Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Umass standard soil test check

Expand Messages
  • PhilipS
    I would suggest adding analysis for pH, and for Ca. A rinse will remove some P and K. Could the miracle gro soak simply have contributed less than the rinse
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 19, 2010
      I would suggest adding analysis for pH, and for Ca.

      A rinse will remove some P and K. Could the miracle gro soak simply have
      contributed less than the rinse removed? If so, next go around I would
      eliminate any rinse loss, spray just enough so that there is no
      appreciable rinse yield.

      You biofertilizer results look promising.

      Warm regards,

      Phil

      "For every complex question there is one simple wrong answer"

      --- In biochar@yahoogroups.com, Richard Haard <richrd@...> wrote:
      >
      > Group - Suggestions for next test?

      > --- I have no idea at what happened with the miracle gro soak. I
      assumed soaking in an excellent soluble garden fertilizer would show an
      enriched charcoal.


      > ----any suggestions for setting up experiment especially the nutrient
      soak part?
    • Richard Haard
      OK. 1. P2O5 is the soluble faction that shows up in the soil analysis as Umass stated is used to determine P available to plants. Leaching or washing would
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 19, 2010
        OK. 

        1. P2O5 is the soluble faction that shows up in the soil analysis  as Umass stated is used to determine P available to plants. Leaching or washing would effect this value.

        2. Organic matter is determined by roasting soil sample to oxidize the carbon. I was told 'Total Carbon' analysis would be better but comparing samples 4463, 1.1%,4464 3.7 %,4465, 4.5%  considering addition of 2 % biochar is close enough. I'm hoping this 'inexpensive' soil test will allow multiple tests at low cost.

        Given this: then cation exchange capacity should reflect these new 'OM' values.

        A clip from some text Dr. Hugh supplied

        'Biochar has a property known as “Cation Exchange Capacity”, which is a measure of how much capacity the biochar has for plant nutrients such as ammonia and potassium cations.'

        and  'This ability of biochar to store nutrients is proportional to the amount of biochar in the soil, but has also been shown to increase within the biochar as it interacts with the soil matrix. Thus, both incremental additions of biochar and the long-term presence of biochar in the soil will be rewarded with improved nutrient retention in the soil.'

        Now - the base saturation data shows potassium was picked up but overall the CEC shows very little change. ie  0.4 or 0 .2 units. 
        The % Base saturation showed  4463 control 1.7 %, 4464 2.5 % and 4465 2.7%. Perhaps the biochar had little or nothing to do with these changes?

        What should I expect? Is this a time related property of biochar and development of CEC property takes time in contact with soil?

        Thanks all
        Rich

        As I was rambling about below I think next step will be to put some treated trays into the garden for a period of time. This way the leaching problem is equalized..... and time will allow biochar CEC to develop.










        On Mar 19, 2010, at 2:56 PM, PhilipS wrote:

         


        Rich:

        A rinse will remove some P and K. Could the miracle gro soak simply have
        contributed less than any rinse loss removed? Seems tooo easy an
        explanation, but had to ask.

        Warm regards,

        Phil

        "For every complex soil question there is one simple wrong answer"

        --- In biochar-soils@ yahoogroups. com, Richard Haard <richrd@...> wrote:
        >
        > Group - Suggestions for next test?
        >
        > I made up some soil samples of a sandy subsoil with 1 % OM and added
        biochar. (from commercial supplier, water friendly)
        >
        > I took soil samples from these lots. 4642 and 4643 were dry, never
        wetted.
        >
        > 1 kg untreated soil #4642
        > 1 kg soil with 2 % by weight biochar #4643
        > 1 kg soil with 2 % biochar conditioned with biofertilizer in growth
        chamber growout #4644 (barley that grew to about 5 inches)
        > 1 kg soil with 2% biochar that was overnight soaked in miracle gro
        solution then dried #4645
        >
        > I then took samples of these and sent to UMass soil lab for standard
        soil test with organic matter.
        >
        > Results:
        >
        > Sample# P K CEC (meq/100g) OM%
        > 4642 P 5 PPM K 57 PPM 6 MEQ OM 1.1%
        > 4643 P 4 PPM K 82 PPM 6.4 MEQ OM 3.7%
        > 4644 P 4 PPM K 77 PPM 6.2 MEQ OM 4.5% (may have been some plant root
        hairs)
        > 4645 P 3 PPM K 49 PPM 6.1 MEQ OM 2.0%
        >
        > May have been some sampling problems but interesting trends. I think I
        need to redo this and let the samples age for a few months. The addition
        of biochar does show up immediately in the soil test results because of
        the analysis method. The changes in base saturation showed increased K
        in 4643 and 4644 only. I wonder where the P (or P2O5) went? only diluted
        by 2% and down by 20% ??? Does this mean the P was bound up? I have no
        idea at what happened with the miracle gro soak. I assumed soaking in an
        excellent soluble garden fertilizer would show an enriched charcoal.
        >
        > I think I will repeat this: any suggestions for setting up experiment
        especially the nutrient soak part? Cost me about $60 each time. Will
        send soil report pdf to anyone interested. I'm thinking about a month in
        a tray in garden, normal weather and spring temperatures. Possibly grow
        barley or mustard in everything then dry screen out all large organic
        particles. I think also I will prescreen the biochar to assure more
        uniform samples going to soil testing.
        >
        > In my 3 growing season sandy loam field trial I noticed consistently
        less growth with biochar only over control (untreated). Soil OM, about
        4%. Is biochar only decreasing nutrient availability? ? It would be nice
        to verify this in these tests. It was the biochar / compost test set
        that gave best results.
        >
        > Rich Haard
        > Bellingham, Wa
        >


