Mirai new nutrition concepts

[Deep Sea Diver]

@ Paradox, post: 1078384, member:

Just to get clarification, you are testing the same stuff mentioned in Ryan's stream independently on a different collection of trees?

…. These are some excellent questions!

…..We are observing and working the trees in a separate large trial of 150 museum quality trees where we volunteer.

I think that is good if so.

…. As @IzzyG mentions others are also working with Apical.

As a scientist, I would like more information about the testing when it becomes available so I can see it for myself.

…Actually the best way to do this would either call Apical about their testing protocols or PM @IzzyG as that would give you first hand information. While I can see these reports, as a condition of work we can not copy nor share reports data…

…That said the protocols require periodic samples of media, root leaf/needles to be submitted to Apical for chemical testing

You say things are "going well". Id assume the collection is otherwise being taken care of and maintained and this isnt a result of whatever testing you are doing.

… At this point my personal observation over two years is that all trees are robust and healthy. Where in the past there were always outliers. Nitrogen applications are way down, pest issues too.

I acknowledge that this kind of thing (testing on a large variety of trees) is very hard to get conclusive evidence for without 1000s so replication on the a set of similar test subjects (ie all seedlings of the same species).

… In the bonsai world, rigid experimental trial conditions are rarely possible, except maybe at the Japanese satsuki and white pine etc. farms. Instead we are stuck with observational field trials.

….Yet as I reported there is a stream of periodic chemical analysis backing up these observations. Apical issues this data to trigger different dosing protocols at different times.

…The goal is to achieve a specific chemical “profile”. Which it turns out appears to be remarkably the same for most of not all species. (The guy from Apical mentioned as much on a Mirai stream as a side note).

Hope this helps!

Cheers
DSD sends

 

[Paradox]

@ Paradox, post: 1078384, member:

Just to get clarification, you are testing the same stuff mentioned in Ryan's stream independently on a different collection of trees?

…. These are some excellent questions!

…..We are observing and working the trees in a separate large trial of 150 museum quality trees where we volunteer.

I think that is good if so.

…. As @IzzyG mentions others are also working with Apical.

As a scientist, I would like more information about the testing when it becomes available so I can see it for myself.

…Actually the best way to do this would either call Apical about their testing protocols or PM @IzzyG as that would give you first hand information. While I can see these reports, as a condition of work we can not copy nor share reports data…

…That said the protocols require periodic samples of media, root leaf/needles to be submitted to Apical for chemical testing

You say things are "going well". Id assume the collection is otherwise being taken care of and maintained and this isnt a result of whatever testing you are doing.

… At this point my personal observation over two years is that all trees are robust and healthy. Where in the past there were always outliers. Nitrogen applications are way down, pest issues too.

I acknowledge that this kind of thing (testing on a large variety of trees) is very hard to get conclusive evidence for without 1000s so replication on the a set of similar test subjects (ie all seedlings of the same species).

… In the bonsai world, rigid experimental trial conditions are rarely possible, except maybe at the Japanese satsuki and white pine etc. farms. Instead we are stuck with observational field trials.

….Yet as I reported there is a stream of periodic chemical analysis backing up these observations. Apical issues this data to trigger different dosing protocols at different times.

…The goal is to achieve a specific chemical “profile”. Which it turns out appears to be remarkably the same for most of not all species. (The guy from Apical mentioned as much on a Mirai stream as a side note).

Hope this helps!

Cheers
DSD sends

Understand your responses to my comments/questions and I understand why you might not be able to reveal information at this time due to an agreement with the company.

Thanks

 

[Kievnstavick]

I think the biggest takeaway (at face value) is that all of those who just want to get along "okay" with their trees is that we/they should pay attention to what they give their trees. Make sure that they get all of their Macro and Micro nutrients with a sprinkle of silica and carbon to boot. We should also be making sure the Ph of the substrates is close the trees preferred Ph value.

Another idea that I can take away from this discussion is that we as practicers should take time to learn about the nutrients that trees need. What they do and signs of a deficiency. Just a baseline familiarity really.

I think this expirement with Apical is a good thing with hopefully positive results and a plethora of information to follow for tree health. I am not interested is using Apical's service.

A decent route to figure out how useful this information and methods are is to using a plethora of cuttings from one plant and set an expirement up. A control (user's standard regime), Apical (without following advice), Apical (following advice), and perhaps another company/university set to compare Apical against. We wouldn't be able to totally remove the different conditions of the cuttings, but getting close with the same treatment, styling, pot size, etc. Should give a close enough approximation.

