|
Post by daylilydude on Sept 9, 2017 10:19:42 GMT -5
Do you think that foliar feeding does any good?
|
|
|
Post by daylilydude on Sept 9, 2017 14:28:25 GMT -5
That I believe it does help as I use it all the time especially with pepper plants and Epsom salts.
|
|
|
Post by pepperhead212 on Sept 9, 2017 19:30:42 GMT -5
Are you using epsom salts in the SIPs, like I use the calcium nitrate? I assume it would be much less at a time, but maybe it would be a good idea...I'll have to try it. Maybe 1/4 tsp epsom salts + 1 tsp calcium nitrate/week, as a "snack".
|
|
|
Post by daylilydude on Sept 9, 2017 19:47:57 GMT -5
pepperhead212, I mix mine by the gallon, then use a hand held little sprayer to give them a misting every week... 1 tbs. Epsom salts and 1 tbs. of the blue stuff (Miracle-Gro) in a gallon of water. I bought a small pump sprayer from the dollar general for like 2 bucks and liked it so much I went and bought 3 more... lol!
|
|
|
Post by pepperhead212 on Sept 9, 2017 21:58:40 GMT -5
I might have to try the sprayer from Dollar General. I had a cheap one from Harbor Freight, and it just wouldn't work, after getting clogged up (and I strain everything through a super-fine strainer as it goes in), and I finally tossed it.
I might try some in a foliar spray, when I spray on Surround, which I do mostly in the spring and early summer. Later I do a weekly spray of potassium bicarbonate (I figure using this is better than baking soda, as it is giving the plant potassium, at least), as a fungicide; not sure if adding epsom salts to it would reduce the effect.
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Sept 9, 2017 22:21:24 GMT -5
Plants did not develop with the capability to extract anything from the air since there are none in the air that they can use. The internal "plumbing" is one-way, up. Foliar feeding helps solely because whatever is used eventually drops to the soil where the roots can find it.
Martin
The truth is more important than the facts.
|
|
|
Post by daylilydude on Sept 10, 2017 4:01:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by september on Sept 10, 2017 9:33:52 GMT -5
I don't remember anymore which gardening forum it was on, might have been the old Garden Web, or maybe early Tomatoville, but about 10 years ago, someone did testing of foliar feeding on a bunch of their tomato seedlings, half with and half without. I can't remember if they covered the soil of the cups to cut down on fertilizer drip, I think they did, because as I recall they were pretty meticulous There was enough visible difference in the with/without end pictures so that it looked like it worked. I thought it might be a useful thing to try when having to hold larger pot-bound seedlings when you may not have time to transplant them.
|
|
|
Post by paulf on Sept 10, 2017 12:23:56 GMT -5
Back in the 1970s I worked for a company that advocated its fertilizer product as a starter fertilizer mostly for corn and soybeans and also did a lot of foliar feeding for those crops. Much of what the UConn study stated was what this company did (and I think still does). This company advocated a complete soil test to discover the nutrient levels of each field to get the exact levels of fertilization necessary. Foliar feeding was a large part of the program.
As stated by the study the foliar application needed to be done early evening. They did not advocate early morning. In the evening just as the dew began to set in the pores on leaves open up to suck in the moisture. The foliar feeding fertilizer was a 7.0 pH so the plants thought it was the same as dew. The fertilizer was drawn in and distributed throughout the entire plant. Yields showed a noticeable increase. The application was done by helicopter or airplane crop dusters.
Back in the day I did testing on tomato plants in my gardens with different kinds of foliar feeding fertilizers. I could see very little difference in production. Nitrogen rich plant food produced big plants with less production just like high N fertilizers added to the soil. Nutrients higher in P and K aided in fruit production just like plant food added to the water source. On seedlings foliar feeding tended to speed growth but didn't do much for vigor which seems to come with slower growth. The seedlings got spindly from too fast a growth habit.
My conclusion was that soil testing is an important toll to get what nutrients are necessary both in the soil and if more is needed to jump start growth. Foliar feeding can be a good tool but in a small home gardening situation there is not a very noticeable difference. If I had 100 acres of something I am sure foliar would be beneficial but for 30 plants why go to all the trouble unless a gardener had plenty of time and wanted to play around. Me, I am too lazy.
I still say, don't put anything on the soil or in the plant unless a good soil test has been done and it is recommended. I must be getting too old for experimentation like I used to do all those years ago. Now I do a soil test every other year, add what needs to be added to the soil, grow seedlings, dig a hole, put the plants in the ground, cover them up and let them grow...and water if really necessary and hoe if the weeds start to take over. Not fancy but it works for me.
|
|
|
Post by ladymarmalade on Sept 10, 2017 12:24:20 GMT -5
Yes, though I don't do it myself. I prefer fertilizing with granular applications like Tomato Tone so I can control how much and where it goes. It works enough for me.
