Logan Labs Soil Test - 2017 - Austin, TX

7 years ago

last modified: 7 years ago

I just want to start off by saying thank you to everyone who helps out on this forum! You all are providing valuable analysis, let alone using your precious "free" time, and it really is appreciated.

My 2016 soil test post is here: http://forums2.gardenweb.com/discussions/3451466/logan-labs-soil-test-in-austin-tx

I've followed Morpheus plan exactly over the last year, and I can tell the back yard is improving. I dug my soil samples with a hand shovel and no actual measurement of depth, so there might be some error in the 4" depth number.

This is for a Rental that was frankly horrific when we moved in. The lawn is a bumpy, sloped mix of bermuda/poa/crabgrass/clover/thistle/limestone/fireants :o)

Here's my 2017 Soil Test. Would the resident lawn gurus please chime in with soil rehab ideas?

Featured Answer

User

7 years ago

last modified: 7 years ago

I'm sorry Donnie, it's late but I hate to leave you hanging.

pH goes from 8.0 to 7.1? 9 times less basic?

CEC over 100?

No.

No, no, no.

NO!

This is more than I want to tackle and the tests needed to narrow it down would cost you way too much for a rental. I'm not even sure the questions would get answered.

For this soil, to get the most bang for your buck, find a triple NPK fertilizer like 19-19-19. The higher the numbers, the cheaper it should be per pound of nutrient. A bag of 10-10-10 will be cheaper than a bag of 19-19-19, but per unit of NPK, the triple 19 will cost you less. Apply it at the rate of 1 pound of N per thousand sq feet every month through the growing season.

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (17)

Donnie
Original Author
7 years ago
Thanks RidgeRunner! When you get a chance, could you give me a little more context around what you're thinking?

Sounds like you think the change in numbers is too significant to be accurate. I can say that the sample distribution in the yard was very close to the same as last year.

