[Michaelangelica]

Rhizosphere = round Rhizos?

Eric's "wee beastie" Condos with in built security systems against 'bad guys'

Mechanism 2: Biochar alters the activity of other
micro-organisms that have effects on mycorrhizae
. . .
Hyphae and bacteria that colonize biochar particles (or other porous materials) may be protected from soil predators (Saito 1990; Pietikäinen et al. 2000; Ezawa et al. 2002), which includes mites, collembola and larger (>16 μm in diameter) protozoans and nematodes.
The documented physical parameters of the biochar particles themselves make this mechanism plausible.
The average sizes of soil bacteria and fungal hyphae range from 1 to 4 μm and 2 to 64 μm, respectively, with many fungal hypha being smaller than 16 μm in diameter (Swift et al. 1979).
Additionally, the average body-size of a soil protist is between 8 to 100 μm, while the average body size of soil micro-arthropods ranges from 100 μm to 2 mm (Swift et al. 1979).
In contrast, the pore diameters in a biochar particle can often be smaller than 16 μm in diameter (Kawamotoet al. 2005; Glaser 2007; Hockaday et al. 2007).
Based on the differences in the body sizes across these different organisms, it is clearly possible that many of the pores within a biochar particle are large enough to accommodate soil microorganisms, including most bacteria and many fungi, to the exclusion of their larger predators.
Thus, the biochar would be acting as a refuge for MHB, PSB and mycorrhizal fungi.

Supporting evidence for this hypothesis comes from Saito (1990), Gaur and Adholeya (2000) andEzawa et al. (2002) who all showed that AMF readily colonize porous materials and were capable of heavily colonizing biochar particles in the soil.

Lastly, Pietikäinen et al. (2000) and Samonin and Elikova (2004) showed that bacteria readily colonized biochar particles; these may include MHB and/or PSB.

http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/l...%20Warnock.pdf

[Michaelangelica]

First Nanoscale Image Of Soil Reveals An 'Incredible' Variety, Rich With Patterns
I cant find the research at the Cornell Uni site, that the above article is based on
I did find a nice picky

Bioenergy and GHG
but not the nano ones I was looking for.

[Michaelangelica]

Just found this interesting Australian site.
Well worth exploring.

LeftClick: Composting with worms-- another sustainability lesson from Cuba

Wednesday, May 7
Composting with worms-- another sustainability lesson from Cuba

The English Green Party's Derek Wall dug up (so apt!) this piece by Matthew Werner on worm farming in Cuba for compost week.Worms as Charles Darwin insisted are important critters.

"Food for worms..." can be almost anything as the medieval Church and Shakespeare's Hamlet have pointed out. Food like...very dead human beings.


Not where he eats, but where he is eaten:
a certain convocation of politic worms are e'en at him. Your
worm is your only emperor for diet: we fat all
creatures else to fat us, and we fat ourselves for
maggots: your fat king and your lean beggar is but
variable service, two dishes, but to one table:
that's the end.

Worms are also highly efficient carbon sequestors. By taking organic matter underground, the worms reduce carbon release into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide and worm farming is akin, in my estimation, to such practices as Agri Char (aka Terra Preta) in the role it could play -- rather quickly -- to ameliorate global warming.But no major Vermicompost project has been initiated with that thesis in mind.

David Murphy's book , Organic Growing With Worms addresses that possibility in its pages with great verve such that the irrepressible Peter Cundall writes in regard to it:

"This is an amazing, inspiring book..it should be on the bookshelf of every farmer, gardener, conservationist, scientist or anyone who comprehends the environmental dangers now threatening all life forms on earth."

Murphy writes that "...if [the world's agricultural soil] were raised to 5 per cent [organic matter] to a depth of 25 cm, 150 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide would be sequestered into the soil ".

Healthy soil could sequester up to 350 tonnes of carbon per hectare (Jones 2007), this being equivalent to about 1,285 tonne of carbon dioxide per hectare removed from atmosphere....This exceeds the estimated 15 billion tonnes per annum global emissions of carbon dioxide from all sources (Murphy 2005) 10 times over.

Hence soil represents the largest potential sink (storage capacity) for carbon - if natural soil quality is restored and maintained -- Sunnyside Projects.

*Yep. Worms are really something to get excited about -- not only as a means to bed down waste (3% of national carbon emissions) but also as a means to invigorate the extremely poor nature of Australian soils while helping to reduce the share agriculture plays in our total carbon emissions. -- 16% from Agriculture (larger than transport-- 13%-- and second only to stationary energy ).


Trends in carbon dioxide equivalent emissions from the agricultural sector, 1990-2004


Sixty percent of emissions from the agricultural sector come from enteric fermentation in livestock. These are emissions associated with microbial fermentation during digestion of feed by ruminant (mostly cattle and sheep) and some non-ruminant domestic livestock. Emissions associated with agricultural soils (e.g. disturbance of land by cropping, improved pastures and the application of fertilisers and animal wastes) and prescribed burning of savannas also account for a significant proportion of net emissions.

