Yes, they do! (Or kick another positive ion, but hydrogen is cheap and freely available from cracking water for photosynthesis). Otherwise, upon absorbing phosphorus, calcium, and whatnot, they'd have a net positive charge and send little lightning bolts into the soil when it built up enough. :-)

Technically, that would imply that, over time, they'd turn the soil more acidic. If mulch mowing, that doesn't happen. The calcium they absorbed goes back into the soil. Soil acidification tends to occur because of rainfall leaching Ca, Mg, and K.

I wanted to post a couple of pics of the progress of my yard. So far all I've done to it is apply that 15-5-10 fertilizer in early April (before my soil test) and a bag of Milorganite 2 weeks after. These pictures are from late April.

Then on May 6th I applied the starter fertilizer (24-25-4) as per Morpheuspa's schedule.

I am currently shopping for the Sulfate of Potash to apply on May 20 and I'm slightly concerned as to how I should apply it as far as my dogs (inside dogs) are concerned. I'm assuming I spread it and water it in immediately (and keep the dogs off the lawn).

My lawn may not win any awards on this page in its current condition but I am ecstatic about how great it looks when compared to last year. :)

Should be no issues. Treat it as a mild salt. Google the MSDS for Sulfate of Potash. That will address any of your concerns.

Lawn is looking good!

That looks great!

Potassium sulfate is pretty harmless stuff, but skin (paw) irritation can result. It's really soluble, so water it in and presto, end of problem. Don't allow your dogs to eat it, of course, but it's not poisonous until truly ridiculous levels of ingestion.

You really don't need any more potassium, and definitely you don't need sulfur. Focus on nitrogen, and forget about the rest. I know it sounds too easy, but that's really all you need. Potassium sulfate won't hurt anything, but it's a waste of your time and money.

I suggest a little experiment. Put potassium sulfate on a small (maybe 10 x 10 foot) area and watch to see if you can see the difference. I'll eat my hat if you can see it. Better yet ask a friend who doesn't know where you applied the potassium sulfate to see if they can find it.

AZ would you like to take over the soil reads? I've been needing a break.

I thought there was probably room for more than one opinion.

Actually, that's a serious question, not facetious. I really do need a break.

Go from BCSR to SLAN readings?

Lol. That shouldn't cause any confusion. ;-/

Would make readings and adjustments awful easy though. Let's see:

Mg? >50 ppm. Check.

Ca? >350 ppm. Check.

CEC 15. K? >120 ppm. Check.

P? >50 ppm? Check.

PH? >6. Check.

NEXT! :-)

Oh wow, seeing the contradicting advice here - while not completely unexpected - did throw me for a loop. Given Morpheuspa's long standing reputation on this forum and the fact that my intention is to improve the soil overall (not just the lawn) i'm going to stick with the original plan seeing how the time and money investment of the Potassium Sulfate is next to nothing for my situation (not to mention all the times i've deviated from an established plan in life to then doubt myself).

I do have to say that I am thrilled to see someone else is willing to step up to the plate and provide advice as Morpheuspa has been doing for years (and a few others of course) to help even more homeowners achieve great results.

I do intend to continue sharing more pictures of my progress on this thread about twice a month or so and I'm already looking forward to next years big project of leveling with sand!

Mind you, I find these alternate readings overly simplistic, lacking consideration for element antagonism in the soil (as well as CEC), occasionally chemically in error, and unable to set the soil close enough to the groove where it should be (so drifting is going take far less time).

However, I'm getting to the point where I just don't care about that...which is indicative of burnout. And they'll do OK for the average home user who's not too concerned about anything but a tolerable lawn, I guess.

So far, nobody's really been interested in actually reading the things, just chiming in afterwards. We'll see. You may get referred to an alternate forum in the future.

Kevin, personally I'd stick with the people who are able to tell you WHY they recommend what they recommend. I don't have time to expound more (if anybody cares) until maybe tonight, but morpheus knows his chemistry.

