 – 28:08
whatever was required.
28:08 – 28:11
It might be gypsum applications, potassium
28:11 – 28:13
sulfate applications, compost applications
28:13 – 28:16
we put down Substantial amounts of compost
28:16 – 28:20
in the row when we were making our
28:20 – 28:22
raised beds. And that, the garlic
28:22 – 28:25
responded extremely strongly to that the
28:25 – 28:28
following spring. Now, there was something
28:28 – 28:31
I wanted to experiment with removing the
28:31 – 28:35
and see if I could get, could remove
28:35 – 28:38
the burnt tips on the garlic leaves
28:38 – 28:42
because all the garlic that I almost have
28:42 – 28:44
ever seen growing.
28:44 – 28:47
Has these brown tips on the leaves.
28:47 – 28:49
So what is that exactly?
28:49 – 28:52
I studied that question and some
28:52 – 28:54
colleagues that I exchanged information
28:54 – 28:58
with in Australia also contributed to this
28:58 – 29:01
effort. The garlic tips died back because
29:01 – 29:03
of extremely high concentrations of
29:03 – 29:06
ureides, specific urea metabolites, and
29:06 – 29:08
the requirement to convert those is
29:08 – 29:11
molybdenum. Very high doses of molybdenum.
29:11 – 29:14
But garlic has a substantially higher
29:14 – 29:16
molybdenum requirement than many other
29:16 – 29:20
crops. And so we were putting on two
29:20 – 29:23
to 3x the molybdenum applications that
29:23 – 29:26
were common for other crops, and those
29:26 – 29:28
burnt tips disappeared.
29:28 – 29:32
We had garlic that had healthy leaves all
29:32 – 29:34
the way out to the tip.
29:34 – 29:36
And you can imagine the proportional
29:36 – 29:39
growth response and quality response that
29:39 – 29:42
we got from that was substantial and was
29:42 – 29:45
very worthwhile. So that's kind of the
29:45 – 29:48
longer answer. But I think garlic also has
29:48 – 29:51
a very strong root system.
29:51 – 29:54
It roots very well and putting on at
29:54 – 29:57
seeding or in the in spring right at
29:57 – 29:59
emergence, putting on microbial inoculants
29:59 – 30:01
and accelerants like Rejuvenate.
30:01 – 30:03
Rejuvenate performs very, very well in
30:03 – 30:07
this setting. If you have cool soil in the
30:07 – 30:09
spring, putting on a Rejuvenate
30:09 – 30:12
application will not just ill speed up
30:12 – 30:14
biology substantially, and we have I've
30:14 – 30:16
seen some evidence Of rejuvenated
30:16 – 30:19
applications actually warming the soil up
30:19 – 30:22
in the spring where it was fall applied
30:22 – 30:26
and where it was applied in the treated
30:26 – 30:26
versus untreated.
30:27 – 30:30
The soil thawed more rapidly in the
30:30 – 30:33
spring, snow melted more rapidly, and that
30:33 – 30:36
there was just much greater biological
30:36 – 30:39
activity. So that's something for you to
30:39 – 30:42
consider as well. So a question from Rico,
30:42 – 30:46
what are your top five AEA practices and
30:46 – 30:48
products to build a thriving highproducing
30:48 – 30:50
sweet cherry orchard.
30:50 – 30:52
I am producing sweet cherry orchard.
30:52 – 30:55
Rico, the number one practice is picking
30:55 – 30:59
up the phone and talking to someone at
30:59 – 31:02
AEA because everything else flows from
31:02 – 31:04
that. Because the reality is, everything
31:04 – 31:07
gets customized. What works in one orchard
31:07 – 31:11
or one setting does not work in another
31:11 – 31:13
from a specific nutrition management
31:13 – 31:16
perspective. So I'm hesitant to even point
31:16 – 31:20
out and say that it is this practice
31:20 – 31:22
or that product because years ago.
31:22 – 31:25
When we first really gained some
31:25 – 31:27
significant traction in developing
31:27 – 31:30
resolution for bacterial, come on, I want
31:30 – 31:33
to say bacterial spec, but it's not
31:33 – 31:35
bacterial spec, bacterial canker on
31:35 – 31:36
cherries.
31:38 – 31:41
Growers would ask us the question, well,
31:41 – 31:43
what did you do? To solve bacterial
31:43 – 31:45
canker? Because we actually, we reversed
31:45 – 31:48
bacterial canker. There were trees, our
31:48 – 31:50
entire blocks that were scheduled for the
31:50 – 31:53
dozer, they were ready to be pushed out.
31:53 – 31:56
And in eight months, those trees went not
31:56 – 31:59
to the top performing block, but to a
31:59 – 32:01
middle of the range performing block.
32:01 – 32:04
And all physical evidence of bacterial
32:04 – 32:06
canker, you could not find canker, not
32:06 – 32:08
fresh canker, in that block.