Someone (or group) with the financial means, space, and motivation can certainly do that, but that is outside of the scope for a majority of us anyways.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

Something we should not forget, there is a time tested, tried and true method for growing bonsai in the USA. I am referring to the fact that Bill Valavanis, John Geanangel, Adair Martin, and many, many other top level USA bonsai artists are growing bonsai by well published "conventional" methods. I will sit on the sidelines and observe, until I see better explanation of this "new" technique and wider adoption of these same techniques beyond the narrow circle around Ryan's nursery. The principles of horticulture are well understood and sound. One should be skeptical. When the National Bonsai Collection at the National Arboretum in Washington DC adopts Apical, well, then maybe I'd jump on board. Until more info and more experienced growers adopt the products and methods, I'll stick with what I already am doing.

 

[yashu]

Something we should not forget, there is a time tested, tried and true method for growing bonsai in the USA. I am referring to the fact that Bill Valavanis, John Geanangel, Adair Martin, and many, many other top level USA bonsai artists are growing bonsai by well published "conventional" methods. I will sit on the sidelines and observe, until I see better explanation of this "new" technique and wider adoption of these same techniques beyond the narrow circle around Ryan's nursery. The principles of horticulture are well understood and sound. One should be skeptical. When the National Bonsai Collection at the National Arboretum in Washington DC adopts Apical, well, then maybe I'd jump on board. Until more info and more experienced growers adopt the products and methods, I'll stick with what I already am doing.

I don’t think anyone is forgetting. I think the goal is to move away from the conventional methods to something less reliant on so many chemicals. For many years it’s been apparent that people can successfully grow bonsai with the aid of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, however I do understand and appreciate the goals of this possible new, more sustainable method.

Though Mirai’s new systems seem to hold a great deal of promise, I agree with others that this is outside the financial possibility for your average bonsai hobbyist. I see this as most likely to be used by nurseries or by individuals and institutions with large, highly refined and expensive collections. It seems like it could be a really smart idea in situations where someone is generating income of some sort off their collection so the costs could be written off as an expense.

 

[shohin_branches]

Nothing beyond trying to keep them healthy. Most cases with borers are with weakened trees. So far I’ve had one incident of it but am suspicious that it came into the collection already infected. That tree looked healthy but had a couple of other symptoms that hinted it was actually weakened so it made sense.

If our trees never needed to be repotted and we didn't intentionally put them in an environment of slow growth away from their typical symbiotic organisms then maybe I'd agree, but a few sprays of prevention is worth it to avoid a surprise tree redesign by a creature with no eye for aesthetics.

There is no undoing the damage from borers and it's a really tough lesson to learn. I've seen a lot of beautiful club member trees ruined by them over the years.

Beetle Borers and Bonsai-

One of the truly irascible jerks of the insect world (if you love trees, that is), borers will redesign your bonsai without even asking permission. Even worse, they’ll do it without you even being …

crataegus.com

 

[shohin_branches]

I don’t think anyone is forgetting. I think the goal is to move away from the conventional methods to something less reliant on so many chemicals. For many years it’s been apparent that people can successfully grow bonsai with the aid of chemical pesticides and fertilizers, however I do understand and appreciate the goals of this possible new, more sustainable method.

Though Mirai’s new systems seem to hold a great deal of promise, I agree with others that this is outside the financial possibility for your average bonsai hobbyist. I see this as most likely to be used by nurseries or by individuals and institutions with large, highly refined and expensive collections. It seems like it could be a really smart idea in situations where someone is generating income of some sort off their collection so the costs could be written off as an expense.

Most fertilizers are nothing more than mineral compounds in a form that plants can readily absorb. People like to lump fertilizers in with pesticides and fungicides, but they're not the same level of chemical hazard.

The system that Mirai is promoting is just selling you the treatment they recommend after testing, not eliminating additional inputs to your tree. I don't see this as more sustainable than any other horticultural method of balancing tree nutrion.

 

[pandacular]

Oh but also, Ryan Neil once said, on camera, that he had a sponsorship with the specific kind of paper towel he was wrapping copper wire with while wiring a Japanese Maple, and I didn't get the impression that he was joking.

