Your soil sample may well be just one type of component.

When in doubt, simplify the logic. That can mean going elsewhere to a spot where the soil is obviously different, such as a river bank or a park, and trying it again. This has no immediate results for your yard but is only to see how different samples compare visually to each other.

Gary, shoot me your direct email back and I can help you with an inexpensive soil texture and better yet, overall soil test and consultation that will help you determine what soil and furthermore what to do with your soil going forward. :-)

How do I shoot my direct email back to you?

I sent a soil sample to UMASS but I apparently didn't tell them to give me the clay, silt and sand percentages, too. If you would like to see the results of the initial analysis, how do I send it to you?

See if you can go to my profile, I have provided my email and the site makes it appear that I can receive emails through there.

I sent you an e-mail.

The instructions for doing the mason jar test say that the soil sample should be well sifted, and then pulverized until it is a very fine, even texture.

Would this result in only one layer of soil particles in the jar?

Should I not be sifting the soil?

Sifting and pulverizing can absolutely disrupt the soil's different textures from settling out properly for the mason jar, 60 sec, 1 hour and 24 hour test or whatever it used to be...I'll look closer at your test results form UMASS but right now it looks pretty antiquated. It is nice that they are utilizing base saturation levels but I would disagree with the few conclusions they drew....I'll put an email together after I look closer at your report.

Thanks.

According to the mason jar test instructions, the sand is supposed to settle out at 1 minute, the silt at 1 hours and the clay at 24 hours. I checked for each layer at the appropriate timings but I saw no distinct (or even faint) lines separating the layers. Even after 30 hours, there was no discernible layering.

I would've assumed that UMASS would use modern techniques for testing soil samples.

If you are not seeing definite divisions of soil in the jar then there are none. The primary purpose of the jar test is to determine how much organic matter is in a soil rather than how much of each mineral component is present. More than likely the soil around Riverside is clay with very little if any sand or silt.

A soil testing lab will not test for different soil particles and tell you what percentage of sand, silt, or clay you have. In well over 50 years of using the jar method to look at soil texture I have never had a good reason to pulverize or sift the soil I was testing, except for removing large chunks of mineral or organic matter.

kimmq is kimmsr.

"The primary purpose of the jar test is to determine how much organic matter is in a soil rather than how much of each mineral component is present"?

See: www.hortmag.com/weekly-tips/tools-materials/do-this-simple-test-of-your-soil-to-find-its-type

In that document, the "Here is how you do it:" section says to: "Make sure to SIFT the soil to rid it of any clumps and debris before putting it in the jar".

See www.houstongardeningtips.org/simple-soil-test-for-your-houston-soil-composition/

In that document, the "Sifting" section says: "The soil sample(s) must be SIFTED before testing. Remove all large rocks and large pieces of organic matter (plant and root materials). Spread the soil out on a large, old cookie sheet and let it dry out for a day or two. Once the sample is dry, SIFT it into a bowl using a wire mesh sieve or an old colander to remove any small stones or roots and to break down any remaining clumps of soil".

Gary, the reason for the sifting and pulverizing is to get rid of anything that will throw off your jar test. The largest particles and clumps that can't be broken up are useless. The I recommend sifting but not through a very fine mesh. Be sure to dry your sample first, then grind it around a little to pulverize the clods.

I also urge you to add a teaspoon or so of non-foaming detergent to the water....or much of the fine particles (as in small ) may never precipitate out of the suspension.

If you don't have a powdered dish washer detergent on hand, I suggest a washing soda, such as Arm and Hammer, found in the laundry section of your grocery.

The attached link offers some soil science information, but scroll down to find a good testing procedure.

Click HERE to find a good jar test procedure.

It seems like you could just mark the outside of the jar with a marker at the level of the sediment surface after 1 min, 1 hour and 24 hrs. It doesn't matter what the layer looks like as long as you can discern the top of the sediment layer where it meets the water. The whole ides of the test is that you don't have to be an expert in interpreting the appearance or particle size. You only need a Sharpie and a watch.

I used an ordinary kitchen strainer that's used to remove lumps from sugar or flour.

After removing the rocks, trash, roots and crushing the lumps and clods, the remaining soil is supposed to be "pulverized" so the resulting sediment would be "fine" (instead of "grainy" or "coarse").

After waiting the prescribed times, there is a line between the water and the sediment but the sediment doesn't have "sub-layers" (i.e., sand, silt and/or clay).

I'm going to re-try the "mason jar" test. But, this time, I'll remove the rocks, trash, roots, lumps and clods but I won't sift or pulverize the soil. I'll post the new results.

Same result: Below the water, the sediment has no layers of sand, silt and clay. All of the particles are the same size and color.

