Microbe Organics





All photos are copywrited to Tim Wilson and may only be used with written permission.

Please refresh your browser when returning to see updates .



Contact: thegoodjob@hotmail.com Contents>





Microbe Organics;

Microbe Organics? What the heck is this?; You ask. It is the name I chose to describe my approach to the understanding and interpretation of microbial based soil and plant amendments currently evolving in horticultural practices throughout the world. Two such practices which you may have heard of or use yourself are Compost Tea and EM (Effective Microorganisms {EMRO USA} or Beneficial and Effective Microorganisms{SCD}; 2 Brand Names). I will be focusing to begin with on the practical analysis and use of Compost Tea. CiliateMicrobe Organics? What the heck is this?; You ask. It is the name I chose to describe my approach to the understanding and interpretation of microbial based soil and plant amendments currently evolving in horticultural practices throughout the world. Two such practices which you may have heard of or use yourself are Compost Tea and EM (Effective Microorganisms {EMRO USA} or Beneficial and Effective Microorganisms{SCD}; 2 Brand Names). I will be focusing to begin with on the practical analysis and use of Compost Tea.

I am not an expert in this field of biology, in fact I am a lifelong student and will defer to the far superior overall knowledge of several experts in microbial based amendments, however what I have to offer is a translation or simplification of many of the terms, functions and observations surrounding this science. The reason I am able to do this is mostly due to my ‘I have to see it to believe it or comprehend it’ attitude. When I first started researching microbial based agriculture about six years ago I set up a small microscope laboratory enabling me to observe the microorganisms present in Compost Tea, microbial fermentations (e.g. EM), compost and soil. I set up an interface between a video camera, microscope and computer thus allowing me to capture real time video which has culminated thus far in the production of my first DVD.





Using This Page: I have a dislike for websites where one must wait for pages to load (especially true for limited Internet connections) so I have placed all the information on one page for now. You may access all subject headings via the links in the Contents section below and some subjects have subheadings which are also linked. Some topics may seem mis-ordered but you may always find something instantly by clicking 'Back to Contents' So click away.



Contents:



Articles & Resources;



What Is Compost Tea

More On Compost Tea (2013)

Like the science which this growing (pun intended) phenomenon is based upon, this website will evolve over time. I will post links to sources of knowledge, supplies and practical solutions as I acquire permission to do so and as I learn of them. As I gain more skill managing this site I hope to post video footage of observations and experiments. Therefore keep checking back for updates.



Stuff I am Selling;



Please note that as of the end of May, 2017 KIS Farms/Organics

https://www.kisorganics.com

has taken over airlift brewer sales. You may continue getting downloads

here.



Video Downloads;





Compost Tea Makers DIY Plans; Any problems with download; thegoodjob@hotmail.com

Please be aware these plans are designed to be used with a variety of sized pipe and parts.

It is not an exact scaled replication of the commercial Microbulator which is much more expensive to build.



Discontinued but Interesting

More Helpful Info & Ramblings;







The Logical Gardener

Donations

Over the years many visitors to my page have asked how they can donate.

I now have a project I need help with. I really need help as it looks like the conversions will amount to $40,000.00.

I need to outfit a motorhome as a mobile lab and have a wheelchair lift and hospital bed nstalled. I have had to turn down several opportunities

to help in research and projects because I cannot stay in a regular hotel bed. Help with fuel costs appreciated.

Please follow this link if you wish to make a donation; https://www.youcaring.com/tim-wilson-652568



What is Compost Tea?

Very simply stated Compost Tea is a water-based environment wherein beneficial microorganisms are extracted from compost or vermicompost (worm compost) and multiplied by the millions and billions. Some form of agitation breaks the microbes free from the compost and they multiply because food, like black strap molasses, fish hydrolysate, kelp meal, etc. has been added to the water, which at least one type of microbe digests. When one or more type of microbe begins to multiply in response to the food, other microbes respond to this growth and begin to consume these initial microbes and multiply in turn and so on and so on. For example the initial microbes are usually bacteria which are food for protozoa so the protozoa multiply in response to the bacteria.



The end result is a functional feeding cycle or microbial nutrient cycle. I refer to this as a functional microbial consortia. This develops over a period of 12 to 72 hours or more and is then applied to the soil and plants. In the soil there are a number of organisms which function in basically the same nutrient cycle and zone. Once again, simply stated, there are substances released from the roots of plants which feed bacteria (& archaea), again the bacteria/archaea become prey to the protozoa and the protozoa excrete substances which are available to the roots as nutrients (e.g. nitrogen) thus creating a feeding cycle.



Other compost/soil microorganisms of great importance are fungi. Fungal hyphae, are long branching strands which grow through the soil and serve to; bind soil aggregates together, help retain moisture, store certain nutrients, provide a source of food to certain other microbes, provide pathways for nutrient and moisture delivery, decompose organic material and displace disease causing fungi. There are also other types of fungi which do not grow (to my knowledge) in compost or Compost Tea which form a direct symbiotic nutrient exchange relationship with roots.



This sort of fungi is called mycorrhizal fungi and there are many different species. The major microorganisms at work in Compost Tea are bacteria, protozoa (flagellates, ciliates and amoebae) and fungal hyphae if present in your compost. It is best to have a wide diversity of each of these microbes present. There are higher order organisms like nematodes found in compost and soil and occasionally these are extracted into Compost Tea but they do not grow nor multiply in the tea. Of course in the soil there are many other contributors to the nutrient cycle, like insects, earthworms and other animals. In its totality this is often referred to as the soil food web.



All life is in a symbiotic nutrient cycle even down to the microorganisms contained in our gut that assist us to digest certain foods. Life, consumption, excrement, death, decomposition, life. You are what you eat and the same applies to plants.





It has been discovered that aerated Compost Tea helps to ensure the multiplication of mostly aerobic microbes which are more desirable in this application. Plus the aeration provides the agitation necessary to dislodge the microbes from the compost. Therefore most Compost Tea machines or brewers, as they are commonly known, involve the introduction of air into the water and compost.





Many Compost Tea users and producers have begun examining their brews with microscopes to see the microbes present. This ensures that they have the desired microbes in the right numbers and diversity prior to applying the tea to soil and plants. I am fairly hopeful if not certain that in the future when someone purchases a Compost Tea brewer that the kit will include a microscope. It is the identification of what is going on in this tiny universe where I find my calling.





Fungal Hyphae (brightfield)



More on Compost Tea (2013)

I've decided to post this additional information in response to many inquiries I've had. You will find much of it redundant but better too much than too little, at least in this case.



In my opinion compost tea is poorly named. It is not something one drinks and it is not created by steeping in boiled water as is tea. Aerated compost tea making is an active process which extracts microorganisms (breaks them loose from binding spots) into aerated water and provides them with a food source (foodstock) which causes them to multiply.



A more apt name would be a microbe multiplier and the process is almost identical to a laboratory device known as a bioreactor. Actually we have attempted a name shift by calling our new 12 gallon device an airlift [vortex] bioreactor. This, in my opinion, is a more descriptive term for what is going on but it looks like the term compost tea is going to stick.



If one is using quality compost or vermicompost (hereinafter referred to as [vermi]compost), an efficient ACT maker with sufficient aeration and the correct amount of foodstock, like black strap molasses, it is all about timing and to an extent temperature.



One must, of course use water which is free of chlorine/chloramines. This is easily done by putting a bit of molasses, ascorbic acid or a bit of [vermi]compost in ahead of time, which neutralizes these oxidizers.



The first microbes to begin dividing and growing in ACT are bacteria/archaea and fungi (if present in the [vermi]compost). The fungi grows out rapidly as fungal hyphae and is often attached to pieces of organic matter free floating.



The bacteria/archaea can divide every 20 minutes and appear as moving (motile) or stationary (non-motile) dots, rods and long strands. Usually these organisms are seen in large volume by the 18 hour to 24 hour period of the process, which for simplicity’s sake we’ll call a brew (since that is the term which has been colloquially applied).



In response to the population explosion of bacteria/archaea we have a congruent reactive increase in the protozoa population beginning around the 24 hour period. The usual type of protozoa which we see, given an efficient brewer is flagellates, however sometimes there will also be naked amoebae. The third type of protozoa, which we do not wish to see a ton of, are ciliates, as they can indicate the presence of anaerobic bacteria. The flagellate population can double every 2 hours so usually at the 36 hour period we have a sufficient diversity of microorganisms to call the brew finished and apply it to the soil and plants.



A good temperature range is usually 65 to 75 F but unless really cold the timing estimate is quite reliable.





Why use compost tea?



The main reasons for using compost tea are ;



1/ to provide a quick nutrient kick to the rhizosphere. This works mainly because as the flagellates (protozoa) consume the *bacteria/archaea they utilize only 10 to 40% of the energy intake for their sustenance and the remaining 60 to 90% is expelled as ionic form nutrient which is directly bio-available to the roots of the plants. This is known as ‘the microbial nutrient loop (cycle)’.



2/ to begin or continue an inoculation of the soil with a microbial population. Many of these microorganisms will go dormant until called upon later to fulfill their purpose but many of them will grow and flourish, finding their station in the hierarchical positioning of microbes in a living soil. Some, like the fungi will grow out through the soil binding aggregates together, assisting with air and moisture retention, providing pathways for bacteria/archaea, providing a food source for various microorganisms and degrading organic matter to a point where it is available for other organisms.



Within a very diverse ACT there will be free living nitrogen fixers, anti-pathogens and yes a few of the anaerobic and facultative anaerobes which serve their positive role in a living soil.



3/ to potentially provide the microorganisms which may assist in protecting plants from pathogens.



4/ because it allows the use of less [vermi]compost over a given area. There is nothing wrong with using only [vermi]compost instead of ACT if you have that much. ACT just allows you to use less [vermi]compost and it accelerates the microbial process.



*Note; I use the term bacteria/archaea because without complex testing it is not possible to visually tell the two apart. Recent research has revealed that archaea are commonly found in soil worldwide and have just as an important function in the microbial nutrient cycle as bacteria.



Recipes and Technique ;



In case I have not been clear enough above, our goal in making ACT is to extract, multiply and grow mostly aerobic microorganisms in as large a diversity as possible and inclusive of three basic groups; bacteria/archaea, protozoa [flagellates & naked amoebae] and fungi. (Some [vermi]compost will contain rotifers which are extracted into ACT. These cycle nutrients in similar fashion to protozoa and are a bonus if present.)



Making ACT is not about putting in ingredients which directly benefit the plants. The foodstocks used are strictly to feed or benefit the microorganisms which in turn benefit the plants.



When I jumped on the compost tea bandwagon years back I utilized the whole gambit of ingredients recommended by the current (at that time) supposed authorities. These ingredients or foodstocks included, humic acid, kelp meal, black strap molasses, baby oatmeal (oat flour), fish hydrolysate, alfalfa meal, etc. We used variations of these ingredients in our 1200 gallon ACT maker on our farm and microscopic observation showed success.



I also experimented with using some rock/clay powders as ingredients and observed differences in the microbial make up which had positive results applied to the soil and plants. The types used were mostly soft rock phosphate and pyrophyllite.



Along the line somewhere we left humic acid out of a brew and noticed an increase in microbial numbers so we stopped using it ourselves but, possibly irresponsibly, I continued to recommend it because the ‘bigwigs’ did so. It was not until I devised a method to test each foodstock independently that I began to change my tune and begin to go against the grain of the contemporary experts.



By testing some ingredients independently in a liquid I observed;



1/ that humic acid in varying dilutions does not feed any sort of microscopically visible microbe. I observed that it actually suppresses microbial division and growth. This was confirmed by joint testing with Keep It Simple Inc. (KIS) in the Seattle area. We tested two of the most effective and popular brands. I cannot say definitively that all brands of humic acid will have similar suppressive effects in a liquid (ACT) but it is enough for me to discontinue using it or recommending it as an ACT foodstock. Please note that this does not mean that it is not good to use on/in soil….just not ACT.



2/ that kelp meal initially delays all microbial development in a liquid but does feed fungi and bacteria/archaea following 24 hours. If too much is used the effects are suppressive. From this I garnered that it should be used very sparingly and one must be prepared to brew a little longer if using this foodstock. Again, this does not mean that kelp meal is not a good thing to use in/on soil. It definitely is!



3/ black strap molasses (BSM) feeds both bacteria/archaea and fungi equally well contrary to what the A(A)CT aficionados were saying. The story was that BSM feeds only bacteria. This led to all sorts of misconceptions, even including ones made by USDA and Canada Agriculture scientists who declared that using molasses in ACT could lead to e-coli contamination. It is utter nonsense. Besides the testing I have done and ratifying assays carried out by KIS, it is common knowledge amongst many mycologists like Paul Stamets that BSM grows out fungal hyphae just fine.



4/ fish hydrolysate feeds both fungi and bacteria/archaea again contrary to the story at the time that it is mainly a fungal food. (I’m glad to see that story has now changed)



5/ alfalfa meal is also a decent all round foodstock which sometimes introduces protozoa cysts to the ACT. KIS has done more testing on this than I have.





The result of all this is that my attitude towards recipes for ACT has really evolved over the years with a trend towards the more simple. I know that there are a lot of people who place importance on creating a bacterial or fungal dominant ACT. At one time I myself was so influenced, however, the more I’ve learned and unlearned about living soil and a functioning microbial population interacting with plants, the more I’ve been led to allow the soil and plants to decide which microbes are actively needed by the rhizosphere team. What this means is that 9 times out of 10 I’m trying to create a balanced ACT with a decent ratio of the three basic microbial groups. When this hits the soil, some will go dormant to wake up later and some will be immediately put into action at the direction of the needs of the soil and plants.



The exceptions to this may be if I am attempting to battle a particular pathogen and want to attack it with a heavy fungal or bacterial (or a combo) ACT. In these situations some tweaking of recipes and timing can be helpful. If attempting these variations, a microscope is really the only way to confirm the desired microbial population. I have outlined some recipes which may trend towards a certain microbial group (or combo) or may assist with certain pathogens.



Recipes ;



Through a plethora of trial and error brewing with a dissolved oxygen meter at hand we determined that a pretty reliable volume of [vermi]compost to use is 2.38% by volume of water used up to around a 250 gallon brewer.



So if you have 5 gallons you multiply that by 2.38% to get the amount of [vermi]compost to use. Then you can go to; http://www.onlineconversion.com/volume.htm and convert it into any unit of measure which is convenient. In my opinion measuring [vermi]compost by weight is inaccurate because of varying moisture content.



Anyway to proceed we have;



5 x 2.38% = 0.119 of a gallon = 0.476 of a quart = 0.450 of a liter

= 450.5 milliliters [450 rounded] = 1.904 cups [2 cups rounded] - Your choice



Likewise with the use of black strap molasses, a percentage of 0.50% is a good median amount to use.



These two ingredients, perhaps surprisingly, comprise the total of inputs in most of our brews these days. This simple recipe, if using an efficient ACT maker and good quality [vermi]compost results in a microbial population made up of the important three groups. This is the only recipe used to date, in all the videos on my Youtube channel ‘Microbe Organics’



To get these three groups the ACT maker should be run for 36 to 42 hours. The ideal temperature range is 65 to 72 Fahrenheit (18 to 22 Celsius), however a little cooler or warmer is okay. I’ve had pretty equivalent results with ambient temperatures around 100 F (38 C) and as cool as 50 F (10 C).



To spill a small secret, I’ve been pre-feeding or pre-activating [vermi]compost which is not so fresh by mixing in a small amount of wheat bran (livestock store or bulk foods department grocery store) and moistening with very diluted black strap molasses, loosely covered with cloth or paper towel 24 hours ahead of brew. (approximate ratios, wheat bran 1:30 [vermi]compost & BSM 1:300 water).



This has, so far resulted in (most of the time) attaining the desired microbial population at 24 hours brew time rather than the usual 36 to 42 hours.



Now for some of my other recipes ;



A recipe for a balanced nutrient cycling ACT which many growers claim to have great success with is;



[vermi]compost – 2.38%



unsulphured pure black strap molasses - 0.50% [but you can use a maximum 0.75%]



fish hydrolysate (high quality) - 0.063%

Do not use chemically deodorized liquid fish!



kelp meal - 0.25% max. [Less is more!]

NOTE: This is a maximum amount of kelp and you can experiment using less. This is using regular grade kelp meal for livestock. If you have soluble kelp, I recommend using smaller amounts. As noted earlier kelp meal can initially delay bacterial multiplication and fungal growth in ACT.



soft rock phosphate granules/powder - 0.063% Consider this optional. In the past 2 years I’ve become more aware of the possibility of polonium 210 and lead content in soft rock phosphate which is radioactive. This varies depending on how it was mined and where. If you wish to use this in ACT check all available data. Look for heavy metal testing

We grind up the granules into a powder with a coffee grinder



The brew time should average around 36 hours and no longer than 48 hours. If you have a microscope then stop when the microbes desired are observed. Otherwise smell for the foodstocks being used up, possible rank odor (indicating anaerobes) and a positive earthy or mushroom-like aroma.



Fungal Brew ;

If you want a brew which is more fungal increase the amount of fish hydrolysate to around 0.19% and you may wish to decrease the amount of molasses used so there is not a foodstock overload. Include a pinch of alfalfa meal, not using more than 0.25%. It is important to not overload a brew with foodstocks, otherwise you can easily compromise the dissolved oxygen capacity of the unit. Most importantly discontinue brewing around 18 to 20 hours. Of course if you have a microscope you can judge that for yourself.

Also, if you do not have fungi in your [vermi]compost, you won’t have it magically appear in your ACT.



A Few Extras;



I sometimes include a pinch or handful [depending on brewer size] of sphagnum peatmoss in a brew. Depending on where the peatmoss was harvested, it will contribute a set of microbes somewhat similar to that derived from the ‘Alaska’ humus or humisoil products on the market. It is a least a better bang for your buck and at best a trifle better quality-wise.



I’ve had inconsistent success battling powdery mildew by including soft rock phosphate and pyrophyllite clay powder, both at 0.063% in a 24 hour brew with horse manure fed vermicompost, BSM and fish hydrolysate. I have observed a very tiny peanut shaped bacteria/archaea in vast numbers with this recipe. In the ACT they are very active and appear to feed on yeast. This has led me to hypothesize that they ‘might’ be devouring powdery mildew but at this point that is pure conjecture.



Replacement for Molasses:



I’m continually getting this question. What can I use as a replacement for molasses?

Many people assume that molasses is just sugar and propose using various forms of sugar in its stead. This may actually work to some extent, however black strap molasses is a complex carbohydrate bearing lots of minerals and nutrients plus it is a powerful antioxidant. [some nutrient companies will happily sell you a bottle of carbo this or carbo that when it is actually just molasses, in some cases watered down]



I’m not saying there are not other foodstocks which can be used to feed bacteria/archaea and fungi. Heck, you can grow out some bacteria with potato water or rice water.



What I am saying is that black strap molasses works for the simple process of multiplying bacteria/archaea & fungi so why fret about using something else? If you are somewhere that you cannot get any, then by all means try something different or if you have a scope, go ahead and experiment.



I guess if I was stuck without molasses, I’d try wheat bran.



Mesh Bag or Free Suspension:



This is another decision when making ACT or designing an ACT maker. Do I throw the [vermi]compost into the water and let it float around or do I put it in a mesh extractor bag of some kind?



There are pros for both. Generally one gets a higher density of microorganisms if you just dump all your ingredients into the aerated, agitated water. I have observed over and over microscopically that this is the case. If you are using this method with an ACT design which circulates the water through a pipe like an airlift be aware that big chunks will plug up the pipe. Use fine [vermi]compost for this.



ACT made this way is most appropriate for applying to your soil but what if one wishes to spray it onto leaves? Perhaps you are trying to combat powdery mildew. Perhaps you want to run your ACT through an irrigation system.



This is when you are perhaps going to consider using a mesh bag. I researched many different mesh openings and materials before concluding that a 400 micron monofilament nylon mesh is the best for an extractor bag. This is also the size recommended by SFI. This is what we provide with our 50 gallon airlift brewer (as an optional configuration).



If you cannot find the perfect 400 micron mesh bag, don’t sweat it. Just get a paint strainer from the hardware store and tie it off with the ingredients and airline in it. Please do not use nylon socks/stockings. These usually have too small a mesh size to extract fungal hyphae (unless they are recycled from your 400 pound grandmother). Many people argue for using these by saying ‘hey man how big do ya think bacteria are?’ My reply to that is ‘hey man, bacteria is only one component of ACT’ What about the protozoa besides the fungi already mentioned?



If one does use a mesh extractor it is essential to either use a smaller (e.g. 5 gal) ACT maker which has enough agitation to make that bag dance or to use an air (diffuser) input into the bag.



If you have a cone bottom airlift bioreactor and you wish to use a mesh extractor, I recommend using a separate air pump to supply the bag.



I prefer to use a diffuser in the bag but many just use an open airline. I’m a believer in using what you have (except for chemicals). If you use a mesh bag you do not need to worry about a few large chunks. Many people make good quality ACT this way.



Filtering ;



There is another option. Say you have an airlift vortex ACT bioreactor but to run it with a mesh bag would be kinda silly. You want to run it through a sprayer or irrigation set up. If your unit has a drain valve/spout, then just put a pail under it with a piece of mesh tied across the top. For this we use nylon window screen (800 to 1000 microns mesh size). Because some residue will block the passage we do not want to use 400 microns for this. Open the valve and as organic matter builds up on the screen scoop it off into another bucket. This prevents a build up which will block microbes but also allows you to save the ones that do get blocked, along with the organic matter for topdressing your soil or throwing into the compost pile. You can obviously see why a filter internal to a pipe or hose just won’t work.



Okay, I know that sounds like work. There is another way…the way we do it. Just empty out your ACT maker into the pail, use a mesh bag (800 to 1000 microns) with a sump pump dropped into it, hook the sump pump to a hose. There is your sprayer or waterer or irrigation hookup. When we don’t care about getting residue on leaf surfaces, like our corn or the lawn, we use a trash sump pump with no bag and a thumb over the end of the hose.



Frequency of Use;



You can use ACT as much as you wish. We often used it almost every watering. Just don’t waterlog your soil.



A friend of mine who used actual living microbial soil (ALMS) as opposed to truly living soil (TLO)…hehe, um used ACT for 7 years to beat back an erwinia infection caused by using chemicals in his one acre garden. The infection was gone in the first year but he liked the increased quality so much that he built a 5000 gallon ACT maker (venturi) and used it through his irrigation system. In the 8th and 9th years he only used it once as the microbial population was so well established and his soil had matured to the point where it was no longer necessary



Dilution ;



This is another question I get all the time. How much should I dilute my ACT?

Now this is a difficult question to answer. I believe that SFI has stated that 20 gallons can be diluted to do one acre. In my opinion, this is stretching it but is within the realm of possibilities.



When diluting ACT it is not the same as diluting fish hydrolysate or molasses or (saints forbid) a liquid fertilizer. The water is not ‘weakening’ a solution so much as acting as a carrier for the microbes which you have multiplied. Logically though, if you do not have a ‘tea’ very dense with microorganisms, adding it to water will make it even less dense. So your 5 gallon ACT diluted down enough to cover the quarter acre is still going to get the microbes out there but in much lower numbers.



When we use ACT on our farm our usual practice is to apply it non-diluted, followed by irrigation water if necessary. When we were on the larger farm, we used a 1200 gallon multi-airlift brewer and pumped it straight into the irrigation system, then followed by water. We found that this was enough to do our greenhouse (20 x 64) and a quarter (approx. 750 sq. ft) of our outside beds. A total of just over 2,000 sq. ft. One acre is over 40,000 square feet.



For curiosity (on our little farm where we are now) we diluted 12 gallons of ‘tea’ into 40 gallons of water prior to use, this past season. I looked at it under the microscope before and after and although the microbes survived, they were indeed much more widely dispersed.



I guess the moral of the story is that you can dilute your ACT if you so wish but I think it is better applied non-diluted, followed by water ‘only if necessary’.



Adding Ingredients to a Finished Brew;



As I’ve mentioned we used to make 1200 gallon batches of ACT which we applied on our farm garden beds through an irrigation system. We used the same tank if we wanted to apply some other diluted soil amendment or fertilizer, like fish hydrolysate, molasses (occasionally) or humic acid.



I had read that many growers and landscapers were adding some of these amendments into their ACT just before applying and I believe this process was endorsed by SFI. Anyway we decided to try saving some time and money and dumped 5 gallons of fish hydrolysate into a 1200 gallon batch to pump out. I had, as usual examined the finished brew microscopically and out of curiosity took another sample after mixing in the fish hydrolysate. To my astonishment and dismay I had wiped out or put to sleep almost half of the microorganisms. This was the last time we did this.



We always apply amendments separately from ACT and this is what I recommend unless using the most minuscule amounts. I surmise that adding anything to a finished brew can have similar negative results. The amount of FH we used was 0.4%. If you have a microscope, go ahead and experiment.





Review of Some Common Myths; [In no particular order]



1/ Small bubbles destroy fungal hyphae or other microbes.



This is utter nonsense. The bubbles/air would need to be super compressed to harm any microorganisms.



2/ Molasses should not be used or only feeds bacteria.



Black strap molasses (BSM) is a complex sugar/carbohydrate and feeds bacteria/archaea and fungi equally well.



3/ Fungal hyphae is difficult to grow in ACT.



If you have fungi in your [vermi]compost and have a decent brewer design and use 0.50% BSM it will grow out in the first 15 to 20 hours along with bacteria.



4/ You can have too much air/agitation in a compost tea maker.



This would only be true to the extreme...if your water was jumping out everywhere. If a salesperson is telling you microbes need gentle bubbling, they do not know what they are talking about.



5/ One can make good ACT with an aquarium pump in 5 gallons of water.



We did almost a year straight of research (at a cost of thousands of dollars) building almost every conceivable compost tea brewer design and size, ranging from 1 to 1200 gallons. These included every type itemized on my webpage in the design section and more. We measured the dissolved oxygen (DO2) religiously at all hours of day and night, eliminating configurations which failed to maintain the DO2 at or above 6 PPM. This is close to the minimum level required to support aerobic organisms.



The outcome of this research was, the estimation, that the minimum flow required from an air pump to make compost tea while maintaining the DO2 at 6 PPM, is 0.05 CFM per gallon while the optimum flow is 0.08 CFM per gallon or greater. (the only exception was when utilizing airlifts)



This means that most aquarium pumps will not work with a 5 gallon ACT maker, no matter what a couple of guys from Texas say. Two gallons, perhaps.



6/ Nematodes are a common microbe in ACT.



I’ve received many emails from folks distraught over the fact that they found no nematodes in their ACT or that they had very few. This is normal. Unless you happen to have a species of nematode which is an aquatic dweller, (rare in compost wouldn’t you think) you are very unlikely to have many surviving in ACT over 4 or 5 hours old. Why? Because they drown. (according to those who raise and sell them) A few will survive, which accounts for some making it to the end. Even companies which sell nematodes instruct customers to not leave them in the distribution water more than two hours.



I’m pretty sure that this myth originated with SFI but even they (Dr. Ingham) have now changed their tune and say ACT is not a good environment for nematodes.



7/ You can tell that your ACT is finished or ready to use when it forms a head of foam.



More bunk! But this does have a bit of foundational truth. Foam can be formed by proteins in the water created by microbial activity, however this is not a reliable indicator. Foam can also be created by saponins (aloe vera, alfalfa, yucca) or just by adding molasses or by worms which might have made it in there. I have examined very foamy ACT microscopically which was practically devoid of microbes and ACT with no foam at all which has been swarming with microbial activity.



The best bet to tell when ACT is finished is to use it between 24 and 40 hours, smell it to make sure it has not gone anaerobic (you’ll know) and that most of the foods you added have been consumed. It should smell earthy or somewhat like mushrooms.



I’m not sure how this myth got started but it sure took off.





Organic Growing from a Microbial Perspective



** Addendum to Organic Growing From a Microbial Perspective



What about NPK in Natural Growing?

Some References;

Protozoa and plant growth: 2003;

the microbial loop in soil revisited; Michael Bonkowski;

Rhizosphere Ecology Group, Institut für Zoologie, Technische Universität Darmstadt,

Darmstadt, Germany



Soil microbial loop and nutrient uptake by plants: a test

using a coupled C:N model of plant–microbial interactions

Xavier Raynaud Jean-Christophe Lata

Paul W. Leadley

Plant Soil

DOI 10.1007/s11104-006-9003-9



The mycorrhiza helper bacteria revisited; 2007 P. Frey-Klett, J. Garbaye and M. Tarkka

Interactions Arbres/Micro-organismes, Champenoux, France;

UFZ-Department of Soil Ecology, Helmholz Centre for Environmental

Research, Halle, Germany



Modern Soil Microbiology; 2nd edition 2007 - Chapter 6 - Protozoa and Other Protista in Soil

Marianne Clarholm, Michael Bonkowski, and Bryan Griffiths



Soil protozoa: an under-researched microbial group gaining momentum

Marianne Clarholm

Department of Forest Mycology and Pathology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Box 7026, S-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden

Soil Biology & Biochemistry 37 (2005) 811–817



SOIL BIOTA, SOIL SYSTEMS, AND PROCESSES

David C. Coleman

University of Georgia



I created a PDF from a write up I found on the WSU website. I created this without permission but I believe the authors won't mind. I think some may find it helps to clarify the NPK cycle, etc.

NPK Cycle

The link for the write up is http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/eb1722/eb1722.html



How to Apply All This to Horticultural Activities

Using Compost Tea

Living Soil

Methods of Nutrient Assimilation in the Rhizosphere

CEC

Soil Composition?

I’ve listed some references and reading resources below

Root Exudates

Function In The Soil

Common Positively Charged Soil Cations

Some Common Organic Acids

Common Soil Anions

The Role of Predators

Closing Statement

Resources Used



So You Wanna Build A Compost Tea Brewer



Terms:

* = degree(s); CT = compost tea; ACT = aerated compost tea; O2 = oxygen; CO2 = carbon dioxide

DO2 = dissolved oxygen; CFM = cubic feet per minute; PPM = parts per million



There are several ways to make your own compost tea brewer which may not produce the equivalent results to some commercially available models but should provide you with a microbial extract you can apply to your soil and plants. When I first started messing around with brewers, I experimented with what we had lying in our various junk heaps around the farm; cast-offs from buying the wrong part at the plumbing store, outdated irrigation systems, left over pipe, dead vehicles and other modern broken things. Therefore, if you are a junk collector like me, you may already have much of what you require to build a compost tea brewer.



First of all I’d like to make it clear that most aquarium air pumps don’t produce enough air to use in a container larger than 1 gallon when considering making an aerated brewer. So don’t even try the 5 gallon pail with the aquarium pump idea everybody is passing around. You need a minimum 0.05 CFM (cubic feet per minute), open flow of air and an optimum 0.08 CFM per gallon (US) or higher to make aerated compost tea (ACT). ACT should have the DO2 sustained at or above 6 PPM. Generally, aquarium pumps produce around 0.02 to 0.16 CFM. Another generality is that 25 watts of power usually produces 0.75 to 1.0 CFM in diaphragm air pumps. The wattage is usually marked on the pump which will help you figure out the approximate output. I’ll cover more on air pumps later.



In the following I will outline some simple methods of building a variety of compost tea makers. I am not going to discuss anaerobic methods at this time. Later on I may add some sketches.



1/ Stir Method: The cheapest way to make compost tea is the old fashioned way. Just add compost to clean, non-chlorinated, water (above 65 degrees F. recommended) and stir like mad with a clean stick or whathaveyou. I’d recommend using about 3 to 5% compost by volume of water and stir it up as often as you can over an 8 to 12 hour period. Some people do it over a 24 hour period and also add some foodstock like molasses, fish hydrolysate and kelp. You can experiment with different times and ingredients and decide for yourself. If you have a microscope, check it out. When you feel that you have a completed compost tea (CT) you can remove it in several ways. If you have just used a 5 gallon pail you can simply let the particulate matter settle and pour the clearer CT off into watering cans or your sprayer.



Filtering;

You can place a submersible pump into a mesh bag as a screen, drop it into the tank (barrel, pail) and pump the CT out. I use a regular cheap sump pump for this with a 800 to 1000 micron mesh bag (about the size of window screen) See the testing I did;

. You can purchase mesh bags at www.aquaticeco.com or make your own. Likewise, you can filter the CT by placing the same size screen over top of another pail and pour or siphon the CT through the mesh into the other vessel. If residue builds up, stop and clean off the mesh. As residue builds up it stops the passage of the microbes you want. Never run CT through a pipe constrained filter unless essential as part of your irrigation system or spray rig.



2/ The Venturi Method: If you only have a water pump and wish to make a compost tea brewer you can inject air into the water by using a venturi. I have provided a sketch and text showing how to make your own or you can purchase them from http://www.aquaticeco.com . Basically the venturi creates a vacuum which interfaces with the water as it passes by, sucking air and mixing it with the water. It is quite an efficient method of oxygenating water. If you have a really tough water pump which does not clog, like a trash pump, you may run this type of brewer without a mesh extractor bag. Most are going to want to use a mesh extractor, so I recommend TEEing your water line downstream from the venturi with one return line suspended above the water and the other return line going into the mesh extractor. Undoubtedly you will require a valve to regulate the flow so all of the water does not just take the easiest route to the pipe suspended over the water. To build a CT brewer beyond the stir method, some basic knowledge of fitting plumbing parts and pipes together is essential, as well as some engineering instincts. If you are not up for this just save yourself the aggravation and buy a brewer. You may use your imagination for a mesh extractor. For a small brewer of 100 gallons or less, 400 microns is an ideal mesh size. Sometimes for large brewers which may run for several days to establish a functional nutrient cycling consortia a larger mesh size like 800 µm may be a better choice. This is because, as noted above, the mesh may clog up a little over time. A friend of mine successfully brewed CT using this method in a 5000 gallon brewer for many years. He used 2, barrel sized mesh extractor bags sewn from landscape cloth. He ran a return line into each bag, which was ¾ full of compost and tied off each bag tightly around the pipe so nothing could get out the top. These were dropped into the water (with his tractor) and 2 other return pipes pumped in oxygenated water. You can use your imagination to create mesh extractors, dependent on the size of your brewer, the materials at hand and what works for you. You can even create a basket which is partially above the surface to prevent particulate escape. These systems are not great for extracting and growing fungal hyphae but they produce bacteria/archaea and protozoa just fine.



The Gas Exchange;

The reason for suspending the other pipe(s) above the water is so it splashes into the water, breaking the water’s surface tension and additionally pushing more air into the water like a water fall or running river does. The surface tension of water is unique in its toughness; it surpasses that of oil. When I first started experimenting with the venturi method I had the return pipe submerged. The effects were profound. As the water filled with air, generated by the venturi, the water level rose, even over flowing my 1200 gallon tank. At the time, I thought this was a good sign that I was oxygenating the water. Sure, I was getting air in but was not getting the maximum dissolved oxygen possible with my system. Later when I learned that gas exchange means, ‘trading one gas for another’, I realized that the surface tension must be broken for the optimum gas exchange to occur. In this case, we are trading carbon dioxide (CO2) for oxygen (O2) or dissolved oxygen (DO2). CO2 must make way for DO2. In water, CO2 has two ways of being dissipated (of which I am aware). It is either used by organisms, like water plants or it must escape at the surface interface. In a brewer we have no plants and the microbes we are growing use O2 and create CO2, so the CO2 must escape at the surface. Because of the high surface tension of water, if we break the surface, this escape or release is facilitated and we improve the efficiency of our CT brewer. Once we started suspending the return pipe above the surface, providing a hardy splash to break the surface, we had no further over flows and the DO2 increased. NOTE: This principle applies to air driven brewers as well. The better the surface tension is broken, the better the capacity to contain DO2 in the water.



3/ The Vortex Method: There are many who claim that running water in a vortex pattern comprised of multiple mini vortices changes the properties of water beneficially. I remain dubious but open-minded. You can form your own opinion on this subject. One thing a vortex brewer is very good for is ensuring a full circulation of all the water and compost added. There can be no ‘dead zones’; none of the feared anaerobic pockets!! There is no point to considering the use of a mesh extractor with a vortex brewer unless you conceive of some genius method of suspending a mesh container in the center of the flow. Therefore this design is for those of you who don’t mind using compost in free suspension and deal with the particulate matter later. A vortex action in a CT brewer is pretty much dependent on the shape of the vessel used, combined with the direction of the input flow ‘nozzles’ or pipe ends and finally on the ability of the design to empty from a centrally located opening at the bottom of the vessel and the return of the water emptied, to the top of the vessel, to repeat the trip. Shapewise, you must use a round configured vessel. The most efficient shape is a cone shape with a drain hole at the bottom. Rather than go through a complex description of how to construct an air driven vortex brewer, I’m including this Internet link which illustrates a design by Steven Storch which he has offered up to the public;

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/tw/turbo-vortex.htm One with engineering instincts will come up with a variety of ways to modify this design. For example this design can be transposed to a 50 gallon sized barrel with a drain hole placed in the bottom. You would of course need a larger air pump and need to set the barrel up on blocks or legs. These systems produce a full compliment of microbes (bacteria/archaea, protozoa and fungal hyphae).





One can also create a vortex brewer using a water pump to return the water to the top of the vessel again. Very handy if that is what you have laying around in your junk pile. The advanced thinkers will have already mindfully jumped to the idea that including a venturi with a water pump driven vortex is going to increase its efficiency exponentially. Well….at least a lot. Give yourself a gold star, a pat on the back, a chocolate cookie. Bear in mind, that if you use a water pump you will limit fungal hyphae extraction and growth.



Simple Airlift - Vortex: done my way

I've had many requests to provide a simple design for an airlift brewer. This sketch of a simple design cone bottom tank brewer can be applied to just about any size brewer. Just don't start selling them or I'll have to sue you.

If you wish to create a vortex using this design make sure you use a round shaped tank and position the return nozzle (elbow) so it is directional to the flow desired. This can be reversed by twisting the elbow and tweaked by using a short length of pipe as an extension. I'll try to post some photos shortly.





4/ Bubble Blowers; There are 2 basic styles of commercial bubble blower CT brewers. What I mean by bubble blowers, is that their function depends on just that; blowing bubbles into the water, into a mesh extractor or both. They do not actively move the water, aside from the effect of the bubbles. Because of this, I find it a paradox that they refer to their units as AACT (actively aerated compost tea) brewers to separate themselves from only, aerated compost tea (ACT) brewers, which supposedly just blow air into water. This remains a mystery unto me. I won’t name these brewers because they include almost every commercial brewer available, except mine of course, which should be separated from those by being called an AAACT brewer (giggle). No offense; just kidding around.



Anyway, back to business. A very simple method you can use to make an aerated CT brewer is to use some rigid PVC thin walled pipe (not schedule 40 because it is difficult to make tiny holes in) of approximately ½ inch to ¾ inch size. Rigid pipe is better than flex pipe because it holds its shape, can be cleaned more easily and is easier to drill and saw. Use a straight piece which is approximately as long as your proposed tank is high, joined to a 90* elbow, then following the dimensional circumference of the bottom of your tank build a roughly round hexagon or octagon or whateveragon alternating with PVC fittings (45* or 11*, 22* to 30* if you can find them http://pvcfittings.com ) and short lengths of pipe, terminating just before you hit the elbow which the long pipe slides into. Over the end of this last piece of pipe in your whateveragon slide a cap. None of this needs to be glued (usually) because we are not dealing with high pressure and the whole thing can be taken apart for easy cleaning. We now need three more things. An air supply, an air input interface with the pipe and diffusers. A diffuser is an interface between air and water which ‘diffuses’ of course, air into the water. No matter what name people give it, like orifice or air stone, hole, slit or slot, it is still a diffuser. The smaller the diffuser opening within the capacity of the air pump to push air through easily, the greater the efficiency at raising and maintaining the dissolved oxygen. Therefore you want to put the smallest holes or slits possible at intervals in the short pieces of pipe you used to construct your whateveragon. If you have an electric drill you can drill 1/16th inch holes. You can try cutting slits with a razor knife or very fine hack saw or other blade. A hacksaw cuts around 1000 microns width. I get machined slots which are 254 microns. Make your openings so they are coming out the bottom angled towards the center to begin with. (The pipe is not glued so you can rotate them). For your first trial only put a few air openings in each length of pipe (e.g. 2” spaces). We want the air traveling all the way to the end of the whateveragon. Now to try it out, I guess we better get some air happening.



