Is this little thing really what's destroyed my gardens?

[Heritage]

Naysen and Ivan,

I haven't had time to keep up with your experiment but will put this thread on my winter reading list - lots of great info here I need to absorb!

Naysen, great to see the lab came through with a diagnosis. I hope they can determine the V race for you.

Ivan, as usual, very helpful info. Thanks. I have one question (even though the answer may be somewhere in this thread already, I have only skimmed): It seems widening the watering zone to 1 foot on each side of the plants would encourage root growth into untreated (and infected) soil. Maybe this was meant to be a general recommendation and not specific to this experiment?

I'm looking forward to future chapters!
Steve

[z_willus_d]

Originally Posted by Paradajz

ok, not the clearest photos of all but still do the job.

some questions:
* out of control group, two plants are already in a terminal phase ( JBT still holding on, but not for long, note some iregular stem widening in diameter ). would you estimate that those were pretty much that bad ( much worse than others ) when you planted it?
* out of experiment group:
- did M.P. have any of that yellowing visible at transplant?
- C.P. looking fine ( considering all the story ) i hope.
- A.L. cross unclear to me, was the necrotic branch visibly in bad shape on transplant?

anyway, bad news:
- M.P. was permanently damaged while in the pot ( those new growing leafs you considered suckers are actually ''forcebly'' emerging leafs, the top growth of that plant is 50% damaged, most probably by long exposure to sun or/and heat- the plant left out of potassium, new growth points half dead )
- C.P. looking fine so far, but suggests some signs of mite presence, just as the other plants do
- still can't tell anything abou A.L.

it will all be much simplier in a week or so

• JBT looks now as it did when I planted it. BTW, this plant was very "leggy" and so it was planted a good 15" deep.
• Yes, MP absolutely did have that yellowness in it's older leaves, but I should say the angle of the light in the photos seems to enhance it. It's actually the nicest looking plant by my eyes in terms of the new growth, which is a deep green at present.
• Yes, the ALxCP plants were in bad shape going in. Those dead branches were there or getting there at transplant.

Well, let's hope some of the plants pull through.
Thanks, Naysen

[z_willus_d]

Ivan, gotcha on the other two posts. I didn't notice any biter taste, as I said, and I only provided P through that manure. I'd doubt it would be high, but I will aim to get a full test on the soil sometime next season (or before ideally). I'll have to determine the best way to go about that.

Based on your notes with the brassica, I'll plan to till it in several weeks before planting-out next season (if possible).

I went ahead and performed foliar/drench step (I) today. I'll hit the plants with that .2% Cu tomorrow.

Good dreams of verdant, green, healthy vines to you.
-naysen

[z_willus_d]

Originally Posted by Heritage

Naysen and Ivan,

I haven't had time to keep up with your experiment but will put this thread on my winter reading list - lots of great info here I need to absorb!

Naysen, great to see the lab came through with a diagnosis. I hope they can determine the V race for you.

Ivan, as usual, very helpful info. Thanks. I have one question (even though the answer may be somewhere in this thread already, I have only skimmed): It seems widening the watering zone to 1 foot on each side of the plants would encourage root growth into untreated (and infected) soil. Maybe this was meant to be a general recommendation and not specific to this experiment?

I'm looking forward to future chapters!
Steve

Hi Steve, glad to know you're out there following. I think you raise a very good, common-sense/logical question/concern. I may have made a mistake in judgment locating the control group plants next door to their experimental peers. My thinking in that was to try and keep the conditions as close to the same as possible, but I hadn't considered the implications in terms of the roots branching out laterally and into unprocessed "territory." That goes for both directions, actually. At this point, the experiment is a big ? mark, considering the vines I'm trying culture, but at least this will be practice for next season. I seem to be learning a lot, and I couldn't have much worse results (for grafted vines) next year than this.

Maybe I'll want to place those trenches closer to the plants on the borders between ctrl & exp. We'll see what Ivan thinks.

Thanks for chiming in on that.
-naysen

[Paradajz]

Originally Posted by Heritage

Naysen and Ivan,

I haven't had time to keep up with your experiment but will put this thread on my winter reading list - lots of great info here I need to absorb!

Naysen, great to see the lab came through with a diagnosis. I hope they can determine the V race for you.

