This is not new but still a myth that has not resisted scientific studies.
Not seen if we talked about it here?
Everything is in the pdf http://www.jardiner-autrement.fr/images ... F-2012.pdf
And a detailed article here http://www.lefigaro.fr/jardin/2015/01/2 ... orties.php
Only the holistic methods like those proposed by Hervé Coves remain https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w3qhWkfRMY ;)
Should we throw the plant purines to the nettles?
Just, here too my opinion:
- I do not do it: too much work for a lazy gardener; and as I have more vegetables than I need, why should I tire myself?
- I do not think that these are products likely to "cure" (what is conventionally expected from a "treatment product")
- I do think, however, that they can contribute, like 36 other things, to a better overall balance in the garden; it is obvious that some of these plants have particular capacities; nettle is a formidable extractor of minerals and a nitrogen fixing which it extracts from "waste" [it is not a fabacea - not to be confused]; it is a ruderal (which develops on waste); comfrey concentrates potash; horsetail is very rich in silica ...
So if I was less lazy, I would probably use it for these reasons: to maintain an environment as "harmonious" as possible ...
When in the thread that I devote to the "lazy garden", I keep scolding fashions and "churches", it's good because you have to be stupidly naive to think that the "organic" market is not subject to market laws. The makers of "PNPP" are no angels. They are looking, like everyone else, to sell ...
In addition, there is in our society, from the rejection of the excesses of chemical agriculture (and there is something: the first motivation of my lazy gardening, it is to have healthy products, free of traces of pesticides, products with an excellent carbon footprint ... without breaking a hoe), boulevards for followers of all kinds of "sects". In a society of media-kings, of constant buzz, no wonder some of these sects proliferate beyond reason. The bigger it is, the less buzz! Modern man is confused, left without benchmarks, worried ... What does not work sells very well [see the results of the elections these two Sundays].
Make no mistake: those who spread these "buzz" are generally very good faith! It is all the more disarming to have to be disagreeable with them !!!
"Believe what we see or see what we believe?" That is still the question!
- I do not do it: too much work for a lazy gardener; and as I have more vegetables than I need, why should I tire myself?
- I do not think that these are products likely to "cure" (what is conventionally expected from a "treatment product")
- I do think, however, that they can contribute, like 36 other things, to a better overall balance in the garden; it is obvious that some of these plants have particular capacities; nettle is a formidable extractor of minerals and a nitrogen fixing which it extracts from "waste" [it is not a fabacea - not to be confused]; it is a ruderal (which develops on waste); comfrey concentrates potash; horsetail is very rich in silica ...
So if I was less lazy, I would probably use it for these reasons: to maintain an environment as "harmonious" as possible ...
When in the thread that I devote to the "lazy garden", I keep scolding fashions and "churches", it's good because you have to be stupidly naive to think that the "organic" market is not subject to market laws. The makers of "PNPP" are no angels. They are looking, like everyone else, to sell ...
In addition, there is in our society, from the rejection of the excesses of chemical agriculture (and there is something: the first motivation of my lazy gardening, it is to have healthy products, free of traces of pesticides, products with an excellent carbon footprint ... without breaking a hoe), boulevards for followers of all kinds of "sects". In a society of media-kings, of constant buzz, no wonder some of these sects proliferate beyond reason. The bigger it is, the less buzz! Modern man is confused, left without benchmarks, worried ... What does not work sells very well [see the results of the elections these two Sundays].
Make no mistake: those who spread these "buzz" are generally very good faith! It is all the more disarming to have to be disagreeable with them !!!
"Believe what we see or see what we believe?" That is still the question!
Last edited by Did67 the 16 / 12 / 15, 13: 53, 1 edited once.
0 x
Hello,
The problem is complex because it is the exact nature of this manure?
If it is a simple decoction without fermentation, it can only be the elements present in the plants that can play a role and it is not absurd a priori.
If it's a real manure, it's another matter, this manure must be very rich in various bacteria including bacillus subtilis. Now we know that this bacillus in high concentration can have a real insecticidal effect like bacillus thuringensis so my faith nothing must be completely true or completely false.
cordially
The problem is complex because it is the exact nature of this manure?
If it is a simple decoction without fermentation, it can only be the elements present in the plants that can play a role and it is not absurd a priori.
If it's a real manure, it's another matter, this manure must be very rich in various bacteria including bacillus subtilis. Now we know that this bacillus in high concentration can have a real insecticidal effect like bacillus thuringensis so my faith nothing must be completely true or completely false.
cordially
0 x
Theoretically, if we follow the recipe, it is a fermentation: such a rich medium left in the air for a few days, it "swarms"!
