Methods and composition for plant propagation and growth

Abstract

Apparatus, methods, and compositions including fibrous material and seaweed wherein the device has a surface for engaging with substrate and has a rigidity that decreases over time upon exposure to water, substrate, earth, or a combination thereof. The device may be a pot, disk, or sheet and may have a second surface to engage with earth. The fibrous material may be present in 70 weight percent or more or 60 to 97 weight percent. The seaweed may be present in 30 weight percent or less. The seaweed may include a brown macroalgae species and may include intact seaweed, derivatives of seaweed, seaweed processing waste, or a combination thereof. Methods and compositions including forming a slurry of seaweed and fibrous material, molding the slurry into the device, and drying the device. Forming the slurry may include hydrating fibrous material, seaweed, or both or introducing fibrous material to an agitation vessel.

Description

[0001] METHODS AND COMPOSITION FOR PLANT PROPAGATION AND GROWTH

[0002] Priority Claim

[0003]

[0001] This application claims the benefit of and priority to United States Provisional Application Serial Number 63 / 776,083 with the same title filed on March 22, 2025 and United States Provisional Application Serial Number 63 / 709, 193 with the same title filed on October 18, 2024. Both applications are incorporated by reference herein in their entirety.

[0004] Field

[0005]

[0002] Embodiments of this invention relate to biodegradable plant containers containing seaweed including raw or pre-processed seaweed materials and additional fibrous or cellulosic material from a variety of sources including reclaimed or recycled material.

[0006] Background

[0007]

[0003] New plants from seeds, cloning, rhizomes, or other propagation may be started in a variety of growth mediums and housing containers for the growth mediums. Plastic endures as a low economic cost, easy disposal housing material, but has long term environmental impacts that bedevil its suitability for new plant growth, especially in the scale it is sold to home gardeners motivated by environmental stewardship. Peat containers such as Jiffy Pot™ are of relatively high cost and, despite marketing itself as readily degradable and more environmentally friendly than plastic, do not degrade with certainty.

[0008]

[0004] The marketplace abounds with plant pots marketed as biodegradable with indeterminate degradation characteristics that are typically composed of peat, coconut coir, or paper-based materials. These containers suffer from drawbacks such as poor water retention, limited nutrient availability, and slow, if any, degradation in soil. A survey of materials in the existing marketplace follows. Common materials in the marketplace include peat moss, paper and cardboard, wood fiber, coco coir, cow manure, rice husk, and bamboo.

[0009]

[0005] Peat moss is made of partially decomposed organic matter from sphagnum moss and other plants. It often has high concentrations of lignin and cellulose. Forming a pot from peat moss suffers from weak natural binding and requires additives or netting to hold shape. That is, it tends to crumble without additional support. Its nutrient content is low in nutrients. It is used commercially to primarily act as a soil conditioner. Its pH level is acidic, which may not be suitable for all plants. Harvesting peat moss leads to peatland degradation, releasing stored carbon dioxide. Peat moss does not have as much structural integrity as other materials. It is less suitable for molding into durable pots without additives.

[0010]

[0006] Paper and cardboard are made of and may be recycled into processed wood pulp which is mainly of cellulose fibers. Thus, wood fiber is used herein to indicate virgin tree processing waste, virgin paper and cardboard slurry, ground wood construction or pallet waste, recycled newsprint, recycled cardboard, wood pulp of any grade, or combinations thereof.

[0011]

[0007] Binding agents work by using hydrogen bonds between cellulose fibers, providing moderate strength. Pots made of paper and cardboard often require glues or resins to enhance durability. The nutrient content is minimal, it is just mainly carbon-rich material. Decomposition over time adds organic matter but limited nutrient supply. Pots made with this material are of limited durability, they are susceptible to moisture and may degrade prematurely. Further, there is potential for residual chemicals from industrial processing.

[0012]

[0008] Wood fiber is shredded or pulped wood fibers, primarily cellulose and lignin. It has binding agents including natural lignin which acts as a binder when heated and pressed. Additives are required for forming a pot, wood fiber is often combined with synthetic binders for strength. Its nutrient content is low; its high carbon-to-nitrogen ratio can temporarily immobilize nitrogen in soil. The decomposition rate is slow, delaying nutrient availability. Using wood fiber requires lots of processing energy and requires significant energy to process and mold. It needs binder additives that may include synthetic resins, reducing biodegradability.

[0013]

[0009] Coco coir is fibers from coconut husks, rich in lignin and cellulose. Its lignin content provides some natural binding when compressed. It requires latex or other binders to maintain pot shape.

[0014]

[0010] Coco coir contains some potassium and micronutrients. Its cation exchange capacity (cec) is good, but may require nutrient supplementation. It does have salt content issues, high sodium and potassium levels can affect plant growth if not properly treated. Use of coco coir relies on additional substances to hold its shape.

[0015]

[0011] Cow manure contains organic matter rich in nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Its natural fiber content is low and requires mixing with fibers or binders. It is often combined with recycled paper or other fibers. Its nutrient content is rich in nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Cow manure is good for soil fertility: enhances nutrient content. The drawbacks include odor and pathogens and it requires proper processing and composting.

[0012] Rice husk is the outer shell of rice grains, high in silica and cellulose. Rice husk has weak natural binding: requires binders to form pots. Its silica content makes binding challenging due to rigidity. Its nutrient content is low; primarily provides silica. Rice husk may help with soil conditioning: improves aeration but limited nutrient supply. Processing difficulties exist, it is hard to mold without significant additives. Finally, rice husk pots may have high brittleness, the pots may be fragile and prone to cracking.

[0016]

[0013] Bamboo is a fibrous material rich in cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin. Lignin provides some binding when processed. Synthetic binders are often used to enhance strength and moldability. Bamboo’s nutrient content is minimal when used as a pot material. Its decomposition is slow, providing little immediate nutrient benefit. Bamboo requires energy intensive processing at high temperatures and pressures. Its binders may include non- biodegradable resins.

[0017]

[0014] An effective material that promotes and supports new plant growth, reliably degrades, and leaves its surrounding and contained soil with better water retention properties and an enhanced soil nutrient profile is needed.

[0018] Summary

[0019]

[0015] This summary is provided to comply with 37 C.F.R. § 1.73, requiring a summary of the invention briefly indicating the nature and substance of the invention. It is submitted with the understanding that it will not be used to interpret or limit the scope or meaning of the claims.

[0016] Embodiments herein relate to an apparatus, methods, and compositions including fibrous material and seaweed wherein the device has a surface for engaging with substrate and has a rigidity that decreases over time upon exposure to water, substrate, earth, or a combination thereof. The device may be a pot, disk, or sheet. The device may have a second surface to engage with earth. The fibrous material may include wood fiber. It may be present in 70 weight percent or more or 60 to 97 weight percent. The seaweed may be present in 30 weight percent or less. The seaweed may include a brown macroalgae species. The seaweed may include intact seaweed, derivatives of seaweed, seaweed processing waste, or a combination thereof. The device may have walls of a thickness of at least 2 mm

[0020]

[0017] Embodiments herein relate to methods and compositions including forming a slurry of seaweed and fibrous material, molding the slurry into the device, and drying the device.

[0021] Forming the slurry may include hydrating fibrous material, seaweed, or both or introducing fibrous material to an agitation vessel. In some embodiments, drying the device includes tailoring device surfaces for engaging with substrate and earth.

[0022] Figures

[0023]

[0018] Aspects, features, benefits and advantages of the embodiments described herein will be apparent with regard to the following description, appended claims, and accompanying drawings as follows.

[0024]

[0019] Figures 1A, IB, and 1C are sectional views of an embodiment of a device.

[0025]

[0020] Figure 2 is a schematic drawing of an embodiment of a device holding substrate, water, and a plant.

[0026]

[0021] Figures 3A, 3B, 3C, and 3D provide a schematic of seaweed containing pots and their plants.

[0027]

[0022] Figure 4 is a three-dimensional drawing of a device including its surfaces.

[0028]

[0023] Figure 5 is a plot of moisture retention as a function of time for six pot materials.

[0029]

[0024] Figure 6 is a drawing of a base of an embodiment of a device after the base has rested in earth for several days.

[0030]

[0025] Figure 7 is a cross-sectional view of a plant, its roots, substrate, walls of an embodiment of a device, and earth after the device has been inserted into the earth for several days.

[0031] Detailed Description

[0032]

[0026] This disclosure is not limited to the particular systems, devices and methods described, as these may vary. The terminology used in the description is for the purpose of describing the particular versions or embodiments only, and is not intended to limit the scope.

[0033]

[0027] As used in this document, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural references unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. Unless defined otherwise, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meanings as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Nothing in this disclosure is to be construed as an admission that the embodiments described in this disclosure are not entitled to antedate such disclosure by virtue of prior invention. As used in this document, the term “comprising” means “including, but not limited to.”

[0034]

[0028] Embodiments herein incorporate a blend of seaweed materials such as raw or pre- processed kelp, fibrous reinforcements, and naturally occurring binding agents within the kelp itself. Users of this container material include home gardeners, sustainable agriculture farmers, and horticulture suppliers. This material may also be used for commercial agriculture and horticulture, afforestation projects, organic farming, landscaping, environmental restoration projects, reforestation efforts, desert greening activities, and cannabis cultivation (from seed or propagation). Some users may appreciate an effective, sustainable alternative to peat-based and plastic seedling containers.

[0035]

[0029] In some embodiments, the container may be used to house seeds and seedlings during the first stages of growing and facilitate seed germination and early-stage plant growth. That is, the container holds a substrate such as soil, growing medium, compost, treated manure, or a combination thereof, and a seed, rhizome, cutting, seedling, or other plant start that is undergoing propagation. The material used in some embodiments may be selected to be transplanted directly into the soil with the baby plant. This may minimize transplantation shock and provide a fragile root system with added layer of protection against environmental extremes (dry soil, freezing soil). In some embodiments, the water retention of the pot, the heat transfer properties of the pot, and the composition of the pot may help a plant survive in hot, dry environments. Air pruning is also controlled in some embodiments.

[0036]

[0030] Figures 1 A, IB, and 1C provide a series of schematic drawings for the geometrical considerations for an embodiment of a pot. Figure 2 is a schematic drawing of an additional embodiment holding substrate 201, water (not shown in Figure 2), and a plant 202. Figure 2’s pot was made by using a paper making kit and multiple sheets of seaweed paper were layered on top of each other and molded to a cylinder to create a pot shape.

[0037]

[0031] In some embodiments, a pot may be formed as a round planter with a round lip with a 9 g final dry weight and dimensions of 3-% inch top diameter by 2-‘ / s inch base diameter with a height of 3-% inch. Some devices may have a height of 2 to 3 inches, 2 inches, 3 inches, or a combination thereof. Some devices may have an average wall thickness of 1 to 3mm. Some may have tapered sidewalls with 1 to 7 degrees draft. Some embodiments have sidewalls with 16.2 degrees draft. Some embodiments may have sidewalls with 1 to 17 degrees draft. Some embodiments may have an "X" shape mold on base of cylinder - for perforations for root aeration and water drainage. Tapered sides may be selected for transplanting without root disturbance. Some embodiments may include a reinforced base for additional stability with a "Lip" around the top rim for stability and stickability. Some embodiments may withstand typical weather conditions (e.g., rain, wind, sunlight) for 12 weeks before beginning the decomposition process.

[0038]

[0032] The pots have been observed in home gardening applications including sowing tomato seeds indoors, then transplanted directly into the earth as one continuous plant, soil, and pot system. Figures 3A, 3B, 3C, and 3D provide a schematic of seaweed containing pots 301, 302, 303, and 304, substrate 305, 306, 307, and 308 and their plants 309, 310, 311, and 312. This series illustrates that even when the starting materials are the same, plant growth may vary from pot to pot, but some generalizations about the effectiveness of the pot and its supported plant life may be made across the series of identical starting pots, substrate, and seeds.

[0039]

[0033] Devices that may use embodiments of the methods and compositions described herein may include 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10-pack seedling containers of a depth of 1.5 to 3.0 inches, seed trays, planters, egg cartons, disks, and landscape fabric. Some seedling containers may have square walls and may be connected across the upper wall or upper lip. Some embodiments may have walls of 2 mm or less, 4 mm or less, 6 mm or less, or a combination thereof. Wall thickness may even vary within one device when walls are tapered or configured in pinch points or curves for a specific geometrical design. Some devices may have tear lines or weakened regions between cells to enable single cell separation with less than or equal to 10 N manual force. In some embodiments, the container wall includes micro-ridges, grooves, or textured features configured to increase surface area, enhance capillary uptake, promote directional root egress or air pruning, or a combination thereof. Some embodiments may combine a device with a seed set, seedlings, or substrate optimized for use with the device for a convenient kit for gardening activities.