32:08 – 32:11
We were able to reverse it entirely.
32:11 – 32:13
People asked us, what did you do?
32:13 – 32:16
And they want the solution to be three
32:16 – 32:18
products or five products.
32:18 – 32:20
Like, we did these five things.
32:20 – 32:23
No, we didn't. The answer is really
32:23 – 32:25
simple. We pulled sap analysis.
32:25 – 32:27
We pulled soil samples, and we balanced
32:27 – 32:30
mineral nutrition and we addressed soil
32:30 – 32:31
biology. And that was it.
32:31 – 32:34
That solved it. But was it the zinc,
32:34 – 32:35
manganese, copper?
32:35 – 32:37
Was it the calcium?
32:37 – 32:38
Was it the sulfur?
32:38 – 32:41
Was the combination of all of those
32:41 – 32:43
things? Without question, it was the
32:43 – 32:46
combination of all of those things.
32:46 – 32:49
So there isn't a magic in a gallon jug
32:49 – 32:52
that you can replicate or Transfer from
32:52 – 32:54
one operation to the next.
32:54 – 32:55
Question from Scott.
32:55 – 32:56
High chloride levels.
32:56 – 33:00
I have high chloride levels in sap in
33:00 – 33:02
potatoes. I'm struggling to reduce high
33:02 – 33:04
chloride in the sap numbers.
33:04 – 33:06
Is the chloride potentially a significant
33:06 – 33:08
cause of compromised plant health,
33:08 – 33:11
including bacterial soft rot and reduced
33:11 – 33:11
nitrogen assimilation?
33:11 – 33:14
Is this likely, probable, possible, or
33:14 – 33:17
unlikely? Scott, it's more than all of
33:17 – 33:19
those. It's almost a certainty.
33:19 – 33:22
So when you have high chloride
33:22 – 33:26
levels Yes, it will slow nitrogen
33:26 – 33:28
absorption. It will slow potassium
33:28 – 33:32
absorption to a lesser degree, but
33:32 – 33:34
it will significantly slow calcium
33:34 – 33:36
absorption as well.
33:36 – 33:39
So, calcium and potassium and nitrogen
33:39 – 33:43
absorption will all be less, as
33:43 – 33:46
will phosphorus. I mean, essentially, when
33:46 – 33:49
you have elevated levels of chloride,
33:49 – 33:52
your absorption of calcium, potassium,
33:52 – 33:55
phosphorus, and nitrogen is all going
33:55 – 33:58
to be less. And significantly less
33:58 – 34:02
in many cases, so particularly for
34:02 – 34:05
calcium. So, yes, there is a
34:05 – 34:06
very direct connection.
34:06 – 34:10
My first question would be are
34:10 – 34:12
you fertilizing with potassium chloride?
34:13 – 34:16
And if so, the potassium chloride has to
34:16 – 34:18
go. We've done ongoing experimentation,
34:18 – 34:21
and of course, it varies a little bit from
34:21 – 34:24
year to year with commodity prices.
34:24 – 34:27
But, um Common rebuttal that I get when I
34:27 – 34:29
suggest replacing potassium chloride with
34:29 – 34:31
potassium sulfate is that, well, potassium
34:31 – 34:33
chloride is so much less expensive.
34:33 – 34:36
Well, it's not less expensive when you
34:36 – 34:38
consider the crop performance costs that
34:38 – 34:41
it produces, as you were describing, and
34:41 – 34:43
quality and so forth.
34:43 – 34:45
So we started this rather than replacing
34:45 – 34:47
potassium chloride with potassium sulfate
34:47 – 34:50
on a pound for pound basis of potash.
34:50 – 34:53
We started replacing them on a dollar for
34:53 – 34:56
Dollar basis. And what is interesting, if
34:56 – 34:58
you replace potassium chloride with
34:58 – 35:01
potassium sulfate on a dollar for dollar
35:01 – 35:03
basis, depending on which part of the
35:03 – 35:06
country and logistics and everything else,
35:06 – 35:09
you're looking at anywhere from a 25 to 35
35:09 – 35:11
reduction in actual pounds of potassium.
35:11 – 35:14
And yet, we consistently see greater and
35:14 – 35:16
better potassium absorption and crop
35:16 – 35:18
performance with the potassium sulfate
35:18 – 35:21
than we do with the potassium chloride.
35:21 – 35:24
In my opinion, there are very few it's not
35:24 – 35:26
actually, it's not my opinion.
35:26 – 35:29
My opinion has nothing to do with it.
35:29 – 35:32
In the podcast interview that I did with
35:32 – 35:35
Rick Mulvaney, and I also published a
35:35 – 35:38
couple of blog posts putting out Rick
35:38 – 35:39
Mulvaney and his colleagues' research
35:39 – 35:42
papers, the research the key research
35:42 – 35:44
papers titled The Potassium Paradox," and
35:44 – 35:47
there was an attempted rebuttal by the
35:47 – 35:49
industry, and there was some back and
35:49 – 35:52
forth. But the bottom line is.