Maybe azdoctor is right, but I always like to know the WHY's. Like why is nitrogen the only thing you need? I assume azdoctor has reviewed your lab results? Unless someone is willing to go the extra mile and explain their rationale, I'd just ignore them. Maybe he thinks lawns don't need any chemical other than nitrogen, but we'll never know unless he decides it is worth his time to explain his understanding of healthy soil chemistry. Again, maybe he's on to something, but then again he could also just be a crackpot.

Here is an article with a point/counterpoint by Max Schlossberg and Joel Simmons on BCSR and SLAN. SLAN's focus is on what the plant needs for nutrients and what deficiencies exist. BCSR focuses on the physical condition of the soil in addition to plant nutrition. A soil very low in CEC can be perfectly balanced and yet lack sufficient nutrients, so you need to keep that in mind if using BCSR. Also, under BCSR a "deficiency" may show up but to fix it, you could push the pH up too much. if sufficient nutrients exist (SLANwise) it would be better not to fix the supposed deficiency. I think the two approaches can work together. Daniel, Azdoctor is not a crackpot. He is using SLAN, which is an accepted method, even the most accepted method. But BCSR has advantages and for a homeowner concerned about his particular plot of land, it not only guides nutrition for the grass but also helps improve the physical qualities of the soil.

Thanks for the BCSR/SLAN info, Becky! I haven't had time to understand completely the differences, but I get the gist of it after reading that article. It seems to me at the heart of it is whether you agree with Dr. Albrecht that there really is an optimal cation ratio that will flocculate the soil and allow all the other good things to then happen. If these ratios aren't all that important, then just bumping up whatever is deficient is all you need to do, which I think is SLAN.

In the link you sent me, I think the guy on the right column writes more clearly and makes a better point. It seems the guy on the left column is saying that if you use BCSR on a sandy golf course, you will still not have enough lbs of cations in the ground, even if their ratios are "correct." Well, duh! I assume, as the BCSR guy points out, that BCSR practitioners understand that point, and if they are analyzing a very low CEC soil (like sand) that they need to factor that in to their recommendations.

Well, like I said, I'm just learning about these methods, and I probably don't appreciate all the finer points, but I don't see what the big deal is, really. Do SLAN proponents think the ratios recommended by Albrecht are just wrong?

Not wrong as such, but unnecessary. Also there could be problems calculating CEC in very acid soils because the extractant used could overestimate CEC (counting pH dependent sites not actually there). If CEC is overestimated, then the % calculations for various cations will be lower than they really are. Test levels of CEC can also be off in soils with lots of soluble salts. i'm getting this information from Robert Carrow's book Turfgrass Soil Fertility and Chemical Problems. Here's something from p. 167 that may be useful: "With so much variation among methods, interpretation, and recommendations, it is apparent that soil testing for turf is not an exact science. Treat the recommendations as a guideline. Achieving exact rates is not critical in most cases."

What is, perhaps, most amusing is that I'm not purely BCSR by any sense of the word. In lower CEC soils, I'll kick saturation even if it costs slightly in pH (for the most part, the difference between 6.4 and 6.8 just isn't that extreme, but does give some room to play with resource amounts).

In extremely sandy soils, compromises must be made, of course, that would drive a pure BCSR reader absolutely insane. They don't bother me. Similarly, soils with a resource imbalance that's competitive with other elements can require a great deal of adjustment.

It's fortunate that we don't see too many extremely acidic soils, and those that we do see require more than one year to adjust. So there's a second read to correct CEC results, taken at higher pH. Actually, the worst I ever saw was my own when I started--low in the 4.X range.

Daniel, Morph has been the only person responding to requests for interpretation. And he wants a break, which is very understandable. He has other things to do and it must be frustrating when he gives his time here and then gets criticism from a few that use different methods. If people follow Morph's recommendations, they will get good results. If they were to follow yardtractor's or azdoctor's recommendations, they would also get good results (if they also pay attention to bag information, like limits on how much lime to apply at a time). People can also get soil tests and recommendations from their state agricultural colleges. Morph has been most generous in not only analyzing tests but also explaining what things mean. You won't get that from a university soil test report that is mostly generated by computer. The grass will probably be just fine however the soil is tested and analyzed. The most critical things will be caught.