      • Nikolaus Foidl
        Dear Richard! The FTIR spectrum of charcoal surfaces change with the degree of oxidation. Peaks at 3428.7 cm-1 indicates -OH and _NH (O-H) stretching and the
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 20, 2010
          Dear Richard!

          The FTIR spectrum of charcoal surfaces change with the degree of oxidation. Peaks at 3428.7 cm-1 indicates -OH and _NH (O-H) stretching and the presence of hydroxyl and amine groups on the char coal surface. The spectra of charcoal after extracting it from soil displays a number of of absorption peaks at 2927.8 cm-1;8 C-H stretch) 1631.7 cm-1 ; 1663 cm-1 (C=C stretch)1450.2cm-1;1400.1 cm-1 (C-N stretch)1062.1 cm-1 (C-O) stretch 898.4 cm-1 (C-N stretch)and 698.86;667.56 cm-1 (C-O-H) (Mohan et. al 2006). If you look at the differences of fresh charcoal and soil derived charcoal you see that some of those peaks are increased and become sharp peaks (C = O), (C = C)
          and some disappear like (C-N). Peaks like peak 1531.7 ( C=C stretch)is reduced through uptake of mineral or metal ions. Changes observed in the spectrum indicate involvement  of these C=C;C=O and O-H functional groups in sorption or cation interchange processes.
          The 1800-1540 cm-1 band is associated with C=O stretching mode in carbonyl, carboxylic acid and lactones, while 1440-1000 cm-1 is assigned to the C-O stretching and O-H bending modes such as phenols and carboxylic acids.( Gardea-Torresday et. al 2002; Mohan et al 2006) Depending on the pKH the ph of the soil has a swell a high influence on uptake, as higher the ph less of the charged sites are occupied by protons.Absorption shifting depends on factors like hydrogen bonding, stearic range and position of C=O stretching band ( common to carbonyls,carboxylic acids and lactones). ((Indu Sharma et al 2009)

          These charged sites on the char surface can be occupied as well by Humic substances like fulvic and humic acid, humin or amino acids, peptides whereby these substances can work as charge transformers occupying one charged site but offering multiple unsatisfied charges on there outside. That might be as well one of the reasons that char in soil takes several degradation cycles of organic matter to be oxidized and charged with bigger bio molecules out of the group of humics and amino acids , peptides or proteins.

          These oxidised surface charges ( carbonyl. hydroxyl, carboxylic acids, and lactones or quinones ) have as well a role as signalling substances towards bacteria, fungi and plants. 

          with my best regards Nikolaus 

          From: Richard Haard <richrd@...>
          To: biochar-soils@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: biochar <biochar@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 3:35:43 AM
          Subject: [biochar] Re: Umass standard soil test check

           

          OK. 


          1. P2O5 is the soluble faction that shows up in the soil analysis  as Umass stated is used to determine P available to plants. Leaching or washing would effect this value.

          2. Organic matter is determined by roasting soil sample to oxidize the carbon. I was told 'Total Carbon' analysis would be better but comparing samples 4463, 1.1%,4464 3.7 %,4465, 4.5%  considering addition of 2 % biochar is close enough. I'm hoping this 'inexpensive' soil test will allow multiple tests at low cost.

          Given this: then cation exchange capacity should reflect these new 'OM' values.

          A clip from some text Dr. Hugh supplied

          'Biochar has a property known as “Cation Exchange Capacity”, which is a measure of how much capacity the biochar has for plant nutrients such as ammonia and potassium cations.'

          and  'This ability of biochar to store nutrients is proportional to the amount of biochar in the soil, but has also been shown to increase within the biochar as it interacts with the soil matrix. Thus, both incremental additions of biochar and the long-term presence of biochar in the soil will be rewarded with improved nutrient retention in the soil.'

          Now - the base saturation data shows potassium was picked up but overall the CEC shows very little change. ie  0.4 or 0 .2 units. 
          The % Base saturation showed  4463 control 1.7 %, 4464 2.5 % and 4465 2.7%. Perhaps the biochar had little or nothing to do with these changes?

          What should I expect? Is this a time related property of biochar and development of CEC property takes time in contact with soil?

          Thanks all
          Rich

          As I was rambling about below I think next step will be to put some treated trays into the garden for a period of time. This way the leaching problem is equalized... .. and time will allow biochar CEC to develop.