[0040]

[0034] Manufacturing a device requires several activities. In some embodiments, the initial inputs are fibrous materials processed into a pulp using a pulper with a blade and screw press, separating water and collecting dry or mostly dry pulp. In this process, one may start all “fibrous materials” as a pulp - meaning the materials have already gone through their own pulping process before reaching this stage of the process. In some embodiments, recycled materials are shipped as dry solid to reduce costs and carbon footprint associated with the heavier wet weight. Some material, such as wheat fiber, may be ground or otherwise processed on site at a pulping facility so no or much less shipping is associated with that type of input. The fiber slurry is mixed in an agitation vessel such as a delusion tank for high consistency, ensuring the correct fiber size and structure. Kelp (or other marine-based material) may be added as a dry input at this stage, breaking into smaller particles during mixing in some embodiments. If not fully rehydrated before molding, warping may occur during drying.

[0041]

[0035] In other embodiments, the kelp is harvested, processed, dried, and the raw, dry kelp biomass may be ground into small particles. The material may undergo extraction to remove about 70 percent polysaccharides using an aqueous process, then the remaining kelp biomaterial pulp is separated & re-dehydrated for shipping. After shipping, rehydrating the kelp pulp may be needed. It is rehydrated with water for about an hour to overnight or overnight, then, in some embodiments, may combine the kelp pulp with recycled paper to form a slurry. The fibrous material may be weighed dry and thrown into an agitation vessel such as a blender with the seaweed slurry input and blended into a pulp.

[0042]

[0036] In some embodiments, the seaweed is visible in the fibrous matrix, acting as a structural binder and nutrient source such as that shown in Figure 4. Figure 4 is a schematic drawing of a pot 403. Visible seaweed speckles 401 in pot surface 402 may also imply entry points for life forms including roots or beneficial microbes.

[0043]

[0037] Formation of the pot relies on introducing the slurry into a mold and then allowing the water to drain and dry from the pot. Excess water is removed in ways tailored for the slurry properties. In some embodiments, the pulp slurry is vacuumed into a screen mold using compression and pressure to form pot dimensions. Suction time and slurry volume are adjusted based on fiber composition and pot wall thickness. The slurry may be placed into molds under pressure to form the desired pot shape in some embodiments to ensure uniformity and structural integrity. Once mostly dry, the inside of the mold is pressed again to smooth the pot interior surface, reinforcing structural integrity and preventing deformations. In some embodiments, one may pull the wet slurry through a vacuum. Then, the slurry undergoes molding into devices, plant containers such as pots, wherein the slurry is casted into three-dimensional printed screen mold. The device is dried and the walls are hardened off. Some embodiments may benefit from a low energy drying process. Some embodiments may force the liquid from the slurry solids via machine blowout, aspiration, physically pressing the slurry through a filter, having a mold configured to aggregate solids and facilitate water flow, etc. and then the formed pots are placed onto a surface to prevent warping. Mild chemical treatments may be applied to enhance the binding properties or to incorporate additional biodegradable binders if necessary. For more complex shapes or continuous production, extrusion molding can be utilized to form long strands or specific designs. No additional surface treatments are applied in some embodiments. Figure 4 shows the wall surface with macro algae distributed through the final pot’s walls because the slurry contained an even distribution of the algae.

[0044]

[0038] Drying, curing, quality control, and packaging are important to device integrity and sales. Controlled conditions may be selected to balance between durability and biodegradability. Kelp pots may be air-dried in a controlled environment to preserve bioactive properties without high temperatures or baking. Some embodiments may have a temperature-controlled or humidity controlled space or room for drying. In some embodiments, the pots may be placed on drying racks at 60 to 75 degrees Fahrenheit. In some embodiments, drying is performed at less than or equal to 110°C to preserve bioactive compounds. Some drying embodiments may achieve a target residual moisture of 4 to 9 weight percent moisture.

[0045]

[0039] The devices are air dried in a controlled environment that may control temperature, humidity, and fan speed or other air movement. Further, the type of seaweed may influence drying - for example, using giant kelp instead of sugar kelp may also increase the time for drying. Adjustments to room temp, humidity, airflow may be necessary depending on the weight, shape, or percentage of seaweed in the container. Hot pressing may be used in some embodiments at 60 to 140 °C and 0.3 to 3.0 MPa for 10 to 600 seconds. Hot pressing may help densify a device and set wet strength.

[0046]

[0040] The weight of the device and surface geometry of the device may influence drying. Because seaweed dries at a different rate than the fibrous mixture, quality control review is also required to minimize warping. Testing for durability helps ensure devices withstand handling and environmental exposure during the seedling phase. Biodegradation testing verifies that pots degrade at a desired rate under specific planting conditions. Material consistency testing ensures the ratio of kelp, fibrous materials, and nutrients remains optimal.

[0047]

[0041] As the devices are used, the engagement with substrate and earth may result in degradation that facilitates soil enrichment. A device may have a wall or other rigidity that decreases over time upon exposure to water, substrate, earth, or a combination thereof. As a device breaks down it releases nutrients like nitrogen (from proteins) and minerals into the soil. Embodiments of the devices may be completely biodegradable and home compostable. This means, the plant, soil, and pot may be planted directly in the soil without having to dislodge the pot from the soil and plant’s roots. The seaweed-based material, when left to decompose and integrate into the earth, may enhance water retention in the soil and helps enhance nutrient delivery to plants. Further, biodegraded material from the pot continues to enrich its surrounding soil, providing enhanced nutrient content, improved soil structure, support for microbial life, reduction of soil erosion, and reduced synthetic inputs. Put another way, in some embodiments, the pot supports plant health through gradual breakdown of the pot in the earth. Herein, earth is used to refer to continuous material of the ground, raised bed, garden, garden bed, greenhouse, field, irrigation region, or other volume larger than the substrate and device. Earth may include dirt, soil, growing medium, clay, sand, loam, gravel, compost, agricultural land, treated manure, introduced materials such as agricultural waste, silage, mulch, straw, or a combination thereof.

[0042] The time for degradation is lower than pots with peat moss or paper with no seaweed components, some embodiments break down within a single growing season such as eight to twelve weeks, three to six months, or six months during winter. The rate of degradation depends on climate, soil type and time of year. Bacteria, insects, fungus, and other life forms in the earth help with the degradation of the device into unconsolidated organic material, the seaweed presence benefits the life form engagement and degradation. This degradation means the pot leaves no waste behind and the devices decompose much faster than peat or coco pots with no seaweed, and on par with paper and cow manure pots with no seaweed and does not have to be tilled into the earth. The device does not have to be allowed ages to decompose like compostable plastic or the Jiffy Pot™.

[0048]

[0043] Additionally, the pot’s interaction with water over time may provide benefits to the plant and soil. The pot walls and base may have high water retention properties and help with soil moisture regulation. The pot’s porous structure reduces the frequency of watering while preventing overwatering. The porous matrix supports root aeration and soil health. Also, because the plant roots may engage with the structure more easily, root rot and root circling are less likely. The porosity also aids in “Air Pruning”, leading to increased root density within the pot, and increased root spreading once planted. Air pruning occurs when small fibrous roots pass through the container wall and are exposed to air. This makes the roots die off on the outside. This is beneficial, because it signals to the plant to create more roots closer to the root ball, leading to more secondary and tertiary root development inside the pot. Unlike plastic pots, where the first roots keep circling around the inside of the pot and the plant ends up developing fewer central roots as it is put all its energy into a few long, circled roots. Once planted, specimen that have been “air pruned” end up having more roots to shoot out across the soil and can do so at a better rate for adjusting to the new environment. In comparison, when plants are removed from plastic pots, the few long fragile roots are then shocked by the elements and new environment. Those roots can end up dying off, shocking the plant and stunting its growth, while the plant spends more energy developing the secondary roots closer to the root ball. Fiber pots that allow for air pruning have already developed these roots, so they are far less likely to be shocked, and can spend their energy on leaf, stem, flower, and fruit development. Additionally, some embodiments may have an electrical conductivity (EC) of a 1 :5 water extract that is below a phytotoxic threshold suitable for seedling establishment.

[0049]

[0044] The timeline of the device natural decomposition has advantages. Some devices may degrade into the surrounding earth in about 2 to about 16 weeks depending on seasonal and regional weather patterns. Sugar kelp is inherently biodegradable, breaking down naturally in soil without leaving harmful residues. This property eliminates the need for pot removal from the plant or substrate, reducing labor and transplant shock for seedlings. The degradation rate may be tailored through processing methods for different applications, ensuring that the pot maintains its structure long enough for the seedling to establish a robust root system. Soil health improvement may occur, decomposition enriches soil organic matter and stimulates beneficial microbial activity without or with less conventional fertilizer and pesticide.

[0050]

[0045] Energy efficiency may drive some manufacturing processes. No or fewer mechanical equipment may be selected for some embodiments of the air-drying process. Some embodiments may capitalize on the hot summer weather to increase production as this will reduce the amount of time for drying. Some embodiments may benefit from a climate controlled room to limit drying variability.

[0051]

[0046] Some embodiments may find that using two machines together may benefit the efficiency of both machines. For example, a larger molding machine may require 20 times the amount of material to run and at the end of its process anywhere from 2-5 kgs of material is wasted during its cleaning process. However, the smaller production machine may use the waste material from the large machine minimizing overall waste or material loss, and save on energy by using the smaller machine.

[0047] Raw materials transport costs may be considered. Tn some embodiments, all raw materials are sourced and transported within North America - raw kelp gets dried, then goes from Alaska to California, rehydrated for extraction, then dehydrated before arriving at manufacturer - This all means a 90 percent reduction in mass or weight when transporting. Some regional seaweed harvesters, such as those in California, may ship their product without drying the material or only partially drying the material. This may cost more for transport, but reduces rehydration costs. Some embodiments benefit from recycled materials all currently sourced within the region of manufacture such as within Washington state. Manufacturing facilities may be selected for proximity to a seaweed source and consistent supply. Some embodiments benefit when the seaweed is washed, cooled, dried, or otherwise stabilized as quickly as possible to lock in value. This helps avoid degradation such as cell walls degrading, losing moisture, breaking down the cell structure almost immediately after being pulled from the water by naturally occurring enzymes in seaweed, accelerating bacteria growth and spoilage via warm air exposure, causing sliminess and unpleasant odors, reducing gelling and thickening or bioactive properties. Some facilities may be selected within a 5 to 8 hour drive of harvesting sites to reduce transportation emissions and requirements for multiple processing facilities.

[0052]

[0048] Manufacturing process efficiency may also be considered. To reduce costs generally, some products that don’t pass quality analysis may be returned into a slurry mixture, this reduces waste and materials lost. Also, some embodiments may rehydrate “rejected” pots and put them into existing “mixed” slurry for current production run instead of having to re-run the pulper system from start of process and waste materials. Further, in some embodiments, drying is done via air drying, so no electricity used.

[0053]

[0049] Post-formation quality checks include particle size analysis, structural integrity tests (crush test, fiber shape, and warping), water retention tests (freeness, the ability for water to pass through), pH analysis to confirm suitability for plant growth, compostability and biodegradability, disintegration rate, bioactive properties assessment, crush test / strength test - weight necessary to crush container, fiber analysis (fines, fiber lengths, kink, curl, fiber shape. Fiber analysis may inform how roots could penetrate walls), bioactive properties profile analysis, or a combination thereof. Some embodiments may test for brightness looking at how light reflects on the product. Some embodiments may test for PFAS.

[0050] The tests listed above may be used individually or in combination to characterize the pot final composition, the individual components of the raw materials introduced to the slurry to form a pot, or to characterize how the pot will perform as a pot containing soil or as a pot submerged or buried in the earth.

[0054]

[0051] The composition for the individual slurry profiles may rely on several factors including the desired nutrient profile as the device degrades, the geographical considerations of the manufacturing facility, and the type of plant in cultivation. A nutrient profile includes the macro algae itself and its degradation components. Different species possess varying properties that make them suitable for pot formation, plant health improvement, root development, and soil quality enhancement. Some embodiments will leverage the results of all samples to determine the specific concentration of each input percentage based on the specific use-case, with all combination of materials meeting the target range for ideal plant growth. This assessment may also consider fibrous materials to combine using factors such as fiber lengths, freeness, fiber shapes, PFAS concentration, compostability, etc. to determine effective fibrous inputs and the combinations thereof. In some embodiments, this fiber assessment would be used first, then if it meets the structural requirements, we next consider the nutritional assessment to understand how much seaweed and what kind of seaweed needs to be combined to reach the target range or ranges for a specific plant’s growth.

[0055]

[0052] The device includes seaweed and fibrous material. Some embodiments may include a binder. Throughout this document, weight percent is used to indicate the percentage of solid material in comparison to some other solid material. Water may be present in a slurry and in a device of unknown and varied concentration across the life of a slurry and device. Weight percent may be thought of as a proxy for dry weight percent in some embodiments. The seaweed may be introduced to the fiber slurry at 10 to 25 weight percent in a wet slurry and the fibrous material may be introduced at 75 to 90 weight percent. The fibrous material may be present at 60 to 97 weight percent in some embodiments. In some embodiments, the seaweed content is 3 to 40 weight percent or 5 to 25 weight percent or 30 weight percent or less.