Ivan, as usual, very helpful info. Thanks. I have one question (even though the answer may be somewhere in this thread already, I have only skimmed): It seems widening the watering zone to 1 foot on each side of the plants would encourage root growth into untreated (and infected) soil. Maybe this was meant to be a general recommendation and not specific to this experiment?

I'm looking forward to future chapters!
Steve

hi, Steve, great meeting you again, hope things going fine for you there.

it's an excellent question you made, i apologize in advance for the answer i simply can't make in a short and simple way.

* no, if the mixture drench was made properly ( a thorough drench for planting spots and also thorough covering of surounding area 2 feet wide ), it's covered from the aspect of simple math.

* but it's much more complex than a plain math thing.
- for starters, water doesn't ''travel'' through the soil that way, or in other words, it doesn't simply ''go down'' as drenched. i really wouldn't even try to fully elaborate the issue here, but basically it's the laws of gravity, exchange of energy ( equalisation ), and therefore difusion and osmosis, which will regulate the process.
- than again, the ''stuff'' which will be disolved in that water ( in our case copper, sulfur, manganese, zinc, calcium, etc. ), doesn't ''travel'' through the soil in the equal manner as the water does, for it's part. ''travelling'' of those elements includes the soil structure ( and other characteristics ) which will act as a ''membrane'' there and also regulate the process.

* so, basically, what happens there:
- water moves through the soil both vertically and laterally ( due to a simple law of energy equalisation: areas drenched will contain much more water than the surrounding area, which means more free energy, which for it's part will always tend to equalise, which will finally result in the water travelling laterally despite the law of simple gravity; that's the reason why we can see water spots widening and not simply restricting to a narrow spot where we aplly it to the soil when we water plants ); consequently, when a mixture drench applied to a soil of a normal or dry ( better choice ) moisture status, it will actually go quite wider than just the drench area.
- in addition, elements originally disolved in that water, will not travell in the same manner and speed- it will travel in more or less same directions, but slowlier to a significant extent ( due to the soil- membrane doing it's part, letting the water travel freely and delaying the disolved elements by restricting their speed ). consequently, the disolved mixture elements will also travel laterally, but slowlier and ''steadier''- this will help prevent them from ''leaking'' to fast and significantly help us keep them where we need them for as long as possible.

*further more, the presence of other elements in the soil will additionally influence the process, in the way that some of our disolved elements will in a certain way ''bond'' to those other elements, which will again make them more present where we need them. this is an extremely complex issue, but generally what we prefer there is calcium to be our ''bonding element'', and phosphorus not to be the one.

oh, did i make it a ''novel'' or not...
anyway, what happens:
* when mixture drench applied to a 2 feet wide area, it immediatelly went a bit wider than that.
* our ''soldier'' elements, disolved in the mixture, can't travell that fast but they will be travelling both vertically and laterally, steady and calmly we hope.
* consequently, the watering we apply there will actually help them travell additionaly wide to a certain extent, and therefore cover some new areas, with a significantly lower rate though, but it will help anyway.
* additions of those elements ( copper, sulfur ) which come from soaking the soil when doing foliar sprays, will for it's part refuell our ''fighting machine'', not much but it will again help for it's part.
* the addition of gypsum applied there ( with it's signicicant 20+% of calcium which will help bonding our ''soldier'' elements in a good way, and 15- 20% of sulfur which will be disolving fairly fast and transforming into a sulfate form, again helping our cause ), will also significantly refuell our machine, but it also needs that water applied widely so it could be more efficient.

the point of this horribly long and boring bla- bla answer is that the mixture will have effects on even wider area than those 2 feet where it was originally applied, and that ''wide watering'' tactics will additionally help with it- it will ''draw'' the elements to the place where there is the largest amount of free water.

but, even if there wasn't for this boring stuff, if you get to chose wether to encourage the roots go further or to restrict them to a preffered ( safer, disease restricted to a certain level ) area, always chose to encourage them. basically, 2 things:
- it will make stronger plants, with additional capacity to fight the diseases off.
- you cannot restrict pathogens from travelling towards the plants with water too, their main soil forms ( V.'s microsclerotia especially ) are very very much mobile that way. but this way there are fair chances that those will encounter our ''soldiers'' which will hopefully be waiting for them somewhere at the ''membrane wall''...

