Slownickel lounge, pull up a chair. CEC interpretation

[HazyBulldog]

Thanks for breaking that down for me.

My Ca levels were around the same, and I noticed hallow stems only on my KQR. My KQR tends to be a Ca hog, and gets bud rot easily.

 

[GreenHands13]

I'm a big fan of silica. My native soil here is Decomposing granite. I add it to all of my new soil at around 25% of the mix. My si levels come back between 80-100 ppm every test even three year old soil that still only has the original 25% I put in when it was new soil.

 

[slownickel]

Bull...my stems were rock solid. On the Logan test Si was like 93 ppm and Ca was 60%, combined with enough B that created the pathway.

If you look at ppm Ca my numbers are right there where Slow talks about albeit in a slightly higher cec soil. Maybe there is something to the Si and the sufficiency theory v the exact %s.

As far as pH I shoot for 6.8. I do not rely on sulfuric acid like conventional ag, I count on carbonic acid exudates to dissolve minerals and make them available. I posted Microbeman's take on that earlier in this thread.

They got sprayed with plenty of Mn (accelerate) to form bud.

I saw my first piece of bud rot on still running plants this week. For at least the last two years the only place I see it is where bud rubs against Hortinova.

This year I had perfect weather through Oct...last yr shitty cold and rain. So I don't know what to think other than Si is awesome

Jidoka,

I think your plan was nearly perfect, bulking at the end with K. Your calculations might have been a bit off that's all.

You just didn't have enough Ca nor P in your bases to cover that huge K bump. i would argue that had you pushed that K to only 8 to 10% AND HAD enough Ca (80% of CEC calculated using [email protected]) and gypsum spikes installed, you would nailed it. Not sure you would have to even go that high on K either....

The minimum floor level of Ca in ppms to be able to have nutrient density at the root level is 2,000 ppms according to Carey Reams. Below that level it is impossible to get nutrient density.

And I can assure you that when you see 3000 ppm+ of Ca using [email protected] and the distributions are correct, the result is spectacular in both yields and quality.

How would you rate these soils? Which for you would you qualify as the best?

 

[jidoka]

The TS. If redthumb is around he can vouch for that also

So far crickets from spectrum on weighing a sample.

And yea if i try to correct that soil a little bit of vansil and plenty of gypsum to drive off the other base cations

 

[jidoka]

Btw they told me they dont use aa 8.2 for k2...they use m3 with a fudge factor to match their old aa 7.0 results. Bill Urbanowicz is the guy mike sent me to when he got tired of answering questions

 

[HazyBulldog]

Btw they told me they dont use aa 8.2 for k2...they use m3 with a fudge factor to match their old aa 7.0 results. Bill Urbanowicz is the guy mike sent me to when he got tired of answering questions

They have been posting on the tests [email protected] on the tests? I really like the fact we are putting these labs to the test.

 

[slownickel]

Jidoka,

I pay most attention to the Ca from the [email protected] process to make my numbers.

All that K and Mg using M3 and or [email protected] is available to the plant (those numbers vary little and are not proportional to the M3).

Bicarbonates don't grab Mg or K, they grab Ca. I will inquire at the lab regarding the K from [email protected], as often it is higher than the M3, and other times it is in reverse.

 

[jidoka]

They did not give me separate 8.2 results. Do i have to ask for that extra.

Also does anyone know is silicon si or sio2

 

[slownickel]

They did not give me separate 8.2 results. Do i have to ask for that extra.

Also does anyone know is silicon si or sio2

The last numbers on the bottom of the analysis are your [email protected] base elements (K, Mg, Ca and Na) in ppms.

Note the differences against each of the M3.

The report says Silicon.

 

[jidoka]

And also btw...i will post the test so everyone can see it v just the guys you sent it to. May take a while though...i am a hair busy.

And btw dos...last yr in the shitty october weather i did not pump the k. Figured it would cause mold

 

[slownickel]

Jidoka,

https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=7686889&postcount=339

Here are your tests. Already posted them. Thought you saw them.