          On Mar 19, 2010, at 2:56 PM, PhilipS wrote:

           


          Rich:

          A rinse will remove some P and K. Could the miracle gro soak simply have
          contributed less than any rinse loss removed? Seems tooo easy an
          explanation, but had to ask.

          Warm regards,

          Phil

          "For every complex soil question there is one simple wrong answer"

          --- In biochar-soils@ yahoogroups. com, Richard Haard <richrd@...> wrote:
          >
          > Group - Suggestions for next test?
          >
          > I made up some soil samples of a sandy subsoil with 1 % OM and added
          biochar. (from commercial supplier, water friendly)
          >
          > I took soil samples from these lots. 4642 and 4643 were dry, never
          wetted.
          >
          > 1 kg untreated soil #4642
          > 1 kg soil with 2 % by weight biochar #4643
          > 1 kg soil with 2 % biochar conditioned with biofertilizer in growth
          chamber growout #4644 (barley that grew to about 5 inches)
          > 1 kg soil with 2% biochar that was overnight soaked in miracle gro
          solution then dried #4645
          >
          > I then took samples of these and sent to UMass soil lab for standard
          soil test with organic matter.
          >
          > Results:
          >
          > Sample# P K CEC (meq/100g) OM%
          > 4642 P 5 PPM K 57 PPM 6 MEQ OM 1.1%
          > 4643 P 4 PPM K 82 PPM 6.4 MEQ OM 3.7%
          > 4644 P 4 PPM K 77 PPM 6.2 MEQ OM 4.5% (may have been some plant root
          hairs)
          > 4645 P 3 PPM K 49 PPM 6.1 MEQ OM 2.0%
          >
          > May have been some sampling problems but interesting trends. I think I
          need to redo this and let the samples age for a few months. The addition
          of biochar does show up immediately in the soil test results because of
          the analysis method. The changes in base saturation showed increased K
          in 4643 and 4644 only. I wonder where the P (or P2O5) went? only diluted
          by 2% and down by 20% ??? Does this mean the P was bound up? I have no
          idea at what happened with the miracle gro soak. I assumed soaking in an
          excellent soluble garden fertilizer would show an enriched charcoal.
          >
          > I think I will repeat this: any suggestions for setting up experiment
          especially the nutrient soak part? Cost me about $60 each time. Will
          send soil report pdf to anyone interested. I'm thinking about a month in
          a tray in garden, normal weather and spring temperatures. Possibly grow
          barley or mustard in everything then dry screen out all large organic
          particles. I think also I will prescreen the biochar to assure more
          uniform samples going to soil testing.
          >
          > In my 3 growing season sandy loam field trial I noticed consistently
          less growth with biochar only over control (untreated). Soil OM, about
          4%. Is biochar only decreasing nutrient availability? ? It would be nice
          to verify this in these tests. It was the biochar / compost test set
          that gave best results.
          >
          > Rich Haard
          > Bellingham, Wa
          >



        • Richard Haard
          Thank you Tom I am aware of limitations of this test but P205 as measure of available phosphorus is used by farmers widely. This UMass test is only $13 with
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 20, 2010
            Thank you Tom

            I am aware of limitations of this test but P205 as measure of 'available phosphorus' is used by farmers widely. This UMass test is only $13 with OM and I am using it as an low cost for my research that is unfunded. My questions are really about using this test to study many replications and show value to soil chemistry by biochar additions. You are telling me that no test is better than this test? Seriously. Last 4 years I have been spending about $300/year on this test in the 20 + replications I have been running. More expensive tests and consultants are out of question. 

            Our soil is a sandy loam that is low in P205 and high in calcium and potassium. Even un-farmed ground. As long term pasture our soils run 6 to 7 % OM. I understand your concern about value of total C in this type of test. However it did show, pretty well, the 2% biochar I added. This subsoil I am using in this test is parent material for our farm soil and has 1.1 % OM. About 4 years ago we had phosphorus deficiency at our farm expressed but not since we changed our practices. We have problem holding available nitrogen in our soils, This is mitigated now by cover cropping and use of light treatment with urea when plants require. No deficiency problems. 60 acres here. 

            I am trying to study this in 2 steps with my low cost umass test. First in my field study, even after 3 seasons of single and double cropping the biochar only plot yielded less than the control - no fertilizer. I'm beginning with low OM in containerized soils and will later move into OM amendments. 

            We did have positive results in the field test with single time treatment of fertilizer plus biochar and biochar plus compost and fertilizer combinations but all effects disappeared after 3 seasons except the compost and compost plus biochar. Although there is evidence of synergism between biochar and compost the principle benefactor seems to be compost in this soil type. 

            Thanks for your input Tom, I am going to keep plugging away at this and hopefully learn more about biochar myself. It will be interesting to see if I can demonstrate CEC boosting property of biochar as touted. 

