what nutrients to these each plants dynamically accumulate? might be good to list them! --220.245.178.140
I'm looking for a deeper explanation of this term[]
Firstly, what is the history of this term. Who coined it and when if known. I've been unable to find info on any of the other online encyclos including wikipedia.
Secondly, I've seen lists of plants that supposedly accumulate this or that but they seem very pseudo-scientific. For example, one list that I have seen lists a several plants as accumulators of phosphorus - BUT ALL plants use large amounts of phosphorus for their growth and development - it's critical for photosynthesis - thus it seems to me that ALL plants must dynamically accumulate phosphorus, not just a certain handful - the same could be said of the other major plant nutrients nitrogen and potassium.
Thirdly, the term can be deceptive as it might imply that a plant can magically make an element appear out of nowhere. While some plants do have symbiotic relations with soil bacteria - trading carbon for nitrogen that the bacteria 'fix' from the atmosphere thus adding nitrogen to the soil AND while plants do add carbon to the soil through photosynthesis AND while some deep rooted plants can (over many many generations) bring trace nutrients from many metres down up to the topsoil, it is not true that they can make/generate any particular element (carbon and nitrogen excluded) that is lacking in the soil e.g. phosphorus or any of a handful of trace elements - I suspect that many of the people I've met who are passing these lists around think that this is what happens.
Lastly, I've not found any dynamic accumulator list that gives sources, I'd like to see where this info comes from to verify that it is a legitimate claim and not just someone in a shack thinking up stuff in order to 'sell' to the masses some new gardening technique that will grow veg out of thin air.
I am aware that there are a lot of scientifically unsupported claims regarding every field imaginable including agriculture. I've some repect for permaculture in that it seems to try to back claims with sound scientific principles and evidence. This particular term doesn't appear to me to meet that criteria at the moment.
-- jordan *A T* (earthsociety.org)