Good (for being a BCSR type, not for being thin-skinned). I too think BCSR has value in helping with the soil's physical structure. That's a good way to look at it, that SLAN/MLSN is the tiebreaker. That's basically what Morph is doing too. As for your toxic relationship, I think it is a shame because you both are so knowledgeable and both contribute so much to helping people. Life is short. Any chance that you could get along?

I'm looking for reading material. The Carrow book is interlibrary loan and has to go back before long (I took notes). I have Beard's book but there's not much there on soil chemistry. What would you suggest?

I admire your dedication. I don't have any books to refer. My knowledge is derived from passing time (as a retiree, I have lots of it and I enjoy keeping my skills honed) searching and reading studies, papers, articles and educational materials available on line. The biggest problem with that is so many saved links eventually get moved (404 errors) or archived onto pay sites.

Keep it up, it shouldn't be long before you can help morpheuspa out. That is if you have masochistic tendencies. :-/

If morpheuspa would be willing to put what's in his head down on paper I'd be willing to do the legwork and implement the algorithm and host a website for all to use, just plug in your numbers and voila.

J4c11, What Morph does is not an algorithm. He looks at a number of factors and discriminates between them to come up with a best judgment. It'a not a simple "if this, then that." Are you interested in learning? Maybe you and Morph can do training. As for me, I'm in training at another site but I quickly found out I needed to know a lot more about soil than I did. I am not volunteering for Houzz. If Morph stops and no one takes over, the university soil tests will have to suffice. Unless people pay Logan for an interpretation. That is an option. I have no doubt that Morph's interpretations are more thoughtful.

It'a not a simple "if this, then that."

It never is. Unless the readings are completely random, there is a set of rules that he goes by to provide advice to people. They may be very complex, but they exist, and if those rules can be expressed, they can be programmed. A human review will obviously be better able to handle nuances but we could probably get about 95% of the way there.

Are you "virginiagal" on the other side?

Yes, that's me. He looks at the kind of grass, the location, expectations, stuff that's not in the soil test itself. He looks at interactions, judges just how much he can push pH by doing this or that. He decides whether to be conservative or be more aggressive. He makes judgment calls when there are several possible approaches. If all you want is good enough, something 95% the way there, the university soil tests will do fine. And there are usually local people in the co-operative extension offices that will discuss the reports in more depth if you have questions. If you get a soil test interpreted here and at that other site, you may get different recommendations. One is not right while the other is wrong. it's usually just different ways to get to the same goal.

The formulas for calculating the amount of products to apply are relatively straight forward, it's the rest that Becky mentioned that gets fuzzy.

I realize there have been great advances in AI, but morpheuspa also offers a lot of hand holding and that avoids a lot of problems that a "plug and play" program is not going to do. The 'good Samaritan rule" requires assuming a lot of responsibility, something programs won't.

Becky,

Sorry if I put you on the spot. I thought you were interested in that from reading prior posts. Can't fault you a bit.

I didn't feel on the spot. I am trying to learn as much as I can so I can be of some use when I get going. Everything I do will be vetted but I need to know stuff. My first attempt was a disaster. Look at exchangable hydrogen, I was told. I looked and there was none on this particular test. Then I looked at the "ideal" ratio and saw that exchangable hydrogen should be around 10%. I stewed and stewed over how one could add hydrogen and why it was needed anyway. No idea in the world how hydrogen could be added. Well, "look at the hydrogen" was just an another way of saying "look at the pH." I also had no idea that adding potassium could raise pH. The only thing I had ever heard of for raising pH was lime. I needed Soil 101 at the very least. I started reading. I'm still reading. They haven't entrusted me with another soil test yet. I will be more prepared the next time.

Don't feel bad, I'm not sure the other people doing "interpretations" there know much more. I saw on your test they recommended you apply Nitrogen in July and August. Luckily you know better. Others who are just starting out may not be so fortunate.

It was just Milorganite recommended then and apparently it's hard to mess up using Milorganite. But I am wary of anything on fescue in the transition zone during summer. First we have to make it past brown patch and poa annua dying out and then comes week after week of 90+ heat.

j4c11, what would be the reason to not apply Nitrogen in July and August? Is that maybe just for certain grass types?

