Deep Sea Diver
Imperial Masterpiece
It will be real in our lifetime!
Cheers
DSD sends
Cheers
DSD sends
Last edited:
Mycorrhizae, bacteria, and modern bonsai substrate
- Thread starter One First Matter All
- Start date
fredman
Masterpiece
I'm sure of that. All that's needed is one or more scientists to set the ball rolling...similar to what Karen O’Haren is doing with this product. The demand is there...horticulture is already the future.
World Bonsai Police
Sapling
Ya know how I hate to be picky, but if we look back a few years to when somebody thought it would be a good idea to add German Brown Carp to American fish stocks, or rabbits in Australia, or hundreds of other really bad ideas, -too many to list, we find that those really good ideas had consequences. Irreversible consequences. Beware of what you wish for.
Deep Sea Diver
Imperial Masterpiece
... yes, you are correct. There is always the Law of Unintended Consequences to contend with.
Likely harvesting natural occurring soil organisms and putting them back into soil, without genetic alterations, is a lower risk to our environment then some of the other issues you aptly pointed out.
Quite possibly the environmental, health and social issues arising from our ever burgeoning population will overshadow all others.
But let’s work on solving issues one Bonsai at a time
Best
DSD sends
Likely harvesting natural occurring soil organisms and putting them back into soil, without genetic alterations, is a lower risk to our environment then some of the other issues you aptly pointed out.
Quite possibly the environmental, health and social issues arising from our ever burgeoning population will overshadow all others.
But let’s work on solving issues one Bonsai at a time
Best
DSD sends
fredman
Masterpiece
Nah you're not being picky at all. I'm with you about species forced to live outside their native environment. That is another cruel deed man dealt on animals.
This however is about reestablishing species to the benefit of themselves and plants. That's what makes this idea so difficult I would think. You can't just put in some species and get the job done. It has to be a biological eco system... and in balance for it to sustain itself...or it won't last. Nothing is taken out of place. All that's happening is the missing ones are added, in order to get to that equilibrium.
Last edited:
Anthony
Imperial Masterpiece
Guys,
I wanted to say thank you.
You made me realise, where the mistake from Bonsai
was coming from.
The books need to be written by those in Bonsai for
say 60 years.
The experience of growing for a long time the same plants.
Thank you
Anthony
* Wonder how old Murata was ?
@cmeg1 ,
if you go back and look at my image,
Study the soil.
Cannot break down in use,
A tease,
2019 spaces being opened
I wanted to say thank you.
You made me realise, where the mistake from Bonsai
was coming from.
The books need to be written by those in Bonsai for
say 60 years.
The experience of growing for a long time the same plants.
Thank you
Anthony
* Wonder how old Murata was ?
@cmeg1 ,
if you go back and look at my image,
Study the soil.
Cannot break down in use,
A tease,
2019 spaces being opened
Harunobu
Chumono
About the Root Excelurator product, not sure what is inside. potassium hydroxide may be in your food, at tiny concentrations. But the fact that KOH is listed as a the main ingredient and the fact that cmeg1 mentions that one brand eventually eats through the metal casing, something concentrated KOH will do. It will also dissolve glass. I can see how such a product may burn away a fungal infection on the roots of plants. And then it gets washed away with the water you have in your hydroponics. But now you have the same situation, only now your roots were in contact with KOH and the niche that the fungi occupied are completely empty. For sure, the fungus will grow back faster than the roots would recover from the damage they have sustained from the KOH.
And if the KOH is very dilite so it won't affect the roots, how can it affect the fungus? I see it is advertised as a product that stimulates the roots by forming a coating that functions as a membrane. So for that to happen it needs to have some entirely different ingredients in there as well. But a (potent) solution of ammonium nitrate and potassium hydroxide is not what you want to add to the roots of your plants.
"What’s in Roots Excelurator?"
"Roots Excelurator is the top show piece in the House and Garden line of nutrients. The exact formulation is a well kept company secret "
If you want to try it, test it on something disposable first.