35:52 – 35:55
Rick Mulvaney and his colleagues conducted
35:55 – 35:57
an extensive literature review.
35:57 – 35:59
This is just from my memory.
35:59 – 36:03
It's been quite a while since I read
36:03 – 36:06
this. But if I recall correctly, something
36:06 – 36:09
like over 900 papers that have been
36:09 – 36:11
published on trials with potassium
36:11 – 36:14
chloride applications, they found a
36:14 – 36:17
positive yield response 16 of the time.
36:17 – 36:20
One six. 16 I mean, my goodness gracious,
36:20 – 36:23
if AEA products performed like that.
36:23 – 36:27
We would have been out of business a
36:27 – 36:30
long time ago. But that's the benefit of
36:30 – 36:34
being an incumbent in the space and having
36:34 – 36:35
extensive marketing and promotion.
36:35 – 36:39
Like that potassium chloride is one of the
36:39 – 36:41
worst performing fertility products that's
36:41 – 36:43
in the marketplace.
36:43 – 36:46
And yet it gets applied in large amounts
36:46 – 36:48
every year because it's necessary,
36:48 – 36:50
supposedly. But it's not.
36:50 – 36:53
Not even for potatoes that have high
36:53 – 36:55
potassium requirements better off with
36:55 – 36:56
potassium sulfate.
36:56 – 36:59
Go listen to the podcast episode, Reach
36:59 – 37:02
Papers, you will be amazed.
37:02 – 37:05
There was an attempted rebuttal, but that
37:05 – 37:07
attempted rebuttal was rebutted, and you
37:07 – 37:09
can't argue the evidence.
37:09 – 37:12
16 positive success rate across 900
37:12 – 37:15
studies should be enough to indict a
37:15 – 37:18
product and to call it snake oil.
37:18 – 37:19
All right.
37:20 – 37:22
Enough of my soapbox.
37:22 – 37:25
There's a question here from Darren.
37:25 – 37:28
I was wondering when we are Melting
37:28 – 37:32
liquid urea 4600, if it is not
37:32 – 37:36
low buyer at urea, is that a
37:36 – 37:39
huge problem? Low buyer at urea is
37:39 – 37:43
very hard to come by in Saskatchewan.
37:43 – 37:46
Darren. It's been a long time since
37:46 – 37:50
I looked at this. I need to
37:50 – 37:53
refresh my memory and get back to
37:53 – 37:57
you. Is not a problem if it
37:57 – 38:01
is soil applied. It becomes a problem.
38:01 – 38:04
When it is foliar applied at certain
38:04 – 38:08
levels. And I don't remember what those
38:08 – 38:11
levels are. And I need to also
38:11 – 38:15
double check if my memory is correct.
38:15 – 38:18
So that's. I require some research on
38:18 – 38:22
my part to be able to answer
38:22 – 38:24
that question correctly.
38:24 – 38:27
I used to know the answer, but
38:27 – 38:30
I forget. Question here from Grant.
38:30 – 38:34
Hi, Grant. I'm planning to apply three
38:34 – 38:37
pounds of nitrogen as a foliar this
38:37 – 38:41
summer using a product generally used as
38:41 – 38:43
a turf fertilizer, 30000 grade.
38:43 – 38:47
The label says to apply two to
38:47 – 38:51
four quarts per acre at 10 gallons
38:51 – 38:54
per acre. But I'm attempting to apply one
38:54 – 38:58
gallon per acre of product at five gallons
38:58 – 39:00
per acre via a drone.
39:00 – 39:03
Field LARC seems to think that the form
39:03 – 39:06
of the liquid urea, which is urea
39:06 – 39:08
triazone, ouch, an evening application
39:08 – 39:11
timeframe, the presence of humic and
39:11 – 39:13
fulvic substances with the micronutrients
39:13 – 39:15
I'm using, the biological synergy with
39:15 – 39:16
these micronutrients.
39:16 – 39:20
And a 49 to 51 product to water
39:20 – 39:23
ratio is enough to feel confident in no
39:23 – 39:25
leaf burn at this rate.
39:25 – 39:28
Based on your knowledge and experience Has
39:28 – 39:31
this worked and would it work?
39:31 – 39:34
So, somewhere along the line, I'm not
39:34 – 39:37
quite following because you went from one
39:37 – 39:40
gallon per acre at five gallons per acre
39:40 – 39:43
product or five gallons per acre total
39:43 – 39:46
volume. Which is a 20 You went from
39:46 – 39:50
there to a 4951 Perhaps the 4951 is
39:50 – 39:52
because of the micronutrients, the humic
39:52 – 39:55
and fulvic substances, and the other
39:55 – 39:56
things that you're adding.