Morpheus, if you happen to read this I've got a question. When you did my soil reading this year and last you mentioned to feed normally in July and August. I took that to mean a high nitrogen fertilizer such as 46-0-0 (slow release nitrogen). Have I mistakenly assumed that was what you meant? If so what should I have been using during those two months instead?

It doesn't apply to your Bermuda. j4c11 can explain why. 46-0-0 isn't available as slow release, at least not that I've ever seen. Slow release will always be labeled as such on the bag. If the bag doesn't identify a % as slow release or coated, what's in the bag is all fast.

I also had no idea that adding potassium could raise pH. The only thing I had ever heard of for raising pH was lime.

Someone told you that? It is a cation and does have the ability to replace an hydrogen atom on an exchange site, but they told you that it would change PH to a significant degree? Interesting. Did they specify Potassium carbonate or maybe caustic potash? Did they say what the chemistry was? How it worked?

PH is a measurement of the relationship between H and OH. When PH is 7, they are in equilibrium. The more H in the solution, the more acidic and the lower the number. The more OH, the more basic the solution and the higher the number. So anything 7 and above should show 0% hydrogen in the base saturations on the test. Unless, someone added just enough of something to neutralize the H in solution, but left the buffer H untouched. :)

Milorganite and other organic (grain or legume) fertilizers, If X amount of organic product will "decay" and supply Y amount of nutrient, the nutrient is going to be available eventually. The microbes are going to drop it when they drop it, they don't meter it as needed and they don't store it so that it can be dropped at the "right" time. You cannot apply tons of organics safely (for the plant, soil or environment). Ask any agronomist. I have.

Kevin, I want to apologize for taking over your thread. This conversation has diverged long ago from your concerns. Yardtractor, I was told all basic cations can raise the pH. I still don't have a feel for how much doing various things will affect pH. I welcome all information. I do know it's hard to change pH in a high CEC soil and much easier to change it in a low CEC soil. And it's easier to raise it than lower it. Coreman, Bermuda needs lots of nitrogen during its growing season, which is summer. Fescue is entirely different.

Oh wow. I thought coreman was the OP. I am very sorry Kevin, we have created a train wreck here. Becky, there is more I'd enjoy discussing on the topic, but this is not the thread. Once again, apologies to Kevin.

Also with apologies to Kevin, but cleaning up:

>>Morpheus, if you happen to read this I've got a question. When you did my soil reading this year and last you mentioned to feed normally in July and August. I took that to mean a high nitrogen fertilizer such as 46-0-0 (slow release nitrogen). Have I mistakenly assumed that was what you meant? If so what should I have been using during those two months instead?

Assuming Bermuda or another southern grass that needs monthly feeding, yes--high nitrogen. Whether it's slow release or not I actually don't have a preference on, although overuse of slow release isn't a great idea (eventually all the slow release does start to add up to one whopping big whack of nitrogen if you get unlucky).

>> He looks at interactions, judges just how much he can push pH by doing this or that. He decides whether to be conservative or be more aggressive. He makes judgment calls when there are several possible approaches.

He considers how well he knows the person. I make some recommendations privately that I wouldn't make for most people online, unless I already know that they have a similar addiction to accuracy as I do. :-)

I tend to be rather gentle on anything with a potential to do harm, and also consider the date on the calendar as it counterbalances with the state of the soil. I won't tend to recommend sharp corrections during the summer, for instance, nor when we get too close to winter and ground freeze for the poster's locale.

Locale itself also plays a role when combined with the CEC of the soil and local average climate. I won't push a big correction on a soil where I risk having that dump directly into a waterway.

And so on. While theoretically programmable, the nesting of if-then-else statements just to get an "aggression factor" of changes would be rather complicated. And good luck getting a computer to decide how experienced an OP with a soil test is. :-)

Here's j4c11's new robot designed to provide a lawn care prescription. j4's next project is to teach facebook how to write a trending algorithm that does not require the intervention of liberals. :o)

It's more amusing when you realize that I have a robotic lawnmower. Yes, somebody who's certainly a huge fan of grasses and loves lush, rich, dark lawns...is violently allergic to the VOCs released when grass is cut. Plus I absolutely detest mowing the lawn.

