SoilTech or Ants?

Change this description

Found a great article today about soils and ants, yes ants.  I posted it on our twitter page (@soiltec) with the caption saying “SoilTech taking a cue from the insect world, or is it the other way around..?”.  In the article, scientist tested the soil that ants bring up from the ground or in other term, the soil of their ant hill.  The aggregates made by the ants when it takes a bite while digging and then deposits on the surface is some really good soil.  Also, the digging of the ants itself, helps increase soil moisture due to the water being able to penetrate into the soil more easily and further.  Basically what the ants are doing is exactly what SoilTech is doing to your soil, albeit on a larger scale but SoilTech will give these results on a larger area of your yard.  So either bring hundreds-of-thousands of ants to your customers yards to help with their poor soils or provide them SoilTech!

https://www.soils.org/discover-soils/story/making-mulch-ado-ant-hills

One of our last blog posts was about a comprehensive test of SoilTech by ISTRC, and one of those tests measured root growth. The test was performed over a short period of time and a reader, Sean, asked about what SoilTech would do over a longer period of time.  So thanks to Sean for bringing this up and we do have some data on what SoilTech will do to root growth over time.

We will start off with a test the inventor did and you can find that test by clicking here which is a root growth and tensity test.  This test took it’s data over an almost 6 month timeframe.  The results are very impresive but as Sean asked, what about an even longer period of time?  Well, we have a case study that we did on root depth done on a baseball field.

For this test we took multiple soil cores in the area where we would be applying SoilTech and checked to see what the average root depth was (the average was 1.8 inches).  Then we applied SoilTech and waited 11 weeks and found that the average root depth had increased 166% and reached down 4.8 inches.  Then we pulled samples 46 weeks (6 weeks shy of a year) after the applying SoilTech and got amazing results.  The root depth had increased 605% from where it started and reached down an average of 12.7 inches!  Did we have a control, yes we did.  An area that got the same fertilizer and irrigation, just 40 feet away, after 46 weeks had an average root depth of 3 inches.  That test (which is below) pretty conclusively shows that SoilTech opens up the soil and allows the roots to grow much deeper.  

Healthy Roots…Healthy Lawns! 

Introduction:

This test was performed to investigate whether the addition of SoilTech to various soils can support the claim “aerates soil”. Many users claim that SoilTech improves lawn drainage and makes zoysia grass and bermuda grass care easy.

It is widely accepted that soils with poor structure break down to a mud as the amount of water is increased thereby reducing the amount of oxygen available to the plant roots. Air components such as oxygen and nitrogen diffuse through the soil profile. When water is added much less air diffuses through the thick water films.

Question:

Does SoilTech increase the soil respiration rate of treated soils versus non-treated soils?

Purpose:

Soil respiration (aeration) is directly affected by the amount of moisture contained within the soil. Soils will reach a point of saturation, which is the level when aeration or the diffusion of air ceases. At this point plant growth is affected and can be detrimental if the soil remains saturated for a period of time. This test explores the potential of soils that have been treated with SoilTech, to increase the amount of moisture contained before reaching saturation, and increasing aeration at lower moisture levels.

Materials and Methods:

Soil respiration rate is measured by the production of carbon dioxide (CO2) as an indicator of aerobic microorganism activity, live roots, and soil organisms. Soil respiration is essential for the establishment and maintenance of a healthy plant community therefore is considered a positive indicator of soil quality.

The accessibility of oxygen to live plant roots in soil in the various amounts of water is measured by the technique of Webley, Quastel et al., described in detail in the J. Agr. Sci. 37, 257 , (1947). Yeast was substituted for the plant roots and the oxygen uptake by the yeast is measured by a manometric method. The carbon dioxide evolved (respiration) in the metabolic process is absorbed by potassium hydroxide in a center well so that the change in gas volume is caused by the utilization of oxygen by the yeast and the soil microorganisms.

Ten replications of each soil type at four soil moisture % levels were performed to achieve an average result. Three selected topsoils were air-dried, pulverized, and screened to pass a one mm sieve. Each topsoil was then equally divided into ten 100 gm portions. (30 portions total-10 of each topsoil type). Then five 100 gm portions of each of the three topsoils were treated with 40 ml of water. Then the remaining topsoil samples (five of each soil type) were treated with a water solution containing 2.5% SoilTech. Each of the wet soil samples were then broken up, and allowed to air dry. Then each sample was broken up further to pass a 4 mm sieve. Crumbs 4mm or less were collected for each sample. These crumbs were then used in each flask for the evaluation of soil respiration.

Test Results:

Respiration Rate and Soil Moisture %

Interpretation:

The respiration rate measured by the Warburg apparatus should be as high as possible in the presence of the maximum soil moisture levels. All soils become saturated if enough water is added thereby preventing access of air. In this condition, the respiration rate of the soil cannot be measured therefore the result shown in the above chart is “0”. As the soil moisture % increases the respiration rate decreases until the soil becomes saturated and further growth of the yeast stops.

Conclusion:

Soils with good aggregate stability retain their porous crumb structure in the presence of large amounts of water. The yeast suspension in water is spread over a large surface and oxygen can diffuse through relatively thin films of water. This increases oxygen uptake by the yeast, thereby increasing the soil respiration rate. Soils with poor structure break down to a mud as the amount of water are increased and much less oxygen diffuses through these thick water films. Thus the oxygen uptake by yeast in this type of soil is much lower.

SoilTech in all three soils demonstrated an increase in the respiration rate at all tested soil moisture levels. This supports the claim that SoilTech “aerates soil”.

What Are Soil Aggregates?

Soil aggregates are oil particles that bind together into clumps.  When they bind together, pore spaces increase and because without proper pore space air and water penetration is greatly reduced.

What is Aggregate Stability?

Aggregate stability refers to the ability of soil aggregates to resist dispersion when outside forces (usually associated with water) are applied.

Question:

Does SoilTech cause individual clay soil particles to aggregate and remain stable against flowing water?

Purpose:

This test determins whether the addition of SoilTech to clay soil will cause or improve soi particle aggregation.  Soil scientists agree that a soil with good aggregate stability improves soil aeration, water percolation, and infiltration over time.  Increased stable soil aggregates will also reduce bulk density and aid in the soil water-holding capacity over time as well.  Also, formation and preservation of aggregates will allow organic matter to be preserved in the soil.

Materials and Methods:

The effect of SoilTech on the ability to aggregate clay soil particles was determined by the following procedures. Four batches of 120 grams of Chandler clay soil were pulverized to pass through a 0.25mm sieve and 30mL of water was added with varying amounts of SoilTech (0%, 2%, 5%, and 10%) added to different batches.  The soil was well mixed and pressed through a 4mm sieve.  After drying for 2 days in a warm room at low humidity, air at 50°C was blown on the soil for 10mins to complete the drying.  40gm samples were placed on the top sieve of a set of three, 0.84mm, 0.42mm, and 0.25mm arranged in decreasing size.  The sieves were raised and lowered in distilled water through a distance of 1.5cm at the rate of 30 cycles per minute for three minutes.  At the end of that time the sieves were raised, allowed to drain, the soil was then dried at 80°C, and weighed.  This procedure was repeated two times.  This process was replicated three times, producing three samples for each level of SoilTech added.  The results are reported as the percent of soil aggregates larger than 0.25mm.

Test Results:

The Percent of Soil Aggregates Larger Than 0.25mm in Chandler Clay Soils

Conclusion:

The largest % increase occurs between 1% and 2%. Application rates beyond 2% improve the aggregate structure of the soil, but could become a cost factor.  The test supports the product claim that SoilTech not only improves the structure of clay soil by increasing aggregate size, but also shows that those aggregates are stable.

Introduction:

A soil aggregate is defined as many soil particles held in a single mass or cluster, such as a clod, crumb, block, or prism (Brady and Weil, 2002). Pore space created by binding these particles together improves retention and exchange of air and water. Stability of soil aggregate refers to the ability of soil aggregates to resist disruption when outside forces are applied. Products that increase soil aggregation would benefit turfgrass growth on compacted soils with poor soil aeration. This study was initiated to determine if a liquid organic polymer mixture has any influence on turfgrass quality or soil aggregation.

Materials and Methods:

The study was conducted from December 22, 2003 to March 16, 2004 (76 day growing period) in the research greenhouse at the Iowa State University Horticulture Department, Ames, IA. SoilTech was applied to two soils. Local Iowa topsoil (Nicollet, fine-loamy, mixed, mesic Aquic Hapludoll) with 4.0% organic matter was screened and dried. Commercial baseball infield clay, QuickDry®, was used as the second soil. Material for both soils was processed through a hammer mill and soil that passed a 149 micron sieve was used in the green house study. Soil was placed in 2.5 by 2.5 inch plastic pots and treated with SoilTech liquid organic polymer solution.

The Iowa-Soil required 100g of soil treated with 89 ml of SoilTech® and QuickDry® required 70g of porous clay material treated with 76.5 ml of SoilTech solution to fill each pot (Fig 1). Two conditions, with grass and without grass, were made to measure stability of soil aggregate. An additional set of treatment pots with grass were used for destructive sampling during root weight measurement. Pots were seeded with ‘Catalina’ Perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) at 7 lbs/1000 sqft on December 22, 2003. Fertilizer was applied 30 days after planting to supply 1.0 lb of N, P, and K/1000 sqft. One inch of water per week was applied to promote growth during the study.  On 16 Mar 2004 at the end of the study period, aggregate stability was measure according to a modified method by Cambardella and Elliott (1993).

The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications and 12 treatments (Table 1). There were 3 rates of SoilTech liquid organic polymer (0, 2, and 4%), 2 soil sources (Iowa-soil and QuickDry® soil) and 2 grass conditions conditions (with and without grass) for a total of 12 treatments. The data were analyzed using PROC ANOVA of the SAS software, Version 8 of the SAS System for Windows (SAS Institute, 1999). Means were separated (α = 0.05) by Fischer’s protected LSD

Results:

The greenhouse study was initiated as a preliminary study to determine if there was any beneficial response from SoilTech treatment. Results of the preliminary findings were to serve as the basis for further study.

The aggregate particle size distribution and the aggregate mean weight diameter (MWD) are presented in Table 2. Mean weight diameter of soil aggregates is an indication of the stable fraction of the aggregates in the soil system. A higher mean weight diameter value indicates more stable aggregates. Treatment effects were significant for mean weight diameter. The Iowa-soil with grass had more stable aggregates when treated with 2% and 4% SoilTech (MWD 1.09 and 0.93, respectively) compared with the untreated control (MWD 0.62). Increasing SoilTech rate from 2% to 4% did not influence aggregate MWD. Table 1:Treatments showing 3 levels of SoilTech, 2 soil types, and 2 levels of grass cover.

Table 2:  Summary ANOVA, aggregate size distribution, and aggregate mean weight diameter for SoilTech (S.T.) treatments evaluated in a green house study conducted 22 Dec 2003 to 16 Mar 2004.

* Significant at 0.05 probability level** Significant at 0.01 probability level† Mean weight diameter

References:

Brady, N.C, and R.R. Weil. 2002. The nature and properties of soils. 13th ed. Pearson Education, INC., NJ.

Cambardella, C. A. and Elliott, E. T. 1993. Carbon and nitrogen distribution in aggregates from cultivated and native grassland soils.

Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 57:1071-1076.

SAS Institute. 1999. The SAS system for windows, Version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.