When I did the sample late 2015, I broke a hand shovel and bent a second one in parts of the yard because the limestone soil was so dry and hard. This time around, I believe I got better samples due to the soil being softer in general.
Related Discussions
logan labs ph 7.5
Q
Comments (13)
I live in Baytown tx to be exact. Soil is what most people here describe as black gumbo. Extremely dense soil. When dry, hard as a rock and when wet, seems like clay. i performed a jar test but i determined it was inconclusive since most of it seemed like clay balls sinking to the bottom of the jar. Now, the back yard (St augustine), I have no problems at all, except for my dogs digging everywhere. I can easily dig down 2-3 feet and the soil seems very rich, lots of earthworms, but there are 2 trees that provide plenty of organic matter. When I first moved in the house mid august 2012, the St augustine was in very poor shape. No weeds but it was light green in color and hardly growing. When I mean hardly growing, I mean, I NEVER mowed it. The ground was EXTREMELY hard. Watering was not an issue either, we had plenty of rain, but I think the soil was hydrophobic. Today the soil is very soft when wet, hard when it dries. I used A LOT of shampoo and aerated once, but only to overseed with Rye grass. My idea was too have the ryegrass build a massive root system and break the soil a bit. The PERENNIAL ryegrass came in lush and super green and didn't completely die off until late May into june. Probably why my bermuda never came in thick.
...See More
Logan Labs Soil Test Help
Q
Comments (8)
Another interesting soil. This one does present some unusual challenges, but nothing we can't handle. My recommendations are based on a southern grass (Bermuda or the like). If that's not true, let me know. Things have to move around quite a bit. EC 9.4: Midrange, a nice answer, meaning your soil is probably mixed silt and sand. You hold decent resources but the soil is on the easy to change side, so some monitoring is called for. pH 7.5: Normally, I don't care. In this case, with a calcium deficit, I do. We have to deal with the calcium and not push this too much higher, if at all--which means no lime. Fortunately, there's a way to do that. OM 0.5%: So far down in the Poor scale that I'm just going to call this Dreadful. Always mulch mow. Mow all fall leaves. Steal your neighbors' leaves. Feed organically around the synthetics recommended below. Throw your morning coffee grounds on the lawn. No source is too small or too weak. Sulfur 39: While this doesn't give me as much margin as I would like, there's still a fair amount. We're going to push this up a bit. Phosphorus 184: On the low side for your higher-pH soil. My target here will be around 300. Recommendations below. Just purchase the cheapest starter as they'll all target around a pound of phosphorus per thousand square feet, give or take too little to worry about. Calcium 62.8%: While not horrible, the soil shows a slight deficit. I'd like to fix that. Most landscape and garden stores can order gypsum for you, and some big box stores have it as well. Recommendations below. Magnesium 22.1%: Very high. Avoid all sources of magnesium including Epsom salt, dolomitic limestone, and so on. This will create a tight, impenetrable soil. I'm hopeful that the gypsum will take out some of it, but it's not going to be extreme. Potassium 8.2%: Very high, but that's not a problem at all with potassium. Still, none is required or desired. Sodium 3.0%/ 128 PPA: Quite high, to the point that salt-sensitive plants are going to have a problem with this. The gypsum will abolish some of the sodium, and one of the reasons I went as high as I did. This is indicative of a low-rainfall soil that receives a lot of its moisture in lower amounts of rain and/or irrigation most of the time. Try to irrigate the grass rarely, but very deeply. Minor Elements: While I'd like to tap copper, I'm not motivated to do that this year with all the gypsum going down, and it's not that short anyway. The others are fine, although I mentioned iron below. Iron 37: Very low and not going to produce good color or efficient photosynthesis at your pH. Whenever you like, apply Milorganite to slowly raise the iron, provide a short-term-available shot of iron to the grass roots before it soil binds, and also increase your organic matter a little bit. NH4/NO3: In the future, don't bother with this test. Nitrogen levels vary by soil moisture, time of year, time of day, soil temperature, and just about anything else you can think of. If the grass is growing well on a corrected soil with proper irrigation