AusBonsai

Hey Guys
I came across this lady when I first started looking into Auxins. As I understand she is a bonsai practitioner which makes it more interesting. Dr. Linda Chalker-Scott has a Ph.D. in Horticulture from Oregon State University and is an ISA certified arborist. I am again going out on a limb here and will give my opinion on a person I have never met. This opinion is on the work she puts forward in her profession as a doctor.
Her work is very interesting yet I believe it is some what biased towards Myth busting. That in itself is not a great fault the whole idea of science to me is to think of a theory and then work to prove or disprove(at least that what Einstein did) but put that with a bunch of articles that are full of opinions on the conclusion of a bunch of studies that are never referenced and I see a problem. What Dr of science sights material without referencing it. On a university site

All that aside it is a very interesting bunch of articles.
The reason I decided to post these today is think I have finally found a myth that Linda has stated as possible so I figure maybe there is hope for her
The list of myth busting articles are here
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Ch ... index.html
And the myth that she seems to label as possible is milk as a fungal treatment
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Ch ... mildew.pdf
There is a smorgasbord of reading and discussion here Enjoy

On a side note Tim Vivoda gave me a recipe to fight fungus today as well.
Take 100g of sheoak leaves. Ad to 10 L'Of water boil down to 1L add to 8L water and spray top and bottom surface of leaf as a fungal treatment.
After my fungal issues this season I wonder if I can have an over kill using milk,sheoak,lime sulfur and Bravo

Bretts wrote:On a side note Tim Vivoda gave me a recipe to fight fungus today as well.
Take 100g of sheoak leaves. Ad to 10 L'Of water boil down to 1L add to 8L water and spray top and bottom surface of leaf as a fungal treatment.
After my fungal issues this season I wonder if I can have an over kill using milk,sheoak,lime sulfur and Bravo

Hey Brett,

Yes you can have an overload of milk in the system, the ratio's i have heard used are very minute 1-1000 or something similar. Like all homeopathic remedies the results are not improved by using stronger concentrations, quite the reverse it encourages its spread.

Fungal problems can occur for a number of reasons, maybe you need to look at your growing environment and work out why you have had so many troubles this year. The sheoak treatment sounds interesting.. have you tried & tested it yet?

Matt

Bretts wrote:Her work is very interesting yet I believe it is some what biased towards Myth busting. That in itself is not a great fault the whole idea of science to me is to think of a theory and then work to prove or disprove(at least that what Einstein did) but put that with a bunch of articles that are full of opinions on the conclusion of a bunch of studies that are never referenced and I see a problem. What Dr of science sights material without referencing it. On a university site

As a bonsai-ist (?) I can't offer a cent of advice nor knowledge pretty much ever , but as a scientist, I can tell you that you are 99% right. The only fault is that you can never endeavour to 'prove' anything - any scientist who uses the word "prove" is kidding themselves and should be treated with scepticism. A scientific theory needs be be falsifiable (which is why ID can never be a science), and as scientists we attempt to disprove theories. We can only mount supporting evidence in favour of one theory. When eventually all other alternatives are falsified, that's when we come up with a 'scientific fact', but it is always (or should always) be open to scrutiny.

Anyhoo, tangent, point is that you're bang on with your idea of science.

It is weird that she hasn't referenced anything. I haven't time to read the links yet, but will tonight. Maybe she decided to be casual and break free of the rigorous constraints she would have had to deal with her entire Uni life. But more probably, maybe she's dealing with hearsay?

Oops, double post.

Hi Matt
It had been suggested to me that the milk works as a protectant stopping the spores from being able to be released. Linda believes it does much the same thing as a compost tea. Encouraging the good fungi to take up all the residences available leaving no room for the bad ones.

Gardening Australia has what seems to be a different explanation together with Dilution rates that I am familiar with in this quote

A dilution anywhere between 1:5 and 1:10 milk to water is adequate, but if it is much stronger than that it can cause problems like sooty mould. Low fat milk is less effective than full cream milk, but the difference is not really significant. There are various compounds that are active in milk including the fats. The natural antibiotics present in milk, as well as the production of other agents during exposure to sunlight both act to reduce fungal infection.

For it to work effectively it must be used regularly at seven to 10 days intervals, or every fortnight if it is hot. The most important thing is to get a good even coverage over all of the leaves. One of the great advantages of milk fungicide is that you don’t need any protective gear for spraying.

Thanks for the advice on my Fungus issue I will be sure to pass it on to the local council who's street trees are also covered in it

Nice one Rhiannon. With logic like yours it should be a steep learning curve
Can you suggest a better word a lazy writer like me could use instead ?

Rhiannon wrote: It is weird that she hasn't referenced anything. I haven't time to read the links yet, but will tonight. Maybe she decided to be casual and break free of the rigorous constraints she would have had to deal with her entire Uni life. But more probably, maybe she's dealing with hearsay?

Bretts wrote: that with a bunch of articles that are full of opinions on the conclusion of a bunch of studies that are never referenced and I see a problem. What Dr of science sights material without referencing it. On a university site

Well here is the problem... when "myth" busting there is no scientific backing on the myth to start with. Therefore references to the matter would be little if any to start with. Therefore she would have needed to outline her own brief and find a way to disprove or confirm the common belief. The show myth busters works on the same principle, just their conclusions are not printed as scientific papers, instead aired as a tv program for the common man.

I have a cousin who is a Dr of philosophy Brett maybe you could go for that one EH!!

Brett... her reference lists are rather large....
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Ch ... rences.htm

http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Ch ... ences.html
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Ch ... rences.htm

there are more there, the only issues you have is finding access to them and understanding the data entered without a university backing.
Maybe you need to sit back and take what your ready with some more validity, as clearly your knowledge on academia needs a review. She has clearly supplied references where ever possible, and where she hasn't it is clear its a common myth never having been tested by the scientific community before. Also with the fact she is also an Associate Professor should also grant greater respect on her work. It shows she is not only VERY active in her field but she also will have a number of full blown publications (not garden magazine columns), grants and a decent number of students she is supervising.

Bretts wrote: That in itself is not a great fault the whole idea of science to me is to think of a theory and then work to prove or disprove(at least that what Einstein did) but put that with a bunch of articles that are full of opinions on the conclusion of a bunch of studies that are never referenced and I see a problem. What Dr of science sights material without referencing it. On a university site

If you where to review the first link given you will see that these articles are published for a simple garden magazine. There are not publications submitted for peer review, therefor does not need a reference list.

http://www.mastergardeneronline.com/

That's great Aus any chance you can tell us how you found them. I would love to look at other material she has referenced.

Bretts wrote:That's great Aus any chance you can tell us how you found them. I would love to look at other material she has referenced.

Unless you have access to the journals.... you cant. You need to be affiliated with a uni, or find someone to send them to you.
oh but those links I posted... You linked to them on the first link you posted. I guess you didnt take the time to look at the link yourself?

What are you talking about. I am sure you are intelligent enough to discuss this without trying to insult me

Bretts wrote:What are you talking about. I am sure you are intelligent enough to discuss this without trying to insult me

I'm not, I found those lists on the very first link you posted. You will see a "literature" hyperlink on the right... its where she has added references where there is other data to support her review.
Like I said you need to look through things before coming to such conclusions.

Thank you Aus so there is no need for any Uni affiliation to view the links you gave.

I can now see several links that you mention next to these articles. It has been a while since I read any of these and now I see that the most recent articles are the ones that have references. Maybe she has started listening to her critics
Good stuff.