39:56 – 39:59
So Grant, I think what you're proposing
39:59 – 40:03
can work. Some crops are going to be
40:03 – 40:05
more sensitive than others.
40:05 – 40:08
Corn and small grains will probably handle
40:08 – 40:09
this relatively well.
40:09 – 40:10
It's worth testing, though.
40:11 – 40:14
But I think corn and small grains will
40:14 – 40:16
handle it relatively well.
40:16 – 40:19
In addition to the humic and phlovisic
40:19 – 40:22
substances, I would suggest you also add
40:22 – 40:25
some carbohydrates into the mix, add some
40:25 – 40:28
rejuvenate, add some sugar, add something
40:28 – 40:32
else that'll also help buffer it out a
40:32 – 40:35
little bit. Um you're putting this on as
40:35 – 40:39
a foliar. So you're probably going to be
40:39 – 40:41
okay with the triazone urea.
40:41 – 40:45
Actually, yeah. You can be okay with the
40:45 – 40:48
triazone urea. Plants, some of these grain
40:48 – 40:51
crops actually respond to that very well
40:51 – 40:52
at specific stages.
40:52 – 40:54
However, since you mentioned triazone
40:54 – 40:58
urea, I'm going to, just as a general
40:58 – 41:00
service announcement, I suppose triazone
41:00 – 41:03
urea or any form of urea.
41:03 – 41:06
There's a couple forms of urea that are
41:06 – 41:09
manufactured with formaldehyde as one of
41:09 – 41:10
the base ingredients.
41:10 – 41:14
And triazone urea is one of those.
41:14 – 41:17
I forget the name of the other.
41:17 – 41:19
And supposedly, none of the formaldehyde
41:19 – 41:23
is left over in the final product
41:23 – 41:25
formulation, and. I'm not hugely
41:25 – 41:28
concerned. Or I don't have, we haven't
41:28 – 41:30
measured, we haven't looked either.
41:30 – 41:33
We haven't looked and we haven't measured
41:33 – 41:35
any negative effects from those
41:35 – 41:37
formaldehyde synthesized products when
41:37 – 41:40
used as a foliar. But we have measured
41:40 – 41:43
very substantial negative effects from
41:43 – 41:46
those forms of urea when applied to soil.
41:46 – 41:49
And this first really caught our attention
41:49 – 41:52
on a strawberry operation in Florida where
41:52 – 41:55
urea applications were being made through
41:55 – 41:58
the drip irrigation system at low doses.
41:58 – 42:01
A couple pounds per week of product.
42:01 – 42:03
So it did not take much.
42:03 – 42:07
I'm talking a couple pounds per week of
42:07 – 42:09
product, like three to five pounds.
42:09 – 42:12
And we could not understand why soil
42:12 – 42:14
biology was not responding.
42:14 – 42:17
Like soil biology was just non functional.
42:17 – 42:20
It did not respond to a rejuvenate
42:20 – 42:21
application. To inoculation.
42:21 – 42:24
There was just. There was no response to
42:24 – 42:27
it no response to it.
42:27 – 42:29
And we were puzzled by this.
42:29 – 42:33
And we tracked it down to the triazone
42:33 – 42:35
urea and being synthesized from
42:35 – 42:38
formaldehyde. And we pulled the urea out
42:38 – 42:41
of the mix. And in a matter of
42:41 – 42:44
two weeks, we got a tremendous microbial
42:44 – 42:46
response in the soil.
42:46 – 42:48
Now, plants, formaldehyde is actually a
42:48 – 42:50
metabolite in plants.
42:50 – 42:53
Plants. When you apply it to a leaf
42:53 – 42:55
surface, plants have the ability to
42:55 – 42:57
metabolize and to convert formaldehyde.
42:57 – 43:01
But It apparently does a number on soil
43:01 – 43:04
biology. So I wanted to point that out as
43:04 – 43:08
an experience that we had that is, I
43:08 – 43:10
think, worth paying attention to from a
43:10 – 43:13
soil application versus a foliar
43:13 – 43:13
application perspective.
43:13 – 43:17
So, Grant, to kind of summarize and come
43:17 – 43:19
back to your core question.
43:19 – 43:22
49 to 51 percent product mix I see that
43:22 – 43:26
you also have a note here that you're
43:26 – 43:28
using AEA rebound products with HoloKei
43:28 – 43:29
SeaShield SeaStim.
43:29 – 43:32
I put together Polo K, Seashield, Seastem.
43:32 – 43:35
I put together a webinar a number of years
43:35 – 43:38
ago on optimal design for product foliar,
43:38 – 43:40
optimal design for foliar applications.
43:40 – 43:44
And, excuse me. The piece that we need to
43:44 – 43:47
be really concerned about or pay attention
43:47 – 43:49
to is the EC levels.
