Balancing Soil Minerals

[trichrider]

difference between EC and CEC...

EC: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_053280.pdf

CEC: http://www.cbxproducts.com/3_1Soil_CationExchange.html



Larger CEC values indicate that a soil has a greater capacity to hold cations. Therefore, it requires higher rates of fertilizer or lime to change a high CEC soil. When a high CEC soil has good test levels, it offers a large nutrient reserve. However, when it is poor, it can take a large amount of fertilizer or lime to correct that soil test. A high CEC soil requires a higher soil cation level, or soil test, to provide adequate crop nutrition. Low CEC soils hold fewer nutrients, and will likely be subject to leaching of mobile "anion" nutrients. These soils may benefit from split applications of several nutrients. The particular CEC of a soil is neither good nor bad, but knowing it is a valuable management tool.
http://www.spectrumanalytic.com/support/library/ff/CEC_BpH_and_percent_sat.htm

 

[Microbeman]

The points made by Cep and Milky concerning bioavailability are valid. The only nutrients which you want in this form are ones which you know or guess to be immediately required.

I generally prefer to introduce nutrients/minerals/micro-nutrents sequestered in organic matter & rock/clay dusts. (BTW the document linked earlier by Michael thankfully uses the word humus correctly. One can grow tired of the term used to refer to compost).

If a grower makes a judgment call that a certain bioavailable (soluble) nutrient is required immediately then the use of a botanical tea, soluble mineral or salt can be used.

We should really have taken this discussion to another thread. Sorry Michael. But then again, this is the way it goes roun these parts cuz

 

[Bmac1]

As a viewer and new convert to the organic side of things, I personally don't mind . I find it incredibly informative and appreciate the wealth of knowledge you folks have/want to give.

 

[idiit]

the thread was titled balancing soil minerals.

I was talking about avalability of minerals and trace minerals. maybe the correct term is availability. I'm asking for help since i'm not skooled in this subject and don't know what the terms are.

from my research rock dusts are basically unavailable for up to 10 years when they start becoming available. show me the studies that test how long rock dust mineral supplements take to be available to the plants for nutritional uptake.

^if they are not available even partially for up to 10 years then why bother? insane shit going on here.


moringa is just one example of some bioavailable minerals and trace minerals. sea-solids to me classify as another.

because moringa is high in minerals and trace minerals in an organic carbon based source I thought this would be a good place for the discussion emanating from the fact that if the minerals and trace minerals from non carbon (rock dust) sourced amendments are not available for many years what's the point of using them as supplements.

the confirmation would have to come from trace and regular mineral analysis from bud product grown in the amendedsoil.

Michael has been given respect for the only one so far to get into this topic in a straight up honest manner imo.

where's the confusion?

if you are going to have a discussion on mineral and trace mineral soil amendments then the mineral amendments must be available to the plant for nutritional uptake. not addressing this issue renders the conversation invalid.

some amendments in proper proportions like calcium as albriecht has written extensively on make other nutrients available. some amendments excessively applied limit plant nutrient availability. ph regulates nutrient availability. other stuff like cec, etc.. do as well.

i'm referring to chelation time for the minerals and trace minerals to be available.

^ this shit has been going on for years at ic on the soil remineralization threads. I've been addressing this issue for years at ic mag. microman and I have had these conversations several times.

Straw man

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent.[1]

if the term "bioavailablity" inherently and necessarily implies water soluable and this implies excessive leaching issues then we need to address mineral and trace mineral availability since the leached out water soluble minerals would not be available since they are gone from leaching,. DUH!.

We should really have taken this discussion to another thread. Sorry Michael. But then again, this is the way it goes roun these parts cuz

^ straw man argument by microbeman like he's done every time before on this topic.

im asking for help from the pros and Michael is the "one and only" so far to address confirmation issues re the lack of bud product mineral analysis like they used to do back in the day to confirm that the minerals were actually available to the plant for nutrient uptake.

availability is a bigger topic than chelation time. we need to focus on optimum availability in proper proportions /ratios including every facet that affects availability including chelation time, but not restricted to just this one component.

ironically the only true confirmation ( trace and regular mineral ) analysis of the bud ( produce) is not even being performed anymore like they used to do back in da day as Michael has remarked on. hell, it's not even being addressed.

