Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - [nafex] Isn't this a supreme failure of ecology?

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "alden@waldenwinds.com" <alden@waldenwinds.com>
  • To: <nafex@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [nafex] Isn't this a supreme failure of ecology?
  • Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:38:09 -0700

Anton wrote:
<<Nitrogen fixed by the bacterial/shrub partnership is mostly used by the
host plant (until it dies and breaks down).>>
Hector Black has previously written that his Eleagnus Umbellata were
"generous" with their nitrogen, stimulating nearby trees. Attending the
NNGA, studies were reported in conference that Black Walnuts with Eleagnus
Umbellata interplanted were measurably much larger than those without the
beneficial interplant.

<<Even then, the nitrogen is released slowly- not at all like synthetic
fertilizers.>>
This says that the form of nitrogen delivered by Eleagnus Umbellata [the
interplant species confirmed by the study to increase the size of its
co-planted black walnut] is a superior, safer form of nitrogen. I am
still in awe that ecologists can discard a form of nitrogen that is safe,
generated biologically on site, delivered to where it is needed. Now that
Eleagnus Umbellata has been written onto a biological elimination list,
apparently ecologists want us to synthetically create nitrogen, transport
it from distant sites to the delivery point, and burn plants and soil
bacteria in the process of applying it. Isn't this a supreme failure of
ecology?

Charlie in Massachusetts



  • [nafex] Isn't this a supreme failure of ecology?, alden@waldenwinds.com, 02/16/2012

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page