43:49 – 43:52
And obviously, urea has a very high
43:52 – 43:54
electrical conductivity, very high salt
43:54 – 43:57
index. But with what you were describing
43:57 – 43:59
and the combination that you're putting
43:59 – 44:02
together, I'm 98 confident that it's going
44:02 – 44:05
to be fine. It would still be worth
44:05 – 44:07
testing out and verifying.
44:07 – 44:10
But if you're using that particularly on
44:10 – 44:13
corn and small grain crops, I think you're
44:13 – 44:15
going to be completely okay.
44:15 – 44:17
It's a question here from Noah.
44:17 – 44:20
Hi, John. I recently plowed some ground to
44:20 – 44:22
expand our potato crop, essentially
44:22 – 44:24
flipping over a quiet grass sod.
44:24 – 44:27
What are the best ways mineral and the
44:27 – 44:30
soil environment from a quiet grass
44:30 – 44:32
dominated soil to a vegetable garden.
44:32 – 44:34
For reference. I live in Manitoba.
44:34 – 44:37
Canada, with a clay loam 73 pH soil.
44:37 – 44:40
All right, well, you specifically asked
44:40 – 44:42
about a garden and not field scale.
44:42 – 44:46
So I'm going to answer it in that context.
44:46 – 44:49
I've dealt with a lot of quiet grass, more
44:49 – 44:52
than I care to think about.
44:52 – 44:55
And my recommendation would be that for a
44:55 – 44:58
period of time, long as it takes a single
44:58 – 45:00
probably a single summer.
45:00 – 45:02
Single growing season, I would use
45:02 – 45:05
landscape fabric. Or a tarp, probably a
45:05 – 45:07
landscape fabric, and I would simply
45:07 – 45:10
smother it. That's the easiest way, short
45:10 – 45:12
of killing it with Roundup.
45:12 – 45:14
The challenge with killing it with
45:14 – 45:18
Roundup, as I also know from a lot of
45:18 – 45:20
personal experience, is you can kill it
45:20 – 45:24
once and it will be back again the next
45:24 – 45:27
year. Worse than it was the first year.
45:27 – 45:31
So that's Is the using a tarp or landscape
45:31 – 45:35
fabric over the soil is the easy answer to
45:35 – 45:36
solve the population.
45:36 – 45:40
But then how do you change the mineral and
45:40 – 45:41
the microbial profile?
45:41 – 45:44
I would suggest a gypsum application to
45:44 – 45:47
provide a lot of available calcium and to
45:47 – 45:50
help flocculate and loosen the soil.
45:50 – 45:52
And You're already doing some tillage.
45:52 – 45:55
But the question that I would ask is
45:55 – 45:59
what's the Optimal tillage and what is the
45:59 – 46:02
cover crop combination that you need to
46:02 – 46:04
grow to keep that soil loose?
46:04 – 46:07
So I would recommend three cover crops
46:07 – 46:09
that are particularly good at producing
46:09 – 46:11
loose soil buckwheat, annual ryegrass,
46:11 – 46:14
oats are also pretty good, but buckwheat,
46:14 – 46:17
annual ryegrass. And hairy vetch are three
46:17 – 46:20
that are really great at producing very
46:20 – 46:23
loose soil. So essentially, you need roots
46:23 – 46:26
to keep the soil loose, you need calcium
46:26 – 46:29
to loosen it and flocculate it.
46:29 – 46:30
There's a question here.
46:30 – 46:33
It's a question here from Lana.
46:33 – 46:35
My question is about IMOs.
46:35 – 46:36
Indigenous microorganisms.
46:36 – 46:39
I'm interested in available data and
46:39 – 46:43
efficacy. Are IMOs the missing link
46:43 – 46:46
to returning natural nutrient cycling and
46:46 – 46:49
soil function to each region paired
46:49 – 46:52
with rehydration and biodiversity?
46:52 – 46:55
I don't have a great deal
46:55 – 46:58
of personal experience with IMOs.
46:58 – 47:01
Of what I'm, excuse me.
47:01 – 47:04
With what I'm familiar with the
47:04 – 47:07
IMOs and the propagation that is
47:07 – 47:11
used, quite simply, anytime we propagate
47:11 – 47:14
microbes. We need to be cognizant
47:14 – 47:17
of what it is that we're
47:17 – 47:21
propagating and what it is that
47:21 – 47:22
we're leaving behind.
47:22 – 47:26
When we make compost, compost propagates
47:26 – 47:27
certain microorganisms.
47:27 – 47:30
At the expense of others.
47:30 – 47:31
Vermicompost, same thing.
47:31 – 47:34
Indigenous microbes, the same thing.
