What is Biogeochemistry?

Im a BM wrote:
<--- Click on "sealover" (to the left of the arrow)
...deleted spam...

Im a BM wrote:
<--- Click on "sealover" (to the left of the arrow)

Into the Night wrote:
No such thing as 'biogeochemistry'. Buzzword fallacies.

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

Im a BM wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

".. so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution..?" - IBdaMann


I will address this in two parts.

First, I will describe how it was directly relevant to the mission of the research into acidic deposition ("acid rain"), being funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), at the expense of the US taxpayers.

Following that, I will describe more reasons it is significant well beyond theoretical evolutionary biology with multiple applications in agronomy, forestry, and environmental remediation.


The National Science Foundation was funding basic research into the biogeochemistry (yes, there IS "such a thing") of how acidic deposition was provoking aluminum toxicity and deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

In addition to helping explain their adaptive value in evolution, it helped explain the damage that was being done to ecosystems by acidic deposition (aka "acid rain"). And it offered a recipe for mitigation of that damage.

When dissolved aluminum ions, Al3+, are "free" in solution as inorganic salts (aluminum chloride, etc.), they can be taken up by roots and cause aluminum toxicity. Aluminum is of no nutritional value to plants and it can be toxic.

When dissolved aluminum ions are present as organometallic complexes of phenol carboxylic acids (tannins, polyphenols), roots can exclude that aluminum from uptake and prevent aluminum toxicity.

When calcium and magnesium ions, Ca2+ and Mg2+, are present in solution as salts of sulfate or nitrate, CaSO4, MgSO4, Ca(NO3)2, or Mg(NO3)2, they can easily be leached past the rooting zone and lost from the ecosystem, provoking deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

The sulfate in sulfuric acid and the nitrate in nitric acid supply the sulfate and nitrate in "acid rain" that causes loss of calcium and magnesium from the soil.

When the soil has CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CEC), those calcium and magnesium ions can then adsorb to a soil surface and be held tight against leaching loss.

Polyphenols provide the substrate to form the humic acids that provide most of the cation exchange capacity in most forest soils.

Natural rain has pH about 5.6 from the carbonic acid that forms in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. CO2 + H2O = H2CO3
This is CARBONIC acid, not "carbolic acid" as the trolls insist.

"Acid rain" has pH closer to 4 or 3, because of the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3) in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The additional acidity of "acid rain", compared to the slight acidity of natural rain, causes anions of phenol carboxylic acids to protonate. Hydrogen ions, H+ are referred to as "protons", and "protonation" is when a hydrogen ion attaches.

Deprotonated anions of phenol carboxylic acids are soluble and quite capable of forming strong complexes with any calcium or magnesium they encounter. These organometallic chelation complexes of calcium and magnesium readily attach to soil surfaces to prevent their leaching loss.

With additional acid input, those phenol carboxylic anions become protonated, making them FAR LESS SOLUBLE. And far less capable of forming organometallic complexes with calcium and magnesium.

This was more than something of passing interest to evolutionary biologists.

The impact of "acid rain" was to prevent the polyphenols produced by the plants from ameliorating aluminum toxicity and preventing leaching loss of nutrient calcium and magnesium in forests growing on inherently acidic soils.


PART TWO

As mentioned, among the items on the list compiled as I burned the midnight oil to justify more NSF funding for the research were nitrogen and phosphorus cycling. Two essential elements that plants acquire from soil, "acid rain" wasn't harming the nitrogen or phosphorus nutrition.

It would not serve as justification for NSF "acid rain" research money to elaborate on the role of polyphenols in nitrogen and phosphorus cycling.

However, agronomists and foresters have taken keen interest in these applications of the knowledge acquired from the research that came of it.

After completing a master's at Berkeley, I was able to continue polyphenol research in a doctoral program at Davis. No longer constrained to "acid rain" related funding, I was able to go a long way with the other applications. Particularly in regard to nitrogen cycling.

Rather than repeat that here, you can easily find it in the "Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems" thread.


(Into the Night will not be able to resist the compulsion to take a spam on this)

Swan wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

".. so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution..?" - IBdaMann


I will address this in two parts.

First, I will describe how it was directly relevant to the mission of the research into acidic deposition ("acid rain"), being funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), at the expense of the US taxpayers.