            Rich

            On Mar 20, 2010, at 7:13 AM, LINVENT@... wrote:

             

            Soluble phosphate is only one form of it in the soil. Doing a
            total soil digestion for phosphate may yield levels 2 orders of
            magnitude greater. Plants can assimilate more than just the soluble.
            High levels will reduce plant growth, increase weed pressure, insect
            pressure and ultimately destroy soils.
            There are many forms of organic matter in the soil, total organic
            matter which can be determined by combustion (Loss on ignition) which
            is the test reported, is not particularly useful in soil plant
            chemistry as coal would be high in OM, but is mostly useless in plant
            or rhizosphere activity. The better form is a chemical extraction
            process which determines the actual active carbon in the soil. The
            extraction process name escapes me right now.
            A 20 year test at the USDA experimental station in Imperial
            California where 20 tons of manure was put on the soil per year showed
            no increase in organic matter. Nor was CEC affected. There are other
            factors which have to be addressed before carbon in any form can be of
            best benefit to the soil. Usually these types of application rates will
            destroy the soil over time and one serious effect can be serious
            depletion of nitrogen for plant use as the carbon will suck it up
            taking it from the plant.
            A high OM, say peat muck soil will not benefit from carbon
            addition, but will with the right nutrients applied and the OM level
            will drop, CEC increase, and plant productivity will dramatically
            increase.
            This is a very complicated field. Some have spent their lives
            trying to figure it out.
            Sincerely,
            Leland T. "Tom" Taylor
            www.agronicsinc. com
            505-463-8422

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Richard Haard <richrd@...>
            To: biochar-soils@ yahoogroups. com
            Cc: biochar <biochar@yahoogroups .com>
            Sent: Fri, Mar 19, 2010 8:35 pm
            Subject: [biochar-soils] Re: Umass standard soil test check

             
            OK. 

            1. P2O5 is the soluble faction that shows up in the soil analysis  as
            Umass stated is used to determine P available to plants. Leaching or
            washing would effect this value.

            2. Organic matter is determined by roasting soil sample to oxidize the
            carbon. I was told 'Total Carbon' analysis would be better but
            comparing samples 4463, 1.1%,4464 3.7 %,4465, 4.5%  considering
            addition of 2 % biochar is close enough. I'm hoping this 'inexpensive'
            soil test will allow multiple tests at low cost.

            Given this: then cation exchange capacity should reflect these new 'OM'
            values.

            A clip from some text Dr. Hugh supplied

            'Biochar has a propertyknown as “Cation Exchange Capacity”, which is a
            measure of how much capacitythe biochar has for plant nutrients such as
            ammonia and potassium cations.'

            and  'This ability ofbiochar to store nutrients is proportional to the
            amount of biochar in thesoil, but has also been shown to increase
            within the biochar as it interactswith the soil matrix. Thus, both
            incremental additions of biochar and thelong-term presence of biochar
            in the soil will be rewarded with improvednutrient retention in the
            soil.'

            Now - the base saturation data shows potassium was picked up but
            overall the CEC shows very little change. ie  0.4 or 0 .2 units. 
            The % Base saturation showed  4463 control 1.7 %, 4464 2.5 % and 4465
            2.7%. Perhaps the biochar had little or nothing to do with these
            changes?

            What should I expect? Is this a time related property of biochar and
            development of CEC property takes time in contact with soil?

            Thanks all
            Rich

            As I was rambling about below I think next step will be to put some
            treated trays into the garden for a period of time. This way the
            leaching problem is equalized... .. and time will allow biochar CEC to
            develop.

            On Mar 19, 2010, at 2:56 PM, PhilipS wrote:
             

            Rich:

            A rinse will remove some P and K. Could the miracle gro soak simply have
            contributed less than any rinse loss removed? Seems tooo easy an
            explanation, but had to ask.

            Warm regards,

            Phil

            "For every complex soil question there is one simple wrong answer"