47:34 – 47:37
And if we propagate microbes in
47:37 – 47:41
the lab, it's the exact same
47:41 – 47:44
thing. So. All of those various
47:44 – 47:46
cultivation or propagation methodologies
47:46 – 47:50
will propagate certain groups of microbes
47:50 – 47:53
at the expense of others.
47:53 – 47:56
And the reality is, somewhere in
47:56 – 47:59
the 90 plus percentile of all
47:59 – 48:03
known and identified living soil microbes
48:03 – 48:06
will only propagate in the presence
48:06 – 48:08
of living plant roots.
48:08 – 48:12
So unless you are growing compost
48:12 – 48:15
or growing plants in your compost
48:15 – 48:18
or somehow facilitating the extraction
48:18 – 48:20
from plant roots themselves.
48:21 – 48:24
Then you're getting only a very small
48:24 – 48:26
fraction of what's in the total soil
48:26 – 48:30
profile. So there are people who have had
48:30 – 48:33
very good results, and I I believe IMOs
48:33 – 48:36
can be very beneficial, inoculants can be
48:36 – 48:38
very beneficial, composting, they all have
48:38 – 48:40
their place. They all have value.
48:40 – 48:44
But I'm not of the persuasion that Any one
48:44 – 48:47
of them is inherently should be considered
48:47 – 48:49
complete or should be considered the
48:49 – 48:52
missing piece or the missing link because
48:52 – 48:55
we have to have a more integrated and
48:55 – 48:57
broader perspective than that.
48:57 – 48:59
There's a question here from Leonard.
48:59 – 49:02
Do you think a credible certification
49:02 – 49:04
framework that pays farmers for
49:04 – 49:06
regenerative farming, not just carbon
49:06 – 49:08
numbers. But ecosystem services, could do
49:08 – 49:09
more to accelerate?
49:09 – 49:11
The transition than agronomic education
49:11 – 49:13
alone has managed?
49:13 – 49:16
And if so, what would you want that
49:16 – 49:19
framework to actually measure to make it
49:19 – 49:21
mean something at the farm level?
49:21 – 49:25
Leonard. I would refer you to two podcast
49:25 – 49:27
episodes. The first podcast episode is one
49:27 – 49:30
where I introduced the regenerative
49:30 – 49:32
verification standard that we developed
49:32 – 49:33
that's called Integrity Grown.
49:33 – 49:36
And we have had other priorities.
49:36 – 49:38
We haven't emphasized the further
49:38 – 49:40
development of Integrity Grown, although
49:40 – 49:43
that's been a growing request from a
49:43 – 49:46
number of different crops and regions.
49:46 – 49:47
And in that podcast.
49:47 – 49:50
I kind of describe the thinking behind
49:50 – 49:53
Integrity Grown and what I believe needs
49:53 – 49:56
to be developed to be really effective,
49:56 – 49:59
and also some of the things that we're
49:59 – 50:02
measuring and how we're approaching that.
50:02 – 50:05
And then the second podcast interview I
50:05 – 50:08
would refer you to, or podcast I would
50:08 – 50:12
refer you to, is the conversation I had
50:12 – 50:14
with Michael McNeil at the Acres
50:14 – 50:15
Conference last December.
50:15 – 50:19
Where I talked about the the history of
50:19 – 50:22
agricultural economics and how we got to
50:22 – 50:24
this pit to this place.
50:24 – 50:27
Because the reality is, we we are now,
50:27 – 50:30
from a from a macroeconomic perspective,
50:30 – 50:33
we are in this this cycle, or in this.
50:33 – 50:35
Catch twentytwo trap where.
50:35 – 50:38
22 trap where I'm going to speak rather
50:38 – 50:41
crudely and rather broadly, but from a
50:41 – 50:42
quality perspective.
50:42 – 50:45
Most farmers are producing crap.
50:45 – 50:47
They're not specifically trying to produce
50:47 – 50:51
a high quality crop because they're not
50:51 – 50:53
being paid for it.
50:53 – 50:56
And it's a catch22 where if you
50:56 – 50:59
have a federal policy of having cheap
50:59 – 51:03
food readily available, then that comes at
51:03 – 51:05
the expense of quality.
51:05 – 51:08
And if you looked at any other
51:08 – 51:11
part of life, any other consumer goods
51:11 – 51:15
that we purchase. The old adage is
51:15 – 51:18
that you can get great service, Great
51:18 – 51:21
quality or a great price.
51:21 – 51:23
Great quality or great price.
51:23 – 51:26
Pick two out of the three.
51:26 – 51:28
You can't have all three.
51:28 – 51:32
And we have focused at a policy
51:32 – 51:35
level of having the cheapest and most
51:35 – 51:38
abundant food supply, and that comes at
51:38 – 51:42
a cost. And it's come at the
51:42 – 51:45
cost of quality. It's come at the
51:45 – 51:47
cost of farmer economic viability.