Now: OK, so that it is very rich in bacteria (and probably other "micro-organisms" - protozoa, etc ...).
By cons, I doubt:
- that these bacteria and other "micro-organisms" present are "killers" such as Bt!
- That the Bt thus appear, spontaneously, in a decoction of fermented nettles; no doubt, since 40 years that one works with the Bt, a researcher, somewhere, would have identified it ...
The bacteria are very specific and to attribute to one the virtues of another is to think that one will get tuberculosis (a bacterium - a bacillus itself) by eating a yoghurt (a bacterium - another bacillus) ...
On the other hand, I think that the more an environment is rich in bacteria, and the less certain "harmful" bacteria (generating "diseases") will have no place ... Rapists rarely act in a crowded public square [this comparison worth what it is worth, like any comparison!].
On the other hand, sprayed on plants, in full light, in full UV, these bacteria will encapsulate and enter "resistance form" (spores) in less time than it takes to write it ( I type with two fingers!).
That's just my opinion.
Now: OK, so that it is very rich in bacteria (and probably other "micro-organisms" - protozoa, etc ...).
By cons, I doubt:
- that these bacteria and other "micro-organisms" present are "killers" such as Bt!
- That the Bt thus appear, spontaneously, in a decoction of fermented nettles; no doubt, since 40 years that one works with the Bt, a researcher, somewhere, would have identified it ...
The bacteria are very specific and to attribute to one the virtues of another is to think that one will get tuberculosis (a bacterium - a bacillus itself) by eating a yoghurt (a bacterium - another bacillus) ...
On the other hand, I think that the more an environment is rich in bacteria, and the less certain "harmful" bacteria (generating "diseases") will have no place ... Rapists rarely act in a crowded public square [this comparison worth what it is worth, like any comparison!].
On the other hand, sprayed on plants, in full light, in full UV, these bacteria will encapsulate and enter "resistance form" (spores) in less time than it takes to write it ( I type with two fingers!).
That's just my opinion.
0 x
-
izentrop
- Econologue expert
- posts: 13955
- Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
- Location: picardie
- x 1587
- Contact :
Hello,
and thank you for your wise answers.
These wild plants mown once a year, but not all of a sudden, can make a supplement of cover for the garden, restoring their accumulated mineral salt?
This is the trend that I try to get to the chagrin of my neighbors (I exaggerate, we get along well). They spend a lot of time on their lawn tractors. I'll have to regulate the wild rabbits and brambles that clings to the shearer's shoulder
I do not know anything about agronomy, but I like the optics of Hervé Coves http://www.humanite-biodiversite.fr/sys ... oisier.pdf
and thank you for your wise answers.
Hervé Covès advises leaving biodiversity around the garden and reducing lawn surfaces. These plants harbor, feed and maintain the predators of our aphids and slugs, ext ... at an acceptable level.did67 wrote:- I do think, however, that they can contribute, like 36 other things, to a better overall balance in the garden; it is obvious that some of these plants have particular capacities; nettle is a formidable extractor of minerals and a nitrogen fixing which it extracts from "waste" [it is not a fabacea - not to be confused]; it is a ruderal (which develops on waste); comfrey concentrates potash; horsetail is very rich in silica ...
These wild plants mown once a year, but not all of a sudden, can make a supplement of cover for the garden, restoring their accumulated mineral salt?
This is the trend that I try to get to the chagrin of my neighbors (I exaggerate, we get along well). They spend a lot of time on their lawn tractors. I'll have to regulate the wild rabbits and brambles that clings to the shearer's shoulder
I do not know anything about agronomy, but I like the optics of Hervé Coves http://www.humanite-biodiversite.fr/sys ... oisier.pdf
0 x
-
Obamot
- Econologue expert
- posts: 29337
- Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
- Location: regio genevesis
- x 5790
This thread falls well because it clarifies some points that bad luck for the author of the thread, will not support his point of view:
What about Izentrop, wants to send us somewhere the following message (just as he tried to do with homeopathy and other topics, like the placebo of which he did not know the exact current and SCIENTIFIC notion)
Of course it's speculation on my part but not totally! "We cannot throw the manure water with the" bath "water", I explain myself and approach the subject from another angle:
Truth, like all truth, is not so simple:
- Plants IN A NATURAL STATE, develop resistance strategies that plants forced by intensive human cultivation do not have. it takes some time to restore a balance "savage"hence the interest of Didier's thread, which let them fend for themselves" on their own "as much as possible, so that they in particular try to find their own characters.