Following that, I will describe more reasons it is significant well beyond theoretical evolutionary biology with multiple applications in agronomy, forestry, and environmental remediation.


The National Science Foundation was funding basic research into the biogeochemistry (yes, there IS "such a thing") of how acidic deposition was provoking aluminum toxicity and deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

In addition to helping explain their adaptive value in evolution, it helped explain the damage that was being done to ecosystems by acidic deposition (aka "acid rain"). And it offered a recipe for mitigation of that damage.

When dissolved aluminum ions, Al3+, are "free" in solution as inorganic salts (aluminum chloride, etc.), they can be taken up by roots and cause aluminum toxicity. Aluminum is of no nutritional value to plants and it can be toxic.

When dissolved aluminum ions are present as organometallic complexes of phenol carboxylic acids (tannins, polyphenols), roots can exclude that aluminum from uptake and prevent aluminum toxicity.

When calcium and magnesium ions, Ca2+ and Mg2+, are present in solution as salts of sulfate or nitrate, CaSO4, MgSO4, Ca(NO3)2, or Mg(NO3)2, they can easily be leached past the rooting zone and lost from the ecosystem, provoking deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

The sulfate in sulfuric acid and the nitrate in nitric acid supply the sulfate and nitrate in "acid rain" that causes loss of calcium and magnesium from the soil.

When the soil has CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CEC), those calcium and magnesium ions can then adsorb to a soil surface and be held tight against leaching loss.

Polyphenols provide the substrate to form the humic acids that provide most of the cation exchange capacity in most forest soils.

Natural rain has pH about 5.6 from the carbonic acid that forms in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. CO2 + H2O = H2CO3
This is CARBONIC acid, not "carbolic acid" as the trolls insist.

"Acid rain" has pH closer to 4 or 3, because of the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3) in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The additional acidity of "acid rain", compared to the slight acidity of natural rain, causes anions of phenol carboxylic acids to protonate. Hydrogen ions, H+ are referred to as "protons", and "protonation" is when a hydrogen ion attaches.

Deprotonated anions of phenol carboxylic acids are soluble and quite capable of forming strong complexes with any calcium or magnesium they encounter. These organometallic chelation complexes of calcium and magnesium readily attach to soil surfaces to prevent their leaching loss.

With additional acid input, those phenol carboxylic anions become protonated, making them FAR LESS SOLUBLE. And far less capable of forming organometallic complexes with calcium and magnesium.

This was more than something of passing interest to evolutionary biologists.

The impact of "acid rain" was to prevent the polyphenols produced by the plants from ameliorating aluminum toxicity and preventing leaching loss of nutrient calcium and magnesium in forests growing on inherently acidic soils.


PART TWO

As mentioned, among the items on the list compiled as I burned the midnight oil to justify more NSF funding for the research were nitrogen and phosphorus cycling. Two essential elements that plants acquire from soil, "acid rain" wasn't harming the nitrogen or phosphorus nutrition.

It would not serve as justification for NSF "acid rain" research money to elaborate on the role of polyphenols in nitrogen and phosphorus cycling.

However, agronomists and foresters have taken keen interest in these applications of the knowledge acquired from the research that came of it.

After completing a master's at Berkeley, I was able to continue polyphenol research in a doctoral program at Davis. No longer constrained to "acid rain" related funding, I was able to go a long way with the other applications. Particularly in regard to nitrogen cycling.

Rather than repeat that here, you can easily find it in the "Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems" thread.


(Into the Night will not be able to resist the compulsion to take a spam on this)

No human will ever read the above, so why write it?

Im a BM wrote:

Swan wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

".. so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution..?" - IBdaMann


I will address this in two parts.

First, I will describe how it was directly relevant to the mission of the research into acidic deposition ("acid rain"), being funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), at the expense of the US taxpayers.

Following that, I will describe more reasons it is significant well beyond theoretical evolutionary biology with multiple applications in agronomy, forestry, and environmental remediation.


The National Science Foundation was funding basic research into the biogeochemistry (yes, there IS "such a thing") of how acidic deposition was provoking aluminum toxicity and deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

In addition to helping explain their adaptive value in evolution, it helped explain the damage that was being done to ecosystems by acidic deposition (aka "acid rain"). And it offered a recipe for mitigation of that damage.