We got a bunch of comedians on here. Pretty funny though :-).

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me about growing zoysia.

"I assume azdoctor has reviewed your lab results? Unless someone is willing to go the extra mile and explain their rationale, I'd just ignore them. Maybe he thinks lawns don't need any chemical other than nitrogen, but we'll never know unless he decides it is worth his time to explain his understanding of healthy soil chemistry."

Sorry - I did not explain myself very well. I based my recommendations on the soil test provided. It was not a blanket statement. Grasses, like all other plants require N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, B, Cl, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, Zn. The soil test indicated that most of these did not require adjustment, hence my recommendation.

There is a sliver of truth to some of the comments regarding BCSR and soil structure. We use exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) to evaluate the impact of sodium on soil structure. Alternatively, we can use the Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) a ratio of the chemical activities of sodium to calcium plus magnesium. These are routinely used, and are not nutrient based (sodium is not a plant nutrient). These are most important in high CEC, clayey soils. Structure is less important in sandy soils.

Somewhere I posted some articles that describe results of tests comparing BCSR and SLAN. Science is not a belief system. It is a method of evaluating facts. Read up on the facts and then make a conclusion - NOT A BELIEF.

beckyinrichmond

The term 'basic cations' ions a misnomer. Na, Ca, Mg, K are pH neutral cations. Try dissolving sodium chloride in water, and them measure pH. It will not have changed. Sodium chloride is a neutral salt. Same with Ca, Mg, or K chlorides. Now take aluminum chloride and do the same thing, The pH will drop. This is an acidic cation.

In soil, we can divide the exchangeable cations into acidic and non-acidic. Soil scientists use the term 'base saturation' to mean 'non-acidic cation saturation.' It is an unfortunate choice or terms.

Adding lime raises the pH of soil because of the carbonate half of the lime molecule, NOT THE CALCIUM. Do another test: dissolve both lime (calcium carbonate) and gypsum (calcium sulfate) in water. Measure the pH. The gypsum will not change the pH (because it's a neutral salt), but the lime will. Has nothing to do with the calcium. You could just as well use Na, K, or Mg carbonate. They'd all raise soil pH.

@azdoctor

Just curious, what is your profession?

az: In soil, we can divide the exchangeable cations into acidic and
non-acidic. Soil scientists use the term 'base saturation' to mean
'non-acidic cation saturation.' It is an unfortunate choice or terms.

Thank you for making that point. When I was in the lab, inorganic chemistry meant a certain thing, redox reactions, etc. Then in industrial scale water treatment there were certain terms that were particular to that field, and now in soil chemistry I see the same kind of thing. Language/terminology in a particular field can be a little loose and not strictly correct, but good enough for most purposes. Needless to say as a soil novice I was beginning to question my own knowledge of basic chemistry. It's been awhile for me, but I do know the basics.

46-0-0 is urea. You can buy sulfur coated urea (SCU) which is a very good slow release fertilizer.

So the yard continues improving! I've struggled over the past 2 weeks with mowing as it has been raining a lot lately. The grass is very thick and it is growing at an alarming rate! Unfortunately I found myself in a situation where i had to mow wet grass a couple of times last week and the effects of that are shown on the first picture. Do you guys think that could develop into a thatch problem? I'm mowing every 3rd day right now.

Thatch has nothing to do with grass clippings. If you have some clippings matted on the lawn you can take a rake and break it up, or just kick it to spread it around.

Looks great, keep after it!

Your lawn won't get any thatchier than it would have anyway. :-) With zoysia (horrible) or KBG (bad), that's very thatchy. For most of the others, it does vary.

Changing to an organic feeding regimen does help with thatch, eventually. My pure KBG lawn has zero thatch.

Yes! I fully intend to implement an organic feeding regimen once I can get the soil chemistry under control.

I was so concerned about creating a thatch problem that I ALMOST bagged the clippings the two times the rain subsided enough last week for me to be able to mow.

Side note: I've had multiple neighbors ask what my "secret" is this year. This is a HUGE step up for me from last year (when the house was built).