JonW
Shohin
Interesting discussion, and I think some of the best-practice comes down to personal preference. CMEG1 has some great outcomes and learned a lot about hydroponic growth. Few people want to go to that extreme and, actually in opposition to that "scientific" direction, many people here grow plants for the attachment to nature and outdoors etc, and they may even feel overwhelmed (or worse) when they experience all this info as imploring them to do something radically different. Where is the line between what cost and effort is worthwhile, and what tactics are excessive, stress-inducing for us, even harmful for plants that seem to be growing well in their current state? I don't know the exact answer, but what I find is best for me is making incremental improvements that match my level of experience and personal investment in the hobby. *Of course my response is about the human experience - take a psychologist to a bonsai party 
*
I transitioned some years ago to inorganic soil and could not be happier. There is literature about the rate at which plants recover in areas with massive amounts of pumice after volcanic activity - it is observable in nature as a great growth medium! I believe Peter Warren points out in a video that the Earth does a great job sucking away excessive water in in-ground plants, and consequently finer medium works (even though we do see pumice having a great effect as a soil medium in the ground, or we know that adding chunky top-soil helps our landscaping). A pot is different, so we need gritty mix. Even in pots, we even know that taller pots create more suction even though shallow ones might help with (and show) a radial nebari.
I also use "chemical" (inorganic, everything is a chemical - the real distinction is man-made vs organic) fertilizers because it is simple, cheap, easy to measure, familiar to me, doesn't smell, doesn't clog soil, and reduces insects coming into my house on tropical plants... I use Osmocote in fertilizer buckets and half-strength Dyna-Grow foliage pro 2x / week (half strength avoids burning roots). However, I've been tracking these threads considering switching to some/all organic fertilizer if I find one that is not smelly, well pelletized (doesn't clog soil), is cost-effective, etc. People seem to like Jobes, and I know Miracle Grow came out with a new one (I hate most miracle grow products, but curious about their organic fert). I'm interested in people's preferred organic fertilizer. It does seem that organic ferts have some benefits including less salty / better for roots and transpiration, and may benefit the soil-ecosystem (bacteria / fungi), while excessive inorganic ferts can be harsh or detrimental to this ecosystem.
Having said that, I have noticed that my Schefflera, even after complete bare rooting, seems to always grow a nice network of microrhyza. Interesting and not sure why - I'm sure spores remain on roots when I repot, but people also say that certain plants are more so symbiotic than others, which may play a role. But just an example of these fungi working well in an inorganic environment - not that it wouldn't be better to have organic fertilizer.
The idea of PH could be important at certain extremes. Certainly for access to metals that allow other nutrients to be absorbed. I don't think most of use want to put our mental energy into a perfect balance, but maybe something to consider if your finding issues with your trees, such as leaves showing signs of nutrient imbalances despite adequate fertilization. Or if you have reason to believe your water source has an extreme PH. I don't know the answer whether inorganic soil media has a major effect on PH. While I don't trust marketing to tell me if this is vital, it is interesting that different gritty aggregates often list their PH - turface tends to be acidic and while I believe some other media is listed as slightly basic (pumice?). I use a mix of Lava, Pumice and Turface. I mostly add turface for its CEC (cation exchange capacity) to hold nutrients - it replaces bark insofar as it holds water and nutrients, but turface doesn't break down. Pumice and Lava is porous so it has great aeration and the rough surface encourages roots to split, which has a hormonal effect encouraging ramification, but both have poor CEC (doesn't hold nutrients well). Pumice holds moisture while Lava doesn't do that so much - it helps more so with drainage. I don't use akadama because it costs too much and I've seen situations where the top is still gritty, but the bottom of the pot is like a clay brick, but it is good insofar as it encourages fine roots (and ramification), has good CEC and holds water while maintaining drainage until is breaks down. I do not use granite because it, ironically, holds too much water. Most of the info on the net about granite boasts its drainage, but it actually has these concave surfaces that hold pools of water. Some people think this helps bark absorb water before it drains out of the pot (bark can take a while to absorb enough, or even be seemingly hydrophobic until moist if it got too dry). I found this pooling of water was enough to cause root rot in some types of plants. Granite doesn't have the pore that encourage aeration or division of roots, so Lava is a much better alternative.
*I transitioned some years ago to inorganic soil and could not be happier. There is literature about the rate at which plants recover in areas with massive amounts of pumice after volcanic activity - it is observable in nature as a great growth medium! I believe Peter Warren points out in a video that the Earth does a great job sucking away excessive water in in-ground plants, and consequently finer medium works (even though we do see pumice having a great effect as a soil medium in the ground, or we know that adding chunky top-soil helps our landscaping). A pot is different, so we need gritty mix. Even in pots, we even know that taller pots create more suction even though shallow ones might help with (and show) a radial nebari.
