soil remineralization: process and discussion

[jaykush]

Not to derail this thread but some people believe that rock dusts from different locations have different charges/energies. They think that the diversity of energies produces a superior product for crops, rather than a single source of rock dust. It is pretty progressive thinking and I am intrigued by the concept. It makes sense to me that different places have dissimilar electrical charges. This could effect how the soil solution interacts with the minerals. I dunno. just tossing it out there

yup! diversity is key. i use 3-5 sources of rock powders from all different locations and rock types.

it also helps A LOT to let your soil sit and balance out after adding the rock powders( or any amendment really). let all those chemical reactions take place, things being locked up in cations, minerals chelated, etc.....

 

[Maina]

very nice thread and info thank you all!

 

[SpikeSilverback]

LOL...For one I've easily got over 10,000 posts on the canna forums in the last 5+ years. Did nothing but grow canna for quite awhile. I never said JK's advice sucks and I'd never say that cause think he's one of the better peeps online especially when it comes to organic stuff. Doesn't mean I agree with everything he says.

As for soil re-mineralization...how do you know what minerals to add if you don't know what you're missing? Soil tests are easy and inexpensive.

BTW those weren't formulas, they were abstracts.

Journeyman,you nailed it. Without a soil test one doesn't know where one is nor where one is going.

Gentlemen (Ladies?) I've bypassed the introduction page when I saw J's post. So please, indulge me a moment. I'm a newbie to
this site and really glad I found it. I'm thinkin that there are more serious growers here than the half dozen serious straight grower sites that I've populated for the last five years. I run a straight operation currently and am well versed in organic, biodynamic, astral, brix and terra preta issues. I am a veteran of hundreds of elbes of canna growth and a early (70s) importer of Afgahi. My work in the 70s went from the halls of congress to the playboy mansion and all the rock groups in between. http://www.druglibrary.org/special/anderson/highinamerica.htm
I don't take lightly your experiences and only post to help make your experience doable, memorable and profitable.

Because this site so extensive it is way hard to play catchup. One
common thread I repeatedly come across though is that many of
you are laboring under the concept of throwing various minerals into the mix to evoke some perceived change. You will get change, no doubt. But throwing willy nilly minerals ie hi Ca, CaMg,
P an K is grower suicide. Further, I see nothing in these posts that address Mg, S04S, Zn, Fe Mn or Cu. If one gets the soil right, all the problems of disease, insect pressure and growth melt away.
Given the profits y'all are seeking, serious soil analysis is a forgone conclusion. If you can't analyize the test results, I can help. If it is beyond me, I have serious collaborators.

Most Respectfully,

Spike

 

[mad librettist]

sorry spike, but I don't feel you are well versed in microbiology, and thus not well versed in modern organic horticulture/agriculture. I get this feeling because you are speaking from the point of view of a chemist, though you may not be one.

And a chemical analysis of soil, btw, can't determine what elements are locked up inside living organisms. So I have to assume you are referring to a complete analysis of physical properties, root zone, biology, etc...? Really, to grow cannabis that's overkill, larger operations excepted.

the basic point of your post is one side of an old conflict that keeps getting played out here, and all that changes is the handles.

 

[DARC MIND]

im with mad L
a real soil analysis is to costly for a small gardener like me
i have yet to have a problem when adding minerals in small amounts, a good soil recipe and adding small amounts of a diversity of other amendments
compost and casting does the rest
i guess im old school but it works..
fills my belly and keep me lifted

 

[Dignan]

i also came across a paramagnetic mineral mix w/ glacial, SRP, green sand and volcanic dust but that was a while back and i cant find the link...

I'm using this one: http://www.garden-ville.com/4429759_36600.htm Not because I have reason to believe it's the best, or even great, but because the local nursery was blowing it out for $1 per bag.

 

[DARC MIND]

wow thats a good find, sounds like some good stuff
ill keep an eye out for that, thanks

 

[guest2012y]

I'm using this one: http://www.garden-ville.com/4429759_36600.htm Not because I have reason to believe it's the best, or even great, but because the local nursery was blowing it out for $1 per bag.

