4-6 lbs of dolomite will generally raise the pH of 1 yard of media by 0.5 - 1.0 point. 16 (fl) oz of dolomite weighs about 1 lb, so we can use ounces interchangeably (fluid vs weight) for lime. Bark/peat soils usually come in at an unlimed pH of 4.0 - 5.0, so we want to raise them about >1.0 point. There are 80 oz in 5 lbs of lime, or 160 tbsp, which will raise the pH of a yard (202 gallons) of soil about 1 point. The big batch is about 35 gallons (4.5 cu ft) or 1/6 of a yard. We need 1/6 of 160 tbsp or 27 tbsp to raise the pH about 1 point. There are 16 tbsp in a cup, so 27 tbsp is 1.7 cups. Since we need to raise the pH more than 1 point, we round the 1.7 cups up 0.3 cups to 2.0 cups. The change comes as a result of realizing that supplying a single cup of lime might not have raised pH high enough. This can ensure that Ca remains reactive and relatively unavailable instead of (in the case of adding more dolomite) residual and exchangeable. Al

Hi, rina. I know wood chips are different than bark, but I saw a nursery that was using these mixed with some alder saw dust. In about a year it turned to this incredible black, rich "soil". The guy as the nursery said it breaks down better and more nutritious for the soil and depletes less nitrogen in the process. The wood chips I was seeking are about the size of medium bark in nurseries. In retrospect, I am glad I didn't try that. Works great outdoors, not sure about containers! The black bark is essentially composted evergreen tree bark. I say evergreen because it could be a mix of a number of different types here in the Pacific NW --- hemlock, fir, ceder, spruce, etc. I didn't screen it, it seemed plenty loose initially; small to medium size in comparison to bagged nursery store bark. It would have been o.k. had I added the peat and perlite per the formulas given here. Screening would have left just the larger pieces, but that would be quite a chore for the volume I was using! I repotted some of the plants using the 5:1:1 formula with my black bark and those are doing much, much, better. A gardening friend said "Think of it...bark is like big saw dust. If you pack it down it gets as hard as a board". That is essentially what happened when I used the black bark alone without the the perlite and moss. ;(

Yes, I stated that I'm not worried about the aluminum, all the same I won't use aluminum sulfate either. Although it may be safe, I worry about toxic levels. Just because lead is in all soils doesn't mean it's a good idea to add more. Same with aluminum. And if you mix turface without a mask, you will be exposed to it. As far as water absorption Axis noted that turface holds 95% of it's weight in water. Pumice only holds 15% and DE holds 142% Try diatomaceous earth in your tests. Optisorb is about the largest size available to home gardeners. Axis makes an excellent size, but is for commercial use only. Numerous studies document it's use as superior to most other amendments. Such as " Effects of diatomite on soil consistency limits and soil compactibility" by Ekrem Lutfi Aksakala, Ilker Anginb, , , and Taskin Oztasa Or "Effects of diatomite on soil physical properties" by the same authors. Also "Sustainable effects of diatomite on the growth criteria and phytochemical contents of Vicia faba plants." Mona M. Abdalla* Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt. The Axis company also has great info on all amendments. As far as particle size, do a test. Fill a pot with sand, and one with gravel. Stick a pole in, and see which one gives more resistance. It seems to me gravel would. But I might be wrong? I don't know physics well enough to figure it out on paper. Ah and pumice is further dashed to the ground and called a fake, not a single user rises to defend. Well we can agree to disagree, my day job is a laboratory researcher,or was, I'm retired. If turface has various pore sizes then it is not very well made. Thanks for pointing that out. So you do not believe the manufacturer? Controlling pore size in fired clays is often accomplished with the use of polymers such as Polyethylene glycol. This process is extremely important to control how well purifiers work, or how well they hold up with the addition of salts. You are incorrect about the pore size. Yes pore sizes differs, but that process is used to make different products, and is very controlled. Turface is meant to have small pores size or it would ineffective in it's intended use. The porosity of fired clays is extremely important to have a consistent product such as fired brick used to built houses. Varying pore sizes will compromise the strength of the brick. Selling a product and manufacturing one are very different things. The pore size I reported is for calcinated clay. Range of pore sizes is from .1 -.01 microns. Median is .045 . Plants need a .2 micron minimum pore size to utilize. This info is from a study by Andreas Kalytta-Mewes, Kathrin Mattern, and Armin Reller University of Augsburg, Chair of Solid Body Chemistry Georg Armbruster Soil Laboratory. The pore analysis in the study was conducted by Quantachrome,Bavarian Institute of Applied Environmental Research and Applied Technology. Of course it appears none of these sources trump Al. Who has not provided any data at all to back his claims. Please prove to me that pore size is bigger, thinking Al is right because you sell clay products is not proof. After saying all this will turface work? Yes, it will. Works pretty good! Is it ideal? No, it's not, but what is? It's still worth trying for sure. It didn't work for me, but that means nothing. it has worked well for others. It would be nice if it allowed easier access to stored water, but it does store water, and air, and it lasts a long time, maybe 20 years. That's decent. It's a decent product, or appears to be. It would not be on the market if it didn't work. I know it's not meant for potted plants, but it is meant for grass. DE seems a better product, it has it's own problems. it is marketed though for plants more than ball fields, although it is marketed for that too. It's marketed for large commercial gardens. I use it in my garden. I use turface too for my grass, works well. Just not that well in pots for me. All i said that it didn't work for me. Sorry blame me, it's what you usually do when the mixes fail, you blame the poster. Many have said DE doesn't work for them. I actually believe them. All gardening is local. This post was edited by Drew51 on Mon, Dec 29, 14 at 15:33

Mike, Hey sounds like you have a great handle on both the 5-1-1 and gritty mixes! It took me a long time to find all the ingredients and figure out the fertilizer side of things, but once you do some reading of this thread and the previous eight threads it does make sense. Al was most generous with his time, both on and off-list, and answered many of my "newbie" questions. I'm sure your plants should respond much better using these soil mixes next season. My trees are showing huge root growth this season in the gritty mix. Granted, hunting down the ingredients, sifting fines, and mixing the soil it is a bit more work than just buying a bag of MG potting soil, but I have no doubt that in general plants grow better in the 5-1-1 and grit mixes with proper fertilization, watering, drainage and air movemnet through the root zone. The peat in the MG soil acts like a sponge and retains far too much water for far too long, preventing air from getting to the roots and keeping the roots soggy. I agree that typically the big box stores are not very helpful when it comes to finding the right ingredients for the soil mixes. Granted, a few list members have found the right size of pine bark, turface or even silica sand at a HD or Wal-Mart but typically in my area you have to go to local hardware stores, feed stores, etc. to find the ingredients. In my experience, if you go to HD or Lowe's and ask for turface no one has any idea what you are talking about. Sounds like you've already found some great sources for your materials! Good luck next season and be sure to keep us posted on how your plants do in the new mixes. Thanks Dave