Shop Products
Houzz Logo Print
webuser_355114

Some Perspective re Synthetic:Organic Nutrient Supplementation

I'm going to approach this issue by looking at it from a growth perspective. IOW, what will make my plants grow best, and what will ensure that they are able to grow as near to their genetic potential as possible. Politics and ideologies aside, I'm hoping that the reasoning will be viewed as sound. This is about gardens and beds ..... not agribiz.

In my gardens and beds, I adhere pretty strictly to the idea that on an ongoing basis we should use organic products/soil amendments that build the soil structure to minimize the need for soluble (read synthetic) fertilizers and nutrient supplements. That said, there are times we need individual nutrients to complete the assortment of essential nutrients plants take from the soil. If you're limited by a rigid 'no chemicals' ideology, you either deal with the abnormal/sub-par growth associated with deficiency ..... or wait, while you hope the organic matter you've added eventually solves all the issues. If, on the other hand, you are NOT limited by rigid ideology, the issue is easily solved with a soil test and the addition of the appropriate nutrient(s) via a chemical compound like potash, various nitrates, phosphates, etc.

There are extremists at both ends of the organic vs. chemical approach to gardening. Some never think about the soil, believing it just fine to depend on the continual addition of chemicals to 'hopefully' produce growth. Others would never even THINK of using a chemical, and will chastise anyone who does. When it comes to my gardens and beds, I'm in the middle, but as noted I do lean quite heavily toward the organic side, though I stop short of telling anyone what they must do to be a good gardener.

Briefly: where container culture is the topic, soluble synthetic fertilizers get the nod from me - hands down. They are easier to use; we know exactly what nutrients our plants are getting and when they are getting them; delivery of nutrients does not depend on the activity of soil organisms whose populations vary in boom/bust cycles in containers; you're using a soluble product, not an organic soil amendment that has the potential to clog valuable macro-pores; you need not worry about soil structure, because if you are smart you will have built it into the medium before you planted in it ...., but let us save the container soil topic for another day.

I mentioned there are those at one end of the spectrum who would never lift a finger to improve their soil. Adding organic matter to their soils would be as foreign to them as adding exercise to life's itinerary. On the other end, are those who stand ululating and hand-flapping (credit to Dan for that one) at the very thought of anyone using Miracle-Gro. From the plant's perspective, both extremes are ridiculous, and from my perspective, both extremes are unnecessarily self-limiting. The plant just wants to grow to its genetic potential. To do that, it needs a soil that supplies the right amounts of air and water (good structure), and a full compliment of the nutrients plants take from the soil, and it doesn't care if they come from compost or Miracle-Gro.

Perhaps a more logical approach to plant nutrition might be to look at soluble synthetic fertilizers in the same way we look at IPM practices. Use the most naturally harmonious method/product we can to ensure plant growth or yields are in what we determine to be the acceptable range. I realize that in most cases, we can do this by adding more OM, but not always. Often too, time is a consideration. We may have someone who wants to plant immediately, in soil that is deficient in one or more nutrients. We probably shouldn't expect someone to forgo their own freedom of choice and wait two years or more while the soil is fortified/improved only via the addition of organic matter, just so they don't have to suffer the wrath of someone who might not think them 'green' enough to join their club.

There is a technical difference between a fertilizer (Miracle-Gro) and a soil amendment (feather meal), but even that point eventually becomes moot from a strictly nutritional perspective. Plants take up elements that are dissolved in the soil solution and in ionic form. What they take up are salts. The large molecules that make up hydrocarbon chains in organic fertilizers/soil amendments cannot be taken up by the plant unless the hydrocarbon chains are broken down into elemental, soluble form by soil organisms. At that point, the elements from soluble fertilizers are the same as the elements from organic sources, which is why the plant could care less. At the point in time where nutrients are assimilated, they are ALL soluble and in elemental form, regardless if they came from a dead fish, compost or a hose-end sprayer.

If we could only achieve happy healthy plants in a soil teaming with life, using only organic soil amendments and fertilizers, how do we explain hydroponics? ... no medium, or an entirely inorganic one, and only soluble sources of nutrients. At the very least, hydroponics suggests there is a middle ground in which everyone can seek their comfort level.

