John Breker

Feed Nitrate Testing in a Drought Year

in , , /by

Drought is an unwelcome but well-known phenomenon on the Northern Plains and Canadian Prairies. Rainfall has been sparse and scattered across the region, and high temperatures exceeding 90 to 100° F (32 to 38° C) have already caused stress to young crops. These same stresses have also wracked pastures, prompting livestock producers to think about alternative feed options for cattle. Believe it or not, we have already received questions from farmers and ranchers about decisions to cut and bale or graze small grain fields for livestock feed.

When drought-stressed annual crops (e.g., wheat, barley, oat, corn) are cut or grazed, producers must exercise caution about livestock nitrate poisoning when feeding these forages. Drought-stressed crops often accumulate nitrate because plant uptake of nitrate exceeds plant growth and nitrogen utilization. Nitrate is usually concentrated in lower plant parts (lower stem or stalk). When livestock, particularly sheep and cattle, ingest forages with a high nitrate content, nitrate poisoning can occur if large amounts of nitrate convert to nitrite in their digestive system.

Dry soil conditions and high soil nitrate levels favor plant accumulation of nitrate. There is one upside to very dry soil conditions: Some soils may not have had enough soil water to convert all nitrogen fertilizer from the ammonium form to the nitrate form, especially if nitrogen fertilizer was applied in a concentrated band that delays nitrification. Therefore, this may limit the amount of soil nitrate available for plant uptake and accumulation. Regardless, there is still variation across the landscape, and a feed nitrate analysis is the best method to assess livestock nitrate poisoning risk.

When collecting plant material for nitrate analysis, collect the plant parts that the livestock will eat. If plant material will be grazed, recall that lower plant parts contain higher nitrate concentrations; monitor grazing height closely. If plant material will be cut and baled, you should collect plant material above the cutter bar height. Alternatively, plant material can be sampled with a hay probe after being baled.

For the fastest turnaround, submit feed materials for nitrate analysis using a plant sample bag. Write “feed nitrate” for crop choice and select “nitrate-nitrogen” as the analysis option. 

AGVISE Laboratories offers next-day turnaround for feed nitrate analysis. Rapid turnaround on nitrate analysis is important for producers debating to cut and bale or graze small grains or corn as livestock feed.  We also provide livestock water analysis, which includes total dissolved solids, nitrate, and sulfate, to assess livestock drinking water quality. Please call AGVISE staff in Northwood, ND (701-587- 6010) or Benson, MN (320-843-4109) with questions about nitrate, feed/hay quality, or water analysis. We can send you sampling supplies if needed.

AGVISE Laboratories Online Supplies Store

John Breker

Scouting Shorts: Soybean Iron Deficiency Chlorosis (IDC)

in , /by

As soybean plants emerge and add trifoliate leaves, keep your eyes peeled for soybean iron deficiency chlorosis (IDC). Through the upper Midwest and into the Canadian Prairies, soils with high pH and calcium carbonate pose a special problem for soybean plants and iron uptake. If you encounter soybean IDC, you will start to notice soybean plants with distinct interveinal chlorosis (yellow leaf with green leaf veins) in the newest leaves. The unifoliate leaves typically remain green.

Look for characteristic symptoms of soybean IDC (above photo).

When to scout

Right now! Soybean IDC symptoms begin to appear as soybean plants enter the first- to third-trifoliate leaf stage. You will often see soybean IDC symptoms appear after a period of cool, wet weather.

Where to look

Soybean IDC symptoms are usually confined to soybean IDC hotspots with high carbonate and salinity. Soil pH is not a good indicator of soybean IDC risk because some high pH soils do not have high carbonate or salinity, which are the two principal risk factors. The soybean IDC hotspots often occur on landscape positions with moderate to poor drainage, but soybean IDC symptoms may appear across the entire field if high carbonate and salinity are present throughout the field. High residual soil nitrate-nitrogen can also make soybean IDC worse, so take an extra look at fields that were fallowed last year (e.g. Prevented Planting) and had higher soil nitrate-nitrogen than normal.