and mowing, you have sufficient nitrogen. N levels also vary by how you feed. Synthetic feedings provide a sudden burst, then fall very low very quickly. Organics rise slowly, to much lower peaks, but sustain feeding for long periods of time. Paste test: Skip in the future. This is telling us what we already know; some resources are a little short, and your higher pH is interfering with resource uptake. It's not severe, and we're going to shift the soil to compensate. Recommendations: June 1: Feed with starter fertilizer at bag rate. June 15: Apply 15 pounds (15 pounds; not a misprint) of gypsum per thousand square feet. July 1: Feed with starter fertilizer at bag rate. August 1: Feed with starter fertilizer at bag rate. September 1: Feed with starter fertilizer at bag rate. September 15: Apply 10 pounds (again, not a misprint, 10 pounds) of gypsum per thousand square feet.
...See More
Logan Labs Soil Test in Austin, TX
Q
Comments (11)
1) Theoretically yes, and it won't be a problem. Since Milo has some free nitrogen, I might shift it two weeks off the starter fertilizer application just to be safe, particularly in very hot weather. 2) Nope, the amounts are large enough that they won't stick, and potassium sulfate tends to be granular. A small hand-held whirlygig spreader will be able to meter amounts this small, and you can get them at most big box stores with the other spreaders.
...See More
2017 Logan Labs Test Help (year 2 of soil management)
Q
Comments (25)
An excellent analysis and I'm very impressed. As an engineer, I live in the world of assumptions. As long as they’re understood, all is well. However here, I’m making a LOT of assumptions that I don’t understand very well at all, so I’m not too comfortable with my conclusions. That is compounded by the inability to really check the change from last year because of my lack of consistency (I know, I know). After going through the numbers in detail, I now see just how helpful a truly consistent measurement would have been. I'd say that's a pretty accurate description for soil analysis: a bunch of assumptions. This isn't a controlled lab situation and each year's soil sampling and test results can/will very sometimes significantly, so any variable we can control when sampling helps reduce those fluctuations. To try to stay grounded in expertise, I’ve generally just taken morpheuspa’s plan from 2016 and based on RidgeRunner’s ranges and comments, tried to convince myself of whether I could justify using the same 2016 recommendations. So, my thoughts: Why not? It's as good a place to start as any and better than starting from scratch. Assuming M III Phosphorus is what I’m adding with starter fert, bag rate of scotts starter fert (24-25-4) is 0.75 lb/k Phosphorous, or 32.67 lb/ac. I added that 4 times in 2016 for a total of 131 lb/ac of P. Not all of that hung around apparently, and since the B1 section increased by 47lb/ac and the F1 section only increased by 14lb/ac, it appears that the F1 section uses/loses P faster than the B1 section. A couple of clarifications: 1) M III (M3) is the test that was used. It is a cocktail of chemicals that is used to extract nutrients for measurement. In this case the Phosphorous is reported as lbs per acre of P2O5. (Other labs may report it as ppm of elemental Phosphorous). The nice thing about reporting it as P2O5, is that P2O5 is the form of Phosphorous contained in fertilizers. So your assumption is right. 2) Phosphorous moves very slowly (down or otherwise) through the soil and phosphorous binds within days of application and can become unavailable to the plant. In acidic soils it binds to Aluminum and Iron. In high pH soils, it binds with calcium. An assumption: the difference between F1 and B1 may be due in part to the difference in pH between your two soils as reflected in the initial test. If the target is 200, seems like another season of about 4 starter fert applications would make sense, although in the B1 section it seems like I’m cutting it close. Maybe I’ll apply a couple of the apps in that section at 0.5 bag rate? I concur. As an alternative (based on your budget) Milorganite has reconfigured their formula to 5-4-0 from 5-2-0. Now only 10-20% might be organic P, but organic P is "slow" release and would help supply P to your turf better over time. (All of P2O5 is inorganic and although inorganic P is readily available to the turf plant, it also readily binds up. I gave you the 200 range, because you had mentioned that you didn't know what target you had been given last year, 200 is his/a common target for a high maintenance lawn. Some general points of clarification: 1) for every pound of N that a plant uses (not every pound of N that is applied--but USED) the plant needs and uses 1/2 pound of Potassium and 1/4 pound of of Phosphorous. whichever is missing, is the limiting factor. 