For more than 20 years, I have been growing perfectly healthy plants in containers, using a medium whose only organic fraction is 1/3 or less pine or fir bark; the rest of the ingredients are large mineral particles like Turface and crushed granite. I have used ONLY soluble fertilizers in these soils, with the hundreds of pictures I have posted here at GW serving as concrete proof that happy, healthy plants can indeed be grown using only synthetic soluble fertilizers, if the soil structure is favorable, which leads me to the reason for writing this:

Colloquially, the term 'organic' formerly applied to things once living, but even some plastics contain carbon and are considered organic compounds as well. It really is misleading when we throw the word around w/o much consideration, but I admit to being guilty of it from time to time as well. Technically, urea, ureaformaldehyde, isobutylidene diurea, and crotonylidene diurea (forgive me if the spelling is slightly off) are all organic molecules, and actually do an extremely good job of feeding microbes, which strongly reinforces the idea that synthetic fertilizers are getting framed for the microbial murder rap that should be hung on the effects of reduced OM in the soils. The microbial murder rap should be hung on the effects of reduced OM in the soils; purposely redundant so it could not be missed.

It's a vicious circle - mineral soils can support optimal plant growth (nutritionally speaking) only if enough young decaying matter is returned to the soil regularly and frequently. Prairies and forests are virtually self sustaining because all vegetative matter is recycled back into the soil. If we regularly mow and bale the grassland, or log off the forest, nutritional deficiencies are assured as a result of our removal of the OM that would have provided future nutrition - thus the tendency/need for us to adhere to the practice of replacing the lost nutrients using chemicals. Perhaps I should put that another way - .... replacing the deficient nutrients using chemicals.

To be clear, this isn't a 'What came first, the chicken or the egg' thing; it isn't the fertilizer chemicals that causes the ravishment of the soil, it is the ravishment of the soil that is causal of the necessity/tendency to use the chemicals, particularly where expedience is key.

In our gardens/beds/lawns ..., we can add compost or other OM to replace the vegetative matter we remove and use or discard. For more than 20 years, I've used compost regularly in the gardens/beds, and applied fine pine bark mulch 2-3" thick, usually every other year. I have extremely healthy soil and rarely find it necessary to use anything synthetic.

You can find opinions all over the net that chemical fertilizers are laying waste to the landscape, and wiping out microbial populations faster than chocolate disappears from the candy dish in the family room. Are these opinions based on political views and a radical ideology, or warranted and based in fact?

In research by Texas A&M University, intensely managed (read 'managed using chemical fertilizers') sports fields with mostly a sand substrate showed no shortage of soil life. That is there were 10s of millions of bacteria, and 10s to 100s of thousands of fungi per cubic centimeter present in the heavily managed soils. Part of the study included measuring soil life in 11 inches (deep) of pure sand that contained no additional organic amendments whatsoever, over which washed sod was placed. As the sod 'grew in', soil life populations increased almost immediately, 10-100 times their previous numbers.

Soil life populations just sort of hang loose, waiting for something they can digest. If they don't get it, they die and feed off each other. When organic matter is introduced into the soil, they break it down, and their numbers increase. When they've consumed the organic matter, they die and consume each other, but the base population remains, ready to spring into action the moment more organic matter becomes available.

What do soluble fertilizers do? They make plants grow. Sure, extremely high concentrations of chemical fertilizer poured on the soil in volume might kill some microbes in the immediate area, but the o/a affect of chemical fertilizers is actually an increase in microbial populations through increased plant growth/mass. You need only look to the fact that the rhizosphere (root zone) of plants is such a popular gathering place for soil biota to see increased plant mass promotes a marked increase in soil life. It's actually the continual 'taking' of OM from gardens, agricultural fields, lawns ... w/o replacing it that reduces or inhibits the communal activity of microbial populations; even then, they are eveready to bounce back ... if you just give them something to eat.

None of this addresses the hot button political, ideological issues too many wish to export from their own value set, other than the fact it points out the folly in occupying the margin's extremes. Again, I'm pretty pragmatic and results-oriented, so I tend to approach this subject from a plant/soil/growth perspective and leave the politics to the ideologues. My personal view is that in the o/a picture, a chemical fertilizer or nutrient supplement judiciously and responsibly applied to our gardens when it's found to be needed isn't the earth's end; and I prefer to use my own sense of right/wrong to set my course, rather than be told what I need to do to be a good, responsible student of husbandry.

That said, avoidance of unnecessary chemicals in the gardens/beds to the greatest degree I feel is reasonable, is still my normal MO. YMMV, but options are good, and I prefer to keep mine open.

