Electroculture has a very long history dating back the to mid 18th century [1] but it's still a bit of a mystery. Quite fittingly the man who pioneered it, Jean-Antoine Nollet, also discovered osmosis which is probably why the method is effective.
The electrical current causes electrophoresis, which increases ion mobility and allows the roots to more easily absorb them via electroosmosis while also increasing ion exchange between insoluble soil particles and the water. On top of that the ions coming off the electrodes probably contribute since copper is a cofactor in many enzymes that effect photosynthesis, respiration, and signal transduction.
It doesn't always work though, depending on the soil, the electrical current use (strength and duration), and the species. Done incorrectly all it'll do is damage the root system and kill the plant.
I didn't say they were! Since those, and many similar artifacts, were destroyed when the US invaded Iraq we'll likely never know what they really were. Regardless of whether or not they're "batteries", it's well acknowledged that they produce voltage.
It's not outside the realm of possibility that the highly experimental people of the area found some correlation between those devices they made and their agricultural yield.
You don't need modern physics to simply observe. Before penicillin was "discovered" it was well known on battlefields that you should apply a moldy piece of bread to wounds (the most common bread mold is Penicillium).
Another example could be mycorrhizal fungi. Many indigenous people had complex cosmological theories that included trees being able to "talk" to each other. Westerners who had no concept of this might have translated it as "forest spirits" and other woo-hoo. Even if the underlying conceptualization is "wrong" it can still be useful to model out experiments and take observations. We can just as easily imagine an alien species come to learn about our concept of a "photon". There's no such "thing" as a photon. It's just a metaphor we use to talk about the fact that light has properties of both particles and waves. Maybe those aliens would listen to our ramblings and translate it as us believing in some sort of "light spirit".
I was just looking at horizontal gene transfer, which is the idea of genes transfering between plant species via the mycorhizzal hyphea (root highway bettween plant and mushroom mycelium).
Look at the minerals which are transfered via the Hyphea: (conductive)
>mycorrhizae, known as root fungi, form symbiotic associations with plant roots. In these associations, the fungi are actually integrated into the physical structure of the root. The fungi colonize the living root tissue during active plant growth. Through mycorrhization
>>the plant obtains phosphate and other minerals, such as zinc and copper, from the soil.
>The fungus obtains nutrients, such as sugars, from the plant root. Mycorrhizae help increase the surface area of the plant root system because hyphae, which are narrow, can spread beyond the nutrient depletion zone. <-- may lead to why the plants may seem far enough apart.
Whats interesting to note would be the conductivity of the mycelial network entangled the root system. I'd bet you could find the absolute right frequency based on plant species..
What would have been a truly interesting alternate history would have been if Tesla would have prevailed.
Both through wireless power transfer, but, relating to this - his transfer of electricity through the ground.
I wonder if that had become an adopted technology if we would have seen an effect on the flora?
EDIT: I'd really like to know what the electrical impulses between a mycorhyzzal (Gunna start calling it Mz) and a plants root system is - They specifically connect with "vascular root" based species...
This seems to indicate plants whith root systems which may be conductive.
The metaphysical Alex Grey in me wants to believe that the mycelium is just mycological neurons without a body and sybiotically parasites its way around in a Beneficial Dictator manner in which it is a net positive viral biological entity. (but its still a neuron)
FWIU ground discharge is a significant liability; "must've been lodestone there".
Higher EC soil is presumably a better path to ground. Lightning current is too strong and damages plants.
Null hypothesis: There are no companion planting approaches that result in greater yield due to idk symbiotic Eh-Ph homeostasis
Three Sisters: Corn, Bean, Squash
Tomatoes and potatoes grow well together in a 5gal HDPE bucket with hole cut into the side to access the potatoes; no idea whether there is electrical production from the tomatoes waving in the wind
Over 95% of plants make mycorrhizal associations and many are actually completely dependent on mycorrhizae. Most plant roots aren't actually made for "sucking up nutrients" but rather for trading sugars for minerals and other nutrients with mycorrhizal fungi. It's not at all accurate to label these "parasites" in my opinion. Plants that have these associations produce larger fruit, are more resistant to pests, can withstand both droughts AND frosts better, and are generally significantly healthier.
These networks transfer more than just nutrients. It's also a communication network that allows plants across species to warn each other of pests. Recent research shows that even RNA might be being transmitted through mycorrhizal networks and we know that mother trees are able to identify their offspring and send specific nutrients to them and possibly even some sort of chemical, acquired memories.
HGT is not at all unique to mycorrhizal fungi. One interesting example is the dodder plant which is an obligate "parasite" that can affect many different species of plants. A very large portion of its DNA is now plant genes from various species its parasitized. Though it's not clear if these genes are used. It also turns out that dodder plants too can act as above-ground communication networks; allowing plants to warn each other of pests and other threats.
But more and more evidence is emerging that HGT is much more common than we would predict in even mammals and fish. The gene to produce a crucial antifreeze protein in smelt came from herrings for example:
> I'd bet you could find the absolute right frequency based on plant species
There's two major types of mycorrhizal fungi: arbuscular and ectomycorrhizal (there's also endo- but these, by definition, aren't soil fungi). Arbuscular fungi seem to have very low host specificity and are kinda "generalists". One species found in Australia was found to improve crop yields amongst almost every single crop they tested it on. The complex handshake that goes on between plant roots and mycorrhizal fungi seems to be very ancient (fungi made it on to the land first and plants likely wouldn't have survived without their help).