Volcanite...sounds like something Captain Cheeze would use to increase the yield of his Blue Moon Rock crop on the Planet Earth...Super hero puns aside,I would like to keep my mineral trip as simple as possible,(KISS) I think that products like this make it easy to do.
I'm assuming that whatever element I choose to put in comes out through biomass,and of course I realize not everything does.
Since gathering all the information everyone supplies here,I have taken that and applied it to my already functioning organic concept of what organic soil is,and what should be in it.
Like Jay told me,"welcome to the world of LIVING soil".
Correct me if I'm wrong,but by adding these amendments/minerals to our gardens soil we are trying to replicate the best possible soil conditions found on the planet because we want the best possible cannabis on the planet.
I have come to the conclusion that this is not a difficult goal to obtain. I find it easy when I don't get caught up in the various complexities and waste my energy tripping on what the exact content of Paladium is per the porosity surface area of a grain of sand. Not to get off track too much,but a lot of people here are just plain folks without Masters degrees in organic chemistry,(myself included) who just want to grow high quality organic herb. Most folks want to keep it simple and affordable.
There are a number of mineral products available to add to my soil. The only hard part is choosing which one,or which combination. Since I'm using a topsoil rich with humic matter,volcanic in origin,and it is a glacial washout,I'm thinking I'm covered on the minerals...or am I?
The thing that's always in the back of my mind somewhere is the eternal question."Is there a macro/micro mineral I may be lacking?" Like Darc said,It's to costly for a small gardener to do an expensive soil test,so how would I know what's missing if I can't do some expensive test??? Peace

 

[*Journeyman*]

Soil tests are not expensive but guess that's relative. They are not necessary but helpful to confirm/negate assumptions/beliefs/observations and dispel ignorance.

For sure the greater the variety of sources of input to your system the greater chance you will have more bases covered but not guaranteed.

And a chemical analysis of soil, btw, can't determine what elements are locked up inside living organisms.

That's simply not true cause when you do certain chemical analyses the process will lyophilize and dissolve them.

 

[SpikeSilverback]

Soil tests are not expensive but guess that's relative. They are not necessary but helpful to confirm/negate assumptions/beliefs/observations and dispel ignorance.

For sure the greater the variety of sources of input to your system the greater chance you will have more bases covered but not guaranteed.


THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE cause when you do certain chemical analyses the process will lyophilize and dissolve them.

Some state tests are free. Check with your county agent. My consistent preference over the years has been Logan Labs http://www.loganlabs.com/ and https://www.midwestlabs.com/
for Melich (Albrecht) testing or http://www.aglabs.com/ for Reams testing.

If one is growin in shoe boxes in the closet then I spose you can take your chances and work with perceived mixes and uncertain results. All the microbiology in the world is nothing without proper mineral balance. One won't get high brix, disease free plants nor superior reproductive results with biology alone. It doesn't happen with any plant on the planet period. Including canna!

Spike

 

[nvthis]

Great thread J

 

[jjfoo]

ive noticed that ACT made with azomite produces superior tea.

how did you notice this?

 

[mad librettist]

All the microbiology in the world is nothing without proper mineral balance.

Spike

Where is all this biology coming from if the elements making it up are not present? Pure carbon and nitrogen from the air? Diverse soil biology is indicative of available resources. I don't need to lyophilize an Se containing organism to know it contains Se.

I'm not convinced that I should go back to thinking your way. And check out my grow for some uncertain results using the random mineral balance generated by my kitchen waste (salt and all).

The self regulatory properties of good soil are so great they require any npk gardener to use his or her imagination just to grasp it. Then it becomes clear there is no conflict here. Chemistry fits nicely within biology, which fits nicely within gardening, which fits nicely within living.

 

[*Journeyman*]

The self regulatory properties of good soil are so great they require any npk gardener to use his or her imagination just to grasp it. Then it becomes clear there is no conflict here.

I don't see any conflict either. What Jay said earlier is important to this discussion IMO which is 'diversity is the key'. It does come down to inputs and the more varied the sources are the better. Hell yeah you can grow great herb with just some basic soil, worm castings, compost, etc. and not think much about the details and let nature do the work for you. Nature does the work anyway long as you don't interfere...lol.