What soybean IDC can be confused with

Nitrogen deficiency: Pale green and yellowing is uniform across the entire leaf and veins (not interveinal like soybean IDC). Yellowing appears on older leaves. It is sometimes observed when poor inoculation or delayed nodulation occurs. Look at soybean roots for active nodules (bright pink-red center) or take plant and soil samples to confirm.

Potassium deficiency: Yellowing starts at the outer leaf margin, works its way inward with some brown mottling. Yellowing appears on older leaves during early growth stages and sometimes on upper leaves during pod fill. Take plant and soil samples to confirm.

Soybean cyst nematode (SCN): Aboveground symptoms are virtually invisible during the early growing season. Visual SCN symptoms only occasionally appear in late July or August, or if dry soil conditions occur. Look at soybean roots for small white-colored SCN cysts or take an SCN soil sample including infected root material to confirm.

More information on soybean IDC symptoms, causes, and management: https://www.agvise.com/soybean-iron-deficiency-chlorosis-symptoms-causes-and-management/

John Breker

Sidedress Corn Using the Pre-sidedress Soil Nitrate Test (PSNT)

in , , , , /by

As the corn crop begins to emerge, it is time to prepare for sidedress nitrogen applications. Sidedress nitrogen for corn can be applied any time after planting, but the target window is generally between growth stages V4 and V8, before rapid plant nitrogen uptake occurs. Split-applied nitrogen has become a standard practice in corn to reduce in-season nitrogen losses on vulnerable soils, such as sandy and clayey soils. More and more farmers now include topdress or sidedress nitrogen as part of their standard nitrogen management plan. These farmers have witnessed too many years with high in-season nitrogen losses through nitrate leaching or denitrification.

The target timing for PSNT sampling is when corn is 6 to 12″ tall. Twelve-inch corn is often V4 or V5 (like in the picture above). Do not hesitate in collecting soil samples for the PSNT; the target window for sidedress-nitrogen applications in corn is between the V4 and V8 stages. 

Whether your nitrogen management plan includes a planned sidedress nitrogen application or not, the Pre-Sidedress Soil Nitrate Test (PSNT) is one tool to help make decisions about in-season nitrogen. You may also hear this test called the Late-Spring Soil Nitrate Test (LSNT) in Iowa. PSNT is an in-season soil nitrate test taken during the early growing season to determine if additional nitrogen fertilizer is needed. PSNT helps assess available soil nitrate-nitrogen prior to rapid plant nitrogen uptake and the likelihood of crop yield response to additional nitrogen.

The Pre-sidedress Soil Nitrate Test (PSNT), taken when corn is 6 to 12 inches tall, can help you decide the appropriate sidedress nitrogen rate. The PSNT requires a 0-12 inch depth soil sample taken when corn plants are 6 to 12 inches tall (at the whorl), usually in late May or early June. Late-planted corn may not reach that height before mid-June, but PSNT soil samples should still be collected during the first two weeks of June. The recommend soil sampling procedure requires 16 to 24 soil cores taken randomly through the field, staggering your soil cores across the row as you go. All soil cores should be placed in the soil sample bag and submitted to the laboratory within 24 hours or stored in the refrigerator.

You can submit PSNT soil samples using the online AGVISOR program by choosing the “Corn Sidedress N” crop choice and submitting a 0-12 inch soil sample for nitrate analysis. AGVISOR will generate sidedress nitrogen fertilizer guidelines, using the PSNT critical level of 25 ppm nitrate-N (0-12 inch depth). If PSNT is greater than 25 ppm nitrate-N, then the probability of any corn yield response to additional nitrogen is low. If spring rainfall was above normal, then the PSNT critical level of 20 to 22 ppm nitrate-N (0-12 inch depth) should be used. Iowa State University provides additional PSNT interpretation criteria for excessive rainfall, manured soils, and corn after alfalfa.

If the PSNT is taken after excessive rainfall, the soil cores will be wet and difficult to mix in the field. Therefore, it is best to send all soil cores to the laboratory to be dried and ground, ensuring a well-blended soil sample for analysis. Although in-field soil nitrate analyzers have improved over the years, the difficult task of blending wet, sticky soil cores in the field still remains. The only way to get accurate, repeatable soil analysis results is to dry, grind, and blend the entire soil sample in the laboratory before analysis. AGVISE provides 24-hour turnaround on PSNT soil samples. The soil samples are analyzed and reported the next business day after arrival. Soil test results are posted on the online AGVISOR program for quick and easy access. With AGVISE, you get not only great service but also the highest quality data with four decades of soil testing experience.

Pre-Sidedress Soil Nitrate Test (PSNT) resources

Please call our technical support staff if you have any questions on PSNT and interpreting the soil test results for sidedress nitrogen application.

Jodi Boe

Protect Nitrogen Fertilizer from Ammonia Volatilization

in , , , /by

Recent rain and snow have brought much-needed precipitation to the northern Great Plains and upper Midwest regions. Some degree of drought conditions stretch from Alberta to Iowa, and agronomists and farmers are wondering the best ways to protect spring-applied nitrogen as the planting season continues. How much nitrogen might I lose if I cannot incorporate it? Does vertical tillage incorporate fertilizer enough? We have compiled some resources to help answer those questions.

There are three ways to lose fertilizer nitrogen: ammonia volatilization, denitrification, and nitrate leaching. In excessively wet soils, denitrification and nitrate leaching are a concern. However, for spring-applied nitrogen, ammonia volatilization is the main concern with dry soil conditions and unpredictable rainfall forecasts.

When you apply ammoniacal fertilizers (e.g. anhydrous ammonia, urea, UAN, ammonium sulfate) to the soil surface without sufficient incorporation, some amount of free ammonia (NH3) can escape to the atmosphere. Sufficient incorporation with tillage or precipitation is needed to safely protect that nitrogen investment below the soil surface. With dry soil conditions, this is important to remember because we must balance the need to protect nitrogen fertilizer while conserving soil water for seed germination and emergence.

Ammonia volatilization risk depends on soil and environmental factors (Table 1) and the nitrogen fertilizer source (Table 2). Typically, we are most concerned about ammonia volatilization for surface-applied urea or UAN. It is not easy to estimate how much nitrogen might be lost, and sometimes the losses can be substantial. Although you cannot change the soil type or weather forecast, you do have control over the nitrogen source and application method (Table 2) to protect your nitrogen investment.

Practices to reduce ammonia volatilization, in order of most effective: 

  • Apply urea in subsurface bands at least 3 inches below the soil surface. A shallow urea band (1 or 2 inches) acts like a slow-release anhydrous ammonia band, and nobody should ever apply anhydrous ammonia that shallow.
  • If nitrogen will be broadcast with incorporation, make sure the fertilizer is sufficiently incorporated at least 2 inches below the soil surface to ensure good soil coverage. A chisel plow or field cultivator is usually needed. The popularity of high-speed disks (vertical tillage) has led some people to think that it counts as a meaningful incorporation event. In reality, it just moves soil and crop residue around on the soil surface without really incorporating any fertilizer. Take a look after you run across the field and you will see white urea granules everywhere. There are soil-applied herbicide incorporation videos from the 1970s that show what a thorough incorporation job really requires.
  • If nitrogen will be broadcast without incorporation, try to time the fertilizer application right before rain (at least 0.3 inch of precipitation). Soils with good crop residue cover (no-till) may require more rain to sufficiently move urea or UAN into the soil surface.
  • If no rain is forecasted in the near future, consider applying a urease inhibitor on urea or UAN to provide temporary protection until rain arrives. The university research-proven urease inhibitor is NBPT, available in products like Agrotain (Koch) and its generic cousins. For generic products, make sure the active ingredient rate is 1.3 to 1.8 lb NBPT per ton of urea to ensure effective NBPT activity and protection. NBPT begins to breakdown after 7 to 14 days. In addition, it is important to remember that nitrification inhibitors like nitrapyrin and DCD do not protect against ammonia volatilization.

