Message Board - BigPumpkins.com

Middleton, WI

My soil results are in. I would appreciate your thoughts and suggestions:

soil PH 6.9
O.M. 6.1
Phosphorous(ppm) 308
Potasium (ppm) 904
Calcium (ppm) 4047
Magnesium (ppm) 540
Est. CEC 27
Boron(ppm) 540
Manganese (ppm) 72
Zinc (ppm) 14.7
Sulfate-Sulfur (ppm) 2954
Sulfur Avail. Index 11853

Thank-you. Regards, George

1/30/2006 9:38:30 PM

the gr8 pumpkin

Norton, MA

Looks very good. I'm not an expert, but the only thing I notice is that you could raise your OM a little to alot if you have a good rotted source. Everything else looks sufficient or better to me. Don't know anything about sulfur though. AleX Noel.

1/31/2006 8:01:51 PM

Mocksville, NC

looks like you added gypsum. Personaly i would raise your phosphorous all in all not shabby whats you na or your SSI
THOSE ARE YOUR SALTS, and whats your ALI ALUMINUM INDEX

1/31/2006 9:05:48 PM

Middleton, WI

Alex and RogNC,

Thanks for your comments. RogNC, I don't see the data your asking for on my soil test results. This is the first soil test that I've ordered. Maybe I did'nt ask for all that I need. And Yes, I did put down a few hundred pounds of peletized gypsum last fall, and also shells from Lake Michigan.

What is a desirable range for Phosporous (ppm)?

I've been getting a 5 gallon pail of coffee grinds from Starbucks every day and spreading over the patch. How much is too much?

I appreciate your comments,

George

1/31/2006 10:38:47 PM

Follansbee, Wv

Um, am I the only one who see something wrong here?? Take a look at that Boron level! Nothing would grow in soil with 540 ppm Boron, even if 540ppm is the total Boron content. If only 1/2 of one percent of that level is available it still gives 2.7ppm. With am OM content 6.1 you can bet a heck of a lot more than .5% will be available after it rained. Boron is water soluble which means that you would likely have 2% or more available once the soil is wet. That would give an available level of a whopping 10.8ppm! Can you say TOXIC?

My guess is either 1. Your soil sample was contaminated, and you need to pull a clean sample for re-testing. 2. You missed a decimal point in that number. 3. The lab goofed it and you need to change labs. 4. Your Boron really is that high and you have a serious problem.

Also take a look at the sulphur levels. 2954? Are you kidding me??

Mg is getting on the high side, so you have either used Dolomitic lime in the past or have naturally high levels. Avoid Dolomitic lime in the future or you could end up with undesirable levels of Mg.

I'm certainly no soil expert, but the reported Boron and Sulphur levels are way out of whack here. Maybe Tremor will see this and correct me if I'm wrong.

IMHO, it looks like the sample was contaminated or taken right after adding something to the patch. Personally, I would be very concerned.

2/1/2006 6:19:51 AM

Mocksville, NC

well for now stop adding anything now, and let the worms work on what you have, as far as phos. just after transplanting use some peters 10-50-10 water soulable or 15-30-15 mir-grow the water soulables will be taken up in the plant even if your soil is off. use it for 2 or three weeks then swicth to 20-20-20 for most of the season then the last use more k POTASH NOW THIS IS SIMPLE TERMS LOOK AT MY SOIL TESTS ON ROGNC IN 05 1ST AND SCROLL DOWN TO 2ND TEST i GREW 7 PUMPKINS 487 TO 756 THE 756 WAS AT 70 DAYS IT GOT A SMALL HIDDEN SPLIT THAT i DIDNT CATCH SOON ENOUGH ALL 7 GROWN IN 2000SQ FT VERY LITTLE FERTS OR WATER. MY SULFER LEVEL WAS HIGH TOO! GOOD LUCK

2/1/2006 9:50:01 AM

Andy W

Western NY

monty is right. if that boron level is accurate, you're in trouble. we'll all be dead before that much will even start to leach out to a safe level.

2/1/2006 12:28:34 PM

Follansbee, Wv

I saw your test results Rog. I noticed you S levels were less than half of what George posted. Could he grow AG's with the levels of sulphur he posted? Probably. Sulphur is one of those nutrients that are only taken up as needed.

My point is, his soil sample was either contaminated or taken right after adding something. In either case the entire test is in doubt for accuracy.

What irks me is seeing a Boron level that cannot possibly support plant growth, yet George is being told...hey it looks very good...not too shabby...etc...etc.

No. That test result DOES NOT look good AT ALL.