 

[Ratzilla]

idiit
"availability is a bigger topic than chelation time. we need to focus on optimum availability in proper proportions /ratios including every facet that affects availability including chelation time, but not restricted to just this one component."

I kinda think availability and chelation time as one and the same?
Huh
Maybe its that I am not getting your point.
Sure some minerals takes years for their benefits come into play.
Other minerals only a part of what they bring will be available in the beginning.
I think any mineral in the sulfate form is readily available.
With the help of the soil biology even complex bonds are soon broken.
With diversity ,things that bring the same element but with different breakdown times.
I am sure I am being simple for I can see that this is important to you err,
sorry I am just not seeing any difference between availability and chelation at least not to any big degree.
I find myself repeating what you wrote.
True enough things like greensand takes many years to break down and if a peep isn't recycling his mix then sure enough no gain by using it in the first place.
Also if a mineral is not chelated is it even available? Maybe if in solution?
So what am I talking about anyway?
Ratz

 

[idiit]

Also if a mineral is not chelated is it even available? Maybe if in solution?
So what am I talking about anyway?
Ratz

exactly^. we need to address the subject in a clear coherent manner addressing mineral nutrient availability. the availability of rock dust source minerals and trace minerals has not been addressed imo. i'm primarily but not exclusively referring to chelation time for rock dust sourced mineral amendments. availability is a big topic.

I kinda think availability and chelation time as one and the same?

the calcium ratios affect nutrient availability.

the ph affects nutrient availability. wrong ph = nutrient lock-out.

the mg levels affect nutrient availability. too much mg = nutrient lock-out.

^ just a partial list.

CANNABIS NUTRIENT DISORDERS





Nutrient disorders are caused by too much or too little of one or several nutrients being available.

These nutrients are made available between a pH range of five and seven (5-7) and a total dissolved solids (TDS) range from (800 -3000 PPM) (parts per million). Maintaining these conditions is the key to proper nutrient uptake.
Too much of a nutrient may cause toxicity. Symptoms of toxicity often mimic symptoms of deficiency.

Nutrients: Over twenty elements are necessary for a plant to grow. Carbon, hydrogen and oxygen are absorbed from the air and water. The rest of the elements, called mineral nutrients, are dissolved in the nutrient solution. The primary or macronutrients (nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K)) are the elements plants use the most. Calcium (Ca) and magnesium (Mg) are secondary nutrients and used in smaller amounts. Iron (Fe), sulfur (S), manganese (Mn), boron (B), molybdenum (Mo), zinc (Zn) and copper (Cu) are micronutrients or trace elements. Trace elements are found in most soils. Rockwool (hydroponic) fertilizers must contain these trace elements, as they do not normally exist in sufficient quantities in Rockwool or water. Other elements also play a part in plant growth. Aluminum, chlorine, cobalt, iodine, selenium, silicon, sodium and vanadium are not normally included in nutrient mixes. They are required in very minute amounts that are usually present as impurities in the water supply or mixed along with other nutrients.
*NOTE: The nutrients must be soluble (able to be dissolved in water) and go into solution. Useless otherwise.

Macronutrients are those plants use a lot of while micronutrients are needed in much smaller amounts by plants

Generally , the micro-nutrients (Fe, Zn, Mn, Cu) get locked out at a high pH (alkaline) above 7.0, while the major nutrients (N, P, K, Mg) can be less available in acidic soil or water (below 5.0).