I would guess that most plant species evolved to support this ancient language and there isn't enough variation to differentiate anything at the species level. Perhaps you'd have more luck with ectomycorrhizal fungi, but even then I would assume the frequency is much more likely to be associated with fungi species than plant species.
Wonderful, thank you. I have here in front of me "The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mushrooms" I think Ill read up a bit in there to see what I can find out.
(heh saw you in another thread, mr 4/4 (that Kuni Kath architecture vid was interesting)
-
Paul Stamets is a national treasure - I just wish he would release what he knows about Portobellos that he claims they will kill him if he releases it.
Maybe this works for a 1 week market where hydroponic can be competitive for some small % of supply
but the hydroponic costs are like 10-500x the cost of traditional modern farming of specialty crops (think lettuces, berries, leafy greens) and worse for row crops.
Also the effectiveness of electrolysis of the soil also varies greatly based on CEC (cat-ion exchange capacity) — which is the water holding capacity of soil profile — which in the right range is what allows the increased microbial activity which is what increases the root uptake of nutrients.
Does the economics improve with scale? A lot of things can easily improve costs by 10-500x when produced in extreme scales, which would be necessary to feed any meaningful percentage of the population. But it does seem hard to imagine beating soil growth for economics, unless climate change or some other environmental issue plays havoc.
The obvious answer to my mind is feeding colonies. All elemental nutrients can be sourced out of the regolith, as well as glass and metals for building materials. Other nutrients can be densely shipped from earth. Electricity is plentiful. Soil is expensive to move to space.
The economics vary heavily location to location. In some areas, well designed hydroponics or aeroponics “cost less” due to density - if good lands expensive.
If land with decent soil (and keeping the soil good) is inexpensive, traditional soil based farming is superior.
Restoring or amending super overworked or “poor” soil is both expensive and time consuming.
A lot of those interesting vertical farming startups fail miserably because they are outcompeted by relatively nearby, lower cost soil based production - the whole location part of the equation simply doesn’t work.
There’s also fun questions about if you can reliably do hydro/aqua “organically” to appease the granola crowd, it turns out that soil has certain advantages if treated right such as having various fungi etc that help fight crop disease/pests etc.
> Barley seedlings grow on average 50% more when their root system is stimulated electrically through a new cultivation substrate. In a study published in the journal PNAS, researchers from Linköping University have developed an electrically conductive “soil” for soilless cultivation, ; eSoil
Something about making the food supply electric sits unwell with me, which doesn’t make a lot of sense given the amount of fertilizer and transportation energy already involved. The whole system screams fragile to me.
"The EULA for your potatoes is being updated to make it easier to understand how we use your soil profile data. Hit A to accept the new agreement, or S to starve."
I would say it is pretty fragile, half the worlds population is completely dependent on artificially produced fertilizer and unsustainable agricultural practices to source their food. And its not that we don't have enough arable land to produce the food we need otherwise and far more sustainably, it is just less profitable so we don't do that. And if shit does hit the fan its not like we can reopen 50% more farmland within just a few years that hasn't been used in a decade or more and is overgrown with trees and shrubs. Plus a lot of the old farmland has been depleted before being abandoned and it takes many decades, usually around 75-150 years, to build the soil back up to previous topsoil depths, which also means dealing with reduced yields and sacrificing yield and fertilizer to the soil until it is.
This is not correct. You can recover soil in the timescales of 20 years through active management. The problem is that this is a losing battle. If the original farmer making the money didn't care, then who is going to pay to restore a plot of land from which they make no income whatsoever?
If anything, it seems better to me than using fertilizer, if electricity is an effective replacement. it’s a renewable resource, it doesn’t stick around and runoff into streams and rivers, and since it’s conductive through the ground, maybe it doesn’t require as much tilling of the soil as you need with fertilizer to make sure it’s properly mixed in.
Might be we would need to use less fertilizer- not only if it helps plants mature faster, but also because a good amount isn't used by plants anyway (water runoff, etc).
Somewhat related, I read somewhere a few weeks ago that grounding the human body reduced inflammation. Din't really read too closely. So no idea how it was measured. But seems like something that could be somewhat possible. Maybe Myth Busters episode worthy.
Fascinating! Especially because it sounds very woo-woo at first thought. Adam Neumann comes to mind. I googled and found something similar. Was is this[1] article?
If true, I could see this being used by some mom and pop shops that specialize in supplying microgreens to local groceries and restaurants. Given the short growing cycles, this has a chance to dramatically increase yield over time.
The electrical current causes electrophoresis, which increases ion mobility and allows the roots to more easily absorb them via electroosmosis while also increasing ion exchange between insoluble soil particles and the water. On top of that the ions coming off the electrodes probably contribute since copper is a cofactor in many enzymes that effect photosynthesis, respiration, and signal transduction.
It doesn't always work though, depending on the soil, the electrical current use (strength and duration), and the species. Done incorrectly all it'll do is damage the root system and kill the plant.
[1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/43426439