Root oxygenation and container choice

I use wooden boxes. They last a long time for me. I build in excellent drainage. I particularly like the way the boxes keep the high temperatures cooled off and on the opposite the boxes keep my cold and freezing temperatures a bit regulated. The boxes work best for me in winter. Myth? I don’t know. I only know my trees are healthy. The boxes are perfectly stable when I do any moving or shifting....even a strong tilt during the rains if I think it’s needed. The boxes offer a perfect opportunity to add an eyelet for a secure guy wire...just about anywhere. I’ve never had a box blow over even in extreme winds. I use 1x6 or 1x4.
8C09743A-92D3-4876-B898-21D37F5D24B9.jpeg
 
I think you have misunderstood this. Or else it is ground breaking news.
Correct. That is an action unique to photosynthesis -splitting a water molecule to gain a carbon atom and releasing two oxygen atoms as a byproduct, only occurring within a leaf or photosynthetic stem. There are no mechanisms to do this in root tissue.
 
OK, the roots don't cleave the molecule, the microbes use oxides to produce food that roots absorb. And, roots absorb water that is the plants major source of O. The point was that plants do not rely on air as their major source of O.
 
The point was that plants do not rely on air as their major source of O.

Funny how it takes 3 pages to get to this little tidbit.

It's like foliar feeding, we still kinda believe it's greater than it is.

Thanks for bringing it up.

Sorce
 
OK, the roots don't cleave the molecule, the microbes use oxides to produce food that roots absorb. And, roots absorb water that is the plants major source of O. The point was that plants do not rely on air as their major source of O.
This is incorrect. The oxygen that roots uptake for respiration is taken up by root hairs from air within a soil.

This is why our trees can not survive in soils that do not breathe. Mangrove or bald cypress have developed adaptations to this, but species like this are the exception.
The oxygen within water that is taken up by the plant is not released until photosynthesis occurs. When an h2o molecule is split, the two oxygen atoms re-combine and are released into the air. Oxygen in raw form a plant uses is procured at the root, not from water.
 
Here’s some links supporting thoughts above:




 
Correct. That is an action unique to photosynthesis -splitting a water molecule to gain a carbon atom and releasing two oxygen atoms as a byproduct, only occurring within a leaf or photosynthetic stem. There are no mechanisms to do this in root tissue.
I said this wrong -the water molecule split gains the plant a hydrogen atom which links to carbon derived from co2...etc..
 
  • Like
Reactions: n8
The point was that plants do not rely on air as their major source of O.
Sorry but you really have not understood the process.

Plants breath oxygen and produce CO2 in their regular processes, just like animals. Next to this, they take up CO2 and produce O2 in the leaves, under influence of light. These cycles are independent of eachother.
 
  • Like
Reactions: n8
So, roots obtain more O from respiration than from the water absorbed? That's pretty debatable.
 
Here’s some links supporting thoughts above:





I am only here because debating this is more entertaining than anything else.

I don't believe these links that are attached to selling something. "Proven winners" "pro mix" sounds like advertising more than science.

I am a bit disappointed in the UCDavis link because it is about hydroponics.

Before we even begin to discuss oxygen and roots we have to know what type of hydroponic system is being used. The paper does not say, so it is essentially useless.

If we are to assume it is a hydroponic system where roots are constantly surrounded by water, we can use the argument that it is only validating what we are arguing. Since constant water would mean ONLY getting Oxygen from water.

Sorce
 
Since constant water would mean ONLY getting Oxygen from water.
I think it would be fair to say.. Roots are always moist, and as such, oxygen to the roots would have to come from the water. So orxygen dissolved in water (But not sure).

THe problem I have is with the idea that roots have found a magical way to extract the O from the H2O. WHich in my eyes is nonsense. That is a process which takes place in Chlorophyll. Not in roots.
 
Oxegynated water isn't more than H2O right?

So how does that Oxygen differ from the air we breathe?

Sorce
 
Of course, I think poking holes in our soil is more useful than trying to poke holes in theories about oxygen.

Too many variables.

Sorce
 
I think the main point is, you're much more likely to get that
water with oxygen dissolved
Oxygen to your roots than unhindered "sucked in" O2.