First of all, for your air input you need to match air tubing with your air pump and get a threaded barbed fitting that the tubing fits over and a slip X female threaded coupling to go over your long straight piece of PVC pipe which goes down and joins to your whateveragon. This, you may need to glue.

I have provided a rudimentary representative sketch to help illustrate the basic construction >click here



A Word About Diaphragm Air Pumps;

If you are going to buy a pump to run your aerated CT brewer I now (as of Feb 2015) recommend the Elemental line of commercial air pumps. Like ECO commercial air they are a combination piston and rubber (diaphragm) pump but they are quieter and seem to out perform the ECOs for the same price range. The Elemental 951 gph which we are using with our Mini-Microbulator outputs 2.5 CFM and the 1744 gph which we will be using with our 50 gallon airlift Microbulator measures an average 5.3 CFM (ECO 5 is 4.0 CFM). On top of that, these pumps are painted and it seems there is a higher standard applied to their manufacture. In the USA you can purchase this line through buildasoil.com. If there is enough demand we will sell these pumps in (from) Canada



I can also recommend Hailea 9730 pumps (2 CFM max.) which you can purchase from www.aquaticeco.com and other places. These are solid, long lasting pumps and I know other commercial brewers use them for 50 gallons but I just can’t recommend them for more than 30 gallons. If you use one for a 5 gallon unit it will last virtually forever. All of these pumps come with a little threaded brass fitting for screwing into the air output. DO NOT USE THESE! Put them in your parts drawer. These constrict the air and reduce your CFM by at least 20%. Rather, find tubing which slides over the nipple into which the threads are tapped. In the case of the Eco Plus 5 and the Hailea, 5/8ths inside diameter works. Slide the air tubing over and secure with a gear clamp. The Eco Plus has a very short nipple so I score the metal with a couple of swipes with a hacksaw to create barbs for the tubing to grip. You can find tubing at a building supply like Home Depot or Rona in Canada. I use the braided reinforced stuff which does not kink. Always try to keep your pump at or above the surface of the water so it does not siphon back if the power fails.



Now that we have our air supply you can slide the tubing over the barbed fitting air input on the end of your straight piece of PVC and fire her up. Ooops! Forgot the spring clamp. You can use a spring clamp to pinch the long PVC air pipe to the edge of your tank at the top. This keeps the hole thing from floating and you can adjust the distance your whateveragon is from the bottom. Spring clamps are like giant clothes pegs http://www.leevalley.com/wood/page.aspx?c=1&cat=1,43838&p=41712

http://www.hobbytool.com/springclamps.aspx

I’m sure you can find them at Home Depot too or you may think up another idea (like a ‘C’ clamp).



Okay fire up the pump and fill up your tank (pail, barrel) with water. Watch the amount of air coming out of the openings you made. What we want is air coming out right to the end of the whateveragon and even dispersal all around and we want really broiling water bubbling up to the surface. The reason I suggested angling the openings on the bottom towards the center of the tank is so it would sweep right up from the base. You can raise it closer to the surface to get a better look at how evenly the air is coming out. You can also just put the air tube end in the water, right to the bottom so you can get an idea of your air potential and how much should be coming out of the holes you made. You don’t want to restrict the air flow. If you feel comfortable that you need more air coming out start adding more openings (on top), beginning at the cap end on the top of the pipe and working your way around towards the air input. You’ll get the hang of it. If you screw up, no biggy cause you are using really short pieces of very cheap pipe, not glued and you can redo and experiment to your heart’s content.



This is very similar to the KIS 5 gallon brewer (a very efficient little brewer; buy one if you don't like doing this) so their compost brew kits will be ideal to use with this. You can use this system with compost and feedstock in free suspension (added directly to the water) or in the case of a 5 gallon set up you can probably get away with placing your compost and solid food into a mesh bag tightly tied up and floating around in the water. The turbulence may keep it suspended. You could put some fishing floats or ping pong balls in it to be sure it won’t sink.



If you wish to use an extractor bag with a larger brewer, then you can use a variation of the set up previously described, except that you have a PVC air line entering your (tube/sock shaped) mesh extractor bag with diffuser openings close to the bottom of the bag and with a cap on the end of the pipe. This pipe should go very close to the bottom of the bag. You will need to tie off or fashion a lid for the extractor bag or keep the top above the water surface. As stated previously, 400 microns is the optimum sized mesh to use. You may purchase a variety of mesh bags from http://www.aquaticeco.com . You can experiment with the number of diffuser openings which provides sufficient agitation. These types of systems depend upon the agitation of the compost against the mesh, caused by the air, to extract the microbes from the compost. Some systems have no additional air diffusion outside of the mesh extractor, while others incorporate one or more additional diffusers. One could TEE off from the air line, one diffuser going into the mesh bag, the other into the water. A valve to regulate the air flow would be necessary in this case. Alternatively one could use two air pumps. One could combine both designs, using a whateveragon diffuser and another pipe going into the mesh extractor.



Diffusers;

One could incorporate good quality glass bonded diffusers if one did not wish to mess with PVC pipes and making their own diffusers. These diffusers are resistant to break down by microbes and can be cleaned with muriatic acid (but are not environmentally friendly to clean). They are called Sweetwater medium bore diffusers and are available at http://www.aquaticeco.com . They are far superior to homemade PVC diffusers in terms of sustaining DO2 because they produce finer bubbles . There is no truth (that I have seen) to the statement that fine bubbles damage some microbes.



Anaerobes;

Many people are overly anxious about having any anaerobic microbes in their CT. If you have a tremendous number of ciliates in your CT, or if it stinks to high heavens, there is a likelihood that your CT has gone anaerobic and you should toss it. However, I would not worry about seeing a healthy number of ciliates (if you have a microscope), especially if there are also high numbers of flagellates and/or amoebae. Additionally anaerobic (facultative and obligate) bacteria and archaea occur naturally in the soil and other environments and their existence is part of the balance of nature so don’t worry if you have a few in your consortia.



Cleaning;

You should clean out your brewer after each use, especially the extractor bag if you use one.



Conversions;

1 US gallon = 3.78 litres (liters)

1 US quart = 0.946 litre (liter)

1 micrometer or micron (µm) = 0.000039 inch (39/100000ths)

For converting mesh to microns: http://chemplazaonline.com/meshsizecoverter.aspx



I think I’ve covered the basics. If anyone has any suggestions or if you notice any errors, please speak up.





Some Photo, Video and Linked Resources for Organism Identification:

Please inform me of any dead links.



Back to Contents



Who I am

My name is Tim Wilson. I am a self-taught researcher/scientist. I do not possess a degree but did study a wide range of courses at university, some of them

post-graduate courses I was allowed into based on my knowledge level at the time. I learned scientific thought and method from a great scientist and friend Barry Beyerstein who suddenly passed at a much too young age of 60.

Many of you will know me by my contributions to various discussion forums on the web. Presently I reside in southern British Columbia, Canada.

I have designed a simple bioreactor to be used for extracting and multiplying microorganisms from compost or vermicompost; so called aerated compost tea, as it has been named, I hold a patent on the airlift and diffusion chamber (& extraction method) but have made much of this information freely available. We therefore see many DIY airlift 'brewers'. They are different from most other brewers I have seen, in that the water is actively circulated through a pipe while being charged with air and returned to the tank from an elevated position with use of only an air pump. They sustain a higher than average dissolved oxygen level than most bubbler type compost tea makers.



Stuff I'm Selling



> pay button below My DVD Now available as a download (850 MB) $28 USD

I have produced a narrated video condensed to 1 hour, 43 minutes from hours and hours of live real time video captured through an interface of a Leitz Orthoplan microscope, a Sony high definition video camera and a computer. No film was used in this process. The purpose of this video is to assist folks who are using microscopes to identify the microbes they are observing in their compost, soil and compost tea. Although I used a high definition camera it was not set on HD as this causes a delay through firewire to the computer and makes realtime tracking of microbes with the mechanical stage impossible.



It includes some

examples of;

1/ What microbes you should see in a finished compost tea,

2/ Bacteria,

3/ Flagellates,

4/ Ciliates,

5/ Amoebae (3,4 &5 comprise the three groups of Protozoa),

6/ Fungal hyphae,

7/ Yeast cells,

8/ Nematodes,

9/ Rotifers and

10/ Compost Examination.

For those of you without microscopes the DVD offers a good visual representation of what is going on in your compost, vermicompost, compost tea and soil.



The DVD as a set of 2 discs in a case is no longer available. Problems? > then email me thegoodjob@hotmail.com



BUT now for $28 USD



I have been able to render the complete DVD set into a down loadable mp4 video file. It is quite large download at 850 MB so it may take a long time to download, Those with poor download situations may need to decide the best action to take. The resolution is not quite as good as on disc but still surprisingly good.



Make payment by credit card, debit card or Paypal by clicking the 'Buy Now' button below.



Instructions for Download; This is the only chance you have to download so follow these directions exactly. The download link is not emailed. You must save it to your computer immedia

tely after completing payment.



After you have completed payment, staying on the payment page, scroll down and click on 'Return to Merchant' and the video will be available for download. A typical download tool bar will appear with options to open or save. Clicking on the arrow beside save, opens 'save as'.

Select 'Save As' to save it to the desired location on your computer where you can find it after download completes. (It may take a while) It is called 'microbeid'. Double click and it should play in your media player. If it does not play you may need to update your media player or change media settings. (e.g. Windows Media Player) It takes a few seconds to begin playing. If you have trouble downloading email me.

$28 USD

Please Note

As I have matured and gained more insight and experience, I have questioned a few of my conclusions narrated in the video.

I have noted these controvertibles by insertion of text into the (down loadable) video.

********************

SAMPLE VIDEO CLIP

Click on the following video link (4.7 MB) to download a 'wmv' (Windows Media Video) to your computer. Depending on your download speed it may take a while. It is an example of what sort of footage is included in the DVD.

Video link

NOTE RE VIDEOS; If you are unable to view some of the videos displayed on this site and have a Windows operating system, you may need to initiate, dowload or update Windows Media Player.

This does not apply to the download videos

What Folks Have Said About the (video) DVD Set;



Deighton King

Jeff Lowenfels; Author; Teaming With Microbes

Wayne Lewis, Alaska Humus Co., Anchorage; Author; Teaming With Microbes

Steve Diver







Here is an easy to make 50 gallon airlift - previously sold as The Poorboy



The Video Data



















The Mini-Microbulator Airlift Microbial Extrapolator

(Aerated Compost Tea Maker) [US Patent 7972839 B2]

Ask at KIS Organics https://www.kisorganics.com



How It Works

Guaranteed Performance

Cleaning

Other Uses



**********************************************************************

Download PDF plans to build your own Mini-Microbulator - $7.00 USD



********************************************************************** Download PDF plans to build your own Mini-Microbulator - $7.00 USD







Aftter Payment Click on 'Return to Merchant' and the PDF Plans will open for you to save.

A PDF reader software is required



**********************************************************************************************







The Microbulator 50;

ONLY AVAILABLE AS OF END OF MAY 2017 FROM KIS ORGANICS





https://www.kisorganics.com/collections/compost-tea-brewing-systems/products/50-gallon-microbulator-compost-tea-brewer





Ugly But Efficient & Cheap!

Features:













Data:

Details, Details NO LONGER AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE - ORDER THROUGH; KIS ORGANICS



https://www.kisorganics.com/collections/compost-tea-brewing-systems/products/50-gallon-microbulator-compost-tea-brewer





Now, how does this work and what makes it different than other commercial brewers on the market?

With Extractor Unit;

Free Suspension;

What did you use and why?

Pump:

IMPORTANT NOTE: I did not use a check valve for the pump because it prohibits air flow so the pump must be placed above or at the same level of the water surface to prevent back flow if there is a power outage or the pump is turned off

The Air Tubing;

Clamps:

Air Control Valve;

Piping;

Diffusers;

Brass Fittings:

Barrel:

Extractor;

Bungee Cord;

How about cleaning?

What about brew times?





Back to Contents





Data

Where is your data?

SFI TEST RESULTS

Video Clips

In Operation;



Microbes;



Video Data for The Microbulator 50;



Without The Extractor - Free Suspension Configuration;

The following video clips were shot to record microbial extraction and multiplication at varying time periods of a brew while using the Microbulator 50 in the free suspension configuration, that is with 4.5 liters of vermicompost and solid feedstock added directly to the water without the use of the extractor. Our own vermicompost was used which was fed a base of very old cow and horse manure/wood shavings compost, sphagnum peat moss and kitchen scraps. Both brews were started at a temperature of around 18 C (65F). In the first brew the vermicompost was not mixed with anything to activate it. For the second brew the vermicompost was mixed with oat flour 20:1 and covered for around 120 hours prior to using it. Both brews maintained great DO2 levels to 60 hours; Brew #1 – 9.0 PPM DO2; Brew #2 – 8.9 PPM DO2.

I do not recommend brewing for 60 hours and longer unless you have the instruments to check your brew or unless circumstances dictate the necessity. I have however included video footage recorded at this time period.





I am very pleased with the results demonstrated by the brewer as well as our by vermicompost. The following video clips are narrated and fairly self explanatory.



Microbial Identification:



In one instance I refer to an amoeba as naked, although I’m not entirely sure whether it has a shell (test) or not. I am researching to identify it. You will see some flagellates which are joined together like a bunch of balloons. These may be Choanoflagellida Salpingoecidae (diploeca) or Kinetoplastida Bodonidae Cephalothamnium cyclopum or of a related group within the major Mastigophora group.





NOTE RE VIDEOS; I am gradually converting videos to Youtube but most are still Windows Media. If you are unable to view the videos and have a Windows operating system, you may need to initiate, download or update Windows Media Player.





For WMV please click the links below to download video clips. In most cases there is a choice of a large higher resolution file followed by a smaller lower resolution file.







Brew #1 Vermicompost Free Suspension; Not mixed with Oat Flour;



10 hours;







18 hours clip 1;









18 hours clip 2;





18 hours clip 3;







36 hours







42 hours





60 hours





Back to Contents



The following videos must be downloaded to view.







NOTE: These plans are designed to be flexible with the pipe size used and brewer size (50 to 300 gallons)

therefore do not expect a replication of the commercial Microbulator. The diffusion chamber and diffusers

are described but not recommended due to complexity and expense. Troubles?



Plans - DIY 50 Gallon ACT Maker $15 USDNOTE: These plans are designed to be flexible with the pipe size used and brewer size (50 to 300 gallons)therefore do not expect a replication of the commercial Microbulator. The diffusion chamber and diffusersare described but not recommended due to complexity and expense. Troubles? thegoodjob@hotmail.com Build your own 50 gallon airlift bioreactor (ACT maker) using these downloadable plans .

The plans include

- a written description

- diagrams

- explanatory photos

- links to private videos



Payment is by credit card, debit card or Paypal



Important Instructions;

After completing payment stay on the payment page, scroll down and click on

'Return to Merchant' and the main PDF document will be downloaded instantly. Make sure you save this PDF to your computer.

This documents contains links which download the sketches and contains a link to a private Youtube playlist.

$15 USD I do not receive email through paypal!!

General Microscopy Helper Video; For Download (480 MB)

Price $10 USD

I'm providing here for download a 58 minute excerpt from the DVD set which was provided with the microscopes we sold.

It is made for that microscope but the information is applicable to brightfield compound microscopes in general.



The topics/chapters covered are;

1/ General Assembly of the Microscope

2/ Use and Function of the Condenser

3/ Using the Mechanical Stage

4/ The Objectives

5/ The Trinocular Head

6/ Using Barlow Lenses

7/ Field Light use and Centering

8/ Specimen and Slide Preparation (compost/soil smear, using pipette, placement of coverslip, etc)

9/ Focal Distance With No Coverslip

10/ Focusing - First Time - Troubleshooting

11/ Creating Contrast Over Organisms Closing Condenser Iris - Shadowing Technique (enhances view)

12/ Compost Examination

13/ Centering the Condenser and Kohler Illumination



Some may find parts of the video too basic, boring and redundant. That is what fast forward is for :)



This is a 480 MB download so depending on your download speed it could take some time. Please email me if you have trouble.





Instructions for Download; This is the only chance you have to download so follow these directions exactly. The download link is not emailed. You must save it to your computer immediately after completing payment. Troubles? thegoodjob@hotmail.com



After you have completed payment, staying on the payment page, scroll down and click on 'Return to Merchant' and the video will be available for download. A typical download tool bar will appear with options to open or save. Clicking on the arrow beside save, opens 'save as'.



Select 'Save As' to save it to the desired location on your computer where you can find it after download completes. (It may take a while) It is called 'microbeid'. Double click and it should play in your media player. If it does not play you may need to update your media player or change media settings. (e.g. Windows Media Player) It takes a few seconds to begin playing. If you have trouble downloading email me.



Price $10 USD Make payment by credit card, debit card or Paypal by clicking the 'Buy Now' button below.If you have trouble downloading email me.





Microscopes

Unfortunately due to the rising US dollar we are unable to provide this microscope at a decent price NO LONGER AVAILABLE

I am leaving up this information for interest and in the event things change. (Feb 2016) I am truly sorry.





Accessories: I've listed below where one can get replacement electrical components and accessories.

Barlow lenses

3X multiplier Barlow lens

replacement bulb

replacement fuses

NAPA

Lordco

Other Interests;

Microscope Description:

Brightfield Images

Enhanced Images;

Photos through trinocular scope;

Tests, Observations & Postulations



Subcontents:



Canadian Sphagnum Peat Moss & Alaska Magic (Humus);

Does Microbial Life Survive Pump Impellers?

2007 Test With 1200 gallon (US) Brewer;

Repeat Trial: 2008

Rambling Dissertation on Yelm Field Trials for Brewer Prototype

Only read this if you are ready for a lengthy rambling dissertation. I begin with my excursion to the Yelm Earthworm farm for a field trial of my brewer design but diverge into laboratory techniques and their foundations.



I traveled to Yelm, Washington in July, 2007 to visit the Yelm Earthworm and Castings Farm and do a field trial of my brewer design at a location close enough to get a fresh sample to the SFI labs at Corvallis, Oregon.



At Yelm;

The first thing I did before setting up the brewers was to check the DO2, temperature and the TDS/EC (totally dissolved salts {solids}/electrical conductivity) of their well water. The DO2 (dissolved oxygen) was 6.8 ppm, somewhat lower than ours at around 9 ppm. Challenge number one. Challenge number two came in a TDS reading of 93 ppm. You may recall my report that our water usually reads around 21 ppm. This does not mean there is something wrong with their water. It probably is high in mineral content but it does mean the capacity to sustain DO2 is diminished somewhat. The temperature of their water comes out of the ground at 65* F (Note; * = degrees). I was mulling over in my mind how to alter the compost and foodstock ratios to accommodate these readings when the largest challenge yet, presented itself in the form of the barrels which they had for me to use. They were very tall and almost football shaped with the points cut off. I had no idea that plastic 55 gallon barrels came in different shapes. Because my device has a base shape which must sit on the bottom of the barrel and has an air tube plugged into it at the bottom, the pressure applied to the stiff tubing and the restricted surface area made for a poorly balanced situation. At home we use a weight, which is a ‘U’ shaped PVC structure filled with gravel to hold down the device; once there is air flowing through it, it wants to float. Well, I don’t know if water has variant buoyancy properties at different elevations but the water at Yelm seemed to buoy the device despite the weight. We had to put rocks in ziplock bags which we balanced on the return pipe of the device to hold it down. I already knew at this point that I was going to have to market the device with a tank or give strict measurements and instructions to those wishing to get and adapt their own tanks. I also realized the weight idea is a no go and would need to secure the device with a strap across the tank. I thought about scrapping the trial at that point but talked myself into persisting since I had traveled so far and the SFI lab was only 4 hours south.