Cold weather (below 50 degrees F./10 degrees C.) can lock up phosphorous

http://medicalmarijuana.com/experts/expert/title.cfm?artID=719

 

[Ratzilla]

When I first make up a batch of soil I'll use some calcium carbonate and or dolomite.
I do this to set the mixes ph.
I shoot for a base saturation rate according to Michaels handbook
Calcium 60-70%
Mag 10-20%
K 3-5%
After letting the mix come to a balance the pH will settle in 6.4-6.6.
This usually takes 2-3 weeks.
The more humus the harder it is to move the pH.
I will give the pH no thought after letting the mix stabilize.
Of course I have other elements in the mix but get the Ca-Mg ratios right all else falls into place very easy I think.
I also favor organic matter like Alfalfa and or Kelp meal.
I have had no problems in elemental take up issue in this base saturation rate.
I am a big believer in that through what exudes the plant sends down to the roots will dictate what it wants to uptake.
I believe that the plant is in charge
I am a organic gardener who believes in organic diversity, good drainage and aeration, and buffers like up to 60-70 % calcium of its base saturation levels a peep will never see a pH lock out.
At least adhering to Michaels principles I have never seen ANY problems in uptake issues.
As a competent caregiver I do best when I let the plant decide .
I am only a inside gardener who loves his plants. I am their god when it comes to the plants environmental surroundings
Think static cling.
Sure the tree falling makes a sound even if no one hears it.
One of us is making this more complicated then it has to be I think?
LOL
When it is all said and done it is whatever works.
It just might be me for I take much pleasure in taking simplistic things and making them as complicated as possible.
One last question have you read Michaels hand book?
Ratz

 

[Ratzilla]

One last thing I like to add is the pH of a mixes containers go up and down with its moisture content.
The wetter it is ,the lower the containers pH will be, as it dries out the pH will rise most growers don't know this.
It is when a mix is holding to much moisture or is not allowed to dry out that the pH will be constantly in the 4-5ives and create problems .
Ratz

 

[idiit]

i'm an outdoor organic farmer.

every organic farmer should know that the #1 preventative measure against plant disease is proper nutritional uptake by the plant with primary focus on mineral and trace mineral uptake.

mineral and trace mineral uptake are essential to a plant's immune system against insects and disease.

cannot be emphasized enough.

to not address mineral and trace mineral uptake ie availability is a gross error of severe magnitude.

^ this is exactly the reason for my posts.

 

[Ratzilla]

idiit
In talking about SAR setting up a immune system against insects.
I have played around with plant hormones Jasmonates and Harpin as well as Gibberellic acid
Awhile back I had this outside plant which was having problems.
It was among many plants but it was just the one not doing so good.
I watch a bunch of spider mites in a line marching to this one plant totally ignoring all the others to lay waste to the one that was in distress.
I have heard it put like this.
Plants put out harmonics like ripples in a lake when these harmonics become unbalance it put a call out to insects and other slayers.
We don't know what we don't know.
Ratz

 

[idiit]

I am grateful to Michael for responding re the trace mineral content tests in produce question and all his other helpful advice..


instead of just complaining I did some more research and I found a nice term for search;Agrogeology (Agricultural Geology)


the key search term for some good research appears to be the science of agrogeology since soil remineralization is the gist of agrogeology.

Agrogeology is broadly defined as ‘geology in the service of agriculture,’ a study of geological processes​

that influence the distribution and formation of soils, and the application of geological materials in​

farming and forestry systems as means of maintaining and enhancing soil productivity for increased​

social, economic and environmental benefits

once I found this search term I found information that had eluded my previous search efforts.


using Agrogeology I found a lot of soil mineralization stuff for anyone interested in doing their own research.

http://remineralize.org/a-rock-dust-primer-download/?ver=0a4d
ea6d3469c191c148ccba010cd44ca61e2e74

^ nice little download available:

Choose a gradation based on end use. The courser fractions, which can accurately be
described as ‘grits-to-dust’, are an excellent choice for building structure in silty or
sandy soils or flocculating clays as well as mineralizing potting mixtures for starting
plants or for creating soil-less media. The finer blended gradations should be utilized for
germination beds, potting mixes for seedlings, top dressing or side dressing planting
beds, forage or pasture. The highly micronized stone flours should be reserved for
specific applications such as composting, top dressing potted plants, and for aqueous
suspensions such as teas, drenches and foliar sprays.