2)The ranges I gave you are the ones that soil scientist have found within which plants "appear" to do well. They are quantities averaged for soil types and plants. Research has shown that values below the range result in poor performance. That as you approach the low end, additions of that nutrient are more likely to show a visible improvement in the plant and as you approach the high end, additions of the nutrient are much less likely to result in any improvement. Values above the high end are very unlikely to show any improvement and at some point can be detrimental to the plant. (did I say this before?) Bottom line, as you progress with balancing your soil, if you reach a point within the range where you no longer see improvement, you've reached your optimum in regard to any nutrient. My Ca/Mg ratios are roughly in range (F1/B1 5.1/13.1) and slightly up from 2016 (4.7/10.6), so that’s fine, but the Calcium saturation is fairly far off. I’m assuming that this is what is causing my low pH values, but not sure how that’s calculated. Also not sure how to calculate what my expected increase in Mg saturation should be based on the fast acting lime. But since my calcium is clearly low, at a minimum I can add the same calcium (lime) app I did last year (F1: 3lb/k, B1: 1lb/k, spring and fall). The question would be can I increase that app, particularly in the B1 section, and what should the corresponding Mg app be? Since the Ca/Mg ratio is on the low side in F1 maybe I should add less Epsom Salt than I did last year? Say, 1lb/k instead of 2lb/k? Add the same or more in the B1 section to keep that ratio from becoming too large. Say, 2lb/k again. This is when a buffer pH test would help- a lot IMO. If they still have your sample (30 days?) they could run that for about $10 per sample. You are correct that base saturation reflects low pH readings and if you fill up all but 10 to 15% of the cation sites with Ca, Mg. and Potassium and leave the 10-15% to Hydrogen, you should end up with a pH in the 6's. But none of those nutrients neutralize the acidity. For soils, an addition of carbonate will do that. It's better to know how much carbonate/lime (an amount derived from buffer pH testing) is needed to raise pH than to estimate based on total base saturations. BSCR, CEC, lime and differences in lime products, etc. is a bit involved, but I'm happy to clarify any questions you have on them. As it stands now, without a buffer test, as your pH is not really moving and/or dropping and as you want to avoid freeing up any more Aluminum (which can be toxic to the turf in addition to the P issue), you want to raise your pH using lime additions. Your Mg is near sufficient levels, so it shouldn't be an impediment to your turf, however, if you wish to address the base saturation ratio, yes, 1#/k for B1 only of Epsom (considering the difference in sampling and to avoid over shooting) and mixed with the lime. Yes, I'd increase the lime app. As both areas are near the same pH, fast acting lime at 9lbs/k (B1 and F1) would be indicated and even that may not make for much movement in pH on a future test. It should help the available P values to raise. Potassium values seem to be low, and the saturation fell significantly, which, based on morpheuspa’s statements, probably has to do with the Calcium. Common lawn wisdom makes me think I should add in a potassium-rich “winterizer” app in the fall to bump that number. But it again seems like I need to add at least what I added of Potassium Sulfate in 2016 (F1: 3lb/k). However, this time it looks as though adding 3lb/k to the B1 section also might be a good idea. Agree, in fact, I'd suggest increasing to three apps of 3#/k this year. Avoid applying within 2-3 weeks of any lime app. I’ve been sufficiently warned about playing with boron in my lawn to try to improve the number without very specific advice, so I’ll probably just leave that alone this round. That's up to you, based on the soil tests and your previous app,, you could apply 2 tablespoons of Borax per k again to raise values into the optimal range. Your decision. I would have done the jar test, but I came home to a light dusting of snow. Winter isn’t done with us yet, even in S. Carolina. Hope that makes sense. Feel free to ask for any clarifications. Once again, nice job.
...See More
User
7 years ago
Sounds like you think the change in numbers is too significant to be accurate.