George, pull a new sample. Use clean, stainless steel tools, and a reputable lab. Do not mix the sample with your hands. Remember, we are talking about ppm, Parts Per Million. With that kind of scale, washing your hands with Borax before mixing your sample by hand could cause exactly what we are seeing in these results.

Look at it this way:

Take the amount of soil in your sample and divide it into 1,000,000 equal parts. Now see if you can even SEE one of those parts. That one microspic, 1/1,000,000th part of the sample is about how much Boron you should have. A flake of skin contaminated from washing your hands with Borax would be larger than 1/1,000,000th of your sample, and still be microscopic.

2/1/2006 6:25:03 PM

Middleton, WI

MontyJ

Sorry to get folks excited, I goofed on entering the Boron results. The correct soils report number is : Boron (ppm)1.9

Oops!

The sulfate-sulfur report number is correct as stated 2,954 (ppm). I will speak with the UW soil and plant analysis Lab about that test result.

I appreciate your comments and sorry for the goof-up. After reading your response I was worried! LOL

George

2/1/2006 6:27:34 PM

Follansbee, Wv

I could live with 1.9ppm. Boron is what helps give plant cells elasticity when they develope. The only concern I have with a sulphur content of 2900+ is the effect it could have on pH in the future. Monitor it closely.

I personally don't see anything else of real concern.

2/1/2006 6:41:24 PM

Middleton, WI

MontyJ

Thanks for your comments. I'll talk with the testing lab folks.

George

2/1/2006 6:43:45 PM

Mocksville, NC

The only way his boron levels could be that high, is if he was useing borax to wash close, and drain it in his patch. Or he was useing alot of treated lumber in a raised patch, and having a ph of 6.9 does limit the availabilty of uptake.
being new I took it on a hunch. And Monty you were right on, with your answer. Great luck in 06 your bud Roger:)

2/2/2006 2:20:20 AM

Mocksville, NC

George, sorry I got off track you asked a question about phos,the desired range! That is a age old question That I don't know. I can tell ya that phosphorous is good for your root system, and flowering, thats why personaly I would have it higher at the start without strong roots, and flowers well chances are your not going to achieve your goals, but you never know. Growing Pumpkins, and SQ for me is like Christmas you dont know what your going to get lots of unseen factors from year to year. I can tell ya with 100% certainty that the more you learn the bigger your Christmas present gets. Take care and grow'em big Roger

2/2/2006 3:17:22 PM

sam1962

Piqua,Ohio

I would say your phous reading is more than adequate. it would register very high on any graph and it should be in ratio to potash in which your at i see notyhing wrong with your macro readings. remember we need things in balance or you start tying up nutrients because there are to much of one or the other even though you have enough of all. if that makes any since? balance is the key high ranges for most crops is above 50-60 ppm ie ags are heavy feeders 100 would not bother me. your phous reading is 308 potash correlates with cec the higher the cec the higher the reading needs to be cec around 10 250-300 would be high 15 cec 350 to 400 would be high cec 20 I would say 400 plus would be high these # are not exact but off the top of my head and fairly acurate but we should stay in the same ratio it is possible to much of one can interfear with the uptake of the other.

2/2/2006 3:45:38 PM

Middleton, WI

I spoke with the lab today and they pulled the raw data sheet to check the Sulfate-Sulfur. Yes, they slipped a decimal point. The actual reading is 295.4 ppm not 2,954 ppm as reported on the soil test report.

Is the SSI(soluable salts)important? They still have my sample and say they can run the lab work on it. Is it worth the $7 to run it?

George

2/2/2006 6:51:56 PM

Mocksville, NC

you should be fine the gypsum will leach it out if your not getting rain water in.

2/2/2006 10:09:41 PM

Follansbee, Wv

Let me correct myself. The sulfate-sulfur will have no effect on pH. In fact, I think sulfate-sulfur is a primary component of gypsum, which we all know will not alter pH. Sorry for the mis-information. That explains your elevated levels Rog, you probably added gypsum at some point before pulling your sample.

I agree with Rog on the point of salts. Unless there is some reason to believe there is a problem, it's not worth the money to test for them. If you have added large amounts of fresh manures, particularly horse manure, it might be a good idea to test for salts.

2/3/2006 7:06:37 AM

Middleton, WI

Everyone, thanks for your comments

George

2/3/2006 3:42:46 PM

Tremor

Ctpumpkin@optonline.net

You're correct Monty. Also worth mentioning is that Sulfur is used in large quantities by plants. For reasons unknown, some growers get very nervous whenever they see high levels of S. Let not your heart be troubled.

2/3/2006 5:20:53 PM