eventually, there is a justified logic in watering that way, fighting the diseases off or just plainly growing with ''higher quality'' tactics, all the same.
i intentionally made this answer that boringly long and complex, because understanding this issue is actually the fundamental basis to further understand the processes of plant's nutrients uptake, and this for it's part paves the road to quality fertilising and soil amending, which for it's part should be one of the main steps to those ''healtly, strong, nice looking plants, with lots of tasty fruits'' we all aim for.

on the other hand, the main problem with the procedure he's implementing at this moment, isn't in watering ( or raining ) which at some point, sooner or later, will ''wash out'' most of the elements there.
unfortunatelly, the main problem is in junk plant material ( infected ), which is present in the soil there.
more precisely, the mixture ( copper especially ) will definitelly eradicate all pathogens which it encounters ''looselly'' hanging there, in whatever forms those could be shaped. but those which are still tied to their host parts ( infected roots pieces left in the soil mostly ) will not be eradicated to the full extent, rather blocked for a certain period of time.
for this reason i was thinking of recommending him a higher quantity of original mixture application, and maybe changing the soil in the planting wholes with new, not infected one, but eventually chose not to, mostly for the reasons that i'm aware that there are people who could be trying to implement this on their own, which i wouldn't like if the procedure here was defined to it's ''border limits'' ( which actually would be at twice higher doses than we're doing here ), and because i don't prefer people doing things which they don't fully understand, when those things could be concerning their health especially.

but to really close this incredibly long bla-bla-bla-blation, next Spring more than 80% of that junk material will be fully decomposed, with quite some percentage of pathogens eradicated or left ''looselly'' hanging there, if the ''cooking'' applied especially, and he will have a true chance of fully ''getting them where he wants them'', while this experience should definitely be of help there.

p.s.

ok, i really don't expect that anyone reads this all the way trough, but i sure hope that the winter there will be long enough, so there could be time for some of you to make some use of it

[Paradajz]

...well, i've been re- reading my last post...

i can just say:
Steve, you with your questions... you woke the monster again!

[Paradajz]

Originally Posted by z_willus_d

• JBT looks now as it did when I planted it. BTW, this plant was very "leggy" and so it was planted a good 15" deep.
• Yes, MP absolutely did have that yellowness in it's older leaves, but I should say the angle of the light in the photos seems to enhance it. It's actually the nicest looking plant by my eyes in terms of the new growth, which is a deep green at present.
• Yes, the ALxCP plants were in bad shape going in. Those dead branches were there or getting there at transplant.

Well, let's hope some of the plants pull through.
Thanks, Naysen

ok, looking fine for now, we'll see what happens next.

[Paradajz]

Originally Posted by z_willus_d

Ivan, gotcha on the other two posts. I didn't notice any biter taste, as I said, and I only provided P through that manure. I'd doubt it would be high, but I will aim to get a full test on the soil sometime next season (or before ideally). I'll have to determine the best way to go about that.

Based on your notes with the brassica, I'll plan to till it in several weeks before planting-out next season (if possible).

I went ahead and performed foliar/drench step (I) today. I'll hit the plants with that .2% Cu tomorrow.

Good dreams of verdant, green, healthy vines to you.
-naysen

good, just soak the soi welll with it too.

btw, i intentionally didn't include beneficials as a part of the 3-step emergency procedure, because i don't know how much that stuff costs you, to be honest about it.
e.g., around here it's quite cheap ( i can get some 5l of the product i use for approx. 15e, and 5l completes the season in my home garden, more than sufficiantly ), so i use it as much as i like. but i also wouldn't like you to spend some horrible amounts of money for the sake of this experiment, and the plants could do more or less the same without large quantities of it used there.
but if you still feel you could use it, feel free to add some to all 3 emergency steps ( drenches and foliars, doesn't matter ) named, at the same dilution rates recommended for kelp and fert.
it can just never ever be used with copper at the same time.

EDIT: haha, thanks for your good night wishes, nobody's wished me someting like that ever. i'll remember that one

[z_willus_d]

Hi Ivan, I enjoyed reading the blah blah blah post/novel. Thanks for that explanation. I suppose my concern will run in reverse of Steve's. Since I crammed 6 plants into the space of ~11x2+-feet, I have only around 1.83-feet lateral per plant to work with, a 1.83x2.5' rectangle. When applying the soldiers, I made sure to give a 6" wide birth around the intersecting borders between control and experimental bed areas. As you say, the material will disperse and spread-out, creating something of a penumbra or liminal area between control and experimental areas. I worry that my control areas will receive some or most of the benefits of the experiment, and as they receive all the foliar, drench, and soil amendments as well, they may not make very good controls. I suppose biasing the whole towards more coverage isn't a bad idea, given the negative factors across the board.