[0056]

[0053] Adjustment for the circumstances and objectives may be appropriate. That is, if one would like a device with final concentration profile of 13 weight percent sugar kelp, 12 weight percent giant kelp, 25 weight percent Kraft paper, 25 weight percent wheat straw pulp, and 25 weight percent wood pulp, those percentages should be consistently present in the slurry batch throughout the entire run. Some embodiments may have up to 50 weight percent seaweed, it depends on what a specific sample profile is. In some embodiments, too much seaweed would not allow the degradable material and seaweed fibers to bond properly. Adjustments can be made if percentages are off. Some visual tests of slurry as it is collected and dried in small allotments may also be useful for ensuring consistency.

[0057]

[0054] The weight percentage of each component may also depend on the nutritional profile of all the inputs combined. The alginate concentration helps determine the moisture and the macro and micronutrient profile of the seaweed and degradable material helps determine the nutrition available as the device degrades. If a slurry sample has high levels of both alginate and NPK values, one may limit the amount the amount of seaweed used to ensure a well-balanced nutrient delivery (i.e. to avoid over fertilizing). If a sample has high alginate but low NPK, one may supplement for a different species of seaweed that matches the NPK necessary to make up the gap-

[0058]

[0055] The slurry of the combined fibrous material and seaweed and its resulting final device reflect the interaction between the seaweed and fibrous material. The concentration of the components may be uniform. The molding and drying results in a device that is more likely to be uniform when the slurry has evenly distributed components. The material science properties of the components do influence this. That is, fibrous material such as recycled newsprint and cardboard has fibrous material particles that started as a tree, then paper pulp, then paper, then it is hydrated and treated as recycled material. The fibrous material is most likely of a size and shape that reflects this physically intense history including shorter, finer, less branched cellulose particles than the virgin paper pulp. The resulting fibrillation of the fibrous material means that is more likely to have a denser, harder, less flexible contribution to the device wall matrix.

[0059]

[0056] The length of the fiber and other properties of the fibrous material does vary based on the type of material. For example, long fibers are more likely with softwood pulp, hemp, and kenaf. These longer fibers provide mechanical strength because they create a more extensive network of hydrogen bonds. The long fibers interact well which adds tensile strength and tear resistance to the matrix. The long fibers may not pack tightly, though, there is a higher likelihood of larger void space, reducing density and surface smoothness. In contrast, shorter fibers such as those found with hardwood pulp, grasses, and recycled fibers may fill voids between longer fibers and increase bulk and stiffness. This may increase surface smoothness and printability of the matrix.

[0057] In contrast, seaweed is rarely, if ever, recycled. The virgin material as it is harvested from the ocean may be dried or mechanically or chemically altered, but the process steps are limited between harvest and incorporation to the device slurry. This lower amount of physical interaction preserves the structure of the seaweed particles in comparison to the fibrous material. The intact fibrils of the of the seaweed fibers allow for higher water absorption and, in some cases, visible swelling. Seaweed flesh does break down faster than fibrous material which allows a dynamic and complex ongoing surface interaction between the seaweed and fibrous material. The seaweed may have an average particle size of 50 to 1000 pm or 0.5mm - 4.5mm prior to blending.

[0060]

[0058] All materials may have a fines component, smallest fiber fragments and cell wall debris that may be created along the way. This may include parenchyma cells ray cells, and fibrillated fiber fragments. Fines may help fill the gaps between fibers to improve density and barrier properties and increase the bonding area to enhance tensile strength and sometimes water resistance. Too many fines in the slurry or resulting device may reduce drainage and slow dewatering in the molds. Too many fines may make materials brittle and reduce porosity and air permeability, trapping water and leading to drying issues.

[0061]

[0059] Upon combination, the seaweed particles and degradable material fibers form a matrix of multiple fiber and fines geometries, sizes, and shapes. Long particles have a lower surface area per gram than short fibers yielding fewer bonding sites for water to cling to. The long fibers may form a more open network with larger pores. Thus, water drains faster, but the substrate and device may dry more quickly. This also favors air flow and drainage but lower water retention. The large, malleable, seaweed particles with high concentration of fibrils form a skeleton and muscles of the device wall matrix while the smaller, denser, harder degradable materials fill the gaps across the matrix. In contrast, the short fibers have a higher surface area per gram and more sites for hydrogen bonding. Their presence may create a denser, less porous structure for holding water longer. Fines may act as sponges, their higher surface area makes them hydrophilic. Fines fill in even more gaps than short fibers, they do help with retaining water. Recycled fibers have a past that shifts performance. Recycled fibers behave with more surface area, are more hydrophilic, and form denser mats. Recycled fibers are more likely to undergo homification as the pore inside the cell wall collapse and the fibers bond more tightly with each other, but absorb less water inside themselves. Multiple types of fibrous material mixed with seaweed may also yield a matrix of multiple sized particles and voids. Water interacts with all surfaces at a rate consistent with the surface properties of the seaweed or fibrous material it encounters.

[0062]

[0060] Fibrous material sources may include any material with fibrous properties such as plant based fibers, lignocellulosic fibers or cellulose. Examples may include wood fiber, wheat fiber pulp, hemp fiber pulp, sugar beet fiber pulp, rice husk, sugar cane, cereal straw, bagasse, mushroom compost, brewers spent grain (bsg), corn stover and com husk pulp, coffee grounds and chaff, banana stem pulp, cotton byproducts, distillers dried grains (ddgs), or a combination thereof. Wood fiber may include any material from tree processing, tree-based building materials, paper pulp, recycled paper, recycled kraft paper, recycled cardboard, recycled building materials, or a combination thereof. Some embodiments may benefit from reinforcement fibers including weaving fibers, such as hemp, flax, bamboo fibers, wood, or other cellulosic materials, to maintain molded structure and improve mechanical strength. Shorter fibers create a tighter weave, while longer fibers improve flexibility and root penetration. In some embodiments that use recycled paper or cardboard, non-paper impurities may be present consistent with any recycled paper.

[0063]

[0061] Table 1. Comparison of materials.

[0064]

[0062] In some embodiments, the walls and base of the pot may further include recycled natural fibers from wood or paper pulp processing. A mixture of 50 percent grey 100 percent recycled paper and 50 percent kraft 100 percent recycled paper fiber may be effective for some embodiments.

[0065]

[0063] The components, the walls and base of the pot may include macro algae-based material. This seaweed-based material may be whole, sustainably sourced kelp or it may be kelp components that are routinely treated as waste or a waste stream, that is, kelp components that remain after harvested kelp undergoes extraction processing for use in the health, beauty, medicinal, agricultural, and food industries. Some embodiments may benefit from using specifically Saccharina Latissima, sugar kelp, or a waste stream or byproduct of sugar kelp processing. The kelp components that remain after extraction may include alginate, other organic matter, and minerals. In some embodiments, the alginate content is as non-soluble alginic acid, non-gelling, "Non-activated Alginate," and includes 30 percent remaining polysaccharides. A particle size for seaweed such as kelp pulp is 0.5mm-4.5mm. Some embodiments may benefit from smaller particles of 50 to 500 pm which are present and not visible. Some embodiments may benefit from particle sizes of 500 to 4500pm which are more likely to be visible.

[0066]

[0064] Harvesting and processing macro algae requires multiple mechanical processes. Harvesting and drying includes sustainable harvesting practices (ensuring kelp is harvested in a manner that allows for regrowth and maintains marine biodiversity), cleaning (kelp is inspected and cleaned to remove debris or marine organisms. Damaged or unhealthy pieces are discarded.), and drying techniques (kelp is sun-dried or air-dried to remove excess moisture, preventing decomposition during storage and handling, but may also be freeze dried). Pulping and formulation includes mechanical pulping wherein the dried kelp is mechanically processed to create a fine pulp, breaking down the fibers for easier molding. Drying and curing may also be performed. In some embodiments, the hydrated seaweed is adjusted to 5.5 to 7.5 pH before addition to the slurry with fibrous materials.

[0067]

[0065] Herein, the word seaweed is used to refer to red, green, and brown algae. Seaweed includes brown macroalgae. Seaweed is also used to refer to byproducts or waste of seaweed processing for industrial, commercial, agricultural, health, food, or other uses. Such byproducts may have a chemical composition or physical properties that vary some from the algae in whole, but the variable nature does not stray far afield from the word seaweed - the byproducts still contain some portion of the starting material and use of the word seaweed does encompass such byproducts. Thus, seaweed may include intact seaweed, derivatives of seaweed, seaweed processing waste, or a combination thereof. The sodium ion concentration of the seaweed may be reduced prior to use in some embodiments herein by washing, soaking, fermentation, or ion exchange to achieve an extract salinity below a threshold that is non-inhibitory to seedlings. Some seaweed processors may wash or rinse seaweed to reduce the presence of salt. This reduction of sodium does not happen when it is only air dried. Thus, some embodiments may use seaweed with a higher sodium content in one formula, but use a washed version with lower sodium in another.

[0068]

[0066] Seaweed may also mean algae species that is fresh, dried, milled, or as an aqueous extract. A survey of seaweed and its use within embodiments described herein follows.

[0067] The device performance may be tailored by selecting from different types of seaweed with varied composition as follows. In some embodiments, giant kelp creates a bit more rigidity for a device. A pot for growing tomato plants from seed may have a tomato plant grow better upon exposure to one type of seaweed while a pot for growing a tree seedling may have a tree benefit from exposure to a different type of seaweed. That is, tomato plants benefit from increased levels of Phosphorus (P) in early stages of development as this increases root development and establishment. In comparison, lettuce germinates quickly and has a shallow root system, so the plant needs an immediate availability of nitrogen (N) to focus on leaf development. Phosphorous is still important to lettuce, but not in the same amount because it shifts focus to leaf production much faster than tomatoes do. In contrast, tomato plants benefit from an application of nitrogen later for increased leaf development. Tomatoes have a much longer growth cycle, and depend heavily on root development in early stages, as healthy roots uptake more nutrients that will aid in leaf and fruit yield later. This means one type of seaweed or a blend with high phosphorous may be selected for tomato plants and one type of seaweed or a blend with high nitrogen content may be selected for lettuces depending on the circumstances.

[0068] Selecting raw materials for the seaweed components of pots for specific plants may be tailored. Leafy vegetable pots may blend saccharina latissima with ulva lactuca for high nitrogen content and growth stimulation. Fruit and flower pots may use ascophyllum nodosum and Laminaria digitata to enhance flowering and fruit development. Tree seedling pots may employ Macrocystis pyrifera and Nereocystis luetkeana for robust root and stem growth. Moisture retention pots: incorporate Chondrus crispus and Palmaria palmata to maintain soil moisture for sensitive plants. Nitrogen-demanding crops may utilize Ulva lactuca and Enteromorpha species to boost nitrogen availability. Some compositions may use blends of seaweed. For balanced nutrient supply and structural integrity, one may combine brown algae for strength with red algae for moisture retention and additional nutrients. For example, a mix of laminaria digitata (structural strength and nutrients) and chondrus crispus (moisture retention and vitamins) may be selected. Some embodiments may benefit from considering regional product lines. A North Atlantic focus may use locally abundant species like Laminaria digitata, Ascophyllum nodosum, Chondrus crispus to reduce transportation costs and support local economies. A Pacific Regions focus may emphasize Macrocystis pyrifera, Nereocystis luetkeana, and Gracilaria species for products marketed in the Pacific regions.

[0069]

[0069] Like any life form, the variety in species, in physical characteristics, growth and health status, exposure to geographical conditions such as water impurities, salt type and concentration, dissolved chemicals, other life form presence, dissolved gasses, temperature, cultivation or wild harvesting practices, and many other factors may influence the composition and physical properties of any one particular volume of seaweed in time. Some generalizations are made by species as follows, but variety and variability may exist, characterizing any particular volume of material may vary and may rely on supplier or manufacturer testing across the manufacturing process. That is, seaweed suppliers may test the material before their processing or component separation steps and testing may continue at the manufacturing facility from hydration of the seaweed, through slurry development, molding and drying, after the device is made, or any combination thereof.

[0070]

[0070] Brown algae (Phaeophyceae), red algae (Rhodophyta), and green algae (Chlorophyta) are discussed below. This includes an expanded list of algae and their characteristics such as binding properties, plant benefits, native regions, and suitability for various plant types.

[0071] 1. Brown Algae (Phaeophyceae)

[0072]

[0071] Brown algae include laminariates, fucales, dictyotales, and ectocarpales. It is marine and multicellular, and it is present as large seaweed, forming kelp forests. Brown algae are rich in alginates, which are binding agents. Laminarin and mannitol may also be present. Fucoidans, sulfated polysaccharides, are present and bioactive, providing antimicrobial and immune effects. Brown algae provide structural scaffolding, fiber binders, and strong gelation with calcium, and act as thickeners, stabilizers, and film formers. The fibrous nature of sugar kelp imparts tensile strength, making the material resilient against handling and environmental stresses during the initial growth stages of plants. Sugar kelp and other brown algae have a natural porous structure that may enhance water retention and aeration within the device, promoting healthy root development and may prevent waterlogging.

[0073]

[0072] Brown algae also contain a variety of nutrients and bioactive compounds beneficial to plant health. Iodine may be present in concentrations up to 1000 times land plants.

[0074] Polysaccharides, minerals including potassium, calcium, and magnesium, and polyphenols such as phlorotannins and antioxidants. Protein may be present in concentrations of 5 to 15 dry weight percentage.

