I'm not quite sure what is the point of this thread. In this one meta analysis, they reviewed 343 previous studies done, examining and measuring nutritional content of organic vs non organic vegetables. Is that right? Yet, after 343 studies done, they still find very little difference in the nutritional value of both groups. No difference that would actually support recommending one over the other for nutritional content. After 343 studies. That to me is a very large waste of time and money to do that many studies when the first 50 probably told you all you needed to know. I also have to wonder, who was paying for these studies? Is some organization trying to gain support for their point of view with 'scientific studies showâ¦'? At any rate, I haven't expected that organic produce has significantly higher amounts of nutrition over non organic produce. I simply understand that pesticides and fungicides actually are designed to kill bugs and fungus. Why would I want to eat foods that were sprayed with any kind of agent that can kill, even if it is just a small bug? And had them repeatedly applied? And that the soil that they are growing in has had years and years of them being applied? The other reason I choose organic gardening, is because an ecological system clearly exists. Why ignore that rather than try to understand it and work with the system rather than against it? None of these studies address either of those reasons why I choose organic.

Apparently the link that I gave earlier to the 2011 paper has stopped working. Try this link: doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2010.06.029 Here is the abstract. Title: Effect of cultural system and storage temperature on antioxidant capacity and phenolic compounds in strawberries Authors: Peng Jin a,b, Shiow Y. Wang c, Chien Y. Wanga,*, Yonghua Zheng b Authors affiliation: a Food Quality Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA b College of Food Science and Technology, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, PR China c Genetic Improvement of Fruits and Vegetables Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD 20705, USA Published in: Food Chemistry 124 (2011) 262270 Abstract: "The effects of cultural systems and storage temperatures on antioxidant enzyme activities and nonenzyme antioxidant components in two cultivars (Earliglow and Allstar) of strawberries were investigated. Fruit samples were hand-harvested from organic and conventional farms in Maryland, USA, and were stored at 10, 5 and 0 C. The results from this study showed that strawberries grown from organic culture exhibited generally higher activities in antioxidant enzymes. Moreover, the organic culture also produced fruits with higher level of antioxidant contents. Strawberries stored at higher temperature (10 C) had higher activities of antioxidant enzymes and antioxidant capacities than those stored at lower temperatures (0 or 5 C), in both organic and conventional cultural systems. In conclusion, strawberries produced from organic culture contained significantly higher antioxidant capacities and flavonoid contents than those produced from conventional culture, and even though low storage temperatures retarded decay, they also reduced the increase in antioxidant activities." --------------------------------------------- I found the following idea of a "compost sock" interesting (wouldn't this be considered an organic method?). This link is to a 2009 USDA reviewed research paper that compared growing straberries in "compost socks" with a standard black plastic mulch system and also in a standard matted row system. Please compare the results. The definition of what a "compost sock" is was given as: Compost Socks. Mature, leaf-yard-trimming compost (Leafgro, Millersville, MD) was used to fill 20-cm-diameter compost socks (Filtrexx Inc., Grafton,OH) using a pneumatic blower system attached to a flexible hose. Leaf-grass-poultry (layer) manure compost produced at the USDA Composting Facility, Beltsville, MD, and polyethylene-mesh socks were also used.Adrip irrigation system (BerryHill Irrigation, Buffalo Junction, VA) with emitters spaced 30.5 cm apart and an emitter flow rate of 0.055 L-min per linearm(4.5 gal-min per 1000 linear ft) of row was placed on bed centers (on top of compost socks) and secured with metal landscape pins."

Google, hmmm... "The wood is extremely hard, resistant to rot and long lasting, making it prized for fence posts and small watercraft. As a young man, Abraham Lincoln spent a lot of time splitting rails and fence posts from black locust logs. Flavonoids in the heartwood allow the wood to last over 100 years in soil.[2] In the Netherlands and some other parts of Europe, black locust is the most rot-resistant local tree, and projects have started to limit the use of tropical wood by promoting this tree and creating plantations. It is one of the heaviest and hardest woods in North America." source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_locust My yard used to be part of a farm. When we moved in 18 years ago, I figured the old, weatherbeaten fence posts up by the road would soon just fall down. No need to cut them down. Well, they look the same now as they did 18 years ago. OK, I'll take a ride to the sawmill - see if they have any 4/4".

The spots on the leaves are jus a water marks. If I may suggest something: in the long run, it would be better to keep jades separate from cacti and add perlite to the soil you are using. When potting up the plants, add little more potting mix so they are not sitting so much inside of the pot - it will improve air circulation around plants and also allow more light on your plants.