Steve Turner wrote in message . ..
Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

I am trying to nail-down the inverse or reverse relationship. As to why
plants need animals to reform nitrogen.

Plants lack the biochemical pathways for large scale protein
degradation. That is the specialty of saprophytes (e.g. fungi and
bacteria). Legumes are able to convert atmospheric nitrogen to usable
form by virtue of rhizobia bacteria in root nodules (it is the
bacteria which do the conversion). Plants can also use inorganic
(mineral) nitrate as a source of nitrogen. Higher animals are a
relatively minor source of nitrogen.

True enough. There are some plants that eat meat (like Venus Flytrap)
but they are generally located in nitrogen depleted areas.

There is an important symbiosis between plants and animals, in that
plants use carbon dioxide and emit oxygen, and animals do the
opposite.
Um, not quite. Plants respire just fine. It's just that they make
their own oxygen so that they can use respiration in an oxygen
atmosphere to reduce the sugars they've made to use energy.
Photosynthesis is the storage of energy. Respiration is the use or
release of that energy. Animals do the latter. Plants do both.

Some symbiosis not because of the nitrogen or carbon cycles but for
breeding purposes. Some higher plants have learned to use animals to
pollinate them and spread their seeds. Wind pollination is inefficient
and random. Animal pollination is efficient relative to wind
pollination. Animals carrying seeds away from the mother plant helps
spread them in different directions instead of just downwind. In
return, animals get valuable nutrition. Most lower plants don't take
advantage of this situation as they developed before animals were
important to the ecosystem.

In conclusion, the hypothesis that the nitrogen cycle must include a
direct animal to plant transfer does not seem to have any proof and
the symbiosis exists for other reasons, in indirect transfer (animal
to ground to plant) and in other cycles.

Todd O.

Why do bunnies taste like chicken??



"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in
message ...
| I was wondering about rabbit manure. In some forests,
other than insects
| and their bodies as fertilizer it seems as though rabbit
manure is one
| of the most
| available. For we all know that in pristine forests,
humans do not go in
| there with
| fertilizer and that natural fertilizer is what sustains
untouched
| forests. I suppose
| birds contribute natural fertilizer but it seems as though
insects are
| the biggest
| single contributor. Then there are rabbits. So I wonder if
anyone has
| done analysis of rabbit pellets as a fertilizer?
|
| And can someone tell me why rabbits love elm and locust
and cherry
| shoots
| and twigs but hate currant.
|
| Archimedes Plutonium,
| whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
| of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|

"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
Sun, 16 Mar 2003 19:27:57 GMT Charles wrote:



http://plenty.150m.com/My_Links_Page..._manure01.html
_


Thanks for the excellent site of comparison of rabbit manure to other
manure. Rabbit manure is unusually high in nitrogen.

Can someone tell me in chemistry if the animal body does something
with nitrogen that the plant body cannot do to nitrogen?

SNIP
Yes.
It degrades the protein, which contains nitrogen.
The protein is originally created by plants.
You have this entirely the wrong way round, I'm afraid.


--
May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)

Oz wrote in message
...
Tony writes

Pretty obvious stuff. I'm sure archie has heard it all before.

a big assumption.

I think the interesting thing will be to watch and wait and see how
archie recycles it in a few months time. It can be amusing to try and
trace the roots of some of his ideas. Tony may bear the awful
responsibility of being the source of the next bee in archies bonnet.


--
Jim Webster

"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"

'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'

Jim Webster writes
I think the interesting thing will be to watch and wait and see how
archie recycles it in a few months time. It can be amusing to try and
trace the roots of some of his ideas. Tony may bear the awful
responsibility of being the source of the next bee in archies bonnet.

From little seeds so do mighty oaks grow.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Oz wrote in message
...
Jim Webster writes
I think the interesting thing will be to watch and wait and see how
archie recycles it in a few months time. It can be amusing to try and
trace the roots of some of his ideas. Tony may bear the awful
responsibility of being the source of the next bee in archies bonnet.