[0075]

[0073] Brown algae, as it degrades into the earth and interacts with the substrate in a device, may benefit the plant growing in the device substrate by helping with root development, stress tolerance, nutrient uptake, and potassium and iodine supply. Alginate enhances root structure and moisture retention. Fucoidan and laminarin act as elicitors helping plants resist drought, salinity and pathogens. Mannitol chelates minerals improving their availability. Plant metabolism, stress defense and resilience, and mineral balance are enhanced. Pathogens are less likely when brown algae is present. Plant defense mechanisms are stimulated.

[0076]

[0074] Saccharina latissima (Sugar Kelp). In addition to the characteristics described generally for brown algae including the presence of laminarin and fucoidan, sugar kelp has concentrations of cellulose, nitrogen, and phosphorus that contribute to device mechanical strength and rigidity. It is native to South Africa and the cold waters of the North Atlantic and North Pacific

[0077] Oceans. Plants that benefit include leafy greens and herbs by boosting leaf development and chlorophyll production and root vegetables by improving root growth and nutrient uptake. The gel-forming properties allow for versatile pot shapes and sizes. Sulfur is present in a concentration to support structural development and metabolic functions. Micro nutrients present include iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), boron (B), molybdenum (Mo), and cobalt (Co), these are vital for various enzymatic and physiological processes. Bioactive Compounds of sugar kelp include plant growth hormones such as auxins, cytokinins, and gibberellins that stimulate growth. Vitamins and antioxidants enhance stress resistance and overall plant health.

[0078]

[0075] Laminaria digitata (Oarweed). There are bioactive compounds and antimicrobial properties specific to laminaria, kelp. Laminarin is a polysaccharide that disrupts bacterial cell membranes, leading to cell death. Phlorotannins provide additional antibacterial and antifungal protection. Laminaria’s high alginate content (up to 40% of dry weight), helps form strong gels. Laminaria contains growth hormones like auxins and cytokinins, promoting root and shoot development. Laminaria is native to the North Atlantic coasts, including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Eastern Canada, and northeastern US. Plant benefits include that it is rich in minerals (potassium, magnesium, calcium) and trace elements (iron, zinc, copper). Plants that benefit include vegetables and fruits by enhanced growth, yield, and fruit quality and trees and shrubs by promoting strong root systems and overall vigor.

[0079]

[0076] Ascophyllum nodosum (Rockweed). Rockweed binding agents do contain alginates, though in slightly lower quantities than kelps. It has high levels of cytokinins and betaines, enhancing stress tolerance and delaying senescence. Rockweed is rich in potassium, aiding in fruit and flower development. It is native to North Atlantic coastlines, particularly Northern Europe and the Eastern Coast of North America. It is desirable for flowers and ornamentals by enhancing bloom size, color, and longevity and for fruits by improving fruit set, size, and quality.

[0080]

[0077] Macrocystis pyrifera (Giant Kelp). Giant kelp binding agents include high alginate content, suitable for strong gel formation. Giant kelp contains gibberellins, promoting stem elongation, seed germination, and flowering. Giant kelp is rich in essential minerals. It is native to the Pacific coastlines of North and South America, Australia, and New Zealand. It is desirable for trees and vines by supporting vigorous growth and development and for crops requiring rapid establishment by aiding in quick germination and early growth.

[0081]

[0078] Nereocystis luetkeana (Bull Kelp). Bull kelp binding agents have a high alginate content and form strong gels. Bull kelp has high nutrient content, including nitrogen and potassium and contains growth hormones that stimulate cell division and elongation. Bull kelp is native to the North Pacific Oceans, particularly along the coasts of Alaska, Canada, and the Pacific Northwest USA. Bull kelp is advantageous to large vegetables and fruit trees by enhancing size and yield and root crops by promoting deep root development.

[0079] Alaria esculenta (Winged Kelp). Winged kelp binding agents contain alginate, suitable for gel formation. It is rich in iodine and trace minerals and enhances plant metabolism and stress resistance. Winged kelp is native to the North Atlantic and North Pacific Oceans. Winged kelp helps leafy vegetables and herbs by improving growth and flavor and plants in iodine-deficient soils by supplementing essential micronutrients.

[0082]

[0080] Fucus vesiculosus (Bladderwrack). Bladderwrack binding agents contain alginate and can be used for gel formation. Bladderwrack is high in iodine and antioxidants and enhances stress tolerance and disease resistance. It is native to North Atlantic coastlines. Bladderwrack is beneficial for hardy vegetables and fruit trees by improving resilience to environmental stresses. It is an effective soil amendment because it enriches soil with essential minerals.

[0083]

[0081] Sargassum muticum (Japanese Wireweed). Sargassum muticum binding agents contain alginate, suitable for device formation. It is rich in bioactive compounds and nutrients and stimulates growth and enhances stress tolerance. It is native to the Western Pacific and invasive in North Atlantic and European waters. Sargassum muticum helps vines and rapid-growth crops by supporting quick growth and establishment and is good for soil health by improving microbial activity and soil structure.

[0084] 2. Red Algae (Rhodophyta)

[0085]

[0082] Red algae are rich in agar and carrageenan, effective gelling agents, and contain unique bioactive compounds beneficial to plants. Red algae form thermo-reversable gels that gel when cooled and melt when heated. This provides strong gelation, gel and emulsion stabilization, and water binding. Red algae have less iodine than brown algae generally. Red algae does have up to 1000 times the iodine concentration of land plants. Its protein concentration is similar to greens, up to 40% dry weight. It also has high concentrations polysaccharides including agar and carrageenan, hydrocolloids, trace minerals including zinc, manganese, and iron, and omega-3 fatty acids such as EPA. Plants benefit from red algae that provides soil moisture management, improving water retention in soils and helping seedlings. Zinc and manganese are useful for enzymatic functions and iron prevent chlorosis. Some red algae extracts stimulate rhizobia activity to promote root nodulation, especially in legumes. Carrageenan may trigger plant immune responses and priming defense genes.

[0086]

[0083] Chondrus crispus (Irish Moss). Irish moss is an effective binding agent and is high in carrageenan. It is effective for forming strong gels. Irish moss contains vitamins (a, b, c, d, e, k) and minerals. Irish moss enhances soil moisture retention and reduces water stress. It is native to North Atlantic coasts, especially Ireland, Great Britain, and the Eastern Coast of Canada. Irish moss helps moisture-sensitive plants by maintaining consistent moisture levels and seedlings and transplants by reducing transplant shock and promoting establishment.

[0087]

[0084] Palmaria palmata (Dulse). Dulse binding agents contain agar and carrageenan. It is high in vitamins, proteins, and essential amino acids. Dulse enhances soil moisture retention and fertility. It is native to North Atlantic coasts. Leafy greens and herbs benefit from improved nutritional content and growth. Dulse is a soil amendment, enriching soil with organic matter and nutrients.

[0088]

[0085] Gracilaria species (Gracilaria). Gracilaria has binding agents that are rich in agar and used for gel formation. It provides trace elements and amino acids and enhances soil structure and water retention. It is native to waters worldwide, including Asia, Africa, South America, and Australia. It benefits aquatic plants and rice cultivation because it is compatible with wet environments and nursery plants because it supports early growth stages and root development.

[0086] Porphyra umbilicalis (Nori). Nori has binding agents that contain porphyran, a sulfated polysaccharide similar to carrageenan. It is high in vitamins (especially B vitamins) and proteins and promotes rapid growth and enhances leaf development. Nori is native to the North Pacific and North Atlantic Oceans. Nori benefits quick-growing vegetables and supports rapid vegetative growth. Leafy herbs also benefit from enhanced flavor and nutrient content.

[0089] 3. Green Algae (Chlorophyta)

[0090]

[0087] Green algae include many bright green, intertidal species and contain ulvan, a sulfated polysaccharide with potential as a binding agent and beneficial properties for plants. Ulvan may form films and interact with proteins and chitosan. Green algae are high in soluble fibers, chlorophylls, and amino acids. It may also have protein in concentrations up to 30 dry weight percent. It is rich in vitamins including beta-carotene (pro-vitamin A) and vitamin C. It is also rich in minerals including magnesium and iron.

[0091]

[0088] Green algae plant benefits include seed germination and vigor, germination stimulation, and enhanced early root and shoot growth. It may correct iron deficiency chlorosis in crops. Photosynthesis is enhanced when its chlorophyll precursors boost leaf greening. The high amino acid and protein content support beneficial microbial communities in the rhizosphere.

[0089] Ulva lactuca (Sea Lettuce). Sea lettuce binding agents include ulvan which can form films and gels. Plants benefit from it because it is high in nitrogen, promoting lush foliage and it stimulates plant immune responses and stress tolerance. Sea lettuce is globally distributed in temperate and tropical oceans. It helps leafy vegetables and herbs by enhancing leaf growth and chlorophyll content. Sea lettuce also helps with soil amendment by improving soil fertility and microbial activity.

[0092]

[0090] Enteromorpha species (Hairy Green Algae). Hairy green algae binding agents contain ulvan and may require blending with other seaweeds for optimal binding. It provides nutrients, promotes beneficial microbial activity, and enhances nitrogen availability in the soil. Hairy green algae is widespread in coastal areas worldwide. It benefits nitrogen-demanding crops by supporting rapid vegetative growth and provides soil health improvement by enhancing microbial diversity and nutrient cycling.

[0093]

[0091] Particular seaweed components have properties that may influence device performance. Alginate is a natural polysaccharide predominantly found in the cell walls of brown algae like sugar kelp. It is composed of P-D-mannuronic acid (M) and a-L-guluronic acid (G) units. It has an ability to form viscous gels and films when combined with divalent cations like calcium. Gelforming properties benefit from alginate's ability to form strong gels and this makes it a natural binder for holding kelp particles together in pot formation. Generally, alginate may be used to create flexible and durable films, contributing to the structural integrity of a device. Alginate is biodegradable and environmentally friendly. Alginate may bind kelp fibers or particles, forming a cohesive matrix. The gel-like properties allow the material to be molded into various shapes and sizes. Alginate helps with controlled degradation. That is, by adjusting the composition, the degradation rate of the pots can be managed to align with plant growth cycles. Alginate improves soil structure by increasing water retention and aeration and may stimulate microbial activity and serve as a food source for beneficial soil microbes.

[0094]

[0092] Fucoidan is a sulfated polysaccharide rich in fucose and found in brown algae cell walls. Fucoidan exhibits bioactive properties and can interact with other polymers. Fucoidan’ s role as a binder includes viscosity enhancement. Fucoidan may increase the viscosity of solutions, aiding in the binding process. Film formation is enhanced when combined with other polysaccharides or proteins. Fucoidan synergistic effects include enhancing the binding properties when used in conjunction with alginate. Strength enhancement occurs by improving the mechanical properties of the pot material. As it degrades, fucoidan may release beneficial compounds that promote plant health and help with nutrient release.

[0095]

[0093] Laminarin is a storage glucan composed mainly of [3(1— >3)-glucan with occasional [3(1— >6) branches and functions as an energy reserve in brown algae. Laminarin contributes to gel formation. Laminarin can form gels under certain conditions, contributing to the binding matrix. Laminarin provides additional adhesion between particles. Structural cohesion is enhanced. Laminarin adds to the overall integrity of the pot structure and contributes to the biodegradable nature of the pots, breaking down a device matrix structure into glucose units.

[0094] Cellulose is a common structural polysaccharide present in the cell walls of algae and is composed of linear chains of [3(1 ^4)-l inked D-glucose units. Cellulose acts as a binder. Cellulose acts as a reinforcing agent and provides fiber strength including mechanical strength and rigidity to the material. Cellulose fibers can form extensive hydrogen bonds, enhancing the structural network. Cellulose enhances the texture and handling characteristics of the pots.

[0096]

[0001] Other carbohydrates have an influence. Mannose acts as an energy source for soil microbes, enhancing soil fertility. Ribose, although present in smaller quantities, is more involved in nucleic acids than structural polysaccharides. Glucuronic acid may aid in chelating soil nutrients, improving their availability to plants. Xylose supports microbial activity in the soil. Fucose has bioactive properties that can stimulate plant defense mechanisms.

[0097]

[0095] Some vitamins and other components may also play a role. Vitamin B6 (Pyridoxine) may be measured in some embodiments. Enzyme cofactor is involved in amino acid metabolism and synthesis. Stress response contributes to plant stress tolerance and defense mechanisms. Growth regulation aids in the synthesis of phytohormones.

[0098]

[0096] Some embodiments may include a binding agent or some may rely on the properties of their seaweed. Natural cross-linking agents may be used to enhance the strength of the pots without compromising biodegradability. The seaweed’s naturally occurring biopolymers act as an inherent binder and moisture retention agent, reducing the need for additional adhesives or synthetic binders. Some embodiments may include an additional binder to provide natural biopolymer binding. In some embodiments, all binders would be naturally occurring biopolymers. Seaweed based binders may be selected for some embodiments. The natural binding agents such as alginates and other polysaccharides provide structural integrity without synthetic additives.