These practices should also be considered if you will be applying in-season nitrogen to corn or wheat later in the summer. it is always best to apply nitrogen below the soil surface, such as injected anhydrous ammonia or coulter-injected UAN, to protect nitrogen fertilizer. For surface-applied urea or UAN, you will want to time the fertilizer application just before a rainfall or consider NBPT to extend the rainfall window.

Resources on ammonia volatilization and urease inhibitors

Nitrogen extenders and additives for field crops, NDSU

How long can NBPT-treated urea remain on the soil surface without loss?, NDSU

Should you add inhibitors to your sidedress nitrogen application?, University of Minnesota

Split the risk with in-season nitrogen, AGVISE

John Lee

Adjusting high soil pH and salinity with sugar beet-processing spent lime

in , , /by

The sugar beet processing industry uses large quantities of fine-ground, high-grade calcium carbonate (lime) to purify sucrose in the sugar extraction process. The by-product spent lime retains high reactivity and purity, making it an attractive liming material for acidic soils. Application of spent lime is a common practice through the sugar beet producing areas of the upper Midwest and northern Great Plains, where its primary function is the suppression of the soil-borne disease Aphanomyces root rot of sugar beet. The spent lime also contains about 20 lb P2O5 per ton, mostly as organic phosphorus impurities gained from sugar refining.

We often get questions about correcting high soil pH and salinity with spent lime. Salt-affected soils, saline and sodic, are a common problem across the northern Great Plains. These soils have high soil pH and present numerous agronomic and soil management problems. The soil amendment gypsum (calcium sulfate) is often applied to sodic soils (those with high sodium) to combat soil swelling and dispersion. The spent lime (calcium carbonate) also contains calcium, but it is very insoluble at high soil pH.

Each year, we get many questions about applying spent lime on soils with high pH and salinity. To answer these questions, AGVISE Laboratories installed a long-term demonstration project in 2008 to evaluate adjusting high soil pH and salinity with spent lime. We applied multiple spent lime rates and tracked soil test levels over seven years. There were no significant changes or trends in soil pH (Table 1) or salinity (Table 2). This is no surprise because the initial soil pH was high and buffered around 7.8-8.2, indicating the presence of natural calcium carbonate. If the soil already contains naturally occurring lime, what is the good of adding more lime? Moreover, calcium carbonate is very insoluble, so there is no expectation that more lime will decrease or increase salinity.

Since soil test levels did not change over seven years, we terminated the project in 2014. The research question was a conclusive dud. While spent lime is useful to amend acidic soils and suppress Aphanomyces root rot of sugar beet, it does not help on soils with high pH or salinity.

 

 

Table 1. Soil pH (1:1) following sugar beet-processing spent lime application on high pH soil.
Spent Lime Year Average
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
ton/acre
1 7.8 7.7 7.9 7.8 7.7 8.0 8.0 7.80
2 7.9 7.9 8.1 7.9 7.9 8.0 8.0 7.94
3 7.9 7.9 8.1 7.9 7.9 8.1 8.1 7.95
4 7.8 7.8 7.9 7.7 7.8 8.1 8.0 7.85
5 7.8 7.8 8.0 7.9 7.9 8.0 8.0 7.90
6 8.0 7.9 8.2 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.1 8.00
Spent lime applied and incorporated September 2008. Soil sampled in fall.

