What's new
  • As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.

Lightweight Peat's Mucky Muck soil testing

slownickel

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
So on acid soils you're saying with direct experience that the M3 and AA7.0 do not jive on Ca, mg, K and N. when ran side by side?



The AA7.0 isn't used to test for all the other elements you mention.

You are correct, DPTA is the process that they use when running AA@pH 7 and the DPTA is run at a pH of 7.3 I believe.
 

biggreg

Member
When trying to use any other procedure other than M3 we never saw Fe toxicity of 200 ppms or more. All other procedures would report silly low

Other procedures for extracting micros will never give the same valuie as the Mehlich 3. All soil test are just values indexed to crop response. DTPA or hot water Boron, etc will never match the Mehlich 3 value. That's not how it works with the Phosphorus tests or the micro extractions according to the lab manuals.

The base cation test M3 vs AA 7.0 or 8.5 should in theory displace the cations attached with ammonium.

Without intference from free carbonates or salts, they should agree closely, assuming the test was executed correctly.
 

biggreg

Member
DPTA is a whole seperate test with its own 10g sample

The AA7.0 is a stand alone 2.5g sample and isn't related to your story on micro levels
 

slownickel

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Other procedures for extracting micros will never give the same valuie as the Mehlich 3. All soil test are just values indexed to crop response. DTPA or hot water Boron, etc will never match the Mehlich 3 value. That's not how it works with the Phosphorus tests or the micro extractions according to the lab manuals.

The base cation test M3 vs AA 7.0 or 8.5 should in theory displace the cations attached with ammonium.

Without intference from free carbonates or salts, they should agree closely, assuming the test was executed correctly.

K and sometimes Mg come close comparing [email protected] vs M3. Sometimes Mg is way off. Ca is always the big wild card. Sometimes even in neutral soils where there are lots of calcium carbonate rock present the difference between M3 and [email protected] is great. We even found some bicarbonates one time, this is because of the very low rainfall in that area, Zacapa valley Guatemala. When I worked there 25 year ago, it was a soil that always left us very confused, getting good prolonged response there in melons was very difficult. They have huge bicarbonate levels in the water (over 5 meq) and the soil reacts to muriatic acid at about 20 inches down. Lots of white and creamy colored, red stained rocks.

As for P, well, the correlation between high P here and yields is pretty impressive using M3 on alkaline soils!
 

Bradley_Danks

Active member
Veteran
Bradley, you're in my area. That soil will work fine if you get calcium up to 70% base saturation minimum. I used to use A&L but they will only run dpta on "medias" not mehlich 3. I can't really make calls on amendments with just dpta.

These are the recommendations concentrates northwest gave me for that a&l lab test. I know you cant make calls on amendments with just dpta but are you applying similar amounts of limestone at these recommended rates on native jory?. You think they would get us to 70% base saturation minimum or even close?

Apply the following per 1000 sq. ft. / 3015 sq. ft.:

180#* Limestone (Not Dolomite)

28.3# Feather Meal

5# Fish Bone Meal

4.8# Sulfate of Potash

As a substitute for the feather meal, fish bone meal, and sulfate of potash, you could use a pre-mixed fertilizer we carry. I’d recommend 50# of the “Nature’s Intent 7-2-4.”

*The key to applying this much lime or dolomite is that it must be worked into the soil to a 6"-8" depth. If you don't till in the lime, you should limit the application to 90# per 1000 sq. ft..

For trace nutrients, I generally recommend the following per 1000 sq. ft.:

#10 Kelp Meal

#10 Rock Dust (Ex: Cascade Minerals, Glacial Rock Dust, Azomite, or Greensand)

The test also noted that you have low Boron levels, but applying kelp over the next 5 years should correct the deficiency. If you want to make a one-time application of boron
 

slownickel

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
DPTA is a whole seperate test with its own 10g sample

The AA7.0 is a stand alone 2.5g sample and isn't related to your story on micro levels

The local university and many others run the AA@pH 7 procedure and the DPTA at pH 7.3 The labs tend to utilize "the package" of procedures for specific pH soils. Correct? Those two go hand in hand.

The point is that I need to know which specific metals are there and how much of those metals there really are at a pH similar to that of root exudates. M3 is a pH of 2.5 I believe.

When using the alkaline soil package and reactants working at alkaline pH's, you can't balance metals as you have no idea of the real quantities of metals in that soil.

Run DPTA and M3 on the same soil and you can find 30 times more Fe and more in the M3 procedure vs AA@pH 7.
 

biggreg

Member
K and sometimes Mg come close comparing [email protected] vs M3. Sometimes Mg is way off. Ca is always the big wild card. Sometimes even in neutral soils where there are lots of calcium carbonate rock present the difference between M3 and [email protected] is great. We even found some bicarbonates one time, this is because of the very low rainfall in that area, Zacapa valley Guatemala. When I worked there 25 year ago, it was a soil that always left us very confused, getting good prolonged response there in melons was very difficult. They have huge bicarbonate levels in the water (over 5 meq) and the soil reacts to muriatic acid at about 20 inches down. Lots of white and creamy colored, red stained rocks.

As for P, well, the correlation between high P here and yields is pretty impressive using M3 on alkaline soils!

I can agree limestone based sands interfere with the test.

The interference would be similar for M3 and 7.0.

You reccomend the AA 8.2 with a Mehlich 3 for every acidic and alkaline soil?

Are you doing these two tests to find a more true value for the Ca actually attached to the exchange sites in order to better calculate the CEC for a ratio based approach?
 

slownickel

Active member
ICMag Donor
Veteran
I can agree limestone based sands interfere with the test.