While enteric fermentation is the main driver of emissions from agriculture, to replace that caloric output with plant foods behooves a major shift in soil management .

--Dave Riley

--

[Michaelangelica]

The activity of soil organisms can be divided into four functions:
1. Regulation of OM turnover & nutrient cycling,
2. Biological degradation
3. Maintenance of soil structure, and
4. Interaction with plants.
1a. Organic Matter (OM) Turnover:
• Carbon is a core element of OM and a vital energy source for soil biota.
• By decomposing OM the soil biota gain access to this carbon.
• Microbial biomass, the population of micro-organisms, acts as the engine for
OM turnover and nutrient release.
• Soils with high levels of OM support a greater number and a more diverse
range of biota.
• Where OM energy is plentiful, crop residue decomposition and OM
accumulation will occur.
• Specific organisms breakdown different types of OM. e.g. cellulolytic micro-
organisms only decompose cellulose and not lignin.
• The rate of OM breakdown relates to the soil environment, the number and
type of organisms present and the chemical structure of the plant residues.
Breakdown may occur in months or several thousand years.
1b. Transformation of Nutrients:
• The conversion of OM, by soil organisms, to available nutrients is called
mineralisation. This process is a key element of soil fertility.
• Whilst decomposing OM to obtain carbon, other nutrients are released.
These may be: soluble and leached (e.g. nitrate [NO3]), volatile and lost to
the atmosphere (e.g. nitrogen as N2 & N2O, sulphur as H2S) or readily
available to the plant (e.g. nitrates, phosphates and sulphates).
• In order to increase the up-take of a specific nutrient, many plants form
mutual relationships (symbioses) with soil micro-organisms. Examples of
symbiotic relationships include: legumes with the bacteria Rhizobium
species to fix atmospheric nitrogen gas, and most crops with mycorrhizal
fungi to absorb phosphorus and other nutrients from the soil environment.
• Mycorrhiza have been found to improve plant uptake of phosphorus. This is
thought to be due to the vast ‘collection structure’ provided by the hyphal
network of fungi.
. . .

[url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:AYNOHBwvwTYJ:www.csiro.au/files/files/pcz9.pdf+CSIRO+no+till+farming+soil+microorganisms &hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=au&client=firefox-a]The

The relationship between agricultureand soil organisms

Tillage:
Cultivation alters the physical, chemical and biological components of the soil
system. No-till, direct-drill systems result in significant differences in soil
organism activity compared to conventional deeper tillage.
No tillage:
• OM levels are high and micro-organisms become concentrated at the soil
surface.
• Residue decomposition and nutrient mineralisation is slower.
• Fungal hyphae are more prolific in the top 5cm of soil. This is beneficial in
terms of desirable fungi such as mycorrhizae but negative in relation to
pathogenic fungi such as Rhizoctonia.
• Fungal feeding nematodes, protozoa and macro fauna increase.
• 10 - 100 times more fungal feeding protozoa were counted under no-till and
stubble retention treatments. These may provide controls for pathogenic
fungi.
• Narrow points on cultivators used at seeding result in soil disturbance below
the seed. This in combination with a three week chemical fallow, prior to
seeding, reduces the severity of the pathogenic fungus Rhizoctonia .
• Deep burrowing earthworms in direct drilled plots improve soil structure
assisting root growth and increasing the yield of annual crops.

Conventional Tillage:
• This favours organisms with short generation times, rapid dispersal and high
metabolic rates. Bacteria and bactivorous fauna are dominant in cultivated
soils.
• Fungal hyphae are broken by cultivation and therefore reduced.
• Organisms are distributed more deeply into the ploughed layer .
• Residue decomposition and nutrient mineralisation is more rapid due to
better soil-stubble contact.
• The rapid activity results in a higher level of breakdown and a lower level of
OM accumulation.
• Earthworm populations significantly decrease.
• Increased cultivation has been shown to reduce the number of root lesion
nematodes, but no effect on cereal yield has been recorded.
influence soil biota activity?
Stubble incorporation favours bacteria and bactivorous fauna whereas stubble left on soil surface supports more fungi and fungivorous fauna.
. . .

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:AYNOHBwvwTYJ:www.csiro.au/files/files/pcz9.pdf+CSIRO+no+till+farming+soil+microorganisms &hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=au&client=firefox-a

[Michaelangelica]

Wee Beasties to pyrolysis to charcoal to soil to more Wee Beasties?

When people think of capturing sunlight energy in biomass, they focus on plants, which are familiar. However, plants are quite inefficient at capturing sunlight energy and turning it into biomass that can be used a fuel,"
. . .
"Photosynthetic bacteria can capture sunlight energy at rates 100 times or more greater than plants, and they do not compete for arable land," Rittmann said.
This high rate of energy capture means that renewable biofuels can be generated in quantities that rival our current use of fossil fuels.

In addition, non-photosynthetic microorganisms are capable of converting the energy value of all kinds of biomass, including wastes, into readily useful energy forms, such as methane, hydrogen, and electricity.

"Microorganisms can provide just the services our society needs to move from fossil fuels to renewable biofuels," said Rittmann.
"Only the microorganisms can pass all the tests, and we should take full advantage of the opportunities that microorganisms present."