- When the plants are attacked, they defend themselves by releasing toxic substances, to try to kill the aggressor (I gave in the other thread the example of the latex, released by the salad when one cuts some leaves, for achieve this goal: info given by our bio-chemist);
- All plants, even when they are not attacked (from wild or non-wild strains) already have naturally on their surface (in the skin, under the skin, etc.) substances that protect them, which are natural disinfectants. And we, when we eat them raw, also act in our body as a natural disinfectant and we also clean the body (this disinfectant is beneficial to us, it disinfects our esophagus and makes us crazy.) Try to drink a real juice carrot, do it by being receptive to what is happening in your body, and see how you feel right after ...) information given by a researcher laureate of the University of Lausanne who then developed his own laboratory and experienced his own theories. Notably on white purebred female mice ordered from the Pasteur Institute, but then - thanks to her medical studies - was able to benefit her own patients;
- BUT (because there is a but ...) the plants which are grown, which are denatured, cultivated by man, no longer develop their immune defense as much (just like us who eat them) and therefore they are of advantage still vulnerable as long as they are treated, nature which is a little lazy says to itself: "bonnard, I'm in an environment where I do not need to trample me anymore, but immune defenses being superfluous, I will use my energy otherwise or let it flow softly ..."(scientific interview made with my own plants, under torture and after a prolonged stay in Guantanamo ^^: it's my paranoid side, saying crazy things based on nothing, I invent as I go, it's why am I wasting my time on forums, like many ...)
- and it's not over, the worst part is that I don't really like ORGANIC, certainly it's better, but it's not yet ... Why (stop delusional and say no importenawak Oba ...)! Why because treating "BIO" does not mean that it is "good for everyone", there again plants can "take it easy" and moreover, an "BIO" poison to treat, even if it is BIO-degradable, nonetheless remains a poison! And who knows, maybe for some people, an organic poison is more harmful than a synthetic molecule that has been harshly tested and "certified harmless" for humans (while BIO is perhaps not as tested) or VICE-VERSA BIO poisons may be less harmful for SOME PEOPLE than synthetic substances (it all depends on the individual metabolic response). But in both cases it does not really help us (it's a better ... for sure, the BIO). But the BIO also kills, it is made for that ...!
And we end up with the ancestral recipe of our manure, which as some speakers have said, does not mean much or nothing in the study such as the one published in Figaro (kilkoolol) - highly scientific duck by the way - because indeed, applying it to plants of weakened species families does not help to see clearly, since it had been necessary to test it on species a little more "wild"! who already have a good immune response against their own parasites.
It's crazy what peremptory opinions can be biased nowadays, when you don't know a domain inside out, and that said, I'm not against these liquid manure, nor completely for, you have to see to the use and completely agree with the history of bacteria which develop in a certain biotope which makes (or not) the effectiveness. In any case, we must beware of hasty judgments, can we conclude immediately? I think no, you have to experiment and base practice on experience. To say niet seems to me as suspicious as to say that "it will work" without having tested it under good conditions (which take into account all the parameters, and too bad for this monument of human intelligence that is the Figaro if the result is not as "liberal" as expected ^^).
In fact we do not care, there is only the result that counts: if it gives a desired result: as much apply. And as Izentrop I share this opinion: it must be done scientifically and like him it is good to seek the truth .... But we must not forget concepts and be bold to take into account that have not been explored (to the extent that it remains plausible.)
It tells you all the great good that I think of Did67 thread, which is going in the right direction and in my humble opinion.
RTDC.
* a- private.
It's not new but still a myth that has not stood up to scientific studies
What about Izentrop, wants to send us somewhere the following message (just as he tried to do with homeopathy and other topics, like the placebo of which he did not know the exact current and SCIENTIFIC notion)
— we live in a world where certain things have been experimented, in principle scientifically, so necessarily what does not belong to this paradigm would necessarily be a-scientific * (I'm right, those who think otherwise are wrong and I would not like Voltaire, to fight so that they can say it: name of name!)
Of course it's speculation on my part but not totally! "We cannot throw the manure water with the" bath "water", I explain myself and approach the subject from another angle:
Truth, like all truth, is not so simple:
- Plants IN A NATURAL STATE, develop resistance strategies that plants forced by intensive human cultivation do not have. it takes some time to restore a balance "savage"hence the interest of Didier's thread, which let them fend for themselves" on their own "as much as possible, so that they in particular try to find their own characters.