            --- In biochar-soils@ yahoogroups. com, Richard Haard &lt;richrd@. ..&gt;
            wrote:
            &gt;
            &gt; Group - Suggestions for next test?
            &gt;
            &gt; I made up some soil samples of a sandy subsoil with 1 % OM and
            added
            biochar. (from commercial supplier, water friendly)
            &gt;
            &gt; I took soil samples from these lots. 4642 and 4643 were dry, never
            wetted.
            &gt;
            &gt; 1 kg untreated soil #4642
            &gt; 1 kg soil with 2 % by weight biochar #4643
            &gt; 1 kg soil with 2 % biochar conditioned with biofertilizer in growth
            chamber growout #4644 (barley that grew to about 5 inches)
            &gt; 1 kg soil with 2% biochar that was overnight soaked in miracle gro
            solution then dried #4645
            &gt;
            &gt; I then took samples of these and sent to UMass soil lab for
            standard
            soil test with organic matter.
            &gt;
            &gt; Results:
            &gt;
            &gt; Sample# P K CEC (meq/100g) OM%
            &gt; 4642 P 5 PPM K 57 PPM 6 MEQ OM 1.1%
            &gt; 4643 P 4 PPM K 82 PPM 6.4 MEQ OM 3.7%
            &gt; 4644 P 4 PPM K 77 PPM 6.2 MEQ OM 4.5% (may have been some plant
            root
            hairs)
            &gt; 4645 P 3 PPM K 49 PPM 6.1 MEQ OM 2.0%
            &gt;
            &gt; May have been some sampling problems but interesting trends. I
            think I
            need to redo this and let the samples age for a few months. The addition
            of biochar does show up immediately in the soil test results because of
            the analysis method. The changes in base saturation showed increased K
            in 4643 and 4644 only. I wonder where the P (or P2O5) went? only diluted
            by 2% and down by 20% ??? Does this mean the P was bound up? I have no
            idea at what happened with the miracle gro soak. I assumed soaking in an
            excellent soluble garden fertilizer would show an enriched charcoal.
            &gt;
            &gt; I think I will repeat this: any suggestions for setting up
            experiment
            especially the nutrient soak part? Cost me about $60 each time. Will
            send soil report pdf to anyone interested. I'm thinking about a month in
            a tray in garden, normal weather and spring temperatures. Possibly grow
            barley or mustard in everything then dry screen out all large organic
            particles. I think also I will prescreen the biochar to assure more
            uniform samples going to soil testing.
            &gt;
            &gt; In my 3 growing season sandy loam field trial I noticed
            consistently
            less growth with biochar only over control (untreated). Soil OM, about
            4%. Is biochar only decreasing nutrient availability? ? It would be nice
            to verify this in these tests. It was the biochar / compost test set
            that gave best results.
            &gt;
            &gt; Rich Haard
            &gt; Bellingham, Wa
            &gt;


          • Richard Haard
            Re: Umass standard soil test check Posted by: PhilipS psmall2008@landprofile.com paleorthid Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:01 pm (PDT) Thanks Phil I would suggest
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 20, 2010

              Re: Umass standard soil test check

              Posted by: "PhilipS" psmall2008@...   paleorthid

              Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:01 pm (PDT)

              Thanks Phil


              I would suggest adding analysis for pH, and for Ca.

              Calcium reading in our soils is always high as is potassium. We have trouble maintaining N.  

              4642 control  ca 1494 ppm, ph 7.1 buffer 7.1
              4643 2% biochar never wet   ca 1422 ppm pH 7.3 buffer 7.3 
              4644 2 % biochar , conditioned  ca 1275 ppm pH 6 .6 buffer 7.3
              4645 2 % biochar, miracle gro soak ca 1427 ppm pH 6.4 buffer 7.2

              A rinse will remove some P and K. Could the miracle gro soak simply have
              contributed less than the rinse removed? If so, next go around I would
              eliminate any rinse loss, spray just enough so that there is no
              appreciable rinse yield.

              You biofertilizer results look promising.

              I'm trying a mix of beneficials from Fungi Perfecti. I will continue to follow this thread

              Warm regards,

              Phil

              > > Group - Suggestions for next test?
              > >
              > > I made up some soil samples of a sandy subsoil with 1 % OM and added
              > biochar. (from commercial supplier, water friendly)
              > >
              > > I took soil samples from these lots. 4642 and 4643 were dry, never
              > wetted.
              > >
              > > 1 kg untreated soil #4642
              > > 1 kg soil with 2 % by weight biochar #4643
              > > 1 kg soil with 2 % biochar conditioned with biofertilizer in growth
              > chamber growout #4644 (barley that grew to about 5 inches)
              > > 1 kg soil with 2% biochar that was overnight soaked in miracle gro
              > solution then dried #4645
              > >
              > > I then took samples of these and sent to UMass soil lab for standard
              > soil test with organic matter.
              > >
              > > Results:
              > >
              > > Sample# P K CEC (meq/100g) OM%
              > > 4642 P 5 PPM K 57 PPM 6 MEQ OM 1.1%
              > > 4643 P 4 PPM K 82 PPM 6.4 MEQ OM 3.7%
              > > 4644 P 4 PPM K 77 PPM 6.2 MEQ OM 4.5% (may have been some plant root
              > hairs)
              > > 4645 P 3 PPM K 49 PPM 6.1 MEQ OM 2.0%
              > >
              > > May have been some sampling problems but interesting trends. I think I
              > need to redo this and let the samples age for a few months. The addition
              > of biochar does show up immediately in the soil test results because of
              > the analysis method. The changes in base saturation showed increased K
              > in 4643 and 4644 only. I wonder where the P (or P2O5) went? only diluted
              > by 2% and down by 20% ??? Does this mean the P was bound up? I have no
              > idea at what happened with the miracle gro soak. I assumed soaking in an
              > excellent soluble garden fertilizer would show an enriched charcoal.
              > >
              > > I think I will repeat this: any suggestions for setting up experiment
              > especially the nutrient soak part? Cost me about $60 each time. Will
              > send soil report pdf to anyone interested. I'm thinking about a month in
              > a tray in garden, normal weather and spring temperatures. Possibly grow
              > barley or mustard in everything then dry screen out all large organic
              > particles. I think also I will prescreen the biochar to assure more
              > uniform samples going to soil testing.
              > >
              > > In my 3 growing season sandy loam field trial I noticed consistently
              > less growth with biochar only over control (untreated). Soil OM, about
              > 4%. Is biochar only decreasing nutrient availability? ? It would be nice
              > to verify this in these tests. It was the biochar / compost test set
              > that gave best results.
              > >
              > > Rich Haard
              > > Bellingham, Wa
              > >
            • Geralyn D
              Dr Lehmann s writings say as much,  that CEC develops over time.... Geralyn   http://tinyurl.com/ykx6lsv        or....  
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 20, 2010
                Dr Lehmann's writings say as much,  that CEC develops over time.... Geralyn
                 