So like

Just saying

For some the paper towel matters, and for others it does not. It's fine.

hilarious that i already mentioned this misrepresentation and it comes up again. good work team


i really would prefer if Mirai haters would just excuse themselves from these threads, but i can't ask a level of self restraint that i myself can't/don't practice

 

[coh]

hilarious that i already mentioned this misrepresentation and it comes up again. good work team


i really would prefer if Mirai haters would just excuse themselves from these threads, but i can't ask a level of self restraint that i myself can't/don't practice

I remember him saying there was a brand he preferred - Bounty I think? (but not sure). However, I don't recall the joke about sponsorship though I could easily see him saying that.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

Personally, I have moved to pretty much all "organic" fertilizer. These days Fish Lysate (essentially a cold process version of fish emulsion) available from Dramm, Green Bay, Wisconsin. And seaweed extract, a low dose of humic acid and fulvic acid. That's pretty much it. Nothing complicated, all info needed has been published on BNut and the many gardening websites.

I used to be a proponent of the nitrates, but I have moved beyond. So far, so good.

 

[pandacular]

I remember him saying there was a brand he preferred - Bounty I think? (but not sure). However, I don't recall the joke about sponsorship though I could easily see him saying that.

specifically what he said was "I never thought I would find myself endorsing a brand of paper towels." If that doesn't sound like a joke--if the concept of a paper towel brand endorsing a bonsai practitioner doesn't sound like a joke--then it's likely that you're blinded by hatred. If he had used the phrase "endorsement deal" or "sponsorship" it would've been different, but endorsing something without compensation is a completely normal thing to do as an educator.

edited to add: it seems to be the myself and the same guy who got into this previously, so perhaps its a waste of my breath. I just really don't like disinformation, especially targeting an individual's character.

 

[coh]

Personally, I have moved to pretty much all "organic" fertilizer. These days Fish Lysate (essentially a cold process version of fish emulsion) available from Dramm, Green Bay, Wisconsin. And seaweed extract, a low dose of humic acid and fulvic acid. That's pretty much it. Nothing complicated, all info needed has been published on BNut and the many gardening websites.

I used to be a proponent of the nitrates, but I have moved beyond. So far, so good.

So, what was the original impetus behind the idea of nitrates? I recall reading a series of papers about container gardening where they looked at the impact of water quality (specifically water alkalinity) and how it could push soil pH out of whack over time, making it too high (I believe). This of course leads to some of the essential nutrients being unavailable. Can't recall who wrote the papers but there were like 5 of them is the series. They also talked about the impact of either urea or nitrate as the nitrogen source. I can't recall the details but it seemed to me, based on those papers, that nitrate would be a better nitrogen source. Can you clarify this - am I on the right track or remembering this incorrectly? It's been a while. I vary my fertilizers, and do apply organic mixtures in bags. However, I do use the "blue water" types quite often, every 2 weeks or so, and use ones that are nitrate-based most of the time.

Of course, the usual caveats apply - they were not testing bonsai "soil", weren't trying to grow dwarf trees in tiny pots, etc.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

I was reading into plant physiology, or actually my two favorite PhD plant physiology friends were looking into plant nutrition and horticulture. One does bonsai in Michigan, the other does orchids. Both have pointed out the metabolic cost the plant expends to utilize nitrates as a nitrogen source. As much as 75% of the ATP production in 12 hours of photosynthesis can be consumed processing nitrate for that 24 period of protein synthesis.

When amino acids are the source of nitrogen only a small percentage, maybe 10% of the ATP production is required for the same 24 hr period. This means more efficient growth with less metabolic stress.

Now I have not done trials or testing yet, but I trust the physiology theory is sound. Might not make a huge difference. But I am checking it out and encouraging others to look into it too.

 

[badatusernames]

hilarious that i already mentioned this misrepresentation and it comes up again. good work team


i really would prefer if Mirai haters would just excuse themselves from these threads, but i can't ask a level of self restraint that i myself can't/don't practice

Sorry not trying to be a hater. Didn’t see your comment, the paper towel thing just jumped out at me on a video. I respect his hustle, didn’t mean to indicate otherwise. And tbh, this stuff DOES matter, and it’s fascinating, I just need to give myself permission to know when it’s becoming less fun for me.

It was awhile ago, I must have misremembered / misunderstood when I saw it. I mean even if it were real it’d just be impressive.

Apologies, I should have listened to the voice telling me not to post that

 

[yashu]

Most fertilizers are nothing more than mineral compounds in a form that plants can readily absorb. People like to lump fertilizers in with pesticides and fungicides, but they're not the same level of chemical hazard.