[0097] Some may act as exceptional natural binding agents. Alginate in sugar kelp provides strong, natural binding without the need for synthetic additives, ensuring structural integrity and ease of manufacturing. Alginates interact with calcium ions (from ash) to form a strong gel matrix, serving as the primary binder. Fucoidan and other polysaccharides may enhance gel properties. Cellulose (from glucose polymers) provides rigidity and strength. Proteins and polysaccharides create interconnected networks, providing strength and flexibility. Proteins reinforce the matrix through cross-linking and network formation. Mannitol acts as a natural plasticizer, improving flexibility. Monosaccharides contribute to the viscosity, aiding in molding processes.

[0099]

[0098] The following chart provides target ranges for raw materials based on a given slurry to form a device for a target plant’s nutrient needs. These target ranges for each of the slurry components. For example, if one seaweed input has a preferred potassium target percentage, and a degradable fiber input also has high potassium, we need to adjust the input percentages so that the total combined ingredients in the slurry have the target range for potassium, not too high that it would hurt the target plant.

[0100]

[0099] Further, traditional dairy forage tests for nutrients, energy content, moisture, minerals, metals, toxins, protean, ash, fat, etc. may help inform the raw materials selected for use in the slurry. Radial compressive stress may be measured or estimated for some embodiments. The nutritional value, also known as the combined components that form a chemical composition, may be tailored to consider the goals upon the composition exposure to the target plant, the soil housed by the pot, and the soil encountered by the exterior of the pot. Some tailoring may consider how the fiber inputs may also have retained bioactive properties after their pulping process.

[0101]

[0100] Table 2. Components to consider in device, slurry, and seaweed quality control.

[0102]

[0101] This table does not list iodine, but it may be tested in some embodiments. It may help protect plants against pathogens and may influence metabolic processes and growth regulation. The structural and performance section of the table above is referencing seaweed for some embodiments. The seaweed particle size needs to be a specific size to ensure uniform blending. The seaweed particle size could change based on the fiber length of the seaweed or other slurry components. For example, shorter fibers might allow for larger seaweed particle sizes, where longer fibers are not as strong and seaweed particle size may need to be smaller. Particle size may be selected to be larger when going into the slurry as a dry input, as the blade in the pulping machine can help control the particle size as it breaks down and blends together with the fiber material. If the machine doesn’t have ability to break down particle size, the particle size should be ground down to a target range as a dry input before going into the slurry. The seaweed particle size increases when it is rehydrated, but shrinks again in the drying process.

[0103]

[0102] The quality control section of the chart above summarizes some factors to consider. Raw material properties tests help ensure that suppliers don’t send an input with X levels of potassium in shipment 1, and then Z levels of potassium in shipment 2. We want any ‘input’ used in our process to have one specific nutritional profile that doesn’t deviate between deliveries. Over time, the profiles will become like product skews, so we know that seaweed from a given supplier has the same profile every time we use it. Similarly, the slurry concentration properties tests may be run multiple times on each batch during the manufacturing process. This ensures that the slurry is mixing the concentrations appropriately and that all of our inputs are in the slurry in the appropriate proportions or percentages.

[0104] Experimental Results

[0105]

[0103] An initial discussion of the experimental apparatus and results is followed by a more detailed experimental procedure and results discussion. A comparison of pots made of plastic, Jiffy Pot™, and two types of seaweed waste streams was conducted over several months using tomato seeds and organic potting soil in each type of container. The containers were housed indoors then moved outside and planted into the earth. The temperature, soil humidity, mass of soil, plant, and container, sprout germination, and plant growth as illustrated by leaf count, buds, and tomato formation were observed. The purpose of the experiment was to evaluate the performance of pots containing kelp against paper, peat, and plastic pots in growing tomato plants through key lifecycle stages (seed sowing, transplanting, and fruit harvesting). Tomato seeds were planted in five types of pots — kelp (two seaweed / paper mixes), paper, peat, and plastic — with controlled variables including soil type, seed batch, watering, and lighting. The tomato seeds were from Territorial Seed Co., the varieties were Early Cherry and Beaverlodge 6808 Slicer. The soil was Black & Gold: Sun Gro Seedling Mix, consistent across all pots Indoor water was Purelife Distilled Water and tap water through a hose was used when the plants moved outside. A standard growing setup was selected (tables, fans, heaters, grow lights, etc.). Humidity domes, heat mats, moisture meters, and measurement tools were used. Labeling tools (tape, sharpie, sticks, etc.) were used. No additional fertilizer or plant food was used during the experiment.

[0106]

[0104] At the conclusion of the comparison, the plants were dug out of the ground to observe root growth and container degradation. By all observations, the seaweed containing pots were most effective. For some of the final observations, no pot at all was discernable to the human eye in the soil implying that the pot had completely integrated into the earth. Pots containing kelp exhibited the fastest plant recovery after outdoor transplantation. Peat pots resulted in the poorest recovery and growth. Pots containing kelp enhanced plant growth and stress recovery.

[0107]

[0105] Five testing groups were observed. Each group contained 10 pots (5 per tomato variety: Early Cherry and Beaverlodge) and 3 seeds per pot, with weaker sprouts removed prior to transplant, leaving 1 plant per pot. Thus, 50 pots (25 per tomato variety) were observed. Testing Groups

[0108] Table 3. Group pot assignments.

[0109]

[0106] Variables were controlled including soil, lighting, temperature, humidity, and water. The same bag of soil (Black & Gold Sun Gro Seedling Mix) was used for all samples, with ~45g of dry soil per pot during indoor phases. After transplanting outdoors, plants were planted in the same bed of soil spaced 1 foot apart. Equal light conditions were provided for all samples using a combination of natural sunlight and artificial grow lights (16 hours / day). After transplanting outdors, plants were exposed to natural daylight, with no artificial lighting applied. While the plants were indoors, a consistent temperature of 77.5°F was maintained using a combination of natural light, heat mats, and artificial heating. Fans and heaters were used to regulate temperature fluctuations. After transplanting outdoors, temperature control was no longer possible. Outdoor temperatures were subject to natural fluctuations, and no heating or cooling devices were used. A cold snap before transplant delayed outdoor planting. Indoor humidity was controlled using humidity domes during germination and monitored throughout the early growth stage. Fans were used to adjust humidity when necessary after dome removal. Outdoor humidity was naturally variable and dependent on outdoor conditions. No artificial means of humidity control were applied. Initially, the plan was to water all groups consistently, but differences in pot material required adjustments. Group 4 (Plastic) retained more moisture due to the non-porous walls, requiring watering only every three days. Excess water would drain through the plastic containers into the tray. In contrast, the biodegradable pots (Groups 1 , 2, 3, and 5) needed to be watered more frequently (every day or every other day) due to higher moisture loss through their porous walls, allowing for faster evaporation. After transplanting outdoors, all groups were watered evenly. Group 4 (Plastic) plants had been removed from their containers and were placed directly in the soil. The biodegradable pots were planted directly in the ground, remaining in their containers, which allowed for natural moisture exchange with the soil.

[0110]

[0107] Plant growth was observed. The seeds germinated over a 7-day period under controlled temperature and humidity, with domes removed on day 7 to allow seedlings to begin hardening off. During this phase, data was collected on seed germination rates, container weight, water loss, temperature, and humidity. Observations were also made on container smell, appearance, and the initial sprouting of seedlings. Germination rates were within expected ranges. Group 4 (Plastic) seeds germinated first, followed by Group 2 (Kelp-BSl). Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) was the last to sprout seeds. All seeds that would germinate had sprouted by Day 7, when humidity domes were removed.

[0111]

[0108] Samples were watered only on Day 1, and humidity domes created condensation, resulting in excess moisture. On Day 6, excess moisture was drained from the trays to observe water retention by each container type. Group 4 (Plastic) had the least amount of excess water (loz), while Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) had the most (5oz).

[0112]

[0109] The combined plant, soil, and water weight and water usage were observed. Group 1 (Paper) showed inconsistent moisture absorption, with some pots retaining more water. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) retained the most water by Day 6, with visibly moist containers. Group 4 (Plastic) lost the least water, while Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) lost the most and showed drying at the container edges by Day 6.

[0113]

[0110] Temperature and humidity were also observed. Group 4 (Plastic) had the highest average temperature, followed by Group 2 (Kelp-BSl). Temperature was fairly consistent across Groups 1, 2, 3, and 5, with differences within 0.5°F. Group 4 (Plastic) had the lowest average humidity, while Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) had the highest, followed by Group 1 (Paper).

[0114]

[0111] Observations for Days 1-7 include the following by group. Group 1 (Paper) had inconsistent moisture absorption between samples. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) had a mild seaweed smell for the first 48 hours, then dissipated. Pots remained consistently moist and maintained the second-highest temperature and highest humidity. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) had a slight seaweed smell (less than BS1), which also disappeared after 48 hours. Group 4 (Plastic) had noticeable taller stem growth, likely due to higher heat conductivity in plastic, which may have accelerated upward stem growth. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had excessive pooling of water in trays and noticeable drying of pot rims. Germination was slower, and seedlings struggled to shed their seed coats.

[0115]

[0112] Early growth (Day 8 - Day 41) observations included that once the seedlings had produced 2-3 true leaves, the weakest seedlings were thinned, leaving one plant per pot. Plants continued to grow indoors with consistent light (16 hours / day), temperature (77.5°F), and watering schedules. Indoor monitoring included daily temperature, humidity, and container weight loss measurements to track water retention and plant health. During this phase, the humidity domes were removed on Day 7, allowing seedlings to harden off. Initial watering occurred on Day 7, and weaker seedlings (duds) were removed on Day 21 and Day 25 to give stronger seedlings more space to grow. Data collection focused on daily container weight, water loss, temperature, humidity, and plant appearance (leaf size and count, height, and uniformity). Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) maintained the highest average weight throughout early growth, while Group 4 (Plastic) had the lowest weight, even after adjusting for its lighter pot weight. Group 4 (Plastic) lost the least water daily, about half the water loss of biodegradable groups. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) lost the least water among the biodegradable pots, while Group 1 (Paper) lost the most, followed by Group 3 (Kelp-BS2).

[0116]

[0113] Temperature and humidity were observed over Days 8-41. Temperature readings reflected the atmospheric temperature around the tray, as individual container temperature readings were inconsistent. Groups 2 and 3 (Pots containing kelp) had the highest average temperatures, while Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) had the lowest. Despite the higher atmospheric temperatures in the Kelp groups, containers in Group 4 (Plastic) felt warmest to the touch. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had the highest humidity at 46.9%, followed by Group 1 (Paper). Group 4 (Plastic) had the lowest humidity at 40.4%, followed by Group 2 (Kelp-BSl).

[0117]

[0114] Leaf Count excluding dicot leaves was also conducted. The second set of leaves appeared first in Group 4 (Plastic) on Day 10, followed by Groups 2 and 3 (Pots containing kelp) on Day 11. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) was the last to develop secondary leaves, on Day 13. Group 4 (Plastic) had the highest leaf count overall, nearly double that of the biodegradable pots. Group

[0118] 3 (Kelp-BS2) had the highest average leaf count among biodegradable pots, while Group 1 (Paper) had the lowest.

[0115] Plant appearance, color, stem and leaf properties, and root properties were observed over Days 8-41. On Day 21, the weakest seedlings were removed, and the remaining two were allowed more space for root development. On Day 25, the second weakest seedling was removed, with root development of the removed seedlings recorded. Group 4 (Plastic) plants were a brighter green compared to the darker green, slightly purple-tinted leaves of the biodegradable groups. Group 4 (Plastic) plants were, on average, nearly twice as tall as those in the biodegradable pots. Stem thickness followed a similar trend. Stems were thinnest in Group 1 (Paper) and Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy). Group 4 (Plastic) leaves had a lighter green color compared to Groups 1, 2, 3, and 5, whose leaves were a darker green with a purple tint on the underside. Dicot leaves began shriveling and falling off in Groups 1 and 5 first, but all groups experienced some loss of dicot leaves before transplantation. Groups 1 and 5 lost the most leaves during early growth, with nearly all samples losing one or both dicot leaves. Group 4 (Plastic) lost the fewest leaves, though yellowing and brown spots appeared on a few newer leaves around Day 25 (this did not persist). Group 1 (Paper) had root growth that varied, with some roots pushing across the container’s top rather than growing downward. A few roots penetrated the container walls but not as extensively as in Groups 2 and 3. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) had roots primarily grew downward, resulting in some root breakage when seedlings were removed. Roots were visible on the container walls by Day 30. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) had roots that were visible on the exterior walls by Day 30, with more roots pushing through the container walls than in any other group. Group 4 (Plastic) had the largest observable root balls, with minimal root breakage upon removal. No roots penetrated the bottom drainage holes. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had root circling around the inner rims of the containers, with only minimal root penetration through the container walls (on 3 samples).

[0119]

[0116] The container appearance was also observed over Days 8-41. Group 1 (Paper) had warping, tearing, and browning as early as Day 12, especially around the container rims and base. Some containers stuck to the tray, leading to tearing when removed for measurements. There was inconsistent moisture absorption across samples. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) showed the earliest and most significant signs of biodegradation, with containers shrinking by ~0.5” in height. Warping and shrinkage were common as containers expanded when wet and contracted when dry. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) had similar expansion and contraction to Group 2, but the containers retained their shape better overall. Group 4 (Plastic) had early signs of algae growth on the soil surface starting on Day 12. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had container structure that remained stable, though greening (indicative of algae) was observed around the inner rims of some samples.