                http://tinyurl.com/ykx6lsv        or....
                 
                 
                "Furthermore, the cation retention of fresh biochar is relatively low compared to aged biochar in soil, and it is not clear under what conditions, and over what period of time, biochar develops its adsorbing properties."

                "Typically, the ability of soils to retain cations in an exchangeable and thus plant-available form (cation exchange capacity [CEC]) increases in proportion

                to the amount of soil organic matter, and this holds

                for biochar as well. However, biochar has an even greater

                ability than other soil organic matter to adsorb cations

                per unit carbon (Sombroek

                et al. 1993), due to its greater

                surface area, greater negative surface charge, and greater charge density (Liang

                et al. 2006). In contrast to other organic matter in soil, biochar also appears to be able to  strongly adsorb phosphate, even though it is an anion (Figure 4), although the mechanism for this process is not fully understood."

              • Erich Knight
                Dear List, May I say to you all, with deep appreciation and sadisfaction, how I love this list . As questions and data arise, I say to myself; Oh I should
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 20, 2010
                  Dear List,
                  May I say to you all, with deep appreciation and sadisfaction, how I love this list .
                  As questions and data arise, I say to myself; " Oh I should send this to Phillip Small", but then he arrives.
                  or
                  I say to myself ; "Oh.. I need to look up that Lehman paper quote on CEC,....." Then Geralyn delivers...! 
                  or
                   Nikolaus posting  a wonderful one liner like;
                  "These oxidised surface charges; carbonyl. hydroxyl, carboxylic acids, and lactones or quinones,  have as well a role as signaling substances towards bacteria, fungi and plants."


                  So thanks for;
                  fleshing out my thoughts,
                  Relieving my undone homework gilt
                  and if the adage: " Great minds think alike " is true, then thanks for giving me the perception great mindedness.
                  Cheers,
                  Erich


                  PS:
                  In the thread on Soil carbon / Blueleaf / Pagans attack,
                   Kevin said that Biochar is Inorganic Carbon
                  ,
                   I said to myself :
                  NOT according to Dr. Paul Hepperly; Biochar is Organic Carbon,

                  Erich


                  On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Geralyn D <palmtreepathos@...> wrote:
                   

                  Dr Lehmann's writings say as much,  that CEC develops over time.... Geralyn
                   
                  http://tinyurl.com/ykx6lsv        or....
                   
                   
                  "Furthermore, the cation retention of fresh biochar is relatively low compared to aged biochar in soil, and it is not clear under what conditions, and over what period of time, biochar develops its adsorbing properties."

                  "Typically, the ability of soils to retain cations in an exchangeable and thus plant-available form (cation exchange capacity [CEC]) increases in proportion

                  to the amount of soil organic matter, and this holds

                  for biochar as well. However, biochar has an even greater

                  ability than other soil organic matter to adsorb cations

                  per unit carbon (Sombroek

                  et al. 1993), due to its greater

                  surface area, greater negative surface charge, and greater charge density (Liang

                  et al. 2006). In contrast to other organic matter in soil, biochar also appears to be able to  strongly adsorb phosphate, even though it is an anion (Figure 4), although the mechanism for this process is not fully understood."


                • Kevin Chisholm
                  Dear Erich ... From: Erich Knight To: biochar@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 4:49 PM Subject: Re: [biochar] Re: Umass standard soil test check
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 20, 2010
                    Dear Erich
                    ----- Original Message -----
                    Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 4:49 PM
                    Subject: Re: [biochar] Re: Umass standard soil test check
                     
                    ....del...

                     PS:
                    In the thread on Soil carbon / Blueleaf / Pagans attack,
                     Kevin said that Biochar is Inorganic Carbon
                    ,
                     I said to myself :
                    NOT according to Dr. Paul Hepperly; Biochar is Organic Carbon,

                    # With all due respect to Dr. Hepperly, I would suggest that he is wrong, for teh reasons listed below. 
                     
                    # There is no question that the biomass material from which it was derived is organic, but it is composed of two general components:
                    1: Pure Carbon, C, which constitutes the bulk of the charcoal, which is subsequently put to use as "Biochar".
                    2: Complex "products of pyrolysis" still remaining in the charcoal. These are "organic chemical compounds."
                     
                    # Coal is derived from biomass also, and it has both "fixed carbon" and "organic carbon compounds", yet it is generally considered "inorganic". One would not add coal to ones garden soil to raise its "organic content."
                     