Application rates will vary according to usage, soil type and condition. Field trials
indicate that a direct benefit exists between application rate and increase harvest weight
starting at very low rates and running up through very high rates, up to 200% increase
in harvest weight over the controls. (Goreau et. al, New Harmony Farm 2012) Rock dust
for remineralization has traditionally been utilized at very high rates, up to 10 tons per
acre. However the science indicates that low rates of high value rock dust containing a
highly micronized fraction will have immediate and lasting benefits

Because of low solubility and near neutral pH The
risk of 'burning' or damaging crops within maximum application rates is virtually nil.

Here are some metrics for determining application rates:
43,560 square feet/acre.
1 ton/acre converts to 5 lbs/100 square feet.

Choice of particle size, specific geologic make up, proximity of the source and economics
will also determine annual usage. There is no harm in remineralizing over time, but
dramatic and immediate results have been shown with heavy applications in year one.

Any addition of high value rock dust will increase nutrient content of soils and improve
crop yields and nutrient content. Those results are directly linked to application rates,
the health of the soil biota and carbon content.

Here are some general guidelines:
In tillage for remineralization purposes; Between 5 and 10 tons/acre (25 - 50 lbs / 100
sq. ft.) of a course stone dust passing 1/4” screen (1/4”-0) or finer. Apply at once or
build to these rates over several seasons. An objective of 10 tons is a good goal in most
situations. Economics and management strategy will define application rates as much as
anything. Maximum rates for top dressing are generally capped at 5 tons/acre (25 lb./
100 sq. ft.) with an 1/8”-0 gradation or finer utilized for this purpose.
The more highly micronized fractions will work faster as the surface area is greater for
each pound of material. So an application rate of a stone flour or a blend of a fine ‘gritsto-
dust’ gradation (1/8”-0) can be reduced in the first year to achieve the same growth
response.
Subsequent applications will build mineral content over time. The fines will be
assimilated and use up and the course fractions will weather out, providing a continuos
source of mineral based nutrients.
For use in aqueous suspensions such as teas and drenches or foliar sprays:
Between .5-1 lb/gal of the highly micronized stone flours may be used. Wetting agents
are recommended for foliar applications to spread the solution over the leaf surfaces.

Fortifying Compost with Rock Dust
Good results have been achieved using 15-20 lbs. micronized high silica, calcium rich
rock dusts/ cubic yard of compost raw material. Mix different geologic sources together
to take advantage of each, or use them one at a time. Building compost with rock dust is
an excellent way to assimilate the minerals within a complex biologic system, making
the nutrients available to the plants and feeding the essential beneficial microbes which
in turn build fertility in soils and nutrient content in crops. True remineralized compost

Annual soil testing should show improvements in both available nutrients and overall
nutrient density in soils. Overall improvement in plant vigor should follow the
assimilation of minerals in the rock dust. Brix refractometer readings should improve,
indicating higher sugar and mineral content in plant sap. Higher sugar and mineral
content will improve disease and insect resistance as well as drought and frost
resistance. Tissue analysis of produce and forage should indicate increased mineral and
nutrient value. Produce tastes better. Herd health of livestock fed remineralized forage
and feeds will improve, reducing vet bills, reducing mortality and increasing
profitability. Remineralizing soils is the first step to remineralizing living things,
whether they be microflora in soils, animals or human beings. Remineralization is a
foundational practice of nutrient dense food production. The benefits can be measurable
and cumulative.

Scientific studies have shown that remineralized soils capture carbon and nitrogen
(Tang, Goreau et.al 2012) and fix them in soil as carbonates and complex organic
compounds created by microorganisms through biologic activity. Remineralization with
naturally occurring and readily available rock dusts in combination with fixed carbon
sources such as biochar provide an immediate and workable solution to the immediate
problem of reducing atmospheric greenhouse gases such as CO2 by building fixed
carbon in soils.