For me I'm never satisfied and always looking at ways to improve things. With organics it's more determining what natural inputs will help balance things better. The problems really come into play when dealing with macros like calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium which has more to do with base saturation.

I believe quality ultimately comes down to the limiting factor and here with a good program you're down to dealing with trace and what I'd consider ultra trace elements. These are key to enzyme function. Yeah soil is basically self regulating but will only be as good as your input.

Mainly I gotta learn the science out of necessity due to a project otherwise would not get in so deep.

 

[C21H30O2]

how did you notice this?

just casual observations based on the plants after application. I have used tea with and without azomite and the plants seem to respond better with the azomite. For example up until a few weeks ago I had not been using azomite in my tea. My plants were suffering from potash def. and I had a major light cycle issue, basically the plants were stressed the hell out. Started giving them azomite tea and a day after the first application leaves were pointed at a 4 degree angle the plants looked super happy despite my fuck ups. Now i get that effect with normal tea but sometimes it varies, or at least the plant response varies. With Azomite I have noticed a consistent response from the plants ie. they get tea I get super happy plants.

so no hard evidence just observations, my teas would probably be better with cleaner water and a better source of wormcasting/compost but i find the azomite fills in the gaps so to speak.

 

[*Journeyman*]

As for the Azomite in teas I remember many years back when dealing with a nutrition expert he said that minerals, especially trace ones, are basically food for bacteria. I can easily see how something like Azomite would work in a tea. I bet you would have similar results if you used something like Sea-Crop or Ocean Solutions stuff in your tea. The traces in those products do not even need to be processed by bacteria and are immediately available in a foliar application. They should still rock out those teas though.

 

[mad librettist]

Nature does the work anyway long as you don't interfere...lol.

For me I'm never satisfied and always looking at ways to improve things.

You want a conflict? To me the above seems like a conflict.

Seems to me we've left npk inputs behind but kept the sense of meaning they gave us.

 

[*Journeyman*]

Ha ha...you're a funny guy. I'm not talking about NPK inputs as stand alones but the general input into the system which you control and yes some of those inputs will have N, P and K in them. I was not even talking about NPK before anyway. I mean jeez...in this thread the topic is re-mineralization which is an input.

For me striving to improve things is obtaining a better understanding of the natural process and how can I possibly support that better. For the most part the plant is dependent on me and what I give it particularly in an indoor environment. Yeah stick a plant in native soil and it can fend for it self...except where I live cause for the most part it'd die pretty fast due to lack of water in the summer...lol.

 

[*Journeyman*]

In my ongoing research found this:

[FONT=&quot]There’s a tremendous increase in the frequency of chronic and metabolic ailments in society. Research clearly indicates people generally lack a complete physiological chemistry that is also balanced. Essential minerals of the soil have eroded to the sea or been withdrawn by crops and not replenished; consequently, most modern crops are nutritionally lacking and the animals eating these plants are, therefore, nutritionally deficient. Potatoes, sugar beets, corn, cereals, etc. drain enormous amounts of nutrients and elements from the soil. A clear example of this very fast demineralization is the Dutch Northeast Polder reclaimed from the sea in 1942, drained and brought into cultivation in 1955. The soil consists of very mineral rich clay. Initially the crop yields were astronomically higher than on the mainland with 30 to 40% greater yields being quite normal. After a few decades and in spite of continuous research and progress in isolation and synthesizing of essential minerals and the application of different fertilizers combined with the introduction of new hybrid seeds, the yields steadily declined and diseases also increased. How can it be explained that now, with the introduction of the so called ‘deep plough’ method (0.6 – 1 meter deep or 2 – 3.3 feet deep), all of a sudden the yields increased by 40% or more? [/FONT]

Any input? Is this about locked up NPK/organic stuff or minerals that were 'liberated' by deep ploughing? Considering we're talking about what was once shallow seabed will be interesting to hear what you think...thx. Lot's of organic activity/sediment on the seafloor BTW.

 

[mad librettist]

how about a newer explanation (that doesn't make it right). Here goes. It's Dr. Ingham:

What happens in compacted soils?