Not necessarily inaccurate per se as that I just don't possess the knowledge to understand why it may have changed. Gypsiferous? It's just not compatible with my knowledge base. Combined with my unfamiliarity with your region of the country and soils, it's better reasoned to admit my limitations than to shoot from the hip.

I would suggest you consult and test with a local resource familiar with your soils and any specialized testing processes that might be available, like TAMU.
dchall_san_antonio
7 years ago
Ridgerunner is stumped??

Once again, welcome to Texas soil. Most of us have similar soil. TAMU's soil test lab has been discredited...by TAMU officials themselves. I would trust Logan Labs more. Without additional input from morph, what I would do is repeat what he said for last year except substitute Milo for every starter fertilizer app. Also do not repeat the boron/copper treatment this year without further guidance. These are nutrients up to a fragile point when they suddenly become poisons.

When you sent this sample in, did you tell LL that it was almost pure limestone? I think that makes a difference in how they test it. I'm not sure if their samples are completely use up or discarded after testing. You might call them and ask if they have enough to rerun it and what test they would recommend for such a soil sample.

While the boron kicked up this year, it does not appear the rest of the work you did showed up in the soil. I'm concerned about the organic matter falling. This is why I suggested using Milo for every fertilizer application.

I would not expect much improvement up next to the fence or the house due to the shade, but the rest of the yard should look pretty good. If you are planning to be there long term, I would spend $5 on three pieces of St Augustine sod and drop them in the shadiest parts of the yard. Assuming they are watered deeply and infrequently throughout the season, those will establish well in the shade and spread to the sunny areas and completely take over the yard. St Aug spreads about 15 feet a year. It spreads fastest when the temps are in the 70s and low 80s, but it is definitely trying to spread in the 90s and above. Once you have the St Augustine established, then the poa, crabgrass, thistle, and clover can be killed out with an atrazine herbicide sprayed once a year in April. But don't try that now, because atrazine also kills bermuda.
Donnie thanked dchall_san_antonio
Donnie
Original Author
7 years ago
Thanks dchall. I'm not planning on being here long term, but I view this yard as a good way to learn.

I am planning on following the same schedule as you suggested, but I don't know if I can help myself from putting more N down in the summer. I didn't put as much milo as I probably should have last season. I only put it down when I needed to apply the boron and used it as a carrier.

As for the shade, it's definitely a problem around the fence and underneath a large crepe myrtle, so I might just take your suggestion re: st augustine.

As for the weeds, I put down dimension in the fall and again 3 weeks ago, and also sprayed some image about a month ago. I may have to bite the bullet and finally get some celsius if I can't get these guys under control by the time it heats up.
User
7 years ago
Donnie,

How closely did you follow the plan that you were given last year?
Donnie
Original Author
7 years ago
Ridgerunner,

I did every single step in the plan last year and on schedule within a week. potassium sulfate, boron, copper, starter fert every month, watered deeply once a week in the hot season, mowed 1-2 times a week when it was above 90, etc.
User
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
...I view this yard as a good way to learn.

I haven't changed my position, but against my better judgment, I'm willing to guess if you are.

A drop in pH from 8 to 7.1 and a 30% increase in calcium is not what one would expect. Normally for a high pH soil, an ammonium acetate test is recommended for accurate Ca numbers and an accurate TEC estimate. But the error is considered so small that it is not recommended if pH is 7.2 or below. (see the Quit It" thread for an explanation). So which is it here? Is there a substantial amount of free calcium (read as unbound Ca) that is not present as calcium carbonate (which is also present here) or as gypsum (16ppm Sulfur is a fair amount, but, I don't believe it is enough to account for all the calcium that would need be tied up as gypsum)?

pH: It's not unusually for fairly large discrepancies in pH to occur in acidic soils depending on a number of factors, but primarily occurs when testing is done at different times of the year. Although I suppose possible, large swings are not as common in calcareous soils. So pH 7.1 to 8.0. Raising pH is doable, lowering pH is not usually realistic. So other than informing us how available nutrients might be, you're pretty much stuck with a high/higher pH whatever it might really be.

TEC: 107 and 166. Possibly in a highly organic soil (bog) but not in a mineral soil. There is a test for determining (measuring) TEC rather than estimating it, but it's $50 or so. A particle analysis might help in narrowing it down to a range, but they aren't cheap either. Pick a number. Really doesn't matter on a calcareous soil, not going move things around anyway. So no BCSR analysis. Only use here would be in determining how fast things will move through the soil.

So where are we so far? pH is somwhere above 7, and based on the likely TEC, nothing can be done about lowering it. TEC is totally unknown and with the amount of calcium in the soil, BCSR (saturation ratios/%) is totally useless.

What you can do is look at the sufficiency levels and do your best to supply the grass with at least the bare minimums. Compare your two tests and consider what you applied between them and come up with a plan. Post it and I'll help you adjust it to avoid any over (or under) applications. Hint: Where did all that phosphorous you applied go? Maybe dchall can help with that and adjust sources and timing.

PH: 6.0-6.9 pH has a strong influence on the availability of
nutrients and the health/population of microorganisms. Most common
target for turf soil is slightly above the middle 6.6 to 6.8.

TEC/CEC: Reflects the capacity of the soil to hold cation elements (most importantly, plant nutrients) in reserve. For
the most part, it is what it is although adding organic matter can
eventually raise it very slightly (putting lipstick on a pig).

Organic matter: 3% to 10% Source of nutrients (dust to dust), important for soil structure and moisture retention. Most common target is 5-6%.

