Soil Testing
- Thread starter gone
- Start date
Blackwater boy
Moderator
A 10 acre field for a man I walk crops for. Pretty serious difference from one end to the next in ph. The spring barley at the end where the PH was 5.8 nearly died and the area that was 7.6 also nearly died. Lime was the issue in one part and 'P' lock up and manganese was the issue in the high PH part. That's going to be a tricky one to fix.
jay gatsby
Well-Known Member
Any ideas on the high ph @Blackwater boy ? It's a recurring problem here with ph regularly up around 7.5?
Blackwater boy
Moderator
Soil type really, there is pockets of that very high PH ground around, especially down by the coast. High PH means you never need lime but as a result the P is often unavailable even tho there is lots of P there. Manganese lock up is also an issue. The test above just shows all the different soil types even within the same field, the variation is huge, far greater than i taught it would be
C
Cork
Guest
Tricky one alright! Variable rate lime would be handy there. Fine firm seed bed for the Manganese plus maybe Manganese on the seed and obviously in the sprayer.
P in the seedbed transformed our P lock up issues on high pH (just spread before planter, not even placed). Pressing has greatly helped our Manganese issues on other land.
C
Cork
Guest
Some soil results back. Still have one place left to sample. Everything looks well topped up. 95% of this land hasn’t received lime in 30yrs...
gone
Well-Known Member
Very variable Mn. and Mg. levels, would see these differences at field level?
C
Cork
Guest
Not that I’ve seen. That’s across 4 different land holdings and different soil types so not really variable within holdings. One small field is showing something like Mg deficiency though so I intend doing a tissue analysis on it.
Hardysplicer
Well-Known Member
Which one
A high Mg field will show it too
I would like to see calcium levels to match Mg levels
C
Cork
Guest
Sample 11 is the field, it’s our smallest field, 3-4 acres.
Mightn’t even be Mg deficiency. Never got to excited about it due to its size. I’d expect Ca levels to be high there but never tested for it.
Something is definitely out of synch in the field though.
Arthur
Well-Known Member
Interesting on the lime, I'd have thought light soils would drop lime quickly yet your levels are high, even excessive if for grass, what is the cost of a basic NPK and ph sample and how much more for the trace elements, PM if you wish
C
Cork
Guest
Yes, it’s striking how high our pHs stay. Our heavier soil is over limestone so that could explain that. Our lightest are over red sandstone but are coastal and I’ve a feeling that perhaps sand/seashell fragments brought in seaweed when using it for manure years ago is a factor.
We have other land away from the coast that is over red sandstone and does need more watching for lime. (It’s not in this set of results).
I think these tests were about €31 each.
gone
Well-Known Member
Would you think that there would be any benefit in reducing or leaving out the Epsom salts on the very high Mg. fields?
Ozzy Scott
Well-Known Member
Impossible to say that without seeing a profile of the soil. I have one farm with P and K in index 4 across the board and it the furtherest thing away from a health soil
Ozzy Scott
Well-Known Member
Why cant Teagasc include the Ca numbers, surely it wouldnt be that costly and then one can work out the important Ca:Mg ratio
C
Cork
Guest
Only a cost benefit I’d say as it would be hard to argue for any real yield benefit where Mg is already high? I intend doing some tissue testing to see if anything much is short.
Our yields have been very good but one would expect the high pH to make some nutrients less available.
Manganese deficiency does show up in patches in two fields and is dealt with usually. It’s really surprising that Mn deficiency isn’t more apparent given the high pH.
The land that’s showing pH 8 and over is that which has been averaging close to 4tn of spring barley over the past couple of years so there can’t be anything too unavailable you’d say.
Samples 8 & 9 is the ground that did 4.15tn this year.
C
Cork
Guest
What is wrong with the soil you mention? Structural damage?
My main measure of a soils health is its long term performance in terms of yield.
Hardysplicer
Well-Known Member
Unless you do Base saturation albrecht type test you won’t know the interactions between each nutrient
You are showing plenty of everything it would be ratios between elements
My guess is you need more Mg than you think
C
Cork
Guest
I should look into this. I’m not a soil scientist but we did study soil science in UCD. Albrecht was never discussed as far as I remember so I’ve always more or less dismissed it, this dismissal was encouraged further when I see some of the folks that have promoted it in the past.
That said, it’s something that I’d like to at least try. Teagasc soil tests are something I trust but saying that, they rarely if ever mention or suggest the Olsens P test which is practiced in the UK and needed for some high pH soils (like those numbered 6-9) on my sample list so digging a bit deeper can pay.
Hardysplicer
Well-Known Member
Teagasc tests are ideal for legislative reasons
Not much else really
Even a field with low indexes will yield well as long as you give the crop the correct amount required to yield
High indexes may not always be available as you know
Read up on albrecht, just because it wasn’t taught in UCD is hardly grounds for dismissal
An albrecht of your best field and worst field will show where the latter needs to be to give a similar yield
Always Thinking
Well-Known Member
When I do an Albrecht soil test mostly it tells me my most limiting factors are 1. Magnesium, 2. Boron, 3. Zinc, 4.Copper. when I do plant tissue sampling i get the exact same result. That's a compelling arguement to me. Standard soil tests tell me index 4 for Mag (yet i get a yield result from applying it), standard advice says don't apply Boron to cereals (we get better grain fill when we do) it also tells me we have enough copper and zinc yet both elements consistently short on leaf test and both important for plant health and disease prevention (becoming a bit important given our current and worsening disease resistance problems)
Put simply the standard advice is becoming outdated. The high levels of Nitrogen we use is masking various problems with our soil fertility decline. There is more to crop nutrition than NPK, and it starts with educating ourselves about the interactions between elements.
Blackwater boy
Moderator
Who does or where do you send your samples for testing with the Albrecht method?
Always Thinking
Well-Known Member
NRM in UK is most common lab used I think. Neal Kinseys lab (Perry labs) in US also, Precision Nutrition in Ardee use them I think.