Rating composts.Which carries the most organic matter??

[replenish&subdue]

Around where I am planted people use Back to Nature (nature's blend),Black Cow,Leaf Compost and I use Cotton Burr Compost.
And then there are many other composts with carry the name but have little in the way of organic matter. Problem is when I charge the customer my price is higher because to them compost is compost.
I can get leaf compost at about $10 a yard if I buy more than I have a place to put it or I can buy cotton burr compost at $14 a yard. I assume cotton burr exceeds leaf compost in organic matter but does anyone know links to studies that will tell how these different composts rate?

[ICT Bill]

You might try here, I haven't visited there in somtime so I am not sure if there is pertinent info or not

http://www.compostingcouncil.org/

[starry night]

You might try here, I haven't visited there in somtime so I am not sure if there is pertinent info or not

http://www.compostingcouncil.org/

Bill, I just went to that site. It looks like one of those "not for profit except for the administrators" groups whose interest is largely self-preservation for self-employment. Am I wrong?

[ICT Bill]

Bill, I just went to that site. It looks like one of those "not for profit except for the administrators" groups whose interest is largely self-preservation for self-employment. Am I wrong?

Like any association they are trying to represent their bill paying members and represent them to federal and state government laws and practices to promote what they do.

Make compost from everything imaginable

A better word would probably be "lobbiest"

But I believe there is pretty good information on there, you know one that would probably better is ATTRA http://www.attra.org/

[muddstopper]

Try hardwood bark compost
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/homestead/2005-August/005498.html

[replenish&subdue]

This is a quote from an organic head and some "research" he looked into:In the world of composting, experts worldwide agree that The Soil Food Web (soilfoodweb.com) is the world's leading authority in the field of compost research, testing, and grading of compost. Founded by noted researcher Dr. Elaine Ingham, the Soil Food Web has a network of laboratories around the world and is a leading advocate of sustainable agriculture.

Only a few consultants are endorsed by and associated with the Soil Food web, one of which is Ms. Jennifer Appel. When interviewed about the efficacy of cotton burr compost, Ms. Appel told me that, "cotton burr compost is head and shoulders above any other compost." Yes, that's a big claim, so my follow- up question dealt with her reasoning for this position. Ms. Appel states that "cotton is a very heavy feeder, absorbing vast amounts of nutrients from the soil as it grows and the bulk of the nutrients are located in the burr left over from the ginning process."

[muddstopper]

Your original question had to do with which compost material contains the most organic matter. That question is misleading simply because if you are building compost, everything you should be using would be considered organic matter. So, one organic material wouldnt contain anymore organic matter than any other organic matter. Of course then you could go into percent organic matter by volume or by weight, moisture content, etc, lots of varibles.

Now to say cotten burr compost is heads above any other compost is simply rediculous. Yes cotton burrs can contain many nutrients, one nutrient most associated with cotton waste is Calcium, which is a greatly needed nutrient in most soils. Further such a compost would greatly benefit a soil deficient in calcium. Now suppose that soil has an abundance in calcium, would a cotten based organic compost rich in calcium be the best choice for that soil? Certainly not. Is the amount of calcium contained in a cotten burr compost enough to really change a soils balance in nutrients, probably not, unless you continue to apply your compost year after year, or you apply massive amounts of this same compost, then you would see a gradual increase in the calcium levels.

While cotten burr residues might make an excellent compost material, painting it as the best compost material for every situation is absurb.

Now if your intentions are to increase soil humis levels, then cottenburrs are not even in the same league as the ramail wood chips for suppling carbon, which is the bases for humis. All wood chips are not the same either, hardwood being better than softwoods. Considering that 70% of all the nutrients contained in a tree are stored in the outer couple of inches of the trees surface, you have to use the outer layers of the tree to gain the full benefit of the organic material. The wood contained inside the trees trunk area hold very little nutrients, (when compared to the outer layers of the same tree),and therefore, sawdust, wood shavings, groundup wooden pallets, etc, make very poor microbial food sources. This is evident by how slow a sawdust pile will compost when compared to a pile of wood bark. Nutrient rich materials are not limited to just the bark layer of the tree, small branches, twiggs, etc will hold similar nutrient levels as the bark layers.

[JDUtah]

Your original question had to do with which compost material contains the most organic matter. That question is misleading simply because if you are building compost, everything you should be using would be considered organic matter. So, one organic material wouldnt contain anymore organic matter than any other organic matter. Of course then you could go into percent organic matter by volume or by weight, moisture content, etc, lots of varibles.

Now to say cotten burr compost is heads above any other compost is simply rediculous. Yes cotton burrs can contain many nutrients, one nutrient most associated with cotton waste is Calcium, which is a greatly needed nutrient in most soils. Further such a compost would greatly benefit a soil deficient in calcium. Now suppose that soil has an abundance in calcium, would a cotten based organic compost rich in calcium be the best choice for that soil? Certainly not. Is the amount of calcium contained in a cotten burr compost enough to really change a soils balance in nutrients, probably not, unless you continue to apply your compost year after year, or you apply massive amounts of this same compost, then you would see a gradual increase in the calcium levels.

While cotten burr residues might make an excellent compost material, painting it as the best compost material for every situation is absurb.

Now if your intentions are to increase soil humis levels, then cottenburrs are not even in the same league as the ramail wood chips for suppling carbon, which is the bases for humis. All wood chips are not the same either, hardwood being better than softwoods. Considering that 70% of all the nutrients contained in a tree are stored in the outer couple of inches of the trees surface, you have to use the outer layers of the tree to gain the full benefit of the organic material. The wood contained inside the trees trunk area hold very little nutrients, (when compared to the outer layers of the same tree),and therefore, sawdust, wood shavings, groundup wooden pallets, etc, make very poor microbial food sources. This is evident by how slow a sawdust pile will compost when compared to a pile of wood bark. Nutrient rich materials are not limited to just the bark layer of the tree, small branches, twiggs, etc will hold similar nutrient levels as the bark layers.

I agree that the selection of best compost needs to be determined by soil needs. I would suggest an alternate reason for sawdust piles breaking down slower than bark piles, and that would be oxygen availability. It is probably a combination of the 2. (LAW OF THE LIMITING FACTOR)