The ranges for the following have been tailored to reflect the units
reported in the LL Soil Test. The ranges encompass the amounts consider
sufficient for a healthy, aesthetically pleasing turf. Values below the
minimum have been found to be deficient and make for unhealthy turf that
exhibits observable plant issues from unattractive appearance to
malformed leaves and roots. Starting at the midpoint, the closer the
value is to the low end of the range, the more likely an addition of a
nutrient will have a positive (observable) affect on the turf. The
closer a value is to the high end of the range from the midpoint, the
less likely an addition of a nutrient is to make any improvement. A
value above the high end is considered excessive and at some point
may/can/will have a detrimental affect on the turf:

Phosphorus: (range 116-260 lbs/ac of P205) Most common target is 200 lbs.

Sulfur: (range 9 to 40ppm although no known max value has been found detrimental) Most common target is 15-40 ppm.

The following are cations and capable of attaching/holding to a TEC
site. In addition to considering the sufficiency ranges, the saturation
ratios and percentages should also be considered to avoid imbalances and
avoid adverse interactions that are detrimental to the turf:

Calcium: (700+ lbs/ac to unknown) Ca/Mg ratio range: can vary greatly without detriment to plant health. Recommended ratio range is 5:1 to 10:1.

Ca Saturation: (60-85%) To be considered in conjunction with Mg saturation percentages, Ca:Mg ratios and sufficiency level values.

Magnesium: (range 100-600 lbs/ac)

Mg Saturation: (6-20%) To be considered in conjunction with Ca and recommended Ca:Mg ratios, saturation percentages and sufficiency level values.

Potassium: (range 100-440 lbs/ac) Common target is 220 to 360 lbs/ac

K Saturation: (2-7%) To be considered in conjunction with Potassium (K) recommended sufficiency level values. most common target 4-5%.

Sodium and Sodium Saturation: Not considered a nutrient but some sodium is likely beneficial to the turf. (Range 0.5-3.0%) less than 110 ppm and less than 5% of base saturation, otherwise very poor soil structure is likely.

I usually don't address micronutrients as they are almost never
deficient as to cause issues with turf and the chance for misapplication
is high. However, as you have already addressed Boron and Copper, the common optimum range for Boron is 0.5 to 1.5 ppm, and Copper is 0.5 to 2.0.
Donnie thanked User
User
7 years ago
Donnie,

If you're still out there :) and you'd just rather that I do the recommendations and timing, just let me know.
Donnie
Original Author
7 years ago
Hey RidgeRunner, I'll post my plan sometime soon. Just need to make some time to sit down and put it together... Thanks for following up!
Donnie
Original Author
7 years ago
Alright, I think I'm going to do the same fert and potassium sulfate applications as last year, with the exception, I'm going to try putting milo down every 8 weeks to raise the organic matter a little. One thing I noticed is that I put the starter fert down at bag rate last season, but I don't know how different that is from the 1 lb of N per 1K sqft rate. I have no idea why the phosphorous numbers didn't move...

March 15, 2016: Apply Milo at bag rate.

April 1: Apply starter fertilizer at bag rate.

April 15: Apply 2 pounds per thousand square feet of potassium sulfate.

May 1: Apply starter fertilizer at bag rate.

May 15: Apply Milo at bag rate. Apply 2 pounds per thousand square feet of potassium sulfate.

June 1: Apply starter fertilizer at bag rate.

July 1: Apply starter fertilizer at bag rate.

July 15: Apply Milo at bag rate.

August 1: Apply starter fertilizer at bag rate.

September 1: Apply starter fertilizer at bag rate.

September 15: Apply Milo at bag rate. Apply 2 pounds per thousand square feet of potassium sulfate.
User
7 years ago
I like it. Looks like a good plan.

The reason you aren't seeing P go up, is that even in the best of circumstances it ties up fairly quickly. At very low pH and very high pH it ties up very quickly and becomes unavailable to the grass. (It's most available at pH 6.5 to 7.) The P you've added is there, it's just not readily available. Soil tests are designed to report the readily available nutrients, not all of the nutrients present.