- When the plants are attacked, they defend themselves by releasing toxic substances, to try to kill the aggressor (I gave in the other thread the example of the latex, released by the salad when one cuts some leaves, for achieve this goal: info given by our bio-chemist);
- All plants, even when they are not attacked (from wild or non-wild strains) already have naturally on their surface (in the skin, under the skin, etc.) substances that protect them, which are natural disinfectants. And we, when we eat them raw, also act in our body as a natural disinfectant and we also clean the body (this disinfectant is beneficial to us, it disinfects our esophagus and makes us crazy.) Try to drink a real juice carrot, do it by being receptive to what is happening in your body, and see how you feel right after ...) information given by a researcher laureate of the University of Lausanne who then developed his own laboratory and experienced his own theories. Notably on white purebred female mice ordered from the Pasteur Institute, but then - thanks to her medical studies - was able to benefit her own patients;
- BUT (because there is a but ...) the plants which are grown, which are denatured, cultivated by man, no longer develop their immune defense as much (just like us who eat them) and therefore they are of advantage still vulnerable as long as they are treated, nature which is a little lazy says to itself: "bonnard, I'm in an environment where I do not need to trample me anymore, but immune defenses being superfluous, I will use my energy otherwise or let it flow softly ..."(scientific interview made with my own plants, under torture and after a prolonged stay in Guantanamo ^^: it's my paranoid side, saying crazy things based on nothing, I invent as I go, it's why am I wasting my time on forums, like many ...)
- and it's not over, the worst part is that I don't really like ORGANIC, certainly it's better, but it's not yet ... Why (stop delusional and say no importenawak Oba ...)! Why because treating "BIO" does not mean that it is "good for everyone", there again plants can "take it easy" and moreover, an "BIO" poison to treat, even if it is BIO-degradable, nonetheless remains a poison! And who knows, maybe for some people, an organic poison is more harmful than a synthetic molecule that has been harshly tested and "certified harmless" for humans (while BIO is perhaps not as tested) or VICE-VERSA BIO poisons may be less harmful for SOME PEOPLE than synthetic substances (it all depends on the individual metabolic response). But in both cases it does not really help us (it's a better ... for sure, the BIO). But the BIO also kills, it is made for that ...!
And we end up with the ancestral recipe of our manure, which as some speakers have said, does not mean much or nothing in the study such as the one published in Figaro (kilkoolol) - highly scientific duck by the way - because indeed, applying it to plants of weakened species families does not help to see clearly, since it had been necessary to test it on species a little more "wild"! who already have a good immune response against their own parasites.
It's crazy what peremptory opinions can be biased nowadays, when you don't know a domain inside out, and that said, I'm not against these liquid manure, nor completely for, you have to see to the use and completely agree with the history of bacteria which develop in a certain biotope which makes (or not) the effectiveness. In any case, we must beware of hasty judgments, can we conclude immediately? I think no, you have to experiment and base practice on experience. To say niet seems to me as suspicious as to say that "it will work" without having tested it under good conditions (which take into account all the parameters, and too bad for this monument of human intelligence that is the Figaro if the result is not as "liberal" as expected ^^).
In fact we do not care, there is only the result that counts: if it gives a desired result: as much apply. And as Izentrop I share this opinion: it must be done scientifically and like him it is good to seek the truth .... But we must not forget concepts and be bold to take into account that have not been explored (to the extent that it remains plausible.)
It tells you all the great good that I think of Did67 thread, which is going in the right direction and in my humble opinion.
RTDC.
* a- private.
0 x
izentrop wrote:
Hervé Covès advises leaving biodiversity around the garden and reducing lawn surfaces. These plants harbor, feed and maintain the predators of our aphids and slugs, ext ... at an acceptable level.
These wild plants mown once a year, but not all of a sudden, can make a supplement of cover for the garden, restoring their accumulated mineral salt?
This is the trend that I try to get to the chagrin of my neighbors (I exaggerate, we get along well). They spend a lot of time on their lawn tractors. I'll have to regulate the rabbits and brambles that clings to the shearer's shoulder: |
I do not know anything about agronomy, but I like the optics of Hervé Coves http://www.humanite-biodiversite.fr/sys ... oisier.pdf
1) I do not know this person.
2) But I'm doing the same.
I re-introduce herbaceous passages in my garden, the width of my mower - because I remain lazy, which are, in fact, precious shelters especially for the golden ground beetles, enemies of snails; they live in these lawns, from where they launch their "raids" ...