51:47 – 51:51
So there is this whole ball of
51:51 – 51:54
wax where all of this is intertwined,
51:54 – 51:58
and I'm of the persuasion that if
51:58 – 52:01
we had a quality food policy instead
52:01 – 52:04
of a cheap food policy, we would
52:04 – 52:08
all be much better served because we
52:08 – 52:10
would have better public health, lower
52:10 – 52:13
medical costs. Better public health
52:13 – 52:16
outcomes, on and on the list goes.
52:16 – 52:18
But there's a whole combination of issues
52:18 – 52:21
there that paying farmers for ecosystem
52:21 – 52:22
services does not solve.
52:22 – 52:25
It doesn't solve for food quality and
52:25 – 52:26
nutritional quality.
52:26 – 52:28
There's more that has to be considered
52:28 – 52:31
there. There's a question here from
52:31 – 52:33
Dennis. Our family has been farming the
52:33 – 52:35
same soil since 1854.
52:35 – 52:38
And there are some really strange field
52:38 – 52:40
patterns that are difficult to explain.
52:40 – 52:43
Fertile soils that produce 10x what the
52:43 – 52:45
soil just feed away produced.
52:45 – 52:48
These patterns are most easily seen in hay
52:48 – 52:50
ground. Conventional soil tests reveal the
52:50 – 52:52
predictable elevated NPK levels of the
52:52 – 52:55
deeper soils. I stopped using synthetic
52:55 – 52:56
PNK several years ago.
52:56 – 52:59
And apply nitrogen according to the Haney
52:59 – 53:01
test. I rotationally graze cattle through
53:01 – 53:03
every acre of the farm.
53:03 – 53:06
There is an ongoing debate as to whether
53:06 – 53:08
the increased production over the tile
53:08 – 53:11
lines is due to drainage or to
53:11 – 53:13
micronutrients. I'm told that the old
53:13 – 53:16
timers would manure the fields for
53:16 – 53:17
micronutrient deficiencies.
53:17 – 53:19
Any thoughts or comments are appreciated.
53:19 – 53:21
All right Dennis. There's some
53:21 – 53:22
interpretation required here.
53:22 – 53:26
I'm going to assume Assume that the going
53:26 – 53:30
to assume that the patterns, the strange
53:30 – 53:33
field patterns that you are describing are
53:33 – 53:34
not tile patterns.
53:34 – 53:37
Otherwise, why would they be strange?
53:37 – 53:40
So for interesting field patterns, I've
53:40 – 53:42
observed a number of those.
53:42 – 53:46
I've observed them on hay crops as well.
53:46 – 53:48
My instinct, my guess.
53:48 – 53:52
Just based on observing them over a number
53:52 – 53:55
of years these patterns shift and change.
53:55 – 53:58
The ones that I've observed, they shift
53:58 – 54:01
and change, they expand over time,
54:01 – 54:03
sometimes they contract.
54:03 – 54:06
I suspect that they are present or they
54:06 – 54:09
are the expression of soil fungal
54:09 – 54:11
populations, mycorrhizal fungi hyphae
54:11 – 54:13
networks, because I've similarly observed
54:13 – 54:14
remarkable degrees.
54:14 – 54:17
A remarkable variation of productivity
54:17 – 54:20
within a few feet of each other.
54:20 – 54:24
And I don't Believe it's because of the
54:24 – 54:26
nutritional profile of soil.
54:26 – 54:29
I believe it's because of changes in the
54:29 – 54:32
microbial profile of soil, particularly
54:32 – 54:33
fungal populations.
54:33 – 54:36
So that would be my first guess.
54:36 – 54:40
And the good news is today it's able,
54:40 – 54:43
it's possible for us to measure that and
54:43 – 54:46
to quantify that. What the differences
54:46 – 54:50
are. Then relative to the tile lines and
54:50 – 54:53
the patterns that you're seeing there,
54:53 – 54:57
whether that is due to drainage or to
54:57 – 54:59
micronutrients. You Mentioned that your
54:59 – 55:02
family has been farming the same soil
55:02 – 55:05
since 1854 and that it would be
55:05 – 55:09
interesting to know you are now grazing
55:09 – 55:11
cattle over every acre every year.
55:11 – 55:15
But has this soil perchance been depleted?
55:15 – 55:17
Has it always had cattle?
55:17 – 55:20
That would be something to be interested
55:20 – 55:24
in knowing about. It is certainly true
55:24 – 55:27
that many subsoils have higher levels of
55:27 – 55:30
trace minerals than the topsoil does.
55:30 – 55:32
Because of depletion that was accelerated
55:32 – 55:35
by tillage and particularly by the
55:35 – 55:37
application of soluble fertilizers.
55:37 – 55:40
A lot of people don't realize this.
55:40 – 55:43
But a nitrogen application or a potassium
55:43 – 55:47
chloride application, a good part of the
55:47 – 55:50
supposed damage that it does isn't
55:50 – 55:52
measured in the short term.