                    # There is obviously a difference between the Carbon Content of Compost, and the Carbon Content of "Biochar." The carbon content of compost is clearly "Organic", in that it is available for utilization by soil life forms as a source of food and nourishment. The carbon content of Biochar is inorganic, in that it is generally accepted that it does not serve as a source of nutrition or a "building block" for soil life forms. Hence, its long life in the soil.
                     
                    # Note that there is a possible problem with definitions from different "Fields of Science." In Analytical Chemistry, "Total Organic Carbon" is defined as "Carbon released from a sample by oxidation in an oven, with an oxidizing atmosphere, at a temperature of  (about) 450 C (?)
                    At this level, "burnable carbon," as from roots, grasses, soil life forms, etc is relased. This then forms the basis for a "Total Organic Carbon", TOC, or "Soil Organic Carbon", SOC, analysis.
                     
                    # This, of course is not correct. Other forms of carbon, such as coal, charcoal, graphite, and diamonds would also be oxidized to CO and CO2 under these conditions, and would all report as "Organic Carbon."
                     
                    # To the Analytic Chemist doing soil analysis, the carbon remaining in the "ashed sample" would be considered "Inorganic Carbon." An example of "Inorganic Carbon" would be the C tied up in carbonates, such as CaCO3.
                     
                    # We can clearly see the error with teh conventional "Total Organic Carbon" (TOC) method of analysis... it reports coal, oil spills, graphite, diamonds and charcoal as "organic carbon", the same as it would report grass, compost, sugar, dead worms and humic acids as "organic carbon." 
                     
                    Erich, you have reported on what Dr. Hepperly says, but what do you say? Would you consider it fair and reasonable to consider the Fixed Carbon content of biochar to be Organic or Inorganic Carbon?
                     
                    Best wishes,
                     
                    Kevin
                     
                     
                     
                    Erich


                    On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Geralyn D <palmtreepathos@ yahoo.com> wrote:
                     

                    Dr Lehmann's writings say as much,  that CEC develops over time.... Geralyn
                     
                    http://tinyurl. com/ykx6lsv        or....
                     
                     
                    "Furthermore, the cation retention of fresh biochar is relatively low compared to aged biochar in soil, and it is not clear under what conditions, and over what period of time, biochar develops its adsorbing properties."

                    "Typically, the ability of soils to retain cations in an exchangeable and thus plant-available form (cation exchange capacity [CEC]) increases in proportion

                    to the amount of soil organic matter, and this holds

                    for biochar as well. However, biochar has an even greater

                    ability than other soil organic matter to adsorb cations

                    per unit carbon (Sombroek

                    et al. 1993), due to its greater

                    surface area, greater negative surface charge, and greater charge density (Liang

                    et al. 2006). In contrast to other organic matter in soil, biochar also appears to be able to  strongly adsorb phosphate, even though it is an anion (Figure 4), although the mechanism for this process is not fully understood."


                  • Richard Haard
                    Thank you Geralyn for this clarification. This makes complete sense. ... My mission here is evaluation of the simple UMass soil test as assay of biochar
                    Message 9 of 11 , Mar 21, 2010

                      Thank you Geralyn for this clarification. This makes complete sense. 


                      --- In biochar@yahoogroups.com, Geralyn D <palmtreepathos@...> wrote: > > Dr Lehmann's writings say as much,  that CEC develops over time.... Geralyn >   > http://tinyurl.com/ykx6lsv        or.... >   > http://www.css.cornell.edu/faculty/lehmann/publ/FrontiersEcolEnv%205,%20381-387,%202007%20Lehmann.pdf 


                      > "Furthermore, the cation retention of fresh biochar is relatively low compared to aged biochar in soil, and it is not clear under what conditions, and over what period of time, biochar develops its adsorbing properties." > > "Typically, the ability of soils to retain cations in an exchangeable and thus plant-available form (cation exchange capacity [CEC]) increases in proportion > to the amount of soil organic matter, and this holds > for biochar as well. However, biochar has an even greater > ability than other soil organic matter to adsorb cations > per unit carbon (Sombroek et al. 1993), due to its greater > surface area, greater negative surface charge, and greater charge density (Liang et al. 2006). In contrast to other organic matter in soil, biochar also appears to be able to  strongly adsorb phosphate, even though it is an anion (Figure 4), although the mechanism for this process is not fully understood." >

                      My mission here is evaluation of the simple UMass soil test as assay of biochar properties. More time then is needed for this property to express changes in soil analysis relevant to cation exchange capacity. I will follow this up. So far though I can only confirm this test detects biochar as component of 'total carbon' in their organic matter %. Earlier tests that I conducted confirm this. However my earlier tests, noted below, conducted 2007, 2008 and 2009 on 22 plots, 2 replications show biochar has little long lasting effect on soil CEC.

                      OK then - In same time span of my current 14 to 21 day experiments of 2% amended soil with biochar I see distinct differences in growth between treated and untreated containers. As has been reported by many other people.

