Sodium instead of Potassium?

[urbanfarmer]

Potassium deficiency can be greatly alleviated in the presence of sodium but the resulting sodium-rich plants are much more succulent than a high potassium plant. In some plants over 90% of the required potassium can be replaced with sodium without any reduction in growth.

http://4e.plantphys.net/article.php?ch=t&id=289 (way at the bottom)

I posted this previously, but I wanted to bring it to the forefront of all of our collectively short attention spans...

Thoughts??? :ugeek:

[jcx]

Potassium is better for you when you eat it, I would guess. Just feed your worms bananas or dump a lil molasses in the water.

Although I did not real the article yet..

[urbanfarmer]

I like to use ashes from a clean wood fire to add potash! :D

No one thinks this is amazing? Okay, I give up!

[rfeiller]

Is that sodium chloride?
There are so many new releases of information, so much of it changes the way we have thought. The info as stated is a teaser, because it doesn't give any parameters.
A lot of articles are even in contradiction to each other. So much more information has to be discovered. It certainly is a continuing growth experience.

[urbanfarmer]

Is that sodium chloride?
There are so many new releases of information, so much of it changes the way we have thought. The info as stated is a teaser, because it doesn't give any parameters.
A lot of articles are even in contradiction to each other. So much more information has to be discovered. It certainly is a continuing growth experience.
No, it's sodium. Sodium chloride will add sodium just as soda ash (Na2CO3), baking soda (NaHCO3), caustic soda (NaOH), sodium nitrate (NaNO3), di- and tri-sodium phosphates.

Caustic soda (NaOH) can be used to raise the pH. Since we now know that plants do uptake sodium (under certain conditions), we can be more inclined to recommend it or use it ourselves!!!

The info is not a teaser. The document is supplemental to the textbook, but the supplemental is online for free. Typically, information in a textbook is aimed towards teaching students and is based on scientifically reproducible information that has in fact been reproduced again and again. Therefore, I wouldn't consider it "iffy" or "cutting edge research" type information, but sound scientific fact. Anyway, the point of my post was not to question the scientific fact itself, but for us as an AP community to consider the implications and possible benefits or any other feedback based on this information.