 

Table 2. Soil salinity (electrical conductivity, EC 1:1) following sugar beet-processing spent lime application on moderately saline soil.
Spent Lime Year
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
ton/acre ——————— dS/m ———————
1 1.5 1.2 1.8 1.1 1.6 1.2 1.8
2 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 2.3 2.0 2.0
3 1.9 2.2 2.6 2.5 2.4 1.9 1.9
4 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.5 1.9 1.9
5 1.7 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.2 1.7 1.7
6 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.9 2.5 1.9 1.9
Spent lime applied and incorporated September 2008. Soil sampled in fall.
John Lee

Uffda, that’s a lot of potash!

in , /by

Question: Can you really change the %K base cation saturation ratio?

This winter, we have gotten more questions from farmers asking about the base cation saturation ratio (BSCR) concept. The farmers had attended a series of meetings where the speakers encouraged farmers increase the %K saturation in their soils and apply high potassium fertilizer rates to soils, even though there was little to no chance to get a crop yield response. In short, the BSCR concept revolves around reaching a certain percentage (%) of each base cation in your soil to obtain the “ideal” soil. If you do not have the right percentage of each cation, then you are instructed to apply large amounts of fertilizer to reach this “ideal” balance of each cation. Potassium is the most common nutrient where people fall into the BSCR trap, often suggesting that extra potassium will “fix” their soil.

Since the 1940s, university and industry researchers from around the world have thoroughly debunked the BCSR concept. But sometimes, you just need to show people how this works in the real world to get their attention. To help farmers see the silliness of the BSCR concept, we conducted a simple field project in 2015 to show just one flaw in the failed BSCR concept, focusing on its primary claim that you can actually change the %K saturation in soil. We identified three soils in Manitoba, Minnesota, and North Dakota with low initial %K saturation. The goal was to increase %K saturation into the 4 to 6% range, which is recommended by BCSR promoters. We applied a staggering rate of 1000 lb/acre K2O (1666 lb/ acre potassium chloride, KCl, 0-0-60). You are probably thinking that 1000 lb/acre K2O is a lot of potash! And so did we. We called the project the “uffda” project because my Norwegian grandfather, who farmed in southern Minnesota 60 years ago, would have looked at the high rate and said, “Uffda, that’s a lot of potash!”

But, we failed to achieve the “ideal” 4 to 6% K saturation (Table 1). As expected, soil test K (part per million, ppm) increased substantially, but the %K saturation did not reach the “ideal” soil range even with the enormous potassium fertilizer rate.

Table 1. Soil test potassium and potassium base saturation after application of 1000 lb/acre K2O (1666 lb/acre potassium chloride, KCl, 0-0-60).
Location Soil test K, ppm K saturation, %
initial final initial final
Northwood, ND 156 430 0.6 1.6
Benson, MN 154 290 1.9 3.7
Roseisle, MB 50 330 0.4 2.8

Do you need more proof? Let’s see what the plants said. The soybean plant tissue K concentrations did not change either because the soil test K (ppm) was sufficient and above the 150 ppm critical level (Table 2). Simply put, the proven university-developed soil fertility guidelines would have told you that more potassium was not needed. I know a few farmers who were convinced to follow the BCSR concept, which only wasted their valuable dollars and time on the failed idea.

Table 2. Soybean leaf potassium concentration did not increase with additional potassium fertilizer applied on soils with soil test potassium above the critical level (150 ppm).
Fertilizer K Rate Soybean leaf K, %
lb/acre K2O Northwood, ND

STK 150 ppm

 Benson, MN

STK 190 ppm
0 3.2 1.9
20 2.6 1.8
100 2.7 1.8
200 3.0 1.8
1000 2.6 1.9
Soybean leaf K sufficiency level = 1.7 %K

All things considered, there are still good reasons to apply potassium fertilizer (moderate rates) to achieve profitable yield responses. Either way, the base cation saturation ratio (BCSR) concept is a really bad way to justify potassium fertilizer use, and it usually leads to very high fertilizer rates and costs. Here are some good reasons to include potassium in your soil fertility program:

  • Soil test K below 150 ppm (grid or zone soil test)
  • Soil test K below 200 ppm (composite soil test, high soil variability)
  • History of low plant tissue K when no potassium fertilizer is applied; potential compaction
  • Replicated strip trials showing profitable crop yield response to moderate potassium fertilizer rates
  • Chloride required for small grains; potassium chloride (0-0-60-50Cl) is the most common chloride source
John Lee

Starter Fertilizer Display: How low can YOU go?

in , , , , , , /by

When profits are squeezed, more farmers are asking about optimal starter fertilizer rates and how low starter fertilizer rates can be. These questions are the result of wanting to keep fertilizer costs down, to plant as many acres per day as possible, and to take advantage of more efficient, lower rates of banded phosphorus fertilizer compared to higher rates of broadcast phosphorus fertilizer.

To illustrate the role of starter fertilizer rates and seed placement, we put together displays showing the distance between fertilizer granules or droplets at various rates and row spacings. You can see several pictures with canola, corn, soybean, sugar beet, and wheat. We greatly thank John Heard with Manitoba Agriculture for helping with the displays.

The displays show the normal seed spacing for several crops with different dry or liquid fertilizer rates alongside the seed. These displays help visualize the distance between the seed and fertilizer at several rates. University research shows that to achieve the full starter effect, a fertilizer granule or droplet must be within 1.5-2.0 inches of each seed. If the fertilizer granule or droplet is more than 1.5-2.0 inches away from the seed, the starter effect is lost. Some people wonder about these displays, but you can prove it to yourself pretty easily. Just run the planter partially down on a hard surface at normal planting speed. You will see what you imagine as a constant stream of liquid fertilizer, ends up being individual droplets at normal speed, especially with narrow row spacings and lower fertilizer rates.

These displays help illustrate the minimum starter fertilizer rate to maintain fertilizer placement within 1.5-2.0 inches of each seed for the full starter effect. In addition to an adequate starter fertilizer rate, additional phosphorus and potassium should be applied to prevent nutrient mining, causing soil test levels to decline in years when minimum fertilizer rates are applied.

John Lee

Adjusting low soil pH with sugar beet-processing spent lime

in , /by

The sugar beet processing industry uses large quantities of fine-ground, high-grade calcium carbonate (lime) to purify sucrose in the sugar extraction process. The by-product spent lime retains high reactivity and purity, making an attractive liming material for acidic soils. Application of spent lime is a common practice through the sugar beet producing areas of the upper Midwest and northern Great Plains, where its primary function is the suppression of the soil-borne disease Aphanomyces root rot of sugar beet. The spent lime also contains about 20 lb P2O5 per ton, mostly as organic phosphorus impurities gained from sugar refining.

AGVISE Laboratories installed a long-term demonstration project in 2014 to evaluate adjusting low soil pH with spent lime. The project site was located near our Northwood Laboratory. Northwood lies along the beachline of glacial Lake Agassiz, where well-drained coarse-textured soils with low pH are common. We located a very acidic soil with soil pH 4.7 (0-6 inch), which was the perfect site to evaluate lime application. In May 2014, spent lime was applied and incorporated with rototiller. The spent lime quality was very high at 1,500 lb ENP/ton. In Minnesota, lime quality is measured as effective neutralizing power (ENP), which measures lime purity and fineness. Soil pH was tracked over three years (Table 1).

The lowest spent lime rate (2,500 lb ENP/acre) increased soil pH above 5.5. This soil pH reduced aluminum toxicity risk, but it did not reach the target pH 6.0, appropriate for corn-soybean rotation. The highest spent lime rate (10,000 lb ENP/acre) increased soil pH above 7.0 and maintained soil pH for several years. Spent lime is a fine-ground material with high reactivity, so its full effects were seen in the first application year. The project showed that spent lime is an effective liming material for low pH soils.