So I think reading one of the chapters of your novel you were suggesting I could have doubled my soldier concentration? Was that a 2nd application after planting or just a higher concentration on the original?

Good day.
-naysen

[Paradajz]

Originally Posted by z_willus_d

Hi Ivan, I enjoyed reading the blah blah blah post/novel. Thanks for that explanation. I suppose my concern will run in reverse of Steve's. Since I crammed 6 plants into the space of ~11x2+-feet, I have only around 1.83-feet lateral per plant to work with, a 1.83x2.5' rectangle. When applying the soldiers, I made sure to give a 6" wide birth around the intersecting borders between control and experimental bed areas. As you say, the material will disperse and spread-out, creating something of a penumbra or liminal area between control and experimental areas. I worry that my control areas will receive some or most of the benefits of the experiment, and as they receive all the foliar, drench, and soil amendments as well, they may not make very good controls. I suppose biasing the whole towards more coverage isn't a bad idea, given the negative factors across the board.

So I think reading one of the chapters of your novel you were suggesting I could have doubled my soldier concentration? Was that a 2nd application after planting or just a higher concentration on the original?

Good day.
-naysen

hi, N., and don't worry- your control is just fine.

first, the elements from the mixture cannot travel that fast, they'll be quite slow actually, and even if they could get that far towards the control group ( which they cannot ), it would be to late. as a mater of fact, in the situation given, your control plants were most probably infected somewhere within the 72- 96h period after transplant

second, those elements will travel in a different direction- towards the watering line you create for the plants. btw, if one wanted to describe this process in the most simplified manner of all, it would be that the watering line will constantly be drawing all the subjects to it's center: plant roots, but before that, both pathogens and our elements.

third, and the most unfortunate one: the ''novel'' is actually a total total oversimplification, used just to explain the basics ( and even that not to a full extent ). in the reality it's much more complex than that: those elements, especially copper, will not be active all the way trough, it's ions will constantly tend to deactivate along the way. it's another incredibly complex issue, but anyway, some of the amendments you made there, along with those foliar sprays and finally watering, will for their part all work to reactivate it to the maximum possible level.

and finally, some more complexity: the nature of the process is that it can't happen that those elements ''travel to far''. if there ever was a situation where those elements moved away from it's original place in a significant percentage ( which actually cannot happen ), and by doing that created a situation where the soil away from the original drench place gets saturated with elements, while the original drench place gets to be ''out of elements'', by the law of it's moving those would return where they originaly came from.
uh, if any people who are educated for this stuff read what i've just written, they'd most probably shoot me, it's a horrible over- simplification.

anyway, the point is that your control group is just ok, no ''soldiers'' can make any significant presence over there, and even if they could it would be to late, and on some other ocasion i'll see to fully explain the basic principles of soil solution work, with the specific roles of the solvent ( water ), solute ( elements ), and the membrane ( soil/root tissue ) in the process of plant feeding better explained.

and finally, no, please, no need for higher concentrations there, those applied are just ok to do the job, especially with the additional soil soaking with foliars, and the amendments made.
originally, it was defined as a possibility of making another equal treatment at a certain period after transplant, precisely aiming to cover for possible high amount rainfalls, and secondary ( postponed ) activation of infected residues, but it is absolutelly my experience that there is no need for it.

btw, ''integral ag'' could be defined as ''making the max. out of min. chemistry, by the means of making the max. out of max. organics ( ''use the nature to create a better nature'' ), and doing it at such growth periods ( early ) which absolutely minimise any effects that the chemistry could potentially have''.
that's what i'd like you to understand

and finally, if you want my honest personal opinion, your experiment has already succeeded.
with the presumption that you didn't deliberately take 2 plants which were already dying at transplant for the control group, you can already see the initial pathogen control there working, and that's basically what you needed to see at this point.
as for the further course, as you said, it's quite a question mark, but i do believe that we should be seeing a period of quite a normal growth there, which will be a mayor success for you, or at least a promising fact.

[z_willus_d]

Six pics of the plants (left to right as before), one per plant.

I'll try to keep a record everyday or other, so we can track progress.