I also use "chemical" (inorganic, everything is a chemical - the real distinction is man-made vs organic) fertilizers because it is simple, cheap, easy to measure, familiar to me, doesn't smell, doesn't clog soil, and reduces insects coming into my house on tropical plants... I use Osmocote in fertilizer buckets and half-strength Dyna-Grow foliage pro 2x / week (half strength avoids burning roots). However, I've been tracking these threads considering switching to some/all organic fertilizer if I find one that is not smelly, well pelletized (doesn't clog soil), is cost-effective, etc. People seem to like Jobes, and I know Miracle Grow came out with a new one (I hate most miracle grow products, but curious about their organic fert). I'm interested in people's preferred organic fertilizer. It does seem that organic ferts have some benefits including less salty / better for roots and transpiration, and may benefit the soil-ecosystem (bacteria / fungi), while excessive inorganic ferts can be harsh or detrimental to this ecosystem.
Having said that, I have noticed that my Schefflera, even after complete bare rooting, seems to always grow a nice network of microrhyza. Interesting and not sure why - I'm sure spores remain on roots when I repot, but people also say that certain plants are more so symbiotic than others, which may play a role. But just an example of these fungi working well in an inorganic environment - not that it wouldn't be better to have organic fertilizer.
The idea of PH could be important at certain extremes. Certainly for access to metals that allow other nutrients to be absorbed. I don't think most of use want to put our mental energy into a perfect balance, but maybe something to consider if your finding issues with your trees, such as leaves showing signs of nutrient imbalances despite adequate fertilization. Or if you have reason to believe your water source has an extreme PH. I don't know the answer whether inorganic soil media has a major effect on PH. While I don't trust marketing to tell me if this is vital, it is interesting that different gritty aggregates often list their PH - turface tends to be acidic and while I believe some other media is listed as slightly basic (pumice?). I use a mix of Lava, Pumice and Turface. I mostly add turface for its CEC (cation exchange capacity) to hold nutrients - it replaces bark insofar as it holds water and nutrients, but turface doesn't break down. Pumice and Lava is porous so it has great aeration and the rough surface encourages roots to split, which has a hormonal effect encouraging ramification, but both have poor CEC (doesn't hold nutrients well). Pumice holds moisture while Lava doesn't do that so much - it helps more so with drainage. I don't use akadama because it costs too much and I've seen situations where the top is still gritty, but the bottom of the pot is like a clay brick, but it is good insofar as it encourages fine roots (and ramification), has good CEC and holds water while maintaining drainage until is breaks down. I do not use granite because it, ironically, holds too much water. Most of the info on the net about granite boasts its drainage, but it actually has these concave surfaces that hold pools of water. Some people think this helps bark absorb water before it drains out of the pot (bark can take a while to absorb enough, or even be seemingly hydrophobic until moist if it got too dry). I found this pooling of water was enough to cause root rot in some types of plants. Granite doesn't have the pore that encourage aeration or division of roots, so Lava is a much better alternative.
Last edited:
Wires_Guy_wires
Imperial Masterpiece
Here's a piece of my mind:
Our war against pathogens isn't fought in the front line, that's where we try to fix the problems we have caused. I can keep my JBP on steroids, pump them full of biocides, go full biochemical warfare.. And I can keep doing that for the next 60 or so years. Why? Because I decided that I wanted to own a sub-tropical pine species in a backyard that's just not suited for them, in a climate where they would freeze to death if only we got a good winter.
The entire issue started with me buying seeds. I made it worse by germinating them, and even worse by adhering to my own watering schedule and using my own substrate.
Don't grow trees you're not supposed to, and you'll never have to combat any real disease. Natural ranges are there for a reason, and nature lets us know if we're crossing that line.
What if we would be able to find a biological fungi killer?
Iheavily suspect know for sure that we would find other ways to kill both our trees and that biological fungi killer. They are already there, they're all around. That kind of warfare is continuously evolving. All around us.
The biological fungi killers are out there, we humans just make conditions just perfect for two things: pathogen spread and fungi-killer eradication. Setting the firemen on fire and then wonder why nobody is putting out other fires after that.