Table 1. Soil pH (1:1) following sugar beet-processing spent lime application on low pH soil.
Spent Lime Year
May 2014 Sept 2014 July 2015 June 2016
lb ENP/acre
0 4.8 4.8 4.7 5.1
2,500 4.8 5.5 5.2 5.4
5,000 4.8 5.6 5.7 5.5
10,000 4.8 7.4 7.0 7.4
Spent lime applied and incorporated September 2008. Soil sampled in fall.
John Breker

High soil pH and calcium carbonate inflate base cation saturation and cation exchange capacity (CEC)

in , , /by

Soil pH is a soil chemical property that measures soil acidity or alkalinity, and it affects many soil chemical and biological activities. Soils of the northern Great Plains and Canadian Prairies often have high soil pH (>7.3) and contain calcium carbonate (free lime) at or near the soil surface. It is the calcium carbonate in soil that maintains high soil pH and keeps it buffered around pH 8.0. The calcium carbonate originates from soil formation processes since the latest glacial period.

Soils with high pH and calcium carbonate create analytical challenges in determining cation exchange capacity (CEC) and subsequent base cation saturation ratio (BCSR) calculations. Cation exchange capacity is the amount of positive-charged cations (e.g. ammonium, calcium, hydrogen, magnesium, potassium, sodium) held on negative-charged soil particles, like clay and organic matter. Fine-textured soils (high clay content) and organic soils (high organic matter content) have high CEC, while coarse-textured soils (low clay content) have low CEC. The BSCR is the relative proportion of base cations in soil.

The routine laboratory method to determine CEC is the summation method, where all extractable cations on soil particles are added together. The assumption is that all positive-charged cations extracted are held on negative-charged exchange sites on soil particles. The assumption falls apart in soils with pH > 7.3 because the soil test method also extracts calcium from the naturally occurring soil mineral calcium carbonate, which is not held on cation exchange sites. The resulting amount of extractable calcium is inflated. The summation procedure still sums together the inflated calcium result, producing an inaccurate and inflated CEC result. Any subsequent base cation saturation calculations are similarly flawed.

To illustrate the inflated CEC problem, AGVISE Laboratories conducted a laboratory experiment. The experiment showed that more calcium carbonate in soil increased the amount of extractable calcium (Table 1). Furthermore, the inflated amount of extracted calcium also inflated the CEC because all the extractable cations are summed together. The correct CEC is 24 cmolc/kg, yet the inflated CEC could be 150 to 200% higher with increasing calcium carbonate content. Adding calcium carbonate to soil did not increase the inherent CEC sources, i.e. clay and organic matter, yet the laboratory CEC result increased. In reality, the ability to hold more cations did not change. This highlights the analytical challenge in determining CEC via summation method on soils with high pH and calcium carbonate.

Table 1. Effect of calcium carbonate addition on extractable cations and cation exchange capacity.
Calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE) pH EC Ca Mg K Na CEC
% dS/m —————– ppm —————– cmolc/kg
0 7.5 0.43 3350 730 220 45 24
1 7.6 0.51 6150 730 220 50 37
5 7.7 0.52 7480 720 215 45 44
10 7.8 0.50 7240 650 180 40 42
Abbrev.: pH (1:1); EC, electrical conductivity (1:1); Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; K, potassium; Na, sodium; CEC, cation exchange capacity via summation of cations.

The subsequent base cation saturation calculations were also affected, showing much lower percent potassium saturation as calcium carbonate content increased (Table 2). This presents a major challenge in using the base cation saturation ratio (BCSR) concept to guide soil fertility and plant nutrition on soils with high pH and calcium carbonate. Without an accurate analytical method, the BCSR concept loses its grounding and any practical application.