From little seeds so do mighty oaks grow.

Tony might have provided the great to produce a pearl of great price

although it has to be admitted that the odds are against it


--
Jim Webster

"The pasture of stupidity is unwholesome to mankind"

'Abd-ar-Rahman b. Muhammad b. Khaldun al-Hadrami'

"Frank Martin" wrote in message
...
Why do bunnies taste like chicken??

Everything tastes like chicken? A tautology?



"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in
message ...
| I was wondering about rabbit manure. In some forests,
other than insects
| and their bodies as fertilizer it seems as though rabbit
manure is one
| of the most
| available. For we all know that in pristine forests,
humans do not go in
| there with
| fertilizer and that natural fertilizer is what sustains
untouched
| forests. I suppose
| birds contribute natural fertilizer but it seems as though
insects are
| the biggest
| single contributor. Then there are rabbits. So I wonder if
anyone has
| done analysis of rabbit pellets as a fertilizer?
|
| And can someone tell me why rabbits love elm and locust
and cherry
| shoots
| and twigs but hate currant.
|
| Archimedes Plutonium,
| whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
| of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|

From: Archimedes Plutonium

I believe there exists some inverse or reverse relationship between plants
and
animals so that both can live on Earth and without the other, both would
quickly
die.


Without plants, animals (including insects) would quickly die. Without animals,
many plants will do just fine. Some plants rely on animals to fertilize their
flowers or distribute their seeds, these plants would not do as well.

Sean



--
Visit my photolog page; http://members.aol.com/grommit383/myhomepage
Last updated 08-04-02 with 15 pictures of the Aztec Ruins.
Address mungled. To email, please spite my face.

"Gilgamesh" wrote in message
...
"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
Sun, 16 Mar 2003 19:27:57 GMT Charles wrote:



http://plenty.150m.com/My_Links_Page..._manure01.html
_


Thanks for the excellent site of comparison of rabbit manure to other
manure. Rabbit manure is unusually high in nitrogen.

Can someone tell me in chemistry if the animal body does something
with nitrogen that the plant body cannot do to nitrogen?

SNIP
Yes.
It degrades the protein, which contains nitrogen.
The protein is originally created by plants.
You have this entirely the wrong way round, I'm afraid.

Bacteria do quite well at creating protien. I can feed a cow urea for a
major part of her protien requirement and if there are enough carbohydrates
available the bacteria in the rumen will convert it to protien the cow can
use quite well.

With corn so cheap it less expensive to burn it for heating to heat a house
than anything but natural gas it makes good sense to winter cows on pasture
on corn, urea, low grade hay instead of good hay and oil seed meal that is
costs a small fortune. The cows do just as well. You have to make sure and
have enough trough space that they all get to eat and you have to feed them
every day or may have problems but after the bacteria get through with it
the cow likes it fine.

The sorry hay could be replaced with paper or saw dust if you had to but
the freight is cheaper on the hay. All it really does is keep the cow from
eating too much at one time and can be left out if you feed the cattle as
they come in from grazing. It is hard to believe what a cow can covert to
food if all the necessary elements are present. A goat can do even better
but not near as much research has been done on goats.

Rabbits ferment grass to nutrients at the other end of the gut in the
appendix but it doesn't extract protien which is why their manure is high in
protien. When we try that we end up in the hospital having our appendix
removed.

Gordon

On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 04:41:37 -0500, Gordon Couger wrote:


"Gilgamesh" wrote in message
...
"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
Sun, 16 Mar 2003 19:27:57 GMT Charles wrote:



http://plenty.150m.com/My_Links_Page..._manure01.html _


Thanks for the excellent site of comparison of rabbit manure to other
manure. Rabbit manure is unusually high in nitrogen.

Can someone tell me in chemistry if the animal body does something
with nitrogen that the plant body cannot do to nitrogen?

SNIP
Yes.
It degrades the protein, which contains nitrogen. The protein is
originally created by plants. You have this entirely the wrong way
round, I'm afraid.

Bacteria do quite well at creating protien. I can feed a cow urea for a
major part of her protien requirement and if there are enough
carbohydrates available the bacteria in the rumen will convert it to
protien the cow can use quite well.

With corn so cheap it less expensive to burn it for heating to heat a
house than anything but natural gas it makes good sense to winter cows
on pasture on corn, urea, low grade hay instead of good hay and oil
seed meal that is costs a small fortune. The cows do just as well. You
have to make sure and have enough trough space that they all get to eat
and you have to feed them every day or may have problems but after the
bacteria get through with it the cow likes it fine.

What with natural gas prices going up, corn will be more expensive to
produce. This is especially true for crops that need anhydrous ammonia,
since I suppose it's hard to import. Do you have in guesstimates on how
much U.S. farmer's production costs will increase this year?

The sorry hay could be replaced with paper or saw dust if you had to
but the freight is cheaper on the hay. All it really does is keep the
cow from eating too much at one time and can be left out if you feed the
cattle as they come in from grazing. It is hard to believe what a cow
can covert to food if all the necessary elements are present. A goat can
do even better but not near as much research has been done on goats.

Rabbits ferment grass to nutrients at the other end of the gut in the
appendix but it doesn't extract protien which is why their manure is
high in protien. When we try that we end up in the hospital having our
appendix removed.

Gordon

"Tim Miller" wrote in message
newsan.2003.03.31.03.56.31.255202.1615@noamspay. indspringmay.com...
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 04:41:37 -0500, Gordon Couger wrote:


"Gilgamesh" wrote in message
...
"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
Sun, 16 Mar 2003 19:27:57 GMT Charles wrote:



http://plenty.150m.com/My_Links_Page..._manure01.html _


Thanks for the excellent site of comparison of rabbit manure to other
manure. Rabbit manure is unusually high in nitrogen.

Can someone tell me in chemistry if the animal body does something
with nitrogen that the plant body cannot do to nitrogen?

SNIP
Yes.
It degrades the protein, which contains nitrogen. The protein is
originally created by plants. You have this entirely the wrong way
round, I'm afraid.

Bacteria do quite well at creating protien. I can feed a cow urea for a
major part of her protien requirement and if there are enough
carbohydrates available the bacteria in the rumen will convert it to
protien the cow can use quite well.

With corn so cheap it less expensive to burn it for heating to heat a
house than anything but natural gas it makes good sense to winter cows
on pasture on corn, urea, low grade hay instead of good hay and oil
seed meal that is costs a small fortune. The cows do just as well. You
have to make sure and have enough trough space that they all get to eat
and you have to feed them every day or may have problems but after the
bacteria get through with it the cow likes it fine.

What with natural gas prices going up, corn will be more expensive to
produce. This is especially true for crops that need anhydrous ammonia,
since I suppose it's hard to import. Do you have in guesstimates on how
much U.S. farmer's production costs will increase this year?

It's not too hard to import I think it is 200 miles form one plant and 140
from another plant. You forget we sit on a rather large natural gas feild.

If I am buying corn I don't give a damn the price of NH3 only the price of
corn counts. The price of NH3 matters to the guy that grew the corn but that
is not today's problem. It will effect the price of Urea making it cost
about
380 USD per short ton but for no more than cattle need it doesn't mater.

You confuses the cost of production wiht the market value of the product. If
I could be guaranteed getting back all the money it cost to rasie a crop I
would be a rich man. I would never loose money and make some on good years.

You again show that you lack the basic underrating of farm economics.

Gordon

Gordon Couger wrote:

You confuses the cost of production wiht the market value of the product.


Gordon,

It's a small pleasure in the morning to run across somebody with an
elementary understanding of economics.