Journal reference:

1. Rittmann et al. Opportunities for renewable bioenergy using microorganisms. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 2008; 100 (2): 203 DOI: 10.1002/bit.21875

Adapted from materials provided by Arizona State University, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Harnessing Microbes To Meet Our Future Energy Needs

[Michaelangelica]

I watched a show last night on ABC TV on the Rice Research Institute in the Philippines. A lot of Oz researchers are working there.

One researcher gave a long list of all the factors affecting rice production, genetics, pests, disease resistance etc., etc., at least 20 or more factors/variables.

Yet she did not mention "soil" once.

No mention of Rice Hull Charcoal now being exported.

How sad.

: (: : (: : (: : (: : (: : (: : (:

Here is a website that will keep you studying for a decade.
Krasil'nikov: TOC

SOIL MICROORGANISMS AND HIGHER PLANTS

[Michaelangelica]

[quote]
What are the functions that the microbes perform that cannot be accomplished by synthetic or mineral products?
The following are the functions that only the biological life in the soil can perform:

1. Decomposition of crop residues, manure and other organic matter to humus by the microbes for use by the plants.
2. Retention of nutrients in humus and in the microbes themselves that recycles.
3. Nutrient recycling by the biological food chain as microbes consume each other and nutrients are released to the plants.
4. Biological control of plant and soil diseases through biological pathogen suppression.
5. Production of plant growth regulators by the microbes that affect plant production.
6. Soil structure and tilth development produced by biological byproducts of the microbes.
7. Biological clean up of herbicide of pesticide carryover through degradation by the microbes into harmless byproducts.


What is the process the plant uses to support the microbial population?
In the photosynthesis of plants, photosynthates (complex sugars) are produced in the leaves. The plants send as much as 50% of these complex sugars down, passing out of the root into the soil to feed the microbes. With this energy received from the plant, the microbes convert essential nutrients from synthetic fertilizers along with nutrients and mineral reserves held in humus and other carbon-based compounds.

This biological partnership between plants and microbes is mutually beneficial. The plants feed the microbes the energy they need and the microbes feed the plants the variety of nutrients the plants need.
p

Why can't plants obtain all of the nutrients they need from synthetic fertilizers?
Plants feed at the second table. The plant feeds on what the microbes provide. Plants are poor foragers and scavengers of nutrients in fertilizers compared to microbes. Microbes have the capacity of "mining" or releasing nutrients from soil particles that are unavailable or "tied-up". Since microbes need carbon, nitrogen, phosphate, potassium and minor nutrients and trace minerals, they digest these nutrients and change them to a chelated or carbon-based form for the plants.
The microbes rely on plants to provide the complex sugars released from plant roots to support the microbes ability to provide nutrition for the plants.

Plants rely on the microbes to digest organic matter into humus that contains the nutrients in stable humic compounds.
The plant uses these stored and stable nutrients through the symbiotic relationship with the microbes.
The carbon and the balanced carbon/nitrogen relationship of microbes are vital in maintaining healthy, productive soil.

How do microbes function as the digestive system for plants?
The rhizosphere (microbes on or near the roots) is the digestive system for the plants. This zone of soil next to plant roots supports a much higher population of microbes than the soil even a short distance away from the roots. The numbers of microbes on or near the roots is up to 100 times greater than just 1/4" away from the root.
This high population of microbes near plant roots is varied in composition and activity.
This is the area of greatest digestion of minerals and nutrients by microbes that is made available to the growing plants.
These microbes live in a symbiotic relationship with the plant roots, using as a source of energy the varied organic nutrients that the roots discharge to feed the microbes.
These complex sugars stimulate a variety of microbes to obtain nutrients the plant needs for balanced nutrition.
Microbes have the chelating capacity for converting inorganic minerals to chelated or organic-based minerals plants can use to improve balanced nutrition.
[/quote]
BioFlora - Nature Knows Best

[Moontanman]

Have any studies been done on the microorganisms and their effects on aquatic substrates?

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

Have any studies been done on the microorganisms and their effects on aquatic substrates?

This looks to be a good source of info on that:
Gorlenko, V. M.;Dubinina, G. A.; Kuznetsov, S. I.: The ecology of aquatic micro-organisms. ISBN 978-3-510-40039-3

[Michaelangelica]

Interesting note in Wiki

The growth of AM hyphae through the soil is controlled by host root exudates and the soil phosphorus concentration.

Low phosphorus concentrations in the soil increase hyphal growth and branching as well as induce plant exudation of compounds which control hyphal branching intensity.[7][9]

The branching of AM fungal hyphae grown in 1 mM phosphorus media is significantly reduced but the length of the germ tube and total hyphal growth was not affected. A concentration of 10 mM phosphorus inhibited both hyphal growth and branching. This phosphorus concentration occurs in natural soil conditions and could thus contribute to reduced mycorrhizal colonisation.[9]

Arbuscular mycorrhiza - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Commercial Fertilisers for acid loving plants are low in Phosphorus. Why is that?