55:52 – 55:56
It takes 20, 30, 40 years to show
55:56 – 55:59
up because it solubilizes the presence of
55:59 – 56:01
these high salt content electrolytes
56:01 – 56:04
solubilizes Trace minerals and moves them
56:04 – 56:07
further down into the soil profile.
56:07 – 56:10
So if you have a history of 40
56:10 – 56:14
or 50. Or 60 years of fertilizer
56:14 – 56:16
applications, then yes, those trace
56:16 – 56:18
minerals will have depleted from the
56:18 – 56:21
topsoil and moved down the soil profile,
56:21 – 56:24
and that can facilitate a drain tile
56:24 – 56:27
pattern. I've certainly seen that showing
56:27 – 56:30
up. Then when you speak about your
56:30 – 56:34
Question is, I'm told that the old timers
56:34 – 56:36
would manure the fields for micronutrient
56:36 – 56:39
deficiencies. Well, if you read the old
56:39 – 56:42
literature. They would actually use the
56:42 – 56:45
term manuring the fields." If you go back
56:45 – 56:49
far enough, 70, 80 years ago, they would
56:49 – 56:52
use that terminology to describe what we
56:52 – 56:55
today call soil amendments, or they would
56:55 – 56:58
speak about putting on soil amendments of
56:58 – 56:59
trace minerals directly.
56:59 – 57:02
If I'm understanding your question
57:02 – 57:04
correctly, you're not asking about that
57:04 – 57:07
but you're asking about livestock manure
57:07 – 57:10
and whether that can correct the
57:10 – 57:10
micronutrient deficiencies.
57:10 – 57:13
And ruminant cow manure in particular, B4
57:13 – 57:16
dairy, has an incredible microbiome.
57:16 – 57:18
Their rumen microbiome, other ruminant
57:18 – 57:20
animals are really valuable, are valuable
57:20 – 57:24
as well, but cows in particular are
57:24 – 57:24
particularly valuable.
57:25 – 57:29
And they can greatly increase the nutrient
57:29 – 57:32
availability on soils where that manure is
57:32 – 57:35
applied, but they only Deliver nutrients
57:35 – 57:38
in the manure that are present in
57:38 – 57:41
the original parent forage that they're
57:41 – 57:45
consuming. So manure by itself, or let
57:45 – 57:48
me say it this way, manure from
57:48 – 57:52
a depleted soil does not fix micronutrient
57:52 – 57:54
deficiencies. I hope I answered your
57:54 – 57:57
question. There's a question here from
57:57 – 58:00
Teresa. What? Theresa, what nutrient
58:00 – 58:03
deficiency is indicated by an infestation
58:03 – 58:06
of aphids? We actually have a couple
58:06 – 58:10
of webinars on this where we talk
58:10 – 58:11
about aphids specifically.
58:11 – 58:14
Aphids will show up in plants that
58:14 – 58:18
have a particular nitrogen profile as well
58:18 – 58:20
as a particular sugar profile.
58:20 – 58:23
An application of Fodomag that contains
58:23 – 58:26
magnesium, sulfur, molybdenum, and boron
58:26 – 58:29
will change that profile very quickly.
58:29 – 58:32
So in particular, these plants need high
58:32 – 58:35
levels of nitrates and low levels of
58:35 – 58:36
complete proteins.
58:36 – 58:40
What happened? An hour is already gone.
58:41 – 58:43
Wow, that was quick.
58:43 – 58:46
All right, I think I'm going to take a
58:46 – 58:49
couple more questions here, and then
58:49 – 58:51
actually probably only one more.
58:51 – 58:53
There's a question here from Andy.
58:53 – 58:55
What is pinions affect on botrytis?
58:55 – 58:57
So, um Effect on botrytis.
58:57 – 59:00
So as of this point we've tried pinon on
59:00 – 59:02
botrytis and I think strawberries,
59:02 – 59:05
blueberries, a couple of other crops as
59:05 – 59:08
well on the fruit, where botrytis shows up
59:08 – 59:11
on the fruit. It's also been used in
59:11 – 59:14
greenhouses. And at this point botrytis is
59:14 – 59:17
100 pinon has a 100 success rate with
59:17 – 59:18
botrytis at this point.
59:18 – 59:22
So I think I'm going to call it a
59:22 – 59:23
wrap at that point.
59:23 – 59:26
At this point, thank you all for being
59:26 – 59:29
here. Hope you find the information
59:29 – 59:31
valuable and useful to our newsletter so
59:31 – 59:34
you can send in questions in advance.
59:34 – 59:37
And I look forward to having another one
59:37 – 59:40
of these and chatting with all of you
59:40 – 59:42
again soon. Thank you very much.
59:42 – 59:43
Happy growing.
