Lightweight Peat's Mucky Muck soil testing

[biggreg]

Anyone using sharp sand for drainage in heavy,broken down mixes?
The John innes loam based potting mix is 58% loam, 25% peat and 16% sand. That seems to have worked for a few people.
Not sure how helpful big chunks of pumice or whatever is in a dense mucky mix?

Oh, and thanks for the calcined DE tip!

 

[acespicoli]

The use of materials with dissimilar surface texture IMO is a bonus.

SAND CLAY SILT PEAT

Also sand will drain and not hold water so the total moisture in the mix can be adjusted as needed. The more Oxygen in the soil the better I would think, maybe the hydroponic guys running DWC (Deep Water Culture) and R-DWC (Recirculating DWC) would agree?

https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Soil_respiration

Due to the lack of oxygen, this pathway is described as anaerobic respiration. This is an important source of CO2 in soil respiration in waterlogged ecosystems where oxygen is scarce, as in peat bogs and wetlands. However, most CO2 released from the soil occurs via respiration and one of the most important aspects of belowground respiration occurs in the plant roots.

 

[biggreg]

So, I was told the sharp, freshly crushed sand would have higher paramagnetic energy. I have no clue about such energies and my first inclination is skepticism but there is a paramagnetic soil meter. The Dr. Phil Callahan stuff? Anyone actually measuring their mix for paramagnetic energy?

 

[biggreg]

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ref/?cid=nrcs142p2_053572

The acid test. No, not the Haight-Ashbury kind but the almost as fun soil fizzy looking for free carbonates kind. This 1m HCL fizz test is a bit stronger than the old vinegar test. Wonder if our soil passes this test with no fizzies, would we detect free carbonates with a AA8.2/M3?

Or maybe the vinegar test would be the best one? White distilled vinegar has about the same PH as Mehlich 3 solution. (PH 2.5)

Vinegar will fizz on calcium bentonite clay so that may skew a M3 Ca.number if it's in the mix?

 

[jidoka]

so if you believe in paramagnatism...and i aint saying what i think either way...look into 1/4 inch basalt as a drainage amendment

 

[biggreg]

so if you believe in paramagnatism...and i aint saying what i think either way...look into 1/4 inch basalt as a drainage amendment

I'm more of a doubting Thomas on this but I have to admit I threw some so called paramagnetic basalt in my last mix just for the hell of it.

 

[jidoka]

pike agri labs will test it for you

there are energies on this earth i will never understand

 

[biggreg]

Someone gave me advice on using the pounds per acre number on my soil test: to amend , convert the lbs/acre to square feet 6" deep, calculate the increase in lbs/acre id like to see, and just double or triple depending on my container depth. ??? Huh?

Should work fine in my mineral soil outdoor garden but for a lightweight, organic or organic-mineral container soil it assumes a wrong density. Ppm x2 = lbs /acre isn't true for soils that have a bulk density less than 1g/cm3.


On the container sized scale with a lightweight soil, a correct way would be to convert the mg/kg ppm from the report to mg/L with a bulk density. Then just figure how many mg per L of an element you want to add and how many L you have to mix.


This brings me back to:

A soil lab should not knowingly put false and confusing information on a soil test.

The lab should know organic soil is lighter density and follow the written lab manual and actually weigh it in.

They should know that a bulk density is required to report pounds per acre.

They should not deviate from the written methods without customer permission or knowledge

They should know that their little bar graphs of low, adequate, high, very high are for volumes of soil, not a mass. Those numbers are based on lbs per acre slice ( a volume).

Labs should be ashamed to take money for and put their name on such garbage.

 

[jidoka]

for your mineral soil...there are 807 yards in an acre furrow slice. lbs per acre divided by 807 gives lbs per yard or lbs per 202 gallons. simple to get from there to lbs per whatever size your containers are

 

[biggreg]

Nice mineral soil math. Way less convoluted.if you are mixing a soil with a bulk density of 1g/cm3 in containers.

 

[biggreg]

A Lab should never give a number on a report that isn't either measured directly or calculated correctly. The pounds per acre cannot be calculated without a bulk density unless it's close to 1g/cm3.

A certain lab told me they know they are wrong but it's in the computer like that and they can't change it? WTF?

 

[jidoka]

http://blog.nutri-tech.com.au/soil-therapy-guidelines-understanding-your-soil-report-1/

Has a couple of paragraphs about paramagnetism. Like you I remain skeptical. I will say I found some volcanic topsoil and it rocks

 

[biggreg]

Adding basalt is a low risk gamble, I figure it can't hurt. I did 1000g per yard3 last mix. Guess I would need to test it to find if that was enough to put the soil in the optimum range.

 

[jidoka]

gotta watch out for iron going high an blocking mn uptake. the diff between paramag and magnetic is a bit blurry if you ask me

 

[biggreg]

The addition of the basalt didn't change my Fe numbers on my scooped M3s

. It's tricky to balance micros in proportions to each other in small batches trying to use bastardized mis-weighed lab tests. Fe=1/3 K, Mn=1/2 Fe was what I was shooting for. I'm sick of looking at test results through a fun house mirror.

 

[jidoka]

so on one of your pots...if you hit that fe:mn ratio spray a bunch of mn when you switch to flower and give the plants enough food to support the hormonal shift. you can do it your own or take a look at accelerate from aea. i bet you are pleasantly surprised.

 

[biggreg]

Sent off another soil sample today to check out a lab. They seem promising and are willing to provide a custom report.

Sent sample field moist. The lab will do a volume measurement and then air dry for a bulk density measurement. I'm getting the Mehlich 3 with the soil weighed in the proper 2g with a real balance and NO more mis-calibrated, bastardized procedure SCOOP test! The report will show both mg/kg and mg/L. CEC in both meq/100g and meq/100cm3

I'll post the report when it comes back.

 

[biggreg]

Back to this notion of calcium vs magnesium and the physical effect of opening vs tightening the soil at differing ratios in organic vs mineral soils.

I've been digging on info on this. In soils that contain clay, it's a for sure thing that calcium binding with the clay flocculates the soil, opening it up with air in a sorta chemical and physical reaction. Magnesium doing the opposite, closing up and tightening the soil. Growers in mineral soils can use this fact to open up heavy clays with Ca and tighten up loose sands with Mg.

Does this hold true in low/no clay organic soils? In these soils, Ca and Mg bind with organic matter, not inorganic clay molecules.

Anyone have any direct experience or any published research with Ca/Mg ratios, organic based soils and the resultant physical properties change?

http://www.gret-perg.ulaval.ca/uploads/tx_centrerecherche/Caron_Price_Rochefort_VadoseZoneJ_2015.pdf

(Semi-related link)

 

[biggreg]

More organic histosol stuff attached.

 

[biggreg]

More gifts attached for that soil nerd on yer xmas list: