27 Jan 2011 by Simon Glanfield
I am considering doing some soil samples as i have recently purchased a corer from IOG and send them away for analysis.
The advice i am after is where is the best place to send them to? can anyone recommend for me an address or a person that i can make contact with regarding this.
Many Thanks in advance
Simon,
Why not call in one of the major fertiliser companies to do an analysis for you? They will do it free of charge, send you a detailed report and of course add their recommendations as to what you should use.
Vic.
Or contact the STRI, Total Turf Solutions, but they will charge.
Beware of using fertiliser companies. They have an amazing knack of finding a defecit that only one of their own products can cure. In the past I have sent the same batch of sample to two different companies and they have come back with different results. If you are doing it for physical analysis for top dressing compatability then fine. If you are looking at nutrient levels than don't bother. Soil samples cannot tell you N levels and nobody knows what the correct level is for the others anyway. There is no set level of parts per million of each element as compounds like phosphate can be locked by an acidic clay soil. By the same token a very sandy free draining soil where nutrients rapidly leach out will show a greater defecit. This does not mean it requires a higher level of application. It means it needs a more regular one or a non leaching slow release. Every site varies in terms of nutrient take up. Things like local weather, topography, shade, light, north facing, south facing, waterlogging etc. A soil sample sent to a lab cannot take those factors into consideration.
Rant over.
Chris
You will never see a statue in honour of a committee.
simon i always use the yara lab at pocklington it was the old lancrop. they wont give product recommendations but will tell you how much nutrients you need to correct any deficencys.
sculler. How much nutrient is the correct amount?
Chris
You will never see a statue in honour of a committee.
27 Jan 2011 by Anthony Asquith Last edited 27 Jan 2011
The true fact of the matter is that turfgrasses can survive in a wide range of nutritional values so you do not need to be precise as wide and broad ranges exist.
Much of my consultancy work these days is dialing in SITE SPECIFIC nutrition programmes as species, cultivars, soils are all different. This is based on development of sufficiency level data and building up a picture of requirements via correlation to field trial responses using correct extraction techniques and methodology. As Chris say's, it is never a case of one size fit's all - both plants and soils, and what can be deemed as low, medium or high needs to be calculated using the advice I gave above which is site specific as no two fertilizer programmes from golf course to golf course are the same, so it need's to be dialed in to the native turf and soil and historical site data needs to be built up.
I often advice it to track trends, monitor changes (there hardly ever is apart from very free draining soils) and avoid making knee jerk reactions based on the limited knowlege of the grasses overall sysyem.
It also depends on what grasses you have and want to promote. Many fine grass stands I have seen turn into other vegetation based on overfeeding using the base saturation method or using saturated pastes to dial in nutritional requirements.
Anthony
chris sorry but you are wrong you can get nitrogen levels from soil samples and as for the correct amount of nutrients each sample is taken on its own merit and used properly and professionaly will give rewards .
27 Jan 2011 by Loammeister Last edited 27 Jan 2011
Hi Simon
The instinct to gather scientific information to make more informed decisions is a good one, nut you have to temper that with the kind of testing costs that you might incur to get that information.
As Vic says various companies offer an analysis 'free of charge' so you are free to take or leave their advice, but maybe start to build a picture through the data given. Agree with Chris that along with this 'free analysis' comes recommendations that you use their products, but if you are strong minded you can resist the pressure and make your own decisions.
It's worth noting a passage from Mike A's response to a recent thread that is relevant to your situation:
Things do go a bit blurry for me in some areas though, and I feel that some people/companies can abuse things. In the 10 years or so that I have worked in the industry, i've seen a lot of changes... many of which go away from the basic fundamental principles of turfcare, and these principles have been lost in the marketing that now takes precedence over seemingly everything else. In all but the sharpest cookies out there, confusion reigns supreme, and I feel that this is down to marketing, misdirection, word play, profiteering and other, underhanded tactics. Many sales folk, rather that backing up their claims with hard, scientific research and factual evidence, rely on marketing, word play, and most annoyingly to me, discrediting of other people, all in an effort to get a sale. There seems to be a culture of brainwashing taking place - take for instance, micro prill fertilisers, which are now one of the 'buzz' products - when I started out, we we're working with fertilisers that were a nats hair from ag grade, yet the greens at my old club were first class, yet here we are today "you can't use that, you'll get this that and the other"... come on now... I wasn't born yesterday; however, many volunteers who aren't so privileged to have had an education in turfcare, can easily have the wool pulled over their eyes, and I find that very annoying.
Keep an open mind by all means, gather together all the relevant data you can, but trust your own senses and build up a picture of how things flourish in some circumstances and don't in others, and you won't go too far wrong. Good Luck.
The light at the end of the tunnel is not a train
28 Jan 2011 by Poa7 Last edited 28 Jan 2011
To answer your question Simon, I would certainly put that new corer of yours to work and send the samples to an independent test facility.
ETL (European Turfgrass Laboratories)
TurfTrax
STRI
Google any of the above.
Take a sample across the pitch (W type fashion) and try to collect at least a kg.
You will need to look on the websites for each and tell them what you want analysing.
Full nutrient
Organic matter content
Hydraulic conductivity
etc - see the sites for more.
Obviously with these guy's there will be a cost. Not too much and worth the spend IMO
All the best.
4 Feb 2011 by vid
Hi Simon - a bit late on the post I know!! There are different ways of getting samples as above. The depth of testing will be dependant on how much you want to pay. To get a full test with all the main macro (major) and micro (minor) elements will cost as much as £50 or more from an independant. Yes you can get a free one from a fertiliser supplier but I personally am appauled that the suggestion here is to use the freebe and ignore the advice - if someone does something that costs money for free I always use as many of their products as possible - to be 'strong' and resist their products is unethical in the extreme in my opinion.
The one thing I would say however is make sure you understand the results and what they mean. Most laboratories are set up around agriculture and their advice is not particularly relevant to amenity use. Interpretation is everything and very few salesman have the slightest idea what any of the readings mean or how to advise off report. Get the advice of someone who understands the agronomy Too many fertiliser companies use these reports to sell maximum amounts of fertiliser without considering the effect this may have on other important elements within the soil. In places this has lead to toxic levels of elements or the displacing of others that are not even considered in their report. This information without the knowledge to interpret it can be more dangerous than not finding out in the first place.
Hi guys just a quick thank you on all the above advice, i have taken some samples, a few have gone to the company i buy my fertiliser off and a few i took up to a agricultural college 30 miles away, he was very helpful and let me watch when he did tested the NPK in the soil. We also took some of the better samples to another dept at the college where they looked at the structure of the sample, again very interesting.
The conclusion was that there is a very compacted layer about 2 to 3 inches down which means the water is just lying on the top, also the pitch has a lot of thatch, which is also holding the water and is making the wet patches seem to smell like old pond water!? Some samples showed a black layer just under the surface
When he did his test there was no traces of Nitrogen or potash in the samples, and a little potassium. They said the soil underneath the compacted area isnt to bad and suggested when the conditions are right to maybe get a hollow core done and either remove cores or let them dry out for a few days then harrow and brush in, they wernt surprised when i told them the pitch didnt seem to divot like my other pitch, it seems to just shear off the top inch.
It will be interesting to see the difference if any in sample tests, but will listen and take in any advice i can get from people who have been doing this many many years longer than me, even if it does men buying thier products, you have to build a working relationship with these people dont you??
Any way thank you again and keep up the good work on this forum, you will be surprised how much you can pick up reading through it all
Back to Top - Go to Next Unread Message
This Message is closed, you may not post a reply at this time