For a long time, I have neglected the useful parts (passages, spreading clothes, corner "picnic table", I treat my lawn in flowered lawn (a single late mowing, after flowering and shelling flowers")...
I installed on the periphery, plants favorable to slugs (hostas) or aphids (roses, honeysuckle, elderberry) ... to raise them and feed a population of live anti-aphids (ladybugs and hoverflies) or of anti-slug ...
0 x
Obamot wrote:
It tells you all the great good that I think of Did67 thread, which is going in the right direction and in my humble opinion.
Thank you very much. It's nice.
I hope, indeed, to go in the right direction. In a complex area!
I also hope to be able to explain the essential, with tangible data. Even if the complexity of the living, and the extremely incomplete knowledge of what is happening in the hidden face of the ground, I will inevitably have surprises, good or bad, and I will butter on the gaps / my shortcomings ...
I hope to stay away from sectarian and dogmatic thoughts, illusions of optics, collective smokers, in short everything I'm so fond of, while walking completely off the beaten path. It is a number of mountebank not simple.
PS: and I am very happy to see that I enjoy the respect of the greatest number on the wire where I report, without complacency, my experiences; and that's huge! [honestly, I did not believe it!]
0 x
Obamot wrote:
... the worst part is that I don't really like ORGANIC, admittedly it's better, but it's not yet ... Why (stop delirious and say no matter how awak Oba ... )! Why because treating "BIO" does not mean that it is "good for everyone", there again plants can "take it easy" and moreover, an "BIO" poison to treat, even if it is BIO-degradable, nonetheless remains a poison! And who knows, maybe for some people, an organic poison is more harmful than a synthetic molecule that has been harshly tested and "certified harmless" for humans (while BIO is perhaps not as tested) or VICE-VERSA BIO poisons may be less harmful for SOME PEOPLE than synthetic substances (it all depends on the individual metabolic response). But in both cases it does not really help us (it's a better ... for sure, the BIO). But the BIO also kills, it is made for that ....
You didn't follow the debate I had with janic about my expression "more than organic", "organic which is all white so you can't have whiter than white ..." etc ....
Because I evoke a radical fact:
- Silicone breasts (except when they are fake) do not seem to pose a problem after a lot of years (I do not know the males who fiddle with them ???)
- the most natural curare, the most "organic" hemlock will shoot you ...
So the hyphenation line does not pass between "synthesis" and "natural".
Rotenone, long - for 20 or 30 years - used as an organic insecticide, was banned less than 10 years ago because fairly recent research has irrefutably shown that it causes ... Parkinson's disease.
It is proved that copper (copper sulphate = Bordeaux mixture), which remains one of the most used organic anti-mildious, is a real poison for soils, where it accumulates. He does not fit in my garden!
So "organic", "designed" in reaction to the drifts of chemical agriculture, is certainly a big step forward: return to organic fertilization (composts), less treatments, attention to balances and auxiliaries, etc ...
However, this is a flawed and misleading method in this respect:
- strong oil drift (even if the purists - an ultra-minority - resort to animal trcation)
- dependence of natural fertilizers (phsophates, potash) which are a limited mineral resource; so that remains a mining agriculture
- use of "natural" products open to criticism (Bordeaux mixture, rotenone previously) ...
- tillage, which remains a crime against earthworms!
Hence my ambition to go further, towards what I call "more than organic".
[PS: when I speak of "organic", it must be understood "certified organic", in other words method of production of a product which one finds in the commecre with the green leaf EU and / or the French AB]
PS2: organic is clearly better than conventional ... but still worse than "more than organic from did67"!
0 x
I remember discussing biodynamics and its "magic" recipes and, without commenting on the substance, I pointed out that someone who spent his time scrutinizing his plants, preparing them strange mixtures (including decoctions of consoudes and fermentations of nettles are the most harmless) and to pay so much attention to his garden, could not help but obtain good results, regardless of the validity of his theories.
I am also very impressed by the difference in resistance existing between wild or semi-domesticated plants and the ultra-anthropised varieties ... It would seem that the defense mechanisms are rapidly disappearing in an artificialized context *, making it all the more this protection and thus establishing a vicious circle ...
* This observation applies to the whole of the living.
I am also very impressed by the difference in resistance existing between wild or semi-domesticated plants and the ultra-anthropised varieties ... It would seem that the defense mechanisms are rapidly disappearing in an artificialized context *, making it all the more this protection and thus establishing a vicious circle ...
* This observation applies to the whole of the living.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Back to "Garden: landscaping, plants, garden, ponds and pools"
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 93 guests