When dissolved aluminum ions, Al3+, are "free" in solution as inorganic salts (aluminum chloride, etc.), they can be taken up by roots and cause aluminum toxicity. Aluminum is of no nutritional value to plants and it can be toxic.

When dissolved aluminum ions are present as organometallic complexes of phenol carboxylic acids (tannins, polyphenols), roots can exclude that aluminum from uptake and prevent aluminum toxicity.

When calcium and magnesium ions, Ca2+ and Mg2+, are present in solution as salts of sulfate or nitrate, CaSO4, MgSO4, Ca(NO3)2, or Mg(NO3)2, they can easily be leached past the rooting zone and lost from the ecosystem, provoking deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

The sulfate in sulfuric acid and the nitrate in nitric acid supply the sulfate and nitrate in "acid rain" that causes loss of calcium and magnesium from the soil.

When the soil has CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CEC), those calcium and magnesium ions can then adsorb to a soil surface and be held tight against leaching loss.

Polyphenols provide the substrate to form the humic acids that provide most of the cation exchange capacity in most forest soils.

Natural rain has pH about 5.6 from the carbonic acid that forms in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. CO2 + H2O = H2CO3
This is CARBONIC acid, not "carbolic acid" as the trolls insist.

"Acid rain" has pH closer to 4 or 3, because of the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3) in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The additional acidity of "acid rain", compared to the slight acidity of natural rain, causes anions of phenol carboxylic acids to protonate. Hydrogen ions, H+ are referred to as "protons", and "protonation" is when a hydrogen ion attaches.

Deprotonated anions of phenol carboxylic acids are soluble and quite capable of forming strong complexes with any calcium or magnesium they encounter. These organometallic chelation complexes of calcium and magnesium readily attach to soil surfaces to prevent their leaching loss.

With additional acid input, those phenol carboxylic anions become protonated, making them FAR LESS SOLUBLE. And far less capable of forming organometallic complexes with calcium and magnesium.

This was more than something of passing interest to evolutionary biologists.

The impact of "acid rain" was to prevent the polyphenols produced by the plants from ameliorating aluminum toxicity and preventing leaching loss of nutrient calcium and magnesium in forests growing on inherently acidic soils.


PART TWO

As mentioned, among the items on the list compiled as I burned the midnight oil to justify more NSF funding for the research were nitrogen and phosphorus cycling. Two essential elements that plants acquire from soil, "acid rain" wasn't harming the nitrogen or phosphorus nutrition.

It would not serve as justification for NSF "acid rain" research money to elaborate on the role of polyphenols in nitrogen and phosphorus cycling.

However, agronomists and foresters have taken keen interest in these applications of the knowledge acquired from the research that came of it.

After completing a master's at Berkeley, I was able to continue polyphenol research in a doctoral program at Davis. No longer constrained to "acid rain" related funding, I was able to go a long way with the other applications. Particularly in regard to nitrogen cycling.

Rather than repeat that here, you can easily find it in the "Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems" thread.


(Into the Night will not be able to resist the compulsion to take a spam on this)

No human will ever read the above, so why write it?

The "Cow gas..." thread has already gotten more than 2000 "views".

That is very different than when the website pretends there are more than 200 "Guests online".

During those periodic episodes throughout the day and night when the website pretends that 50-200 "Guests online" suddenly opened up the site to take a look, ZERO additional "views" show up on any active threads.

The "views" certainly include actual human beings, even if the "Guests online" is often comprised overwhelmingly by NOT actual human beings.

More than 2000 views of the new "cow gas" thread cannot possibly be just the scientifically illiterate trolls who put up most of the posts at climate-debate.com

"No, actual human being will ever read the above, so why write it?" - Swan


Why write it? Because I am confident that actual human beings WILL read it.

On the other hand, SWAN, if you honestly believe your entire audience is robots or extraterrestrials...

"..so why write it?"

WTF, Swan?

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

sealover wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

".. so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution..?" - IBdaMann


I will address this in two parts.

First, I will describe how it was directly relevant to the mission of the research into acidic deposition ("acid rain"), being funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), at the expense of the US taxpayers.

Following that, I will describe more reasons it is significant well beyond theoretical evolutionary biology with multiple applications in agronomy, forestry, and environmental remediation.