 

[jidoka]

Slow...can you use your influence to get them to take the extra 5 seconds to weigh things.

If that doesnt work we should mount a campaign to have tons of people write them. This shit aint right for light soils

Edit...those cocksuckers are ignoring me and pissing me off

 

[slownickel]

Slow...can you use your influence to get them to take the extra 5 seconds to weigh things.

If that doesnt work we should mount a campaign to have tons of people write them. This shit aint right for light soils

Edit...those cocksuckers are ignoring me and pissing me off

Please be gentle with the guys at the lab. They do thousands of samples per day. They tolerate us.

I have already inquired about the weighing and the potassium number being reported with [email protected], and am waiting on their response. Bill has a been a bit under the weather and sometimes takes a day to respond.

 

[plantingplants]

IT AIN'T RIGHT!

also ain't right if they're not actually doing AA8.2


slow, why did you mention the K meter?

 

[jidoka]

He was putting the needle in me...and fair enough. I went crazy. I like that about slow, lol

 

[Avenger]

for the lightweight peat based mixes, having them report estimated CEC in meq/liter would be my preference.

To clarify, from my understanding:
-Spectrum does do the [email protected] extraction on the base cations when requested.
-However they do not use these results when they do their CEC estimation, because their is no research to support these calculations.

The use of buffer pH instead of soil:water(1:1) pH to estimate exchangeable acidity(hydrogen) for the calculations is the only difference in the written methods to determine estimated CEC between Spectrum and Logan labs.

The silicon is reported as Si in the Spectrum report. Critical values for soil Si test (acetic acid extraction method) levels as reported by Snyder (2001) are as follows:
<7 ppm -low
7-24 ppm - medium
>24 - high

 

[jidoka]

Avenger...what would my sio2 be at this level. 22 sticks in my head but my head aint that reliable anymore

 

[slownickel]

for the lightweight peat based mixes, having them report estimated CEC in meq/liter would be my preference.

Avenger,

Great job!

Given that the lab is using a physical measurement, not one by weight, we are in reality getting a volumetric measurement. Think about it.

Basically they are using a measuring cup.

(Bill promised to look into it tomorrow and give us all the details, he was out today and is a zillion times more helpful than Mike). A cup is a cup, what the cup weighs is what it weighs. Same space.

In this case the lab is doing exactly that, measuring a volume and assuming that the measurement weighs 100 grams (which may or may not be true, we will know tomorrow). The more time goes by and the more biology there is, the faster these hybrid mixes become soil and acting like one. Given there is compost, rock dust, etc., this stuff could actually be heavier than soil.

 

[Avenger]

22 ppm Si = 47ppm SiO2

fyi, the sample size that each M3 or [email protected] extraction is run on is 1.7 cc (2 gram scoop)

imagine trying to scoop out accurate samples of dried and ground up peat based mix with a 1/3 teaspoon scoop.

 

[slownickel]

not yet. the email is going to both slow and I. Soon as he gets it he can post it and we can use it as a basis for discussion.

The TS will be the top soil mix I used. This was by far the best plant I grew. It outyielded everything else and quality was on point. It is making me want to change out all my soil although I think I have an even better idea for next yr.

I simply used 1/2 inch local basalt rock as a drainage amendment and you cannot find a trace of it. So definitely high bio activity. But also a mistake cause the basalt is high in Fe. And so is the soil cause it comes from the top of a mesa formed by volcanic activity sitting right on top of that same basalt deposit. On the other hand it is highly paramagnetic...maybe there is something to that.

The second soil is marked BAS. It is Jeremy's base with my own amendments. I used Oly Mountain compost. If you have seen it you know how much hardwood is in it...gone in one full season grow. The other plant substantially beat this one on yield but I would say this soil performed very well also.

So me cards are on the table. let's turn em over and see what I got

Jidoka,

tell us more about what is in these samples? Peat? Perlite? Etc? And how long ago?

And you said somewhere you can't find any wood chips either.... so you have basically made a soil. Did you sift the sample? What did you send in?