I was wishing I had stuffed one more thing in the little Montana van, my white barrel. I’m sure I already had looked suspicious enough at the border crossing stocked with microscope, two weird looking cameras, empty pill bottles for test tubes, rubber gloves, vials filled with dark liquid, strangely configured PVC pipe, tubing connected to brass valves, ziplocks of compost in coolers and a beard and messy hair to boot. A 55 gallon barrel may have pushed it over the edge. Thank goodness for my USA passport. Without it I would never have made it.



Well we set up two barrels in preparation for brewing. Brew ‘A’ would use the Yelm Earthworm farm vermicompost/thermophilic compost blend and Brew ‘B’ would use my horsemanure/shavings vermicompost. Our compost normally presents a good quantity and quality of fungal hyphae in a Compost Tea (CT) and a high number of bacteria with flagellates at varying blooms throughout the brew. After getting things pretty much balanced and running the brewers for a few hours without ingredients, the DO2 was up to 9.5 ppm. Because of the high TDS readings I decided to reduce the compost used from 4% to 3% or 4.5 liters (18 cups) and the black strap molasses to 0.65%, the kelp meal I left at 0.25% but reduced the fish hydrolisate to 0.05% (which had got quite smelly at this point). I added the ingredients and we were off and running. It was around this time that we heard through the news that a heat wave was on its way. You know; the one which broke all the records in the North West. I thought to myself; ‘Of course, Murphy’s Law’.



At the Yelm Earthworm farm they are open from 8:30 AM to 5 PM and keep the big front gate locked when closed so there was no way to check on the progress of the brews in the ‘off’ hours. When I drove in the following morning and checked the brews ‘B’ device had tipped over and was not operating in correct fashion. I straightened it up and checked the DO2 at 3.9 ppm. Damn! Of course it had to be the brew with my compost. The ‘A’ brew was okay at 7.7 ppm. This was at the 21 hour mark, three hours away from drawing my first sample. The ‘A’ sample at 24 hours was still maintaining at 7.7 ppm DO2 and 72* F when I drew it. Through the microscope tube it exhibited a good amount of active bacteria at about 5% with about 7 to 8% total bacteria. I was disappointed that there was still some fish smell present. (maybe my fish was too old) Generally the CT was as I expected at this stage prior to the protozoa explosion. To see a short video of A24 click here (5 MB). The ‘B’ sample had crept back up to 5.2 ppm DO2. The temperature for both brews was 72*F. Through the microscope tube B24 presented with a good quantity of active bacteria at about 3 to 4% and very thick total bacteria at about 20 to 30%. There is some fungal hyphae present albeit of a smaller diameter than we normally see from this compost and quite coated with bacteria. I attributed this to the mishap with the device tipping but the other variables could also be at play. I only saw 1 lonely flagellate representing the protozoa population. To see B24 click here (14 MB) or here (6 MB). As usual these clips are viewed in Windows Media and may take a while to download.

Note; In the narration for b24 I use the word ‘mature’ for fungal hyphae when I mean more developed.



By this time the heat wave had hit full blast and the little room where I had set up my temporary lab became a torturous sweat box in the afternoon. This is where I was set up to examine the Alaska Magic, Sphagnum peat moss and various other substances people were bringing me to look at. I became very appreciative of the drive back to the motel at 5 PM with the windows wide open until the A/C kicked in.



The next morning the hour had arrived, or rather the 44th hour when I had decided to draw the final samples and head to the SFI lab at Corvallis. I drew the samples and had a microscopic look at them, recording the data to the computer under the witnessing eye of Kelan, one of the farm owners. My goal, primarily was to create a CT optimum for nutrient cycling in the soil. Brew ‘A44’ appeared excellent for this purpose. The DO2 was at 7.0 ppm despite the temperature being slightly over 74*F. Looking through the microscope I conservatively counted 90 flagellates per 250X field of view and as is to be expected, the number of active bacteria was radically reduced to less than 1% by the protozoa but the total bacterial level was still good at about 5%. I did not however see any amoebae. When you view the short video clip of A44 by clicking here (7 MB) bear in mind that the camera only shows about 1/3rd of a field of view. The ‘B44’ sample was the same temperature 74*F+ but the DO2 had never recovered and remained under 5.0 ppm. Through the microscope tube B44 exhibited a tiny bit of fungal hyphae but this was a really brief exam so there could easily have been more, there was less than 1% active bacteria but very high inactive bacterial biomass for a total of around 12 to 15%; there were about 2 flagellates per 250X field; quite low. Click here to view B44 (10 MB).



I re-examined the 24 hour samples as well to decide what all I would include to get tested at SFI. The A24 sample appeared to have degraded and there was not much bacterial activity so I decided to save some money and exclude it. In reality the only really good sample for my purposes was A44 but I wanted to see what the SFI report would say concerning the fungal hyphae in B24 and B44 so I loaded the 3 samples into a small cooler and hit the road.



As, I have relayed previously I had a telephone conversation with Elaine Ingham about 10 days prior where I understood that I would be able to have a quick look at one sample using one of their scopes just to see how the flagellates had survived the 4 hour transport. In the same conversation I had understood her to say that the plate culture method was not used for counting protozoa in Compost Tea samples, contrary to what the lab manager had told me. Rather, they use the direct count or direct determination to ascertain quantities of all organisms in Compost Tea samples. When I arrived at the lab I kinda expected to go in with the samples and watch the technician put the sample on the slide, have a peek, explain to her my reason for submitting the ‘B’ samples and head back to Yelm. I had witnessed this done for someone else several years ago when I spent a day in the SFI lab. I was told to wait for the technician. After about a half hour+ I was beckoned into the lab by the tech and there was a slide prepared and on a microscope set up for incident light fluorescence, what one uses for observing stained or autofluorescing organisms. At first I glanced down the eyepiece but then asked if there was not a scope I could use with transmitted light to observe the survival and activity of the protozoa. The tech replied “What!?”. (I’m not sure which part she did not understand or if she was just startled.) She then said the protozoa would not be observable for 5 days as they were being plated out. I replied ‘That’s silly, I observed around 100 active flagellates per 250X field a few hours ago. They don't need plating.’ I wish I had not blurted out ‘silly’ but the heat of the moment and mounting disappointment was overwhelming me. The technician suggested I speak to the lab manager. I did spend a few fruitless moments engaged in conversation with the manager trying to ratify what Elaine had told me. He determined that I had misunderstood Elaine, which I guess is correct and that all Compost Tea samples are plate cultured to count protozoa. I blurted out, again, that such a count is not valid. He rightfully corrected me that, in my opinion it is not valid and I corrected my statement to reflect this meaning.



I left the lab feeling rather frustrated and confused but, despite having spent almost $400 on testing methods different than anticipated I held out hope that in the big picture the learning experience would be worth the price paid. The rush hour traffic through Portland was ugly.



The next morning at the Yelm Earthworm farm I relayed my experience and predicted that the utilization of the plate culture method would show the CT which is high in protozoa content as being lower because the CT had already produced protozoa to the optimum and many of the resting cysts had already excysted (hatched). The CT sample which is low in protozoa content would likely show a higher count after being plate cultured because there is more potential for protozoa multiplication as they have yet to populate to an optimum level and there may be resting cysts yet to excyst.



Upon returning home I contacted some people knowledgeable in microbiology and several laboratories to try to get their take on this method for counting protozoa. I could find none that thought the plate culture method made any sense for counting protozoa and one lab concurred with my prediction theory. There were also suggestions that the plate culture medium may not grow the same set of protozoa present in the CT as is. The consensus was that if they were asked to do a count of protozoa in such a medium (CT) they would immediately prepare several slides, do a live count and calculate an average. Most suggested they would use a hemacytometer or other counting chamber (slides with pockets and etchings of precise dimensions for counting microorganisms).



I thought something is not right here. Maybe I’m missing something. I had always agreed with Elaine Ingham’s assertion that the way to get a more accurate estimation of live microbes was through direct determination and that plate culturing was unreliable because it misses most of the organisms and because it projects the growth rather than showing what is present now. I have admired her stance on this amidst criticism but now, apparently her lab is using this very method for protozoa counts, while other labs are advocating direct determination. Does it make sense to use direct determination for one set of microorganisms while plating out another?



Back to Contents



The following excerpts are from Elaine Ingham or are associated with her; I wish to make it clear that I intend no enmity towards Elaine. I hold her in high regard. Her knowledge level eclipses mine. I seek only clarity and verity.

Species diversity is the same in compost and the tea made from that compost. Species diversity in compost is higher than fumigated or sick soil. But at least one plate count microbiology lab is giving out data suggesting that compost has lower diversity than bad soil and that “ok” tea has less diversity than bad compost. It is clear that plate count “diversity” methods are not effective in assessing species diversity, or species richness, in soil, compost or compost tea. Molecular methods tell us that species diversity in soil, tea, and compost, can number in the thousands and tens of thousands per gram.

Use of methods that tell you that soil contains only a few 5 to 10 species, or that compost contains only 8 to 15 species need to be viewed with a great deal of incredulity. Plate methods are missing only about 99.9% of what is actually present!

Do plate counts or direct counts assess tea quality? The clear answer is that direct counts assess tea quality, while plate counts do not. Take a look at the results (below) from a test where two different teas were used to control blight on tomato plants.



TSA incubated at room temperature, in aerobic conditions, measures “aerobic heterotrophs”. There was no detectable difference between the two teas using plate methods, despite the fact that Tea Two was capable of suppressing blight, while Tea One, sprayed at the same concentration, in the same conditions, did not suppress disease.

King’s B medium selects for pseudomonads, but not all these bacterial species are beneficial to plants. Enumeration indicated that there were more pseudomonads in the not-suppressive tea. Plate methods cannot distinguish whether the bacteria growing on this plate, and thus presumably pseudomonads, will be beneficial to the plant. If these values were used to measure “species richness-diversity”, the not-suppressive tea would get a higher “index” score than the tea that resulted in the plants remaining alive and producing a bumper crop of tomato later in the year.

Please note that “species richness-diversity” is not a valid name for any ecologically accepted measure of diversity. The lab that developed and uses this index will NOT explain how this index is calculated, and will not show any data that documents what relationship the index has with plant health. They claim the index is in any introductory textbook, but in fact, no textbook anywhere has a measure called species richness-diversity. Until such time as the lab using this index documents the claim that a higher index value actually means a benefit to the plant, the use of this index must remain highly questionable.