BTW, that CP-AL cross is actually an CP-TJ. That's a Thomas Jefferson. I got my presidents mixed up.


BTW, those beneficial bacteria aren't exactly cheap here. The Biota-max "pill" I used is ~$6 a pop, but that's just one use (maybe two if you split it). I have some others, but they are heavy with Mycos, which I thought you were concerned about. If you don't have an issue, I can include one, two or all of the following in my seaweed/fert CPR foliars:

• http://www.fungi.com/product-detail/...uble-1-oz.html
• http://naturalindustries.com/commerc...12/aglabel.pdf
• http://www.plant-success.com/index.p...orrhizae.html#

That's about all I have access to right now. I need to purchase some more worm-castings for that tea step. They run about $20 a bag.


Thanks for thinking of the pocketbook.
-naysen

[Paradajz]

Originally Posted by z_willus_d

Six pics of the plants (left to right as before), one per plant.

I'll try to keep a record everyday or other, so we can track progress.

BTW, that CP-AL cross is actually an CP-TJ. That's a Thomas Jefferson. I got my presidents mixed up.


BTW, those beneficial bacteria aren't exactly cheap here. The Biota-max "pill" I used is ~$6 a pop, but that's just one use (maybe two if you split it). I have some others, but they are heavy with Mycos, which I thought you were concerned about. If you don't have an issue, I can include one, two or all of the following in my seaweed/fert CPR foliars:

• http://www.fungi.com/product-detail/...uble-1-oz.html
• http://naturalindustries.com/commerc...12/aglabel.pdf
• http://www.plant-success.com/index.p...orrhizae.html#

That's about all I have access to right now. I need to purchase some more worm-castings for that tea step. They run about $20 a bag.


Thanks for thinking of the pocketbook.
-naysen

ok.

no trouble with using mycos as a foliar:
* the bacteria generally better because it has 2 effects that way: 1) it will feed the plant with some of the auxins ( growth stimulators ) and other similar stuff it constantly produces in it's life cycle; 2) it will directly activate the systemic resistance of the plants and get them to the next level of fighting capability.
* mycos will do the same with systemic resistance activation.
* my concerns about mycos mostly related to drench applications and their constant messing with Ph values, although it might be that i'm making a wrongfull accusation there

you don't have to apply the worm- castings in III then, just enlarge the fert dilution rate at 50% of the recommended dose in the mixture.

[Paradajz]

hi again.

while i'm still a bit on a ''free ride'' with my time ( which will end in a couple of days unfortunatelly ), i want to explain some other stuff about your garden, which is both directly connected to the experiment and also of high general importance, and i didn't have the time to explain earlier, although the whole amendment process you did was made with high consideration of those ( unexplained ) factors.

1. soil
we talked about it plenty, not much to add, but you need to be aware of some facts clearly visible there:
* sands/peat/forrest soil combinations + amendments you made there are generally ok, but the resulting soil structure is hard to work with. water preserving of such structures, drainage ability, and finally the way it will influence the nutrients uptake ( and the whole growing process ) are a bit specific. and, please note, i'm not saying it's bad or something, just that it's quite a specific soil with a specific structure and you should be aware that not all of the ''common rules'' of standard gardening procedures can be fully applyed there. simply, organic content is absolutely sufficient, but it's combination with sand is not that easy to manage. a good old brown/reddish, dusty, clayish dirt, up to a 30% total rate, on the expence of sand, was just ideal as an addition there.
altogether, i estimate it a quality soil, with absence of any chemical polution ( in the situation given, with even a low grade chemical polution, you would be whitnessing such an iron deficiency that you couldn't believe it ), but very specific for a quality management because of it's highly diverse components structure, with some excess of sands, and alkaline compounds being applied slightly high.
2. water
Ph is just one of the factors, much more to check to see what's exactly the situation there. it's very very high on Ph values and you definitely need to check why. it could be a ''normal'', not a significant cause, but it could also be caused by some uncomfortable tings.
therefore, along with soil analysis you definitely need that water analysed. what basically interests you is where that Ph comes from.
consequently, salinity, with levels of sodium, chlorides, calcium, magnesium, iron, carbonates, bicarbonates, sulphates ( with exactly such an order of importance ) should be checked.
further more, any presence of borron, both in the soil and water, should be known to you. e.g., if higly present in the soil ( which is just the oposite of the basic nature- standard that it should be the ''most missing'' element of all ) it usually suggests that there is something happening with the water as the common cause.