Let's go back to my backyard. There are a hundred scots pines with zero issues this year. They're protected by whatever defenders are growing in my backyard. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that those defenders are host-specific. They latch on to everything they know, they form an interaction, they communicate/exchange; symbiosis. They speak the same language, they co-evolved together, they've been partners for generations, they have the same enemies and always have had those, they know how to fight them and they can estimate the enemies next move because of this. If all else fails, they know how to talk to each other and to brain storm for a better solution. They can even call in the cavalry.
Then I introduce a new host, a pine from an isolated island on the other side of the globe. From an entirely different environment and an entirely different response. It co-evolved with different microbes, it had partners in that environment but not here, the enemies here are different, they don't speak the same language. They don't know what to fight or how to fight it. They can't plan on future attacks or estimate next moves. They can't brainstorm and they can't call in the cavalry. It could survive if it gathers enough friends, learns a new language and if conditions are somewhat similar to the native range. But when we see that that isn't happening, what do we do?
We keep trying.
Maybe that's where we're in the wrong.
You don't get trench foot in the savanna.
But Zebras and other savanna dwelling animals do get issues when they're standing in European mud every day of the year.
So we keep importing sand, stacking layer upon layer, hoping that drainage will do its part and hoping it doesn't rain. We import types of grasses to suit their nutritional needs. We give them companion animals.
All because we want to have zebras in Europe. The zebras don't like it here.
Maybe we shouldn't want them. Then they wouldn't have issues and we wouldn't have to combat those issues as a result.
But if we do, we might just have to accept that we'll be dealing with constant issues. Things that don't happen in their natural range.
What if we made a hoof protectant? A silicone based water repellent that didn't rub off. A special kind of flooring that drains so well that it never gets wet. A special skin cream to keep the midges away. Something to stop pollen allergies.
Just so we can keep zebras. They still don't like it here, but we like them being here.
If you ask me, that's a human error. Nature is fighting these animals and we're fighting back on behalf of ourselves with the excuse of the fight being on behalf of the animals.
We're doing the same with trees. And we're bummed that nature always wins.
I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm just saying that we should choose our fights wisely and maybe stop fighting constant wars that we're never going to win anyways.
Take away alcohol from an alcoholic, and they'll get more. Give them a fine, they don't care. Take the store down, and they'll get more. Lock them up in a cell 20 hours a day, 356 days a year, and they'll get more. Somehow.
Take away their motivation for drinking, and you don't have to do any of the above. Saves a bunch of money and time and effort.
Social distancing and vaccination relies on the same principle. No host? No spread. Take away the patient zero and poof! No pandemic!
Think of pathogens what you want, but it's a given fact that they can't infect things that aren't there. They also can't infect resistant hosts or hosts that have magical protectors. If we can't accommodate an entire biome for whatever reason, then maybe we just should stop trying to tell ourselves we can. The evidence is out there that we can't.. What more do we need?
Our war against pathogens isn't fought in the front line, that's where we try to fix the problems we have caused. I can keep my JBP on steroids, pump them full of biocides, go full biochemical warfare.. And I can keep doing that for the next 60 or so years. Why? Because I decided that I wanted to own a sub-tropical pine species in a backyard that's just not suited for them, in a climate where they would freeze to death if only we got a good winter.
The entire issue started with me buying seeds. I made it worse by germinating them, and even worse by adhering to my own watering schedule and using my own substrate.
Don't grow trees you're not supposed to, and you'll never have to combat any real disease. Natural ranges are there for a reason, and nature lets us know if we're crossing that line.
What if we would be able to find a biological fungi killer?
I
The biological fungi killers are out there, we humans just make conditions just perfect for two things: pathogen spread and fungi-killer eradication. Setting the firemen on fire and then wonder why nobody is putting out other fires after that.
Let's go back to my backyard. There are a hundred scots pines with zero issues this year. They're protected by whatever defenders are growing in my backyard. Let's assume for the sake of the argument that those defenders are host-specific. They latch on to everything they know, they form an interaction, they communicate/exchange; symbiosis. They speak the same language, they co-evolved together, they've been partners for generations, they have the same enemies and always have had those, they know how to fight them and they can estimate the enemies next move because of this. If all else fails, they know how to talk to each other and to brain storm for a better solution. They can even call in the cavalry.