Table 2. Effect of calcium carbonate addition on base cation saturation ratio and cation exchange capacity.
Calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE) Ca sat. Mg sat. K sat. Na sat. CEC
% ————————– % ————————– cmolc/kg
0 71 26 2.4 0.8 24
1 82 16 1.5 0.6 37
5 85 14 1.2 0.4 44
10 86 13 1.1 0.4 42
Abbrev.: Ca, calcium; Mg, magnesium; K, potassium; Na, sodium; CEC, cation exchange capacity via summation of cations.

In general, the routine CEC method via summation of cations is quite accurate on soils with pH less than 7.3 and no calcium carbonate. However, the routine method has clear challenges on soils with pH greater than 7.3. The resulting CEC and subsequent base cation saturation calculations are inflated and/or flawed. This is why the BCSR concept is extremely misleading on soils with high pH.

John Lee

Adjusting high soil pH with elemental sulfur

in , , /by

Soil pH is a soil chemical property that measures soil acidity or alkalinity, and it affects many soil chemical and biological activities. Soils with high pH can reduce the availability of certain nutrients, such as phosphorus and zinc. Soils of the northern Great Plains and Canadian Prairies often have high soil pH (>7.3) and contain calcium carbonate (free lime) at or near the soil surface. It is the calcium carbonate in soil that maintains high soil pH and keeps it buffered around pH 8.0. The calcium carbonate originates from soil formation processes since the latest glacial period.

An unfounded soil management suggestion is that soil pH can be successfully reduced by applying moderate rates of elemental sulfur (about 100 to 200 lb/acre elemental S). Elemental sulfur must go through a transformation process called oxidation, converting elemental sulfur (S0) to sulfuric acid (H2SO4), a strong acid. Sulfuric acid does lower soil pH, but the problem is the amount of carbonate in the northern region, which commonly ranges from 1 to 5% CCE and sometimes over 10% CCE. Soils containing carbonate (pH >7.3) will require A LOT of elemental sulfur to neutralize carbonate before it can reduce soil pH.

To lower pH in soils containing carbonate, the naturally-occurring carbonate must first be neutralized by sulfuric acid generated from elemental sulfur. You can visualize the fizz that takes place when you pour acid on a soil with carbonate. That fizz is the acid reacting with calcium carbonate to produce carbon dioxide (CO2) gas. Once all calcium carbonate in soil has been neutralized by sulfuric acid, only then can the soil pH be lowered permanently. It is important to note that sulfate-sulfur sources, such as gypsum (calcium sulfate, CaSO4), do not create sulfuric acid when they react with soil, so they cannot neutralize calcium carbonate or change soil pH (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Soil pH following gypsum application on soil with high pH and calcium carbonate.

In 2005, AGVISE Laboratories installed a long-term demonstration project evaluating elemental sulfur and gypsum on a soil with pH 8.0 and 2.5% calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE). The highest elemental sulfur rate was 10,000 lb/acre (yes, 5 ton/acre)! We chose such a high rate because the soil would require a lot of elemental sulfur to neutralize all calcium carbonate. Good science tells us that 10,000 lb/acre elemental sulfur should decrease soil pH temporarily, but it is still not enough to lower soil pH permanently. In fact, this is exactly what we saw (Figure 2). Soil pH declined in the first year, but it returned to the initial pH over subsequent years because the amount of elemental sulfur was not enough to neutralize all calcium carbonate.

Figure 2. Soil pH following elemental sulfur application on soil with high pH and calcium carbonate.

A quick calculation showed that the soil with 2.5% CCE would require about 16,000 lb/acre elemental sulfur to neutralize all calcium carbonate in the topsoil. Such high rates of elemental sulfur are both impractical and expensive on soils in the northern Great Plains. The only thing to gained is a large bill for elemental sulfur. While high soil pH does lower availability of phosphorus and zinc, you can overcome these limitations with banded phosphorus fertilizer and chelated zinc on sensitive crops. All in all, high soil pH is manageable with the appropriate strategy. That strategy does not involve elemental sulfur.