The system that Mirai is promoting is just selling you the treatment they recommend after testing, not eliminating additional inputs to your tree. I don't see this as more sustainable than any other horticultural method of balancing tree nutrion.

Ok, well this is news to me. I did not know that Mirai was selling this as a product at this point.

I’m very aware of what fertilizer is. I also understand that having to use less is a good thing. Using less pest control chemicals is also very good. Using less of something is inherently more sustainable, that’s practically the definition of the concept. One other thing I understand is that the majority of both fertilizer and pest control chemicals flow right through your pots and onto the ground considering the soil types we use. There are ramifications to that spillage even if they are small, but again, in matters of scale like big gardens/collections this all matters more. I’m sure you’re aware that fertilizer run off in the environment is not a good thing. Both the environment and the bottom line of the person who may use far less chemicals are better off if Mirai’s claims are on target.

 

[pandacular]

Ok, well this is news to me. I did not know that Mirai was selling this as a product at this point.

It does not appear that they are, or if they are, it’s not to the general public. Whether they’re recommending it to their private clients is really not for us to say (though I would be curious to hear from Izzy on this). And if he is, that seems fully within his purview as a professional.

 

[Glaucus]

I was reading into plant physiology, or actually my two favorite PhD plant physiology friends were looking into plant nutrition and horticulture. One does bonsai in Michigan, the other does orchids. Both have pointed out the metabolic cost the plant expends to utilize nitrates as a nitrogen source. As much as 75% of the ATP production in 12 hours of photosynthesis can be consumed processing nitrate for that 24 period of protein synthesis.

When amino acids are the source of nitrogen only a small percentage, maybe 10% of the ATP production is required for the same 24 hr period. This means more efficient growth with less metabolic stress.

Now I have not done trials or testing yet, but I trust the physiology theory is sound. Might not make a huge difference. But I am checking it out and encouraging others to look into it too.

Of course it is correct that a plant would have to reduce nitrogen back to ammonia after uptake, and that this takes ATP. While ammonia can be used directly.
But it does not seem true that therefore fertilizing a plant with ammonia is therefore superior, because of the energy saved.
It seems to be quite plant specific which ratio between nitrogen and ammonia gives the most dry mass aka plant growth in a controlled experiment.
And that for all plants tested, a blend is preferred. Besides that, there is effect on soil pH and the potential toxicity of too much ammonia where nitrate is much safer and excess nitrate can be flushed out of the soil/substrate more easily.

This may be why most commercial grade fertilizer blends are quite high in nitrate as their nitrogen source.

I'd like to read the source on that 75% of ATP used in 12 hours. I am looking at some papers on nitrate vs ammonia right now, that's quite highly cited, and it doesn't mention the energy cost of denitrification as a major issue for plants preference of nitrate vs ammonia. More important seem to be the ability of plants to store nitrate, the pH of the soil, and the potential toxicity of ammonia. But I am sure there's much more work out there.
I did specifically pick out a fertilizer blend higher on ammonia for my azaleas, though. I was surprised that some blends are almost all nitrate and very little ammonia. And urea seems rare because it gives pH fluctuations in substrate. Which means most of us bonsai people want to avoid urea. These companies specifically tell their hydroponics clients to never use urea, except for foilar feeding, for this reason. Which actually makes me wonder if the same is true for protein hydrolysates, peptides and amino acids in say akadama or lava based bonsai mixes.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

Of course it is correct that a plant would have to reduce nitrogen back to ammonia after uptake, and that this takes ATP. While ammonia can be used directly.
But it does not seem true that therefore fertilizing a plant with ammonia is therefore superior, because of the energy saved.
It seems to be quite plant specific which ratio between nitrogen and ammonia gives the most dry mass aka plant growth in a controlled experiment.
And that for all plants tested, a blend is preferred. Besides that, there is effect on soil pH and the potential toxicity of too much ammonia where nitrate is much safer and excess nitrate can be flushed out of the soil/substrate more easily.

This may be why most commercial grade fertilizer blends are quite high in nitrate as their nitrogen source.