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Sept 10, 2017 16:49:49 GMT -5
The only way that a foliar-feeding test could be proved to be 100% effective is if whatever is used will never be allowed to also enter the soil. Whatever is sprayed on leaves either drips off or is washed off by rain or irrigation. In the case of seedlings, it's a bit hard to prevent it also being sprayed on the soil around them. That alone would negate any claims that it works.
Martin
The truth is more important than the facts.
|
|
|
Post by pepperhead212 on Sept 10, 2017 17:41:44 GMT -5
daylilydude I went up to Dollar General and got one of those 1 liter pump sprayers for $1.28, original price $4. Is that the one you got? They also had a 1 gal, but none were marked there - just in clearance area. Maybe I'll take the large one up and see how low it rings up, to see if I want it!
|
|
|
Post by daylilydude on Sept 10, 2017 17:55:15 GMT -5
pepperhead212, here is a pic of one of the 4 I have... I didn't see a one gallon... i'm going to go check that out tomorrow...lol!
|
|
|
Post by pepperhead212 on Sept 10, 2017 19:28:38 GMT -5
That's the one I got daylilydude. Only had the one left...but there are several DGs around.
|
|
|
Post by september on Sept 10, 2017 23:48:27 GMT -5
The only way that a foliar-feeding test could be proved to be 100% effective is if whatever is used will never be allowed to also enter the soil. Whatever is sprayed on leaves either drips off or is washed off by rain or irrigation. In the case of seedlings, it's a bit hard to prevent it also being sprayed on the soil around them. That alone would negate any claims that it works. Not really that hard to cover individual cups/pots with plastic cling wrap tightly around the stem to prevent dripping into the soil. Or hold them sideways while spraying, and rotate to reach all sides of the plant, and shake off any excess before turning them upright again.
|
|
|
Post by paulf on Sept 11, 2017 8:17:46 GMT -5
Even if some of the plant food makes it to the soil that does not negate the effect of foliar feeding. Foliar feeding works best when misted and almost all is absorbed by the leaves. If there is a lot of dripping too much is being applied. Plants only take in so much. Soaking down the leaves isn't the best procedure for foliar.
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Sept 11, 2017 20:13:42 GMT -5
Although there are many possible explanations of how or why it should work, it is not the ultimate method or it would be promoted more widely than it is. For the most part it is promoted by companies selling it.
A true test would be one where there is no possible root access to the fertilizer and I have never seen such a report. There was mention of applying it from a plane or copter. Unless the crop is a solid canopy and no air disturbance, the immediate result would be little more than if a dry fertilizer were sprayed. Only a certain percentage would land on the leaves while the rest would fall directly onto the soil. Any actual overall effect therefore could not be attributed to either foliar or root use by the plant.
And while on this, is there a scientifically-reviewed list of garden plants which have the ability to absorb nutrients through their leaves? If so, I have not seen one yet.
Martin
The truth is more important than the facts.
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Sept 12, 2017 13:46:45 GMT -5
Now that some have had time to ponder that, think of more of the big picture and come away scratching your head in wonder or banging it. There are tomato growers here. There seems to be no end to the recipes for preventing BER by spraying with anything containing calcium. It doesn't work for two reasons. First is that the fruit can not absorb it. Second is that the leaves can absorb it but can not pass it along to the fruit. That sentence is all that is needed to answer the question asked in this thread. Your Aunt Liz of "Dizzy Lissy's Garden and Wine Tasting Club" may claim to have a concoction that works but "Dr. Greenthumb, PhD" of whatever school of your choosing would be more credible. edis.ifas.ufl.edu/hs200.htmMartin The truth is more important than the facts.
|
|
|
Post by pepperhead212 on Sept 12, 2017 16:14:59 GMT -5
One way to test foliar feeding effectiveness, that came to mind, would be to do it in a hydroponic setup, having two identical setups, and somehow, maybe a plastic film, along with absorbant paper, more or less sealing off the stalks, preventing the fertilizer from passing into the solution below. Then, mist one with fertilizer, and one with just water - a "placebo", STS. And maybe grow the plants to half size, then reduce the nutrient solution to a minimal amount, which would make the effects more obvious, if the fertilizer is absorbed through the leaves. daylilydude That 1 gal sprayer at Dollar General was not reduced - still regular price. Oh well...
|
|
|
Post by paulf on Sept 12, 2017 16:34:09 GMT -5
There has been a great amount of study done by both universities and the private sector on the effects of foliar feeding agricultural crops, mostly soybeans and corn and also on many other commercial fruit and vegetable crops including both annuals and perennials. Spending a little time looking for studies and results indicate foliar feeding as a supplemental application of nutrients and micro elements has shown excellent results. These studies include tomatoes, peppers, grapes, tree nuts and a host of other plants. Foliar seems always to be in conjunction with a solid soil health program so it is a booster shot for that extra productivity or to bring a stressed crop up to standard.