Then I introduce a new host, a pine from an isolated island on the other side of the globe. From an entirely different environment and an entirely different response. It co-evolved with different microbes, it had partners in that environment but not here, the enemies here are different, they don't speak the same language. They don't know what to fight or how to fight it. They can't plan on future attacks or estimate next moves. They can't brainstorm and they can't call in the cavalry. It could survive if it gathers enough friends, learns a new language and if conditions are somewhat similar to the native range. But when we see that that isn't happening, what do we do?
We keep trying.
Maybe that's where we're in the wrong.
You don't get trench foot in the savanna.
But Zebras and other savanna dwelling animals do get issues when they're standing in European mud every day of the year.
So we keep importing sand, stacking layer upon layer, hoping that drainage will do its part and hoping it doesn't rain. We import types of grasses to suit their nutritional needs. We give them companion animals.
All because we want to have zebras in Europe. The zebras don't like it here.
Maybe we shouldn't want them. Then they wouldn't have issues and we wouldn't have to combat those issues as a result.
But if we do, we might just have to accept that we'll be dealing with constant issues. Things that don't happen in their natural range.
What if we made a hoof protectant? A silicone based water repellent that didn't rub off. A special kind of flooring that drains so well that it never gets wet. A special skin cream to keep the midges away. Something to stop pollen allergies.
Just so we can keep zebras. They still don't like it here, but we like them being here.
If you ask me, that's a human error. Nature is fighting these animals and we're fighting back on behalf of ourselves with the excuse of the fight being on behalf of the animals.
We're doing the same with trees. And we're bummed that nature always wins.
I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm just saying that we should choose our fights wisely and maybe stop fighting constant wars that we're never going to win anyways.
Take away alcohol from an alcoholic, and they'll get more. Give them a fine, they don't care. Take the store down, and they'll get more. Lock them up in a cell 20 hours a day, 356 days a year, and they'll get more. Somehow.
Take away their motivation for drinking, and you don't have to do any of the above. Saves a bunch of money and time and effort.
Social distancing and vaccination relies on the same principle. No host? No spread. Take away the patient zero and poof! No pandemic!
Think of pathogens what you want, but it's a given fact that they can't infect things that aren't there. They also can't infect resistant hosts or hosts that have magical protectors. If we can't accommodate an entire biome for whatever reason, then maybe we just should stop trying to tell ourselves we can. The evidence is out there that we can't.. What more do we need?
sorce
Nonsense Rascal
Amen.
Treat the cause.
Not the symptoms.
Sorce
Treat the cause.
Not the symptoms.
Sorce
leatherback
The Treedeemer
But
But
But..
I like pomegranates
I like olives
I @Clicio s trees in the rain..
I LOVE jabuticaba..
Now what?
Wires_Guy_wires
Imperial Masterpiece
As if olives and pomegranates have any issues growing here. My own pomegranate flushes three times a year.
I'm a fan of @Clicio s trees too!
Now what? Just grow them! If they don't like it there, they'll let you know. It's about what you do when that happens; accept a bunch of extra work and care, or just let them be and let nature run its course.
Clicio
Masterpiece
Of course it is possible, @leatherback is growing a big example in his own bench!
Vance Wood
Lord Mugo
In the Biblical sense I think you are straining at a nat and swallowing a camel.
One First Matter All
Mame
Not sure I follow you.
One First Matter All
Mame
I think you're right that modern substrates do support microbial/fungal life, but I also came across this quote from a scientific article, which seems to suggest that inorganic, soilless substrates do not support microbial/fungal life to the same degree as regular soil. If you have any sources on this subject, please send them my way--I find the subject fascinating.
"Microorganism population differ significantly between soilless culture systems and the indigenous microorganism type in each soilless system is unique. Organic (coconut-fiber) soilless substrate system had the highest amount of fungi and Fusarium spp., whereas the inorganic substrate (rockwool) contained the highest amount of fluorescent pseudomonads. In addition, aerobic bacteria could be dominant over fungi in inorganic (rockwool) substrate. Soilless substrates lack the diverse biological and microbial communities found in conventional agriculture soil. For soilless culture, a few studies have assessed the usefulness of inoculating plant with microorganisms at early stages but none of them showed a significant positive impact on cultivated crop."