The National Science Foundation was funding basic research into the biogeochemistry (yes, there IS "such a thing") of how acidic deposition was provoking aluminum toxicity and deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

In addition to helping explain their adaptive value in evolution, it helped explain the damage that was being done to ecosystems by acidic deposition (aka "acid rain"). And it offered a recipe for mitigation of that damage.

When dissolved aluminum ions, Al3+, are "free" in solution as inorganic salts (aluminum chloride, etc.), they can be taken up by roots and cause aluminum toxicity. Aluminum is of no nutritional value to plants and it can be toxic.

When dissolved aluminum ions are present as organometallic complexes of phenol carboxylic acids (tannins, polyphenols), roots can exclude that aluminum from uptake and prevent aluminum toxicity.

When calcium and magnesium ions, Ca2+ and Mg2+, are present in solution as salts of sulfate or nitrate, CaSO4, MgSO4, Ca(NO3)2, or Mg(NO3)2, they can easily be leached past the rooting zone and lost from the ecosystem, provoking deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

The sulfate in sulfuric acid and the nitrate in nitric acid supply the sulfate and nitrate in "acid rain" that causes loss of calcium and magnesium from the soil.

When the soil has CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CEC), those calcium and magnesium ions can then adsorb to a soil surface and be held tight against leaching loss.

Polyphenols provide the substrate to form the humic acids that provide most of the cation exchange capacity in most forest soils.

Natural rain has pH about 5.6 from the carbonic acid that forms in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. CO2 + H2O = H2CO3
This is CARBONIC acid, not "carbolic acid" as the trolls insist.

"Acid rain" has pH closer to 4 or 3, because of the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3) in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The additional acidity of "acid rain", compared to the slight acidity of natural rain, causes anions of phenol carboxylic acids to protonate. Hydrogen ions, H+ are referred to as "protons", and "protonation" is when a hydrogen ion attaches.

Deprotonated anions of phenol carboxylic acids are soluble and quite capable of forming strong complexes with any calcium or magnesium they encounter. These organometallic chelation complexes of calcium and magnesium readily attach to soil surfaces to prevent their leaching loss.

With additional acid input, those phenol carboxylic anions become protonated, making them FAR LESS SOLUBLE. And far less capable of forming organometallic complexes with calcium and magnesium.

This was more than something of passing interest to evolutionary biologists.

The impact of "acid rain" was to prevent the polyphenols produced by the plants from ameliorating aluminum toxicity and preventing leaching loss of calcium and magnesium in forests growing on inherently acidic soils.


PART TWO

As mentioned, among the items on the list compiled as I burned the midnight oil to justify more NSF funding for the research were nitrogen and phosphorus cycling. Two essential elements that plants acquire from soil, "acid rain" wasn't harming the nitrogen or phosphorus nutrition.

It would not serve as justification for NSF "acid rain" research money to elaborate on the role of polyphenols in nitrogen and phosphorus cycling.

However, agronomists and foresters have taken keen interest in these applications of the knowledge acquired from the research that came of it.

After completing a master's at Berkeley, I was able to continue polyphenol research in a doctoral program at Davis. No longer constrained to "acid rain" related funding, I was able to go a long way with the other applications. Particularly in regard to nitrogen cycling.

Rather than repeat that here, you can easily find it in the "Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems" thread.


(Into the Night will not be able to resist the compulsion to take a spam on this)

Swan wrote:

sealover wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

".. so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution..?" - IBdaMann


I will address this in two parts.

First, I will describe how it was directly relevant to the mission of the research into acidic deposition ("acid rain"), being funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), at the expense of the US taxpayers.

Following that, I will describe more reasons it is significant well beyond theoretical evolutionary biology with multiple applications in agronomy, forestry, and environmental remediation.


The National Science Foundation was funding basic research into the biogeochemistry (yes, there IS "such a thing") of how acidic deposition was provoking aluminum toxicity and deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

In addition to helping explain their adaptive value in evolution, it helped explain the damage that was being done to ecosystems by acidic deposition (aka "acid rain"). And it offered a recipe for mitigation of that damage.

When dissolved aluminum ions, Al3+, are "free" in solution as inorganic salts (aluminum chloride, etc.), they can be taken up by roots and cause aluminum toxicity. Aluminum is of no nutritional value to plants and it can be toxic.