Gary, if all of the particles are of the same size and color you have one of the three soil types. This test is not going to make something that is not there appear.

I have seen, over the years, many work hard at making this simple soil test more difficult. Picking out the large bits and pieces of "stuff" in a soil sample works just as well as sifting that sample. the only reason for pulverizing is if there are clumps of soil (most often a problem in clay soils) that will not fall apart. In a soil testing lab the sample needs to be dry, in you backyard it does not. Adding something to aid in dispersion is not necessary and will not change what you see significantly enough to warrant adding that to the sample. This test is not a scientifically serious test, it is for a rough idea of what you have.

Here are the instructions that I have posted here for many years, change a bit to accommodate some that could not understand what was written.

1) Soil test for organic
matter. From that soil sample put enough of the rest to make a 4 inch level in
a clear 1 quart jar, with a tight fitting lid. Fill that jar with water and
replace the lid, tightly. Shake the jar vigorously and then let it stand for 24
hours. Your soil will settle out according to soil particle size and weight.
For example, a good loam will have about 1-3/4 inch (about 45%) of sand on the
bottom. about 1 inch (about 25%) of silt next, about 1 inch (25%) of clay above
that, and about 1/4 inch (about 5%) of organic matter on the top.

In over 50 years of using that for soil testing the water has always been cloudy enough that I had to wait the full 24 hours to see what the result was. Don't make this more difficult than necessary.

kimmq is kimmsr

Growing in this soil are many hybrid tea and grandiflora roses; a holly bush; a cotoneaster; a small Strawberry Guava (Psidium cattleianum) tree; and a Purple-Leaf Plum (Prunus cerasifera) tree and tons of ever-recurring black medic (Medicago Lupina) weeds.

After I get rid of the existing weeds, I'm going to add a 4" layer of bark mulch to deter future weeds.

The UMASS soil lab has provided me with an analysis of my soil (see below) showing that I need to add organic matter and increase the nitrogen level but not the phosphorous or potassium levels. But I forgot to have UMASS do a soil texture test to measure the sand, silt and clay in my soil so I thought the mason jar test would give me a rough idea of the percentages of each component.

======================================================================

The first number is the amount in my soil sample; The second number/range is the optimum number/range. For example: In Phosphorus (P) 201.2 4-14, my sample contained 201.2 ppm; the optimum range is 4-14 ppm

Soil pH (1:1, H2O) 7.1

Modified Morgan extractable

Macronutrients (ppm)
Phosphorus (P) 201.2 4-14
Potassium (K) 626 100-160
Calcium (Ca) 4195 1000-1500
Magnesium (Mg) 448 50-120
Sulfur (S) 38.3 >10

Micronutrients (ppm)
Boron (B) 2.6 0.1 to 0.5
Manganese (Mn) 15.4 1.1 to 6.3
Zinc (Zn) 15.2 1.0 to 7.6
Copper (Cu) 1.3 0.3 to 0.6
Iron (Fe) 5.9 2.7 to 9.4
Aluminum (Al) 6 <75
Lead (Pb) 0.0 <22

Cation Exch Capacity, meq/100g 26.2

Exch. Acidity, meq/100g 0.0

Calcium Base Saturation 80% 50 to 80%
Magnesium Base Saturation 14% 10 to 30%
Potassium Base Saturation 6% 2.0 to 7.0%

Scoop Density, g/cc 0.94

Soil Organic Matter (LOI) 6.9%
Soluble Salts (1:2) dS/m 0.32 <0.6
Nitrate-N (NO3-N) ppm 11

Recommendations for Flowers, Roses, & Herbs
Potassium is above optimum.
Phosphorus is excessive!!!
Add only a source of nitrogen: .1 to .2 lbs/100 sq ft

Recommendations for Acid-loving Trees, Shrubs, & Groundcover-
Soil pH is too high for Acid-Loving trees and shrubs
Potassium is above optimum.
Phosphorus is excessive!!!
Add only a source of nitrogen: .1 to .2 lbs/100 sq ft

One time ages ago I did the jar test with a lot of soil in the jar. Because there was very little open water space in the jar, the particles didn't really have a chance to get into suspension and didn't separate out. I performed the test again with less soil and more water and it worked just fine.

At 6.9 percent organic matter, Gary, you have adequate levels and only need to maintain those levels. Adding one to two tenths of a pound of nitrogen per 100 square feet is so little an amount that it would be difficult to do.

If the soil particles are one color and one size you have one of the three basic soil types, Sand, Silt, or Clay, and from my experience of one year in California (back in the 1960's) I would feel very confident in that you have Clay soil. All that test will do is show you what you have. However, the most important part of that test is how much organic matter does it show, soil texture is not of much importance in reality since little can be done to change that.

kimmq is kimmsr

Hi kimmq

In November 2002, I had the soil from the same garden analyzed by EarthCo. I just found those results.

