AgTalk Home
AgTalk Home
Search Forums | Classifieds (154) | Skins | Language
You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Fertilizer recomendations?? Soil Tests
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Forums List -> Crop TalkMessage format
 
Hay Wilson in TX
Posted 2/5/2012 15:55 (#2207622 - in reply to #2204121)
Subject: Re: Fertilizer recomendations?? Soil Tests



Little River, TX

 

Foliardud.
 
I am not sure how to take this post #2204121.
 
In a rush I became excited and copied off your contribution.  After printing off the post and looking at the International AG LABS web page My enthusiasm decreased greatly. 
 
It appears to be not much more than a disguised Infomercial.
 
Like our friend from just a bit north of London Town JWC I found fault with several of your points, which discredits the presentation.
 
 
When potassium is at high levels we see increased water uptake That is bovine scat.
 
 I agree with JWC in his statement boron probably / potassium definitely positively implicated in plant water management / drought proofing.
The mechanism comes from the potassium molecules in the mouth of each stomata in the leaves. When this mechinism detects a difficult draw for the water exiting thru the stomata the stomata close stopping the loss of water. The speed of the closing is related to the amount of potassium in the cells. The more K the faster the openings close and the less moisture is lost.
 
Potassium: One of the most over applied nutrients in the history of mankind. This doesn’t mean we don’t need K2O, we need to keep this element in balance with phosphorous with a minimum of a 2:1 ratio remembering that potassium is needed only half as much when using the LaMotte soil test
I disagree! Alfalfa needs 44 lbs K/ton of hay ( 52.8 Lbs K2O ) & 5 lbs P/ton of hay ( 11.5 lbs P2O5 )
You do the  math.
 
 
Next.
I would really look at a second test, using a Morgan soil   I assume you are referring to using the Morgan Chemistry for the high pH soil sample. I can assure you that the Morgan extractant will provide a Very High Reported Phosphate Level on soil that is deficient in phosphate.  The Morgan extractant will find about the same level of potassium as the others that I have been exposed to.
 
 4) Anhydrous Ammonia. It may be the cheapest per-unit source of nitrogen, ( True ) but it will cost you in the end. ( Not accurate at all Ammonia is a highly toxic gas. ( true ) It will kill any life near the injection point. Some can escape into the air, wasting money. Worst of all, it causes the soil’s humus to dissolve and leach, robbing the soil of potential nutrients and making it as hard as concrete. That is a world class fallacy!
Maybe 25 years ago, when I was first suing anhydrous ammonium this fallacy was running ramped. Being a young & impressionable senior citizen I applied 3,000 lbs of 82-0-0 on just under 2 acres. The material was flowing through the lines as a liquid, and I had to pull the rig at a slow speed, and even then I had to cover the ground two times to get all the fertilizer applied.  I was using an open station tractor to pull the rig and two dogs were playing behind the machine as it ran. No gas vapors escaped that day.   Seven Years later with no additional nitrogen applied to that patch was the first decrease in hay yield for that patch.
 
Rock phosphates provide a continuous supply of phosphorus  not in this high pH soil.  Here phosphoric acid turns to a rock phosphate, in a short time.
 
 We do not use pH to guide our calcium recommendations I believe this is SoilLife's contention also.
 
 
 * Everything that we have covered in this booklet is documented in college textbooks from Iowa State University, University of Minnesota, and Purdue University.
 Excuse the language but a bunch of Yankee Eastern Elites. Not a Universal sampling. 
 Hardly a ringing endorsement. 
Top of the page Bottom of the page


Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

(Delete cookies)