A couple things:

As the P in your soil gets tied up so quickly, you may want to consider spoon feeding it (the starter) over time to help make it more available to the turf before it binds on a continuous basis.

The extra Milo is an excellent addition. Not for the OM, as it wont do much for that, but it does have 20-30% organic P. That organic P acts as a slow release P source and will help keep some P accessible to the turf over time.

Have at it and good luck.
Donnie thanked User
User
7 years ago
I have no idea why the phosphorous numbers didn't move...

I meant to say in my short explanation above that the P is binding with all that incredibly high amount of calcium. But I forgot. Anywho, that is where all the P went and will continue to go.
Red (6a SW PA) Skip
7 years ago
Just trying to learn here...

Is the fertilizer program Donnie provided aggressive for the summer months? Also, in all my reading, and I'm not expert, synthetic Fert should be applied every 6-8 weeks not 4-5.

Not questioning the program, just trying to learn something new.

The reason I ask is, my planned program looks like this:

3/25 Applied Starter Fert at Bag Rate

5/1 Apply Starter Fert at Bag Rate

6/1 - Milo @ 15#/1000

7/1 - Milo @ 15#/1000

8/1 - Milo @ 15#/1000

9/1 - Starter Fert at bag rate

10/15 - Starter Fert at bag rate

I don't have a soul study because I applied the Fert already, but if the gurus think I should, I'll definitely get it done!

My schedule contradicts what I've read, but I wanted to give it a go. My lawn is really thin and new, we built our house last year in August and the grass hasn't taken very well. Thinking of treating this year as a brand new lawn and establish good root structure and concentrate on weeds next year.

Thoughts?

Donnie, sorry for the hijack on your post.

Skip
User
7 years ago
last modified: 7 years ago
Skip

It's best to start a new thread. For the sake of keeping things straight, clarity and out of courtesy to Donnie. I do understand the piggy back, and I'm going to try to answer your question because it raises a point I meant to make to Donnie, but if you have any followup please post a new thread and link or cut and paste this thread.

Donnie,

Skips question about N apps reminded me of a point I wanted to make to you. Because there is so much Ca in your soil, the P you add is going to always be binding and unavailable (not that you shouldn't always test regularly) and ithe likelihood of ever balancing P in your soil is nil. Consequently you are going to need to add P regularly through the growing season just as you need to add N regularly. The availability of both will regularly diminish and need constant dosed replenishment.

Skip,

Please notice that Donnie is in Texas and has Bermuda grass. You are in Pa and don't have Bermuda.

Regular monthly doses of N during the summer is required for a healthy attractive Bermuda lawn. So the program Donne developed would not be at all aggressive for his location and turf. It would be the norm.

Not so with a cool season grass (although one that is regularly watered might use a decent amount of N through the summer months.)

Why are you being so aggressive with N during the Summer? And why so much phosphorus? Please open a new thread if you wish to follow-up.

Thanks
Donnie
Original Author
7 years ago
RidgeRunner,

That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the explanation.
User
7 years ago
Checked and Ok

Logan Labs Soil Test - 2017 - Austin, TX

User

Comments (17)

Donnie
Original Author

Related Discussions

User

dchall_san_antonio

Donnie
Original Author

User

Donnie
Original Author

User

User

Donnie
Original Author

Donnie
Original Author

User

User

Red (6a SW PA) Skip

User

Donnie
Original Author

User

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

Logan Labs Soil Test - 2017 - Austin, TX

Comments (17)

DonnieOriginal Author

Related Discussions

DonnieOriginal Author

DonnieOriginal Author

DonnieOriginal Author

DonnieOriginal Author

DonnieOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

Donnie
Original Author

Donnie
Original Author

Donnie
Original Author

Donnie
Original Author

Donnie
Original Author

Donnie
Original Author