Al

Comments (19)

  • puglvr1
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Wow! Thank you Al, for a very well written post, we truly appreciate you taking the time to post this thread, lots of great info. Some of it went over my head, (but that's me not you,lol...)not the best when it comes to Science, not my best subject :o), but you've helped clarify things, I appreciate that. I do use MG on some of my flowers and shrubs, but only a couple of times a year, mostly when I remember. I'm nowhere as diligent about my inground plants as I am with my container plants for some reason. I do however put down a thick layer of mulch once every 12-18 months. It does help my plants tremendously especially during the very hot and dry Spring, Fall and Winter. Thanks again!!

  • jonhughes
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    AL,
    You Are The Man ;-)
    Good Job Brother ! ! !

    {{gwi:316607}}

  • curt_grow
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Great job Al, Very clearly written. Thank you.

    Curt

  • kentstar
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Awesomely spoken Al! Very informative, as usual, and very well said :)

    (I myself tend to garden somewhere in the middle. I try to use organics as a rule, but when necessary I will go the synthetic route without a problem). For example, I had my first soil tests done on my rose bed this year. It called for potash, sulphur for my high pH, and nitrogen of course. I don't run out there and douse my garden with a 10-10-10 or 12-12-12 then. I went out and applied just the nutrients needed.
    I do add compost, or manure, leaves, whatever I have on hand, once a year and will continue doing so. In the meantime, I do what I can to help my plants whether it be organic (preferred) or synthetic if necessary.

  • tapla (mid-Michigan, USDA z5b-6a)
    Original Author
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Thanks very much, Nancy, John and Curt. I appreciate you guys taking the time to offer a kindness.

    KS - Thank you for the kind words, too. What you said sounds perfectly reasonable. I think the % of people like you, who find themselves somewhere in the middle zone where there is some evidence of give and take, is much, much greater than the % of those at the extremes, who would try to guilt you for your reasoned choices. Truly successful decision making relies on a balance between deliberate reasoned and instinctive thinking, both of which are undeniably impeded by dogma and rigid ideology.

    Al

  • Michael
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Bingo Al: thanks for saying it so clearly and thoughtfully so I didn't have to sit up all night trying to do it myself. It very much needed to be said. Oh, one tiny little addition, how about aeroponics where air is the media, talk about a lack of teaming life?

  • Lloyd
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Al, that has got to be one of the best posts I've read on GW! VoR!

    Lloyd

  • alphonse
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Gratitude for your cogent exposition, Master

    -grasshopper

  • jodik_gw
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Another well written, informative writing... thank you, Al!

    I find myself sitting somewhere in the middle, too, when it comes to chemical versus organic, but only in the gardens. I know that containers and garden beds are worlds apart, and I treat them thus. But in the world that is the garden bed, I'm not adverse to going the chemical route should the need arise.

    I'm lucky to have access to all the composted manures I can use, and all the wood/bark mulch I can blanket the beds with. Every spring, I dig under the large piles of composted yard waste to use the loamy soil that has been created through decomposition. And my beds tell me that the arrangement I'm using is a good one.

    But I also keep an array of bottled liquids and granular items around... just in case I need to supplement a bed.

    Not everyone, though, has their own little army of manure machines... horses, goats, ducks, chickens, peacocks, and other farm type gift givers. And not everyone has access to truckloads of wood/bark mulch. Furthermore, not everyone can spare the room to keep more than two large piles of waste materials in a constant state of decomposition.

    So, I probably use chemicals less and go the organic route more when it comes to my garden beds. But in many yards, probably the more suburban... as opposed to rural... chemical usage does have its place.

  • tiffy_z5_6_can
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Every beginning gardener should listen to such a voice of reason... Best lesson they could ever have. :O)

  • tapla (mid-Michigan, USDA z5b-6a)
    Original Author
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Thank you guys VERY much. I had hoped for a positive response, but you've been kinder than anything I'd anticipated.

    I think most of all, I wanted the offering to be seen as well reasoned and reasonable (Thanks, Tif). Lol - I was trying to think of an analogy that parallels what I was trying to do; the best I could come up with is, maybe I was like a squirrel on a nut - stripping away the hulls of politics and dogma/ideology to get at the kernel most of us consider to be the good stuff - what we can do to help our plants grow better.

    More perspective (from a bunny's view):
    {{gwi:1211}}

    Al

  • luckygal
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Thank you sooo much for this balanced view of supplementation in the garden. I have knocked myself out trying to be 100% organic but last summer I gave up trying to have an organic lawn and used granular nitrogen. My weedy less than green grass quickly became lush and very green. Of course I felt extremely guilty but you have helped alleviate that.