So far as I know...which is very little...not much extensive study has been done on home gardens and that has been mostly anecdotal in nature. What we would see in a 50'X50' garden would not be noticeable, but in a 40 acre field maybe the applier could pay off the mortgage on a piece of expensive equipment. All the studies say it works.
|
|
|
Post by horsea on Sept 14, 2017 12:43:42 GMT -5
Plants did not develop with the capability to extract anything from the air since there are none in the air that they can use. The internal "plumbing" is one-way, up. Foliar feeding helps solely because whatever is used eventually drops to the soil where the roots can find it. Here is what the experts say: Approximately 79% of the air is nitrogen gas. However, it is not in a form that plants can use. In reality it is not the plant that removes nitrogen from the air but Rhizobium bacteria which live in small tumor like structures called nodules on the legume plant roots.
I think that for this person to claim that "it is not the plant that removes nitrogen from the air but Rhizobiuim bacteria on the plants' roots" is splitting hairs.
|
|
|
Post by paulf on Sept 14, 2017 16:27:08 GMT -5
Another answer to the above statement made by paquebot is stated by: blog.nutri-tech.com.au/top-10-most-frequently-asked-foliar-fertilising-questions/part of their statements say: Foliar feeding of plant nutrients is a relatively new agricultural technique compared to the long history of agriculture, and consequently is often poorly understood. At NTS we have been doing research on foliar applications of nutrients and have obtained some excellent results. Further, we have a large range of products that can be foliar applied, so we want to encourage the use of these products because they can give tremendous benefits to growers. Here are our most frequently asked questions: 1) Can plants absorb nutrients through their leaves to bypass nutrient uptake through the root system? The answer to this important question was provided in the 1950s by H.B. Tukey & S.H. Wittwer from Michigan State University, USA. They sprayed plants with radioactive potassium (K) and phosphorus (P) and then with a Geiger counter measured the absorption, movement and utilisation of these nutrients within the plant. They found that the nutrients moved at a rate of about 0.3 m/h to all parts of the plants. 2) Are foliar-applied nutrients directly absorbed through the leaves or are they washed off and later absorbed from the soil? Urea has been applied in trials to banana, coffee, cacao and apple plant leaves. Up to 65% of the urea was absorbed within 25 minutes, with the majority of this being absorbed by the younger leaves and/or by the underneath side of the leaves. Total absorption of the urea occurred in bananas within 30 hrs and in coffee and cacao within 24 hrs. The underneath side of young apple leaves absorbed the urea far better than the underneath side of older leaves. These trials clearly demonstrated that nutrients are directly absorbed through the leaves. In fact, it is becoming a popular practice to foliar apply urea as a cost-effective alternative to side dressing, 3) How are foliar-applied nutrients absorbed? Leaves have transcuticular pores (i.e. pores between cell structures) and stomata through which nutrient sprays can enter the plant. The transcuticular pores are on both the upper and lower surfaces of leaves and are open all the time, so foliar-applied nutrients are believed to primarily enter through these pores. Stomata are present in far greater numbers on the underneath side of leaves, and if they are open and the spray is directed to the underneath side, this can be a good entry point for the nutrients. (The uptake efficiency was 10 to 12 times better through the leaves than through the roots). Pasture grasses and sugarcane have stomata distributed on both sides of the leaf so there is not the same requirement for spraying on the underside of these leaves. 4) Is it only the leaves that absorb nutrients? No. The original experiments of Tukey and Wittwer showed that buds, twigs, the trunk, flowers and fruit all absorbed nutrients. For example, there is an advantage in spraying boron on deciduous trees, like cherries, during dormancy, to ensure that this important mineral is present at good levels for flowering (when it is most required). paquebot's statement was recognized as true up until the 1950s. Since then things have changed considerably in the field of agronomy and horticulture. Even now some of my friends don't believe in computers or cell phones.
|
|
|
Post by paquebot on Sept 14, 2017 23:45:32 GMT -5
Re the nitrogen thing, plants can not uses the nitrogen that is in the air. It is ammonium nitrite. It must be converted to ammonium nitrate before they can use is. I have not heard of any garden plant which can use NH3 direct from any application. Grass is always greener after a rain. Grass is also cleaner after a rain.
The MSU study does not apply to this thread. Banana, coffee, cocoa, and apples are not annual garden vegetable plants but perennials. They have the ability to reverse the vascular system, something that everyone knows about maples. Annuals, as most vegetable plants are, have a system which is very much one-way. There are no internal valves which stop the upward flow nor pumps to force it back down. I want anyone to find a study that will show that the vascular system of any pepper or tomato plant is able to reverse flow to allow anything to reach anywhere below the leaves. There isn't one because it can't be done no matter how much it is claimed. Suggesting that I am a Luddite isn't going to make it any more right!
Martin
The truth is more important than the facts.
|
|