My argument becomes that of what is really going on in the gaps of "open" soil.

Is the optimal open space 3MM, one MM for roots around each soil particle, with 1MM o do space left between the roots for mycorrhiza?

My point is....

There is a point where so much air is between the particles that a root is more likely to die/dry than be healthy.

IMO...

It is safer to be on the "wetter" side.

Favoring 1MM soil particles, so 1MM Feeders can grow around each.
2 feeders inside 3mm. Near 0 negative space

Where with open soil, you get 2 1mm feeders In the 3mm of open space, with chance between. And 4- 5 mil particles.
Leaving much less space for actual feeder root growth.

Consider these 9mm of soil.
20200102_153550.jpg
On the left with 1mm soil, you get 5 feeders per 9mm.
On the right with 5mm soil, you get 2 feeders per 9mm.

The void between the 5mm soil may or may not grow roots. It can allow so much air that it dry kills your 2 Feeders.

It will never provide opportunity for more than 5 feeders without competition.

Hence my argument for high CEC capacity easy to soak 1mm soil particles. Maybe 2mm. Certainly not 5mm as it leaves too much to chance.

Sorce
 
I should have paid more attention in that chemistry class. However....I am following the points made.
 
I am only here because debating this is more entertaining than anything else.

I don't believe these links that are attached to selling something. "Proven winners" "pro mix" sounds like advertising more than science.

I am a bit disappointed in the UCDavis link because it is about hydroponics.

Before we even begin to discuss oxygen and roots we have to know what type of hydroponic system is being used. The paper does not say, so it is essentially useless.

If we are to assume it is a hydroponic system where roots are constantly surrounded by water, we can use the argument that it is only validating what we are arguing. Since constant water would mean ONLY getting Oxygen from water.

Sorce

I agree you point on the Proven Winners/pro-mix link, their goal is to sell something ultimately. I've never used or sold this soil, and where I work has no contract with any plant distributer (looking especially at you, Monrovia). Honestly, I just did a quick and dirty search at work to find these links, but they all (university, peer reviewed paper, horticulture whatever) say the same thing -roots need air/oxygen. I try to always support things scientifically, and that ain't that, but still think these companies are saying this because its true, and their bread and butter depends on it. That said, I too am very weary of the hucksters.

The hydroponics paper I thought was especially poignant because it directly gets at this deal of non-aquatic plants requiring oxygen at their roots, even especially if submerged in water. This directly relates to bonsai soil and putting a tree in a small pot. The first two lines of the abstract of that paper are:
Plants need oxygen to perform cellular respiration. Plants absorb oxygen through their roots.

Dissolved oxygen (DO) is just normal oxygen -not freely floating in the air, but in a liquid.
While there are a bazillion factors that determine how much DO is in water it is usually in nature something like a fraction of 1%.

Henry's Law says: At a constant temperature, the amount of a given gas that dissolves in a given type and volume of liquid is directly proportional to the partial pressure of that gas in equilibrium with that liquid. I understand this as a gas such as O2 will enter water at varying degrees under different circumstances. A big factor is surface area of the pond or ocean in relation to pressure around (elevation, etc.) / (wide anderson flat or drainage holes everywhere pond basket or colander vs. wood box). Another factor would be like when it rains and the fish start biting.

Photosynthetic plants are the only organisms on the planet we know of that can split a water molecule naturally. So every creature on the planet requiring oxygen gets it through the air or as DO. An octopus breathes DO in the water, but does not pull it out of the water itself, to do so would take a great amount of energy, rather it filters it out.

But I think, unlike an octopus, roots (species dependent) can both uptake oxygen from the air in a soil, or sometimes from the DO (technically air/gas) in water. A window of opportunity. We don't think of our lungs being wet, we'll drown, but they are juicy right? I thinking now of roots as if we had no skin or ribcage, and the only way we could drink or breathe would be to put our chest into dirt, but I believe there is this window of drying-but-not-dry where oxygen uptake will take place, but unlike us they don't have to breathe all of the time, oxygen or CO2.
 
So, roots obtain more O from respiration than from the water absorbed? That's pretty debatable.
 
Back
Top Bottom