Are you in fact a farmer? I guess that'll do it to you... :-)

Cheers,

-dlj.

With corn so cheap it less expensive to burn it for heating to heat a
house than anything but natural gas it makes good sense to winter cows
on pasture on corn, urea, low grade hay instead of good hay and oil
seed meal that is costs a small fortune. The cows do just as well. You

What is the heat output (BTU/bushel or whatever) from burning corn? I've
seen corn stoves for sale providing justification to the statement that
corn is cheap enough to burn. (Can you really feed a cow paper and urea
and get more cow?)

Michael Moroney writes
With corn so cheap it less expensive to burn it for heating to heat a
house than anything but natural gas it makes good sense to winter cows
on pasture on corn, urea, low grade hay instead of good hay and oil
seed meal that is costs a small fortune. The cows do just as well. You

What is the heat output (BTU/bushel or whatever) from burning corn? I've
seen corn stoves for sale providing justification to the statement that
corn is cheap enough to burn. (Can you really feed a cow paper and urea
and get more cow?)

You forget that the corn plant has been busy converting sunlight into
chemical energy (biomass) for quite a few months. In fact there is
probably as much energy in the stover as in the maize grain.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 07:02:49 -0500, Gordon Couger wrote:


"Tim Miller" wrote in message
newsan.2003.03.31.03.56.31.255202.1615@noamspay. indspringmay.com...
On Sat, 22 Mar 2003 04:41:37 -0500, Gordon Couger wrote:


"Gilgamesh" wrote in message
...
"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
...
Sun, 16 Mar 2003 19:27:57 GMT Charles wrote:



http://plenty.150m.com/My_Links_Page..._manure01.html _


Thanks for the excellent site of comparison of rabbit manure to
other manure. Rabbit manure is unusually high in nitrogen.

Can someone tell me in chemistry if the animal body does something
with nitrogen that the plant body cannot do to nitrogen?

SNIP
Yes.
It degrades the protein, which contains nitrogen. The protein is
originally created by plants. You have this entirely the wrong way
round, I'm afraid.

Bacteria do quite well at creating protien. I can feed a cow urea for
a major part of her protien requirement and if there are enough
carbohydrates available the bacteria in the rumen will convert it to
protien the cow can use quite well.

With corn so cheap it less expensive to burn it for heating to heat a
house than anything but natural gas it makes good sense to winter
cows on pasture on corn, urea, low grade hay instead of good hay and
oil seed meal that is costs a small fortune. The cows do just as
well. You have to make sure and have enough trough space that they
all get to eat and you have to feed them every day or may have
problems but after the bacteria get through with it the cow likes it
fine.

What with natural gas prices going up, corn will be more expensive to
produce. This is especially true for crops that need anhydrous ammonia,
since I suppose it's hard to import. Do you have in guesstimates on how
much U.S. farmer's production costs will increase this year?

It's not too hard to import I think it is 200 miles form one plant and
140 from another plant. You forget we sit on a rather large natural gas
feild.

By import I mean from foreign countries that still have low natural gas
prices. Dry chemicals like urea are lot easier to ship.

If I am buying corn I don't give a damn the price of NH3 only the price
of corn counts. The price of NH3 matters to the guy that grew the corn
but that is not today's problem. It will effect the price of Urea making
it cost about
380 USD per short ton but for no more than cattle need it doesn't mater.

You confuses the cost of production wiht the market value of the
product. If I could be guaranteed getting back all the money it cost to
rasie a crop I would be a rich man. I would never loose money and make
some on good years.

Unless you are like me and grow corn as a hobby prices in the long run
can't stay below the cost of production minus subsidies. I think you will
agree that farmers have bills to pay.

You again show that you lack the basic underrating of farm economics.

BTW, in another thread Uncle Al suggest that it might be better to burn
the ammonia and sell the resulting nitric acid thant to use it to grow
corn to burn in a stove.

Gordon