    In the future I will continue to use the supplements I was previously using such as alfalfa tea, soymeal, UCG, etc. but if necessary I will feel less guilty if my grass needs more help than that and I have to use a bit of synthetic nitrogen. I can never make enough compost to use on the lawn. I use almost no synthetic chemicals for my perennial beds but I've found annuals and potted annuals do need a balanced fertilizer for optimum growth.

  • joepyeweed
    13 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    I agree whole heartly.

    Moderation in all things; especially rigid ideology about politics, religion and gardening.

  • Loveplants2 8b Virginia Beach, Virginia
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Hello Everyone,

    I was doing some searching about fertilizers and came across this old thread. Since I do feel like i want to always do the right thing for the enviromemt as far as using "Earth Friendly" products, I do find myself being pulled in both directions.

    My garage is full of "Organic" and "Synthetic' fertilizers as well as different types of Pesticides.

    I live on the Chesapeake Bay and i'm always reading about what all of the run off is doing to the "Cheaspeake Water Shed", so i'm constantly having the battle of using the right products on my plants, trees, containers etc.

    Reading this old thread has made me feel better in making my decisions on what to use and when i need to use it.

    It really is a treat to read all of this great information!!

    Thank you AL, for another informative post!! It is very informative and definately very balanced.

    We all seem to try to do the very best for our gardens and sometimes i have to reach for the the "other " products to acheive the results that i looking for...

    Reading this has made me feel better with what i need to use, Thank you!!!

    I dont usually post over here, but this thread made so much sense that i had to say a few things...

    Thank again!!

    Take Care,

    Laura in VB

  • wertach zone 7-B SC
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Ditto Laura.

  • Joe1980
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Laura, I'm glad you brought this thread back to life, because I have never found it. Al, as always, is very informative and reasonable. I agree whole heartedly with how he approaches gardening. I too prefer to use compost, and avoid chemicals, but am not against using chemicals either. For example, I refuse to sit back and watch my garden be destroyed by insects because I don't want to use chemicals. Usually I don't need to, but if things get rough, I have to bust out the big guns. Anyways, Laura, you talked about the runoff problems in your area; these issues come up all over, including here in WI. The biggest misconception people have is that the people using the "nasty" chemical fertilizers are causing the runoff, when in fact runoff problems can be caused by organic fertilizers as well. The biggest issue is not the stuff causing the problems, but the people who are. Proper use of inorganic AND organic fertilizers is key. You can buy all sorts off different products, both organic and inorganic, and each has instructions as to the proper application. If you don't follow these instructions, well, that is where the problem lies.

    So, with that said, you seem like a very reasonable and responsible person, so whether you apply organic fertilizer or synthetic fertilizer, and can assure you that if you follow the directions, you personally are NOT contributing to the runoff problems.

    Again, thanks to Al for his infinate wisdom, and to Laura for bringing this one back to life.

    Joe

  • wayne_5 zone 6a Central Indiana
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    An old post Al, but it resounds with my thinking.

    I believe too that having an abundance of organic matter in the soil is the key to other good things to follow.

    When it comes to plant and human health....results matter. The media which are loaded with drug advertising [making them servants to the drug companies] like to trumpet any "study" which downgrades natural supplements. When they trumpet that vitamin E failed to be helpful, they certainly don't tell you that just a synthetic version of fractional value likely was used rather than the whole 8 components of natural vitamin...and they don't likely even know of their gross ignorance.

  • Loveplants2 8b Virginia Beach, Virginia
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Hello Everyone,

    Thanks Joe for your comments!!

    I do try and follow all the right directions and do my best to be a responsible gardener. You are right.. It's the ones that dont give a hoot about what they use and how they apply it.

    This is a great thread and im certainly glad that i came across this wonderful informtion so i could bring it back for others to see. I know that i was excited to read this and I hope others will get the same satisfaction as i did.

    So, Joe thanks for the nice response and I hope that you have a wonderful weekend!!

    Take care everyone,

    Laura in VB

  • tapla (mid-Michigan, USDA z5b-6a)
    Original Author
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    Oh wow - another old one resurrected. Thanks for the kind comments, Laura, and for the bump. I'm pleased you found some value in the thread. Thanks too, to everyone else who posted subsequent to my latest, and who I didn't get a chance to thank for their kind words. .... much appreciated!

    Al

Sponsored
Brenda M. Miller Designer of Interior Spaces
Average rating: 5 out of 5 stars73 Reviews
Client-Oriented Interior Design in Loudoun County | Best of Houzz X6