When dissolved aluminum ions are present as organometallic complexes of phenol carboxylic acids (tannins, polyphenols), roots can exclude that aluminum from uptake and prevent aluminum toxicity.

When calcium and magnesium ions, Ca2+ and Mg2+, are present in solution as salts of sulfate or nitrate, CaSO4, MgSO4, Ca(NO3)2, or Mg(NO3)2, they can easily be leached past the rooting zone and lost from the ecosystem, provoking deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

The sulfate in sulfuric acid and the nitrate in nitric acid supply the sulfate and nitrate in "acid rain" that causes loss of calcium and magnesium from the soil.

When the soil has CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CEC), those calcium and magnesium ions can then adsorb to a soil surface and be held tight against leaching loss.

Polyphenols provide the substrate to form the humic acids that provide most of the cation exchange capacity in most forest soils.

Natural rain has pH about 5.6 from the carbonic acid that forms in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. CO2 + H2O = H2CO3
This is CARBONIC acid, not "carbolic acid" as the trolls insist.

"Acid rain" has pH closer to 4 or 3, because of the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3) in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The additional acidity of "acid rain", compared to the slight acidity of natural rain, causes anions of phenol carboxylic acids to protonate. Hydrogen ions, H+ are referred to as "protons", and "protonation" is when a hydrogen ion attaches.

Deprotonated anions of phenol carboxylic acids are soluble and quite capable of forming strong complexes with any calcium or magnesium they encounter. These organometallic chelation complexes of calcium and magnesium readily attach to soil surfaces to prevent their leaching loss.

With additional acid input, those phenol carboxylic anions become protonated, making them FAR LESS SOLUBLE. And far less capable of forming organometallic complexes with calcium and magnesium.

This was more than something of passing interest to evolutionary biologists.

The impact of "acid rain" was to prevent the polyphenols produced by the plants from ameliorating aluminum toxicity and preventing leaching loss of calcium and magnesium in forests growing on inherently acidic soils.


PART TWO

As mentioned, among the items on the list compiled as I burned the midnight oil to justify more NSF funding for the research were nitrogen and phosphorus cycling. Two essential elements that plants acquire from soil, "acid rain" wasn't harming the nitrogen or phosphorus nutrition.

It would not serve as justification for NSF "acid rain" research money to elaborate on the role of polyphenols in nitrogen and phosphorus cycling.

However, agronomists and foresters have taken keen interest in these applications of the knowledge acquired from the research that came of it.

After completing a master's at Berkeley, I was able to continue polyphenol research in a doctoral program at Davis. No longer constrained to "acid rain" related funding, I was able to go a long way with the other applications. Particularly in regard to nitrogen cycling.

Rather than repeat that here, you can easily find it in the "Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems" thread.


(Into the Night will not be able to resist the compulsion to take a spam on this)

Babbling about Berzerkely is berzerkly berzerk

IBdaMann wrote:

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

Im a BM wrote:
First, I will describe how it was directly relevant to the mission of the research into acidic deposition ("acid rain"), being funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), at the expense of the US taxpayers.

Im a BM wrote:
Following that, I will describe more reasons it is significant well beyond theoretical evolutionary biology with multiple applications in agronomy, forestry, and environmental remediation.

Im a BM wrote:
The National Science Foundation was funding basic research into the biogeochemistry (yes, there IS "such a thing") of how acidic deposition was provoking aluminum toxicity and deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

Im a BM wrote:
In addition to helping explain their adaptive value in evolution, it helped explain the damage that was being done to ecosystems by acidic deposition (aka "acid rain"). And it offered a recipe for mitigation of that damage.

Im a BM wrote:
When dissolved aluminum ions, Al3+, are "free" in solution as inorganic salts (aluminum chloride, etc.), they can be taken up by roots and cause aluminum toxicity. Aluminum is of no nutritional value to plants and it can be toxic.

Im a BM wrote:
When dissolved aluminum ions are present as organometallic complexes of phenol carboxylic acids (tannins, polyphenols), roots can exclude that aluminum from uptake and prevent aluminum toxicity.

Im a BM wrote:
When calcium and magnesium ions, Ca2+ and Mg2+, are present in solution as salts of sulfate or nitrate, CaSO4, MgSO4, Ca(NO3)2, or Mg(NO3)2, they can easily be leached past the rooting zone and lost from the ecosystem, provoking deficiency of calcium and magnesium.