Compaction destroys the air passageways and water infiltration hallways in soil. If possible, the aerobic organisms start re-building the structure immediately, but their activities may use up the oxygen faster than oxygen can diffuse into the soil. When that happens, the soil loses oxygen, and may move into the facultative anaerobic and finally into the anaerobic zone of metabolism.

How rapid is the loss of oxygen? Depends on how active the organisms are, and how limited the diffusion of oxygen into the soil. Do a soil penetrometer reading. Look how far down the roots of your plants grow.

Take a look at some of Steiner’s and Pfiffer’s drawings of how far down roots went into soil just a mere 50 or 60 years ago. And now look at what current soils books tell you about root depth.

Something has happened. Roots of plants today don’t seem to go down as far as they used to go down.

Look at the USDA definition of soil depth. In the 1940-s and 1950’s, soil was defined as material in which you can grow plants. That depth was determined by how far down roots went, and in the 1930’s, that depth was defined as 4 to 6 inches. In the mid-1980’s, soil depth was re-defined as going down to 12 to 18 inches. In 1994, soil was re-defined again as going down 4 ft. Below those zones, in any time period, you could not get plants to grow in ag that soil. Except for tap roots, roots would not grow deeper than those depths.

How can that be? You have to understand tillage equipment. In agriculture, up to the 1970’s, most soils, especially in the Midwest were tilled with mold-board plows which turn the soil to a depth of 4 to 6 inches. With continuing tillage, the soil became so compacted at that depth that water and air could not move through it. The “soil” below that point was anaerobic, salt problems occurred. Water would hold up and not penetrate further into the soil. In the spring, that pan would prevent water from moving into the soil, and then erosion occurred, taking soil downhill.

The solution to this was an engineering approach. Have a hard pan? Break it open physically. Plow deeper. Chisel and disc plows go down to, 12 to 18 inches. The hardpan at 4 to 6 inches was broken up, but the compaction zone was then imposed at 12 to 18 inches, depending on your equipment. Within a few years, the hardpan was so bad at those depths that deeper tilling equipment was invented. We need to break open the compaction zone at 12 to 18 inches, by deep-tilling, or sub-soiling. We shatter the soil down to 4 feet, and so we develop two compaction zones. One at 4 feet, and the “normal” ones at 12 to 18 inches.

As compaction occurs, oxygen movement slows, aerobic organisms go to sleep. Anaerobic organisms start to grow. In aerobic conditions, the bacteria making alkaline slime were predominant. But as anaerobic bacteria, and yeasts (which are fungi, but are not normally functional in soil in aerobic conditions), begin to win in competition with aerobes for the food resources.

If you aren't farming soil cut off from the earth by tillage, minerals from bedrock are there for the taking and work their way up. If you have healthy microbes, particularly fungi, you can get even more from well, everywhere and everything.

I'm all for rock dust, but it shouldn't be used as tape on the engine light. The problem is tilling and other destructive practices. The demineralization is a symptom.

You may find Cocannouer interesting as well. He says we need weeds to save us:

The redroot pigweed intrigued me particularly in those days. Not that I had any special admiration for the thing, but because on a plant growing alone the vegetative development used to be such a perfect indicator of what the roots were doing at every stage of growth. The black and shiny seeds of the redroot, produced by the thousands by every full-grown plant, have marvelous vitality. The husky red rootlets go galloping down into the ground immediately the seed germinates, and the subsequent roots don't stop foraging as long as there is life in the stem. At first this pigweed stem is delicate and innocent looking, but in a short time it takes on the rough, don't-touch-me appearance. By the time the greenish flower clusters appear in every branch axle, which is usually before the plant is a foot tall, the lateral roots, which spring from the strong taproot, have penetrated long distances in every direction. At this stage most of the feeder roots are diving into the subsoil for their food and water.

And by the time the main stalk with its rough flowering parts reaches two feet or so, an even larger proportion of the feeding roots are working in the lower soils. At this period, even if the soil is muddy, the weeds are so well anchored they are difficult to pull up. And what those weeds in all such situations are gathering up to be stored in the roots and stems and leaves! Nitrogen and phosphorus and potash and almost everything else needed in the plant-food line. Nature's soil improvers -- and we were treating them all the time as some of our worst enemies.