^ from above posted link.


I still have not found a study listing the availability of rock dusts over time. some benefits are available in the first year.

 

[idiit]

Why Remineralize?
• Provides slow, natural release of elements and trace minerals
• Increases yields as much as 2-4 times
• Increases nutrient intake of plants
• More nutritious crops
• Rebalances soil pH
• Increases microorganisms and earthworm activity
• Builds humus complex
• Prevents soil erosion
• Increases the storage capacity of the soil
• Enhances flavor in crops
• Decreases dependence on fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides
• Increases resistance to insects, disease, frost, and drought

Remineralization also includes sea
solids, diluted sea water, limestone,
rock phosphate, paramagnetic rocks,
humates, and numerous other natural
mineral amendments

Approximate Application Rate Conversions
3 t 14 lb 100 ft 1 25 lb d
U.S.
tons per acre = lb. per sq. ft. = 1.25 lb. per sq. yd.
10 tons per acre = 46 lb. per 100 sq. ft. = 4 lb. per sq. yd.
20 tons per acre = 92 lb. per 100 sq. ft. = 8 lb. per sq. yd.
7.5 tons per ha = 750 kg per 1000 sq. m = 75 kg per 100 sq. m = 750 grams per 1 sq.
m
Intl. (Metric)
25 tons per ha = 2.5 tons per 1000 sq. m = 250 kg per 100 sq. m = 2.5 kg per 1 sq. m
50 tons per ha = 5 tons per 1000 sq. m = 500 kg per 1000 sq. m = 5 kg per 1 sq. m

• First off, I believe that remineralization is the
basis of restoring soil fertility.
Dr. John Todd of Ocean Arks
International is an
internationally recognized
biologist and a visionary
• Secondly, that Costa Rica's volcanic rock
ground up has enormous potential. g y
leader in the field of
ecological design who was
named a "Hero of the
Planet" by Time magazine.
• Thirdly that we have to increase organic
matter in the soils and add clay-based humic
materials to finish off the mix.

In the long term healthy remineralized
plants will not be plagued by insect
infestations as they become healthier and
more insect resistant

In the short term very fine dust sprayed
directly on plants and trees has been
shown in research in Germany to deter
insect infestations very effectively

http://www.foodforthoughtstore.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Remineralize-the-Earth.pdf

^ soil remineralization is very important. that's why I posted so hard on this topic.

 

[milkyjoe]

Is there any chance we can talk you into starting your own thread so we can talk soil balancing? You might notice Michael has not been back since you jumped the rails

 

[trichrider]

might try comparing spinach with moringa idiit. the source is much cheaper and easier to find.

http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2626/2

 

[idiit]

Is there any chance we can talk you into starting your own thread so we can talk soil balancing? You might notice Michael has not been back since you jumped the rails

the thread is titled soil mineral balancing.

i'm done. been wanting answers on this stuff for several years.

would love to sit back and let Michael skool us.

 

[Microbeman]

I'm not really sure why everyone keeps thinking I'm arguing. Idit the only reason I said anything was because you named me. I then just noted that Cep and Milky answered similar to my philosophy.

It has already been explained (by me and others) since 2008 on occasions almost too numerous to count that nutrients and micronutrients and minerals are made available (bioavailability) by organic acids (hydrogen molecules/ions) which are released (exudated) by bacteria, archaea, fungi and roots. Yes, this means from rocks too!

IMO it is these organisms which adjust and maintain the pH (power of hydrogen or potential hydrogen) over time. One further step I often talk about is the extrapolation of this system through predation of bacteria/archaea by protozoa and nematodes.

This is the nutshell of my living soil method and it does not necessarily correlate to Michael's balanced soil. I am not a big believer in Albrecht's hypotheses, thus my apology for discussing this in this thread, which you called a straw man argument.

For some reason you seem to think I am well versed in things which am not.