[0120]

[0117] Transplantation occurred over Days 41 to 47. The seedlings were prepared for outdoor transplantation once nighttime temperatures were consistently above 50°F. Due to a cold snap, outdoor planting was delayed, and seedlings were moved outside on day 41 but were not planted in the ground until Day 47. Average temperatures during this phase were 60-70 degrees F during the day and above 55 degrees F at night. The four healthiest samples from each testing group (20 total) were selected for outdoor planting. For biodegradable pots (paper, kelp, peat), the entire container was planted, while plastic pots were removed before planting. To prepare the plants for this transition, they were exposed to outdoor conditions for 12 hours each day and brought back inside when temperatures dropped below 50°F. Not all 50 samples were transplanted; instead, the top 2 performers from each set (A & B) of every group were selected, resulting in a total of 4 transplanted samples per group, or 20 plants in total. The healthiest 2 plants from sets A and B of each group were chosen for transplantation based on several factors: stem strength, root development, and overall growth during the early phase. This selection process ensured that only the most vigorous plants were transplanted outdoors to maximize success in the next stage of the experiment. A total of 20 plants were selected for transplantation, with 4 plants from each group (2 from Early Cherry and 2 from Beaverlodge per group). To ensure the plants could handle the outdoor environment, they were placed outside for 12 hours each day starting on Day 41. They were exposed to sunlight, wind, and outdoor temperatures, and brought inside overnight to avoid temperatures below 50°F. During the acclimation period, some plants showed signs of mild stress, such as wilting during hotter midday hours, but most adjusted by the end of the daily outdoor exposure period.

[0121]

[0118] Transplanting into the ground included a method, conditions, and watering and care. On Day 47, the selected plants were transplanted into the garden. The plants in biodegradable pots (Groups 1, 2, 3, and 5) were planted directly into the soil with their containers intact, along with 4 holes poked into the bottom of each container to encourage downward root growth, as the biodegradable material was designed to break down in the soil. In contrast, the plastic pots from Group 4 were removed, and the plants were placed directly in the soil, allowing their roots to spread freely. All samples were planted 1 foot apart in the same well-draining flower bed, facing southwest for maximum sun exposure. The bed was located against an exterior wall with a small overhang, offering some protection from wind and rain, while the wall provided additional heat. No additional soil additives or fertilizers were used to avoid skewing results, as Group 4 (Plastic) was removed from its pot and had more direct contact with the soil. The soil had been worked to remove any obstructions like rocks or roots that could hinder plant development. After transplanting, all plants were watered evenly to help settle them into the new environment. No additional support measures (e.g., staking, mulching) were implemented at this time.

[0122]

[0119] Vegetative growth (Day 48 - Day 74) occurred after transplantation, plants were monitored outdoors for 85 days during the vegetative growth stage. Regular observations of plant health were made, including measurements of leaf size, plant height, and overall vigor. During the vegetative growth phase, plants were allowed to grow naturally without pruning or trimming, and minimal support was provided to allow for natural growth patterns. Stakes were used only to keep the main stems upright. This phase focuses on the recovery of plants post-transplantation and their overall growth progression. Data collected included leaf count, while other observations were made on stem thickness, plant height, branching, leaf appearance, root growth, and overall plant vigor.

[0123]

[0120] Leaf count was recorded periodically during the vegetative growth phase on Days 41, 62, 69, and 74. Only fully formed leaves were counted, and dicot leaves were excluded. In some cases, early leaf formations were noted with values below 1.0, representing leaves that had begun to develop but were not yet fully formed. Across all groups, some lower leaves were lost as the plants diverted energy toward new growth after transplantation. The leaf count was used as a key indicator of plant recovery and growth progression following transplantation. Group 4 (Plastic) had the highest overall leaf count at every recorded time point, averaging 11.25 leaves by Day 74. However, this group showed a slower rate of new leaf production compared to the kelp pot groups. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) exhibited the fastest rate of new leaf growth, with an average of 5.25 new leaves formed between Days 41 and 74. This suggests a strong recovery and growth rate after transplantation. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) also performed well, with 4.875 new leaves on average, indicating robust growth similar to Group 2. Group 1 (Paper) and Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had the lowest total leaf counts and slower growth rates. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) performed the worst overall, adding only 1.5 new leaves on average during the vegetative phase. This data shows that while Group 4 (Plastic) started with the highest initial leaf count, the pots containing kelp (Groups 2 and 3) supported the fastest new growth, indicating strong plant recovery and vigor post-transplantation.

[0124]

[0121] Stem thickness was observed during vegetative growth. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) had the thickest stems, followed by Group 3 (Kelp-BS2), Group 1 (Paper), Group 4 (Plastic), and finally Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy), which had the thinnest stems. Stem thickness was also influenced by variety, with samples from set A ("Cherry") exhibiting thicker stems compared to set B ("Beaverlodge") across all groups. Group 4 (Plastic) displayed significant elongation in stem height but without proportional thickening of the stems, leading to the need for additional stake support earlier than other groups. By the end of the vegetative phase, Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) showed minimal changes in stem thickness compared to the other groups.

[0125]

[0122] Plant height was also observed during vegetative growth. Group 4 (Plastic) experienced rapid upward growth, with plants nearly twice as tall as those in Groups 1 (Paper), 2 (Kelp-BSl), and 3 (Kelp-BS2) by the end of the vegetative phase. However, the height increase in Group 4 was accompanied by thinner stems, contributing to the need for additional support. In contrast, Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) showed very little change in height during this phase, remaining much shorter than all other groups. While exact height measurements were not recorded, it was clear that the rapid elongation of Group 4 contrasted with the slower, more compact growth observed in the other groups.

[0126]

[0123] Branching was observed during the vegetative phase. Groups 1 (Paper), 2 (Kelp-BSl), and 3 (Kelp-BS2) showed more lateral branching during the vegetative phase, resulting in a bushier overall appearance despite not being pruned or trimmed. The plants in these groups expanded more horizontally, although exact measurements of plant width were not taken. Group 4 (Plastic) grew more vertically, with fewer side branches, contributing to its more upright and slender growth pattern. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) appeared stunted in terms of branching, with minimal lateral growth and overall lack of vigor compared to the other groups.

[0127]

[0124] Leaf appearance including size, color, and health was recorded. General observations (Day 62 and Day 69) included that across all groups, newer leaf growth appeared brighter green compared to leaves formed indoors, especially in the biodegradable pots. Leaf size increased as plants matured, with newer leaves growing larger than older ones. However, leaf health varied across groups, with some showing signs of yellowing, browning, or curling. Group 1 (Paper) on Day 62 found all samples exhibited some degree of yellowing or browning on the lowest two leaves, with one sample showing widespread yellowing across most leaves. Newer leaves remained healthy, and leaf size was smaller than in other groups. Day 69 noted that no new yellowing was observed, and the plants appeared to be recovering. Some older leaves had dropped, but newer leaves continued to grow larger, though they remained smaller than in Groups 2, 3, and 4. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) on Day 62 found only two samples showed yellowing on the bottom leaves, while the rest remained healthy. New leaves were larger in size and brighter in color. Day 69 had no new yellowing or browning was observed. Bottom leaves that had browned had fallen off, and new growth was thicker and bushier, with leaves developing rapidly. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) found on Day 62 that minor yellowing was observed on lower leaves, with one sample showing some yellowing on higher leaves. The overall health of the leaves was good, with larger leaf sizes. Day 69 had observations similar to Group 2, no new yellowing occurred. Lower leaves that had shown signs of browning remained on the plant. Newer leaves were thicker and bushier, indicating healthy growth. Group 4 (Plastic) on Day 62 found lower leaves had already dropped off, with noticeable yellowing on the lowest remaining leaves across all samples. Some new leaves began showing signs of yellowing as well. Mature leaves curled downward, while newer growth extended upward. Day 69 had continued yellowing on lower leaves, and the downward curling of mature leaves persisted. New leaves were increasing in size but did not appear as bushy as those in Groups 2 and 3. This group was the first to show signs of budding, observed on this day. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) on Day 62 had noticeable yellowing across all samples, with at least two leaves dropped per plant. Growth appeared stunted compared to other groups. Day 69 had continued yellowing and curling of lower leaves, with signs of stunted growth. The plants in this group were significantly less developed compared to the other groups, and leaf size remained small.

[0128]

[0125] Plant recovery from transplantation was observed during the vegetative phase. Groups 1 (Paper), 2 (Kelp-BSl), and 3 (Kelp-BS2) showed the quickest recovery after being transplanted into the ground. These groups resumed healthy growth within the first few weeks of the vegetative phase, with Group 2 standing out as having the largest plants overall. In contrast, Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) struggled to recover, with minimal changes in size or color during this phase, suggesting poor adaptation to the new environment. Group 4 (Plastic) exhibited rapid upward growth, but the plants never developed the bushy or full appearance seen in Groups 1, 2, and 3, focusing more on vertical growth rather than lateral branching.

[0126] Next, flowering and fruit development (Day 74 - Day 130) were observed. Plants were observed for the development of flower buds and fruit formation. Measurements were taken at regular intervals to track the number of flower buds and the rate of fruit development. Photographs were taken to document growth and the progression from flowering to fruiting stages. This phase tracks the transition from flowering to fruit production in the tomato plants. Both numerical data (e.g., flower and fruit counts) and observational data (e.g., plant vigor and fruit quality) were collected during this stage to assess performance across the different pot types. The first signs of flower buds were observed for each group. Group 4 (Plastic) exhibited the fastest transition into the flowering stage, showing buds as early as Day 62. However, this rapid flowering may have been stress-induced, aligning with later signs of plant wilting. Groups 2 and 3 (Kelp) closely followed, suggesting that the pots containing kelp provided a nurturing, balanced environment that supported timely flowering without inducing stress. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) was the slowest to develop flower buds, further highlighting the delayed growth and developmental challenges in the peat pots.

[0129]

[0127] The average number of flower buds per plant in each group was recorded. Group 4 (Plastic) started with the highest bud count, but its productivity leveled off quickly, with slower gains after Day 69. This suggests that the early boost in flowering came at the expense of longterm growth. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) had the strongest performance, showing consistent growth and nearly doubling its flower bud count between Day 69 and Day 88. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) followed a similar pattern, confirming the benefits of kelp-based pots. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) continued to underperform, with low bud formation throughout the phase.

[0130]

[0128] The first signs of fruit formation were observed during flowering and fruit development. Group 4 (Plastic) produced fruit earlier than the others, on Day 74, consistent with its early flowering. However, the rapid development may have been a response to stress rather than a sign of healthy maturation. Groups 2 and 3 (Kelp) followed soon after on Day 83, indicating a more balanced and sustainable growth pattern, supporting both vegetative and reproductive development. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) was severely delayed, not forming fruit until Day 107, further confirming its poor performance.

[0131]

[0129] The average number of tomatoes per plant in each group was recorded during flowering and fruit development. Group 4 (Plastic) initially led in tomato count but plateaued by Day 118, suggesting that early fruit development may have been at the expense of long-term productivity. Groups 2 and 3 (Kelp) showed the highest tomato counts by the end of the phase, reinforcing the idea that pots containing kelp supported sustained growth and healthier fruit production. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) consistently lagged behind, with only minimal fruit development even by the end of the phase.

[0132]

[0130] The first signs of ripening were observed during flowering and fruit development. Group 4 (Plastic) showed the earliest signs of ripening, but this may have been stress-induced due to rapid growth in earlier stages. Groups 2 and 3 (Kelp) ripened at a natural pace around Day 117-118, showing healthy, steady fruit maturation. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) was again the last to ripen, demonstrating the overall delayed growth and development in this group.

[0133]

[0131] Plant health and vigor including leaf appearance, stem thickness, branching were observed over Days 74-130. Group 1 (Paper) had plants in this group that showed moderate stem thickening by Day 83, with consistent but less robust growth compared to Groups 2 and 3. The leaves were smaller and more prone to yellowing early on, but by Day 69, leaf health had improved, with newer leaves showing better growth. The plants branched moderately, requiring minimal support for branching. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) displayed the most vigorous growth throughout the phase. By Day 83, the stems were thick and sturdy, with pronounced lateral branching, making the plants appear bushy and dense. The leaves were large and healthy, with minimal yellowing observed. New leaves continued to grow rapidly, and the plants required additional support due to their size and branching patterns. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) was similar to Group 2, Group 3 showed thick, healthy stems and strong lateral branching by Day 83. The plants were bushy and had a consistent, dense growth pattern. The leaves were large, with only minor yellowing observed on lower leaves by Day 62, but by Day 69, the plants had recovered, and leaf health improved. Branching was extensive, requiring significant staking to support the heavy stems and branches. Group 4 (Plastic) had plants that grew tall, with significant elongation by Day 83, but the stems were thin compared to the height, leading to the need for early staking. The leaves were lighter green than those in biodegradable pots, with noticeable yellowing on the lower leaves by Day 62, which continued through the phase. Branching was minimal, with more space between branches, resulting in a less bushy appearance. Although new leaves were still growing, the plants appeared stressed, with curling leaves and slowed overall growth after Day 83. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) showed minimal growth in both stem thickness and branching throughout the phase. By Day 83, only one sample showed moderate stem growth, while the others remained stunted. Leaves were small and prone to yellowing, with significant leaf drop observed early on. There was minimal lateral branching, and the plants appeared sparse and weak compared to all other groups.