I'd like to read the source on that 75% of ATP used in 12 hours. I am looking at some papers on nitrate vs ammonia right now, that's quite highly cited, and it doesn't mention the energy cost of denitrification as a major issue for plants preference of nitrate vs ammonia. More important seem to be the ability of plants to store nitrate, the pH of the soil, and the potential toxicity of ammonia. But I am sure there's much more work out there.
I did specifically pick out a fertilizer blend higher on ammonia for my azaleas, though. I was surprised that some blends are almost all nitrate and very little ammonia. And urea seems rare because it gives pH fluctuations in substrate. Which means most of us bonsai people want to avoid urea. These companies specifically tell their hydroponics clients to never use urea, except for foilar feeding, for this reason. Which actually makes me wonder if the same is true for protein hydrolysates, peptides and amino acids in say akadama or lava based bonsai mixes.

I don't have specific references to cite because I cheated. I have been chatting with 2 different PhD physiologists. One is a now retired USDA cotton breeder, who also raised orchids. The other is now teaching physiology in Michigan and raises bonsai. They "did the reading for me" we just had a series of long conversations. I suppose I can ask. My number of 75% might be "mis-remembered" , It seems near right, I know I was struck by the fact that majority of the photosynthetic product of the day was consumed processing nitrate.

With the coarse substrates we use for bonsai, and relatively low dose rates for all our fertilizers ammonia toxicity seems to be a trivial concern. An open mix will allow plenty of oxygen into the root zone. Our near daily clear flushes of water will pull in air and leach out excess concentrations should they occur.

On the blueberry farm we used an "acid fertilizer" for blueberries, as Vaccinium species can not absorb nitrates at all. It was or is an 11 -2-6 formula with the nitrogen source being ammonium phosphate and ammonium sulfate. We never had concerns about toxicity though we never fed at higher than 300 ppm as N. Usually we fed at 50 ppm as N.

 

[Leo in N E Illinois]

I don't have specific references to cite because I cheated. I have been chatting with 2 different PhD physiologists. One is a now retired USDA cotton breeder, who also raised orchids. The other is now teaching physiology in Michigan and raises bonsai. They "did the reading for me" we just had a series of long conversations. I suppose I can ask. My number of 75% might be "mis-remembered" , It seems near right, I know I was struck by the fact that majority of the photosynthetic product of the day was consumed processing nitrate.

With the coarse substrates we use for bonsai, and relatively low dose rates for all our fertilizers ammonia toxicity seems to be a trivial concern. An open mix will allow plenty of oxygen into the root zone. Our near daily clear flushes of water will pull in air and leach out excess concentrations should they occur.

On the blueberry farm we used an "acid fertilizer" for blueberries, as Vaccinium species can not absorb nitrates at all. It was or is an 11 -2-6 formula with the nitrogen source being ammonium phosphate and ammonium sulfate. We never had concerns about toxicity though we never fed at higher than 300 ppm as N. Usually we fed at 50 ppm as N.

For some reason I keep getting timed out on full image download. So I had to severely crop the fertilizer label to get it to upload.

 

[Glaucus]

Yeah, I was going to include a 'ask your friends this question for me' or something, haha.

But I can answer why acidophile fertilizers are high in ammonia. When a plant takes up nitrate NO3-, it is taking up a negative charge. Now, a charge potential can exist across cell membranes (for example, outside the cell can have more positive ions and inside it is more negative. This is how our neurons work, for example. But in general, the plant wants to keep things neutral in both side. So taking up a negative ion, it also has to expel a negative ion. This means a plant ends up expelling HCO3- or even OH-. But when a plant takes up a ammonia NH4+, it often returns a H+ back to the soil. So by taking up ammonia, a plant acidifies the soil. Which is why this blueberry formulation has only ammonia.
I know from the literature for rhododendron that if only nitrate fertilizer is added, chlorosis/an iron deficiency can occur. But by adding in ammonia or even supplying extra Fe2+, this can be resolved.

With fertilizer it is always important to realize that you aren't feeding the plant. You are adding minerals back to the soil. And potentially with organic fertilizer, you are feeding the microbes in the soil.

Btw, that fertilizer label raises another question that I have about calcium. It is very rare to see calcium added to a fertilizer. But the magnesium is there. This is a bit odd, because research suggests there should be more calcium than magnesium.
It may connect to the fact that most soils have plenty of calcium carbonate minerals. But then the same ought to be true for magnesium, kinda.

Makes me wonder if fertilizing or fertigating with say calcium nitrate for bonsai in substrate is usually a good thing to do, especially in spring and especially if you want elongated growth. The calcium is one of the hardest things for the plant to take up and the nitrate can do no damage, is easily taken up, and easily flushed back out again.