                      In addition, when challenged with 3 different kinds of preemergent herbicides I observed instant neutralization of herbicide activity. This use for activated charcoal has been standard practice for decades and also. Organic matter in soil complicates and reduces certain herbicide activity also 

                      So where the surface activity properties of biochar and activated charcoal effect complex molocules of herbicides are 'bound into inactivity' attraction of simple ions as ca++ and k+ are not detected in a simple soil test. Hmmm there must be multiple sets of properties here.

                      As Dr Hugh has confirmed biochar, shares some of these deactivation properties with activated charcoal but activated charcoal does not contribute CEC to soil.

                      OK

                      Now here is a chart showing from 24 months of data from my plot study/ May 2007 through May 2009. The information based upon the UMass soil tests conducted in carefully collected taken, dried and sent into the laboratory. It is a field study and I am currently attempting to move research to containers, (trays) in garden and growth chamber.

                      My data does show a trend that CEC decreases without organic matter treatment. It shows increases in CEC due to biochar treatment initially but falling off by 2009. It also shows that CEC in biochar treated soil is lower than control in 2009 after showing an initial increase in 2007. Production of these plots is confirmed to be less than control.


                      Rich Haard
                      Bellingham









                    • Nikolaus Foidl
                      Attachment of humic substances like fulvic and humic acids include anionic and cationic sites which can take up positive and negative charged ions.
                      Message 10 of 11 , Mar 21, 2010
                        Attachment of humic substances like fulvic and humic acids include anionic and cationic sites which can take up positive and negative charged ions. Complexation with already attached calcium could be as well a possible pathway how P gets fixed
                        best regards Nikolaus



                        From: Richard Haard <richrd@...>
                        To: biochar@yahoogroups.com
                        Cc: biochar-soils@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Mon, March 22, 2010 12:59:02 AM
                        Subject: [biochar] Re:Umass standard soil test check

                         

                        Thank you Geralyn for this clarification. This makes complete sense. 


                        --- In biochar@yahoogroups .com, Geralyn D <palmtreepathos@ ...> wrote: > > Dr Lehmann's writings say as much,  that CEC develops over time.... Geralyn >   > http://tinyurl. com/ykx6lsv        or.... >   > http://www.css. cornell.edu/ faculty/lehmann/ publ/FrontiersEc olEnv%205, %20381-387, %202007%20Lehman n.pdf 


                        > "Furthermore, the cation retention of fresh biochar is relatively low compared to aged biochar in soil, and it is not clear under what conditions, and over what period of time, biochar develops its adsorbing properties." > > "Typically, the ability of soils to retain cations in an exchangeable and thus plant-available form (cation exchange capacity [CEC]) increases in proportion > to the amount of soil organic matter, and this holds > for biochar as well. However, biochar has an even greater > ability than other soil organic matter to adsorb cations > per unit carbon (Sombroek et al. 1993), due to its greater > surface area, greater negative surface charge, and greater charge density (Liang et al. 2006). In contrast to other organic matter in soil, biochar also appears to be able to  strongly adsorb phosphate, even though it is an anion (Figure 4), although the mechanism for this process is not fully understood." >

                        My mission here is evaluation of the simple UMass soil test as assay of biochar properties. More time then is needed for this property to express changes in soil analysis relevant to cation exchange capacity. I will follow this up. So far though I can only confirm this test detects biochar as component of 'total carbon' in their organic matter %. Earlier tests that I conducted confirm this. However my earlier tests, noted below, conducted 2007, 2008 and 2009 on 22 plots, 2 replications show biochar has little long lasting effect on soil CEC.

                        OK then - In same time span of my current 14 to 21 day experiments of 2% amended soil with biochar I see distinct differences in growth between treated and untreated containers. As has been reported by many other people.

                        In addition, when challenged with 3 different kinds of preemergent herbicides I observed instant neutralization of herbicide activity. This use for activated charcoal has been standard practice for decades and also. Organic matter in soil complicates and reduces certain herbicide activity also 

                        So where the surface activity properties of biochar and activated charcoal effect complex molocules of herbicides are 'bound into inactivity' attraction of simple ions as ca++ and k+ are not detected in a simple soil test. Hmmm there must be multiple sets of properties here.

                        As Dr Hugh has confirmed biochar, shares some of these deactivation properties with activated charcoal but activated charcoal does not contribute CEC to soil.

                        OK

                        Now here is a chart showing from 24 months of data from my plot study/ May 2007 through May 2009. The information based upon the UMass soil tests conducted in carefully collected taken, dried and sent into the laboratory. It is a field study and I am currently attempting to move research to containers, (trays) in garden and growth chamber.

                        My data does show a trend that CEC decreases without organic matter treatment. It shows increases in CEC due to biochar treatment initially but falling off by 2009. It also shows that CEC in biochar treated soil is lower than control in 2009 after showing an initial increase in 2007. Production of these plots is confirmed to be less than control.


                        Rich Haard
                        Bellingham










                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.