That test showed my soil had organic matter of 2.8% and was classified as "Sandy Loam" comprised of 60% Sand, 20% Silt and 20% Clay.

Ready to send me a soil sample Gary? I'm glad you found the physical test from EarthCo! If you want your nutrient levels nailed down, send me a sample and I'll get you interpretations and recommendations that are accurate, meaningful and guaranteed to give you positive results. ;-)

Hi soilhugger541,

I wish I'd found you before March 23. Since you're in Oregon, your results would probably have been more "California"-oriented than UMASS's.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On March 23, I sent my soil sample (plus $33) to UMASS and got the results on March 27. I then realized I didn't ask them to determine the clay/silt/sand percentages.

Since then, I've failed (several times) doing the mason-jar test myself.

On March 30, I asked UMASS to do the clay/silt/sand test (for $50). I expect to receive those results on Monday, April 6. I'll let you know what it says.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you get UMASS's first report that I e-mailed to you last Wednesday?

Would you like me to send you Earthco's report, too?

You can but the test results are going to be different than the lab that I use. I can only interpret what those labs results are and frankly, I don't trust them. I hope you didn't already pay UMASS for the physical test. The first test at $33 was too expensive for what you received, which is equivalent to what a lot of universities do for free. At $50 that test is way to expensive and not that useful ($30 is standard). You get more accomplished with the ribbon test I described in my email to you.

CA does not offer soil testing via extension services but UMASS was listed on UC's referral list.

$33 and $50 is about what other labs charge for these two tests.

And they are overcharging you for what you actually get. A bunch of numbers and percentages, MDS Harris would give us these beautiful bar graphs (ill have to scan one and send it you, they really are gorgeous) that try and give you the whole picture. But the whole picture relies on impeccable and consistent lab work, correct interpretation and sound recommendations. Most of my clients that produce crops for a living, don't want to hear about pH, P a little high, Ca a little low, they want to know what to do. If the lab doesn't provide that in a precise format (no bar graphs, not one company claiming add N, another add B), then its not worth the money.

I am a home owner; I do not produce crops for a living.

Before I sent my soil sample (and money) to UMASS, I did some research on several other soil-testing labs, too.

I do not have the knowledge and/or experience to judge beforehand the methods, procedures, accuracy, interpretations and recommendations of any of the companies.

I chose the tests that appeared to provide the results and recommendations that I thought I would need for my home garden.

The prices that UMASS charges appeared to be comparable to those of other companies.

Sorry Gary, I in no way meant to offend you. I'll back up, after receiving your two different reports, what action did you take if any in your garden space? Did you add the prescribed N or B? Did you have poor plant performance you were hoping to improve and did you see a response to the addition of N or B? And ultimately, why so intent on determining your soil's texture?

"wait until the bareroot roses had “become established” before applying the Preen"

I agree.

"it would also prevent air, water and nutrients from reaching the roots of the desirable plants"

Totally agree for even more reasons that you/they listed.

If the UMASS report is/was accurate, I would not have mentioned the P as they did. Instead, if I am UMASS, I'd focus on that Ca number and get bringing that down with S and Gypsum applications. The pH will take care of itself. If I were to "unbrainwash" the gardening/ horticulture/agronomy community at large, then I would start with pH. The pH only helps determine which materials you will want to use in your process to get your cations balanced (your Base Saturation).

If you were to get UMASS on the phone, then I think you'd find out quickly that they don't pay much credit to balancing the bases. I know that because at the top of their recommendation page (the second page) they have the same nutrients as on most every bag of fert, N-P-K. The lime recommendation is also "old school" and a lot of university reports show what because...they are still focusing on pH. When it comes to your soil's health, Ca, Mg and K ratios in the soil are at the heart, it has never been about N-P-K or pH.

I'd love to find out what your soil actually has going on so you can make an informed decision. How about you send me a sample and i'll just write it off next year? :-)

I just read through your original posting and see why you were attempting the jar test. I hope you have since abandoned that test, its not that important to know.

"we have plenty of calcium which makes the pH high(not to mention the ground is like concrete"

The Ca is not responsible for the concrete, if that what you experience also. It is the Mg...

Lots of mention of S and as I stated above, I agree but again not to reduce your pH, but to instead lower your Ca. With the amount of Ca the UMASS report claims you have, then you should not have "tight" or concrete like soils, correct?

No, I don't have concrete-like soil.

UMASS has determined that my soil is a "Sandy clay loam" (51% sand, 30% silt and 19% clay).

Is that a "good" texture for roses? If not, should I change these percentages (and how)?

The texture is fine, send me a sample and I'll get you the information you really need to help those roses. Ill send you my PO Box address from my email...