Im a BM wrote:
The sulfate in sulfuric acid and the nitrate in nitric acid supply the sulfate and nitrate in "acid rain" that causes loss of calcium and magnesium from the soil.

Im a BM wrote:
When the soil has CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY (CEC), those calcium and magnesium ions can then adsorb to a soil surface and be held tight against leaching loss.

Im a BM wrote:
Polyphenols provide the substrate to form the humic acids that provide most of the cation exchange capacity in most forest soils.

Im a BM wrote:
Natural rain has pH about 5.6 from the carbonic acid that forms in equilibrium with the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. CO2 + H2O = H2CO3

Im a BM wrote:
"Acid rain" has pH closer to 4 or 3, because of the sulfuric acid (H2SO4) and nitric acid (HNO3) in the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

Im a BM wrote:
The additional acidity of "acid rain", compared to the slight acidity of natural rain, causes anions of phenol carboxylic acids to protonate.

Im a BM wrote:
Hydrogen ions, H+ are referred to as "protons", and "protonation" is when a hydrogen ion attaches.

Im a BM wrote:
Deprotonated anions of phenol carboxylic acids are soluble and quite capable of forming strong complexes with any calcium or magnesium they encounter. These organometallic chelation complexes of calcium and magnesium readily attach to soil surfaces to prevent their leaching loss.

Im a BM wrote:
With additional acid input, those phenol carboxylic anions become protonated, making them FAR LESS SOLUBLE. And far less capable of forming organometallic complexes with calcium and magnesium.

Im a BM wrote:
This was more than something of passing interest to evolutionary biologists.

Im a BM wrote:
The impact of "acid rain" was to prevent the polyphenols produced by the plants from ameliorating aluminum toxicity and preventing leaching loss of calcium and magnesium in forests growing on inherently acidic soils.

Im a BM wrote:

PART TWO

As mentioned, among the items on the list compiled as I burned the midnight oil to justify more NSF funding for the research were nitrogen and phosphorus cycling. Two essential elements that plants acquire from soil, "acid rain" wasn't harming the nitrogen or phosphorus nutrition.

[b]Im a BM wrote:
It would not serve as justification for NSF "acid rain" research money to elaborate on the role of polyphenols in nitrogen and phosphorus cycling.

Im a BM wrote:
However, agronomists and foresters have taken keen interest in these applications of the knowledge acquired from the research that came of it.

Im a BM wrote:
After completing a master's at Berkeley, I was able to continue polyphenol research in a doctoral program at Davis. No longer constrained to "acid rain" related funding, I was able to go a long way with the other applications. Particularly in regard to nitrogen cycling.

Im a BM wrote:
Rather than repeat that here, you can easily find it in the "Maximizing Carbon Sequestration in Terrestrial Agroecosystems" thread.

Im a BM wrote:
Follow up:

Yet ANOTHER things that polyphenols do is influence the biogeochemistry of cattle digestion in a manner that reduces the quantity of methane they belch.

Im a BM wrote:
The organic carbon NOT lost to the atmosphere as methane emissions can contribute to the organic carbon cattle add to the soil instead. Rather than being lost to the atmosphere as methane or carbon dioxide, some of that cow carbon becomes stable soil organic matter. Good for both agriculture and atmosphere.

Im a BM wrote:
"The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these 'grants'" - IBdaMann

Trump has declared war on science.

Im a BM wrote:
The damage he can do is enormous.

Im a BM wrote:
Nobody has ever seen anything like it.

Im a BM wrote:
Trump couldn't possibly comprehend the policy needed to address it, even if he is willing to let go of his REFUSAL to believe that climate change is real.

Im a BM wrote:
Taking a wrecking ball to research funding will not be a legacy of honor.

Im a BM wrote:
Ronald Reagan pushed for the National Science Foundation to fund "acid rain" research, such as the NSF grant that sponsored my master's degree. He believed the results would confirm that there was no need to take costly measures to reduce sulfuric acid emissions from power plants.

Im a BM wrote:
Ronald Reagan did NOT get the scientific data he was hoping for from his NSF investment in acidic deposition research. However, he respected the validity of the result and took historic steps to reduce the harm caused by acid rain.