this is it for starters.
please just understand, i'm not trying to make you do some ''highly scientific, hugely high costs'' stuff for a purpose of having a plain home garden here.
it's just that some of those facts may possibly be quite significant to you, regarding not only your garden, but also your and your family's health on the long run, and i find it better to have those things cleared out, just so you could procceed enjoying your gardening peacefully. again, i don't think there is anything really wrong there, but it's easier when you confirm it.
and it will definitelly have mayor influence for imporving your gardening results.

as for the experiment procedure, i have ''calculated'' those factors in to the best of my knowledge and possibilities with the amendments given, it should be ok for that part.

talk soon, br.

[Paradajz]

also,

a question which could be of some use for your future actions, is a plant named Urtica dioica ( ''Nettle'' should be the correct translation i hope ) available to you?

asking because this one also often comes very handy to a gardener, in plenty aspects.
but i mostly ask because i don't know anything about the availability of such and similar stuff in your country.
e.g., nettle is something that any Montenegrin fellow could collect tons of, in a day, and it would be very clean, healthy and unpoluted. on the other hand, brassicas are generally not that available to our home gardeners ( neither seeds nor seedlings for juncea for example ), and that's why a straw mulch is commonly included to the ''cooking'' procedure- straw is a very common and very cheap thing here.
on the other hand, if i understod correctly, brassicas are quite available to you there, in convenient terms? if so, forget the straw mulch, brassicas are a far more efficient choice.

nettle on the other side has significant capacities in fighting aphids, and feeding your plants with N ( in a good form of it ), iron and potassium, and some flavonides which significantly help plants resistance system.

sorry, a question not dirrectly connected to the experiment, or the subject of your thread, just preparing some possible suggestions for you there.

[z_willus_d]

Originally Posted by Paradajz

also,

a question which could be of some use for your future actions, is a plant named Urtica dioica ( ''Nettle'' should be the correct translation i hope ) available to you?

asking because this one also often comes very handy to a gardener, in plenty aspects.
but i mostly ask because i don't know anything about the availability of such and similar stuff in your country.
e.g., nettle is something that any Montenegrin fellow could collect tons of, in a day, and it would be very clean, healthy and unpoluted. on the other hand, brassicas are generally not that available to our home gardeners ( neither seeds nor seedlings for juncea for example ), and that's why a straw mulch is commonly included to the ''cooking'' procedure- straw is a very common and very cheap thing here.
on the other hand, if i understod correctly, brassicas are quite available to you there, in convenient terms? if so, forget the straw mulch, brassicas are a far more efficient choice.

nettle on the other side has significant capacities in fighting aphids, and feeding your plants with N ( in a good form of it ), iron and potassium, and some flavonides which significantly help plants resistance system.

sorry, a question not dirrectly connected to the experiment, or the subject of your thread, just preparing some possible suggestions for you there.

Hi Ivan, Stinging Nettle, yes we have that here. I see it mostly in areas that are less hot/dry and more moist, maybe up in the pacific northwest. In any event, seeds for that "weed" are available. I'm not sure I want to be working with something that aims to puncture me with every touch, but it might be worth adding to the rotation.

Do you guys use it as a cover-crop during the off-season (doesn't it die back during the winter?), or is it co-planted with the main crops as a kind of buffer? I'm not sure how it would be integrated into the "cooking" phase. Actually for that matter I'm not certain how you use would use broccoli instead of hay there. I'm visualizing a bunch of dead broccoli leaves covering the ground in place of several inches of hay over the black plastic wrap. Or do you grow the broccoli as a cover crop live over the "cooking" manure and wrap? I'm guessing the former. Maybe you till it in with the manure and just leave the black wrap there.

I appreciate the additional background on the soil and water theory. I chose my soil components with purpose, and mainly based on input I received from various "experts" here on the forum. I needed something I could get in bulk that would be suitable for tomato growing. In retrospect, I believe I went to heavy on the sand component (especially on my two older beds), and this was outside of the recommendations of those experts. I posted a link a while back in this thread about my bed and soil-filling process.

My goal will be to increase or at least maintain the organic components of the soil (and maintain pH) overtime. I will not add more sand or perlite etc. The soil is already extremely high draining. I'm open to any and all suggestions you have and the reasoning behind those suggestions.

Thanks,
Naysen