Spore-formers are determined by boiling the material in question to kill vegetative cells, followed by plating the material on TSA. Only spores or highly dormant stages of organisms survive boiling. Those spores capable of growing on TSA, at room temperature, in the particular oxygen conditions present in the plate (please recognize that oxygen exchange is reduced by the fact that the plates are covered), are then enumerated. Again, the not-suppressive tea had higher plate enumeration values. What is the relationship between what will grow on a plate, and physiological functions occurring in the soil, or on plant surfaces? These data show that there is no relationship.

Direct determinations separate bacteria from fungi. Plate media do not separate even bacteria from fungi, much less not giving an indication of what is going on with approximately 99.9% of the species present in the material plated.

Direct determinations also let you know whether protozoa or nematodes are present and performing their functions. A much clearer picture of what biology is present and performing their functions is possible when using direct determinations. Direct methods let you know if coverage on leaf surfaces is adequate. These types of assessments need to have a clear relation back to benefit to the plant.

Please note that there is no consistent relationship between plate count enumerations of “species richness-diversity” and improvement in plant growth. Plate counts do not assess diversity or activity of the organisms in the test material. An insignificant number of the actual total individuals or total species present in a sample grow on any single plate medium or set of lab conditions that it is difficult to see why anyone would continue to pretend that there is a relationship between plant growth and plate count assessments of diversity.

When you talk about functional groups in the soil, it is as if you think that organisms that grow on plate as active in the soil. They are not. Thus, as a method to assess function, plate counts are pitiful. As a method to determine whether a functional group exist in soil, again, plate counts are pitiful, because 99% of the individuals that might be able to perform a function do not grow on that plate.



If you want to know function, do any enzyme test. Then you know how much of that function is being performed right now. But enzyme analysis doesn't help you to know how much that function will be maintained. You can be predictive only if you know the number of active organisms performing that function now, and in ten minutes, and in an hour, etc. Plate counts don't allow you to do that. Most of the organisms that grow on any plate are dormant forms, spores, that were not active in the soil, or compost, or tea.



Monitoring the soil life

The first step in restoring the soil biology is being able to diagnose it. Since we can't look at the soil food web directly, we must rely on indirect methods. Some have suggested nematodes and springtails as indicators of soil health.

Ingham advocates a "direct count" method, in which individual organisms in a sample are counted under a microscope. Following a protocol, a trained technician counts the number of different classes of organisms (bacteria, fungi and protozoa, for example). The result is a report on the organisms estimated to be in the sample. The numbers indicate possible problems in the soil. For example, a high number of ciliates (a group of protozoa) suggests anaerobic conditions - harmful to plant life.

Other researchers have used plate counts. A soil sample is placed in a growth medium like agar, typically in a Petri dish. The number of bacterial or fungal colonies that grow from a soil sample are then counted.

Ingham maintains that this method grossly underestimates the number and variety of soil organisms. She says that the method was designed to detect and grow human disease organisms such as E. coli. In contrast, soil organisms need different conditions than the laboratory setting and growth media can provide. Only about .01 percent of soil organisms can be detected with traditional plate counts, she estimates.



Testing tea is critical - and you have to know whether the competitive organisms in the tea are ACTIVE or not. You cannot measure active organisms using plate counts, you can only measure viable organisms. There's a huge difference.



To get this information, you will need to send samples of soil, compost and compost

tea to a laboratory that can provide this information. Choosing the ‘right’ lab is

important as not all soil and microbiology labs use protocols that can provide the

information that growers need to make good decisions about soil biology

management. To date peer reviewed, direct look protocols and composite databases

are only available at the worldwide soil foodweb labs in the USA, Canada, Australia,New Zealand South Africa and soon England and Belgium. Plate culture laboratory protocols cannot provide this information and miss 95% of the biology in soil because most soil organisms cannot be grown in an artificial lab environment.

In The Compost Tea Brewing Manual 4th Edition, Elaine advocates direct count methods for determination of the microbes present in compost teas.



SFI Test Results:

The SFI test results did come by email. You may view the tests here in PDF format A44 B24 B44



A44 – When we examine the results of bacterial count overall my estimations as to general quantity (quality) from above (active bac low <1% but total okay 5%) seem to roughly concur with the SFI results (active bac. low; total bac. good). SFI reports the bacterial content in mass per volume (ug/ml) so it is difficult to make a direct comparison. I will discuss this later.



When we come to the flagellate count the SFI number is 13,863 per g (or per ml because 1 ml. of water weighs 1 gram). This is where my numbers disagree sharply with the SFI report. Remember that I did a conservative count of 90 flagellates per field of view.



The formula for roughly converting numbers of microorganisms per field of view to microorganisms per ml or g is;

(~ = divided by; field of view = FOV)

Number of microorganisms/ml = area of coverslip ~ area of FOV x number of organisms/FOV x number of pipette drops/ml

The 250X FOV of my portable microscope = .49 sq mm

The number of drops per ml. = 20

The area of the coverslips = 324 sq mm



Therefore; The number of flagellates/ml = 324 ~ .49 x 90 x 20 = 1,190,204.08/ml

Because 1 ml of water = 1 gram, this = 1,190,204 flagellates/g

This is over a million flagellates per gram. Even if my count is off by 10 percent or more this is still radically different from the SFI result. I attribute this to the plate culturing method they used.



Note that my prediction bore out; that the sample with the higher number of direct count flagellates is showing a lower number through the plate count method.



There is a comment in the lower portion of the SFI test which states that the aerobic bacteria are dormant. I would like to know how aerobic bacteria are determined without using plating or other methods.



B24 – Here again the observations I recorded (of active bacteria at about 3 to 4% and very thick total bacteria at about 20 to 30% showing very good; mention of okay fungal hyphae) seem to generally jive with the quality description from SFI (active bac. good; total bac. excellent). Again I cannot make a direct comparison because the bacteria are recorded in mass/volume.



On the surface it would appear that even our flagellate estimations concur were it not for the comments and the following report for B44. The comment at the bottom portion of the report states ‘Protozoa either not present in compost, or did not survive in the tea’



If we skip ahead to the SFI test result for B44, which is drawn from the identical Compost Tea brew (just 20 hours later) the number of flagellates reported is 277,259/g. In the lower portion of the report the flagellate count is described as excellent. Hold on; This is the CT where protozoa were either not present in the compost or did not survive the tea. What’s up with this? I attribute this to the potential inaccuracy of using the plate culture method to count protozoa.



Interestingly, even though the DO2 was miserably low when I drew the B24 sample there is no comment saying that the aerobic bacteria are dormant. The description makes this CT sample sound superior to A44 even though we have (to the best of our current knowledge) observed microbial activity and DO2 readings indicating the opposite. One good thing to know is that SFI measures the fungal hyphae at 4 micrometers and determines it to be beneficial. Now that’s the kind of meat and potatoes information I find useful. It backs up my estimates of 6 micrometer hyphae when everything is going right.



B44 – My numbers (less than 1% active bacteria but very high inactive bacterial biomass for a total of around 12 to 15%;) for bacteria observed seem to go along with the SFI qualitative description (active bac. low; total bac. good) except that I may have a higher total bacteria. This could be where their superior staining techniques may help define bacteria from other junk. Of course as previously outlined our flagellate counts are way different. My observation being about 2 flagellates per 250X field; quite low, translated; 324~.49x2x20= 26,530/ml = 26,530/g. Yes that’s what I call low but much lower than the SFI; 277,259/g.



Note that my predicted theory bears out again; the sample which had the directly determined lower count of flagellates ended up showing the higher count when the plate culture method of counting was employed.



I need to question the reason for the plate culture method being used to assess protozoa numbers in CT. Generally, in my understanding, a plate culture method is useful for determining the potential for a substance to produce certain microorganisms. It is therefore useful for application to soil, compost, humus, peat samples, etc. For CT samples I’m an advocate for what you see is what you got NOT what you see is what you might get if you culture these microbes out over 5 days. I could also be missing the point completely and am therefore open to being educated.



Back to Contents



Microbial Mass

I said that I would discuss the results for bacteria and fungal hyphae expressed in terms of mass per volume. This type of expression is used in various studies and analysis of microbes. It is deemed necessary for certain trials which have been carried out and there have been numerous approaches and formulae establishing conversion factors to interpret volume/volume of microbes as mass/volume or mass/mass.



I have searched for and read some of the research papers on which many of the accepted conversion factors are based for studies carried out by contemporary scientists. I have found the results to vary greatly and indeed even some of the authors of the papers warn that these are rough averages and one must have confidence in the methods used to formulate the presently used conversion factor for the specific group of microbes being utilized. We are talking about the weight of microorganisms here. You can’t use the bathroom scales so it is based primarily on the mass of carbon and there are many variables concerning environmental medium, growth rates, species, etc.



I have already been overly long-winded so I’ll not provide any excerpts but will be happy to email the journal articles to interested parties. I will, however list some of the conversion factors with the author(s’) name(s). I have converted them all into grams per cubic centimeter so there is some chance of misplaced decimal points. If you see any errors please let me know;

1979 – van Veen & Paul; bacteria - 0.8 g/cu cm; fungal hyphae – 0.33 g/ cu cm

1982 – Newell & Statzell-Tallman; fungal hyphae - 0.9 g dry/cu cm

1982 – Bakken & Olsen; bacteria – 1.09 g/cu cm and 30% dry matter (DM); fungal hyphae – 1.09 g/cu cm and 21% DM; I have trouble comprehending this one

1885 – Braktak; fixated bacteria – 0.056 g/ cu cm; wild bacteria(?) - 0.22 g/cu cm

1987 – Borsheim & Braktak; bacteria – 0.22 g/cu cm

1987 – Lee & Fuhrman; bacteria – 0.38 g/cu cm

There are other articles I could not access ($) and I’m sure there is more information available.

I asked the SFI lab in Oregon for their conversion factors and was told it is proprietary information, however Elaine told me in an email that as she recalls they are; prokaryotes (bacteria) - 0.31 g/cu cm; fungal hyphae - 0.44 g/cu cm



There is obviously value in expressing bacterial and fungal amounts like this, especially if one needs to perform calculations or express mass to mass ratios. For my information to use these results I’d like to know what the conversion factor is, what researc