hort.net Seasonal photo, (c) 2006 Christopher P. Lindsey, All Rights Reserved: do not copy
articles | gallery of plants | blog | tech blog | plant profiles | patents | mailing lists | top stories | links | shorturl service | tom clothier's archive0
Gallery of Plants
Tech Blog
Plant Profiles
Mailing Lists
    Search ALL lists
    Search help
    Subscription info
Top Stories
sHORTurl service
Tom Clothier's Archive
 Top Stories
New Trillium species discovered

Disease could hit Britain's trees hard

Ten of the best snowdrop cultivars

Plant protein database helps identify plant gene functions

Dendroclimatologists record history through trees

Potato beetle could be thwarted through gene manipulation

Hawaii expands coffee farm quarantine

Study explains flower petal loss

RSS story archive

Re: CULT: antibacterial organics? (was Re: losing rhizomes)

  • To: Multiple recipients of list <iris-l@rt66.com>
  • Subject: Re: CULT: antibacterial organics? (was Re: losing rhizomes)
  • From: Linda Mann <lmann@icx.net>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Sep 1997 18:05:47 -0600 (MDT)

- from a text book in a class I took more than 30 yrs ago:

"Although many theories have been advanced for the control of
damping-off organisms by sphagnum [a type of peat] moss, the most
plausible explanation lies in the antibiotic theory.  Fungi associated
with sphagnum moss apparently exude or contain substances which prevent
the development of fungal complexes that cause damping-off. [why this is
called 'antibiotic' is obscure to me]  This theory is supported by the
fact that sphagnum in the fresh state or recently baled affords damping
off control under a wide range of conditions...."  etc (older stuff
doesn't work as well)

from Plant Propagation 1957 (!!) by Mahlstede and Haber.

Linda Mann east Tennessee USA
wondering what made that tiny paragraph lodge in my mind all these

 © 1995-2017 Mallorn Computing, Inc.All Rights Reserved.
Our Privacy Statement
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index