Im a BM wrote:
Very similar to how Reagan sponsored ozone layer thinning research,

Im a BM wrote:
and respected the conclusions of the scientists even if they disappointed him. Reagan took historic measures to reverse the destruction of the ozone layer.

Im a BM wrote:
Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan.

Im a BM wrote:
Using Google to prove that "There is no such thing."

Im a BM wrote:
Sometimes absurd pseudo scientific assertions are made during Internet discussions.

Im a BM wrote:
Sometimes folks try to bluff it by throwing around big words in Startrekese.

Im a BM wrote:
Bogus terms can be called out with Google's help.

Im a BM wrote:
Ask Google: "Is there such a thing as ("buzzword"?)"

Im a BM wrote:
Tell us, Google, Is there such a thing as a "phantom inertial gas"?

Im a BM wrote:
Google can only offer a reference to debunk "centrifugal" force, also known as "inertial" force. Doesn't quite debunk an "inertial" gas.

Im a BM wrote:
Clearly there are no textbooks, scientific papers, or anything else out there published where anyone uses the term "phantom inertial gas".

Im a BM wrote:
Were I to assert "There is no such thing as a phantom inertial gas", I could not invoke Google as a source to support the claim in the most direct way.

Im a BM wrote:
However, when a scientifically illiterate Internet troll asserts, over and over....

Im a BM wrote:
I mean OVER and OVER as in the exact same sentence repeated in hundreds of posts. Often standing alone as the ONLY sentence of that post (supposedly a response to some other post)

Im a BM wrote:
"There is no such thing as 'biogeochemistry'"

Im a BM wrote:
Well, Google takes that one head on.

Yes, there IS such a thing as biogeochemistry.

Im a BM wrote:
As IBdaMann loves to say, "Only a scientifically illiterate moron would say that.."

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

Im a BM wrote:
Using Google to prove that "There is no such thing."
...deleted spam...

Im a BM wrote: In January, 1988, I was helping write the new grant proposal. We wanted to justify to the National Science Foundation why they should provide additional funding for the NSF-funded acidic deposition ("acid rain") research project in progress.

The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these "grants."

Im a BM wrote: My master's thesis research was specifically about how acidic deposition influenced the solubility and behavior of phenol carboxylic anions in forest floor leachate.

What was your justification for an organization providing a grant for this research?

Im a BM wrote:
They provide cation exchange capacity (CEC).
They ameliorate aluminum toxicity.
They facilitate retention of nutrient cations such as calcium and magnesium.
They maintain nitrogen in a form that cannot be lost from the ecosystem.
They prevent phosphorus fixation and release "fixed" phosphorus in soil.

Then it hit me. LIKE A BOLT OF LIGHTENING! All of these were feedbacks that benefitted the plants that produced them.

... so why would this be of any significance except to support a theory of evolution, which would be a little late to the ball game, yes?

Im a BM wrote:
"The Trump Administration probably isn't going to go for many of these 'grants'" - IBdaMann

Trump has declared war on science.

Im a BM wrote:
The damage he can do is enormous.

Im a BM wrote:
Nobody has ever seen anything like it.

Im a BM wrote:
Trump couldn't possibly comprehend the policy needed to address it, even if he is willing to let go of his REFUSAL to believe that climate change is real.

Im a BM wrote:
Taking a wrecking ball to research funding will not be a legacy of honor.

Im a BM wrote:
Ronald Reagan pushed for the National Science Foundation to fund "acid rain" research,

Im a BM wrote:
such as the NSF grant that sponsored my master's degree.

Im a BM wrote:
He believed the results would confirm that there was no need to take costly measures to reduce sulfuric acid emissions from power plants.

Im a BM wrote:
Ronald Reagan did NOT get the scientific data

Im a BM wrote:
he was hoping for from his NSF investment in acidic deposition research.

Im a BM wrote:
However, he respected the validity of the result and took historic steps to reduce the harm caused by acid rain.

Im a BM wrote:
Very similar to how Reagan sponsored ozone layer thinning research,

Im a BM wrote:
and respected the conclusions of the scientists even if they disappointed him.

Im a BM wrote:
Reagan took historic measures to reverse the destruction of the ozone layer.

Im a BM wrote:
Donald Trump is no Ronald Reagan.

Im a BM wrote:
...deleted spam...