Note: [Soluble (the way I used it) means that they are immediately solubilized in the soil solution and are instantly available.]

Michael; Say the word and I'll delete all this.

 

[milkyjoe]

Albrecht had the philosophy available (just like MM describes) but not soluble. I certainly believe in biology being most important. I just believe in also balancing the soil. Not such a big difference really.

 

[Weird]

I am confused I did not think nutrient cycling was theoretical, and if it isn't theoretical then isn't mineralization simply a fix for a broken/ineffective/incomplete nutrient cycle or degraded soil environment?

Is albrecht's hypothesis and LOS mutually exclusive or did he simply observe key characteristics of healthy soil within homogenous microbrial or outside specialized microbe/soil/rhizosphere environments with additional mechanisms and interactions (a static view of a dynamic system?)

In the end, I enjoy the information on making soil for nutrient rich food, but I still prefer my plants to cannibalize their own stores before harvest and I found biologically active soil which runs a leaner opposed to richer accomplishes that for me.

I think as far as organic quality mineral source is less relevant and the differential is more in regards to sustainability.

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

A nutrient cycle (or ecological recycling) is the movement and exchange of organic and inorganic matter back into the production of living matter. The process is regulated by food web pathways that decompose matter into mineral nutrients. Nutrient cycles occur within ecosystems. Ecosystems are interconnected systems where matter and energy flows and is exchanged as organisms feed, digest, and migrate about. Minerals and nutrients accumulate in varied densities and uneven configurations across the planet. Ecosystems recycle locally, converting mineral nutrients into the production of biomass, and on a larger scale they participate in a global system of inputs and outputs where matter is exchanged and transported through a larger system of biogeochemical cycles.

Particulate matter is recycled by biodiversity inhabiting the detritus in soils, water columns, and along particle surfaces (including 'aeolian dust'). Ecologists may refer to ecological recycling, organic recycling, biocycling, cycling, biogeochemical recycling, natural recycling, or just recycling in reference to the work of nature. Whereas the global biogeochemical cycles describe the natural movement and exchange of every kind of particulate matter through the living and non-living components of the Earth, nutrient cycling refers to the biodiversity within community food web systems that loop organic nutrients or water supplies back into production. The difference is a matter of scale and compartmentalization with nutrient cycles feeding into global biogeochemical cycles. Solar energy flows through ecosystems along unidirectional and noncyclic pathways, whereas the movement of mineral nutrients is cyclic. Mineral cycles include carbon cycle, sulfur cycle, nitrogen cycle, water cycle, phosphorus cycle, oxygen cycle, among others that continually recycle along with other mineral nutrients into productive ecological nutrition. Global biogeochemical cycles are the sum product of localized ecological recycling regulated by the action of food webs moving particulate matter from one living generation onto the next. Earths ecosystems have recycled mineral nutrients sustainably for billions of years.

 

[Weird]

nature works with an economy of movement by building in many coordinated features into each organism in a ecosystem

allelopathic relationships are realized in natural environments, even microbiological

 

[Ratzilla]

Gees I want to be able to shut up but find I am unable.
I THINK I follow the Albrechting way.
I think.
First came Sir Albert Howard he was given the title of "The Father of Organiculture"
Eco-Agriculture.
Then came
William A Albrecht
He emphasized the role of minerals. With his main discovery that calcium was not a secondary nutrient but a major fertilizing element, more so then potassium.
His hypothesis was that minerals attached themselves to particles of humus to form colloids.
Then came
Carey Reams
He gave us the analogy of a car battery one held a charge and the other battery was dead.
That energy through minerals being broken down would give off energy.
I have it in my mind that they were all on the same page.
Now comes
Michael Astera
The author of "The ideal soil" hand book
Anyone seeking knowledge on how the new agriculture works will find many answers between its covers.
This is why I am laying claim to being Michaels #1 fan.

I told you all that I cant keep my pie hole shut.
Cripes I hope I am not upsetting anyone?
Ratz