(PDF) SOILLESS CULTURE: MANAGEMENT OF GROWING SUBSTRATE, WATER, NUTRIENT, SALINITY, MICROORGANISM AND PRODUCT QUALITY
PDF | The present article reviews the scientific literature on soilless culture and provided a critical examination of the micro-environmental factors... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
www.researchgate.net
Harunobu
Chumono
This is not very surprising to me. If you have two systems that differ significantly, with the very diverse and rich microbial life found in nature, it doesn't surprise me that soilless mixes are more like a certain niche found in nature, and organic cocofiber like another one. And inoculating with your favourite microbe won't chance what kind of niche your growth medium fundamentally is. The big question is what it means. And is a symbiotic organism occupying the niche that is the plant root? Or the niche that is a soilless growth medium with a root being present there as well.
If a root microbiome is that important, and if plants do really well in soilless growth medium, I think there can only be one conclusion. If we think that microbes can't do their beneficial duties in soilless media, then either they are not important in the first place, or we got it wrong. And then what is the bit we got wrong? Us believing beneficial microbes aren't doing their beneficial duty? Or our conclusion that our plants are doing well in soilless mixes? Or the symbiotic relationship with microbes is marginal. It would greatly surprise me if it is the latter.
If a root microbiome is that important, and if plants do really well in soilless growth medium, I think there can only be one conclusion. If we think that microbes can't do their beneficial duties in soilless media, then either they are not important in the first place, or we got it wrong. And then what is the bit we got wrong? Us believing beneficial microbes aren't doing their beneficial duty? Or our conclusion that our plants are doing well in soilless mixes? Or the symbiotic relationship with microbes is marginal. It would greatly surprise me if it is the latter.
cmeg1
Imperial Masterpiece
I am working,but this product starting working instantly ....better so in organic fert ,open soil.I think you're right that modern substrates do support microbial/fungal life, but I also came across this quote from a scientific article, which seems to suggest that inorganic, soilless substrates do not support microbial/fungal life to the same degree as regular soil. If you have any sources on this subject, please send them my way--I find the subject fascinating.
"Microorganism population differ significantly between soilless culture systems and the indigenous microorganism type in each soilless system is unique. Organic (coconut-fiber) soilless substrate system had the highest amount of fungi and Fusarium spp., whereas the inorganic substrate (rockwool) contained the highest amount of fluorescent pseudomonads. In addition, aerobic bacteria could be dominant over fungi in inorganic (rockwool) substrate. Soilless substrates lack the diverse biological and microbial communities found in conventional agriculture soil. For soilless culture, a few studies have assessed the usefulness of inoculating plant with microorganisms at early stages but none of them showed a significant positive impact on cultivated crop."
(PDF) SOILLESS CULTURE: MANAGEMENT OF GROWING SUBSTRATE, WATER, NUTRIENT, SALINITY, MICROORGANISM AND PRODUCT QUALITY
PDF | The present article reviews the scientific literature on soilless culture and provided a critical examination of the micro-environmental factors... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
I tree I used to own.......I over applyed the product and it actually became a bit aggressive....thread is here somewhere.
Firstflush
Chumono
Got a bunch of this type product from work for veggie prop. It increases veggie vigor for sure.
Magic pixie dust or ......?
www.xtreme-gardening.com
Magic pixie dust or ......?
Xtreme Gardening Mykos Mycorrhizae
America's #1 source of pure mycorrhizae. Mykos is a natural & organic single species of beneficial soil fungi that helps increase nutrient & water availability.
www.xtreme-gardening.com
Deep Sea Diver
Imperial Masterpiece
I did read that thread. There is no doubt that your bonsai had particularly large fungal bloom after you added that product.
Yet, did it actually benefit the tree, or just add another foreign competitor into the rhizosphere?
There is solid evidence indicating these supplements have no benefit, except in sterilized media, also that if the mycorrhizae in your soil isn't working, supplements won't help either.
However, adding nitrogen and organic matter while cutting out (or maybe way down in bonsai soils and off in those containing clay.) the soluble phosphorus fertilizer added to soil will decidedly benefit the existing mycorrhizae in your soil.
Here is a really thorough article written for master gardeners by one of the professors at WSU, our big state agricultural university that explains the ins and outs of mycorrhizae. The article also briefly mentions the effect of adding fungicides to soil while thoroughly addressing mycorrhizal additives near the end.
Mycorrhizae - What the Heck are they, anyways?
best
DSD sends