The interference would be similar for M3 and 7.0.

You reccomend the AA 8.2 with a Mehlich 3 for every acidic and alkaline soil?

Are you doing these two tests to find a more true value for the Ca actually attached to the exchange sites in order to better calculate the CEC for a ratio based approach?

When I get called in, it is because someone has a problem. I get response. I can't get response underestimating by 50 times or more what I need. Doesn't matter if there are free elements not bound in the soil. Here we can start at a pH of 8.2 or so. Why wash everything away, why not take advantage of it?

I'll tell you why they don't try to take advantage of it, because the conductivity is "high". Yet, when we have enough Ca, crops can tolerate higher conductivity. Read up on the SAR ratio of water. It works on soils. Just in soils we call it the base distributions.
 

biggreg

Member
The local university and many others run the AA@pH 7 procedure and the DPTA at pH 7.3 The labs tend to utilize "the package" of procedures for specific pH soils. Correct? Those two go hand in hand.

The point is that I need to know which specific metals are there and how much of those metals there really are at a pH similar to that of root exudates. M3 is a pH of 2.5 I believe.

When using the alkaline soil package and reactants working at alkaline pH's, you can't balance metals as you have no idea of the real quantities of metals in that soil.

Run DPTA and M3 on the same soil and you can find 30 times more Fe and more in the M3 procedure vs AA@pH 7.



A higher M3value vs DTPA does not mean there is more or less in the soil. They cannot be directly compared. It's similar to the P extractions, they all index to plant response but have differing values. Some of the P extractions have conversion multipliers to each other.

Also,

Ammonium displaces the cations in a process is that is ph independent. That is how it works at the Mehlich 3, 2.5 ph or Aa7.0ph or aa8.5ph Don't let the ph confuse us.

And Also,

We are talking Bradley's Jory acid silt clay loam. Not alkaline soils. Not calcerous limestone sands in acid soils. My question to you wasnt related to micros or Phosphorus solublization or chelation of micros at low ph or alkaline soils. Lots of answers that sound good but a more topic focused answer would be more beneficial to all in the future with other discussions.

This discussion is done.


Biggereg is wrapping this up due to lack of interest or fruitful beneficial participation.


I wish you all luck on your growing endeavors.

My final message is:

Don't let the bastards "scoop" you if you want a real test!

( especially 1/2 scooping Spectrum analytics )



picture.php
 
I'd be interested in hearing about how we could use the community effort of icmag to develop some way of moving forward and possibly resolving this conundrum???

After the jory soil talk obv:tiphat:
 
A higher M3value vs DTPA does not mean there is more or less in the soil. They cannot be directly compared. It's similar to the P extractions, they all index to plant response but have differing values. Some of the P extractions have conversion multipliers to each other.

Also,

Ammonium displaces the cations in a process is that is ph independent. That is how it works at the Mehlich 3, 2.5 ph or Aa7.0ph or aa8.5ph Don't let the ph confuse us.

And Also,

We are talking Bradley's Jory acid silt clay loam. Not alkaline soils. Not calcerous limestone sands in acid soils. My question to you wasnt related to micros or Phosphorus solublization or chelation of micros at low ph or alkaline soils. Lots of answers that sound good but a more topic focused answer would be more beneficial to all in the future with other discussions.

This discussion is done.


Biggereg is wrapping this up due to lack of interest or fruitful beneficial participation.


I wish you all luck on your growing endeavors.

My final message is:

Don't let the bastards "scoop" you if you want a real test!

( especially 1/2 scooping Spectrum analytics )



View Image


thanks biggy you inspired my quest for soil test literacy
 

cannabisforjoe

New member
big thanks for all your hard work

big thanks for all your hard work

biggreg,

thanks for all of the time you put in to this. it really is a shame how many corners are cut by these labs and how little they care. while i have never used them, i have also always wondered why tests from spectrum never added up properly in regards to base saturation. though not that surprising when you read that they don't put much stock in albrecht type bcsr. keep up the good work

Joe
 

plantingplants

Active member
Biggreg, i posted this in slownickel"s thread but thought you may be interested. Dont know if you saw but SN got spectrum to weigh 2g samples for only an extra $10.

Here are two results from the same sample plus the base distros I calculated with AA8.2 Ca- the first is the scooped results, the second is weighed and whatever else they do for k3. This soil is roughly 80% lighter than 2,000,000 lb acre soil.

qDPgJBy.jpg


CEC .. 17.7*
K 0.93 .. 5.2%*
Mg 4.4 .. 24.8%*
Ca 12.2 .. 68%*
Na 0.19 .. 1%*



6Y8Efii.png


40.1 cec
74% ca
20% mg
4% K
0.6% na


Very confused as to why some numbers didn't move at all. Like fe.. 1 ppm??? Doesn't make sense to me.
 

jidoka

Active member
1/5 the weight and cec goes up 5 pts...wtf? ask them do they still limit the ca contribution to cec. why wouldnt cec go up by a factor of 5?

on another note you need to add some N. get that ec up to .5-.7 at least...you dont lack minerals
 

plantingplants

Active member
I think they must be limiting it still because if you use the AA8.2 Ca value in the CEC calculation then it goes from 17.7 to 40.1...... but yea seems like everything should shoot up a lot more, but maybe by grinding everything finely, the soil weight difference goes down.

Thank you for your input. Where do you like to see N?

btw, the NO3 horiba meter on Amazon I'm looking at goes from 62ppm to 6200ppm. I see there are meters with different ranges. N in plant tissue looks like it is between 2-4% which is 20,000 ppm to 40,000 ppm. Is the sap number lower? Will the 62-6200 meter work?
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top