[0134]

[0132] Flower health and size were observed over Days 74-130. Group 1 (Paper) found flower formation in this group was steady, with new buds forming throughout the phase, but flower size was smaller compared to Groups 2 and 3. By Day 111, flower health was generally good, though the plants were producing fewer new buds by the end of the phase. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) consistently produced the healthiest and largest flowers. Flowering was robust, with buds forming regularly throughout the phase. The flowers were vibrant and large, and bud formation continued even late into the phase, with no significant bud drop. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) had flower health that was also strong, with consistent bud formation similar to Group 2. Flowers were large and healthy, and bud formation continued throughout the phase, although slightly less vigorous than in Group 2. Flower size was comparable, and the overall health of the reproductive structures was excellent. Group 4 (Plastic) had flowers that were smaller and showed signs of browning on the petals by Day 83, which continued through the phase. Bud formation slowed down significantly by Day 103, and no new flowers were observed after this time. The early flowering stage was strong, but overall flower health declined as the phase progressed. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) produced the smallest and fewest flowers, with weak bud formation throughout the phase. The flowers that did develop were small and prone to dropping early, and by Day 111, flower production had nearly stopped. The overall health and size of the flowers in Group 5 were the poorest among all the groups.

[0135]

[0133] Fruit health and size were observed over Days 74-130. Group 1 (Paper) had fruit development that was moderate, with a steady increase in tomato count throughout the phase. By Day 111, the first signs of ripening were observed, and the fruits were green and relatively healthy, though some showed signs of stress due to environmental factors, causing some fruits to drop from the vine before they were ripe. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) produced the largest and healthiest tomatoes, with more even fruit formation across all plants. By Day 103, the plants had a substantial number of tomatoes, and ripening began around Day 118. The fruits were large, uniform, and healthy, contributing to the group’s overall high performance. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) had fruit development that was similar to Group 2, with large, healthy tomatoes forming steadily. Ripening began around Day 117, and the overall health of the fruits was strong. Group 4 (Plastic) produced smaller fruits compared to the other groups, with early ripening beginning early on Day 112. However, the fruit size was inconsistent, and some fruits showed signs of stress, such as uneven ripening and smaller-than-expected sizes. The early ripening may have been due to stress rather than healthy maturation. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had fruit production that was minimal, with very few tomatoes forming throughout the phase. The fruits that did develop were small and poorly formed, with uneven ripening observed late in the phase. The overall fruit health was the weakest among all groups.

[0136]

[0134] Root Growth was observed over Days 74-130. Group 1 (Paper) had no visible root growth above the soil, indicating that root development was likely directed downward into the soil, consistent with healthy root establishment. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) had no surface root development, suggesting that the roots in this group grew deep into the soil, supported by the pots containing kelp’ structure. This likely contributed to the plants' overall strong performance. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) was like Group 2, no visible surface roots were observed, and root development was likely deep and healthy. The absence of shallow roots indicated good overall root health. Group 4 (Plastic) had roots that were visible at the base of the stem and appeared to grow along the top of the soil rather than downward, indicating possible issues with deep root establishment. That is, Group 4’s roots may have been growing near the top soil as a result of the original roots being shocked or damaged upon transplant. The lack of air pruning prohibited by plastic pots means the roots go through more stress when transplanted, and can often die. As a result, the tomato plant may have needed to create and establish roots higher on the stalk of the stem near the top soil. The time spent developing these roots may have contributed to lower fruit production and yield. This is in contrast to the pots that did not go through transplant shock and were naturally air pruned in the first stages of growing could focus all their energy on fruit production, rather than splitting energy between root and fruit development in later stages. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) was like Group 4, some roots were visible near the top of the soil, indicating an inability to grow roots downward.

[0137]

[0135] Environmental factors, pests and disease were observed over Days 74-130. Group 1 (Paper) plants showed signs of stress due to environmental changes, such as increased rainfall, leading to some tomatoes dropping off before ripening. However, overall growth was not severely impacted. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) handled environmental fluctuations well, showing minimal signs of stress from temperature or watering inconsistencies. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) was similar to Group 2, this group showed resilience to environmental stresses, with only minor leaf yellowing observed. Group 4 (Plastic) was more affected by environmental factors, particularly heat and moisture fluctuations, leading to wilting or curled leaves and uneven fruit development. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) had environmental stress that had a significant impact on Group 5, with plants showing more pronounced yellowing and minimal bud or fruit development. No significant pest or disease activity was observed in any group during this phase, likely due to the monthly pest control service in place. No group showed signs of pest damage or disease issues, and overall plant health was not affected by external factors related to pests.

[0138]

[0136] Finally, harvest and removal (Day 131 - Day 145) occurred. Between days 131 and 145, plants were harvested to assess root development and the rate of biodegradation in the biodegradable pots. The samples from the biodegradable groups (kelp, paper, and peat pots) were inspected for signs of decomposition and integration with the surrounding soil. During the harvest and removal phase, the goal was to evaluate the overall tomato production, pot decomposition, and root growth. Due to the nature of tomato plants, where ripe fruits can fall from the plant before harvest, it was difficult to provide an exact count of all tomatoes produced. Observations were made based on the number of tomatoes remaining on the plant at the time of harvest, visual assessment of fruit size, and pot degradation.

[0139]

[0137] Tomato production was observed during harvest and removal. Group 1 (Paper) produced the second fewest tomatoes by harvest. One of the tomatoes was comparable in size to those in other groups, while the other was notably smaller. The total count upon removal was 3 tomatoes (2 green, 1 ripe), indicating a slower fruit production rate. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) consistently produced the largest tomatoes across all groups. The fruit size was uniform, and this group yielded a higher number of tomatoes overall. Upon removal, the total count for this sample was 8 tomatoes (5 green, 3 ripe), making it the highest-yielding group with consistently larger fruit. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) closely followed Group 2 in both size and consistency of fruit. Although all tomatoes were still green by Day 145, the total count was 7 tomatoes, suggesting strong growth potential but a slightly delayed ripening process compared to Group 2. Group 4 (Plastic) had the most ripened tomatoes at the time of harvest. However, the sizes varied significantly, with many fruits being smaller than those in Groups 2 and 3. The total count upon removal was 6 tomatoes (2 green, 4 ripe), indicating that this group produced fruit faster but not necessarily in uniform size. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) produced tomatoes similar in size to Groups 2 and 3, the overall yield was significantly lower. Upon removal, this group had only 2 tomatoes, both of which were green, reflecting stunted growth and delayed ripening.

[0140]

[0138] Root Growth was observed during harvest and removal. Group 1 (Paper) had roots in Group 1 that were strong and healthy, growing both downward and outward. The roots successfully broke through the paper walls of the container, showing healthy root development. Three primary root systems were observed, with ample secondary roots extending from them. While well-established, they were easier to pull from the soil compared to Group 2. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) exhibited the most robust root development. Four primary roots were observed, all thicker than those in other groups, with a substantial network of secondary and smaller roots extending outward and downward. The roots had broken through the kelp pot walls and were deeply entrenched in the soil. The root system was so well-established that some roots broke during removal, indicating strong, healthy growth. Group 3’s (Kelp-BS2) root system closely resembled Group 1 in both size and structure, with three primary roots and a strong network of secondary roots. These roots were also able to break through the kelp pot walls and showed healthy outward and downward growth, though they were easier to remove than Group 2. Group 4 (Plastic) had two main root systems that were observed. One root grew downward into the soil, while the other extended along the topsoil, reaching far from the plant. The shallower root spread may have resulted from the restricted environment of the plastic pot, which was removed prior to outdoor transplanting, influencing the plant’s root direction. Group 5 (Peat- Jiffy) had root balls much smaller than in any other group. The plant was completely root-bound inside the Jiffy pot, which was still fully intact at the time of removal. Only one primary root system was observed, growing upward and outward rather than downward, as the roots were restricted by the pot. The smaller root ball and lack of downward growth indicated stunted root development, a likely result of being confined to the Jiffy pot.

[0141]

[0139] Pot decomposition was observed during harvest and removal. By harvest on Days 134, 137, and 145, the paper pots of Group 1 had fully decomposed into the soil, with no remnants of the containers visible. The only part of the original container left was the tape labels, which did not break down. This indicates that the paper pots interacted well with the soil microbes and decomposed effectively. Group 2 (Kelp-BSl) was similar to Group 1, the pots containing kelp in this group had fully biodegraded by each harvest date. Only the tape labels were left behind, and the pot material had fully integrated into the soil, demonstrating successful decomposition. Group 3 (Kelp-BS2) pots were fully decomposed by each harvest. The only remnants were the tape labels, and the material had completely broken down in the soil, indicating excellent biodegradation. Group 4 (Plastic) has no decomposition data, as the plastic pots were removed prior to planting in the ground. However, the plastic pots did not decompose, reinforcing the experiment's goal to find alternatives to plastic, which is non-biodegradable. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) were still largely intact upon harvest, with minimal signs of biodegradation. Although the pots fell apart easily when removed, indicating that the structural integrity was compromised, they did not show significant interaction with the soil or microbial activity that would have caused decomposition. This suggests that the material used in the Jiffy pots did not break down effectively during the experiment’s timeframe.

[0142]

[0140] Environmental Factors were considered across the experiment. Environmental factors, such as temperature fluctuations and occasional dry periods, influenced plant growth, particularly in Group 4 (Plastic), where wilting was observed during hot, dry conditions. However, these factors did not appear to significantly affect the overall outcome of the experiment across the other groups. Watering was adjusted to maintain soil moisture, and plants continued to grow despite external weather variations.

[0143]

[0141] There were some experimental limitations. Plants were harvested on different days, which could have influenced the tomato counts and the ability to compare total production across groups. That is, harvests were made on the same day across all groups, so the counts of fruit & root development should be consistent. There were multiple harvesting days, as there were a total of 4 plants in each group and we did not harvest all 4 in the same day. We harvested one sample at a time across all groups but spread out the days that we harvested each of the 4. Ripe tomatoes falling off plants before they could be counted complicated efforts to measure total fruit production. Some animals such as squirrels, birds, or rabbits may have also eaten some of the ripe fruit, which made counting ripe tomatoes consistently difficult. This is why leaf, bud, and beginning fruit development measurements were also observed. This data gap may affects the accuracy of yield calculations. As the plants were grown outdoors, they were subject to fluctuating weather conditions, which likely introduced variability in how different pots retained moisture and supported plant growth.

[0142] The results of the experiment showed clear differences in plant growth, fruit production, root development, and pot decomposition across the various pot types. The pots containing kelp (Groups 2 and 3) consistently demonstrated the strongest overall performance in terms of root development, healthy plant growth, and fruit production. These groups saw the largest tomatoes, the most consistent fruit production, and full pot decomposition. In contrast, Group 4 (Plastic) had the fastest initial growth but suffered from stress later in the plant's lifecycle, particularly through stem elongation and wilting in dry conditions. Group 5 (Peat-Jiffy) showed stunted growth throughout the experiment, with the smallest root systems and the fewest tomatoes produced, which may have been directly tied to the poor biodegradation of the Jiffy pots.

[0144]

[0143] Complete biodegradation of the containers containing seaweed by harvest date was not expected. It was predicted that small remnants or particles of the container would be found around the root system of the plant, but no observable particles or pieces could be found in the soil, proving the biodegradability performance of pots containing seaweed to be more successful than expected. Additionally, the early ripening of fruits in Group 4 (Plastic) was unexpected, as plastic pots generally retained moisture and insulated roots, but this may have also contributed to early plant stress once they were removed from the plastic pots and transplanted directly in the soil. The lack of biodegradation in the Jiffy Pots™ (Group 5) was also noteworthy. Despite being marketed as biodegradable, the Jiffy Pots™ (Group 5) remained mostly intact by the end of the experiment, hindering root expansion and leading to poor plant performance.

[0145]

[0144] The experiment demonstrated several benefits of pots containing seaweed. Groups 2 and 3 had the strongest root systems, with robust downward and outward root development. This suggests that Pots containing kelp promote healthy, unrestricted root growth by breaking down in the soil, unlike the more restrictive plastic and peat-based pots. The pots containing kelp supported consistent plant health, with steady fruit production and minimal signs of stress, in contrast to the plastic pots where plants experienced early stress. Superior Biodegradation: By the end of the experiment, pots containing seaweed had fully biodegraded, leaving no material behind, compared to the intact Jiffy Pots. This confirms that Pots containing kelp integrate into the soil effectively, promoting sustainability.

[0146]

[0145] A second experiment was conducted to evaluate the performance of 10 categories of biodegradable pots (including two versions of seaweed containing pots) across plant growth, biodegradation, and microbial interaction.

[0146] Germination, plant growth, root development, biodegradation, insects, fungal growth, moisture and weight, plus baseline weights and group mapping were observed daily and weekly. Notes were also made for seedling vigor, leaf ratios, structural breakdown, fungal / algae presence, and insect activity. There were 3 samples per pot type, over 20 days.

[0147]

[0147] Six scoring categories were selected for inclusion in a composite score. These were chosen because they directly affect a gardener’s or grower’s success with starting and transplanting plants. To score germination as a percentage, I measured the seeds germinated by Day 20 (out of 15 sown). Then, the results were scaled 0-10 using min-max normalization. Root penetration was given a 0-10 scale with an average rating of plant root escape, root penetration of the device, from the pot into the earth, higher penetration was scored higher. Leaf and vigor were a combined metric that considered the leaf-to-sprout ratio, the above-ground development, and a visual vigor rating. This was scaled 0-10. Integrity focused on the sweet spot between structural breakdown with a rating of 0-4, mid-range values (softened, but still usable) are optimal and scored 10, and too rigid (<1) or too degraded (>3.5) scored lower. Microbial stability is a composite of fungal and algae presence score -a higher burden was worse- the score was inverted on a 0-10 scale (lowest burden = 10). The insect and fauna activity was observed for net effect, it considered the beneficial fauna (worms, centipedes) minus pests (slugs, pill bugs) and was scaled 0-10.

[0148]

[0148] Weighting the factors for the main composite was carefully considered. Categories were given weights to ensure no single dimension dominated: germination: 20 percent, root penetration: 20 percent, leaf / vigor: 20 percent, integrity: 20 percent, microbial stability: 10 percent, and insect and fauna: 10 percent. Scores were normalized (0-10), multiplied by weight, summed, and divided by 100. This yielded a final weighted score (0-10) and rank (1-10) for each pot type.

[0149]

[0150] 149] Table 4. A chart of normalized scores for experimental comparison (0-10 scale & weighted on percentage).

[0151]

[0150] Figure 5 summarizes the moisture retention of the pots as a function of time for the pots. This shows that the pots containing seaweed were most effective. This shows the pots containing seaweed have moisture retention that is effective and may help with controlled degradation and integration into the earth over time, too.

[0152]

[0151] Figure 6 shows the base of a pot 601 from the Kelp Pots 2.0 series with an abundance of earth 602 and life forms including earth worm 603 engaged with the pot exterior surface 604. This also shows roots 605 growing through the pot base 601 and engaging with the surrounding earth 602. Finally, this shows preliminary degradation, that is, that the combined fibrous material and seaweed 606 of the pot surface 604 integrating into the earth 602.

[0153]

[0152] The pots used in the comparison had a moisture profile that was reported separately. Moisture behavior is complex. It depends on material type, pot volume, absorption vs. retention, and microbial side-effects. To avoid unfair weighting, moisture was kept outside of the composite rank and presented as a diagnostic profile.

[0154]

[0153] Each pot’s moisture profile includes MR1 absorption index (day 1 : change in pot mass vs. dry weight), re-uptake responsiveness (ability to regain water after drying), volatility / stability index (rate of moisture loss, day 1-3), and surface moisture and algae tendency (observed scores) This allows growers to understand watering dynamics and microbial risks without conflating them with germination or root performance.

[0155]

[0156] 154] Table 5. A chart of normalized scores for water retention.

[0157]

[0155] This approach was selected to show raw values and normalized scores side-by-side. Flexibility endures because the weighting system can be adjusted for different user needs (e.g., nurseries may weight visual vigor higher, sustainability programs may weight integrity and microbial stability more). Nuance is maintained by keeping moisture separate, we respect material differences (fiber absorption vs. plastic containment) while still reporting the data.

[0158]

[0156] Figure 7 is a cross-sectional view of a plant 701. This cross-sectional view is possible because of the plexiglass 702 that abutted a pot with walls 703 that had been cut longitudinally, filled with substrate 704 and a seed, placed in surrounding earth 705 and allowed time to grow. This Figure 7 shows plant roots 706 growing past the faint remaining walls of the pot 703. The gradual, subtle difference in shading between substrate 704, pot walls 703, and earth 705 shows that integration of the materials occurred, at least in part, by the degradation of pot walls 703.

[0159]

[0157] Advantages of this device and its manufacture include plant growth and health enhancement, positive soil impact, and reduced energy, land, and resource use for plant cultivation. Soil enrichment occurs when the device releases nutrients as it decomposes, acting as a slow-release fertilizer. A biostimulant effect is more likely because the device decomposition promotes root development and enhances nutrient uptake.

[0160]

[0158] Optimized seed germination and early plant growth may benefit from how the material composition supports the early life stages of plants by maintaining moisture, providing nutrients, allowing air pruning, and preventing transplant shock. Seamless transplantability and decomposition are benefits of how the pot may be planted directly into the ground where it decomposes naturally and contributes organic matter to the soil. Enhanced nutrient delivery may occur with the regulated release of macronutrients (N, P, K) and trace minerals beneficial to plant growth. Optimized decomposition rate may occur as the biodegradability synchronized with the plant’s early growth cycle, ensuring minimal transplant shock. Growth hormones include the presence of natural auxins and cytokinins promotes root and shoot development. Plant stress resistance is enhanced by the antioxidants and betaines enhance plant resilience. pH neutrality is likely, the pot as it degrades is generally neutral to slightly alkaline.

[0161]

[0159] The final, post processing pot is selected to enhance seed germination and early plant development. The pot may be a biodegradable container with an optimized decomposition rate, aligning with plant growth cycles and transplantability. Some pots may enhance soil microbiome interactions, improve root penetration, and support plant immune responses. This positive soil impact includes supporting microbial life, enhancing root penetration and soil structure, and contributing organic matter to the soil as it degrades. Kelp-based materials offer natural binding properties, antifungal benefits, and a sustainable alternative to traditional materials. Some embodiments may provide improved rigidity and water retention to support seed germination and root establishment. The use of the combined seaweed-based material and natural fibers from wood or paper pulp implies that the pot is non-toxic and ecologically friendly. Pots containing kelp are pathogen-free and relatively odorless, ensuring a pleasant user experience and safe plant growth. The use of the pots likely reduces transplant shock and supports root aeration.

[0162]

[0160] The porous structure of the device walls may facilitate better air circulation around soil and roots. Improved airflow reduces the likelihood of bad actors that rely on moisture retention. Some embodiments absorb excess moisture release slowly to prevent water stagnation on container surface and within soil. Alginates are known for their antimicrobial properties that help suppress fungi and bacteria growth. These compounds can reduce the risk of diseases like root rot and damping off. Slugs and potentially other pests such as insects are repelled by the macro algae-containing material. One experimental observation included counting multiple slugs along the plastic, tapioca, and spruce wood pots and no slugs on any surface of the kelp pot.

[0163]

[0161] Plant benefits arise from the use of a device. A nutrient-rich composition and bioactive compounds promote vigorous growth and development resulting in enhanced nutrient supply and biostimulant properties. Pots containing kelp act as a slow-release fertilizer, supplying essential macro and micronutrients, along with growth hormones and bioactive compounds that promote plant health and growth beyond what other materials offer. The degradation of the device permits visible root penetration through the wall within 7-21 days of germination under standard greenhouse conditions while retaining structural integrity for handling. Embodiments biodegrade in soil within 8-16 weeks depending on moisture and temperature without generating microplastic residues. This releases potassium or other trace minerals to the rhizosphere during biodegradation, supporting early plant vigor. Some embodiments may increase amount of potassium (or other targeted mineral). Also, seedlings transplanted with the device directly into the earth exhibit reduced transplant shock as measured by growth lag time or survival percentage compared to bare-root transplants.

[0164]

[0162] There are environmental stewardship advantages to the embodiments described herein. Less irrigation may be needed in irrigation intensive industries that have water retention problems or that are in the midst of drought. Seaweed is a rapidly renewable resource with minimal environmental footprint and does not require land use to grow. Some of the embodiments herein use a seaweed waste stream material that is sourced responsibly, with minimal processing impact. Kelp is a tool to combat climate change and sequesters carbon better than almost anything on the planet. Finally, seaweed acts as a carbon sink, and when captured in the pot walls, will sink carbon from the atmosphere into the soil. That is, embodiments herein use sustainable resources such as kelp, recycled paper pulp, etc. that don’t require land use to develop. Sustainable harvesting includes ensuring seaweed is harvested responsibly to protect marine ecosystems. Seaweed farming (aquaculture) may provide a consistent and sustainable supply. Further, invasive species management may be a benefit of some embodiments that utilize invasive species like Sargassum muticum where appropriate, helping to control their spread while benefiting from their properties. Harvesting kelp does not involve deforestation or peatland degradation. There is also a reduced carbon footprint through sustainable material sourcing and energy-efficient production. The devices are free of intentionally added peat and plastic resins, and is substantially free of urea-based wet-strength agents.

[0165]

[0163] The present disclosure is not to be limited in terms of the particular embodiments described in this application, which are intended as illustrations of various aspects. Many modifications and variations can be made without departing from its spirit and scope. Such modifications and variations are intended to fall within the scope of the appended claims. The present disclosure is to be limited only by the terms of the appended claims, along with the full scope of equivalents to which such claims are entitled. Tt is to be understood that this disclosure is not limited to particular methods, reagents, compounds, compositions or biological systems, which can, of course, vary. It is also to be understood that the terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only, and is not intended to be limiting.

[0166]

[0164] In addition, even if a specific number of an introduced claim recitation is explicitly recited, one will recognize that such recitation should be interpreted to mean at least the recited number (for example, the bare recitation of "two recitations," without other modifiers, means at least two recitations, or two or more recitations). Furthermore, in those instances where a convention analogous to “at least one of A, B, and C, et cetera” is used, in general such a construction is intended in the sense one having skill in the art would understand the convention (for example, “a system having at least one of A, B, and C” would include but not be limited to systems that have A alone, B alone, C alone, A and B together, A and C together, B and C together, and / or A, B, and C together, et cetera). In those instances where a convention analogous to “at least one of A, B, or C, et cetera” is used, in general such a construction is intended in the sense one having skill in the art would understand the convention (for example, “a system having at least one of A, B, or C” would include but not be limited to systems that have A alone, B alone, C alone, A and B together, A and C together, B and C together, and / or A, B, and C together, et cetera). It will be further understood by those within the art that virtually any disjunctive word and / or phrase presenting two or more alternative terms, whether in the description, claims, or drawings, should be understood to contemplate the possibilities of including one of the terms, either of the terms, or both terms. For example, the phrase “A or B” will be understood to include the possibilities of “A” or “B” or “A and B.”

[0167]

[0165] In addition, where features or aspects of the disclosure are described in terms of Markush groups, those skilled in the art will recognize that the disclosure is also thereby described in terms of any individual member or subgroup of members of the Markush group.

[0168]

[0166] All ranges disclosed herein also encompass any and all possible subranges and combinations of subranges thereof. Any listed range can be easily recognized as sufficiently describing and enabling the same range being broken down into at least equal halves, thirds, quarters, fifths, tenths, et cetera. As a non-limiting example, each range discussed herein can be readily broken down into a lower third, middle third and upper third, et cetera. As will also be understood by one skilled in the art all language such as “up to,” “at least,” and the like include the number recited and refer to ranges that can be subsequently broken down into subranges as discussed above. Finally, a range includes each individual member. Thus, for example, a group having 1-3 devices refers to groups having 1, 2, or 3 devices. Similarly, a group having 1-5 devices refers to groups having 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 devices, and so forth.

Claims

Claims im:

1. A device for engaging with substrate and earth, comprising: fibrous material; and seaweed wherein the device has a surface for engaging with substrate and has a rigidity that decreases over time upon exposure to water, substrate, earth, or a combination thereof.

2. The device of claim 1, wherein the device is a pot, disk, or sheet.

3. The device of claim 1, wherein a second surface engages with earth.

4. The device of claim 1, wherein the fibrous material is present in 70 weight percent or more.

5. The device of claim 1, wherein the fibrous material is present as 60 to 97 weight percent.

6. The device of claim 1, wherein the seaweed is present in 30 weight percent or less.

7. The device of claim 1, wherein the seaweed is a brown macroalgae species.

8. The device of claim 1, wherein the fibrous material comprises wood fiber.

9. The device of claim 1, wherein the device has walls of a thickness of at least 2 mm.

10. The device of claim 1, wherein seaweed comprises intact seaweed, derivatives of seaweed, seaweed processing waste, or a combination thereof.

11. A method for making a device, comprising: forming a slurry of seaweed and fibrous material; molding the slurry into the device; and drying the device.

12. The method of claim 11, wherein forming the slurry comprises introducing fibrous material to an agitation vessel.

13. The method of claim 11, wherein forming the slurry comprises hydrating fibrous material, seaweed, or both.

14. The method of claim 11, wherein drying the slurry comprises controlling the humidity of the air surrounding the device.

15. The method of claim 11, wherein drying the device comprises tailoring surfaces for engaging with substrate and earth.

Images